From अरण्यकाण्डम्

गोस्वामीश्री तुलसीदास कृत रामचरितमानस, अरण्यकाण्ड से

--

नमामि भक्तवत्सलम् । कृपालुशीलकोमलं।। 

भजामि ते पदाम्बुजम् । अकामिनां स्व-धामदम्।।

निकाम श्यामसुन्दरम् । भवाम्बुनाथमन्दरम्।।

प्रफुल्लकञ्जलोचनम् । मदादिदोषमोचनम्।। 

प्रलम्बबाहु-विक्रमम् । प्रभोऽप्रमेयवैभवम्।।

निषङ्गचापसायकम्। धरं त्रिलोकनायकम्।।

दिनेशवंशमण्डनम्। महेशचाप-खण्डनम्।।

मुनीन्द्रसन्तरञ्जनम्। सुरारिवृन्दभञ्जनम्।।

मनोजवैरिवन्दितम्। अजादिदेव सेवितम्।।

विशुद्ध-बोध-विग्रहम्। समस्तदूषणापहम्।।

नमामि इन्दिरापतिम्। सुखाकरं सतां गतिम्।।

भजे सशक्ति-सानुजम्। शचीपतिं प्रियानुजम्।।

त्वदङ्घ्रिमूल ये नरा। भजन्ति हीन-मत्सरा।।

पतन्ति नो भवार्णवे। वितर्कवीचिसङ्कुले।।

विविक्तवासिनः सदा। भजन्ति मुक्तये मुदा।। 

निरस्य इन्द्रियादिकम्। प्रयान्ति ते गतिं स्वकम्।।

तमेकमद्भुतं प्रभुम्। निरीहमीश्वरं विभुम्।।

जगद्गुरुं च शाश्वतम्। तुरीयमेव केवलम्।।

भजामि भाववल्लभम्। कुयोगिनां सुदुर्लभम्।।

स्वभक्तकल्पपादपम्। समं सुसेव्यमन्वहम्।।

अनूपरूपभूपतिम्। नतोऽहमुर्विजापतिम्।।

प्रसीद मे नमामि ते। पदाब्जभक्ति देहि मे।।

फलश्रुतिः

पठन्ति ये स्तवं इदम्। नरादरेण ते पदम्।।

व्रजन्ति नात्र संशयम्। त्वचीय भक्ति-संयुता।। 

***

 

What or Who?

Ego / Alter-ego

Sat-Darshanam Verses 22 to 27 may help in understanding how the Personal / the individual ego keeps manifesting in and as the Alter-ego and the first step is to dissolve / merge this Alter-ego into the ego and then the second step is to let the ego on it's own dissolve / merge into the source from which it emerged out.

This may remind a sincere seeker the way :

माण्डूक्य उपनिषद् 

the mANDUKya UpaniShad

Points out about dissolving / merging the म्  / M into the उ / u and then dissolving / merging the उ / u  into the अ / a 

The three syllables :

 अ / a, उ / u and M / म्  

denote the manifest ॐ / OM

While this sound denotes the Supreme, Ultimate reality beyond and within the manifest.

ॐ जाग्रतादि त्रयोन्मुक्तं जाग्रतादिमयंस्तथा।।

ॐकारैकसुसंवेद्यं यत्पदं तन्नमाम्यहम्।।

(माण्डूक्य उपनिषद् मङ्गलम्)

This is therefore the  : 

आगमोक्तेः / AgamokteH 

Injunction from the scripture.

However this is not so easy to grasp the deeper sense of the above teaching as is given in the words of the scripture.

The world is the third person What

The ego / alter ego is the second person; an ad-mixture - विकार  of :

What and Who,

the first (what) is utterly dead matter, while the next (who) is consciousness, - either as in a man, or Consciousness as Supreme and Ultimate and Pure - beyond the both.

This point has been well elaborated in the following verse 26.

--

सद्दर्शनम्  / saddarsshanaM --

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्  ...

--

यदीशितुर्वीक्षणमीक्षितार-

मवीक्ष्य तन्मासिकेक्षणं स्यात्।।

न दृष्टुरन्यः परमो हि तस्य

वीक्षा स्वमूले प्रविलीय निष्ठा।।२२।।

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्... 

आत्मानमीक्षेत परं प्रपश्येत्-

इति आगमोक्तेः सुलभो न भावः।।

नात्मैव दृश्यो यदि का कथेशे

स्वयं तदन्नीभवनं तदीक्षा।।२३।।

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्  ...

धिये प्रकाशं परमो वितीर्य

स्वयं धियोऽन्तः प्रविभाति गुप्त।। 

धियं परावर्त्य धियोऽन्तरेऽत्र

संयोजनान्नेश्वरदृष्टिरन्या।।२४।।

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्  ...

न वक्ति देहोऽहमः प्रसुप्तौ

न कोऽपि नाभूवमिति प्रवक्ति।।

यत्रोदिते सर्वमुदेति तस्य 

धियाऽहमः शोधय जन्मदेशम्।।२५।।

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्  ...

देहो न जानाति सतो न जन्म

देह-प्रमाणोऽन्य उदेति मध्ये।।

अहंकृतिः-ग्रन्थि-विबन्ध-सूक्ष्म-

शरीर-चेतो-भव-जीव-नामा।।२६।।

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्  ...

रूपोद्भवो रूपतति प्रतिष्ठो

रूपाशनो धूतगृहीतरूपः।। 

स्वयं विरूपः विचारकाले 

धावत्यहंकार पिशाच एषः।।२७।।

सत्प्रत्यया किं नु विहाय सन्तम्  ...

Still we know all this theoretically only. 

To understand at the direct level through self-enquiry we can see how the sense of 'self' keeps us confused all the time, and we fail to notice that in its two forms we get overwhelmed and begin to say :

I have to get rid of the ego, I have to be free from the ego.

Can't we see the apparent but otherwise evident paradox / contradiction in our this thought where I want to free myself from myself? Isn't it self-contradictory only but ridiculous also!

But why we become a victim of such a paradox? Isn't it because though all the time and certainly, without least doubt, from the very insight we know ourself as the consciousness, as oneself who exists; and existence implies this knowing that we exist as consciousness only, somehow we tend to define and pronounce exactly what we might be!

So we accept whatever we have been told to us by others. Like

"You are so and so, you have this name, you're child, young man, boy or girl, man or woman, strong or weak, healthy or sick, you're of this age because you were born on such and such a date!" 

So we have a fairly excessive amount of data about what people think of of "me"  and we go on believing without raising a doubt whether it might be true or not.

In appearance this all is perfectly correct but inherently it's basically information and words only. If we turn to Patanjali's Yoga-Sutra for help, we can see how the sage has defined all this information in the following two aphorisms :

विपर्ययो मिथ्याज्ञानमतद्रूपप्रतिष्ठम्।।८।।

शब्दज्ञानानुपाती वस्तुशून्यो विकल्पः।।९।।

(समाधिपाद)

The above two aphorisms point out that all the worldly knowledge acquired is of two kinds only -

The first is  knowledge in the distorted form :

विपर्यय  / aberration  of the known fact,

The second is an alternative word used to denote something with no essence at all. 

This may be explained by the following examples : 

First of all let us see the example of a word "past".

The past in time tells us about an event that happened sometime ago -may be a minute, an hour, a day, a week, a month an year or a few years or decades ago.

Is it the same in the memory of all those who were part of the event?  Don't all of them have a different narrative?  So the word "past" as it is told is but distortion of what exactly might have happened.

Take another word "Future".

The "past" was at least known to some extent by all, but what about the future? The happening that will happen after a short, long or very long time from now? This could neither be experienced, nor proved by any means, neither by logic, exoerience, nor by any example. Future necessarily doesn't mean uncertainty, but only a chance, a probability. At this moment, future is just unavailable to us to say and understand what it might be.  Really it is just absent. This is called but "option". It is therefore a solid example of  "विकल्प".

And how one could possibly handle that which is just not available?

Let us now see another example.

The "Past" was at least "known". Though maybe partially only,  but the "future" couldn't even be touched, what to speak of seeing, visualizing or handling it?

Isn't "Future" only an imagination of the kind? And in this moment of now, is just absurd to say that we will / can change or alter this assumed "Future".

How you're possibly going to acquire that miracle? Could you materialize the "future" and bring a mutation to this, of the kind now, at this very moment?

This is how there is no parallel to the

wisdom of Sage Patanjali.

।।ॐ नमो ऋषिभ्यः पूर्वेभ्यः।। 

The word :

"Brahman".

We have this word only and actually no object whatever indicated by this word. Still we discuss, define and debate a lot about this word and what might be it's possible meaning.

Then the scripture points out through the four  महावाक्य  :

1. अहं ब्रह्मास्मि, 

2. तत्त्वमसि, 

3. अयमात्मा ब्रह्म, 

4. प्रज्ञानं ब्रह्म 

The three of them indirectly tell about what might be the  ब्रह्म  /  Brahman.

The second also in the same way uses a synonym to tell what might be this 

ब्रह्म / Brahman .

The straightforward English translation would be something like this :

1. I Am Brahman -- I AM THAT, 

2. Thou Art That -- You are That.

3. The / This Self (Itself) is Brahman. 

4. Awareness, Consciousness  or the Attention is  verily the Brahman. 

In effect, this word  ब्रह्म  / Brahman is a good example of what is विपर्यय. 

Another example may be  the "sky" :

We all know what we call "sky" is just nothing, a void or a blank only.

In the same way we acquire beliefs and ideas only about ourself, the world, God, Truth and so many other things. Instead if we try to find out what the word "I"   might mean, our attention at once will be drawn to ourself -

What we think of ourselves and what we might be Really in our own true being.

Alter-ego is therefore the one, "Who"   passes through the five kinds of 

 वृत्ति / vRtti,

as are enumerated by the Sage in these aphorisms of Patanjali.

One who says : 

"I think", "I've to do this or that, "I will do this or that", "I'm happy or sad", "I'm the owner of this property, body, house, family, monet and the relations", "I've this experience" I've in my name this achievement", "My name is going to be reputed always".

The experience is the Alter-ego, while the one who claims to have had it is the ego. 

What we think and believe we are, is but the Alter-ego, while knowing I'm but existence and consciousness only is ego. But enquiring about the "I"  and knowing the full import of this word takes us beyond ego and the Alter-ego both. 

***

 

The Trans.

The  Average Mind  /  चित्त

Goes through the following five phases :

मूढ  - unconscious.  

When the attention is yet to wake up and is free from the sense of individuality in a perceived world. Where the whole and the individual are undifferentiated.

क्षिप्त  - evolved / conscious. 

Where the attention has just woken up and the sense of the individuality comes up in a perceived world of senses. Like in the case of plants and trees where they are supposed to have only the sense of touch and know / experience the feeling only. A vague sense of just being only.

The same attention gradually grows in the kind of the next five kinds of sensory perceptions, like the smell, sound, taste and sight respectively.

So there is this hierarchy in that order. 

The insects, the tape-worm, the snail, the turtle, the frog and the fish are the next.

Then there are the animals, the birds and finally the humans on this ladder.

With this gradual ramification the five prominent sensory perceptions of them too become refined and subtle.

The same attention that in the beginning was of one kind, namely the touch, then becomes five-fold attention and though the focus of attention keeps on shifting from one to another kind, at a time only one of them governs over the other four. For example :

When you touch, attention is focused on this only and is withdrawn from all the other kinds of senses.

When you taste, the same thing repeats.

And in this way at any time the one of them dominates over the other four. In this way, the different kind of sensory perceptions always follow one-another.

एकाग्र  - centred  / pointed.

But when the attention is voluntarily or involuntarily kept fixed upon only one of them, the attention becomes pointed or centred about that specific perception.

Then you carefully withdraw attention from the other four kinds of the sensory perceptions and try to extend the time for comparatively a longer.

समाहित  - absorbed  / identified with the object of attention.

Because for that much span of Time, all sense of duality  seems to have ceased. It's like the state of deep dreamless sleep, where one enjoys the pure sense of being only and the natural, spontaneous bliss associated with it.

If the object attracts the attention and is very interesting, this rapt attention may give a great indescribable pleasure that remains stored in the memory.

But after a while because of compulsion or some other reason, when the pleasure is no more, attention diverts to another object of attraction.

This state of  mind  can't stay for long still one remembers it for a long time. This may be akin to Trans or samAdhi.

निरुद्ध - controlled.

This one is gained through effort because one realizes that all sensory perceptions howsoever promising and fulfilling don't last and can't stay for ever.

This is the beginning of the practice of Yoga. The aphorism :

अथ योगानुशासनम्।।१।।

योगश्चित्तवृत्तिनिरोधः।।२।।

The first aphorism, points out how to practice the discipline of Yoga.

The next one for the beginners, defines in the most simple words what Yoga means and is all about.

The above lines describe what are the five phases of Mind. 

It is also equally important to see and understand the consciousness in terms of the three states is something different but deeply related to the these five phases of Mind  /  चित्त.

That will be discussed in the next post :

The Alter-ego 

and 

The Altered states of consciousness.

So that in that perspective, we can better understand the meaning and the significance of the word :

Alter-ego.

***

 

The Ready-reckoner.

Characteristics and The Clues helpful in  recognizing   The Ego, The Alter-ego and The multiple Alter-ego(s).

अहं, प्रत्यहं और  प्रत्यहं के लक्षणों और उनके बीच के विविध भेदों की पहचान करने और उन्हें समझने  में सहायक कुछ संकेत :

लक्षण / characteristics

और,

पहचान / Identifying.

--

A word about the Identification and Identifying :

This English word :

"Identification" 

is used to express the idea about getting oneself identified as something, and also in distinguishing between so many and  different objects of perception.

Saying -

"I am poor or wealthy, white or black, Indian, American, Russian, Japanese, Chinese, old or young ..."

is kind of a conceptual thought only and doesn't really tell anything about who or what you're, but saying you're hungry or weak, male or female, comfortable or tired, healthy or sick, no doubt certainly  tells something to some extent about and of you, which all and everone can at once understand.

Likewise, saying I am wise or ignorant, I'm successful, not really so successful, may tell something about you but which can't easily be verified.

One can recognize someone other by the external marks like the clothes, through some religious signs and the manners of speaking and behaving.

But what about the characteristic marks of someone who says I'm Christian, Jew, Buddhist, Jain, Sikh or Hindu?

So if someone identifies oneself as such,it can't be easily verified whether it's true or not true.

In the same way when someone says - I'm happy, sad, angry, anxious, depressed then also it's only one's own assertion, no another one could know or verify if it's true or not. But it's a kind of  feeling, indulgence or involvement whereby one says so.

In other words, in this way one identifies oneself with the feeling. This feeling may change at any moment and then maybe, one identifies with the feeling that comes next.

"Identification" therefore means :

One may either recognize oneself as if belonging to a class, religion, gender, sect, people, country, nationality or may identify oneself with a feeling, sentiment, thought or philosophy.

Both these ways are forms of ego either at a societal level or a conceptual level.

Both the two identifications hide your true identity and impose upon you some  another, probably a false one, which has no visible evidence whatsoever.

Both these are therefore kinds of the Acquired / Artificial / Unfounded / Alter-ego.

There is absolutely no need to prove or verify what is your true identity.

Therefore the true identity of oneself and all the others too is evidently known to all and everyone without exception any, but for reasons whatever, rarely anyone refers to that as "I"  or as my-self.

Despite this being the evident truth, all human beings, even very learned ones, refer to themselves as if they belonged to this or that religion, class, nationality, country, social or cultural group, and see the irony / hype farce - even the so-called spiritual people are too, though they may hide this under the mask of the fake humility! 

In this way, the ego / Alter-ego work(s) through all and everyone.

Ego survives in the latent, dormant and  hidden, as well as in the manifest form. 

The latent is like in the state when one goes through the state of deep sleep.

In the dream state one may be partially asleep, while the mind may remember and part of the past experience and may go on visualizing whatever experience one may have passed through while in the waking state.

Again when fast asleep, the ego is still at work, because after waking up from the sleep one asserts how he enjoyed it. This means the same ego that enjoyed is now telling the experience.

While the ego underlies beneath all other kinds of experiences, all these are strung over a thread of the unique, one and the same, "I-sense" which is the plain ego, where the experience is experienced by the one (the individual) who claims to have gone through the experience.

Could there possibly be yet another ego,  who could be the "witness"?

Obviously ego is ever so overwhelmed by the sense of "individuality" while this "witness" can never be an individual just because it's unable to define itself, while the individual is always very sure and constantly keeps on assuming many a forms and kinds.

Understanding this whole pattern of the ego and the Alter-ego, one can not but go beyond it and also realize that there are no differently many individuals. No one is good, nor bad, it's only the ignorance of the true identity of oneself at one hand and those of the many forms and kinds of Alter-ego on the other that causes the apparent distinctions between man and man.

Everyone can sure go through this and see for oneself what might be one's true identity and how one should refer to it. 

***

विपर्ययो

मिथ्याज्ञानमतद्रूपप्रतिष्ठम्।।८।।

(पातञ्जल योगसूत्र समाधिपाद)

--

विचारणीय प्रश्न यह है कि जिसे बुद्धि कहा जाता है, और जिसके सक्रिय होने पर ही मस्तिष्क में विचार का कार्य होता है, वह नष्ट, विचलित या विलुप्त होने की स्थिति में क्या होता है? और पुनः जिन स्थितियों में यह हो सकता है, वह हैं जागृति, निद्रा, स्वप्न और मूर्च्छा। और इन सभी स्थितियों में भी मस्तिष्क अपना कार्य स्वचालित ढंग से करता ही रहता है। चेतन और अचेतन रूप से मस्तिष्क भी प्रकृति के अनुसार वैसे ही अपना कार्य करता रहता है जैसे शरीर के अन्य सभी अंग और कार्य प्रणालियाँ भी किया करते हैं। किन्तु बुद्धि का सम्पूर्ण कार्य "ज्ञात" या स्मृति पर ही अवलंबित होने से जैसे ही "ज्ञात" या स्मृति से कोई भी सूचना मिलना बंद हो जाता है, और बुद्धि को कार्य कर पाना संभव ही नहीं रह जाता है, तब यह प्रश्न ही नहीं रह जाता तब यह प्रश्न उठता है कि ऐसी किसी स्थिति में बुद्धि की क्या स्थिति होगी? और क्या तब बुद्धि स्तब्ध या कुंठित होकर अवरुद्ध या व्याकुल होकर रह जाती है? किन्तु जैसा कि प्रायः पाया जाता है, उस समय भी मनुष्य को यह भान हो सकता है कि बुद्धि ठिठक गई है और कुछ सोच सकने की स्थिति में नहीं है, या कि कुछ सूझ नहीं रहा है! किन्तु तब भी व्याकुलता, भय, चिन्ता या घबराहट भावना की तरह विद्यमान रह सकता है। इस मनःस्थिति में बुद्धि का अभाव तो नहीं हो जाता और यदि जागरूकता / ध्यान / अवधान स्थिर रहे, तो इसे ही बोध की तरह जान लिया जाता है। यद्यपि तब विचार कर पाना भी संभव न होता हो, फिर भी अपने अस्तित्व की सहज स्फूर्ति तो होती ही है। यही भान, जो विचार, भावना  बुद्धि से विलक्षण वह अवस्था है जिसे द्वैतरहित अस्मिता या निजता भी कहा जा सकता है। चूँकि यह सदैव विद्यमान है और "समय" की कल्पना या सत्यता की तरह चूँकि तब स्वयं को दूसरे से भिन्न नहीं जाना जाता, इसलिए यह वह अपरोक्षानुभूति या दर्शन (immediate or non-mediate) है जिसे परम निष्कल आत्मज्ञान कह सकते हैं, जो मिथ्याज्ञान अर्थात् विपर्यय से भिन्न होता है।

*** 

It Depends On.

Circumstances

मूढ जहीहि धनागम-तृष्णा, 

कुरु वैतृष्ण्यं विषय-वितृष्णा।।

-- 

Sings the sage, walking along, the River.

He has no one, to say His own.

The River He Talks of Is the Life Sacred,

Is without any beginning, or any end, 

He lives in the woods, the forest, or in the Jungle, 

Though has no 

Jungle-house

like the one I live in!) 

He lives in the open, where there are so many wild and ferocious animals, 

Where the weather is, Arid, Humid or Extreme, Cold Or Just Pleasant, 

People occasionally come there to see Him or just as a tourist from the cities, for a picnic, and seeing Him, bow to Him.

Offer Him respects, gifts, money, and the  things of luxury and comfort, 

He merely casts a glance over them or even looks not at them, He distributes the offerings amongst the visitors and hardly keeps anything for Himself. 

He has a place as a shelter, of a tree, a home for all the good, bad or the normal weathers,

The cool and fresh water of The River to drink, and to quench the thirst, 

Hardships and troubles, keep following Him, yet unperturbed, unconcerned of them, he never complains.

He knows these all, are the colors of the picture, that keeps charming, changing, enchanting. 

Always, all the time. Everyday, and every moment. He comes across and welcomes quite a new every situation,

He has with Him a walking stick only, to help Him in walking, supporting and protecting Himself just in case, from the occasional and the unexpected dangers, that are aplenty in the woods. 

He knows quite well, and needs not to remember that decay is inherent in all composite things. 

He as well understands, only the names and the forms are the things that go on and on without a beginning, appearing and disappearing and their is nothing to grieve about. In fact, nothing is going to perish, for nothing is born. It's like the river that is but The Life sacred. 

Because of knowing this nature of things and of their inherent decay, and the ever-changing names and forms of things He thinks not of death, 

Nor how to protect the body, the mind or even the self, for their survival from the fate ultimate.

He is aware, the greatest pain is the pain of safety and insecurities; in the form of worry and the fear and anticipation of the incumbent imaginary future, never arrives in this present moment, now and here in the instant.

Who dies?

Is not death only an idea that itself gets born and dies and reborn, a thousand times in the life of everyone?

--

They had come in a car. The visitors,  - a team of doctors. Someone wanted that they check if the sage is doing well and may need any help. 

He allowed them to perform the health check and they found Him in excellent health condition.

They however gave Him a few medicines and supplementary tonics, which were soon given away to some local visitors who often came to see Him.

This was so because He had no place to store those things.

He didn't thank them but just asked :

"Why are you worried?"

"We just want to see you happy and in good health"

They replied.

He only smiled back in response.

And they left.

What really makes one insecure, unsafe and worrisome?

Isn't it's the insensitivity only?

Insensitivity brings fear and the thought of the hypothetical future, which could neither in experience, nor through logic or example be brought into perception.

It remains as much elusive, as it has no substance nor essence.

Six Yoga-Sutra of Patanjali are a gem in understanding the characteristics of all such tendencies  (वृत्ति)  which form the core of the ego and the Alter-ego.

Again the ego and the Alter-ego itself is a tendency of the mind, though looking as if are different and independent from one another, really they are complementary of one and the same phenomenon that is the individual mind.

 वृत्तयः पञ्चतय्यः क्लिष्टाक्लिष्टाः।।५।।

प्रमाणविपर्ययविकल्पनिद्रास्मृतयः।।६।।

प्रत्यक्षानुमानागमाः प्रमाणानि।।७।।

शब्दज्ञानानुपाती वस्तुशून्यो विकल्पः।।८।।

विपर्ययो मिथ्याज्ञानमतद्रूपप्रतिष्ठम्।।९।।

अभाव-प्रत्यययालम्बना वृत्तिः निद्रा।।१०।।

अनुभूतविषयसम्प्रमोषः वृत्तिः स्मृतिः।।११।।

(समाधिपाद)

The phenomenon that has these two core and essential complimentary aspects are ego and Alter-ego is the very sense of I itself which again is given the names :

अहं-वृत्ति, and अहं-प्रत्यय,

The following verse of :

Vivekachudamani

Elaborates how this sense of I is only a manifestation and reflection of its very own source from where it comes into existence and gives rise to the apparent all the phenomenal worldly Existence -

अस्ति कश्चित् स्वयं नित्यं अहं-प्रत्ययलम्बनः।।

अवस्थात्रय साक्षी सन् पञ्चकोषविलक्षणः।।१२५।।

The source and the origin which is the only Reality is in no way affected by all this apparent emergence of the World and the individual Who finds oneself confined in the world as is perceived by the I-sense. 

Another equally important clue comes from the Sanskrit text UpadeshaSaraH of Sri Ramana : 

वृत्यस्त्वहंवृत्तिमाश्रिताः।।

वृत्तयो मनः विद्ध्यहं मनः।।१७।।

मानसं तु किं मार्गणे कृते।।

नैव मानसं मार्ग आर्जवात्।।१८।।

All the tendencies depend upon and are supported by the अहं-वृत्ति /  I-sense  as has been already said in the stanza 125.

Know therefore the mind as the "I-sense" itself.

Trying to find out "What is Mind?"

results in the revelation that there is no independent existence of this thing what is named "the mind".

The ego is therefore verily the mind, the one who is possessed with the idea :

I do (sense of doer-ship)

I feel / experience (the sense of oneself being the one who enjoys or suffers) 

I know (through the knowledge and the memory)

and finally, 

I own (the sense of oneself as having the things thought of one's own).

The ego is thus split into these 4 ways and all the secondary tendencies form the Alter-ego.

Thus summarily, 

The Thinker is the ego while the thought is the Alter-ego.

The Observer is the ego and the observed is Alter-ego.

Having understood and realized this the Sage ever so abides in the Timeless Bliss  of :

The Self  / Brahman 

***

 

Ego and Alter-ego.

The Ecology

पारिस्थितिकी

अहं और प्रत्यहं

प्रतीति, अहं-प्रतीति और निरहं-प्रतीति

--

What Is,

What Exists,

And The One,

Who EXISTS and KNOWS!

-- 

What Is, What Exists and The One Who Knows are apparently Three aspects of One and the same Unique Reality only.

What Is, What Exists and The One Who KNOWS are though Three aspects of The One and the same Unique Reality, The One Who KNOWS Is independent of the other two.

The other two aspects are Known, The One Who KNOWS is never The KNOWN.

The One Who KNOWS Is The KNOWING, ever so devoid of All The Known.

Within and from This One Who KNOWS, Within and from The Unique KNOWING, arises the multiplicity of the individuals, all who though wrongly, tend to feel they are different from one-another.

Again, The Known to them is presumed to exist apart from the individual as the oneself and they think (though not in the spoken words) and call this KNOWN :

- The World.

It is really the THOUGHT / THINKING only, which deploys and uses the spoken words and which causes and gives rise to the sense of oneself as the individual; as the KNOWER and all the rest as the KNOWN.

This Apparently Individual KNOWER is the Ego while the KNOWN in this Ego is The Alter-ego - The knowledge, memory  and the Information available to This Ego.

The Ego tries to find out -

What it's all about!

As more it tries to find out, so more gets strengthened as an individual.

The interaction between the Ego and the Alter-ego goes on because the Alter-ego, though a shadow of the Ego, and born of the same Ego can persist and continue for indefinitely so long a time almost for ever! This is the very Ignorance which feeds on itself and grows on and on till for no reason whatsoever, it disappears and the Reality shines forth where there is neither Ego nor the Alter-Ego!

Destiny, Will-Power, Effort and the  Conviction -

नियति, संकल्प, यत्न और निष्ठा --

आरभ्यते जीवजगत्परात्म

तत्वाभिधानेन मतं समस्तम्।।

इदं त्रयं यावदहंमतिः स्यात्

सर्वोत्तमाऽहंमतिशून्यनिष्ठा।।४।।

सत्यं मृषा वा चिदिदं जडं वा

दुःखं सुखं वेति मुधा विवादः।।

अदृष्ट लोका निरहंप्रतीतिः

निष्ठाऽविकल्पा परमाऽखिलेष्टा।।५।।

विधेः प्रयत्नस्य च कोऽपि वादः

तयोर्द्वयोर्मूलमजानतानांस्यात्।।

विधेः प्रयत्नस्य च मूलवस्तु

सञ्जानतां नैव विधिर्न यत्नः।।२१।।

(सद्दर्शनम्)

***

Who's Who?

So I knew!

Me / self is Ego, Ego is Thinker,

Alter-ego is Thought!

I'm none of all that!

***

I, Me and My Alter-ego.

The Essential Trinity

Perception, Gestalt and The Algorithm.

--

Trying to understand and in this way knowing myself I could discover this Essential Trinity that Is I'm and is my Alter-ego. Of course I'm visibly the self, say 'a self's like so many innumerable souls in the world. Though the World appears and disappears too before me repeatedly in an unending sequence of events; is face to face to me also, when I turn away my eyes from it, I remain the only thing made of a couple of the self / me and my Alter-ego.

Though I'm visibly and invariably the self or the ego, I exist as this pair of the two in myself.

Recently, in fact this morning I came to realize how the two always co-exist and together form what I'm in the eyes of the world of my perception. 

So the perception is the very ground on which I come across the world (or say my world).

Living in harmony and peace with this interminant world, I have a medium of interaction with the world.

This medium is again a couple made of the gestalt and the algorithm that is with me always. No doubt, this medium is as and according to my past experiences in dealing with the world, I constantly keep on trying to bring a change in their mode of working. The core-issue is finding out who's who! Though I'm really always the same, the unique self, my ego (or say, the ego) and the Alter-ego together appear and disappear simultaneously at once and I because of In-attention, fail to see what's all this about! 

So the ego / self and the Alter-ego talk to one another and I literally get "lost" in their mutual conversation.

In the common words : I talk to myself, I get split into the duo and just can't see and remember :

"Who the real I'm?"

I'm neither of the two. I see them talking of and about so many ideas and concepts and thereby I get trapped into believing the dream they cast upon me.

I like, watching the dream with rapt attention getting involved, indulging in it.

I know but tend to forget that a dream is but a dream only. Neither true nor false.

I define and redefine myself repeatedly.

I become self, ego and Alter-ego for the time being.

The magic and the miracle last but for a brief time, appearing as if unending.

***

The way I Understand!

ऋषि कणाद का वैशेषिक दर्शन

जैसा कि मैंने समझा, कणाद उस ऋषि का उपनाम था, जिन्होंने न्याय दर्शन  की शाखा वैशेषिक दर्शन  का आविष्कार किया क्योंकि ऋषि सत्य का दर्शन करते हुए सिद्धान्तों का आविष्कार करते हैं न कि स्थापना, जैसा कि आधुनिक समझे जानेवाले भौतिक विज्ञान के मत को स्थापित करते हैं जो किसी तथ्य को तात्कालिक रूप से व्याख्यायित तो करता है किन्तु कालान्तर में उसे पुनः संशोधित किया जाना आवश्यक हो जाता है। वैज्ञानिक रीति से तथ्यों को समझने का तरीका प्रमाण पर निर्भर होता है जिसे असत्य सिद्ध नहीं किया जा सकता है।

पतञ्जलि के योग-दर्शन के अनुसार प्रमाण एक वृत्ति विशेष का ही एक प्रकार होता है -

वृत्तयः पञ्चतय्यः क्लिष्टाक्लिष्टाः।। 

प्रमाणविपर्ययविकल्पनिद्रास्मृतयः।।

प्रत्यक्षानुमानागमाः प्रमाणानि।।

इसलिए प्रमाण नामक वृत्ति आकलन (evaluation) का ही एक रूप है, जो प्रत्यक्ष इन्द्रिय-संवेदन से, बौद्धिक आकलन से बुद्धिगम्य या जिसे प्रयोग के द्वारा निष्कर्ष के रूप में प्राप्त कर तात्कालिक रूप से सत्य मानकर लिया जाता है। प्रथम को प्रत्यक्ष, द्वितीय को अनुमान  और अंतिम को आगम कहा जाता है। इसीलिए वैदिक शास्त्र भी तदनुसार लौकिक, दैविक और आध्यात्मिक आधार पर ज्ञान का वर्णन इन तीनों प्रकारों से करते हैं। किन्तु इन तीनों ही छः दर्शनों  पर आधारित और उन पर ही आश्रित होते हैं। इन छः दर्शनों को क्रमशः :

साँख्य, कर्म-पूर्वमीमांसा, न्याय, योग और उत्तर-मीमांसा, वैशेषिक और (वेदान्त) के नाम से जाना जाता है।

न्यायदर्शन की ही एक शाखा है - वैशेषिक दर्शन, जिसका आविष्कार महर्षि कणाद ने किया था। यह सूक्ष्म गणित पर आधारित विशेष दर्शन है जिसमें पदार्थ विज्ञान के सिद्धान्तों को प्रस्तुत किया गया है।

यहाँ पर मुझसे कुछ त्रुटि हुई हो तो उसे कृपया सुधार लें। 

ऋषि कणाद का नाम का अर्थ :

कणं अत्ति इति कणादः 

से समझा जा सकता है। जैसे पिप्पलाद ऋषि पीपल के वृक्ष के फलों को खाते थे, उसी प्रकार कणाद ऋषि खेत करने के बाद उसमें पड़े अन्न-कणों का संग्रह और सेवन कर उनसे अपनी भूख मिटाते थे।

वैसे कण शब्द का एक अर्थ तो कं (किसे), और दूसरा क  अर्थात् आकाश (space) भी हो सकता है जैसा कि कमण्डल शब्द की व्युत्पत्ति से स्पष्ट है। "क" का अर्थ "चारों ओर" भी होता है, जैसा कि कपाल, कपोल, कन्ध / स्कन्ध, कर (हाथ), कटि (कमर) और कफोघ्नि (कोहनी) आदि संस्कृत शब्दों से देखा जा सकता है। कण शब्द का तीसरा अर्थ है पदार्थ (material) या द्रव्य यह जानना रोचक है कि पदार्थ आकाश को और आकाश पदार्थ / द्रव्य को खा जाता है। और इसीलिए आकाश (Space) और पदार्थ (material) दोनों ही पञ्च-महाभूत कहे जाते हैं। दोनों ही अव्यक्त से व्यक्त और व्यक्त से अव्यक्त में आते जाते रहते हैं -

अव्यक्तादीनि भूतानि मध्यव्यक्तानि भारत।।

अव्यक्तनिधनान्येव तत्र का परिदेवना।।

आकाश शून्य, एक, दो, तीन, चार, पाँच, छः या सात आयामों से युक्त है।

ॐ सबमें व्याप्त है और सब ॐ में ही ओत प्रोत है।

भूः भुवः स्वः क्रमशः तीन आयाम हैं जिनमें से प्रथम स्थूल या भौतिक, द्वितीय सूक्ष्म या दैविक / मानसिक और तृतीय जैसा कि नाम से स्पष्ट ही है, स्वपरक या अनंता / अस्मिता / चेतना (consciousness) का आयाम है। प्रथम बिन्दुमात्र है, जिससे सब व्यक्त होकर पुनः जिसमें लौट जाता है। यह नेत्र और दृष्टि भी है। आयामशून्य भी है और सातों आयामों के रूप में व्यक्त स्वरूप भी ग्रहण करता है।

जैसे द्विआयामी भौतिक जगत में एक समतल पर एक सरल रेखा एक आयामी होती है, किन्तु दीर्घवृत्त या वृत्त द्विआयामी होता है। पुनः वृत्त एक-नेत्र (univocal) जबकि दीर्घ-वृत्त द्विनेत्र होता है।

इसे इस प्रकार से समझ सकते हैं :

वृत्त में एक केन्द्र होता है जिसके चारों ओर एक बिन्दु के उससे समान दूरी पर परिभ्रमण करने से वृत्त की रचना होती है। इसी प्रकार एक समतल पर स्थित दो बिन्दुओं के चारों ओर घूमता हुआ एक बिन्दु जिसकी इन दोनों बिन्दुओं से दूरियों का योग स्थिर और सुनिश्चित हो, एक दीर्घवृत्त की रचना करता है। उदाहरण के लिए परिकर (compass) में एक पेन्सिल लगाकर जैसे एक वृत्त की रचना की जा सकती है, उसी तरह दो स्थिर बिन्दुओं के चारों ओर यदि एक बिन्दु इस प्रकार परिभ्रमण करने कि दोनों से उसकी दूरियों का योग सुनिश्चित हो तो हमें एक दीर्घवृत्त प्राप्त होगा। इस स्थिति में दीर्घवृत्त के दो केन्द्र या नेत्र हैं ऐसा कह सकते हैं। (वैसे यदि आपकी रुचि हो तो किसी कागज पर दो पिन लगाकर एक पेन्सिल और एक धागे की सहायता से भी धागे को पिनों के चारों ओर घुमाकर उसमें पेन्सिल रखकर एक दीर्घवृत्त की रचना कर सकते हैं।)

जैसे किसी त्रिआयामी वस्तु का चित्र द्विआयामी समतल पर बनाया जा सकता है, उसी प्रकार इस स्थूल भौतिक जगत् में चार आयामी स्व पुनः पुनः किसी भौतिक शरीर के तीन आयामों में व्यक्त और अव्यक्त होता रहता है। यह चतुरानन चार आयामी सतह ही सृष्टिकर्ता ब्रह्मा है

अब पुनः इस त्रिआयामी जगत में स्थित दो स्थूल पिण्डों का विचार करें। जैसे अभी हमने एक दीर्घवृत्त की रचना कैसे होती है इसे समझा, उसी प्रकार जब पदार्थ अनेक छोटे-बड़े पिण्डों में टूटता है तो विभिन्न पिण्डों के बीच गुरुत्व बल की शक्ति के अनुपात में या तो दोनों परस्पर मिल जाते हैं, या अपनी अपनी विशिष्ट दिशाओं की ओर जाते हैं। अब हम रॉकेट साइन्स का उदाहरण देखें - जब किसी रॉकेट को लॉन्च किया जाता है और जब वह एक निश्चित गति से पृथ्वी से दूर जा रहा होता है तो जैसे जैसे पृथ्वी से उसकी दूरी बढ़ती है, उस पर लगने वाला पृथ्वी का गुरुत्वाकर्षण बल तब तक क्षीण होता रहता है, जब तक कि रॉकेट पर लगनेवाला यह बल बिलकुल ही शून्य नहीं हो जाता। पृथ्वी के गुरुत्वाकर्षण बल से बँधा रॉकेट फिर भी पृथ्वी की उस कक्षा से बाहर नहीं निकल पाता किन्तु उसकी दिशा अवश्य ही बदल जाती है और वह किसी वृत्ताकार या दीर्घवृत्ताकार कक्षा में पृथ्वी के चारों ओर चक्कर काटने लगता है।

पहले दिए गए वृत्त और दीर्घवृत्त की रचना से यह समझा जा सकता है कि कैसे विभिन्न उपग्रह किसी ग्रह के चारों ओर, और सारे ग्रह सूर्य के चारों ओर किसी वृत्ताकार या दीर्घ वृत्ताकार कक्षा में परिभ्रमण करते हैं।

इसे एक और प्रयोग कर आप अच्छी तरह यह देख भी सकते हैं कि कैसे ये सभी ग्रह एक ही समतल में स्थित होते हैं। एक लंबी रस्सी में थोड़ी थोड़ी दूरी पर छोटे-बड़े पत्थर बाँध दीजिए और रस्सी को एक सिरे से पकड़कर कुछ तेज तेज घुमाइये, जैसे कि बच्चे कभी कभी रस्सी के एक सिरे पर एक पत्थर बाँधकर खेल खेल में रस्सी को गोल गोल घुमाता हैं। आप देख सकते हैं कि रस्सी में बँधे सभी पत्थर एक ही समतल में रहते हुए केन्द्र के उस बिन्दु की परिक्रमा करने लगते हैं।

इसकी कल्पना मेरे मन में उस समय उठी जब मैं करीब नौ वर्षों पहले वाल्मीकि रामायण पढ़ रहा था जिसमें यह वर्णन है कि जब भगवान राम के कुल में उत्पन्न त्रिशंकु नामक उनका पूर्वज सशरीर देवलोक जाना चाहता थे और इसके लिए उन्होंने ऋषि विश्वामित्र की सहायता ली तो देवलोक अर्थात् सूर्य और उसके चारों तरफ परिक्रमा करनेवाले ग्रहदेवताओं ने इस पर आपत्ति की। किन्तु वे सभी ऋषि विश्वामित्र से डरते भी थे। अंततः इन्द्र आदि ने ऋषि की प्रार्थना की और उन्हें इसके लिए राजी किया कि राजा त्रिशंकु को उनके देवलोक के इस समतल से भिन्न तिर्यक् दिशा में स्थान दे दिया जाए। त्रिशंकु नाम से ही हम समझ सकते हैं कि यह राजा का नहीं, बल्कि उस अंतरिक्षयान का नाम है जिसमें तीन शंक्वाकार सिरे हों, जैसा कि आधुनिक उपग्रहों में भी देखा जा सकता है।

महर्षि कणाद ने इसी सिद्धान्त के आधार पर वैशेषिक दर्शन का आविष्कार किया जिसमें सामान्य और विशेष तत्वों का वर्णन है।

***