Silent Thunder

AUM SRI SWAPRAKASA SARVA SAMPURNAM BHAVATHI.

Sri Sadasiva Samarambham Shankaracharya Madhyamam

Asmadacharya Paryantam Vande Sri Guru Param Param

 

SILENT THUNDER.

 

WHO

WHERE        IS              GOD?

WHY

These are the fundamental questions that have been  asked since time immemorial. There is no single species in the creation, seen or unseen, which existed, or exists, or will exist, that is not aware of its existence. THAT IS THE TRUTH. The word ‘exist’ has derived its meaning from the root Sanskrit word, SAT. Sat means’ Existence’ It is a well known fact as documented by Yaska (700 B.C.), Max Muller and others, that Sanskrit is more ancient a language than English and so we can convincingly take it that the word ’existence’ is a reasonable translation of ‘Sat’ of ancient Sanskrit language. Sat is the very syllable representing the highest and foremost attributes of the Omnipotent GOD, Sat Chit Ananda.

Hence, we can deduce that, the first and foremost attribute of ‘GOD’ principle is ‘Sat’ which means ‘Existence’. Earlier philosophers called it ‘Being’. Master Aurobindo called it as ‘Be-ness’.

Before we go deep into the subject of Philosophy which deals with the object of finding the Truth free from all disputes,let us start from the Known. The present is the key to the past and we have to proceed from the Known, to the unknown.

Thus, the most intimately known object is “Yourself” or simply the ‘Self’. Everybody knows himself or herself, better than anything or anyone else. You see yourself with eyes open or eyes closed, whether waking, dreaming, or sleeping. During sleep, your sense organs may not work temporarily. But the moment you wake up, you feel that you slept well or you did not sleep well. But you know all of this by yourself without an iota of doubt.

Now let us turn our search light inwards. Into ourselves.Let us direct “the beam of inquiry” inside, as deep as possible with scientific zeal and child like curiosity, so that we can ultimately reach our goal to find the Truth, and the Truth alone, which is true in all periods of past, present and future and beyond time; the Truth, or the Ultimate Truth, something common to all minds, which can be reached rationally; Truth free from everything and not opposed to any form of thought, or religion or interpretation of scriptures.

Then our fundamental questions are to be re drafted as:

WHO AM I?  WHENCE AM I? WHY AM I?

Are these questions very difficult, or very easy? Depends on the way you look at them.

One of the greatest Suffi mystics of 20h Century, Sri JAGADGURU KAMILIBABA,  was born in Gajualaramavaram village,  a part of Greater Hyderabad area of Andhra Pradesh. As a child, he witnessed heaviest bloodshed due to intense religious fanaticism.He underwent deep penance in the hills of Kondapalli, (near Vijayawada of Andhra Pradesh) and after obtaining enlightenment through divine grace,  He returned to the people, to help the common man lead a better life. His greatness can be gauged by the fact that Sri Swami Chinmayananda, the founder President of Chinmaya Mission, stayed in the hermitage of Kamli Babaji for a considerable time.

Sri Kamilibaba, distilled the spirit and meaning of Upanishads and put it into a capsule of Mantra “Sri Swaprakasa Sarva Sampurnam Bhavathi” and gifted the nectar of truth through ‘Dyva Prasadika’.

Sri Kamilibaba dealt with the ‘Who-am-I?” enquiry in a clear, scientific, and rational manner. 

 NENU EVARU? (MY KAUN? );  ( KOHAM?) WHO AM I?

What is this object, that is called as ’I’ in English, ‘Aham’ in Sanskrit, ‘Main’ in Hindi,  ‘Nenu’ in Telugu, ‘Inni’  in Arabic? In this world, we hear words like Pot, Photo, Horse, Bull, Elephant, Tree, River, Stream, Mountain, Earth and Sky etc. The moment you hear any word like that, you will be able to know that, that word indicates an object. When you hear the word Pot, you will immediately know that it is a vessel for storing/ carrying water. Likewise whenever any person hears a word, he will be able to comprehend the object, which is denoted by the word. Hence the linguists say that name indicates the object.

Sri Adi Shankara, one of the greatest saints from India, while commenting on Mandukya Upanishad, says that:  “As all diversified objects we see around us, indicated by names, and are not different from their corresponding names, the name and object denoted by it  are identical, which is understood from the stand point of mentalism, which explains that everything  cognized or perceived as only a form of thought.”

Continuing the divine message of Sri Kamilibabaji,

“In this world (Universe), every one uses the words like Aham, Nenu, My, in different languages indicating the same self “I”. In Telugu we use ‘Nenu’, in English ‘I’, and in Sanskrit ’Aham’. There is no person living in this world who does not use one of these words in his own language. Did you any time ponder  as to what the word ‘I’ in English, mean? Only looking at his body he talks as if he is red in color, stout, tall, beautiful and healthy. Then the word ‘I’ in English and Aham in Sanskrit etc indicates the body of the person. Then ‘I’ means the body! If so when I say that this is my leg, this is my hand, my eyes, my head, my stomach, and my body, then body is not indicated by the word ‘I’, and “I’ and body” are different. When I say my house, my garden, my wealth, my wife, my children, ‘I’ am different from home, wife etc. Similarly, my body and ‘I’ are different. Then the question “What am I?”, “ What is I?” remains un-answered.

Then is it possible, that all persons, literates or illiterates are using the most commonly used word ‘I’ without knowing the meaning of ‘I’ or what it means. Every human being as long as he lives, feels about himself that “I exist” only means that he exists. If he does not know, how he can say that he exists. As such we have to deduce that all persons who are using the word ‘I’ know the meaning of ‘I’. Then what is I? (Or what ‘I’ is indicating). What is that object? How is it? What is its shape? It’s nature? Is it perceivable through our senses like skin, eye, ear, and nose? If it can not be seen, or heard, or smelt or felt, how do we know the existence of that object? Does ‘I’ exist or not? What are the answers? We have to get the answers.

If you say “I am not the body and there is nothing more to know about it”, it is not correct.

To say that ‘I’ is not the body is only a negative answer, not an affirmative answer. When you question about any object, you have to answer what that object is. You can not reply that it is not that, it is not this. Now you know how difficult it is to answer, who am I?

Some people say that the answer to the question ‘Who am I’ is ‘Jeeva’. In Hindu religious way of thinking, and as per scriptures propagating Sanathana Dharma, Jeeva is the word for the individual entity, which inhabits the body which is subject to birth, growth, and death; as against Brahman or Para Brahman, who is omniscient and omnipotent. The root ‘Jeev’ indicates birth and is more related to words like ‘Janma’genetic, gene, Janaka, (meaning father) and Janani, (meaning mother).

Some scholars answer the question ‘Who am I’ as Atman.  Atman is the word coined in Vedic literature of Sanathana Dharma; the ‘divine spark’ ‘the life spark’. All witnessing, eternal light of wisdom, the divine spark within us, which is the source of all life and light, is technically called as ‘Atman’ in Vedanta.

By answering the question ‘Who am I’ as Jeeva or Atman, the answer looks simple, but what the enquirer knows, by these two words? He will learn two new words only. But his knowledge of who he is, or the answer to the question ‘Who am I’ remains at the starting point itself. Scientists and Philosophers define objects depending on their qualities, their manifold activities, results, and their origin, directly perceived or inferable, deduced by keen intelligent observation and convincing inference, without adding mythological imaginations.

Observation, inference, and reliable information form the basis of the knowledge of any object. Without the knowledge of effort in learning, it is impossible to gain objective knowledge. This is the only scientific way to know the nature of objects definitely. It is a well known fact that human beings gain knowledge only through  their sense instruments,  also known as instruments of knowledge, (Jnanendriyas/sense organs)i.e., eye, nose, ear, tongue, and skin.

The knowledge gained through these sense organs is direct knowledge. But, there is another way of knowing the nature of the object and knowledge of object. We infer, fire, by observing smoke. The knowledge of fire thus obtained is indirect and inferred knowledge. Like wise by direct perception of the object and its attributes, or by inferring the cause through observation of its effect, or knowing the effect through perception of cause also can give rise to indirect or infer able knowledge.

The knowledge gained through the words of our well wishers like our Father, Mother and Guru, (Master), is called sound knowledge.  According to Vaiseshika darsanam of Kanada Maharshi, who was earlier than even Pluto, it is known as Apta vachanam, agama shabda pramana, or Shabda jnanam. Swami Chinmya says that a ‘word’ is the manifestation of a thought wave. When a little disturbance is created in the mental lake, in the energy field known as mind, a thought wave is generated which gets transmitted through the mind-body bridge, and then through vocal chord. Only when it passes through the mouth it results as sound known as ‘Vaikhari’. All through the process, the energy is transmitted as waves, as ‘Resonance’. Adi Shankara says “that everything cognized or perceived as only a form of thought.”In ancient days of Kanada Maharshi a few hundreds of years before Christ, the knowledge was conveyed through spoken words. Hence we can indirectly deduce that the word ‘Shabda’ means the knowledge conveyed through sound also. In common parlour, obviously it is sound knowledge, obtained through sound and also sound knowledge means the correct and full knowledge. We gain tremendous amount of knowledge and education through our parents and teachers, by listening to their words and lectures.

Without that knowledge, it is impossible to gain the knowledge of the entire Universe, and its splendour, and all the objects in the Universe such as Galaxies and sub atomic particles, like electrons, neutrons, and protons.

The scientific community has come to the conclusion that what we observe is an extremely small percentage (about 4% as per latest scientific data) compared to what remains beyond observation in the immense Universe on one side and   infinite number of sub- atomic particles on the other end. Hence the scientific knowledge gained through inference is quite large. The simplest example is, that Earth was considered as a flat object as per common perceptible knowledge, while Galileo found that Earth was ellipsoid  through inference and same was  proved, by later scientific observations and experiments.

The object to be known by the word ’I’ is not an object, and can not be known by direct perception. It can not be perceived by our instruments of knowledge, commonly known as Indriyas or senses like eye etc. Body is known by direct perception by senses. But ‘I’ is not perceptible and not known by our senses. If we investigate and analyze what are knowable through our instruments of knowledge, we can understand why “I” can not be known by sense organs.

.                                   Only objects with colors like white, black, red, etc. are perceived by eyes. Objects of smell are felt by nose, all objects of taste are felt by tongue, all things which produce sound are heard by ear, and skin feels the sense of touch. Whatever is the quality of hearing, sensation of touch, form, taste, etc. the thing or the object is only known by (Jnana Indriyas,) the sense organs.  In this term ‘I’ not one of the five qualities described above is present. Therefore ‘I’ is not witnessed by sense organs. The idea is that ‘I’ is not sensed or felt by eye witness, or by direct perception.

This word ‘I’ is a thing known to be present in the body itself by its daily actions, through statements  such as, I am present, I am coming, I am eating, I am seeing. All these usages are used by the body itself. However at times even when the whole body is present and observable, these usages such as ‘I am’ will not be there. The body in that condition after death does not use such words, as I am present, I am coming, etc. Then we come to understand that the object known as ‘I’ is not present in the body and that it has left the body and gone some where else. From this, we deduce that the object/thing, identified by the word ‘I’ is present in the observable body, during one’s life time, and not present at some other times and goes away at the time of death.

Besides, when ‘I’ is present in the body, knowledge, (Wisdom), desire, effort, hatred, joy and sorrow, etc. are present in the body. When ‘I’ leaves the body, knowledge and other feelings/emotions mentioned above are not present in the body. When ‘I’ is present in the body, ‘I’ expresses that, it knows this or that. Not only it understands the objects around it, it also expresses that, it is a book; it is a house, and so on. Besides, the ‘I’ determines the undesirable things among them. It develops hatred towards those objects which cause sorrow to it. ‘I’ tries to procure the things which ‘I’ likes, and shoves away the things, which it hates.  If the things procured and used by it, are found unfavourable, it feels unhappy and sorrow.

 Hence those six attributes such as knowledge, desire, hatred, effort, happiness and sorrow are present in the body as long as ‘I’ is present in the body. When ‘I’ leaves the body at the time of death, in the dead body, these six attributes are not perceptible. This phenomenon is known to all. What do we understand by this phenomenon? It can be clearly grasped that six attributes such as knowledge, desire have a close relationship (affinity) with the object pronounced as ‘I’. It is for this reason when ‘I’ is present in the body, they (the six attributes) are present in the body, and they are absent when ‘I’ is absent. It can definitely be known that  specific attributes are present when a specific object is present and they (the specific attributes or Characteristics) are absent when a specific thing is absent, it can definitely be known that, that specific object is the one having the specific attributes or Character. Where there is fire, there is heat and when there is no fire, heat is absent. Therefore, it is a well known universal Truth, that Fire possesses the attributes, or character of heat. Hence it is now crystal clear to us that ‘I’ is a thing which possesses six attributes such as knowledge, desire, hatred, effort, joy and sorrow.

By grasping the meaning of the above sentences, I hope readers can now identify that ’I’ is a thing that has the attributes/characteristics, such as knowledge and others as mentioned above.

Therefore, a truthful positive answer for the question ‘Who am I’ is that, it is a thing with attributes such as, knowledge, desire, etc. If ‘I’ is a thing with attributes like knowledge, why ‘I’ is not perceptible directly? But attributes such as Knowledge, Desire, are not observable/ perceptible to our sense Organs. Only five attributes such as sound, touch, form, taste, & smell are known / perceptible to sense organs. So ‘I’ is not perceptible to sense organs and not directly known or observable. The fact that the terms ‘I’, Jeeva, and Jeevatma are words with identical meaning is already understood by readers. Now readers can clearly identify that ‘jeeva’ is a thing with attributes such as Knowledge etc. Qualities such as knowledge etc. are characteristic attributes of ‘jeeva’. From these characteristic attributes only, we can infer what is   known by ‘I’, or Jeeva.

Accordingly, we can understand a thing, by knowing the characteristic attributes of the same. This phenomenon is known as Inferable Knowledge or knowledge gained through inference.

From the above discussion as explained by Sri Kamili baba, through his Dyva Prasadika, we know that ‘I’ is something with specific characteristic attributes such as knowledge etc. That clearly shows that we can know about it by possessing the knowledge about it, a something usually expressed as ‘I’, and it is a thing which can not be grasped by any of our sense organs.

Think clearly, it is something, but need not necessarily be a material thing. Just think! Is thinking, a thing, or something connected with the process of thinking?

Both Sanskrit and English are beautiful languages. A lot of difference in meaning can be obtained by a simple twist or turn. This is the great beauty, which our ancient Rishis and later the masters of Philosophy and self realized Scholar and mystic, Sri Shankara Bhagavadpada, not only used, for proper interpretation of Vedas along with Upanishads, Brahma  Sutras, and Bhagavad-Gita, but also presented to us, such highly spiritual and philosophical books, like Viveka Chudamani, and hymns like, Bhajagovindam. Similarly western Philosophers have made use of English language to reinterpret philosophy and Spirituality in a proper manner.  Observe the words ‘Know’ and ‘Knowledge’, a ledger of what we know, arranged in an organized manner. Sir James Jeans in his “The New  background of Science” (1933), has defined Science as Organized knowledge.

Hence, we have to scientifically analyze the knowledge of “I” and this knowledge is an infinite ocean.  However let us not get depressed. Let us find out what our ancient Rishis presented us through Vedas and Vedanta, the latter popularly known as Upanishads. The word ‘Veda’ in Sanskrit language is from the root, ‘Vid’, which means “To know”. When we arrange every thing we know in an organized manner, it is Science i.e. organized knowledge. Now you can understand why I have taken so much pain, only to prove that Vedas including Upanishads if properly interpreted are, but scientific data files.

 Only our certified, so called educated Pandith classes have, through their incomplete knowledge, misinterpreted our ancient scriptures and brought untold misery to our humanity, and in particular to our Sanathana Dharma, popularly known as Hinduism as it was most commonly followed by people living in the area drained by Sindhu River, in pre- Vedic times, more than six thousand years before the present. This evil of misinterpretation of scriptural literature was fought by Sri Bhagavan Buddha, about 3500 years back. In the 8th Century A.D. Bhagavan Adi Shankara spent his whole life, to save Hinduism and the whole of humanity from the clutches of half knowledged, certified educated class, without proper spiritual knowledge and experience of self. About One hundred and odd years back, the greatest, saint, Philosopher, Sri Rama Krishna Pramahamsa and his disciple Sri Vivekananda upheld the same tradition and helped not only Hinduism, but the entire humanity. Ramakrishna Mission founded by Sri Vivekananda is doing yeoman service to humanity to rediscover spiritual Life.

 More recently Sri Chinmayananda Swami and his Chinmaya mission continued   the same mission with a motto of giving maximum happiness for maximum people. There are saints, sages, and philosophers like Kabeer, Jnana Dev, Shirdi Sai baba, and Jagadguru  Kamili baba, who upheld the tenets of Sanathana Dharma, and its Universal nature, not bound by time and space, religion, sect, race etc.

Let us come back to the theme being projected by Sri Kamili Baba. Baba says “Among the ancient Rishis, sages and philosophers of India ‘Kanada Maharshi’ was one. He was before the birth of Jesus Christ. He was earlier to even renowned Greek Philosophers, Plato and Socrates. Sri Kanada Maharshi based his arguments on Atomic theory. He propagated that the Primordial Soup from which the entire Universe was created, contained six primary substances. (The recent philosophers like Pandith Gopadev and Sri Kotilingam Bapuji also concurred with his view.) They are described as below:

(1)Substances (Dravyam) (2)Characteristics,(Qualities)

(3)Action; (4)Usual attributes;  (5) Unusual attributes (6) Inseparables(samavayi)

These materialistic objects and phenomena are again classified as explained below. The first category, known as substances are divided into nine categories. 1) Earth. 2) Water. 3) Fire.  4) Air.  5) Space. (6) Mind.  7) Time.   Direction. 9) Atman.

These are called substances.

So far what is referred to as ‘I’ by the readers, is now called as ‘Atman’ ( or called as Self in common parlour) and the same is included under “substances” Hence readers may hereafter understand that wherever the word’ Atman’ is   referred   to, it implies the word ‘I’.

 Therefore:       I = Atman=substance. We have already explained that Atman,

 (And thereby ‘I’) is a substance.( Readers may please note that these are the views of Kanada Maharshi who propagated Vaishesika system of Philosophy, while most of the followers of Shankara Bagavadpad follow the sankhya system propagated by Gautama. The same was explained in detail in Bhagavad Gita.)

If we know what a substance is, then we can easily grasp the meaning of ‘I’, where ever there is action and attributes that is known as substance. On that, in which action is produced by the interrelationship or co-existence is called ‘substance’. This is called ‘Samavayuvu’, inseparables (that inter relationship which can not be separated). The act can not be separated from interrelationship.

 For example, just as thread is indispensable for a cloth, cloth comes into existence, or is made with the thread, without which inter-relationship is not possible. From cloth threads can not be separated. There fore there is that inter dependency between a cloth and thread.  The idea behind this sort of relationship, the particular thing that generates or comes into being is a substance. With this relationship of interdependence, and inseparableness, if a particular thing is generated or comes into being in a thing, that thing is called ‘substance’. The interdependent relationship is always known as substance. But readers should remember that there is no rule that action should be produced inevitably from all things known as substances.

Likewise, as per the views of Indian philosophers, Atman, or Self is now made equivalent to that substance, which is being frequently called as ‘I’, ‘I’ and I, is a substance like Earth, Akasha or space, et al. That is the Substratum for activity and attributes. In English language, Scientists term this thing which we have identified with ‘I’ about which the entire discussion was going on and which was identical with the term Atman, as substance. In a more appropriate Language it is called as ‘Substratum’. (Substratum, or Nowmeron,), substance possessing attributes and/ or matter or mind considered as the basis of qualities and phenomenon. Therefore Readers should remember that as per the views of ancient Indian Philosophers, (Like kanada) ‘Atman’ is a substance capable of existence independently and a substratum for activities and attributes or active attributes, and that forms one of the six fundamental aggregates of the Universe.

It may not be out of place to know the views of western philosophers like ‘Kant’ regarding Atman and the defects in their line of thinking. Western philosophers consider that the entire Universe is the result of/comprises of material objects, or material particles and Atman is not material, i.e. immaterial. In their view, this physical/materialistic Universe is real and independently existing. Atman is non materialistic, imaginary, non existing and a void. If Atman is not real and imaginary, is just a feeling or expression, and not an object,  how could it be possible for Atman to understand the real materialistic world? How could it generate an action on the external substances? Western philosophers of earlier generations (i.e. before early 20th century), consider that there is no similarity between Atman, (or now being commonly referred as Consciousness), and physical world .It is their firm conviction that, even the most fundamental aspect of physical substances, of occupying space is not present in Atman, since they feel that Atman is non material and, imaginary, and is like vacuum, or void, without any substance. Not a single attribute of the present day objective world is present in Atman. Then how does the Atman of human beings is able to acquire the knowledge of external world? Western Philosophers are at a loss.

Readers may ask how western philosophers of earlier centuries solved this dual problem. (1) How is it possible for the human Atman (let us for convenience sake term it as human soul or self as it is in common usage, although we can see at a later stage that soul can not define Atman which is more potent and divine.) which is not a substance to acquire the knowledge of external substances and (2) How it is able to create action in them? They have given their explanation in two different ways. Impressions and influences of external substances get imprinted in Atman and due to their imprints; Atman acquires the knowledge of substances. And

Due to the influence of extra cosmic power of God, Atman attains the knowledge of external substances, or objects. Both these explanations are not correct. We shall discus the reasons.

If one substance has to create an imprint of its inherent natural characteristics on another substance, there should be some similarity between them. Then, only there is a possibility of creating impressions of mutual characteristics on one another in the case of physical objects/substances .For example: If we take a lump of soft wax and spread it flatly and press it on a figure engraved on a hard substance like wood or metal, the characters and impressions of figure get imprinted on the wax. The substance on which the figure is engraved and the wax: both are physical material, naturally existing real substances with specific attributes.

Therefore there is a similarity between them. One can create an imprint or impression of its characteristics on the other.  But how an external physical object/material can cause imprinting of its characteristics on the ‘Self’ (Let us use the word ‘Self’ instead of Atman as we have already explained that I, Aham, Atman and Self are identical words, indicating the Universal Truth). Human Self (Atman) is not a physical entity. It is not- naturally existing like other substances and unreal compared with material objects of the universe. Human self does not have any similarity with material attributes. Therefore the characters/attributes of external material objects can not create imprint or impression on human Self. Western philosophers can not tell how these impressions can be imported. That is the reason why the problem as to how self can acquire the knowledge of external substances remains unsolved with certainty.

In case we suppose that external material objects can form the impressions/ imprints of their characters/and or attributes on the brain, (and participatory sensory system) which is the seat of intelligence, through sense organs like eye etc. it is possible since due to nascence (Avidya, ignorance or Maya), the human Self (Ego in this context) is a naturally existing substance like sense organs and brain. Therefore we can agree that the external material can form impressions on the brain. But the impressions so formed are more mental and unnatural. How can they generate knowledge in the self, which is not real as per the knowledge obtained through sense organs? How can the impressions reach self whose real existence is not known to sense organs as we have in the beginning of discussion itself promulgated that   self   can not   be   known through sense organs. If through sense organs we can get the knowledge of self, then there is no problem at all. Everybody can acquire this knowledge very easily. There is absolutely no relationship between sense organs and Self. So the problem remains unsolved.

Some of the western philosophers endeavoured to solve this problem in a different way. They created God with supernatural divine powers in between external physical universe and human self/ human ego) God with his divine powers created so many substances in this external world. At the same time, He created/caused impressions and /or imprints, which simulate the variations in the attributes of external substances on the Self.  Because of such impressions so created, self acquires the knowledge of external things. But this explanation is also not correct. Even if we agree that with his divine powers God created impressions akin to variations in the attributes of external objects on ‘Self’, self acquires the knowledge of such variations in Self only, but not the knowledge of the impressions of external substances. They are only changes similar in form.

These radical changes and impressions are not the outcome of those belonging to the external substances.

Therefore, human self cognizes and comprehends only the changes created by the divine powers of God. But it is not able to understand the realities of external substances. That is, to that the knowledge of external substances can not be achieved .Through this second line of  explanation not only does it lack the power of  attaining the knowledge of external substances, but it does not have the reason to believe that there are these external substances. It disclaims or disregards the very existence and origin of the external world. The reason is that ‘Self’ is able to comprehend only the changes brought in it, by the divine power of God. It has no relationship with the external world. Then where is the proof for the existence of God? Even this is only an idea created to solve the problem.

How the human self attains the knowledge of the external world is the vital   problem   that is engaging the attention of the western philosophy until now. The reader would have understood the defects involved in the explanation for the said question.  How does human self create activity in the external substances? It is to be learnt as to how westerners interpret the defects in the answer for the question.

How human self is able to understand external objects? More difficult than this question is the problem as to how it (the self) can make the external material objects behave with activities? Or to say make it dynamic?

Imagine that a man is able to lift an iron piece weighing twenty pounds with his hand? We have been observing almost every day people lifting so many things.

How is that the ‘Self’ (I or Atman), is able to lift that iron piece?  The will power of ‘Self’ generates actions in the nervous system controlled by brain. Thereby contractions and extensions of muscles take place. By the result of action in muscles, the hand is able to act and lift the heavy iron piece. Basing on the knowledge of human anatomy and   nervous system, the same problem can be solved. But the defects discussed above regarding the former problem remain the same.

According to the line of   thinking   of western philosophers the ‘Self’ is not material (more mental) and objects like iron piece are material, hard and perceptible to. Readers should not forget this. Therefore, the intuitions generated by the will power of ‘Self’ are only mental. How can these intuitions generated in the mental plane of ‘Self’ create activity in the brain and related material substance?

As long as we can not remove the gulf of material-non material or mental, difference between the ‘Self’ (Atman) of human beings and the external substances and find out the similarities in the attributes of self and substances, we can not solve the problem. As long as we accept the western philosophers view point that ‘Self’ is imaginary and immaterial or rather non material, non -existing and unnatural, we can not solve this problem.

Therefore, abandoning the false and imaginary theories of western philosophers, we turn our attention to the view point of our ancient Hindu philosophers, according to whom the ‘Self’ of human beings is a substance like that of earth and water, e t .a l , and is a substratum for all attributes and actions and is not void. Self is one of the fundamental aspects of the universe as ascertained by deep contemplation and examination.

Babaji says “Awareness, Witness, Effulgence, Knowledge, Substratum, and Eternal; all are the different names given for ‘Atman’. Without substratum, no thing can manifest”. Omniscient, omnipotent, eternal, attribute less, ‘Paramatma’ exists in everything at all times, beyond time and space.

Babaji says “Before creation, there was empty space without atmosphere and total darkness.(Akin to the ‘Dark energy’) Kamili baba says “Observing that the life spark,(Atman) pervades up to the tip of nails and the also inert objects, Aryans have stated that  whatever is, is only Consciousness  and nothing else.

It is apt to summarize what we have learnt about ‘I’, i.e. ‘Self’. The words, ‘I’, Self; Aham , Atman are identical and carry the same meaning and indicate the eternal Truth, or the ultimate Truth, free from all disputes, and independent of sect, race, creed, colour, sex, belief,  and Time and space. This ‘Self’ is not the body and is not perceptible, or infer able through the help of our sense organs.

It may not be out of context to quote a few verses from “Science of Reality” written by Sri Swami Sivananda, founder of the Divine Life Society, Sivanandanagar, Tehri-Garhawal, (Uttarakhand). Born in the year 1887, in the illustrious family of sage Appayya Dikshitar and several saints and savants, Sri Swami Sivananda had a natural flair for a life devoted to the study and practice of Vedanta.

 His passion for service drew him to medical career. A few of the verses from that book which are most relevant to our present discussion, as ‘Who am I’ and thereby leading to the solution of our fundamental problem with which we started this treatise viz. Who is God? Where is God? And why is God? ; are quoted below:

ATMA-THE WITNESSING-CONSCIOUSNESS.

Eyes can see only. Ears can hear only. But you say:

“I see, I hear, I taste, I feel, I smell.” This ‘I’ is a synthetic agent or consciousness.          It is like a thread in a garland or mala that links or connects all flowers or beads.  You say “I dreamt yesterday. I had a good sleep day before yesterday. I had such an experience at 11 a.m. yesterday”: There is one connecting consciousness which links the waking, dreaming and deep sleep states. It is ever the witness of the three states. This connecting witnessing consciousness is   Brahman or Atman

 

You remember the experiences of childhood,     boyhood, manhood and old age.

 

You remember so many things and events. Memory is only possible if there is one Self or Atman, which connects all past experiences of different states.

Here is a dialogue between Swami Sivanada and a doctor.

Siva: O Man! Who are you? Doctor: I am a doctor

Siva: Who is the doctor? Doctor: (He touches his chest with his index finger.) Here is the doctor. Siva: It is only your chest, my dear doctor.

The doctor then points out his head. Siva: O doctor, this is only your head. The doctor then points out his   whole body. Siva: This is only your physical body. Doctor: Then says.  Thinking is the doctor.

Siva: Where is your thinking during deep sleep? The doctor is puzzled. Siva: There is awareness even during sleeping. Because when you wake up, you say “I   enjoyed a very   sound sleep.” That awareness is the doctor, or the real infinite “I”. That “awareness,” or “pure consciousness” alone exists. That ‘awareness’ thou art.

Her own child howsoever may be the child” Sant Sri Asaram Bapu. (17.0

‘Tat Twam Asi’ ‘That Thou Art’.

Note:

*1 The Mandukya Upanishad with Gaudapada’s   Karika

and Sankara’s Commentary, translated by Swami Nikhilananda