CHAPTER 5
THE EGO
The Self is luminous owing to its self-shining nature. At the instant of perception of objects, such as a pot, the ego-sense of identity
with the body vanishes. There is no experience of the complexion of the body (for instance) simultaneous with perception of objects.
Otherwise one would be thinking, “I am fair or brown,” even while perceiving a pot. In other words, when an object is perceived it is
as non-self, like the body known as ‘mine’ (my body).
It should not be said that the Self does not shine as ‘I’ simultaneously with the perception of objects. If so, the objects cannot be
perceived. For when there are no lights to illumine objects they are not perceived. It should not also be said – yet there is no ‘I’
sparkling (spurthi). For it implies some distinctive form of shining and not the sheen of pure light; this will also imply inertness.
Therefore the Self shines as pure ‘I’. On account of this those who hold that knowledge is self-evident, admit the experience “I know
the pot” (but not ‘I have the knowledge of the pot’). (Ghatam aham jaanaami but not Ghata jnaana-vaan aham).
If the Self be not admitted to shine of itself even during our objective perceptions, it will not be proper to reject the doubt whether ‘I
am or not.’ Nor should it be said that simultaneously with objective perception the ego shines (i.e., manifests) identical with body
etc. If in the perception of an object the form of the object does not manifest, the body cannot manifest itself at the time of sensing
the body etc. It does not follow that in the knowledge ‘He is Chaitra’, the intelligence namely the Self of Chaitra is signified by the
word ‘he’ and manifests transcending his body-ego; for, to him Chaitra’s ego remains unimpaired (i.e., he feels his ego-sense all the
same).
In deep sleep and samadhi the ‘I’ cannot be denied existence. All admit its continued existence in those states also because of the
recollection of the experience (in those two states). True, the Self remains continuous in those states but it cannot be denoted by ‘I’
for the former is unmodified Consciousness and the latter is a mode of consciousness. The answer to such an objection is
according to the sages well-versed in aagamas, as follows: – ‘I’ is of two kinds, moded and unmoded intelligence. Mode means
differentiation; therefore moded intelligence is differentiated intelligence. The other one is undifferentiated and is therefore unmoded.
When objectified as bodies etc., the ego is moded and differentiated. But in deep sleep and samaadhi, Consciousness remains
unobjectified and undifferentiated; therefore it is unmoded. It does not follow from this that the admission of ‘I’ in samadhi will amount
to admission of the triads (e.g., cogniser, cognition and the cognised). Since ‘I’ remains as the residue devoid of “non-I” there are no
triads there. It is said in Pratyabhijna, “Although I shine as Pure Light yet it is word in a subtle form (paraavak).” This ego is not a
mode. Such is the doctrine of advaita.
This (unmoded Intelligence) is just the knowledge of “I-I”. The aagamas speak of it as Perfect EGO or Perfect Knowledge. Because
this state later finds expression to describe it, it is said to be ‘word’ (vaak); but it does not mean audible word. It is ‘word’ in a subtle
form, remaining unspoken.
Perfect Ego cannot be denied in the unmoded Consciousness for it will amount to inertness, Bhagavan Hariina has said, “Should
‘word’ mean differentiation in the ever-Present Light, it would amount to saying the Sight does not shine (of itself)”. On the other
hand, ‘word’ signifies “profound contemplation.” Pratyabhijna says “Deliberation makes clear the Self-shining Light. Were it not so,
i.e., if light should shine only in contact with an object, it would be inert like a crystal.” Bhagavan Sri Sankara also says that the
Self, namely Chit, is always shining as ‘I’. In Viveka Chuudaamani it is found, “That which constantly shines forth as ‘I’ throughout
infancy etc., waking state etc., which are super-imposed on it…”
DULLNESS OF DEEP SLEEP
Though the Self that is Chit is Pure Solid Intelligence, it is not like a solid rock for that would amount to inertness. It is pure,
scintillating awareness. Its shining nature is distinct from that of bright objects such as a flame. This awareness is also called
intelligence, deliberation, light of consciousness, activity, vibration, the supreme Ego etc. Because of this nature the Supreme Being
is capable of creation and this also finds mention in Soundarya Lahari Sloka 1.
It is not correct to say that Paramasiva remains united with the power of maayaa which is indescribable (anirvachaneeya) and
illusory. Should the jagat be false (non-existent) like a hare’s horn, its creation must also be declared to be so. It is not proper to
say that the Lord’s nature is wasteful because it will end in a blank i.e., sunya. If the jagat is said to be non-existent like a hare’s
horn, sruti declarations such as “Form whom all these elements, all these creatures have come forth etc.” would amount to a mad
man’s ravings. Nor is it proper to contend that acceptance of Supreme Intelligent Being followed by the denial of the reality of the
jagat is sunya vaada, because false jagat inclusive of the Supreme Reality is self-contradictory. (The correct position is: the
Supreme Being appears as or seems to be the jagat.) If you argue that this results in duality whereas the srutis declare, “There are
not many here but only the Self”, I say you do not understand the advaita saastra; nowhere do the saastras declare the jagat to be
unreal. But yet they proclaim advaita to be certain. Srutis such as “He became all”, “Only the non-dual Supreme Being shines as
the universe”, declare the jagat to be real and thereby non-duality is not impaired. Though the town reflected in a mirror seems
distinct yet it cannot exist without the mirror and so is no other than the mirror; in the same manner the jagat though seeming
distinct is no other than the Supreme Self. So non-duality is unimpaired.
As in the sruti cited by you, “there are not many here”, the denial relates to duality only and nothing else. Therefore it is a sign of
ignorance to declare the jagat to be unreal. The sages know that true knowledge consists in realising that “all is Siva.” Suta
Samhita says, “to say pot etc., are unreal, is ignorance. Correctly to say pot etc., is real, is true knowledge.”
Thus the supreme Intelligent Being by its own supreme power of maayaa manifests Itself as this wonderful universe. In the universe
thus manifested to see the jiva distinct from the Supreme is duality and constitutes the bondage of the individual. Knowledge of
non-duality constitutes liberation. His “independence” (svatantra, free will), reflection of the universe, reflection of the individual
selves, reflection of the bondage, reflection of liberation are all presented within Himself by His own independent power. Like a
day-dream, all these depend upon His power of manifestation which however is not distinct from the Supreme Intelligence. So our
system is free from any stigma. Power of deliberation always remains constant with the Supreme Being.
However in deep sleep the reflection of inertness (jada sakti) veils it and renders it weak; though the Supreme Being or Chit is then shining in full, the sages have proclaimed the state to be one of inertness or dullness.
