Arya Samaj

Shyena · Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 6:23 pm Post subject: Some que about samkhya

Namaste,
Can anyone explain to me:
What are the names and qualities of the three bodies we bear
What are the different states/types of mind such as manas, mahat, etc..
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:31 pm Post subject:

Namaste PD,

Great topic! I'll write something up now. Give me some time, though, as the topic is pretty complex. Wink

_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Mon Oct 30, 2006 7:40 pm Post subject:

Namaste Shishya,
Take your time... This is going to make some crucial change to what I analyse to be (a part of) nature of god upon which I've been contemplating of the late.
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Prabhat · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 1:04 am Post subject: Re: Some que about samkhya

Shishya · Posted: Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:06 am Post subject:

Namaste PD & Prabhat,

Well, my answer is turing out to be much longer than I originally anticipated. What I have so far are the fundamentals which have to be understood before getting to the details of PD's original question. I'll post it now and hopefully get to the rest in the next day or so. But, don't let that stop you from responding.

Also, I wanted to note that what I present below is my best understanding after years of personal research comparing texts such as the Samkhya Sutras of Kapila, the Samkhyakarika of Ishvarakrishna, the works of Adi Shankara as well as those of Swamiji. It is, therefore, a compliation of the ideas presented in those monumental texts. However, I'm certainly no expert. So, take it all with a grain of salt. Wink

Fundamental Distinctions

Saamkhya philosophy starts with the distinction between two categories of being: (1) Purusha, Spiritual Being, and (2) Prakriti, Material Being. The primary difference between them is that, whereas Purusha is characterized by consciousness, Prakriti is characterized by non-consciousness. Also, while Purusha remains changeless, Prakriti is always changing.

The category Purusha can be further divided into (1) God, the Supreme Conscious Being, and (2) Souls, the subordinate conscious beings. The primary difference between them is that, whereas God is one, the Souls are many. Also, while God is all-knowing, the Soul is limited in knowledge.

The category Prakriti can be further divided into (1) Mula Prakriti, the ultimate undifferentiated material cause, and (2) Prakriti (Proper), the ultimate differentiated material cause. The primary difference between them is that, whereas Mula Prakriti is in perfect unified harmony with itself, Prakriti is in a state of fragmented disharmony. Also, while Mula Prakriti is non-manifest, Prakriti is manifest.

[It is worth noting at this point that Swamiji also occasionally refers to Mula Prakriti as Saamarthya or God’s Power.

Also, it might be worthwhile to note the way in which Adi Shankara interpreted this system of distinction. That which we have termed God and Soul above, Shankara would term Ishvara and Jiva respectively. He would agree that Ishvara and Jiva are two distinct categories of being. However, he would propose that there is a higher level of existence which subsumes both Ishvara and Jiva, revealing two faces of the one Absolute Reality, known as Brahman and Aatman respectively.

Analogously, Shankara would argue that there is a level above Mula Prakriti and Prakriti (Proper), which he refers to as Maya. Maya, according to him, is also responsible for the apparent distinction between Ishvara and Jiva. However, Shankara has difficulties in explaining the existence of Maya within the framework of non-dualism, and is forced to say that neither existence nor non-existence can be attributed to it.]

The Process of Cosmic Evolution

Prakriti represents the basis or fundament of perceptible material creation, whereby ‘material’ includes three categories or classes of manifestation: (1) Causal, (2) Subtle and (3) Physical.

Within Prakriti, three Gunas or Modes exist: (1) Sattva, (2) Rajas and (3) Tamas. The three can be typified by the characteristics harmonic, dynamic and static respectively. The Gunas play an important role in all subsequent level of manifestation, as their imbalance within Prakriti is that which drives the process of evolution forward.

The first thing to evolve out of Prakriti is Cosmic Intelligence, called Mahat or Mahatattva. This contains all of the creative principles and universal laws that shall become manifest in the production of the cosmos. It is, so to speak, the ideal framework or blueprint for creation.

Out of Mahat evolves the Principle of Individuation, called Ahamkara. Through this the application of the ideal framework of Mahat to the extremely subtle potential within Prakriti is enabled. Thus, it is at this point that the manifestation of subatomic and atomic particles as individually existing entities becomes possible. (The Ahamkara, in addition to working upon the potential contained within Prakriti, also works upon the Soul. The effects of this process shall be discussed below.)

Out of Ahamkara evolves three groups of ‘elements’, each comprising five components, whereby the term ‘element’ is used in its broadest possible sense to include both what we would consider material (as noted above) as well as psychical.

The first group is known as the Five (Sukshma) Jñanendriyas or Faculties of Sensation. They are Shrotra (Hearing), Tvak (Touch), Chakshus (Sight), Rasana (Taste) and Ghrana (Smell).

The second group is known as the Five (Sukshma) Karmendriyas or Faculties of Action. They are Vak (Speech), Pani (Manual Dexterity), Pada (Locomotion), Payu (Excretion) and Upastha (Procreation).

The third group is referred to in two ways, depending on the context in which they are understood. The first is as the Five Tanmatras or Objects of Sensation. In this sense they are referred to as Sabda (Sound), Sparsha (Touch), Rupa (Appearance), Rasa (Taste) and Gandha (Smell). The second is as the Five (Sukshma) Bhutani or Elemental Forms. In this sense they are referred to as Akasha (Ethereal), Vayu (Gaseous), Taijasa (Luminous), Apas (Fluidic) and Prithivi (Solid). The first is in reference to their means of perception, whereas the second is in reference to their mode of appearance.

These three groups in turn produce three more groups, each being the physical or gross manifestation of its subtle counterpart. This results in Five Organs of Sensation (Ear, Skin, Eye, Tongue and Nose), Five Organs of Action (Vocal Apparatus, Hands, Feet, Anus and Reproductive Organ) and Five Physical Elements (Ether, Air, Fire, Water and Earth).

[It should be noted that the term Indriya means both ‘faculty’ as well as ‘organ’, depending upon the context. It is for this reason that terms such as Shrotra, for example, can mean both a manifest organ (in this case, ear) and the faculty of sensation operating through that organ (in this case, the auditory faculty, or hearing). The difference resides in the one being Sukshma or Subtle and the other being Sthula or Gross.]

Thus we have enumerated all of the primary components of manifestation. Next, we shall see how these go towards composing the human being.

(To be continued...)
_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Sat Nov 04, 2006 5:01 pm Post subject:

When are you posting the second part Sad

_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:43 am Post subject:

Namaste PD,

Well, in the middle of composing what was becoming a very long and complicated presentation, I had second thoughts and decided it would be more appropriate if I let Swamiji speak on the subject. (It would be a bit presumptuous of me to present my own understanding before that of a Maharishi. Wink

)

Below is the section from the Satyarth Prakash where Swamiji discusses the constitution of man. (I have added a few terms for clarification in parantheses.)

Shyena · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 7:32 am Post subject:

Okay the questions I have is...
>Which of these bodies 'carries the impressions of previous births'?
>What are the properties of mahat, buddhi, ahamkara, manas? Are all of these material - thus independent or operated by atman?
>Can all of these perceive the element of time? If not, which bodies dont perceive time?
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:36 am Post subject:

Namaste PD,

1. The causal body (karana sharira)

2. Yes, mahat, buddhi, ahamkara and manas are all 'material' in nature, being products of the modification of prakriti, and non-identical with the Soul.

3. As I understand it, the causal body, when divorced from the subtle and gross bodies, is the one which does not facilitate perception of time.
_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:00 pm Post subject:

1. So what properties does the sukshma sharira carry to the next incarnation? As the next birth is not limited to any race or genus, it definitely wont carry form if I'm not mistaken..

2. So can they 'work independent of atman'? Also what differentiates these different entities? The cursory definitions are not helping me Sad

3. Okay, this part cleared
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:21 pm Post subject:

Namaste PD,

1. Perhaps my last post in the thread on Swamiji and Advaita would be of some use here.

2. No. Just as the body is 'dead' without the presence of the animating Soul, so too are the mind and intellect, etc. As to their differentiation: I think Mahat has been sufficiently explained above. The difference between buddhi and manas is analogous to that made between reason (Vernunft) and understanding (Verstand) in European philosophy. Whereas reason (buddhi) operates on the basis of axiomatic, a priori truths which are self-evident due to the nature of reality, the understanding (manas) operates on the basis of a posteriori experience. One could think of them as the Inductive/Deductive, Logical/Analogical, or Theoretical/Practical sides of man's mental life. Ahamkara is the Principle of Individuation as it exists in the individual, i.e. the Ego, the 'I am' of conscious experience. Everything experienced in waking consciousness is focused through the ahamkara.
_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 1:56 pm Post subject:

2. Sorry, I need to rephrase that. What I mean is, is the dependence on soul like a battery powering the mind or the soul controlling the mind? If the soul controls the mind, what exactly is the soul's nature(i.e., mind) when independent?
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 2:29 pm Post subject:

Namaste PD,

I'm afraid I don't quite yet understand the question exactly.

If you are asking about the nature of the soul independent of the mind and other spiritual faculties, I think the answer is to be found in the post I last linked to. The only time at which the soul finds itself in such a state is during pralaya. Otherwise it is always in contact with the mind (as well as it's other subtle aspects).

Mahat is a universal principle, an evolute of prakriti. The soul is like a prism which captures and refracts mahat as buddhi and manas in the spiritual dimension of its being. Therefore, it wouldn't really be correct to say that the soul 'powers' the mind like a battery. However, the presence of the soul - which is the source of the consciousness illuminating the individual mind - is necessary.

It would perhaps be easier if you could explain what you have in mind and then we could discuss that in the context of the overall system, looking for similarities and differences. That way we might be able to avoid the hit-and-miss results which seem to domintate at the moment. Wink

_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Sun Nov 05, 2006 4:13 pm Post subject:

Namaste Shishya,

The reason I first wanted to acquire this information was to harmonise some lines about advaita, but proper understanding would lead me to making some logical conclusions about nature of soul and god as well. This is wholly off-topic, but as you said, it is needed for avoiding trial-and-error kind of stuff.

Basically, the many lines in favour of advaitins - such as "That thou art" "universe is god", etc etc... are difficult to explain through traitavaada. This is how I try to reason things out to a conclusion which explains jeeva* to be a fusion of atman, isvara and prakrti. Most of the stuff below is already accepted, but I'm just posting so as to clearly express my view:

We start off with the initial postulates : soul has free will, eternal distinction between matter, god, souls; etc...

Soul controls the material body on its own, so it must be able to control certain level of prakrti. Does it have control over subtler levels of prakrti? There is no reason to say it shouldn't be so. Presides, mind etc... are controlled by atman. To make an assumption it can't leads us to an infinite regressive position as there should be something to place these limits on the soul. Yoga Sutras and advanced yogis also demonstrate the point that we can indeed control beyond the level of sthula prakrti.
Soul doesn't remember anything in the next birth, this means either of three things: (a)Soul can access it (b) Soul cannot access it (c) Soul requires god to access it
The second conclusion is illogical for me, because to say that soul has a limit would mean that something set these limits to it. To say god put these limits, would mean that god overpowered soul, so soul should have greater power than it has now - but those should be limited as well, leading to infinite regression; therefore should be ruled out. The third conclusion would mean that god can control our emotions etc... which violates the presupposition that soul has free will.
Finally, soul shows no behaviour after cosmic dissolution of universe or any attempt of manifesting prakrti. This means, the soul is incapable of action to a great extent.

The above three points bring me to the conclusion that soul is inactive on its own. When empowered by god, it is capable of activity. A living creature can be described as made out of prakrti, operated by soul, empowered by god. The atman being empowered by god - and this power being an aspect of god, its active conscious state - it is on a whole, a fusion of god and soul.

Now, just as a salt-crystal is dissolved in water - and although it is within and without water, though distinct from it - yet is referred to as 'water'; similiarly when the atman realises that it has god within and without - it proclaims 'tat tvam asi'. Another way to understand is, god is infinite, part of god empowers you, therefore infinity empowers you. The explanation of swamiji that you are within god was inadequate for me. That is why I expand the explanation to god is part of you.

When it comes to 'universe is god', I can elaborate this part only after gaining a clear idea of mahat, etc....
EDIT: Okay my question is almost clear, did some re-reading the content you posted. I have a last question - citta(?memory?) is material, but does god have this citta?
--
* - By jeeva I refer to the bodies and state the atman is present in while the universe is in state of existence. I *think* this is what it means, if not, do correct me...
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Mon Nov 06, 2006 8:22 pm Post subject:

Namaste PD,

Very interesting. I'm doing a bit of research and hope to be able to respond in the coming days.
_________________
Namaste,

Shishya
ॐ

ॐ सह नावतु । सह तौ भुनक्तु । सह वीर्यं करवावहै । तेजस्वि नावधीतमस्तु मा विद्विषावहै ॥
"Together may we be protected. Together may we be profited. Together may we do a hero's work. May we learn intelligently. May we never hate one another."
-Brihadaranyaka & Taittiriya Upanishads

Shyena · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 6:17 pm Post subject:

Namaste Shishya,
Thank you for your co-operation. The thing is, the last bit of my analysis is that - as buddhi on its own has no memory, it requires citta to do so. But god is bodiless and pure according to a vedic hymn, and citta is material. Therefore it is possible that - the world itself is god's citta (i.e., uses it like his memory..). Reason - consciousness is ever-changing, and as what swamiji said (in a rebuttal of buddhism), this denies existence of memory - memory is something that stays constant over period of time.
I'm reminded of Laplace's demon; that complete awareness of the present state of a system lets you cognise the state of the system in the past and future. However, the existence of conscience means the past state can be predicted and cognized but not the upcoming state. In other words - world is god's mind...
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste

Shishya · Posted: Tue Nov 07, 2006 8:05 pm Post subject:

Namaste PD,

I'm still doing some research (mostly going through the Upanishads and other texts), but I wanted to make a comment in regards to your last post:

Shyena · Posted: Thu Nov 09, 2006 4:37 pm Post subject:

Lol what i mean is more like 'memory' of god. Its kind of degrading god perhaps, but that's the only way I can reason out the idea of god having citta and keep it consistent with samkhya's metaphysics.
_________________

Krinvanto Vishwam Aryam meditate

Namaste