Transcription
Um, seven oggela to her, no luck—Sir Javie diem cut awawa a deja suite Harvard. He too must to mahmud fish over a own Shanti Shanti Shanti ohm. Mei Brahmin protect us all. Mei Bramha nourish us all. May be attained great spiritual Heights by the grace of Brahman. May our study be luminous. May there be no disharmony amongst us. Home peace peace peace.
I'll chant the first verse of the drink—uh, Vivica with which we started last time, and you can follow after me. I'll chant first, and then you follow. Reuben drishyam lo johnandrich. Reuben drishyam lo johnandrich. Tawdry Chandra cumin some. Tawdry Chandra cumin some. Drishya de Bretagne Sakshi Rashad. Every tire Sakshi dree gave Ana to Tricia t3 gave Ana to Tricia tea.
As we saw last time, this is the most profound verse. It gives us a technique of realizing our true self. You see, in every experience we have the subject and the object, the one who is experiencing and that which is experienced. The one who experiences is the subject, the knower, or in the language of this, the seer; and that which is experienced is the object, the known, or the seen.
Now, it is a matter of common experience that the seer and the seen are different. In every experience, we are aware of ourselves as the knower, as the seer, and what we know or what we see as the object, as the scene. So the seer and the seen, the knower and the known, the—star and the drishya in the terms of this verse—they are always different. And using this principle last time, we observed the text guides us through this process just like a very good teacher, King us from the from the most common sensical experience from our what we know from there to deeper and deeper levels of analysis.
So we start with something very common: we are looking out at the world, simply looking out with our eyes. So the world full of color and shape, that is the scene, and the eyes are the seer, in a very common sense, naive, a just look at it the way we experience the world. And since the seer and the scene are different, it's quite obvious the eyes are different from what they see.
And you go next deeper: the eyes themselves are objects of experience. The pie eyes are open or they're closed or they're itching, or I need spectacles, or I can see very well—all these aspects of the eyes are known by the mind. So the mind becomes the knower, and the eyes become the known. The mind becomes the seer, rushed ah, and the eyes become the scene, Tricia. And the two are different, as we saw last time. It's quite obviously they are different. As we go deeper further, we find the mind itself is also known. After all, we are aware and happy, I like this or I don't like it, and we are aware of this—this is the thoughts in them, our minds, our feelings, our emotions, our memories, ideas, comprehension, lack of comprehension—all these we are aware of as they come and go. Therefore, the contents of our minds are also something that we know, so they are also in the category of the known, the scene, the object. And there is something which illumines the mind from within, so that becomes the ultimate seer, knower. And since we are always this seer, we are never the scene in our all our experience in experience. We always see it as as we are the experience sir, and the rest is the experienced—what we experience is the experienced object.
So in this case also, if there is something which knows the mind, then we are that; we are that which knows the mind; we are that which shines upon the mind; we are that which illumines the contents of the mind. And the mind is known as an object. Through the mind we know the rest of the body and our sense organs; that is also known, seen through the mind. And the sense organs we experience the world, and the world is also something that is seen, observed, known. What do we know at the end of this analysis? We know that we are not the body; we are not the sense organs; we are not the mind, even even the contents of the mind. And this is enormous in itself; it's a huge revelation to us because what we think of ourselves as usually before we reflect, before we take a critical view of our experience, before that, in a pre-critical stage, we regard ourselves as a body-mind complex: I am an individual, and this is who I am—this body and this the mind within it, this is Who I am. The boundary of the body, the skin, this is my boundary; beyond this is not me, up to this is me. That's how we think of ourselves. But this analysis, it claims to show us that we are not even this body; we are the experiencer of this body; we are not even the mind within, via the experiencer of the mind. So we, the experience, are the knower; we are these, the witness of the mind and the body. This is what we saw last time, and now we have will go further ahead; we'll go into the next few verses.
Some of you are thinking, last time if it took one hour to explain one verse, we are not going to make much progress. But don't worry, it's not going to be like that. Some of the verses we can we can move much faster. For example, now we are going to do the second, third, fourth, and fifth verses, and we are going to do them one after another, because what these verses do, second, third, fourth, and fifth, is just explain the first verse—what we saw last time that is explained in detail by these four verses. These Sanskrit verses, slokas, they have four quarters, four parts—first quarter, second quarter, third quarter, and fourth quarter—and they this verse which we did also has four quarters. The first quarter is forms are the scene and the eyes are the seer; that's the quarter one. And verse number two explains this quarter. The second quarter is the eyes are the scene and the mind is this year, and the second quarter is explained by the third verse. And similarly, the third quarter, the mind itself is seen, and there is a witness to the mind; that is explained by the fourth four verse. And the fifth verse explains the fourth quarter—that the seer of the mind, the witness itself, never becomes an object of knowledge, never is experienced; it is always the experiencer. So now we shall go into the second, third, fourth, and fifth verses one after another. I shall read out the Sanskrit as always, and so you repeat after I have read it out. Verse number 2: those of you have got the book, you can follow me. Nila PETA's Tula sukshma. Nila pitas Tula Sushma. Razvi dear God eBay data resada gotta be data non Evita Nehru pani non Aveda Nehru Barney Pichette low genomic at her but she loach Anamika da.
So the first quarter of the first verse, eyes are the seer in the world of forms and shapes, colors—that is the scene—that is explained in detail here. And what is said here, something very simple: colors—black or blue and yellow; shapes, the forms in the world outside—somewhat gross from some are very subtle forms—all of them are seen by the eye. Some are long, and some are tall; some are short, and as so, all these different kinds of forms are seen by the same pair of eyes, by the same organ of vision. You may recall we learned three things last time: first, the seer and the seen are different—number one; number two, the seer is one, and the scene are many. So here you have many colors and many forms, but they are seen by the same ayah. I don't mean one eye, but the same organ of vision. And the third thing we learned was the scene are relatively tear changing compared to the seer. So the forms which we see, the colors and people things around us, keeps changing throughout, relatively speaking, our eyes which see them, they do not change much. Now, if you look at the verse, it's very simple. Neela and Peter means blue and yellow; stool and Sushma means gross and subtle; rustle in short deidre means long; Adi means etc; Bharata these differences Nana with a Nehru pani, the variety of forms. Incidentally, the word Rupa in sanskrit, it means form in general, but particularly specifically it means color. So you know one the thing which we first see when we open our eyes, we see we see people land chairs and tables—actually we see colors; we see colors, and we can make out shapes. So all these varieties nana with Ronnie Roo Barney varieties of colors and shapes and forms per shade sees the eyes by themselves a kadhai. This is an explanation of the first quarter, meaning there by the sea or the eyes are different from the forms which they see.
Now we go to the third verse. Remember, it explains the second quarter—that the eyes themselves become an object of knowledge, and the mind is the seer. So let's go to the third verse. On diamandra /- three shoe. On dia Manya /- three shoe. Nitra term issue Shikata. Nitra dharma shoe Shahada. Sankalp ID mana otra. Sankalpa mana strata - a god o yo J Tom Edom - a god o yo J Tommy dumb. What does this verse? A different characteristics of my eyes: sometimes eyes may be blind; some persons cannot see; or some persons sometimes I feel that I cannot see well; I need contacts or spectacles; or sometimes I feel I can see well. These different characteristics of the eyes of my eyes are known by me, and what knows them, the mind. There's nothing there's no very deep philosophy here; it's simply recounting our experiences and inviting us to reflect on our experiences. Everybody experiences this. So I know the conditions of my eyes—eyes are open as a close; I can see well; I cannot see well; and so on. Who knows this? The mind. If the mind is the knower, then all of these these are become to known—the eyes become the known, and the mind is different from the ISTEP. Knower and the known are different; they cannot be the same. And quite obviously we feel, we see, it's a fact that our minds are different from the eyes. Sungl by mana l read out the sanskrit, and ear means blindness; Mangia means dullness of the eyes, the inability of the eyes to see well; /- sharpness of vision, twenty by twenty they say doctors and nature adharma the qualities of the mind, the characteristic characteristics of the eyes; nature means eyes, characteristics of the eyes; picada by itself the mind; sankalpa 8 mana the mind can cognize, can understand, can think about. Now what you do is the same thing, not only for the eyes also for all our sense organs. Why only the eyes? Ears—what the condition of my ears? I can like I can hear well or I need I think I can hear well, but everybody tells me you cannot hear well, so you need hearing aid. So the conditions of the ears are well known to the mind; the mind understands it. So the mind is different from the years, and so for the skin, the nose and so on, the tongue and so on. So schroeder o means ears; tongue means skin; years skin nose tongue all the sense organs; your jaw dimittam you can fit it here; the same goes for all the other same sense organs. The mind by itself understands, cognizes, nose sees the sense organs. So the mind is different from the sense organs, and by that by that reasoning, the mind is something which knows the body from within, and so the mind is the knower; sense organs and the physical body are the known. So the mind must be different from them because the seer and the seen are different. This is the fundamental distinction that we are holding onto from the very beginning—that the mind is different from the sense from the body and the sense organs. It is not difficult to understand; that's how we feel also. The mind is something subtle; the body something gross; we feel this, though scientists and doctors will tell you that the mind is something generated by the brain, but that's a different matter altogether—how the mind is generated by the brain, and that that that's a we are entering vague territory there, but here as we feel it, we feel that the mind is something and the body is something else. So the mind becomes this year; the body is the same quick examination. What about the world outside? Is it the seer of the scene now seen? The world is always the scene; the known world is always known, but the body and mind—sometimes we feel that it is the knower with respect to the world outside—but when we look at the body and mind, it becomes the known, and the mind becomes dinner.
Now we go to the fourth verse. This fourth verse is about the third quarter—the third quarter of the first person. The third quarter says the contents of our minds are known; they are objects of knowledge. The contents of our minds are as much objects as this book is an object different from me. And this fourth verse goes and read out then you can follow. Thomas uncle person day home shraddha add a treat eatery read he'll be read a bill it gave him a Dean Maserati caja GT sanity Kadam GT. So beautiful verse. City he means consciousness; consciousness humans by itself—what does it illumine? What does consciousness shine upon? It shines upon the contents of our minds. And what are the contents of our minds? Desire—I want this, I want that—desire, I want something. How we are aware that we want something. Now here I'll make a subtle distinction. Distinction is this: when we say that we are aware when we want something, when we see we are aware of our thoughts, what they mean here is not that you are thinking about your thoughts; that's called introspection. Even when I don't think of out it, when I am when I want something, I'm also immediately aware that there is a thought or desire in my mind even without reflecting back upon it. So consciousness directly humans our thoughts, our emotions, our desires, our memories, our understanding or lack of understanding, all of that is directly illumined by consciousness. You may remember I told you that there are three stages of understanding this: the first stages we should be able to repeat back what the verse says; the second stage is we should intellectually understand what they are trying to tell us—we get it—and the third stages it must become a living fact for us, just as I say that there is a book on the table, you don't have to believe it; you don't have to intellectual about intellectualize about it; it's a fact; you can see it. In the same way, we should it should become a clear fact for us that the contents of my mind are objects and consciousness. You means these objects, karma, desire arises in the mind, immediately I am aware of that; sankalpa thoughts, various types of thoughts; Sunday had out so he is so intelligently putting this: suppose you don't understand, I don't understand what this guy is talking about; I do not understand this confusion; am I not aware of the confusion in the mind also? That's what he's saying—the confusion in the mind also is illuminated, simple. Someone doubts the whole thing, skeptical about this whole thing, skeptical about this whole thing; all that advaitha tells this person is if you're skeptical about the whole thing, are you aware that you are skeptical? There are maybe that I'm skeptical; that's all we're saying. Shankar Acharya says Yanira osteo niraakar Tata see what masa: the one who denies the existence of this vedantic self, that that self it's his very self of the self of the one who's denying the existence of the self. So that this consciousness does not exist; it's as ridiculous as saying if I speak and I say I don't have a tongue, I don't have a tongue; if I don't have a tongue, how am I speaking? So anything which we are aware of, that shows that consciousness is illumining that sort in the mind. Sunday had out shrugged ah, a deep faith: yes, I believe in God; I believe in religion; I am convinced about with Vedanta; your conviction also shines in the light of the same art. But I am not convinced; Ishod ha, I don't have faith in this; I'm not convinced; that lack of conviction, that also shines in the same light, light up same Atman Achanta trittye: the ability to hold on to something; it's a great quality in the 13 chapter of the bhagavad-gita, among the qualities which lead to self-realization, one of the things is gritty, ability to hold on to a high pursuit in spite of difficulties; in fact, that's a quality which leads to success in any any endeavor in life; gritty; it's a quality that you display when you come today when it's raining outside and inclement weather and you brave the weather and you come to a we're on the class in the evening; so you are displaying thrity; that's a the manifestation of the ability to hold on to a higher pursuit; 3t Italy etc; all sorts of thoughts, feelings, emotions, memories, whatever comes up in the mind is illumined by one witness, consciousness Chiti he consciousness sarchie witness. What else? Re modesty the understanding intellect; P fear these are just examples eta of imagine and such all sorts of thoughts, feelings, emotions, everything which comes up in the mind Basia the illumines, illumines Agatha GT consciousness by itself humans all of this. So this is the third quarter where we first come across a mention of this. Then the fifth verse; the fifth verse is a very beautiful verse; it talks about our real self, the true self, what we really are according to Advaita Vedanta, and in very poetic way, please follow up to me. No deity nasta mediation. No deity nurse Tammy Dasha nerve redeem yatta knock shyam nerve redeemed Athena Shyam Sai Ahmedabad cotton yawning. So I am the Barton yawning. So its autonomy nam say it's an Tulum Vina. This consciousness within, this consciousness within, ever shining. Know that it's a comparison is with the Sun; it does not rise; we every day we experienced sunrise and sunset; the Sun of consciousness never Rises never sets, eternally shining. No deity NOS timidity, neither it rises neither does it set, always shining. There is a similar verse in the punch of the she where it says days pass, months pass, consciousness shines; years pass, the body grows old, dies, consciousness watches, shines; the ages roll past, thousands of years, life after life comes and goes, consciousness unchanging watches. So it need arises nor sets pancetta she goes further; this is UGA's millions of years, the cycle of creation, the universe itself from Big Big Bang to what do they call it, Big Crunch? Yes, universe dies a heat death; consciousness is still watching. So that consciousness is not something we talk about when we are talking about psychology or physiology, the brain producing consciousness, not that that is that's as far as the the biologist physiologist cycle are the scientists have gone, but this consciousness is fundamental; this is before matter; it only functions through the mind and the brain. So neither does it rise not as it said no they it in a certain ad, neither does it increase not decrease it Swami; sometimes a more conscious sometimes less conscious had to struggle to remain conscious during Vedanta class, for example; yeah, we do lose consciousness and then sin sleep. So are we not unconscious in sleep? This whole idea of your consciousness always shining—I remember right here in this hall last year I gave a talk from pancetta she, and there was this young girl who had come from Canada with her parents, and she asked this question before the class: this whole idea of yours having one unchanging consciousness—well, in deep sleep when we fall asleep there's no consciousness, so doesn't it break down their little own age is passing and death and many thousands of years passing and consciousness shining, none of that; every day we fall asleep and we are unconscious; consciousness is switched off; where is consciousness? Well, that's where Indian philosophy ventures to disagree; we shall see all that later; why that why do we feel that sometimes we are more conscious, sometimes we're less conscious, sometimes we are unconscious; why do we feel that all those things will be taken up and explained in detail afterwards in a few verses sense, but let me it will just suffice to say that in deep sleep also this consciousness is there; the difference between deep sleep and this state is here consciousness has some object to be aware of; in deep sleep there is nothing to be aware of; there's no world for us; remember this is a subjective approach, so we are talking about your experience or my experience; don't say that in deep sleep Swami what do you mean that there is no world; there's no body; there's no mind; we can see the fellow sleeping and snoring; how come there is no buttons nobody; that's we're taking an objective look from outside, but what is that person's experience; what is your experience in deep sleep; what is my experience? My experience is that I have no experience of the world; I have no experience of the body, the sense organs; I have no experience of the mind, thoughts, feelings, emotions, and no experience of myself as reflecting upon my own existence; and yet they say consciousness is there; there is nothing for it to be aware of; it's just consciousness. I remember there was a debate between a philosopher philosophers and scientists in Institute of culture in gold Park several years ago in Calcutta, and they came to this point; they couldn't agree upon the definition of consciousness; so finally somebody asked the neuroscientist doctor in neuroscience in deep sleep is there consciousness or not from your scientific point of view; and the scientists showed up and said the way we define consciousness there is no consciousness in deep sleep; there is no consciousness in deep sleep; and the philosopher a sunken philosopher who's also am an American professor Larson he stood up and said well from the Indian philosophy point of view Vedanta or Sankhya point of view in deep sleep there is only consciousness. See this is the difference: in deep sleep there's no consciousness, and deep sleep there is only consciousness—consciousness without having an object to be aware of. So consciousness is still there in deep sleep; mystics were aware of this as reading a Christian mystics such a beautiful experience is just like in deep space, the blackness of space; in deep space we think it's black dark, it's actually full of light; in near the Sun it's full of light; there's nothing for the nothing to reflect the light, so it appears to be completely dark; similarly in a deep deep sleep consciousness is there, but there's nothing to reflect consciousness, nothing for consciousness to be aware of what happens in deep sleep. So my body it shines by itself, and in the waking state, in the dream state, that consciousness illumines other things, other oniony it illumines everything else. Just imagine, to be aware of anything, we need an instrument to know that people are there in the room; you need eyes; how did you know all these people were there in the room? I saw them. How did you know that the Swami was speaking? I heard him. So we know with the help of instruments of knowledge. So you know that all others were in the room because you saw them; how do you know that you are in the room? Don't say I saw myself; you don't have to wait to see ourselves; even before you know anything, you are already aware of your own existence. So consciousness is self umand it does not depend on any instrument of knowledge to express itself or to shine forth; to know other things it requires instruments; mind is required to know thoughts, feelings, emotions; mind and sense organs are required to know the body in the external world. So the same consciousness, the seer, the knower, the ultimate subject, the witness uses the mind and the sense organs to know the body and to know the external world, but itself he says so my body it's called sub prakasha, self-luminous consciousness is ever shining, and it's self-luminous; it does not require a second entity to know itself; vasa 8000m veena it illumines without any instrument; to know the mic or the table I require the instrument of the eyes, but to know the contents of my own mind consciousness does not require any instrument; it illumines directly. So this is what the explanation of the fourth quarter, the last quarter, the one which is our real nature, pure consciousness. Now I will not go any further with the text now because a new sub area will be started, a new topic will be started next, but what I will do is because this is not just a trig drishya Vivica class, this is an introduction to vedanta, so we will take a little break here and talk about some general matters. I started straight with the text last time because as I said I I wanted us all
To have a taste of Vedanta itself straight away, without any preliminary introduction, is not possible. So now, some preliminary talk, some preliminary matters have to be discussed. The source book, the source texts of the Vedanta, our definitions—in fact, the definition of it—onto the traditional definition of Vedanta is valent a nama Upanishad.
From Adam, what is Vedanta? If you ask a classical Sanskrit scholar what is Vedanta, we will say Vedanta is the source of knowledge known as the Upanishads. Vedanta means Upanishads; the texts called Upanishads. What are these Upanishads? They are part of the fundamental spiritual texts, religious texts, the scriptures of the Hindus, the Vedas. The four Vedas: Rig Veda, Sama Veda, Yajur Veda, Atharvaveda. These are the fundamental, the core spiritual, the scriptural texts of the Hindus. And these Vedas are vast, with a vast corpus of literature; most of them deal with rites, rituals. Many of us, we have seen in the Balanta societies, the fire sacrifice which is performed, the home of fire. So that's a—that traces its origins back to the rituals of the Vedas.
Now, towards the end of the Vedas, sometimes in the middle of the Vedas, you find these texts which set forth the highest philosophical wisdom. So these texts are called Upanishad, or Vedanta. The culmination of Vedanta, the end of Vedanta, sometimes literally at the end of certain Vedic sangitas; sometimes they are in the middle, but they set forth the highest wisdom of the Vedas. So they are called Vedanta, the end, the culmination, the highest knowledge. Vedanta, where "anta" literally means knowledge; here it means spiritual knowledge. There are many Upanishads; there aren't many opening shots, but among them, 10 Upanishads are of particular interest and importance. And these 10 are important because some 1300 years ago, Adi Shankaracharya selected them for commenting, for writing commentaries, extensive explanations. So these are the central Upanishads upon which Advaita Vedanta, Vedanta, is based. Each Upanishad: Isa Upanishad, Kena Upanishad, Katha Upanishad, Prasna Upanishad, Mundaka Upanishad, Mandukya Upanishad, Taittiriya Upanishad, Aitareya Upanishad, Chandogya Upanishad, Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. The 10 we call the major Upanishads because Shankaracharya commented upon them. Some of them are very small; Isa Upanishad, Mandukya Upanishad is smallest. Some are very big: Brihadaranyaka, Chandogya; these are very big Upanishads. Some of them are in verse, mantras in verse; some of them are in prose. They are very old; even by modern reckoning, they are maybe 30 centuries old, three thousand years, four thousand years old. By tradition, they are ageless because they were revealed by God to the Upanishadic seers. There are records of spiritual experiences, timeless spiritual experiences, coming through the sages of the Upanishads, the Rishis. They have been set forth in poetic language, there. And the essence of the Upanishads was taken by Shri Krishna and set forth in the book which is the most well-known book of the Hindus, the Bhagavad Gita.
So the Bhagavad Gita, the song of God—God here means Krishna—the song of God, Bhagavad-Gita, is the essence of the Upanishads. There is a verse which says that the Upanishads are the cows and the one who milked these cows was Krishna, and we got the milk, the nectar-like milk, is the Bhagavad-Gita. So the essence of the Upanishads we find in the Bhagavad-Gita. It's a practical approach to the Upanishads. What do we do? What is the knowledge of the self? How do we meditate? How do we analyze our life? Bhakti, Jnana, Dhyana, Karma—all these things you find in Bhagavad-Gita. But the Bhagavad-Gita is firmly rooted in the Upanishads. So that's also redundant. There's another text not discussed so much, called the Brahma Sutras, not discussed with very good reason. Because if you think this is dry and philosophical, you should try the Brahma Sutras. I remember when I became a monk, a novice, so the first thing I did was I visited the library looking for books and Vedanta books, and I took the biggest, shiniest book I could find. That was the Brahma Sutras, English translation by Swami Gambhirananda. Brahma Sutras, Sanskrit commentaries, translation by Swami Gambhirananda—one of the most dense books in human civilization! Hey, I pulled it out and asked—I told her Swami that I've got a book in Vedanta which I planned to start, and he asked, "Oh, what book is that?" I said, "It's something called Brahma Sutras, Shankara's commentary of Shankaracharya, translated by Swami Gambhirananda." And so the Swami said, "Oh, that book—you won't go beyond a single page. You won't be on the first page." And it scared me so much that I put it back in the library immediately. It's only after I came to the training center and I started—I've just taught to us—then I started reading it. So there are 555 aphorisms, Sutras. Sutras are compact things, and these aphorisms—a lot of meaning is packed into each Sutra, and there are 555 of these. What are these? These are basically reasoning, philosophical reflection upon the Upanishads. Upanishads are poetry; they are mystical. Now, if you want to understand them, if you have got questions about it, we talk about Brahman, existence, consciousness, bliss. Where is this blessed Brahman? You see, the world is false. How is the world false? And what do you mean the world is false? In what sense is it false? I am not the body or mind; I am spirit. What do you—what is meant by—how am I not the body or the mind? The aim of life is God realization. What do you mean by God realization? Can you precisely tell us? All these things are discussed threadbare. I can see a lot of interested looks, but I warn you first: let's finish this before we go into the Brahma Sutras.
Now, Shankaracharya, he wrote commentaries on the Upanishads, on the Bhagavad Gita, and Brahma Sutra. And these Upanishads, the Bhagavad-Gita, and Brahma Sutra, taken together with the commentaries, are called Prasthana Trayi, the threefold Canon of Vedanta. The threefold Canon, the canonical texts of Vedanta, central texts of Vedanta: Upanishads, Bhagavad-Gita, and Brahma Sutras. Especially when we consider Vedanta as a philosophical system, the Brahma Sutras are important. So Brahma Sutras, with Shankaracharya's commentary, forms the basis of the philosophical system known as Advaita Vedanta, the non-dual interpretation of Vedanta. There are other types of Vedanta, different flavors of Vedanta, if you will. Different flavors—you go to a shop, ice-cream shop, you have a lot of different flavors of ice cream. So there are different flavors, different types of Vedanta, depending on the interpretation, especially on the interpretation of the Brahma Sutras. So Shankaracharya's commentary, Brahma Sutra Bhashya, is the basis of the philosophy of non-dual Vedanta, Advaita Vedanta. There were others: Ramanuja, the great qualified non-dualist; he wrote the Sri Bhashya commentary on the Brahma Sutras, and that forms the philosophical basis of the system known as Vishishtadvaita Vedanta. Madhvacharya wrote the Tattva-dipika Bhashya on the same Brahma Sutras, which forms the basis, the philosophical basis, of the great system known as Dvaita Vedanta. Nimbarkacharya, he wrote a Bhashya called the Vedanta Parijata Bhashya on the Brahma Sutras, which forms the basis of the system known as Dvaitadvaita Vedanta. Vallabhacharya wrote the Anu Bhashya on the Brahma Sutras, which forms the basis of another system of Vedanta called Shuddhadvaita Vedanta. And there are others too. There is the Govinda Bhashya on the Brahma Sutras, which forms the basis of eternity of Advaita, the philosophical system of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas. If that doesn't draw any—any sign of recognition, I just based on the Hare Krishnas. So they are rooted in the—in the—their tradition is rooted in the Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition, which is a stream of Vedanta which has a Chinmaya Vedanta at its core. So these are varieties of Vedanta, and what we are studying, what we teach primarily, is Advaita Vedanta, the non-dual Vedanta of the lineage of Shankaracharya.
Now, if all this sounds formidable, it is formidable. Let me not make it—not know Vedanta lightly; it is formidable. So, for that reason, the great masters of Vedanta, they wrote introductory texts. They wrote texts which make our entry into this formidable citadel much easier. And these introductory texts are called Prokare and Ogronthas. Prokare and Ogronthas, introductory texts. What you are—many of you are holding in your hands—this book is a Prokare and Ogrontha, an introductory text. There are many such introductory texts; among them, a very famous text is Vedanta Sara. Another text is Vedanta Paribhasha. Another well-known introductory text: Viveka Chudamani. And there are others. Shankaracharya himself wrote a few: Atma Bodha, Upadesa Sahasri, Atma Buddhi. These are all Prokare and Ogronthas; they are all introductory texts. They introduce you to certain areas of Vedanta; they either give you a bird's-eye view or certain important areas of Vedanta. They are introduced for the benefit of the beginner. So this is what we are studying. A few more comments, then I shall stop and take questions. There is something we should know before we go into Vedanta; this is called the Sadhana Chatushtaya. There are some preliminary qualities that the Masters of Vedanta expect from us. And don't be scared; we all have it to some degree or the other, but we need to work on it. What are these qualities? They are four in number, four qualities which we need to keep our eyes on. One is Viveka; second, Vairagya; third, Shama, Dama; the Shat Sampatti, a set of six disciplines, a set of six disciplines; and fourth, Mumukshutva, a desire for freedom and a yearning for liberation, a yearning for God realization. I'll repeat that: Viveka, it means analysis or discrimination, discrimination between the real and the unreal. Vairagya, second—from where Swami Vivekananda gets his name, Vivekananda; this is the—this is Viveka. Viveka means to distinguish two things which are mixed up, which are protecting coloring, to separate, to understand two things which are mixed up, which come together mixed, to separate them, at least in your mind, to know that this is good and this is bad for me, this is eternal and this is temporary, this is real and this is false, though they come mixed together. The ability to do that is called Viveka. A certain amount of that is required to begin Vedanta. You should have told me; I wouldn't have come all this way. I don't have too much of this very esoteric-sounding quality. It's nothing more than the feeling that there is something to spiritual life. There is nothing more than the feeling that there is something to spiritual life. There is some truth in spirituality, in religion; there is some eternal truth which, if I can realize, if I can get at it, will be of enormous benefit to me. There is some transcendent truth, a certain faith, a certain feeling, a certain intuition, a certain openness to which we all have; otherwise, you—none of us would be here today. So we have that; that is Viveka, the ability to distinguish between the temporal world and some belief in a transcendent truth. And even—even if that scares you—I particularly like Ramana Maharshi of Arunachala fame. Somebody asked him, "Am I qualified for Vedanta? It seems so tough." And Ramana Maharshi said, "Did you say 'I am I qualified'? Did you say 'I'? If you use the word 'term I', you're qualified. You say 'I'; that means you have a self, you are the self. So you are fully qualified for Vedanta. Who else is more qualified?" So let us—we wake up. The second thing is Vairagya. Once I have faith in this, then I want that transcendent truth. I want to realize God; I want to know my own nature; and I am not interested in the pursuits of the world. I may continue to do it for my sustenance, but my primary purpose in life is no longer seeking pleasure and power and pursuing the trivialities of the world. That can no longer be the primary purpose of my life. To God and Mammon do not go together; you cannot seek both; you cannot have both together. So now, a committed pursuit of the transcendent truth, of the feet of the promises that I am the spirit. Now I want to know that; I want to realize that; that becomes the primary purpose of my life. The rest of life can continue, and indeed it must continue, in a spirit of Sadhana. When Shri Krishna—Shri Krishna tells Arjuna in the second chapter of the Bhagavad-Gita about the Atman—this is what we are studying now—he tells Arjuna about this. Arjuna didn't want to fight the war; didn't want to do his duty. When he's told about this, Arjuna says, "Exactly, this is what I want. I don't want to fight this war." Then Krishna tells him, "Now that which you were doing for worldly reasons—you wanted to fight the war for revenge against your villainous cousins; you wanted to fight the war to get a kingdom—now you say you don't want all that. Very good, but now you must do your duty in the spirit of Karma Yoga, so that you're fit for realizing this, this spiritual self which we are talking about." So worldly life goes on, but our attitude towards it changes. Now we are not pursuing temporal goals, worldly goals anymore; we are pursuing the highest goal, Moksha. And the third thing is a set of six disciplines. The set of six disciplines are very quickly: Shama, a certain calmness and quietude, and control of the mind; a certain amount—I'm not trying to scare anybody—then Dama, a certain calmness of the sense organs and motor organs. It can't be too restless. There are people who are very intelligent but very restless. I met this young boy a few weeks ago, very intelligent, and he was talking to me, but all the time bouncing back and forth, in his late teens, bouncing by—he can't stop it. Now this is one—one way—I remember when we—we were novices and we used to go for scripture classes, and there was one of the novices, one of the premature, sitting with us here—the habit of—like many of us do, the habit of shaking his leg while he was sitting, you know, yes, sort of swinging his leg while you're sitting and reading a book. And the Swami who was teaching us suddenly very sharply scolded him, "What's that? Stop! Sit still!" The physical stillness, not trying to, you know, go out to the world all the time. I remember once we were walking with a senior Swami; it was at night; there was a creeper hanging nearby with beautiful flowers. And as the senior Swami—Swami walked past it and we novices we're there around him, one of the novices just casually, unthinkingly, took the flower and smelled it—so didn't even pluck it—this melted on the creeper, and as he was walking by and the Swami noticed it, he looked back and sharply scolded in Bengali. He said, "A key! It's a holy look! What is this? This is the sign of a person who wants to have sense enjoyments. It's an—it's an unthinking reaction; something is nice there, I must see it; something is tasty there, I must eat it." This continues going out into the world. This Dama, some control over that, and most of us do—we have certain control over that. So that is Dama. And then you have Uparati, turning the mind backwards; that mind which is restrained, it should not flow back into the world. Uparati, rotti means enjoyment of the world; reverse that, Uparati. Then we have Titiksha, fortitude; a certain spiritual toughness. Toughness is required for success in any endeavor. "I have a tummy ache; I'm too tired; I won't meditate today." No! Toughness requires, "I must get up and meditate." "It's raining; I won't go to the Vedanta class." No! Titiksha, toughness, spiritual toughness, requires, "I must hold on to that; I must go to the Vedanta class," putting up with the troubles that life throws at us, ignoring all that, holding on to our spiritual pursuit; that is spiritual toughness. And a bit of that is required. And then you have Samadhi, meditativeness; settling down, having been drawn from the world, settling down on God, on the Atman, on Vedanta, thinking about Vedanta, studying Vedanta, practicing Vedanta, and not doing anything else; reducing our worldly activities, engagements, so that energy and time are poured into this and not to anything else. There's the whole purpose why people become monks; this whole purpose of becoming a monk in the Vedantic tradition is Samnyasa, so that we can be drawn from the world and settle down on Brahman. And that—that's the whole purpose. Then Shanta, a certain faith that what the scriptures say is true. This is not belief; not—not faith in the sense that you have to believe; it's just the faith that when I go to a class in UCLA or somewhere, a physics class, just that much faith that what the books say is likely to be true, what the professors are teaching me are true—they are not—they are not pulling a clever one over me—and it's likely to be true, and I expect to understand and expect to see proof of truth. That much faith is necessary; that's all. When you—when we go to learn anything, that much faith is there. So Shanta. These are the six disciplines. So this—these are the preliminary qualities which are expected. You see, it's a tall order. If you look at our lives, we have all of that to some extent. What Vedanta tells us is we must cultivate, polish that up, so that we can come up to the required level, the entry level for Vedanta. I'll stop here; this was a preliminary talk on Vedanta, introduction to Vedanta. In the next class again, we will carry on with the text. Questions? Yes, there's a question there. Yes, we will read that a little later. Basically what we—what we call consciousness and unconsciousness are functions of the mind. There is a stage when the mind is active; the state when the mind is dull, in inter—there is a state when the mind shuts down, in deep sleep; that's what we call unconscious. But what Vedanta calls consciousness and what we call consciousness is the mind + consciousness. You see, when I am seeing, I'm hearing, I am talking; science of psychology would call these conscious events. Vedanta says these are the event part of it; it's a part of the mind. The consciousness is not an event; it's a constant illumination, constant light. So what happens is the mind can shut down; consciousness still remains. So that consciousness, the pure consciousness—there is no unconsciousness; there is no absence of consciousness there. In fact, if you understand this, you can see how people make a mistake. There is an increased interest in pure consciousness among psychologists; and I saw a—a workshop, a seminar on pure consciousness where there—they were cognitive scientists, psychologists, linguists, computer scientists, all of them. One of the areas they talked about was pure consciousness, and they were papers on that; and one of the papers was called—wait for it—the name of the paper was "Pure Consciousness Events." You're good without the students; that's why you laugh. You understand now why the term itself shows a lack of understanding. You are laughing; you understand; you understand that pure consciousness cannot be an event or a series of events. The event part of it is in the mind, in the sense organs, in the mind; these are changes, and pure consciousness is a constant, unchanging illumination which cannot be called an event or events. Events happen in pure consciousness; they're illumined by pure consciousness. Pure consciousness itself is not an event. Okay. Yes, there's a question, Devon. Yes, there's an important point. The fourth word says the consciousness by itself, humans, the various thoughts, feelings, emotions in the mind, desire, karma, sankalpa, thoughts, Sunday heard out, shut, da, faith, a shrug, the lack of faith, gritty fortitude, holding on to something, eater, etcetera, re, modesty, the understanding, p, fear, ETA, imagine, and all such things are illumined by consciousness itself. I can put it—it's very subtle, but there's a point here. You see, the doubt which may be raised here, and it should be raised, is that why are you saying that consciousness in humans, all these—why can't you say the mind is thinking about the mind? Then I say that consciousness elements are thought in my mind, isn't it the mind thinking about that thought? Because the mind can do that; that's the thing. The mind is designed to think about things. So the things which the mind can think about are in the world outside; they are in the body. I can think about my body also, and I can think about my thoughts. I am having spiritual thoughts; I am having non-spiritual thoughts; and having good thoughts and bad thoughts. I'm trying to remember something; I cannot remember something. This is the mind thinking about itself; this is God introspection. What is mentioned here is not introspection. The simple dress test of this is even when I am not introspecting—suppose I am fully engaged in some activity—and still aware, I am not thinking about thinking, but I'm still thinking and aware. In fact, that's a much more concentrated—of the mind. And the second test which the—the second proof which the Vedantists gave—why it is different from introspection—is that there is consciousness in deep sleep, to where the mind is just not thinking; the mind has shut down; there is consciousness. But that many people may not be convinced of; many people may find it difficult to understand. But just take consciousness as we experience in our day-to-day activities. Just now I can think about what's going on in my mind, or I may not think about what's going on in my mind. Even when I'm not thinking about it, still I experience joy, sadness, satisfaction, lack of satisfaction, understanding, in comprehension. I experience these, which means they are all objects of consciousness. This one point I'll—I'll mention here later on. The great temptation by reading all this is to try to be a witness. There are meditation techniques where they tell you, "Now witness your thoughts; witness your sensations; witness your thoughts." And they are good meditation techniques, but Vedanta is not talking about that. The witness that Vedanta talks about is the witness whether you try or you do not try; whether you ever read Vedanta or you do not read Vedanta, the witness is always the witness. It's not a created witness; it's not a witness we manufactured by effort. What they're pointing out is an existing truth. I'll—I remember a Swami in Uttarakhand explaining this—what we are reading—so he's explaining this. At the end of the class he says, in Hindi, he says—what he said was—"Well, Swamis"—we're all around with Swamis—"Swamis, do you feel that you are the Sakshi, the witness? Do you feel that? And now you do feel it, don't you, that we are the witness?" And many of them nodded yes. What he said works very well in Hindi. He said, "Both Burgundy me grow gay"—you're going to fall into a pretty big hole which you have dug for yourself. The witness which you feel—it—I am the witness of everything—which might try to think of myself as the witness—I'm thinking about it—is something that I'm generating with my mind; it was not there earlier. At the moment you leave and you face a traffic jam on the 101, that witness will go away. It's something you're thinking about; the moment you stop thinking that I'm a witness, you don't feel that you're a witness anymore. That is not the real witness. Though I'm—I'm not saying that thinking like that is bad; thinking that it's good is a good practice, but that's not the Vedanta witness. The real self, the real self is the self all the time; there is a witness all the time. One more question, then we are done. Yes, in fact, we do take comfort—the most comforting thing that we have is deep sleep. The most relaxing thing—our mind gets tired by thinking about objects, experiencing objects; the mind shuts down; pure consciousness by itself is not tiring. What gets tired is the mind. So the hours of pure consciousness and deep sleep are most comforting, and those who are great meditators, those who can experience Samadhi, it is said that the deepest relaxation is possible in Samadhi when they can consciously, deliberately shut the mind down—"Yoga chitta vritti nirodha"—and they experience the deepest relaxation. In fact, it is said that those who have experienced Samadhi, they need not sleep; the requirement of sleep goes down. So yes, that is deeply relaxing. Last question; one more question. Your body, brain rots; what continues and what comes back? Yes, those questions will be answered; all those things are dealt with. The book—looks deceptively—book looks deceptively slim; it has lots and lots of material. But to put it very briefly: I am not born; the body is born; even the mind is not born. So then, according to Vedanta, the subtle body, which includes the mind, it lasts—outlasts the body; it was existing before this body came into being; it is there right now, functioning through this body. As the body degenerates, gets old and dies, this subtle body will transmigrate to other bodies, to other lives. So the subtle body continues; that's one. But more than that, the subtle
Body is also continuously changing, but more than that, pure consciousness continues. It was there before the body, before the subtle body—it is there now, it will be there afterwards. And that's what we are. We are not only not this body; we are not even the subtle body which goes from life to life. They are not even that. This will be clearly shown later on. Very beautiful analysis is there, and what you said I just mentioned it here at the end of this text.
Towards the end of this text, a set of exercises will be given. We shall later on read those and practice those later on. They're wonderful techniques, a bunch, a set of six techniques will be given where you can—what we have which we are reading now—where you can actually get a feel for that. Those are very beautiful and profound techniques. Don't rush home and start doing them; they will not work until we have understood, firmly got a grasp on what we are going to study now. Once you put a grasp on that, that understanding will form the basis of those techniques. More of that later, in the next class.
Oh Poonam, ah da funami dumb poo not pounamu da Chetty poorness ya Poonam Adalia Poonam ivara shisha t om shanti shanti shanti. From the infinite has come this manifested world. That is infinite; this is also infinite. Realizing the infinite nature of this manifested world, the infinite alone remains. Home, peace, peace, peace.