ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Asato mā sad gamaya, Tamaso mā jyotirgamayaMrtyor māmṛtaṁ gamaya

From unreal lead me to realFrom darkness lead me to light

From death lead me to immortality.

Joy fills my heart as the research work comes to completion. I thank God for His

continual presence and guidance. He was with me and guided me throughout the

research journey.

Thanks and appreciation to Dr Job Kozhamthadam, SJ the President of Jnana-

Deepa Vidyapeeth, Pune for his encouragement to write the Master of

Philosophy Thesis. Thanks to Dr James Ponnaiah, the dean of the faculty of

Philosophy for his good will and support. Special thanks to Dr Isaac Parackal

OIC, The M. Ph. Co-ordinator for his patience and generosity. Big thanks to Dr

Henry D’Almeida SJ for his compassion, understanding and guidance.

I remember in gratitude Fr. Jayaprakash D’Souza, Br. Movin and Mr. Alban

Travasso for their help and friendship. I take this opportunity to thank the library

staff for their generous assistance.

Thanks to my provincial superior Fr. Camilo Simoes SAC for his support and

encouragement. The Fathers from the P.G. Block has been constant support. I

thank each one of them. Thanks to all the people who supported me through their

prayers and good wishes. May our good God lead us from darkness to light.

i

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

Aitareya Upaniṣad A.U

Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad B.U

Chāndogya Upaniṣad C.U

Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad Mā. U

Ṛgveda R.V

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.........................................................................................................i

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS.....................................................................................................ii

GENERAL INTRODUCTION......................................................................................................1

0.1 Significance of the Dissertation.............................................................................................2

0.2 Methodology...........................................................................................................................2

0.3 Preliminary Understanding of Consciousness.....................................................................3

0.3.1 Consciousness: It’s Etymology...........................................................................................5

0.3.2 Consciousness: It’s Multi-disciplinarity...........................................................................7

0.3.3 Consciousness in Philosophy..............................................................................................7

0.4 Consciousness in Indian Philosophy....................................................................................9

0.4.1 Consciousness in Heterodox Systems..............................................................................10

0.4.1.1 Consciousness in Cārvāka.............................................................................................11

0.4.1.2 Consciousness in Buddhism..........................................................................................12

0.4.1.3 Consciousness in Jainism..............................................................................................14

0.4.2 Consciousness in Orthodox Systems...............................................................................16

0.4.2.1 Consciousness in Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika...............................................................................16

0.4.2.2 Consciousness in Sānkhya-Yoga...................................................................................17

0.4.2.3 Consciousness in Mīmāṁsā and Vedānta....................................................................18

0.5 Conclusion............................................................................................................................20

Chapter One...............................................................................................................................22

1.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................22

1.1 Concept of Consciousness in Pre-Upaniṣadic Literature.................................................23

1.1.1 Consciousness in the Ṛgveda Saṁhitā............................................................................24

1.1.1.1 Principle of Ṛta..............................................................................................................25

1.1.1.2 Quest for the Ultimate Reality......................................................................................26

1.1.2 Consciousness in Other Three Saṁhitās.........................................................................27

1.1.3 Consciousnesses the Brāhmaṇas......................................................................................28

1.1.4 Consciousness in the Āraṇyakas......................................................................................30

1.2 Upaniṣads: An Appraisal....................................................................................................32

1.2.1 Background of the Upaniṣads..........................................................................................33

1.2.2 The Four Upaniṣads for Research...................................................................................34

1.2.2.1 The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣads....................................................................................34

1.2.2.2 The Chāndogya Upaniṣads............................................................................................35

1.2.2.3 The Aitareya Upaniṣads................................................................................................35

1.2.2.4 The Māṇḍukya Upaniṣads............................................................................................36

1.3 Basic Teachings in the Upaniṣads.......................................................................................36

iii

1.3.1 Brahman............................................................................................................................37

1.3.2 Ātman.................................................................................................................................39

1.3.3 Brahman-Ātman...............................................................................................................41

1.4 Upaniṣadic Vocabulary on Consciousness.........................................................................43

1.4.1 Jñāna, Vijñāna and Prajñāna..........................................................................................44

1.4.2 Cit.......................................................................................................................................45

1.5 Conclusion............................................................................................................................46

Chapter Two...............................................................................................................................48

2.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................48

2.1 States of Consciousness........................................................................................................48

2.2 Vaiśva – Waking Consciousness.........................................................................................49

2.2.1 Perceptual Consciousness.................................................................................................50

2.2.2 Plurality of Experience.....................................................................................................51

2.3 Taijasa - Dream Consciousness..........................................................................................51

2.3.1 Contents of Dream Consciousness...................................................................................52

2.3.2 Illusionary Nature of Dreams..........................................................................................53

2.4 Prājña – Deepsleep Consciousness.....................................................................................53

2.4.1 Consciousness Beyond Subject-Object Distinctions......................................................54

2.4.2 Transitory Experience of Oneness.............................................................................55

2.5 Turīya - Transcendental Consciousness............................................................................56

2.5.1 The Inconceivable Experience.........................................................................................57

2.5.2 Oneness with Brahman...................................................................................................57

2.6 Conclusion............................................................................................................................58

Chapter Three............................................................................................................................60

3.0 Introduction..........................................................................................................................60

3.1 Unitary Perspective of Consciousness................................................................................61

3.1.1 Exposition of Mahāvākyas...............................................................................................63

3.1.1.1. Prajñānam brahma – ‘Consciousness is Brahman’...................................................64

3.1.1.2 Ayam ātmā brahma – ‘This Atman is Brahman’.......................................................65

3.1.1.3 Tat tvam asi – ‘Thou art That’.....................................................................................65

3.1.1.4 Aham brahmāsmi – ‘I am Brahman’...........................................................................66

3.2 Epistemological Nature of Consciousness..........................................................................67

3.2.1 Self-luminosity of Consciousness.....................................................................................67

3.2.2 Mind and Consciousness..................................................................................................69

3.3 Ontological Perspective of Consciousness.........................................................................70

3.3.1 Consciousness as the Ultimate Reality............................................................................70

3.3.2 Consciousness as Existence..............................................................................................71

3.4 Consciousness as Epistemologized Ontology.....................................................................73

3.4.1 Uncaused Consciousness..................................................................................................74

iv

3.4.2 Pure Consciousness...........................................................................................................75

3.5 Conclusion............................................................................................................................76

Chapter Four..............................................................................................................................77

4.1 Positive contribution of the Upaniṣads..............................................................................79

4.2 Recent Trends in consciousness studies.............................................................................80

4.3 Final Comment.....................................................................................................................81

BIBLIOGRAPHY......................................................................................................................83

v

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

Ko’ham?...Aham BrahamāsmiWho am I?... I am Brahman.1

“The Upaniṣads occupy a unique place in the development of Indian

Philosophy.”2 Philosophy is in essence an exploration of human consciousness.

‘Ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ’ in Sanskrit means ‘see thy Self’. Indian Philosophy

emphases on ‘dṛṣṭi’ (seeing) and therefore, a seeker of truth is known as a seer.

Moreover, Indian Philosophy is called ‘draśana’ meaning ‘vision,’ seeking the

realization of the Truth.3 The Greek Philosophical dictum ‘gnothi seauton’

means ‘know thyself.’ Whether it is seeing or knowing both are directed to the

fundament question – WHO AM I?

The present thesis starts with this question asked in the Upaniṣads – ko’ham. It

endeavours to find an answer to “who am I?” according to the Upaniṣads. Every

thought, act, feeling, willing, intention, awareness, all mental and physical

activities, contemplation and action, everything is in the realm of our

consciousness. The aim of this work is to search for the understanding of

consciousness in the Upaniṣadic philosophy.

The noble and reflective Upaniṣadic literature unravels the depth of human

being’s search for the divine based on the revealed the Vedic hymnology of

contemplative meditation and intuitive mysticism. It is the journey of the self to

realise itself in the Universal Self – Ātman realizing itself as the Brahman. It

searches to understand consciousness as the ultimate reality.

The Upaniṣads is a vast literature. There is a need to delimit the research to

particular Upaniṣads which deal comprehensively with the theme of the research. 1 B.U. I.4.102 R. D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy: Being An Introduction to the Thought of the Upanishads (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1968), viii.3 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2009), 13.

1

Therefore, four Upaniṣads namely Bṛhadāraṇyaka, Aitareya, Chāndogya and

Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣads are shortlisted for the study of consciousness in

Upaniṣadic philosophy. It is a generic and not a specific study on consciousness

in the four Upaniṣads and not on particular Upaniṣad.

0.1 Significance of the Dissertation

Consciousness studies today are not limited to metaphysical inquiries and

psychological experiments. It has made heightened progress in science and

technology. In the recent discussions on artificial intelligence, scientists and

computer technicians are exclusively into concentrated investigation on

consciousness. It is an exciting topic in the western scholarly circles regardless of

the different specializations.

In this research, the researcher delves into the Upaniṣadic understanding of the

consciousness. It investigates whether the ultimate reality is matter or

consciousness. The Indian sages out of their contemplation intuitively stated

what today scientists tell what they see under sophisticated microscopes and hi-

tech computer controlled experiments. Therefore, the research has significance

in understanding better the Upaniṣadic concept of consciousness to compare and

contrast and appreciate the wisdom of old.

0.2 Methodology

The purpose of this thesis is to ask the question ‘who am I?’ through the

Upaniṣadic texts to know the Upaniṣadic concept of consciousness. The research

endeavours to analyse different conceptions of consciousness in both western

and Indian philosophies. It progresses to seek the seeds of concept of

consciousness in pre-upaniṣadic literature. The concept of consciousness in

Upaniṣads is considered and systematically analysed. Later the concept is studied

under the new light of epistemology and ontology. Since the researcher is a

novice in Sanskrit language English translations and transliterations are used to

study the Upaniṣadic text. They are taken from, ‘The Principal Upaniṣads by S.

2

Radhakrishnan. Transliterated Sanskrit words are used to facilitate the thought

and to apprehend the concept in Indian Philosophical perspective.

‘Knowing is being’ is the goal of the research. It seeks to understand

consciousness in two basic perspectives epistemological and ontological which

are clearly articulated at the end of the research. Since the work is generic in

nature many common terms in Indian philosophy are not defined. The research

envisions unfold the concept of consciousness in the Upaniṣadic as

epistemologized ontology or knowing is being.

0.3 Preliminary Understanding of Consciousness

Consciousness is the core of human existence and experience. It is a mutli-

disciplinary subject and is studied in multiple directions. No field of study can

ignore its importance because of its subjective analysis. In science it is under the

radar of neurological research, in technology it is experimented and computed

for Artificial Intelligence. In psychology it is brain-behaviour module and in arts

it is the creative- expression. Its role in philosophy is exhaustive. It is the crux of

philosophical discussion over the ages. Consciousness rules philosophical

discussions from the subject-object dichotomy in epistemology to logic probing

and from scepticism to ontological realities and metaphysical Ultimate truth.

In daily experience of the common human life4 consciousness is an obvious

reality which s/he is unconsciousness about. The ecstasy of a new born babe and

mystery of death makes her/him to marvel at the reality of consciousness. It

rather makes him/her conscious of being consciousness. Yet, questioned about

the same s/he would reply that consciousness is nothing significant than been

‘aware of something’ - and its true. Consciousness is basically awareness of

something.

4 The discussion on common human experience of consciousness is the researcher’s observations on consciousness in daily living. They are gathered interviewing people randomly.

3

As you read these lines, are you not conscious of the printed words and the

paper. Yes! Indeed. At least now while reading these words your attention or

your awareness is focused towards it. Thus, it signifies the obvious act of

consciousness as – awareness of something. Philosophically, spelled out as –

awareness of perception or awareness of object. Objects meaning entities as

miscellaneous as a person, a place, a melody, a headache, a state of joy and even

inclusive of images or mental patterns experienced through sense perception like

sound, light, touch, the image of a state of well-being. This is the first-hand

common experience of consciousness as awareness of something.

Questioning with a little more intensity the same question, ‘what are ‘you’

conscious of?’ Here, qualifying the ‘you’ in the question makes a remarkable

shift in the answer in common human experience. Immediately, the awareness is

raised to the next level focusing the attention on the self than the object. It is the

awareness of ‘I’ knowing something. This is another common experience of

consciousness in our day-to-day living. Philosophically articulated as –

awareness of the self or subject. The first experience of consciousness is

awareness of something (object) and the second is that ‘I’ (subject) am aware of

something. It is ‘my-awareness’. Hence the subject dimension is strongly

revealed.

To lead the discussion further on common experience of human on

consciousness, it is noticed that, consciousness is awareness itself. Here the

process of awareness is in focus. The awareness is not of ‘that-ness’ or the object

nor of ‘I-ness’ it is of ‘is-ness.’ The first awareness of ‘consciousness’ is the

awareness of the object. The second awareness of ‘consciousness’ is the

awareness of the subject. The third in discussion now is the awareness of

‘consciousness’ is the awareness itself or the process of awareness. The common

human experience points to the epistemological trinity - the known, knower, and

the knowledge.5 5 Santokh Singh, Consciousness as Ultimate Principle (New Delhi: Munssiram Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd, 1985), 2.

4

Moreover, it is acknowledged from common experience that s/he considers that

the mind in is responsible for such awareness. The locality of consciousness is

the mind. To question him/her where does the mind reside? The brain is the

quick answer. The above was the common human experience views from where

we begin to explore and discover the truth about consciousness especially in the

Upaniṣadic philosophy. They are not the whole truth but pointers for further

research.

Consciousness as we commonly think of it, from its basic to its most complex

levels is the unified pattern that brings together the object, the self and

consciousness itself. 6 Thus, the Preliminary understanding gives an overview of

consciousness progressing from simple to complex: from common human

experience to its etymological dissections and from scientific experimentations to

metaphysical and speculative certainties.

0.3.1 Consciousness: It’s Etymology

The concept of consciousness is loaded with meaning. It is multifaceted.

Grammatically, the word ‘consciousness’ is a noun. It is not an abstract noun as

generally, in the case in English with suffix ‘ness’. Consciousness as a noun does

not perform the function of an abstract universal. It is a concrete particular. Here,

it means that it does not refer to what is common to all conscious state but to

consciousness itself.7 Thus, consciousness is a particular term and not a generic

term. Moreover, it is an uncountable noun.8 Uncountable nouns are usually

substances and concepts that cannot be divided into elements. They cannot be

counted and are treated as singular. Grammatical investigation brings out the

particular and unitary nature of consciousness.

6 Antonio Damasio, The Feelings of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the making of consciousness (London: A Harvest Book, 1999), 11. 7 J.N. Mohanty, Lectures on Consciousness and Interpretation (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2009), 43. 8 A.S. Hornby, Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 8th ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010), 319.

5

Etymologically of the word ‘consciousness’ is close to the word ‘conscious’. It is

derived from the Latin word ‘conscius’. It denotes knowing something or being

aware of something. The Latin word ‘conscientia’ which is connected to the

Roman Law and the idea of inner voice or moral sense is also related to

consciousness. From both these Latin terms ‘conscius’ and ‘conscientia’ are

derived from the root word ‘conscire’. Meticulous division of the root word

reveals the basic meaning of the word consciousness: ‘Con’ meaning ‘with’ and

‘scire meaning ‘to know’. Thus, Consciousness is internal knowledge or

conviction especially of owns own inner or mental states. 9

The above etymological examination states that consciousness is the state of

having the mental faculties awake and active. It is also the state or fact of being

mentally aware of totality of the thoughts, feelings, impressions, etc., of a person

or group or such a body of thoughts relating to a particular sphere. The word

consciousness is also used for collective awareness of a group or place.10 Thus

the word “consciousness” is an umbrella term that covers a wide variety of

mental phenomena. It is used with a diversity of meanings. It is heterogeneous in

its range, being applied to particular mental states to consciousness as the

ultimate reality.

0.3.2 Consciousness: It’s Multi-disciplinarity

Consciousness is comprehensively studied under the investigative scanner of

different disciplines. It is noteworthy to look at the diverse perspectives

consciousness presented by them. Religion considers it from the teleological

standpoint. Ethically, it is interpreted as conscience, the moral sense of inward

9 Lesley Brown, Ed., The New Shorter oxford English Dictionary on Historical Principles, Vol. 1 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993), 483. 10 J.A. Simpson and E.S.C. Weiner Eds., The Oxford English Dictionary, Vol. 3, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989), 756-7.

6

judgement of right and wrong. It is also seen from the historically perspective.

Historical consciousness is collective experience of the language, culture, music,

traditions, economy, political and social structures as integrated historical

experiences of human endeavour. Group consciousness is yet another

sociological concern related to collective consciousness of a particular group or

race.

Psychology, presents it as a process of different mental acts primarily in the

conscious, unconscious and subconscious states of mind. Neuroscience studies

research consciousness as the network of neurons and as the functions of

neurotransmitters in the brain. Cognitive sciences delimit it as function of the

brain. They are called functionalist, reductionalist and structuralist theorists who

deny the freedom of the will and spontaneity of consciousness. They reduce

consciousness to a function and try to define consciousness in neurological

structure of stimuli–response pattern.11 Quantum Physics indications leap from

physics to metaphysics in its examinations of consciousness, leading science to

philosophical arena. Philosophy itself has a whole galaxy of perspectives on

consciousness. This initiates to apprehend a compact overview of the western

philosophy perspective of consciousness.

0.3.3 Consciousness in Philosophy

Western philosophy from its modern and contemporary era shows four basic

perspectives on the concept of consciousness. They are the empiricist, the

rationalistic, the phenomenological and the existential perspective.12 Empiricists

like John Locke and David Hume considered consciousness as a mosaic of

sensory data. While rationalists like Rene Descartes, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnitz,

Immanuel Kant gave a rationalistic perspective of consciousness as the activity

of the mind. Phenomenologist like Edmund Husserl focusing on the

intentionality of consciousness stretched it to a new parameter. Intentionality is

11 Sangeetha Menon, The Beyond Experience: Consciousness in Bhagavad Gita (New Delhi: Bluejay Books, 2007), 2-4. 12 Louis P. Pojman, Classics of Philosophy (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998), 7.

7

the capacity of consciousness to represent, or to stand for, things, properties and

states of affairs.13 They conceive consciousness as the constituent essence of

being. The existentialists like Juan Paul Sartre, state that consciousness as the

foundation of existence and the existence of consciousness is revealed from

consciousness itself. Phenomenological and existential approach to

consciousness is usually clubbed together as identity theories.14 They state that

the very intentional nature of consciousness provides it with an individual

character and the presence to itself of consciousness.

Analyzing the metaphysics of Western philosophy we find three major trends

namely, materialism, dualism and idealism. For materialistic metaphysics only

matter, matters. It is the philosophy that all is matter and all is governed by

physical law. They consider consciousness as the epiphenomenon and an

emergent of matter. For the dualistic metaphysics both matter and consciousness

(mind) are primary, separate and independent substances. Human beings are

composed of both substances. Mind is a conscious, thinking entity, i.e., it

understands, wills, senses, and imagines and body is an object which exists in

physical space. For the idealists, consciousness is all and all is consciousness.

Consciousness is fundamental and primary entity. Everything, including all

matter and every mind, exists within Consciousness.15 There have been moves to

amalgamate the above metaphysical theories. The recent trends tend towards a

leaning on scientific confirmations of consciousness.

Western Philosophers today with new vigour, in their philosophical discussions

strive to comprehend the mystery of consciousness. Recent philosophical

discussions by philosophers like Daniel Dennett and David J. Chalmers are

highly corroborated with scientific research. Yet, consciousness remains a puzzle

13 Charles Siewert, "Consciousness and Intentionality", in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Fall 2008 ed. Edward N. Zalta, Ed. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/consciousness-intentionality/ accessed on 13th February 2011. 14 Sangeetha Menon, The Beyond Experience, 6. 15 Stanley Sobottka, “A Course in Consciousness,” http://faculty.virginia.edu/consciousness/ accessed on 16th February 2011.

8

for the philosophers to explain and to be understood. Fritjof Capra remarks

“...consciousness is not that can be derived from or explained in terms of

something else. It is a primal fact of existence out of which everything else

arises.”16 Thus, it demands an open-minded, holistic outlook for the study of

consciousness.

0.4 Consciousness in Indian Philosophy

A remarkable difference between Western Philosophy and Indian Philosophy is

in their approach. Philosophy in the west is an intellectual quest for truth. In

India it is a spiritual quest seeking practical realization of truth. Sarvepalli

Radhakrishnan states “Philosophy in Indian is essentially spiritual.”17 He further

illustrates that spiritual motive dominates Indian thought. The core interest of

Indian philosophy is the ātman or self of human being. Therefore, ‘ātmānam

viddhi’ or ‘know the self’ becomes the centre of everything.18 Moreover, the

above dictum is corroborated with another similar maxim which describes the

direction of Indian Philosophy. It is ‘ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ’ meaning ‘see the

Self’. The word used for Indian Philosophy ‘darśana’ meaning ‘vision’ is derived

from the above adage. It presents a dynamics different from the West. It seeks

immediate and intuitive vision of reality not denying the rational and perceptual

faculties in the realisation of Truth.19 Indian Philosophy as ‘darśana’ seeks a

synthetic vision of reality that comprehends several sciences in unison which in

the west are branched into several departments or faculties. One of the reasons

may be that the source book of Indian philosophy is the Vedas. From there on the

journey begins. The Upaniṣads give new impetus. Later, philosophers either

accept or deny the unified path unfolded in them.

Based on the acceptance and the refusal of the Vedas, the systems of Indian

philosophy are mainly divided into two groups, namely the Nāstika system and

16 Fritjof Capra, Uncommon Wisdom (London: Century Hutchinsons, Ltd., 1988), 150. 17 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1 (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1962), 24. 18 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 28.19 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2009), 13.

9

the Āstika system. Those systems who do not accept validity of the Vedas are

called Nāstikas or the heterodox system of thought. They include the Cārvākas or

the materialist, the Buddhist and the Jainas, who deny the validity of the Vedas.

Those who accept the validity of the Vedas are called Āstikas or the Orthodox

systems. They accept the validity of the Vedas. They are grouped as Nyāya-

Vaiśeṣika, Sāṁkhya-Yoga, Pūrva Mīmāṁsā and Vedānta.20 The metaphysical

understanding of consciousness in Indian philosophy highly depends on the

above divisions. Each school gives its own interpretation to reality of the self and

the world from its perspective. The concept of consciousness is in discussion in

the schools, since the ‘self’ or the ‘ātman’ is the centre of every discussion. The

following subtopics substantiate what is stated in general above.

0.4.1 Consciousness in Heterodox Systems

Nāstikas or the heterodox systems are those systems of Indian Philosophy –

(Cārvākas, Buddhism and Jainism) which neither regard the Vedas as infallible

nor try to establish their own system’s validity on their authority. All three

schools are hold three different view on the metaphysical concept of

consciousness. The Cārvākas have materialist notion of consciousness, the

Buddhist consciousness is based on causality and the Jainas consider

consciousness as the essential quality of the soul.

0.4.1.1 Consciousness in Cārvāka

Cārvāka is the materialistic school of Indian philosophy. They hold the primacy

of matter. Their view of metaphysics is validated in their epistemology. For them

perception is the only source of valid knowledge. They assert that there are four

basic elements: earth, water, fire and air. Out of these four elements everything is

produced. They discard space or ether because it is inferred and cannot be

perceived. Hence, whatever is material and perceived is real and it exists.21

Consciousness, their opinion is an emergent product of matter.

20 Surendranath Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philosophy Vol. 1 (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2010), 67-68. 21 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 279.

10

Madhavāchārya in Sarva-darśana-saṁgraha contributes on the Indian materialist

view. He explains that consciousness is a by product of matter. It is produced in

the same way as the red colour is produced from the combination of betel, areca

and nut and lime. He explains further that out of four elements consciousness is

produced just like inebriating power developed from mixing of certain

ingredients like kiṇwa which is a seed used to produce fermentation in the

manufacturing of spirits from sugar.22 Thus, the Cārvāka affirm that by the total

and unique combination of the four elements consciousness arises.

Consciousness manifests itself in the living body. They say that matter secretes

mind as liver secretes bile. Therefore, the so called soul is the simply the living

body.23 Ananta kumar Bhattacharya explains it further in Cārvāka darśana.

Cārvāka say that ‘self’ which is consciousness is present in a body. Thus, the self

or soul is identified with the body. Anything distinct from the body cannot be

called the self. The awareness involving ‘I’ for the Cārvākas is the self.24

Chāndogya Upaniṣad hints of Cārvāka thought when Prajāpati explains to

Virocana and Indra that the true self is what is perceived.25

Cārvākas consider consciousness to be an epiphenomenon that subsists with the

body. It disappears when the body disintegrates. The death of physical body is

the death of the Self. Thus, Consciousness is produced only when there is a

body. The materialists donot demonstrate the existence of consciousness nor its

non-existence. They have been vehemently criticised by other darsanas.

Reducing consciousness to a mere emergent material product they live on

22 E.B. Cowell and A.E. Gough Trs., Sarva-Darśana-Saṁgraha of Mādhavācārya: Sanskrit Text, English Translation, Notes and Appendix, K.L. Joshi Ed., 3rd ed. (Delhi: Parimal Publications, 1997), 4-5. 23 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 44.24 Anantakumar Bhattacharyya, “Carvaka Darsana” in Carvaka/Lokayata: An Anthology of Source Materials and Some Recent Studies, Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya ed. (New Delhi: Indian Council of Philosophical Research, 1997), 452-454.25 C. U. VII. 8.1-5

11

hedonist ethics. Their liberation lies in enjoying all luxuries of the world and

death is Mokṣa, the cessation of consciousness.26

0.4.1.2 Consciousness in Buddhism

Buddhism is segmented into various philosophical schools and has enormous

volumes of literature. The basic teachings of Buddha are summed up in the four

noble truths (his philosophy)27 and the noble eightfold path (his ethics). The

second noble truth is the foundation of all teaching of Buddha. It contains the

doctrine of dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda). Its causal formula is:

‘This being that arises. (asmin sati, idaṁ bhavati) meaning the cause being

present, the effect arises. Thus, confirming the every object of thought is

necessarily relative and because it is relative it is neither absolutely real nor

absolutely unreal. Applying this to same to the individual self is proposes that the

individual self is momentary and therefore relative and false.28 The concept of

consciousness is Buddhism is intrinsically based on the basic theory of no-self

(nairātmyavāda or anātmavāda).

The non-existence of the individual self and the momentary nature of

consciousness are unanimously accepted by all school of Buddhism. Both these

are based on the principle theory of dependent origination. Buddha speaks of

consciousness as an influx conditioned by a causal pattern. Consciousness is the

causal condition from which name and form is produced in the Discourse to

Kātyāyana. He states: “On ignorance depends karma; on karma depends

consciousness; on consciousness depends name and form; on name and form

depends the six organ of sense...”29 Moreover, name and form again is the

support on which consciousness is based and consciousness and name and form

are causes of each other. Thus, he rejected consciousness as a permanent entity. 26 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 45. 27 The four noble truths (ārya satya) are: There is suffering (duḥkha), there is a cause of suffering (duḥkha-samudaya), there is cessation for suffering (duḥkha-nirodha) and there is a way leading to suffering (duḥkha-nirodha-gāminī pratipat). Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 71-72.28 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 74-75.29 Henry Clark Warren, Buddhism in Translations (New York: Atheneum, 1963), 166.

12

Consciousness or (vijñāna) as it is articulated in the Buddhist literature is

considered as contingent phenomena. Vijñāna is simply an awareness of the

present of an object. One cannot experience consciousness directly as an object.

For as soon as one focuses on the consciousness, it ceases to be the subject and it

become the object. Therefore, unlike Hinduism it does not abide in a soul or self

and is not spirit opposed to matter. “Consciousness, says the Buddha, arises

depending on certain conditions, and ceases hen the conditions cease to be.”30

The Theravāda and Vaibhāṣika schools speak of consciousness in the context of

five categories or skandhas namely rūpa (material), vedanā (feelings), saṁjñā

(perception), Saṁskāras (impression) and vijñāna (consciousness). These five

categories were later divided into twelve dhammas (mental presentation). There

are differences of opinions among different schools of Buddhism. All agree on

the concept of consciousness that it is a series of successive states or chain of

conscious moments and the apparent identity of an individual is an illusion due

to the continuity of consciousness.31 Thus, Buddhism holds for streams of

consciousness or momentary consciousness.

Yogācārā, the idealist school of Buddhism accepts the momentary

consciousness. They consider everything as consciousness and that it alone as

real. This is not in the sense of permanent essence but as fleeting cognition. They

consider the objects and the consciousness are perceived simultaneously.

Therefore, an object and its consciousness is one and the same. Thus, the

ultimate reality is ‘idea’ or ‘transitory consciousnesses.32 Śūnyavādins replace the

transient nature of consciousness by śūnya (void). The external and the internal

objects are both void, śūnya. They address reality and consciousness neither in

affirmation nor in negation nor both nor neither. The concept of śūnya means we

30 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness (New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003), 70. 31 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 401.32 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 72-73.

13

cannot say anything about the ultimate reality.33 Thus, the concept of liberation

or nirvāṇa is cessation of all - the real and the ideal, the external and internal

objects. Nirvāṇa is the goal of Buddhism. It means blown oneself out of

existences by annihilating all desires and passions. Positively it is identified with

bliss.34

0.4.1.3 Consciousness in Jainism

Consciousness is the substratum of the self for the Jainas. Upayoga or

consciousness is the defining character of the soul and called. It is foundation of

the faculty of cognition.35 Soul cannot exist without consciousness and

consciousness abides only in the self. Thus, it is the basis of its functions of the

self. The conscious principle in Jainism is called jīva. It is the doer of action and

the enjoyer of fruits of action and s characterised by formlessness and

consciousness.36 The unconscious principle is called ajīva. The conscious

principle jīva and the unconscious principle ajīva play an important role in the

understanding of consciousness in Jainism which is invariably linked to the

concept of liberation.

According to the Jainas, consciousness and matter are to distinct principles.

Jīvas essentially are of Kevalajñāna or omniscient knowledge or consciousness.

It is the highest kind of consciousness or perfect consciousness which is essence

of the soul. It manifests itself in different degrees on different kind of beings. On

account of the influence and merging with unconscious matter the effect the

consciousness is suppressed. This is considered as bondage. Thus,

consciousness which is of the essence of the soul is hidden due to matter.

Bondage is the modification of consciousness consisting of attachment due to

karmic particles. When the impediments are removed the soul returns to the all

comprehensive knowledge or consciousness. In it there are no unreal distinctions

33 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 662-663.34 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 81. 35 John Grimes, A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms Defined in English (Varanasi: Indica Books, 2009), 391.36 Anantakumar Bhattacharyya, “Carvaka Darsana” in Carvaka/Lokayata: An Anthology of Source Materials and Some Recent Studies, 67.

14

of the empirical world. The distinctions are worldly. Soul is of the nature of

consciousness.37

The Jaina thinkers speak of fourteen stage of the self through which it has to pass

to experience the purity of consciousness. These stages are called guṇasthānas. It

is a pilgrim’s path and progress which ultimately leads to the liberation of the

soul.  The initial two stages, individual consciousness is devoid of any idea of

goodness and truth. The individual’s conscious effort makes him get over

conflicting conditions in the next two stages. Later in the four stages, the

individual cultivates mental control. After psychical force the individual

control over his passions in the next four stages. In the thirteenth stage marks

the attainment of Kevalajñāna which is purified in the last stage in right faith,

right knowledge and right conduct. This stage is called ayogi-kevali-guṇsthāna.38

Here, the self attain total liberation transcending all limitations and enjoying pure

consciousness. Jainas concept of consciousness finds its completion the

attainment of infinite consciousness. It is more a spiritual journey than a

metaphysical or an epistemological search.

0.4.2 Consciousness in Orthodox Systems

Buddhism presenting momentary nature of consciousness challenged the

conventional philosophical thought. Positively, it gave a new impetus to review

and deepen the mainstream thought.39 In this context, the orthodox schools

reorganized their views on consciousness and other subjects. They made arduous

efforts to justify by reason what faith implicitly accepts. There were many but six

systems were more famous than others. They accept the authority of the Vedas.

They are grouped as Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika, Sāṁkhya-Yoga and Pūrva Mīmāṁsā -

Vedānta.

37 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 307-308.38 Sancheti Asoo Lal and Bhandari Manak Mal, “Stages of Progress of the Soul due to Development of its qualities - The Fourteen Gunasthanas” in http://www.jainworld.com/jainbooks/firstep-2/gunasthan.htm accessed on 13th February 2011.39 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 17-18.

15

0.4.2.1 Consciousness in Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika

Amidst the speculative schools of Indian philosophy Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika represent

realism. Through their combined epistemology and ontology they prove the real

nature of matter. Nyāya is known for its logical realism and Vaiśeṣika for its

atomisitc pluralism. Nyāya explores the mechanism of knowledge and Vaiśeṣika

advocates certitude over the scepticism of reality. Because of their similar

ideology, “The two systems had been for long treated as parts of one whole.”40

Gautama explains sixteen topics of logic in his Nyāyasūtra and Kaṇāda six

categories of his metaphysics in Vaiśeṣikasūtra.

Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika opines that consciousness is product, dependent, transitory and

accidental. Kaṇāda states that consciousness is produced in the same way as the

quality of redness is produced in a jar through its connection with fire. The self

exists without the consciousness. Consciousness inheres only in the self because

it cannot belong to any material elements or the manas. It is adventitious nature

that it inheres in the self just as sound inheres is Ākāśa.41 Just as sound is not

essential to ākāśa, it is not essential part to the self. Consciousness is not

svataḥprakāśa or self-revealing only it manifest other objects. Thus,

consciousness is not given an unique status in the Nyāya-Vaiśeṣika philosophy.

Consciousness is the quality of the self and not of the body. The self is eternal

and all-pervading. The self is the jñātā(knower) endowed with knowledge and

controls the mind, sense organs and its functions. Only when the self is in

association with the mind and the body consciousness emerges. Consciousness is

not the quality of the mind because mind itself is controlled by the self. Mind is

only an inter-mediating instrument of perception between the self and the sense

organs. Thus, consciousness is an activity and is momentary and not self

luminous.42

40 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2 (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1962), 31. 41 S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness in Hindu Philosophy, 2nd ed. (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass), 1971, 52.42 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 146-149.

16

0.4.2.2 Consciousness in Sānkhya-Yoga

Sāṁkhya is the dualistic school of Indian philosophy. Tradition regards Kapila to

be the founder of the dualistic school. Sānkhya-pravacana-sūtra is attributed to

him. Sāṁkhya philosophy is founded on two primordial, independent and eternal

entities. They are consciousness (puruṣa) and matter (prakṛti). Puruṣa is pure

consciousness and passive. Prakṛti is unconscious and active.

Puruṣa is distinct from prakṛti. It is not composed of gunas while prakṛti is.

Puruṣa is only perceiver or witness. It is not a substance and never considered as

an object. It is of the nature of consciousness. According to Sānkhya, the

individual is a composite of puruṣa and prakṛti. Prakṛti consists of three

constituents and called gunas. 43 The three gunas support, intermingle and

intimately connect with one another. Creation takes place when puruṣa and

prakṛti interact upsetting the equilibrium of the gunas.

Explaining the psychic-principles in an individual, Sānkhya states that is the first

buddhi or intellect is the first evolute. It mediates between puruṣa and prakṛti and

it functions as ahankāra (self-sense) or the individuating principle.44 Ahankāra

due to because of its self-sense identifies itself as the consciousness. It is not pure

consciousness. Only puruṣa is pure consciousness. Thus, ignorance of the dual

realities is considered as bondage. Liberation consists in discriminating

knowledge of prakṛti as inert and puruṣa as conscious.45 Thus, Sānkhya hold

puruṣa nature does not change as pure consciousness.

Patañjali in his Yogasūtra systematised Yoga as a philosophy on the

metaphysical foundation of Sāṁkhya. Unlike Kapila, Patañjali believes in God

who initiates the contact between puruṣa (pure consciousness) and prakṛti

43 The three constituent gunas are: sattva, rajas, and tamas. Sattva functions as manifestation, rajas functions as activity and tamas functions as restraint. Gunas are not perceived but inferred from their effects. S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 262-263.44 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 267-268.45 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 281-282.

17

(matter). Patañjali describes consciousness as the witness of all the mental

modifications. He introduces the concept of citta. Citta is buddhi which includes

Ahankāra and manas. It is unconscious and appears to be conscious being

closest to puruṣa. It assumes the form of the object. This form is called vṛtti or

modification.46 Yoga is the cessation of the modification of citta47 through

meditation and concentration. The goal of Yoga is that pure consciousness or

puruṣa is crystal clear as consciousness alone without citta and its vṛtti

modification. Patañjali give aṣṭangayoga as a means to attain that pure

consciousness.

0.4.2.3 Consciousness in Mīmāṁsā and Vedānta

Mīmāṁsā means ‘revered thought’ and it gives a philosophical justification for

vedic ritualism. Mīmāṁsā and Vedānta are clubbed together as both base

themselves in the veda: Mīmāṁsā in the Mantra and Brāhmaṇa (pūrva or earlier)

and Vedānta in Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads (uttara or latter). Mīmāṁsā considers

Veda as eternal and authorless. Mīmāṁsā-sūtra of Jaimini is the biggest and

earliest work. Shabarasvāmin wrote a commentary on it which is explained by

Prabhākara and Kumārila Bhaṭṭa who differ on many philosophical issues.48

Prabhākara considers consciousness as not the essence of self but as an

accidental quality. Consciousness is only a mode which appears and disappears.

Kumārila considers consciousness as nature of the self. It is of pure

consciousness. Kumārila explains that consciousness can reveal neither itself nor

the subject therefore it is not self-luminous. Prabhākara says knowledge is self-

luminous. Both agree that all consciousness is necessarily self-consciousness.49

Mīmāṁsā in general believe that the self is the doer and enjoyer of action and

consciousness resides in it. Consciousness cannot reside in the body or the

46 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 170.47 In Sanskrit: yogaschittavṛttinirodhaḥ.48 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 211-212.49 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 412.

18

senses. Moreover, the self is the transcendental knower and is the ultimate

subject identical with eternal and primal consciousness.

Vedānta means the end of the Vedas. The end of the Veda is also ascribed as

Upaniṣads. Upaniṣads is Vedānta in so far they constitute the highest purpose of

the Veda. Vedānta is the system of thought which has its source and inspiration

in the Upaniṣads. The first account of this thought is traditionally, is attributed to

Bādarāyaṇa’s Sūtra also called as Vedāntasūtra and Brahmasūtra.50 Bādarāyaṇa

affirms monism. He accepts Brahman as eternal and the world as impermanent.

The chief commentators of Brahmasūtra are Śankara, Bhāskara, Rāmānuja,

Madhva, Vallabha and Vijñānabhikṣu. Brahmasūtra is written in esoteric and

comprehensive manner it leaves to the interpretator just like the Upaniṣads to

draw its meaning. Thus, Vedānta is marked by different theological schools with

different traditions because of the ambiguous character of the Sūtra. No one has

written extensively and exclusively on the Brahmasūtra than Śankarāchārya.

Śaṁkara a par excellence creative thinker gave new direction and purpose for

philosophy and theology in India. He propounded the philosophy of non-

dualism or Advaita Vedānta. According to his school the Ultimate Reality is

Brahman or Atman which is Pure Consciousness. It a consciousness devoid of all

attributes and categories.51 Self-luminosity is the defining character of

consciousness. It is not intentional. It has no object. It is pure consciousness.

Consciousness is not ‘egological’ meaning, it is not the centre of the ego. Rather

ego is the apparent object of consciousness. It is non temporal and eternal.

Above all, consciousness and being are identical. For the Advaitins, ‘Being’ is

consciousness. In other words ‘to be’ is ‘to be consciousness.’52

There are theories of consciousness other systems of Indian Philosophy. The

different schools of Vedānta accept the concept of consciousness in varied ways.

50 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 431.51 William M. Indich, Consciousness in Advaita Vedānta (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1980), 12. 52 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 101-102.

19

Rāmānuja in Viśiṣṭādvaita (identity-in-difference) rejects pure consciousness.53

Consciousness is he attribute of the self. Sri Aurobindo speaks of consciousness

as a fundamental thing or force in existence which is creative. Kāshmir Śaivism

of Abhinavagupta state that consciousness is the one reality and matter is

identical with it. Indian philosophers like K.C. Bhattacharyya, J N Mohanty,

Bina Gupta and Sangeetha Menon have expounded exclusively on the notion of

consciousness.

0.5 Conclusion

Analysing several Western and Indian traditions, on the nature of consciousness

we can reduce the whole discussion to two basic features: Intentionality and self-

luminosity. One may generalise that western philosophy is pre-occupied with

intentionality and Indian Philosophy with self-luminosity.54 Self-luminosity

implies that by its very existence it is aware of itself. In other words, the subject

because consciousness is self-luminous is aware of having consciousness.

Intentionality refers or points to consciousness of being conscious of an object.

They are many philosophical debates on the mentioned features of consciousness

in both the traditions. The significance of the discussion is to appreciate the

variety of thought and build a foundation to analyse the Upaniṣadic concept of

consciousness. The Upaniṣadic understanding of consciousness is the goal of the

research. The above analyses guide to the next level from overview of

consciousness to detailed analysis of Upaniṣadic consciousness.

53 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2, 682.54 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 6.

20

Chapter One

DEVELOPMENT OF THE CONCEPT OF CONSCIOUSNESS

Pūrṇam adaḥ, pūrṇam idam, pūrṇat pūrṇam udacyatepūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate

That is full, this is full. From fullness fullness proceeds.If we take away the fullness of fullness, even fullness then remains.55

1.0 Introduction

The concept of consciousness is as old as the origin of human being. Human

being in on a continuous search to understand his/her own consciousness. The

Vedic sages epitomize consciousness in different ways at different periods. They

began unfolding the truth of consciousness in the hymns and the myths. Later,

they gave an expression to that consciousness through the prayers and rituals

signifying a reality beyond them. Sacrifice did not satisfy the mind. The true

seekers forced their mind to unravel that consciousness or reality beyond rituals

in the recesses of the mind in the solitude of the forests. Reflecting earnestly on

‘that’- Reality beyond mind and experience progressed into intense philosophical

deliberation. Disciplined deliberate thought culminated in ‘an experience’ of that

Reality beyond and in it is understanding of the concept of consciousness is

found in the Upaniṣads.

The study of consciousness in the pre-Upaniṣadic literature extends beyond the

two basic features of consciousness self-luminosity and intentionality. This

chapter aims to enquire into the nature of consciousness as the Ultimate Reality.

The Upaniṣadic seers consider consciousness as the Ultimate Reality beyond the

world of experience and categories of mind.56 The constant search in the pre-

Upaniṣadic literature is to find out the traces and development of this thought.

The dialectic used is objective and subjective by Vedic seers. Both are

complementary.57 The former endeavours to discover the essence of the outside-

55 B.U. V.1.156 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey of Upanishadic Philosophy, (Bombay: Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1968), 181. 57 S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 13.

21

world and latter to discover the essence of one’s inner-self. Thus, the subject

matter of the pre-upaniṣadic search is the nature for consciousness though the

problem is tackled from various perspectives. Understanding the pre-upaniṣadic

thought sets the background to analyze the Upaniṣads and its philosophical

notion of consciousness in better light.

1.1 Concept of Consciousness in Pre-Upaniṣadic Literature

“Vedas are the earliest written documents of human mind that we posses.”58 The

origin of Indian thought is traced in the Vedas. The foundational concepts on

consciousness are found in the Vedas. ‘Veda’ means knowledge.59 Vedas are

India’s ancient legacy. They are the fount of philosophical lustre. This vast

corpus of literature is divided into four parts: Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas

and Upaniṣads.60 They seem to be divided as per the progression of growth in

human consciousness from hymns to rituals and from reflections to philosophy.

The division in four show a clear transition from poetry to prose and from

reflection to mysticism. The literature which preludes the Upaniṣads is

considered as pre-upaniṣadic literature: Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas, Āraṇyakas.

Through them we find the first traces and development of the concept of

consciousness.

‘Mantras’ are hymns addressed to gods and goddesses. The collection of Mantras

is Saṁhitās. The earliest treatment of the concept of consciousness in Indian

Philosophy is to be found in this hymnology. 61 Ṛgveda Saṁhitā is the oldest and

the most important. The other three Saṁhitās are: Sāmaveda Saṁhitā, Yajurveda

Saṁhitā and Atharvaveda Saṁhitā contain collective literature of systematic

Vedic liturgy. The Saṁhitā literature gives a prelude to the fundamental truth of

existence namely consciousness.

58 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 63.59 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 2nd ed. (Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 2008), 532.60 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 14.61 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 64.

22

Brāhmaṇa are detailed prose on the systematic sacrificial Vedic rituals. They

form the second part of the Vedas. The most important literature is in the

Aitareya Brāhmaṇa, the Taittirīya Brāhmaṇa and the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa. They

emphasize on sacrifice, observance of caste and the supremacy of the priest. The

significance of the Brāhmaṇa literature personifies the sacrifices.62 The concept

of consciousness can be traced in them. Saṁhitās and Brāhmaṇas are grouped as

Karma-kāṇḍa or the text dealing with sacrificial action.

‘Āraṇyakas’ means writings from the forest. This literature gives a transition

from ritualism to philosophical speculations. They are named Āraṇyakas,

because they were related to the life of the forest dwellers. It is a literature and

period between Brāhmaṇa and the Upaniṣads, therefore, there is lot of

overlapping. Aitareya Āraṇyaka and Taittirīya Āraṇyaka present the concept of

consciousness in the mental faculty of intelligence, feelings and resolution.

Upaniṣads are intense philosophical and spiritual writings. They are regarded as

the cream of Vedic philosophy. Āraṇyakas and Upaniṣads are grouped as Jñanā-

kāṇḍa or the texts dealing with philosophy.63 The pre-upaniṣadic literature is

analysed in detail to understand the nature of consciousness.

1.1.1 Consciousness in the Ṛgveda Saṁhitā

The concept of consciousness in the Ṛgveda Saṁhitā is over a thousand years

earlier to the Upaniṣads. R.D. Ranade observes that, “...Ṛgveda is a great

hymnology to the personified forces of nature, and thus represents the earliest

phase in the evolution of religious consciousness,...”64 It is a colossal collection

of 1,017 hymns divided into ten maṇḍala or circles. The first maṇḍala contains

hymns to Agni, Indra and others. The tenth maṇḍala contains speculative hymns

with abstract theorizing. 65 The difference from first maṇḍala with simple lyrical

hymns to speculative in the last maṇḍala indicates the maturing of the mind.

62 Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 124.63 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 14. 64 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 2. 65 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 67.

23

Therefore, it is indispensible to study the concept of consciousness in the Ṛgveda

Saṁhitā.

The concept of consciousness is presented in its cosmogony. Various hymns

portray in a subtle manner the search for the Ultimate reality. In the hymn

Ṛgveda X.88, the seer inquires for the ‘hylē’ or matter out of which the heavens

and the earth were built and upon what the Creator stood when he held the

worlds. In the hymns X.5 and X.27 question about the conceptions of ‘Being’

and ‘Not-being’. In the famous hymn of creation X.129.6, the seer asks, “Who

verily knows and who can here declare it, whence it was born and whence comes

this creation?”66 Thus, it seeks for to know the ultimate reality. 67 From poetry it

launches itself to philosophy. This makes it present a unitary principle of order or

a law which governs nature. It is glorified as Ṛta. It gives a prelude to the

understanding of consciousness in the Ṛgveda.

1.1.1.1 Principle of Ṛta

Ṛta is understood as the ordering principle of the world. Literally, ‘ṛta’ means the

course of things.68 In our search for the consciousness it unwraps the mind to

understand the Ṛgveda thought. Ṛta, almost in all occasions is used in singular. It

is perceived by the poets as a unique and ‘unnameable’ entity as something

which must be qualified rather than identified and described.69 It is understood as

cosmic immanent for which regulates all the specific functioning of the animate

and inanimate nature.70 Even functioning of the human brain is attributed to ṛta.71

One of the basic functions of the brain is to know or to be conscious is ascribed

to it. Thus, ṛta is the unitary principle of the inner and outer world.

66 R.V.I.129.6., Rig Veda, tr. by Ralph T.H. Griffith, (1896), at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rigveda/rv10129.htm R.V.I.129.6. Accessed on 15th February 2011.67 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 2. 68 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol 1, 78.69 A. Sandness, ‘On Ṛtá and Bráhman: Visions of Existence in the Ṛg-Veda,’ Annals of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol LXXXVIII, 2007, 66. 70 R.V.X.121.1 71 S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 16.

24

Ṛta is seen as eternal principle that underlies all existence.72 It is also the

principle of sustenance life and cosmos and continuity depends upon ṛta.73 It is

considered higher than gods. The prayer to the gods is for keeping the path of

ṛta.74 Even Agni rests in ṛta75, Varuṇa is ṛta-minded and Sóma manifests it in the

form of creative speech.76 Interestingly, it remains as a principle and is not give

anthropomorphic and status of god. The great importance given to ṛta in the

Vedas is manifested as eternal.77 Ṛta is put in par with the concept of Brahman

in the Upaniṣads.78 Finally, the clear cut evidence of ṛta as truth-consciousness is

in the hymn to Agni, R.V. I.145.5 “ṛtacid dhi satyaḥ.”79 Thus, the unifying

principle is certainly a definitive which points to consciousness. If we accept ṛta

is the principle of universal dynamics then ṛta as consciousness is the principle

alluding to the Ultimate Reality.80

1.1.1.2 Quest for the Ultimate Reality

Besides the concept of ṛta there are many other elaborative allusions and

indicatives in the Ṛgveda presenting the evolution of the concept of

consciousness as the Ultimate Reality81. The search for the Beyond is evident

from the first maṇḍala to the last. The earliest inquiry is seen in the seer

questions, ‘who has seen that the boneless bear then bony when being born first?

Where may be the breath, the blood, the soul of the earth?82 The enquiry persists

as the poet wonders ‘by what power he moves? Who has seen (him) ‘That’?83

These are metaphysical and epistemological questions the seers ask seeking for 72 R.V.IX.110.46.73 A. Sandness, “On Ṛtá and Bráhman…”, 66-67.74 R.V.X.133.6. 75 R.V.III.1.11.76 R.V.IX.75.2.77 R.V.IV.23.8.78 A. Sandness, “On Ṛtá and Bráhman…”, 77.79 R.V. I.145.5. (Agni the Wise, for he knows Law, the Truthful).80 Satya Prakash Singh, Vedic Vision of Consciousness and Reality, Vol. 12, Part 3, History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian Civilization, (New Delhi: Centre for Studies in Civilizations, 2004), 35. 81 Ultimate Reality refers to the Absolute or the fundamental Reality out of which all other reality is made of. In Upaniṣads it means Brahman. Mā. U I.2 (sarvaṁ hy etad brahma, ayam ātma brahma – All this is verily, Brahman. This self is Brahman.)82 R.V.I.164.4 83 R.V.IV.3.5

25

the Beyond reality. They make a clear distinction between what is manifest and

unmanifest. The questioning magnifies in the speculative hymns. They question

who is that ‘Being’? To ‘who’, shall we offer sacrifice?84 It deepens in the hymn

of creation where the Beyond or the Ultimate Reality is declared as ‘Being and

non-being’ at the same time and the cognisant activity of the creator himself

questioned.85 The above enquiries indicate a true and profound search.

Another endeavour to seeking the Ultimate Reality is to found in the relations

between the material world and the psychosomatic person is explained in the

Vedic term ‘vāk’ referring to speech. In explaining it states that speech or ‘vāk’

is the primordial substratum from which existence originates and subsists. It

states that from ‘vāk’ flows the Veda and on her vāk stands the entire universe. 86

Thus, vāk claims to be beyond the creator. It directs to the understanding of

consciousness as the Ultimate reality. Consequently, the search leads the seer to

sees reality as one: “ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadanti”87 Stating that the truth is

one and the wise articulate in many ways. The Ṛg Vedic conception of

consciousness is found in the concept of ṛta and in the constant quest that there is

a Reality Beyond.

1.1.2 Consciousness in Other Three Saṁhitās

Yajurveda Saṁhitā, Sāmaveda Saṁhitā and Atharvaveda Saṁhitās are

considered largely as liturgical collection. They are considered to be the manuals

for smooth performance of the rituals. Each is Saṁhitā are ascribed to the

different priest involved in the sacrifice. ‘Yajuḥ’ means prose passage. The

Yajurveda Saṁhitā is attributed to Adhvaryu, who performs the sacrifice. The

performance of sacrifice is in the strictest ritualistic code which also involves

giving offering to gods. ‘Sāma’ means melody or song. Sāma Veda Saṁhitā is

84 R.V.X.121.1 85 R.V.X.129.1, also R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 2.86 R.V.I.164.32, Satya Prakash Singh, Vedic Vision of Consciousness and Reality, 41.87 R.V.1.164.46, H. S. Ananthanarayana and W. P. Lehman (compiled), Rig Veda in Sanskrit, at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rvsan/rv01164.htm, accessed on 13th February 2011. All Ṛgveda transliterations are taken from this source.

26

said to be composed for the Udgātā who sings the hymns in sweet musical tones

to entertain and please gods. The Atharvaveda is composed for Brahmā who

supervizes the sacrifice. Ṛgveda is for the Hotā who addresses the hymns to

invoke their presence.88 Collectively they are hymns they contain the mind and

the thought which sought to seek the reality beyond them.

The Yajurveda and Sāma Veda basically deal with the formulae of the

performance of sacrifice more than philosophy. The concept of consciousness is

to be found in the reason of performing the sacrifice. Atharvaveda Saṁhitā gives

an idea of primitive thought filled with the world of ghosts, sorcerers, witches,

diseases and longevity of life. It presents the idea of demonology prevalent

among the superstitions tribes of India. The Atharvaveda is veritably a store-

house of the black art of the ancients.89 Therefore, is less predominant than the

other three Saṁhitās. Among the four Saṁhitās, Ṛgveda takes the prime place.

There are similarities with Ṛgveda hymns and the other three Saṁhitās, but they

point out limited allusion to the concept of consciousness. From the Saṁhitās

we move to search the concept of consciousness in the second part of the Vedas

– the Brāhmaṇas.

1.1.3 Consciousnesses the Brāhmaṇas

Brāhmaṇas is the age of ceremonialism and ritualism with the chief topic as

sacrifice. Brāhmaṇa literature is a mixture of myths, exegeses, doctrine,

philological and philosophical conjectures to demonstrate the efficacy of the

Mantras. The literature of the Brāhmaṇas gives a new dimension to yajña

(sacrifice) as powerful.90 They are a ritual textbook to guide priests through the

complicated details of sacrificial rite. Due to the differences of interpretation in

detail led to formation of several schools of the Brāhmaṇa. Thus, this period is

marked with formal religious fervour and doctrinal evolution. The poetic fire of

the mantras was lost in the performance of the sacrifice and became superfluous

88 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 14.89 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 78.90 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 4.

27

utterance. Cultic priesthood became a profession and Vedas a divine revelation

preserved by the Brāhmins. 91 Yet we find serious metaphysical discussion.

Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa presents several cues on the concept of consciousness.

The Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa presents the concept of consciousness in different

place. It presents the superiority of prāṇa in the analysis of sleep. It states prāṇa

‘that’ which keeps the continuum of the person and therefore it is superior to

all.92 It speaks of the concept of Brahman as the creative principle of the world.93

Stating so it gives a negative description of the first principle of which there is

nothing earlier of after. It says’ “This Brahman has nothing before it and nothing

after it;”94 and little further it states that it is the One Principle which is given

various names by the poets.95 Here we find similarity with the concept of

Brahman in the Upaniṣads – the Ultimate Reality or the supreme consciousness.

Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa elaborates reflection on the subject or the self. It speaks

about meditating upon the true Brahman and it is in meditating upon him that

one is possessed of true understanding and this understanding makes one to pass

from this world to the next.96 The idea presented is a prologue to the idea of

Ātman and Brahman in the Upaniṣads. It clearly shows that the Upaniṣadic view

has it traces and beginnings in the earlier literature. Another important note

making notion in the development of the concept of consciousness is this verse,

which implies that the sages conceived relation between the individual mind and

the cosmic mind. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa states that one becomes what one

meditates on.97 Here, the insight of the Vedic mind is brought forth to light which

Upaniṣads discuss about ‘knowing’ and ‘being’. The Brāhmaṇas concepts -

91 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 124-130.92 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.5.2.15. 93 S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 124, Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa XI.2.3.1 and X.6.3.94 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.3.5.11., also Julius Eggeling tr., Śatapatha Brahmana Part IV, Sacred Book of the East Vol. 43 (1897) at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe43/sbe4360.htm, accessed on 13th

February 2011. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.3.5.11.95 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.4.1.9.96 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.6.3.1-2.97 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.5.2.20.

28

Brahman, self, knowing and being are in seminal form to be understood in its

fullness in the concept of consciousness in the Upaniṣads.

1.1.4 Consciousness in the Āraṇyakas

Āraṇyakas are the further development of the Brāhmaṇas. Araṇya means forest

and Āraṇyakas mean forest treatises. It is the literature of those who withdrew

from the ritualistic world to the forests. They engaged themselves in in

meditation and contemplation on the nature of things. Their intellectual quest led

to philosophical speculation on nature and gradually there was supersession of

the ritualism. Āraṇyakas establish that meditation and self-knowledge as the

highest goal of life.98 They paved way to crystallise the Vedic thought in the

Upaniṣads and reviving the philosophical speculation of the Vedas. The concept

of consciousness comes to light of self-realization.

Aitareya Āraṇyaka contributes largely on the concept of consciousness which is

magnified in the Aitareya Upaniṣad. Initially Aitareya Āraṇyaka presents the

concept of ‘ukthā’. It means from which thing arise and depart. Ukthā is

considered as the essence of the universe.99 Later it is replaced by the concept of

Ātman. A great emphasis throughout is given to ‘prāṇa.’ It means the vital air

that constitutes the life-breath of a living body and also the life-breath of all

mantras, all Vedas and all Vedic declarations.100 Thus, prāṇa considered as the

central principle. In speaking of creation the Āraṇyaka speaks of a god over

looking matter stirring into motion. He is responsible for the change in the world.

Aitareya Āraṇyaka calls this god prajñāna (intelligence) or the eternally active

self-conscious reason.101 There is a shift from prāṇa, the vital air to prajñāna the

self-conscious reason. The Āraṇyakas move a step ahead of the Brāhmaṇas to

call the Ultimate Reality as the self conscious reason. This leads us to the

Upaniṣadic concept consciousness. The fullness of the concept of consciousness

98 Surendranath Dasgupta, A History of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1, 14. 99 Aitareya Āraṇyaka II.1.2100 Aitareya Āraṇyaka II.2.2101 Aitareya Āraṇyaka I.3.3.6

29

in the Aitareya Āraṇyaka is in the explanation of consciousness at different

levels and only in human being consciousness is seen because he is most

endowed with knowledge.102 This, understanding of consciousness is the closest

to the notion of consciousness in the Upaniṣads.

The Saṁhitās, Brāhmaṇas and the Āraṇyakas present a fundamental and

inclusive principle expressed different in various names. They comprehend the

Ultimate Reality which transcends all divisions describing it as ‘one’. The

Ṛgveda calls it ‘ekam sat.’103 This idea of ‘oneness’ is articulated in the concept

of consciousness in the Upaniṣads. The multiplicity of the world is based on the

‘one’ or ‘Pure Consciousness.’ The pre-upaniṣadic literature is a witness to it.

The colossal literature before the Upaniṣads is very vital in the philosophical

analysis of consciousness. Pre-upaniṣadic concept of the Ultimate Reality is

largely oriented towards objectivity. Upaniṣadic concept of consciousness

orients towards subjectivity. The pre-upaniṣadic concept tells that there is an

‘Ultimate Reality’ or it is ‘that.’ The questions of the Vedic speculative hymns

are answered in the Upaniṣads.

The above analysis of the Vedic thought state that it seeks earnestly for the

Beyond or the Ultimate Reality. Its endeavours are remarkable. It is unanimously

agrees that there is an Ultimate reality but its real nature is not definitely

ascertained. It leaves unexplained the exact nature of ‘One Reality’ it presents in

varied manner. The mere existence of ‘that’ Ultimate reality does not satisfy the

Upaniṣadic seers. They further ask the question ‘what’ of ‘that’ of existence.104

Upaniṣadic sages engage themselves in finding out what is the nature of the

Ultimate Reality. The Upaniṣads take up the enquiry and develop in a rational

and systematic manner that has been universally accepted. Their contribution is

the presentation of a highly developed speculative philosophy. Thus, from Vedas

to the Upaniṣads is a journey from prayer to philosophy, from hymnology to

102 Aitareya Āraṇyaka I.3.1-5.103 R.V.I.164.46104 S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 22.

30

reflection, from henotheistic polytheism to monotheistic mysticism.105 This takes

to have a holistic appraisal of the Upaniṣads.

1.2 Upaniṣads: An Appraisal

Just as Brāhmaṇas give way to Āraṇyakas, Āraṇyakas imperceptibly guide to the

Upaniṣads. There is a major shift of interests and direction from the karmakāṇda

to the jñānakāṇda literature. The objective quest of the Vedas expressed in

sacrifice is distilled in subjective meditation of self-realization in the

Upaniṣads.106 Consequently, because of this sublimating process of thought,

Upaniṣads are ranked as the acme of philosophical speculations in India. Since

this research is based on the Upaniṣadic thought on consciousness a survey of the

Upaniṣads is beneficial.

Upaniṣads contain the essence of the Vedic teaching.107 The authors of the

Upaniṣads transform the legacy of the pre-upaniṣadic philosophy they handle.

The themes of the Vedic sages are reviewed, renewed and reproduced by the

Upaniṣads seers in a novel and congruent manner maintaining continuity and in

their innovation. Upaniṣads are reference point for later philosophies and

religions in India. The depth of thought is so rich that later philosophers largely

try to accommodate their thought on the doctrine of the Upaniṣads. The beauty of

Upaniṣads lies the variety of philosophy thought and contributions from various

authors with different world view yet having a unity of purpose. This gives it an

encyclopaedic character. It could be rightly called as an encyclopaedia of the

‘self-realization’ for it aims at ‘ātmā va are draṣṭavyaḥ.’108 In this basic concept

of ‘seeing the self’ is the dynamics of consciousness the as the ultimate reality is

brought to light.

105 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 2.106 Jose Thachil, The Upaniṣads: A Socio-Religious Appraisal, (New Delhi: Intercultural Publications,1993), 11.107 S. Radhakrishnan, The Philosophy of the Upaniṣads, (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1924), 14.108 B.U. IV.5.6, It means ‘the self is to be seen.’ Quotations from the Upaniṣads are taken from S. Radhakrishnan, Ed. and Tr. The Principal Upaniṣads (London: George Allen & Unwin Limited, 1953).

31

The discussion of ‘consciousness’ in the Upaniṣads arise in teaching the disciple

on the real nature of the self or Ātman. Ātman is translated as self. In the western

philosophical traditions self connotes to the subject with the referent ‘I.’ Ātman

is not referred ‘I’ but self. ‘I’ refers to the empirical self which is not equal with

the concept of Ātman. Upaniṣads refer to Ātman or ‘the self’ seeing or realizing

its ‘self’ as consciousness which is one and same with Pure Consciousness. To

comprehend the above concept in totality the background and basic teaching and

terms of the Upaniṣads are to be analysed.

1.2.1 Background of the Upaniṣads

Upaniṣads as the cream of the Veda are called vedānta meaning the end of veda

because they are dated after the pre-upaniṣadic literature. They are considered as

esoteric teachings. In Upaniṣadic era the secret character of instructions was a

rule to pass on the doctrinal knowledge only to whom the teacher finds worthy.

At the time of the deepest part of dispensing knowledge the teacher and the pupil

go apart and talk of the new doctrine as the source of human destiny.109 The

etymological meaning of Upaniṣads necessarily accords with the essential nature

of secrecy. Max Müller states that the word ‘Upaniṣad’ is derived from the root

‘sad’, meaning to sit down. It is preceded by the two prepositions ‘ni’ meaning

down, and ‘upa’ meaning near. It expresses the idea of the pupil sitting down

near their teacher to listen to his instruction.110 The root ‘sad’ also means to

destroy and to loosen.111 It means the disciple sits near his teacher devotedly to

receive instruction about the highest reality to loosen all doubts and destroy all

ignorance. Thus, it is understood as mystical instruction or true knowledge

regarding the Supreme Being.

109 B.U.III.2.13.(Yājñavalkya takes his pupil aside and whispered to him the truth), also in Arthur Berriedale Keith, The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and the Upanishads, Vol. 2.,(Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1976), 488.110 Max Müller, Tr., The Upanishads, Part I, Dover Edition, Sacred Books of the East, at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe01/sbe01015.htm#fn_40. Accessed on 15th February 2011. 111 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit –English Dictionary, 580.

32

The Upaniṣads are not based upon theological reasoning but on experience of

spiritual quest in life. They embody the meditations of seers of old. They present

to the world the one fundamental principle elucidated in two different ways; the

realization of Atman as Brahman and the second in sync with the first, the

Ultimate reality is not different from Brahman. In other words, the inner self and

the great cosmic power are one and the same. The Upaniṣads do not contain

spiritual experience of one great individual but a of great age of enlightenment

with collective manifestation of the divine. Therefore, traditionally they are

considered as Revealed Text.112

The Upaniṣads are more than 200 Upaniṣads. Traditionally only 108 are enlisted

and out of them ten are considered as principle Upaniṣads.113 The Upaniṣadic

literature is placed between 1200B.C and 600B.C based on the different tests to

place the Upaniṣads chronologically. The language, style, grammar, and even

inter-quotations were examined to settle with the chronological order of the

Upaniṣads. 114 The ten principal Upaniṣads are Bṛhadāraṇyaka, Chāndogya, Īśa,

Kena, Āitareya, Taittirīya, Kaṭha, Muṇdaka, Praśna, and Māṇḍukya. This

research focuses on four Upaniṣads namely Bṛihadāraṇyaka, Chāndogya,

Āitareya and Māṇḍukya Upaniṣads as they elaborate comprehensively on the

concept of consciousness.

1.2.2 The Four Upaniṣads for Research

1.2.2.1 The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣads

A full analysis of the Upaniṣads is not possible therefore focusing on four

Upaniṣads seems practical. A brief review provides fortifies the understanding of

the concept of consciousness. The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣads is an important

work of the Upaniṣads. It has its origin in the Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa and

Yajurveda115. It has six chapters out of which second, third and fourth are of

112 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 6-7.113 Muktika Upaniṣad I.30-39 (a study of 108 Upaniṣads). Also in S. Radhakrishnan, The Principle Upaniṣads, 21114 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 9-11.115 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 147.

33

concentred with philosophical content. The Second chapter begins with the

progressive definition of the Brahman between Gārgya and Ajātaśatru and moves

to introduce Yājñavalkya the greatest idealist philosopher of the Upaniṣads in a

conversation with Maitreyi on the Absolute self here he gives the great saying

‘ātmā va are draṣṭavyaḥ.’116 He is the prominent figure in Chapter three and four

discussing in the court of the king Janaka. The sayings of Yājñavalkya contain

serious content on consciousness as the Ultimate reality. The Upaniṣad contains

the great prayer “asato mā sad gamaya...amṛtaṁ gamaya”117 and the mahavakya

‘aham brahmāsmīti.”118 Fifth and the sixth chapter has miscellaneous topics

ranging from ethics to eschatology.

1.2.2.2 The Chāndogya Upaniṣads

The Chāndogya Upaniṣad belongs to the Samaveda. It is the longest Upaniṣad

and has eight chapters. The dominant theme is meditations. The sixth to the

eighth chapters are of philosophical importance. Āruṇeya is the outstanding

personality of Chāndogya Upaniṣad.119 He teaches Śvetaketu to establish an

absolute equation between the individual spirit and the universal spirit without

difference between the two in the words, “tat tvam asi.”120 – That art thou. The

eighth chapter contains important content on states of consciousness as Indra

persists in its search for the true self guided by prajāpati.

1.2.2.3 The Aitareya Upaniṣads

Aitareya Upaniṣad is part of Aitareya Āraṇyaka and belongs to Ṛgveda. The

Upaniṣad contains three chapters. The first is the description of creation by the

primordial Ātman. In chapter three the fundamental doctrine of idealistic

116 B.U. II.4.5 117 B.U. I.3.28 118 B.U. I.4.10119 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 14-15.120 C.U. VI.8.7

34

philosophy of psychical existence as consciousness is revealed.121 Here, The

absolute is called pure consciousness – “prajñānam brahma”122

1.2.2.4 The Māṇḍukya Upaniṣads

The Māṇḍukya Upaniṣad is the last and the shortest among the classical

Upaniṣads. It belongs to the Atharva Veda. It contains only twelve verses. It

presents the different states of consciousness. It proves that in the ultimate state

one becomes the Ultimate Reality as consciousness.123 The Absolute mystic

consciousness is captured in the great aphorism “ayam ātma brahma”124 Thus,

these four Upaniṣads articulate in different ways that the Ultimate Reality is

consciousness.

The Upaniṣads as dynamic as they are use multiple methodologies in explaining

different subjects from diverse perspectives. Every Upaniṣad starts and ends with

an invocation of peace. Metaphors and analogies are extensively used to explain

difficult concepts. They present parables and allegories which bring out the

hidden meaning. Enquiries and dialogues are a common feature. Questioning is

considered as a prerequisite for a good dialogue and inquiry.125 Many concepts

become clear as the metaphors, parables and analogies unfold their meaning. The

concept of consciousness in many places is webbed in metaphors and analogies.

Therefore, Upaniṣadic teachings are called a mysterious hidden in its method of

presentation.

1.3 Basic Teachings in the Upaniṣads

Upaniṣadic writings are the expressions of the innermost experiences of several

ṛṣis over span of centuries. They have no set theory of philosophy or a dogmatic

schema. Their goal is the achievement of human destiny and they present truth of

121 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principle Upaniṣads, 513.122 A.U. III.1.3 123 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 693.124 Mā.U. 1.2125 Ram K. Piparaiya, Ten Upanishads of Four Vedas (New Delhi: New Age Books, 2003), 18-19.

35

life. Hence, “it is not easy to decide what Upaniṣads teach.”126 Nevertheless,

there is an underlying thought that there is only one reality and that reality is

Pure Consciousness. The teaching in the Upaniṣads is characterised by questions

or enquiries. The central question is - ‘what is Real or the Ultimate Reality?’ The

answer to this question begins in metaphysics and culminates in mysticism in the

Upaniṣads.127 The seers of the Upaniṣads aim to reach the Ultimate Reality which

is Infinite Existence (sat), Infinite Consciousness (cit) and Infinite Bliss

(ānanda). Thus, two basic concepts emerge - objective analysis result in the

concept of Brahman and subjective analysis in Ātman and from these arise a

synthesis of the Ātman-Brahman. The aim of the research is to seek the concept

of consciousness in the Upaniṣads. Therefore, the explanation accordingly

focuses on consciousness.

1.3.1 Brahman

Brahman is the word used by the Upaniṣads to indicate Ultimate Reality. It is

derived from the root word ‘bṛh’ - to grow and to increase or burst forth.128 The

derivations suggest gushing forth or continual growth. In the Ṛgveda it is used as

an utterance of sacred knowledge or prayer, Viśva-karman (creator), Prajāpati

and as Puruṣa.129 The term Brahman had timely progressive implications. It was

equated with prayer and with the power of prayer. Later in the Brāhmaṇas it is

denoted as the ritual and regarded omnipotent. Brahman is considered as the

guiding principle of the universe.130 From here onwards the concept of Brahman

is concentrated as ‘the Real’ as God. If one does not know Brahman, one cannot

speak about it. If one knows Brahman, it is because the Real knows itself in the

person. Thus, all spiritual progress was to have the knowledge of Brahman.131

126 S. Radhakrishnan, Philosophy of the Upaniṣads, 15.127 R.D. Ranade, A Constructive Survey, 45.128 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit –English Dictionary, 393.129 R.V.X.81.7, X.71, X.121.130 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.3.5.11.131 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 53.

36

The Upaniṣads attempt to understand the Real on the analysis of the facts of

nature and facts of inner life. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad the seer asks, what is

tajjalān?132 Tajjalān is that from which all things spring, and live and have their

being. The answer is Brahman. Thus, Brahman is considered as the Ultimate

Reality from which everything springs. In the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad Bālāki

Gārgya in his interview with Ajātaśatru puts forth a progressive definition of

Brahman. It concludes calling Brahman as ‘satyasya satyam’ or the truth of the

truth.133 Aitareya Upaniṣad uses the old conception of prāṇa (breath) but

identifies Brahman with prajñāna or consciousness.134

The Nature of Brahman is not only reality or existence and consciousness. It is

also bliss. Taittirīya Upaniṣad presents this concept in the five stages (annamaya,

prāṇamaya, manomaya, vijñānamaya and ānandamaya) in Brahmānanda Vallī or

the chapter on the bliss of Brahman.135 The triad character of the Brahman as

being (sat) consciousness (cit) and (ānanda) is not found in the early

Upaniṣads.136

Yājñavalkya’s attribute of Brahman as consciousness are to be carefully noted.

Just as salt when mixed with water cannot be brought back so also this great

being (referring to Brahman) infinite, limitless, consists of nothing but

consciousness.137 Using the example of salt once again he states that just like the

salt altogether is a mass of taste within and without; the supreme self (meaning

Brahman) is total consciousness.138 Yājñavalkya comparing man to a tree

explains that Brahman’s essential nature is consciousness and its final goal is

bliss.139 Thus, he presents Brahman as pure consciousness.

132 CU. III.14.1.133 B.U. II.1.20.134 A.U. III.1.3 (prajñānam brahma) - Brahman is consciousness. 135 T.U. II.1-9.136 Arthur Berriedale Keith, The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda, 519.137 B.U. II.4.12 (vijñāna-ghana eva)138 B.U.IV.5.13 (prajñāna-ghana eva)139 B.U. III.9.28.7 (vijñānam ānandam brahma)

37

The Brahman is very often described as “neti neti” or bundle of negations in the

Upaniṣads. Yājñavalkya maintaining his position of Brahman as pure

consciousness also states that the Brahman is absolutely ultimate that human

knowledge of the absolute is non-existent. The most drastic expression is “neti

neti” – ‘not so, not so.’140 Not being able to define from the empirical point of

view the Upaniṣad seer uses negation. It is a similar task as to describe light to a

blind person. In such a case to avoid negation is impossible. The possible

description would be light has neither sound nor taste nor form nor weight nor

resistance nor be known through analysis yet be seen. Brahman is therefore, the

Ultimate Reality as cause of all reality, pure consciousness as the inner-most

essence of everything and beyond empirical comprehension.

1.3.2 Ātman

One is absolutely certain of one’s own existence. There is neither doubt nor

denial of ones existence. The individual self is always immediately felt and

known. Ātman refers to the subjective self in the Upaniṣads. The objective self is

the Brahman. Ātman is of the same essence of the Ultimate Reality Brahman.

The word ‘ātman’ is derived from ‘an’ means to breathe or life. It is also called

as breath of life. Gradually, it came to be called as self, soul, or the individual

soul.141 It is inner principle of human life which transcends prāṇa (breath), manas

(mind) and prajña (intellect). The word ‘ātman’ in the Ṛgveda refers to an

unborn portion or the antara puruṣa (eternal self) which has no body and no

organs of sense.142 This points out to the eternal character of ātman. Therefore, it

is not to be identified with body or mind and their organs. As mentioned earlier

Indian Philosophy gives the top most priority to the concept of ātman as its goal

is to realise its true nature. The nature of ātman is consciousness the same as

Brahman.

140 B.U. IV.2.4., 5.15, III.9.26141 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 78.142 R.V.X.16.4.

38

As Brahman is the foundational reality of the universe, ātman is the foundational

reality of the underlying the conscious powers of the individual self. Therefore, it

is the ātman who gives depth to human life. It makes human life go beyond the

perceptible world controlled by the jīva (individual ego).143 The Ātman is

superior reality than the jīva. In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad Prajāpati unfolds the

nature of the Ātman to Indra and Virocana. He mentions four progressive

definitions as four stages of the self: the bodily self, the empirical self, the

transcendental self and the absolute self. Here, the Ātman is progressively

identified with the body consciousness, the dream consciousness, and the deep

sleep consciousness till it identifies itself with the absolute consciousness

unaffected by empirical existence.144 The progressive dynamics of identifying of

the self with different stages leads one from ignorance to knowledge of self

realisation. In the first stage the self identifies with the body, the second with

vital breath and in the third with the intellect. All these stages are not permanent.

Only in the fourth stage the self is understood as a subject and not as an object.145

In this stage the Ātman sees itself as not different from the absolute self. Thus,

ātman realises consciousness as its true nature.

Ātman is conceived as an active subject of perception than a passive spectator.

Ātman in its actual state is self-dependent and free.146 It is not an object. It is free

from all kinds of false identification. It is independent.147 The self realizes ‘That I

am’ in the light of pure consciousness and understands its immortal nature. As

the subject it is the inner ruler. The self who knows that it is ‘That’148 becomes

‘That.’ Here Ātman is understood as the subject and the Brahman as the object of

its consciousness. “He who knows that verily, knows all.”149 Thus, the Ātman

becomes consciousness. The Ātman has no longer the object of consciousness

143 Paul Deussen, A.S. Geden, Tr. , The Philosophy of Upanishads, (New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1966), 450. 144 C.U. VIII.7., Mā.U I.1-12 and also S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol 1, 151. 145 S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 26. 146 B.U. III.4.1 147 B.U. IV.3.11 148 C.U. VI.8.7., ‘That’ means Brahman or the Ultimate Reality. 149 C.U. 2.21.4.

39

but one with the Subject which is consciousness. It is not an individual but an

absolute or the Universal subject. Hence, transcendence of the concept of Ātman

from gross to subtle and from subtle to the subtlest – consciousness is noticed.

The Ātman limited by psychological and intellectual organs questions

‘Ko’ham.’150 The Ātman as pure subject states ‘aham brahmāsmi.’151 The Ātman

is the conscious knowing subject. Ātman has the light which shines above all,

above everything.152 This refers to Ātman as self-shinning consciousness or light

unto itself.153 Thus, the real nature of Ātman is always a subject and never the

object. Ātman becomes the self-shining consciousness.

Ātman and its states of consciousness is an important topic which completes the

subjective notion of consciousness as the Ultimate Reality. This is systematically

dealt in the next chapter. The above analysis on the nature of Ātman leads to the

monistic view of the Upaniṣads - the synthesis of the Brahman-Ātman concept. It

is the oldest idealistic concept which evolved from the philosophy of the Ṛgveda

in the Upaniṣads.

1.3.3 Brahman-Ātman

Ātman is the principle of individual consciousness and Brahman the principle of

cosmic consciousness. The former is the microcosm and the later macrocosm.

Upaniṣads teach us that these distinctions disappear as the Ātman, the inner

principle comprehends the Brahman, the universal principle. The Ātman-

Brahman doctrine as logical development of the idea has its origin in the Ṛg

Veda,154 long previous history in the Brāhmaṇa155 and completion in the

Upaniṣads.156 This thought is the most original to the original thinkers of the

Upaniṣads. They found it when they recognised the Ātman, the most individual

150 A.U. III.1 (who am I?)151 B.U.I.4.10 (I am Brahman)152 C.U. III.13.7 153 B.U.IV.3.1 (ātmaivāsya jyotir)154 R.V.I.164.46., ekaṃ sad viprā bahudhā vadanti .155 Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa X.6.3156 Arthur Berriedale Keith, The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda, 494.

40

being, as the Brahman, the inmost being of universal nature.157 The great

aphorisms or mahāvākyas express it.158 This identification of Ātman and

Brahman is very significant. On this concept of Oneness of Brahman as Ātman is

hinged spiritual treasures and philosophical systems.

The reflection on oneness of subject and object embraces the existence of one

central reality. The different conceptions of the Brahman correspond to different

ideas of Ātman. The four states of the Ātman the bodily self or (viśva), the vital

self (taijasa), the intellectual self (prājña) and Absolute self (turīya) corresponds

to Brahman as the cosmos (virāt), the soul of the world (Hiraṇyagarba) the self-

consciousness (Īśvara) and Ānanda (Brahman) respectively.159 Thus, from the

view point of consciousness, the oneness suggests that ātman and Brahman are

both essentially pure consciousness. It is due to the different state that we

experience multiplicity.

The principle of Brahman as Ātman is neither metaphysical abstraction nor

indeterminate identity nor void. It is the fullness of being. The Upaniṣads don’t

offer abstract monism. Brahman-Ātman is infinite in so far as it is the ground of

all finiteness. Ultimate Reality is not thought or force it is essence and existence.

Aitareya Upaniṣads categorical calls it Consciousness. Brahman is

consciousness.160 Then Ātman also is consciousness. If Brahman and Ātman are

consciousness then the Ultimate Reality is consciousness. Thus, consciousness

becomes the foundational reality.

The chief endeavour of Vedic philosophy right from the period of philosophical

hymns has been the search for the foundational reality. The enquiry has been

what is the one essence of the diverse universe? The second is what is the source

from which organs of life proceed? The macrocosmic principle comprehends the

157 Paul Deussen, A.S. Geden, Tr. , The Philosophy of Upanishads, 40.158 C.U. VI.8.7 - Thou art that, A.U. III.1.3 - Consciousness is Brahman, Mā.U I.2 - This Self is Brahman and B.U. I.4.10 – I am Brahman. 159 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, Vol. 1, 172. 160 A.U. III.1.3.

41

substratum as Brahman and microcosmic principle as the inner self recognised as

Ātman. The fundamental thought of the entire Upaniṣadic philosophy is

expressed in the nonduality of Ātman and Brahman. The teaching of the

Upaniṣad teach idealistic monism which means all is one; is one without a

second. Moreover, from the Vedic to Upaniṣadic times is a journey from prayer

to philosophy and philosophy to mysticism.

Only a mystic can intuit the essence of everything as one and none other than

consciousness.161 These words summarise the above Upaniṣadic thought,

“pūrṇam adaḥ, pūrṇam idam, pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate, pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya

pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate.” That is full, this is full. From fullness, fullness proceeds.

If we take away the fullness of fullness, even fullness then remains.162

1.4 Upaniṣadic Vocabulary on Consciousness

Every concept understood in its context presents its meaning in fullness.

Etymological study helps in this endeavour. Upaniṣadic literature uses different

words and metaphors presenting the concept of consciousness. The Upaniṣads

specify the nature of Ātman as consciousness in different metaphors. For

example: ātman as seer in draṣṭā or vijñātā,163 ātman as self-shining or self-light

in ātmajyoti,164 ātman as inner controller in antaryāmī165 and ātman as self-

luminous in svayaṁjyoti.166 There are several terms like jñāna, vijñāna, and

prajñāna which are used intermittently in referring and connoting to different

cognitive faculties specially consciousness. The word cit is also used in similar

reference. A short analysis of different concept would unravel the concept of

consciousness from the terms used in the Upaniṣads. The study is delimited to

only four terms. They are jñāna, vijñāna and prajñāna and cit.

1.4.1 Jñāna, Vijñāna and Prajñāna

161 Govindagopal Mukhopadhyaya, Studies in the Upaniṣads, Culcutta: Sanskrit college, 1960), 190.162 B.U. V.1.1 163 B.U.III.4.2.164 B.U.IV.3.6.165 B.U. IV.3.6166 B.U.III.7.23. also Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 17.

42

The term jñāna basically means knowledge, wisdom and comprehension. It is

taken from the root verb jñā – to know.167 The root word jñā also means to be

aware of. The word jñāna has other meanings like consciousness, cognizance,

intelligence and understanding. It also refers to sacred knowledge, knowledge

derived from mediation and knowledge of higher truths and of philosophy and

religion. The word ‘Jñānataḥ means consciously.168 Thus, jñāna is a complex

word in Sanskrit having multiple meanings. Upaniṣads also use it with the word

with its dynamics. The Upaniṣadic literature is classified under the term jñāna-

kaṇda. From the perspective of consciousness in the Upaniṣads it is used not

exclusively to mean consciousness but seeking knowledge and wisdom. Jñāna is

to be considered as a generic term for cognition, knowing and knowledge.

The words Vijñāna and Prajñāna have their root in the word jñāna. The prefix

‘vi’ when added to nouns increases the intensity of that word. Here, ‘vi’ added to

‘jñāna’ deepens the intensity of jñāna.169 Hence, Vijñāna means wisdom,

cognition, intellect, consciousness and stream of consciousness.170 It is widely

used in the Upaniṣads as means intelligence, understanding and knowing but it

does not give allusions to mean consciousness as the Ultimate Reality.171 The

Buddhist school Vijñānavāda uses this term exclusively to mean consciousness

as the only reality.172

Prajñāna means wisdom, intuitive wisdom or gnosis.173 The prefix ‘pra’ when

added to noun would mean excessive or having power. Prajñāna is also used

widely in different context in the Upaniṣads indifferent senses. Prajñā is

considered as the state of deep-sleep.174 In Aitareya Upaniṣad ‘prajñāna-brahma’

is used to describe the nature of Brahman as Absolute consciousness. Thus,

167 John Grimes, A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy, 185.168 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 223.169 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 505.170 John Grimes, A Concise Dictionary, 405.171 A.U.III.1.2, C.U.VIII.7.3, B.U.IV.3.31.172 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey, 108. 173 John Grimes, A Concise Dictionary, 279174 Mā.U. I.5.,

43

consciousness as the Ultimate Reality is best portrayed in the term ‘prajñāna’.

Jñāna is a specific sense belongs to the theory of knowledge in Indian philosophy

(pramāṇaśāstra). Consciousness invariably is considered as a substratum of

everything in the Upaniṣads. Moreover, the consciousness is not limited to have

specific branch of philosophy.175 Therefore, the next word to be considered is cit.

1.4.2 Cit

The Sanskrit word cit is loaded with meaning. The first traces of the word cit are

seen in the Ṛg Veda.176 It is used as cétate, cite, ci’ketat and citan’tyā.177 There

are many references to cit in the Upaniṣads.178 Chāndogya Upaniṣad in the

discourse between Sanatkumāra and Nārada cit is presented as citātman.179 The

discussion ends emphasising the primacy of the self. Cit basically means to

perceive, to see, notice, observe, to know, to understand, to be aware or

conscious of or to regain consciousness and to appear and shine. It also means

thought, intellect, intelligence, intellect and understanding. Furthermore, It is

used to mean the soul or the self (ātman) which is the animating principle of life

and even Brahman. When it is often used with ātman it refers to pure

intelligence, the supreme spirit (Brahman) and more importantly consciousness

as the nature of ātman.180 Cit also means spirit, consciousness and Reality.181

Reality is used with a capital ‘R’ meaning the Ultimate Reality. Ultimate Reality

has been the focus of thought throughout this chapter. Thus, from the above

meanings above the word cit shows a comprehensive character. The Sanskrit

term cit is generally accepted as consciousness as the Ultimate Reality (Ātman-

Brahman) in Indian philosophy.182

175 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 5. 176 R.V.I.129.7, VII.95.2, IX.101 and X.143.4.177 Sir Monier Monier-Williams, A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Etymological and Philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate Indo-European Languages, (Delhi: Munishiram Manoharlal Publishers, 1994), 394. 178C.U. VII.5.1-3, also S. Gajanan Shambhu Sadhale, Upaniśad-Vākya-Mahā-Kośa, Vol.1 (Delhi: Sri Satguru Publications, 1947), 357-378.179 C.U. VII.5.2. 180 Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 207-208.181 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 5.182 John Grimes, A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy, 136.

44

The later Upaniṣads use the term ‘cit’ often then the classical Upaniṣads.

Paingala Upaniṣad clear presents the term ‘cit’ in the context of explaining the

Mahāvākayas.183 The term ‘cit’ as consciousness is more often seen in the

writings of the Vedāntins in speaking of the nature of Brahman and Ātman.

Śaṁkara often uses the term jñāna for consciousness.184 Rāmānuja uses the word

‘cit’ exclusively.185 Upaniṣads are known for the diversity of directions yet

moving towards a central theme. The same is true in the expression of the

concept of consciousness. The multiple terms expressing consciousness bring the

beauty of the concept and its various dimensions. To choose one term and

delimit the notion of consciousness to that term is not the goal of the research.

The etymological review is to bring the magnanimity of the concept of

consciousness. This research seeks to understand the fullness of the concept of

the consciousness in the Upaniṣads as the viewed by the Upaniṣadic seers

themselves.

1.5 Conclusion

The concept of consciousness has developed from the pre-upaniṣadic to the

Upaniṣadic times. From the seminal ideas of Ṛgveda to the complexity of

cognitive speculation in the Upaniṣads prove progress and growth in philosophy

and spirituality. Upaniṣads witness the growth and crystallization of the concept

of consciousness. It exhibits it metaphysical and epistemological perspectives in

the theories it presents on consciousness. The Ṛgveda thought developed and

influenced the Upaniṣadic Seers. Similarly later philosophers are influenced by

Upaniṣadic teaching. Upaniṣads become the foundation for their speculations.

The ultimacy of the subjective self and the supremacy of the objective self

blending in one reality – reality as consciousness is the original contribution of

the seers. It is thought provoking and a light to enlightenment. The Upaniṣadic

183 Paingala Upaniṣad III.3.184 S. Radhakrishnan, The Brahma Sūtra: The Philosophy of Spiritual Life (London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1960), 31.185 S. Radhakrishnan, The Brahma Sūtra: The Philosophy of Spiritual Life, 55.

45

contribution of the states of consciousness is remarkable. The distinctions made

and the conclusions drawn lead to carefully study of the states of consciousness

in the next chapter.

46

Chapter Two

ANALYSIS OF CONSCIOUSNESS

Sarvaṁ hy etad brahma, ayam ātmā brahma, so’yam ātmā catuṣ-pātAll this is, verily, Brahman. This self is Brahman. This same self has four quarters.186

2.0 Introduction

The Upaniṣadic ṛṣis expound consciousness as the ultimate reality. The one

reality underlying all other realties is concealed in the unitive concept of

Brahman-Ātman. This one reality is considered as two sides of the same reality:

Brahman as the objective consciousness and Ātman as the subjective

consciousness. The analysis of consciousness is unfolds the truth that,

consciousness is the only reality. The different states of consciousness are

experienced by the self till it realizes its true self as one and the same as

Brahman (Aham Brahamāsmi). This chapter analyses four different states of

consciousness explained in the Upaniṣads unfolding the true nature of

consciousness. The individual self jīva or jivātman is a knower, doer and agent.

It is the ātman embodied within the body experiences the different states of

consciousness because of its psycho-physical organs. These states of

consciousness present the dynamics of the ātman. A systematic investigation of

the states of consciousness deepens the Upaniṣadic understanding of

consciousness.

2.1 States of Consciousness

No single Upaniṣad provides a systematic and comprehensive account of the

nature of Ātman. There is a need to piece them together to get a complete

comprehensive understanding. Thus, primarily the text from only four

Upaniṣads, namely Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, Chāndogya Upaniṣad, Māṇḍūkya

Upaniṣad and Aitareya Upaniṣad. They present the different states of

consciousness of the Ātman. The Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad exclusively gives a

systematic and formal presentation and serves as a guide to the four states of

186 Mā.U. I.1.2

47

consciousness.187 The others Upaniṣads speak of only three states, Māṇḍūkya

includes a fourth.188 The four states of consciousness in the Upaniṣads are:

1. Vaiśva (Waking Consciousness)

2. Taijasa (Dreaming Consciousness)

3. Prājña (Deep sleep Consciousness)

4. Turīya (Transcendental Consciousness)

2.2 Vaiśva – Waking Consciousness

Vaiśva is the first state of consciousness.189 It considered as the gross self

characterised with outward perception. The vaiśva or the waking state of

consciousness is identified with the five organs of the senses (hearing, touch,

sight, taste and smell), the five organs of action (speech, handling, locomotion,

generation and excretion), the five vital breaths the mind (manas), and the

intellect, (buddhi), the self-sense (ahankara) and the thought (citta).190 It is the

external self (body) of the body. Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad labels it ‘Vaiśvānara’

because it leads all in diverse ways to the enjoyment of various objects. It is the

waking state in the normal condition of human being who accepts the perceptible

world as it is without any reflection.191 It is considered as the outermost part of

the self.

The waking state is the normal experience, experienced here and now. It is the

empirical consciousness of thoughts, words and action. The empirical

consciousness of the individual self of the external objects of the objective world

is the significant characteristic of this state of consciousness. There is a duality of

subject and object. The individual self perceiving through the indriyas and manas

is pleased with plurality of perceptions, feelings, emotions, thoughts, desires,

decisions, doubts, faiths, disbeliefs, steadiness, unsteadiness, sense of shame,

187 Mā.U. I. 1.2. 188 S. Radhakrishnan, Philosophy of Upanishads, 35. 189 Mā.U. I.1.3.190 C.U.V.18.2., also Paul Deussen, Philosophy of Upaniṣads, 300.191 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads,695.

48

knowledge, fright, etc.192 It is the commonness of experience.193 The first

observation on waking consciousness is that the firstly, individual self is

conscious of its acts with subject-object duality. The second is the content of

consciousness is perceptive knowledge. Vaiśva consciousness is the limited

consciousness of jīva or the individual self. The waking stage is the first state of

consciousness discussed in the Upaniṣads.

2.2.1 Perceptual Consciousness

Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad describes the process of perception. It states that the

manas controls the indriyas. It is superior to the indriyas. “. . . One sees only

with the mind and hears only with the mind.”194 The manas receives the

sensations from the indriyas and assimilates them. The jīva enjoys the material

world. The jīva thinks that manas is the center for consciousness having dual

function of perception and awareness of that perception.195 Thus, perceptual

consciousness is characteristic to waking consciousness. Perception is of the

objective world outside is experienced. This is to be noted in contrast to the next

two states of consciousness dream and deep sleep.

Upaniṣads portray subject- object duality speaking of perception. They agrees

that perceptive knowledge is susceptible. The sensitivity of the indriyas is

limited. They primarily depend on the manas for the apprehension of the

impression they collect. The hearing, the seeing, the touching, the smelling and

the tasting are controlled by manas.196 Thus, the individual self the waking state

engaged by indriyas and manas enjoys the variety of experiences.

2.2.2 Plurality of Experience

192 Baldev Ṛg Sharma, The Concept of Ātman in the Principal Upaniṣad: In the Perspective of the Saṁhitas, the Brāhmaṇas, the Araṇyakas and Indian Philosophical Systems (New Delhi: Dinesh Publications, 1972) 238. 193 Satya Prakash Singh, Vedic Vision of Consciousness, 274.194 B.U, I.5.3.195 Baldev Ṛg Sharma, The Concept of Ātman in the Principal Upaniṣad, 239-240.196 Paul Deussen, Philosophy of Upanishads, 301.

49

The description of the bodily self given by Prajāpati to Indra and Virocana take

precedence in this context. Prajāpati asks them to see themselves in a pan of

water. They see their ‘self’ in the water and think that what they perceive is their

self.197 The plurality of experience limits them to perceptive knowledge.

Virocana identifies the self with the external self (body). Indra does not. Indra

thinks and understands that the body is not the self because the body

experiences pain and suffering and considers the principle of the bodily self is

inadequate.198 Thus, plurality experience is another significant characteristic of

Upaniṣads. Contrary to it unity is the basic characteristic of the ultimate reality.

Plurality of experience is present throughout the change, the common factors

in the stage waking, dream, sleep, death, rebirth and final deliverance.199

Waking state of consciousness is therefore, empirical consciousness.

2.3 Taijasa - Dream Consciousness

Taijasa is the consciousness of the internal or mental states. Just like vaiśva is

subject of the waking state cognises material objects taijasa experiences mental

states dependent on the predispositions of the waking consciousness.200 It is also

called as dream consciousness. It is related with sleep consciousness and referred

as dream-sleep consciousness. The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad vividly illustrates

dream consciousness. “There (in that state of dream), there are no chariot, no

yoked teams of horses, no streets but it creates for itself chariot teams of horses,

and streets; in that place, there are no fountains, ponds and rivers because it is the

creator.”201 To understand this text we have to analyze in what context the author

speaks of dream consciousness. Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad states that dream state

is an intermediate between waking consciousness and Deepsleep

consciousness.202 Deepsleep is a higher state of consciousness than the dream

197 C.U. VIII.8.1-5. 198 C.U. VIII.9.8.199 B.U. IV.4.5.200 Baldev Ṛg Sharma, The Concept of Ātman in the Principal Upaniṣad, 239-240.201 B.U. IV. 3.10.202 B.U. IV. 3.9. (sandhyam –intermdiate)

50

state. Therefore, the dream consciousness plays a dual role. It is activates in sleep

and in sleep the dream consciousness is experienced.203

When one goes to sleep he carries sensory data in his manas and builds up one’s

own world in sleep because of the mental states. Here there is no active

participation with the senses. The sensory data of the waking states becomes

functional in dream consciousness. This state is not bound by space and time. It

modifies according to the manas.204 Upaniṣads unlike the Western psychology

are not clear on distinction between sleep and dream sleep. The words ‘Svapna’

is translate both as sleep and dream and used as synonyms. 205

The dreams provide two basic observations. The first observation is that the

manas creates its own world out of the impression gathered in the waking

consciousness. The second understanding is dream stage presupposes sleep and

in dream manas still works without influenced by indriyas. Thus, manas creates

and fashions a world of its own experiences which are called dreams.206

2.3.1 Contents of Dream Consciousness

Upaniṣadic concept of dreams explain that dreams are reproduction of the

waking experience. The outside world in dream is experienced by the dreamer

not being aware that it is a dream an creation of the manas. It is not tangible

experience of the waking stage. Yet for the dreamer, dream is real and not a

mental experience. Dream portrays the creative side of the self.207 The contents of

dreams are not restricted to some experienced. It goes beyond perception. In

dream blind man sees and lame man walks.208 Thus, in the dream state, we have

variety of experiences known and unknown to us.

203 Ibid.204 C.U.IV.3.7-14, also, Satya Prakash Singh, Vedic Vision of Consciousness, 274.205 Vaman Shivram Apte, The student’s Sanskrit English Dictionary, 631.206 Mā.U I.1.4207 Ramakrishna Puligandla, That Thou Art: The Wisdom of the Upaniṣads, (New Delhi: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd, 2009) 41.208 C.U.VIII.10.3. B.U. IV.3.7.

51

2.3.2 Illusionary Nature of Dreams

Dreams are said to be illusory because once the dream is over, one comes back to

the waking state. One realizes that the dream was only the creation of the manas

imaginary in nature. The dialogue between Prajāpati to Indra is a classical

example to explain the illusory nature of dreams. Virocana is happy with waking

consciousness but Indra is not. Indra returns to Prajāpati in search of knowledge

of the true self. Prajāpati asks to find Brahman in dreams. Indra goes only to

return understanding the illusory nature of dreams. Indra reflects that the self in

dream is not a true self.209 Indra recognizes it as the empirical self and subject

to changing experience of every movement. The Upaniṣadic understanding of

dreams testifies duality as subject and object, without the subject being aware of

the dream while dreaming. Dream is considered as an intermediate state

therefore it is an is a introduction to the state of the deep sleep.

2.4 Prājña – Deepsleep Consciousness

Prājña is  also called dreamless sleep consciousness. It is the third stage of

consciousness. The waking state has outward-moving consciousness and the

dream state has inward-moving consciousness. The third stage is characterised

by consciousness enjoys peace and has no perception of external nor internal.210

The transitory character of sleep is not the ultimate state.

The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad211 gives different analogies to explain deep-sleep.

In the analogy of the Falcon or Eagle after hang flown in the skies gets tired and

comes and rests on a tree. Similarly, the self moves to that state in which, while

asleep experiences no desire anymore and sees no dream images.212 In the deep

sleep state the outward moving consciousness of the waking stage and the inward

moving consciousness of the dream state is not experienced. There is neither

209 C.U. VIII.10.1-4.210 Mā.U. I.1.5211 B.U. IV.3.19-30.212 B.U. IV.3.19.

52

perception nor dream. The other analogies also portray non desire and more

importantly distinctionlessness.

Deepsleep is essential form of the self that transcends all desires and distinctions.

It is free from fear and all pain. It is not a combination of the previous stages. It

is completely a different kind of consciousness without subject or object.213 This

state is considered as essential form of the self in which it is one without desire

and free from fear.214 But it is not an unconscious state. A significant

characteristic of the deepsleep consciousness is the vanishing of the subject

object distinction. The senses and the mind are not active. There are neither

desires nor dreams.215 Thus, there is a cessation of the empirical consciousness

with its distinctions of subjects and objects. At the same time with the apparent

absence of duality leads to the consciousness of Prājña. Prājña refers to

Brahman.216 The absence of duality prepares ground for the self to experience

bliss and union with the infinite. The self does not recognise its pure essence yet.

2.4.1 Consciousness Beyond Subject-Object Distinctions

In Prājña the manas as well as the indriyas are inactive and consequently there is

the cessation of perceptual consciousness. There are no dreams either. This forms

the basis for the jīva to transcend to a higher level of consciousness. Self is

liberated from the empirical world.217 Radhakrishnan describes the state of

deepsleep as at night all discriminations are shed out due to darkness and all

becomes mass of darkness similarly all precepts become a mass of darkness in

the deepsleep.218 In other words, all objects of consciousness become a mass of

consciousness and the self experiences bliss.219 There is no perception. The bliss

experience transcends the subject-object duality of knowing. It points to the same

213 T.K. John, ‘Deep Sleep Experience: A Probe into its Philosophical Import,’ in Annals of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol. LVII, 1976, 118 (117-127). 214 B.U. IV.3.21.215 Chandradhar Sharma, A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy, 23.216 C.U. VIII.2.1.217 Mā.U.I.1.5.218 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principle Upaniṣads, 697.219 B.U. IV.3.21.

53

experience where there is cessation of perception and therefore regarded as a

state of ignorance. Ignorance is stated as the unmanifested objectivity. The focal

point of deep sleep is in the non-duality and the experience of bliss give a short

view of the transcendental period.

2.4.2 Transitory Experience of Oneness

In contrast with waking state and dream state, in deep sleep state manas is

inactive. The self is not influenced by manas or by buddhi. There is no

experience of pain or suffering. Prājña prepares ground for the experience

of pure consciousness or Brhaman in this context the self enjoys traces

of ‘that’ consciousness.220 The experience of bliss by the self is the

transitory experience of the Ultimate. It is called transitory because when

deep sleep terminates the self returns to the dream state and then to the

waking stage. The self experiences the bliss only for a brief period of deep

sleep. This transitory character of sleep shows that it is not the ultimate state of

consciousness.221 It is only a prelude to the ultimate consciousness.

The dialogue between Prajāpati and Indra is a classical example of deep-sleep

consciousness. Prajāpati opines to Indra that the self in deep-sleep sees no

dream and is the true self within.222 Indra thinks and later rejects the self

which has no contents. He approaches Prajāpati and expresses that the

self does not know itself nor does it know anything that exists. Indra does

not accept such a self as the true self. The search of Indra contains the

Upaniṣadic search for the Ultimate Reality – Brahman. The experience of

deep sleep is an introduction or a passage to the Eternal.

220 B.U.IV.3.22.221 Mā.U.I.1.5.222 C.U. VIII.11.1.

54

2.5 Turīya - Transcendental Consciousness

Turīya is the fourth state of consciousness. The word ‘turīya’ derived from

the word ‘caturtha’ meaning the ‘Fourth’.223 Therefore, it is referred as the

‘Fourth’. The description of the turīya state of consciousness is found in the

Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad. The Upaniṣadic text gives a descriptive representation of

the Turīya state:

(Turīya is) not that which cognizes the internal (objects), not that which

cognises the external (objects), not what cognizes both of them, not a

mass of cognition, not cognitive, not non-cognitive. (It is) unseen,

incapable of being spoken of, ungraspable, without any distinctive marks,

unthinkable, unnameable, the essence of the knowledge of the one self,

that into which the world is resolved, the peaceful, the benign, the non-

dual, such, they think, is the fourth quarter. He is the self; He is to be

known. 224

These words of the Upaniṣads reveal the ultimate state of consciousness. It is

also called the Transcendental Consciousness. It is beyond the empirical

consciousness and superior to the prājña or the taijasa consciousness. The

characteristics given testify of a mystical state. It is the state where the jīva

realizes its real nature, that it is the Ātman and becomes one with the Brahman.

Attainment of this state of consciousness is the supreme goal of the Upaniṣadic

teaching. It is different from the other three states of consciousness examined.

The prājña consciousness prepares the way for turīya. Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad

affirms that prājña eternally look for the Fourth.225 The fourth state is the highest

order. The other three states are related to the finite mind, turīya transcend them

all.226 Two observations can be made. The firstly, it refers to unknowability and

the secondly to the self is one with the Supreme.

223 Mā.U.I.1.7224 Mā.U.I.1.7., S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 698. 225 Mā.U. 12.226 Swami Prabhavananda, The spiritual Heritage of India (Mylapore: Sri Radhakrishna Math, 1981), 54.

55

2.5.1 The Inconceivable Experience

The Māṇḍūkya Upaniṣad explains turīya experience is beyond our grasp of

internal mental faculties. The above quoted definition stress that our

senses and our manas are not able to comprehend the consciousness

experienced. It is a reality beyond the distinction of subject and object.227

Turīya is transcendental knowledge, which cannot be perceived, or

cognized. Manas of the waking consciousness is not able to grasp the real

nature of the self. The dream state is illusionary in character and cannot

witness to the turīya consciousness. Prājña consciousness is the transitory

experience of the divine, the dual identity is lost and one experiences the bliss for

a momentary period. Under such conditions the self cannot experience the

Ultimate. Turīya is a state of pure intuitive consciousness and is the ground of all

states of consciousness.

In turīya consciousness the self is of the inconceivable character. There is no

subject-object relationship. Brahman cannot be treated as an object of

knowledge. Pure consciousness is the Reality.228 The subject-object duality no

longer persists. Brahman is pure being and is beyond word and thought. In Him

there is exists no distinction of knower, known and knowledge and in him exists

all things.229

2.5.2 Oneness with Brahman

Turīya is the state of pure consciousness and is regarded as the permanent union

with Brahman. The pure intuitional consciousness illumines the jīva s mind not

only to withdraw from objects but become one with Brahman. “He who knows it

thus enters the self with his self.”230 The duality between the Brahman and the

self disappears and one realizes the essence of the self as pure consciousness.

The Ātman and Brahman become one reality without a second.231 The self

227 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 698.228 B.U. IV.3.32229 Paul Deussen, The Philosophy of the Upaniṣads, 310.230 Mā.U.I.1.12., also Paul Deussen, The Philosophy of the Upaniṣads, 701.231 Mā.U. I.1. 7.

56

through the non-dual realization transcends the conditions of time space and

causality. The Ātman no longer identifies with its body. It has known the true

and transcendental knowledge. It intuitively knows that the deepest essence of its

self is none other than Brahman.232 A classical example to explain this oneness is

the example of the pot. The Brahman is like the world space, the jīva like the

space in the pot. Once the pot is broken the space within the pot merges one with

the world space. In other words consciousness limited by body mergers with the

infinite consciousness. Pure consciousness is neither physical nor psychological.

Thus one becomes transparent like water one without a second.233 This is the

highest goal, the liberation of oneself from the limited existence. Once the true

knowledge of Brahman is attained one is free from all embodiment. This

experience of the consciousness is a continuum and is a circular reality without

beginning and end. Consciousness is Brahman. This is the goal of the Upaniṣadic

thought. The dialogue between Prajāpati and Indra reaches the climax when

Prajāpati tells Indra that the true self is consciousness itself. Brahman is the

transcendental reality and the Self becomes one with that reality.234 The self is

not different from Brahman.

2.6 Conclusion

The four stages of consciousness show progressive development of the concept

of consciousness. Among the four turīya consciousness attains a separate

identity as pure consciousness. In relation to turīya the other three states of

consciousness become secondary in nature. Vaiśva, taijasa and prājña are

characterised by modification, mental projection and non-contentless

consciousness respectively. Owing to the duality of subject-object relationships

in the waking and dreaming and the objectless subject relationship in the taijasa

leads the Upaniṣadic seers to call these as illusionary in character in relation to

the turīya or pure consciousness. It is characterised by unity and continuity. The

‘Trayah Svapnah’ or ‘the three-dream- states’ concept explained in the Aitareya

232 William M. Indich, Consciousness in Advaita Vedanta, 105.233 B.U.IV.3.32.234 C.U. VIII. 13.1.

57

Upaniṣad elucidate their illusory nature.235 Thus, are Vaiśva, taijasa and prājña

considered illusory because they donot lead to pure consciousness. The

fundamental experience of the Upaniṣadic consciousness is the root of

everything that ‘Is.’

235 A.U. I.3.12.

58

Chapter Three

ONENESS OF CONSCIOUSNESS

Ekātmā-pratyaya-sāramThe essence of the knowledge of the one self.236

3.0 Introduction

Upaniṣadic search is unique. Amidst the plurality of experience and the

multiplicity around the ṛṣis sought for unity. It was the endeavour since Ṛgveda

era to know ‘that’ from which everything arises; what ‘Is’ beyond everything?

The Upaniṣads sought for that oneness of reality or the truth in the experience of

differences and plurality. The plurality of the world outside and plurality of

thought made them seek ‘that’ unitive principle which would lead them to

‘Ultimate Reality.’ It would lead them to ‘tat’ which brings immortality.

Therefore, their prayer was, ‘asato mā sadgamaya, tamaso mā jyotirgamya,

mṛtyor māmṛtaṁ gamaya.’237 They sought not through reason but through

meditation, contemplation which lead them to intuition of the oneness of

consciousness. Philosophy is characterised by plurality of perspectives. Its

complexity vivifies thought and takes it to a new level. Upaniṣadic philosophy

affirms that consciousness is the Ultimate Reality. In other words, consciousness

is the only reality. The Upaniṣads witness to this one and same reality in the

Mahāvākyas. They point to the one Ultimate reality from different angles. They

signify complete unity of reality. Oneness on the other hand can be seen as a

unity of diversity of perspective. Since the Upaniṣads agree on the oneness of

consciousness the task at hand is to equitably analyse the divergent philosophical

perspectives of the oneness of consciousness. The Vedas testify that reality is

one but the wise call it many.238 Consciousness is one but has many dimensions.

This chapter analyses the two different perspectives of the nature of

consciousness.

236 Mā.U. I.1.7237B.U.I.3.28. ‘From the unreal lead me to the real, from darkness lead me to light, from death lead me to immortality.’238 R.V. I.164.46 (Ekam sat vipra bahudhā vadanti)

59

Upaniṣadic consciousness is conceived and propounded as independent and

eternal reality without any distinctions. The problem of philosophy is not in

accepting the unity but in knowing how this oneness is dynamic in nature.

Philosophers pay their attention to the text of the Upaniṣads to understand their

approach and draw conclusions. The common tendency in most of the narratives

is that they begin reflecting on diversity and end in unity of understanding that

reality is one. The approach they take defines the perspective of recognizing the

oneness. There are different perspectives. Upaniṣads address the problem of

Ultimate Reality in ontological and epistemological perspectives. The two

perspectives are based on the four great aphorisms of the Upaniṣads. An analysis

of the same would give a holistic understanding of the Ultimate Reality as

consciousness.

3.1 Unitary Perspective of Consciousness

The philosophical reflections from Ṛgveda to the Upaniṣads on consciousness as

the Ultimate Reality analyzed in chapter one helps in the philosophical analysis

of the nature of Consciousness. They are recognitions of the in-depth study and

reflection of the seers of old. The most fundamental conclusion reached is

‘Reality is one.’ 239 It is both transcendental and immanent yet one, absolute, all

pervading and eternal.240 Absolute consciousness is the total identification of the

Ātman with the Brahman.241 The identification leads to unification of the Ātman

and Brahman as pure consciousness.242 This unification is transcendental. It is

just like the water of a river unites in the ocean and becomes one with it. In this

process there is no difference between the two types of water. They become one.

The unification determines the Oneness of Consciousness of Ātman and

Brahman, there is no difference of essence and existence. The essence and

existence is consciousness itself. It is transcendental and beyond human

239 B.U. I.4.10, also Klaus G. Witz, The Supreme Wisdom of the Upaniṣads: An Introduction (Delhi: Motilal Banaridass Publishers Private Limited, 1998) 73.240 A.U. III.1.3241 C.U. VI.8.7 242 Mā.U. I.2. also S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 32.

60

language. Explanations in positive end and negations are sought to describe this

Oneness as it is not this, not this.243

The Ultimate Reality is Absolute Consciousness. There is no duality of subject

and object.244 Though it appears Ātman as subject and Brahman as object there is

only one subject Ātman-Brahman. There is only subject consciousness. There is

no contradiction, no contrast and no division of subject and object. Phenomenal

experiences of mundane existence are governed by the duality of subject and

object. Absolute Consciousness is beyond logically universals. It is

uncharacterizable, unnameable and inexpressible. Therefore, is called as oneness

of consciousness without attributes, characteristics, mediation and differences.

The daily life is characterized by mediated consciousness but nature of oneness

of consciousness is constant and unchanging. It is just ‘being’ and not

‘becoming.’ This is the fundamental concept which determines the unitary

perspective of consciousness.245

Oneness of consciousness is the unitary principle. The term objective

consciousness is used to for Brahman and subjective consciousness for Ātman.

The objective consciousness and the subjective consciousness are one and the

same and their identification and unifications is termed as oneness of

consciousness. The psychophysical states of experiences lead to three different

states of consciousness analysed in the previous chapter. Only when one

transcends all the external and internal plurality of experience one understands

the oneness of consciousness. This oneness of consciousness is absolute

consciousness explained in the fourth state as turīya. It is the unitary principle of

consciousness. This unitary principle of consciousness is explained in the four

Mahāvākyas of the Upaniṣads.246 Analyzing them systematically leads to the

understanding of the oneness of consciousness as the ultimate reality.

243 B.U. IV.2.4., III.9.26., IV.4.22.244 B.U. II.4.6, III.7.23, III.811.245 Arthur Berriedale Keith, The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda, 520.246 Mā.U. I.1.7, also Swami Muni Narayana Prasad, Chāndogya Upaniṣad: with the Original Text in Sanskrit and Roman Transliteration, (New Delhi: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd., 2006), 433.

61

3.1.1 Exposition of Mahāvākyas

The Upaniṣads establish the oneness of consciousness on the idea of

transcendence and immanence. The central theme is discussed, evaluated,

questioned and answered, repeatedly in the Upaniṣads. It is ‘that’ or ‘Being’ as

the ultimate existence in-it-self.247 They present the realization of the subjective

consciousness Ātman (the immanent principle) within as one and the same with

the objective consciousness Brahman (transcendental principle). In the

realization of Ātman as Brahman is the zenith of the Upaniṣadic thought. In this

process the oneness of reality is acknowledged as nothing different but

consciousness.248

Each of the Mahāvākyas expresses this oneness of experience from different

perspectives. The beauty is in the path they follow to reach the oneness of

Consciousness.249 Mahāvākyas (Sanskrit plural – Mahāvākayani) are great

sayings of the Upaniṣads. There are many Mahāvākyani but only four from four

Vedas are often mentioned.250 The subject matter is the same in all the four

aphorisms: the unity of Ātman and Brahman. The below mentioned are the four

Mahāvākyas from the four Upaniṣads of the four Vedas:

1. Prajñānam brahma – ‘Consciousness is Brahman’ from Aitareya

Upaniṣad III.1.3 of the Ṛgveda.251

2. Ayam ātmā brahma – ‘This Atman is Brahman’ from Māṇḍukya

Upaniṣad I.1.2 of the Atharvaveda.252

3. Tat tvam asi – ‘Thou art That’ from Chāndogya

Upaniṣad VI.8.7 of the Samaveda.253

247 S. Radhakrishnan, Philosophy of the Upaniṣads, 26-27. 248 A.U. III.1.3. Govindagopal Mukhodhyaya, Studies in Upaniṣads, 248-249. 249 R. De Smet and J.Neuner Eds., Religious Hinduism: A Presentation and Appraisal, 2nd ed. (Allahabad: St. Paul Publications, 1964), 44. 250 Paul Deussen, Philosophy of the Upaniṣads, 39. 251 A.U. III.1.3252 Mā.U. I.1.2253 C.U. VI.8.7

62

4. Aham brahmāsmi – ‘I am Brahman’ from Bṛhadāraṇyaka

Upaniṣad I.4.10 of the Yajurveda.254

The Mahāvākyas express the quintessence of the Upaniṣadic teaching. They are

the treasures of the esoteric tradition of the Upaniṣads. Like mathematical

formulae they are concise.255 Analyses of the Mahāvākyas present the

foundational experience of the Upaniṣads. They are conclusions of the long

search for that oneness of consciousness.

3.1.1.1. Prajñānam brahma – ‘Consciousness is Brahman’

Aitareya Upaniṣad in III. 1.3 uses neither parables nor metaphors to describe the

Oneness of consciousness. It plainly states that all is impelled, rooted and

supported by consciousness because Brahman is consciousness. The concept of

oneness of being begins to develop in Aitareya Upaniṣad III.1.1. It begins by

with an inquiry, ‘who is Ātman? It enumerates different physical, psychical and

mental function and considers all these are only names of consciousness. 256 It

even examines whether Brahmā, Indra, Prajāpati, all the gods, all primal

elements, all living creatures, and whatever living and distinguishing different

elements as ātman. After a thorough examination it concludes that everything is

guided, established and supported by consciousness. Therefore it asserts

consciousness is Brahman. Āitareya Upaniṣad III.1.3 shows epistemological

perspective. It examines known but does not find anything matching with ātman.

It finds them incomplete and though they appear as consciousness but they are

not. Consciousness is the substratum of all reality. It is Brahman. Therefore, it

expresses consciousness is Brahman. The central point of the research is in

understanding the oneness of consciousness in Upaniṣadic Philosophy. It

witnesses to the fact that consciousness is the ultimate reality.257

254 B.U. I.4.10255 Klaus G. Witz, The Supreme Wisdom of the Upaniṣads: An Introduction, 124-125.256 A.U.III.3.2, also Jagat Prakash Atreya, Mind and Its function in Indian thought, 127.257 S.K. Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 133.

63

3.1.1.2 Ayam ātmā brahma – ‘This Atman is Brahman’

Māṇḍukya Upaniṣad in I.1.2 evaluates different states of consciousness a person

undergoes. It states that there are four states of consciousness. These four states

of consciousness are examined in the previous chapter. This chapter elaborates

the fourth or turīya. Turīya state symbolises the oneness of Brahman and Ātman.

‘This self is Brahman’ in Māṇḍukya Upaniṣad is a progressive understanding of

the self. It examines different states of consciousness the waking, the dream and

deepsleep consciousness finds them as temporary state of consciousness. It

accepts the fourth as the ultimate state of consciousness. The first three states of

consciousness it postulates are considered incomplete. Oneness of consciousness

is experienced only in turīya.258 Māṇḍukya Upaniṣad begins with epistemological

perspective and ends with ontological perspective.

3.1.1.3 Tat tvam asi – ‘Thou art That’

The Chāndogya Upaniṣad in VI.8.7 is a dialogue between father and guru Āruni,

and his son Śvetaketu. He teaches him on the ontological and epistemological

perspective of the Ultimate reality. The Father finds his son after being in the

gurukula for twelve years was not yet a Brahman knower. He questions him

about the knowledge of ‘that’ one thing by which one knows. In VI.1.3 it holds

for the primacy of being or ‘sad’ existing without a second. He begins to teach

about ‘sat’ which means existence.259 He continues to state that everything comes

to existence from ‘Tat.’ ‘Tat’ refers to ‘That’ which signifies the Brahman or

being. He teaches his son that ‘tat’ is the root, the support and abode of

everything.260 Stripped of external adjuncts one is identical with Reality.261

Chāndogya proposes an ontological but not devoid of epistemological view. It

presents the concept of oneness in the systematic teaching on the ontological

258 Mā.U. I.1.12, also Robert Ernest Hume, The Thirteen Principal Upanishads: Translated from the Sanskrit, 2nd ed. (London: Oxford University Press, 1962) 49.259 C.U. VI.2.1, also Swami Munni Narayana Prasad, Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 405.260 C.U. VI.8.4-6261 Swami Munni Narayana Prasad, Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 430.

64

ultimate ‘tat’ as Brahman. Thus, oneness of consciousness is in knowing that it

one and the same with Brahman.262

3.1.1.4 Aham brahmāsmi – ‘I am Brahman’

Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad is accounts this aphorism in the beginning of the

Upaniṣads. It expounds the theory of creation.263 The self identifies itself as not

different from the Brahman. The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad presents that Brahman

is the beginning knew that it was Brahman and it became all. Brahman is clearly

expressed as the foundational or ultimate reality. Therefore, the Upaniṣad

professes, whoever knows ‘I am Brahman’ become Brahman or the ultimate

Reality.264 The Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad gives an ontological perspective. The

epistemological trends are also observed in so far as knowing is involved. Both

the perspectives collectively lead to the oneness of consciousness.

The above overview of the four aphorisms of the Upaniṣads indicates two

perspectives to comprehend the oneness of Consciousness. The Aitareya

Upaniṣad and Māṇḍukya Upaniṣad show strong epistemological tendencies hile

the Chāndogya Upaniṣad and the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad show stron

ontological views. All four equally sow both perspectives interwoven in one

another. The soul of Upaniṣadic teaching is the oneness of Ātman and Brahman.

The subjective consciousness is of the same essence and existence with the

objective consciousness. The Mahāvākyas prove this oneness. In the following

section the uniqueness of both the perspectives brought elucidating the oneness

of consciousness.

3.2 Epistemological Nature of Consciousness

262 C.U. VI.8.7263 B.U. I.4.10264 B.U. I.4.10, also S. Radhakrishnan, The Principle Upaniṣads, 168-169.

65

Epistemology is the branch of philosophy which studies knowledge. ‘Jñāna’ is

the word associated with knowledge in Indian philosophy.265 ‘To know’ is the

repeatedly employed in the Upaniṣads. Jñāna when used with the prefix ‘vi’ or

‘pra’ refers to consciousness. For example: ‘sa ātmā; sa vijñeyaḥ.’266 It means

‘He is the self; He is to be known.’ In the Upaniṣads, knowledge holds

precedence and knowledge of the Ultimate Reality is of highest importance. The

Upaniṣads are writings of the seekers who sought ‘to know’ the Ultimate

Reality.267 Knowing or knowledge is the focal point of the Upaniṣads. It is not

‘knowing’ as in the western perspective. Knowledge is not mere intellectualism.

The Upaniṣadic knowledge is achieved neither through reasoning nor by shining

intellect not even through repeated hearing. It is not from superficial curiosity.

Only when one gets wedded to the sole pursuit to know one’s self it is attained

intuitively.268 To know is a constant injunction. It is a command in the

Upaniṣads: ‘evaṁ vedam’ means know thus.269 The basic nature of Ātman is a

knowing subject.270 The Brahman is all knowing and knows by itself.271

Therefore, the constant call by the seers in the Upaniṣad is to know the self.272

Ātman as the knowing subject knows and illuminates. Its nature is like light that

illuminates and enlightens.273 Thus, the epistemological perspective analyzes the

self-luminosity of consciousness.

3.2.1 Self-luminosity of Consciousness

Self-luminosity is the central feature of consciousness in the Upaniṣadic

tradition. Self-luminosity means that the self by itself very existence is aware of

itself. It is important to understand this perspective of consciousness to

understand its view from the point of Ultimate Reality which exists on its own.

265 Refer to chapter one section 2.6.1 266 Mā.U. I.1.7. S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 698.267 Jose Thachil, The Upaniṣads: A Socio-Religious Appraisal, 15. 268 Govindagopal Mukhopadhyaya, Studies in Upaniṣads, 7-8.269 B.U. I.4.10 270 B.U. IV.3.7271 B.U. IV.3.9272 B.U.1.4.7-9273 Jose Thachil, The Upaniṣads: A Socio-Religious Appraisal, 32.

66

Self-luminosity proves that consciousness has its own power to manifests its self.

The epistemological perspective of self-luminosity is that consciousness is able

to know itself as a subject. The Upaniṣads use metaphor of light to explain this

view. It is called as ‘svayaṁ-jyoti’ or light unto itself.274 The dialogue between

Yājñavalkya and King Janaka manifests the self-luminosity of the self. With the

metaphor of light it points to the lustre or the capacity to manifest

independently.275 consciousness manifests itself by the same activity which it

manifests other objects and do not need a second cognition to lead to its own

awareness. The Upaniṣads are emphatic on Ātman as self-luminous. The self-

luminosity of the Ātman states that Ātman shines in its own eternal and pure

light. Consciousness cannot be disproved as it is always shining and everything

else is to be formed by consciousness.276 It proves that is self-revealed.

Consciousness is always a subject and cannot be an object. Therefore,

consciousness is held as not only other manifesting but an essential self-

manifesting. Self-luminosity characteristic makes consciousness unique. In it is

the principle of all revelation and light because it is self-revealed.

Upaniṣads highlight the self or Ātman as self-luminous.277 The nature of light is

to reveal itself and other objects by the single act of shining. It is independent in

the matter of its manifestation. The Ātman by itself has the knowledge to reveal

itself. It is light unto itself. It is the light which illuminates though it is itself is

not illumined by anything else.278 This is absolutely possible only in the oneness

of consciousness. Consciousness is in this sense is Ultimate Reality cannot be

divided into the distinction of knower and known. It stands as a witness and as

the source of the essence of all manifestation. Consciousness exists as a self-

subsisting reality in which the distinction of subject consciousness and the object

consciousness merge. The oneness of consciousness in the complete union of

Brahman and Ātman it is the merging of knowing and being. Consciousness as 274 B.U. IV.3.6-9275 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 31. 276 S.K. Seksena, The Nature of Consciousness, 71-72277 C.U. 3.14.2278 B.U. IV.3.6.

67

self-luminous exists as self-revealed even in the absence of any other object just

as sun shines even though there may be no object to be illumined.279 Thus, self-

luminosity is the characteristic of the epistemological perspectives of the oneness

of consciousness where knowing is being.

3.2.2 Mind and Consciousness

Upaniṣads refer to ‘manas’ as the co-ordinating factor that governs the five

organs of perception and five organs of action. The two other psychophysical

organs ‘buddhi’ the organ of discrimination and ‘ahankara’ the organ of personal

ego delimit the self-luminosity of the consciousness.280 Aitareya Upaniṣad draws

distinction between consciousness as a real knower and mind as a sense organ.

The various functions it categorizes as cognition, affection and conation are

termed as only names of consciousness and not consciousness itself. 281 They

seem to be the consciousness but they are not. Consciousness is self-manifesting

and transcends all plurality. Chāndogya Upaniṣad describes mind as the internal

organ endowed with reflection, determination, decision and choice. It acts as the

doer and the enjoyer.282 It is made of subtle matter.283 Therefore, mind cannot be

compared to consciousness. Oneness of consciousness is the subject that

illumines everything.284 Consciousness cannot be an object of knowledge while

concept is an object of knowledge. Absolute consciousness is beyond what is

known, and unknown. Consciousness in the epistemological perspective is

basically self-luminous.

The mind is not self-luminous in nature. It depends on its organs. Consciousness

is self-luminous and cannot be known fully by logical reason. Reason is limited

because of the duality of subject and object. It is a misconception to consider

279 Bina Gupta, Cit Consciousness, 32.280 Sangeeta Menon, The Beyond Experience, 32.281 A.U.III.1.2.282 C.U. VII.3.2 283 C.U.VI.5.1., also Jagat Praksh Atreya, Mind and Its Functions in Indian thought, (New Delhi: Classical Publishing Company, 1985)126.284 Sangeetha Menon, The Beyond Experience, 33-34.

68

consciousness as an object of knowledge. It is through the meditative knowing or

intuition one knows the true self. Self-realization is liberation. The mahāvākyas

are examples of comprehensively knowing the Ultimate Reality.285 This

realization leads to transcendental consciousness. Consciousness is not an

attribute of Ātman but its essence. The epistemological perspective brings out

self-luminosity as the uniqueness of the oneness of consciousness.

3.3 Ontological Perspective of Consciousness

Ontology is the fundamental branch of metaphysics which studies being or

existence. It is analyzes of the nature of reality. It systematically studies the

most basic concepts like being, existence, and reality. The Upaniṣadic search is

basically ontological. It uses similar concepts for meditation in search for the

Ultimate Reality.286 They employ these three terms being, existence and reality

repeatedly. ‘To be’ means to exist. ‘Being’ is the eternal question of the Vedas

and the Upaniṣads. It is expressed in ‘tat’ meaning that reality beyond every

reality. Upaniṣads dis-cover the self and the Ultimate Reality as one unit. Self-

luminosity is from the view of subjective consciousness. Ultimate Reality as

existence is studied from the view point of objective consciousness. Various

answers are presented. It is the question to know the existence of the ultimate

reality.

3.3.1 Consciousness as the Ultimate Reality

The Chāndogya Upaniṣad uses the word ‘tat’287 to mean Brahman. No other

name can signify the Absolute than ‘tat’.288 ‘Tat’ refers to Brahman in

Chāndogya Upaniṣad. The Chāndogya seer uses the word ‘tajjalān’ which is

compact with meaning. This text is the part of Sāṇḍilya Vidyā. Sāṇḍilya vidyā

affirms the oneness of Ātman and Brahman. Its philosophy: Brahman is ‘tat’ or

‘that’ from which all things are born, and by which they live. Ātman is both

285 A.U.III.1.3 (Prajñānam Brahma)286 Sangeetha Menon, The Beyond Experience, 23.287 C.U.VI.8.7, III.14.1288 Ram K. Piparaiya, Ten Upanishads of Four Vedas, 597

69

transcendental and immanent and the end of human person is union with self.289

It begins with the assumption of ‘sarvam khalvidam brahma’ meaning the whole

world is Brahman. The comprehensive word ‘tajjalān’290 is used to mean that

which comes forth from Brahman, lives and moves in Brahman. It indicates the

original or foundational reality is Brahman.291 There is another ontological

account.

In the Chāndogya Upaniṣad the father illustrates to his son Śvetaketu nine

examples so that he comprehends the ontological truth. The culmination of this

dialogue is the great aphorism ‘Tat tvam asi’ or that thou art.292 This ontological

doctrine of consciousness is based on the primacy of being or Brahman or ‘tat.’

It postulates that the Brahman stated in the word ‘tat’ is not different than the

Ātman. It testifies the absolute nature of the self. Thus, through an objective

approach the discussion affirms that Brahman is that Ultimate reality.293 The

perspective is highly ontological but is not complete without the epistemological.

The certainty of the Ultimate reality leads to the next topic consciousness as

existence.

3.3.2 Consciousness as Existence

The certitude of the Ultimate Reality confirms the existence as consciousness.

The word ‘aham’ is of prime importance in this context. It means ‘to be’ or

existence of ‘I.’ This notion is asserted in the text of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka

Upaniṣadas as ‘Aham Brahmāsmi.’294 ‘Brahmāsmi’ means I am Brahman. It is

further confirmed that this Brahman is ‘satyasya satyam’ means the truth of truth

or the real of real.295 The word ‘satya’ has a composite meaning. It means the

289 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 392.290 C.U.III.14.1.291 Swami Muni Narayana Prasad, Chāndogya Upaniṣad, 26.292 C.U.VI.8.7293 R. Balasubramanian, ‘Spiritualcape of the Upaniṣad-s,’ in The Adyar Libarary Bulletin, Vol. 68-70, 2004-2006, 108 (89-115)294 B.U.I.4.10295 B.U.II.1.20

70

whole of reality visible and invisible.296 It is also a reference to the Ultimate

Reality.297 Thus, ‘satya’ meaning being or existence or truth is best understood as

the principle of consciousness. Consciousness is accepted as the basic

ontological reality one equal with existence: ‘Aham’ as existence and ‘Brahman’

as consciousness. Brahman’s essence and existence is upheld as consciousness as

Aitareya Upaniṣad reiterates consciousness is Brahman.298 Thus, existence is

consciousness as the basic ontological reality.

The Upaniṣads prove that consciousness and self are one. There is no distinction

between them. Consciousness is being. It is neither a product nor a quality of the

self. It is the very essence of the self. Consciousness is not an attribute nor

something “possessed by” Ātman but it is Ātman itself. 299 Consciousness is ‘tat’

or oneness of existence. Thus, consciousness is ‘is’ or existence. It is unique,

eternal and infinite.300 Self is consciousness and existence. It is reality itself.301

The ontological perspective focusing on ultimate reality concludes that

consciousness is reality and existence itself.302

Both the approaches overlap each other. They are interwoven with each other.

Self-luminosity manifests existence and existence reveals self-luminous. The two

basic perspectives: the epistemological perspective orients the Self (Ātman)

toward the Supreme Reality (Brahman) and the ontological perspective manifests

the Brahman in every reality. Thus, the search ko’ham ends in aham brahmāsmi.

The answer to who am I? is I am consciousness.

3.4 Consciousness as Epistemologized Ontology

296 G. Gispert-Sauch, Bliss in the Upanishads: An Analytical Study of the Origin and Growth of the Vedic Concept of Ananda (New Delhi: Oriental Publishers & Distributors, 1977), 43.297 S. Radhakrishnan, The Principal Upaniṣads, 190.298 A.U.III.1.3299 C.U.II.14.1300 S.K.Seksena, Nature of Consciousness, 61.301 Sangeetha Menon, The Beyond Experience, 24-25.302 C.U.VI.2.1. The primacy of being highlighted here - In the beginning was Being alone one without a second and from being.

71

The knowing and the being are core aspects of daily life. It is true of

epistemology and ontology in philosophy. The above analyses prove that these

perspectives knowing and being are the essence of consciousness. Consciousness

as a being is the Ultimate Reality and consciousness as a knowing subject is self-

luminous. Self-luminosity and existence are the core essence of consciousness.303

Upaniṣads do not differentiate these two aspects of knowing and being. This is

based on the essential teaching of the Upaniṣads: Brahman is Ātman and Ātman

is Brahman.304 Thus, as oneness of consciousness it is like the light where the

distinction of the fire and flame are beyond distinction. Oneness of

consciousness proceeds from knowing to being. The epistemological (knowing)

of the objective consciousness by the subjective consciousness is culminates in

(being).Therefore the researchers coins the termed as Epistemologized Ontology

for consciousness as the Ultimate Reality.

Epistemologized ontology is the term coined by the researcher to express the

metaphysical dynamics of the ultimate nature of consciousness in the Upaniṣadic

philosophy. The preceding analysis demonstrates the enormous emphasis and

importance to knowledge or ‘knowing’ the Upaniṣads. Epistemological

perspective completes the ontological and the ontological completes the

epistemological perspectives.305 It is not a dualistic presentation of knowledge

and existence. The unity of epistmic and ontologic principles make the concept

of consciousness in the Upaniṣads holistic. The two self-luminosity and

existence as a single unit lead to oneness of consciousness. The researcher

considers as epistemologised ontology as the Upaniṣadic concept of

consciousness. In simple terms ‘knowing is being. The above thought syncs with

the words of R.D. Ranade. He states that “Existence is not Existence if does not

mean Self-consciousness. Reality is not reality, if it does not express throughout

it structure the marks of pure Self-consciousness. Self Consciousness thus

303 S. Radhakrishnan, Brahma Sūtra: The Philosophy of the Spiritual Life, 118-119.304 A.U. III.1.3, Ma.U. I.1.2, C.U. VI.8.7, B.U. I.4.10, also S. Radhakrishnan, Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1.,169-172 305 B.U.I.4.10 (whoever knows thus, ‘I am Brahman,’ becomes this all)

72

constitutes the ultimate category of existence to the Upaniṣadic philosophers.”306

The concept of oneness of consciousness as episitemologized ontology (since

knowing precedes being) it is further explained as uncaused and pure

consciousness.

3.4.1 Uncaused Consciousness

Epistemologized ontology or knowing is being of consciousness is not caused.

There is no principle of causality involved. It is not because of knowing there is

being. Ātman and Brahman ‘is’ or exists as consciousness. It is not a ‘knowing’

with reason or perception but rather it is beyond the normal human capacities. So

the researcher takes recourse to the word ‘transcendental.’ It is uncaused because

there is nothing ‘before’ nothing ‘after’.307 At the same time it is a transcendental

principle. Transcendental is concerned with a prior or intuitive basic knowledge

independent of experience and reason. It asserts a fundamental or supernatural

element in experience, it also means beyond common thought or experience,

mystical or supernatural.308 Upaniṣadic concept of consciousness is a

transcendental concept. Consciousness is treated by the Upaniṣadic seers not

from the rational knowledge but more intuitive mysticism. The four Upaniṣads

we deal with Bṛhadāraṇyaka, Chāndogya, Aitaerya and Māṇḍūkya all are

basically meditation on the Ultimate reality. Brahman is the Ultimate Reality is

often mentioned in the research work. It clearly signifies the transcendental

character of consciousness.

The Ultimate Reality as epistemologized ontology the transcendental nature of

consciousness. It transcends all categories of universals. ‘Knowing’ and ‘Being’

is the ultimate destiny of the Upaniṣadic seer. They sought to know ‘that’ which

is beyond every reality. Upaniṣadic consciousness is beyond the realm of

physics, psychology and philosophy. It transcends the all reality of the natural

order. Consciousness as transcendental which is uncaused or exists eternally as

306 R.D. Ranade, A constructive Survey, 197307 B.U IV.4.20. 308 ‘Transcendental’, on www.thefreedictionary.com/transcendental. Accessed on 13th February 2011.

73

consciousness does not change in time. It is unchanging and permanent. It is

beyond the spatio-temporal limitations. Consciousness always ‘is.’309 This

uncaused transcendental nature of the Ātman and Brahman culminates in the

pure consciousness of epistemologized ontology.

3.4.2 Pure Consciousness

Transcendental nature of consciousness of the Upaniṣads asserts that there is

nothing but consciousness. Upaniṣads absolutize consciousness. Therefore,

consciousness is everything.310 Absolute Consciousness has neither external

relation nor internal differentiations.311 All differentiation and distinction belong

to empirical consciousness. Empirical consciousness points towards

intentionality. It is ‘consciousness of.’312Consciousness ‘of’ is consciousness of

something signifying intentionality. Absolute consciousness is distinctionless.

All distinctions are brought by the limiting principle of subtle bodies of the

organs of jīva. Pure consciousness is one where only the subject exists as

consciousness. Human language and grammar cannot define it adequately.

Therefore, ultimate assumption and negations are used to define pure

consciousness. Consciousness, with Upaniṣadic philosophy is treated as ‘sui

generis’ a genre of its kind.313 Pure consciousness is difficult to be expressed in

universal and best expressed in Yājñavalkya’s neti neti.314 It is like the light

exists and shines (existence and self-luminosity). The pure consciousness is

therefore the knowing ‘is’ being. Epistemologized ontology transcends all

duality of subject and object. Therefore it is pure consciousness.

3.5 Conclusion

309 C.U.VI.8.7.310 A.U.III.1-3.311 S.K. Seksena, The Nature of Consciousness, 134.312 Bina Gupta, Cit: Consciousness, 8. 313 B.U.II.3.7, also S.K. Seksena, The Nature of Consciousness, 141.314 B.U. IV.4.22

74

The concept of consciousness as Epistemologized ontology is a concept that

emphasizes ‘knowing is being’ or self-luminosity and existence as pure

consciousness. The Upaniṣads characterize Pure consciousness as uncaused and

transcendental, The Upaniṣadic seers spent their lives seeking ‘to know that one

Reality which transcends all other realities.’ ‘To know’ explains the Upaniṣadic

search. Knowing is an imperative in Upaniṣadic philosophy.315 Knowledge is the

power which destroys the ignorance of plurality and leads one to oneness in

Consciousness with Brahman. ‘That One Reality’ that is a metaphysical concept

of Brahman as the ultimate Reality. Consciousness is that the ultimate reality

which is one and pure consciousness. This oneness of consciousness is

epistemologized ontology or knowing is being. ‘this is so even now. Whoever

knows thus, ‘I am Brahman,’ becomes this all.’316

Chapter Four

GENERAL CONCLUSION315 B.U. I.4.10, (Evaṁ veda) 316 B.U. I.4.10

75

Tad idam api etarhi ya evaṁ veda, aham brahmāmīti sa idaṁ sarvam bhavati.This is so even now. Whoever knows thus, ‘I am Brahman,’ become this all.317

Consciousness was, is and will be a multidimensional subject. Consciousness is

conscious and is as old as human being. The earliest writings of the Vedas to the

writers recent times have grappled them on the mystery of consciousness. Every

age witnesses the effort in unfolding the mystery of consciousness. The

literature, the culture and the living witness to the fact. It is part and parcel of

every individual being. Today consciousness is under the scanner of

academicians, the microscope of scientists, the expositions of the philosophers,

the observations of the psychologists and the meditations of the mystics, to give

answer or rather to find its other dimensions.

The Upaniṣads contain the supreme wisdom of the Upaniṣadic seers. They are

the witness of their concept of consciousness in their era. Upaniṣads as we have

analysed give us a metaphysical understanding of consciousness. As analysed

systematically in the three chapters consciousness is the Ultimate Reality which

is called Brahman or Ātman. Though looks like two separate entities it is one.

Therefore, the concept articulated in the third chapter is oneness of

consciousness. The oneness of consciousness is the central or the core of

Upaniṣadic teachings. This truth is revealed in every page of the Upaniṣads. The

four Upaniṣads for study deliberate on consciousness as the Ultimate Reality.

They contain the aphorism which contain the esoteric teaching which leads to

experience transcendence of consciousness.

The Upaniṣads are loaded with stories and incidents of teaching and learning,

questioning and answering, meditating and contemplating on the Ultimate

Reality. All agree to the fact that consciousness is self-luminous and existence.

Consciousness by-itself is self-conscious or luminous and it is existence.

Upaniṣads go a step forward and claim that it is the Ultimate Reality. There is

317 B.U. I.4.10

76

nothing before nor after for it. It is always ‘is.’ Consciousness ‘is’ as the first and

only reality. The most interesting part of the Upaniṣads is when one knows or the

individual knows that its essence is nothing but consciousness as the Ultimate

reality or as Brahman, the individual becomes that Ultimate reality. It is not the

case as the becoming is a process or causality. There is no such thing involved.

Knowing implies a transcendental knowing like intuition one receives as an

effort of one search for the Ultimate. One knows through this knowledge that it

is not different from the Ultimate Reality. It is best understood as identification

or unification. Therefore, the sages announce, “This is so even now. Whoever

knows thus, ‘I am Brahman,’ become this all.” In other words ‘Knowing is

being.’

Knowing is being is explained and explored extensively in the as the new

concept coined as ‘epistemologized ontology.’ Epistemologized refers to the

whole domain of knowing - Knowing in the Upaniṣadic way. Knowing is

essential to realise being. Knowing and being are not two different acts or

processes. The two are one. Ontology refers to being or existence. Thus, the

thesis as a generic study of the consciousness in the Upaniṣadic philosophy

survey the pre-upaniṣadic text and the Upaniṣadic texts to conclude that

consciousness in the Upaniṣadic philosophy is basically metaphysical. It is best

understood as knowing is being or Epistemologized Ontology.

Upaniṣadic consciousness is transcendental. There are several other dimensions

of consciousness which are studied. The cognitive science view consciousness as

brain function. Phenomenology considers consciousness from the point of

intentionality. Neuroscience anchors itself to prove that consciousness is based

on neural mechanism. Psychotherapy accepts consciousness as one which is

primarily related to individual’s adaptive capacities. Psychology views

consciousness as neurobiological and related to different states of cognitive and

affective developments. Contemplative traditions maintain that consciousness is

restricted to higher modes of awareness. Quantum mechanics views

77

consciousness as being able to intrinsically capable of interact with the physical

world through quantum interactions. All these are can be brought to an integral

theory of consciousness basing it on the Upaniṣadic concept of consciousness.

Upaniṣadic consciousness is self-consciousness and existence as one. They are

not different but one and cannot be divide. Consciousness is self-consciousness

or self-luminous and existence at the same time. Therefore, this research

concludes acknowledging consciousness as the Ultimate reality. Knowing is

being is manifested in the words of the Upaniṣads: Tad idam api etarhi ya evaṁ

veda, aham brahmāmīti sa idaṁ sarvam bhavati. (This is so even now. Whoever

knows thus, ‘I am Brahman,’ become this all.)318 B.U.I.4.10

4.1 Positive contribution of the Upaniṣads

Having commented and giving concluding remarks it is important to appreciate

the positive contribution of the Upaniṣadic Seers. The Upaniṣadic seers were on

a systematic search for the Ultimate Reality They received their subjective

mystical experience through meditation and contemplation. This experience led

them to the oneness of consciousness. It is the foundational mystical experience

which made them seers. Seer is a person who sees. As referred to in the General

Introduction Indian Philosophy held uses this word ‘dṛṣṭi’ meaning seeing. From

ko’ham to aham brahmāsmi is a journey of the Upaniṣadic Seer to see meaning

experience knowledge but not the same as perceptual knowledge. Here it refers

to transcendental experiential knowledge in which one see the true nature – pure

consciousness. They state that knowledge includes the knower beyond the

known. The known is studied scientifically in the west but not the knower. The

Upaniṣads is the science of consciousness. The all embracing characteristic of

consciousness can be understood as self existent. All existence rests in that

consciousness.

318 B.U. I.4.10

78

The second positive achievement of the Upaniṣadic seer is in tune and parallel to

that of the modern day scientist. Though poles apart from each other with regard

to subject matter, approach, times, sophistication and instrumentations. Just as

thorough and systematic investigation for the last about half a millennium

scientist have explained matter. They use hi-technological devices and computers

to observe matter and give theories stating matter to be a particle, particle to

strings and then to waves and stills further divided as quarks. Scientist like Erwin

Schrödinger who proposed the quantum mechanics theory makes statements

similar to the Upaniṣads. The Upaniṣadic seers accomplished the same with

regard to consciousness though their search and discoveries were through tapas

and investigation within themselves they have found out that consciousness is

the fundamental reality of things. Their conclusions in this respect are treasured

in the axioms. Thus, the Upaniṣadic contribution is pivotal for the metaphysical

understanding of consciousness.

4.2 Recent Trends in consciousness studies

The Upaniṣadic contribution: Consciousness as the Ultimate Reality is the crux

of comprehensive studies in consciousness. Brain studies, cognitive studies and

cultural studies in the last few decades has refined the complexity of

consciousness. Consciousness is the ‘in-thing’ in the present global scenario. The

problem of conscious self-awareness is not addressed adequately by modern

science. Although attempts are made in variety of fields including neuroscience,

psychology, philosophy of science, the basic challenge remains that it is by

nature science speak about objective reality and consciousness as self-awareness

as studied widely in the west ultimately concerns itself to subjective experience

and existence.

Consciousness is perhaps a greatest mystery today. Discoveries in science related

to physical, neuro-chemical, psychological are done on consciousness. The

western philosophers and physiologists have tried to examine and formulate the

nature of consciousness from different viewpoints. They have opposing theories

79

and unacceptable conclusions. They seem a very remote possibility for a

common opinion on consciousness. For them consciousness is mental

phenomenon to our brain and nervous system. Neuroscientist’s interest in

consciousness has been a recent advancement. The field of neuroscience has

advanced greatly. The processes of the brain are understood much better than

before because of the hi-tech electronic gadgets. Brain researchers have also

made great advancements and man realises the existence of intricate invisible

creative hand in all the brain processes. Scientists in brain research have starts

incorporating ‘consciousness’ as an independent creative entity governing the

processes of the brain. In relation to the recent advancement Upaniṣadic search is

purely metaphysical. The recent developments remain more attached to empirical

sciences.

In recent times two famous philosophers on consciousness are drawing attention.

Daniel Clement Dennett provides a philosophy of mind based on scientific

research and David Chalmers presents the easy and the hard problem of

consciousness as the first person data cannot be subjected to the standard method

of explanation. Consciousness is still the mysterious part of the universe. While

things other than consciousness are objective, consciousness is a subjective

experience. Consciousness is more than subjective it is the very existence in the

Upaniṣadic philosophy.

4.3 Final Comment

The Upaniṣadic concept of Consciousness is systematically analyzed as

epistemologized ontology. It is based on the search of the Upaniṣadic seers who

asked the question to themselves – ko’ham? (Who am I?). Their long and

disciplined search ends in stating ‘aham Brahmāsmi.’ (I am Brahman). It is in

knowing ‘who I am?’ leads to the revelation of ‘I am Brahman.’ Similar thought

of oneness of consciousness is also seen in the Bible. In John 10:30 Jesus says, “I

and the Father are one. Here, it does not mean that they are one person but Jesus

shares in the divinity of Father. This statement is not like the Upaniṣadic

80

aphorism which expresses the Ultimate Reality. It allows the mind to stretch

human thinking to go beyond boundaries of religion in the understanding,

Epistemologized Ontology as the crux of Upaniṣadic philosophy of

consciousness.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

81

Ananthanarayana, H. S. and W. P. Lehman. Compiled. Rig Veda in Sanskrit. at

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/rvsan/rv01164.htm.

Accessed on 13th February 2011.

Apte, Vaman Shivram. The Student’s Sanskrit-English Dictionary, 2nd ed. Delhi:

Motilal Banarsidass, 2008.

Atreya, Jagat Prakash. Mind and Its Functions in Indian thought. New Delhi:

Classical Publishing Company, 1985.

Balasubranmanian, R. ‘Spiritualscape of the Upaniṣad-s,’ in The Adyar Library

Bulletin. Vol.68-70, (2004-2006) 86-115.

Bhattacharyya, Ananta Kumar. “Cārvāka Darśana” in Cārvāka/Lokāyata: An

Anthology of Source Materials and Some Recent Studies,

Debiprasad Chattopadhyaya. Ed. New Delhi: Indian

Council of Philosophical Research,1997.

Brown, Lesley ed., The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary on Historical

Principles, Vol. 1. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993.

Capra, Fritjof. Uncommon Wisdom. London: Century Hutchinsons, Ltd., 1988.

Cowell, E.B. and A.E. Gough. trs., Sarva-Darśana-Saṁgraha of Mādhavācārya:

Sanskrit Text, English Translation, Notes and Appendix,

K.L. Joshi Ed., 3rd ed. Delhi: Parimal Publications, 1997.

Damasio, Antonio. The Feelings of What Happens: Body and Emotion in the

making of consciousness. London: A Harvest Book, 1999.

82

Dasgupta, Surendranath. A History of Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2010.

De Smet. R, and J. Neuner. Eds. Religious Hinduism: A Presentation and

Appraisal. 2nd ed. Allahabad: St. Pauls Publicatios, 1964.

Deussen, Paul. A.S. Geden, tr. The Philosophy of Upaniṣad s, Edinburgh: T.&T.

Clark, 1908.

Eggeling, Julius. tr. Śatapatha Brāhmaṇa Part IV .Sacred Books of the East vol.

43. 1897. at

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbr/sbe43/sbe4360.htm.

Accessed on 13th February 2011.

Keith, Arthur Berriedale. The Religion and Philosophy of the Veda and the

Upanishads, Vol. 2. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, 1976.

Gispert-Sauch, G. Bliss in the Upanishads: An Analytical Study of the Origin

and Growth of the Vedic Concept of Ananda. New Delhi:

Oriental Publishers & Distributers, 1977.

Griffith, Ralph T.H. tr. Rig Veda. 1896. at

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/Ṛgveda/rv10129.htm.

Accessed on 15th February 2011.

Grimes, John. A Concise Dictionary of Indian Philosophy: Sanskrit Terms

Defined in English. Varanasi: Indica Books, 2009.

Gupta, Bina. Cit: Consciousness. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2003.

John, T.K. ‘Deep Sleep Experience: A probe into its Philosophical Import,’ in

Annals of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol.

LVII, (1976). 117-127.

83

Indich, William M. Consciousness in Advaita Vedānta. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass, 1980.

Hornby, A.S. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of Current English, 8th ed.

Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010.

Hume, Robert Ernest. The Thirteen Principal Upaniṣad s: Translated from the

Sanskrit, 2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press, 1962.

Lal, Sancheti Asoo and Bhandari Manak Mal. “Stages of Progress of the Soul due

to Development of its qualities - The Fourteen Guṇasthānas”

in

http://www.jainworld.com/jainbooks/firstep-2/gunasthan.ht

m. Accessed on 13th February 2011.

Menon, Sangeetha. The Beyond Experience: Consciousness in Bhagavad Gita.

New Delhi: Bluejay Books, 2007.

Mohanty, J.N. Lectures on Consciousness and Interpretation. New Delhi: Oxford

University Press, 2009.

Monier-Williams, Sir Monier. A Sanskrit-English Dictionary, Etymological and

philologically Arranged with Special Reference to Cognate

Indo-European Languages. Delhi: Munshiram Manoharlal

Publishers, 1994.  

Mukhopadhyaya, Govindagopal. Studies in the Upaniṣads. Culcutta: Sanskrit

college, 1960.

Müller, Max. tr. The Upanishads, Part I, Dover Edition, Sacred Books of the East,

Vol. 1.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe01/sbe01015.htm#fn_40.

Accessed on 13th February 2011.

84

Piparaiya, Ram K. Ten Upanishads of Four Vedas. New Delhi: New Age Books,

2003.

Prabhavananda, Swami. The spiritual Heritage of India. Mylapore: Sri

Radhakrishna Math, 1981.

Prasad, Swami Muni Narayana. Chāndogya Upaniṣad: with the Original Text in

Sanskrit and Roman Transliteration. New Delhi: D.K.

Printworld (P) Ltd., 2006.

Pojman, Louis P. Classics of Philosophy. New York: Oxford University Press,

1998.

Puligandla, Ramakrishna. That Thou Art: The Wisdom of the the Upaniṣads.

New Delhi: D.K. Printworld (P) Ltd, 2009.

Radhakrishnan, S. The Brahma Sūtra: The Philosophy of Spiritual Life. London:

George Allen & Unwin Ltd. 1960.

Radhakrishnan, S. Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1. New York: The MacMillan

Company, 1962.

Radhakrishnan, S. Indian Philosophy, Vol. 2. New York: The MacMillan

Company, 1962.

Radhakrishnan, S. ed. and tr. The Principal Upaniṣads. London: George Allen &

Unwin Limited, 1953.

Radhakrishnan, S. The Philosophy of the Upaniṣads. London: George Allen &

Unwin Limited, 1924.

85

Ranade, R.D. A Constructive Survey of Upaniṣadic Philosophy: Being An

Introduction to the Thought of the Upaniṣads. Bombay:

Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, 1968.

Sadhale, Gajanan Shambhu. Upaniśad-Vākya-Mahā-Kośa, Vol.1. Delhi: Sri

Satguru Publications, 1947.

Sandness, A. ‘On Ṛtá and Bráhman: Visions of Existence in the Ṛg-Veda,’

Annals of Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute, Vol

LXXXVIII, 2007. 61-79.

Seksena, S.K. Nature of Consciousness in Hindu Philosophy, 2nd ed. Delhi:

Motilal Banarsidass.1971.

Siewert, Charles, "Consciousness and Intentionality", The Stanford Encyclopedia

of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), ed. Edward N. Zalta ,

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/consciou

sness-intentionality/ Accessed on 13 February 2011.

Simpson, J.A. and E.S.C. Weiner Eds., The Oxford English Dictionary, Vol. 3,

2nd ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989.

Singh, Santokh. Consciousness as Ultimate Principle. New Delhi: Munshiram

Manoharlal Publishers Pvt. Ltd, 1985.

Singh, Satya Prakash. Vedic Vision of Consciousness and Reality, Vol 12, Part

3, History of Science, Philosophy and Culture in Indian

Civilization. New Delhi: Centre for Studies in

Civilizations, 2004.

Sinha, Jadunath. Indian Philosophy, Vol. 1. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass

Publications Pvt. Ltd., 1999.

86

Sharma, Baldev Ṛg. The Concept of Ātman in the Principal Upaniṣad: In the

Perspective of the Saṁhitas, the Brāhmaṇas, the Araṇyakas

and Indian Philosophical Systems. New Delhi: Dinesh

Publications, 1972.   

Sharma, Chandradhar. A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy. Delhi: Motilal

Banarsidass Publishers Private Limited, 2009.

Sobottka, Stanley. “A Course in Consciousness,”

http://faculty.virginia.edu/consciousness/ Accessed on 16th

February 2011.

Thachil, Jose. The Upaniṣads: A Socio-Religious Appraisal. New Delhi:

Intercultural Publications,1993.

‘Transcendental’, on www.thefreedictionary.com/transcendental. Accessed on

13th February 2011

Warren, Henry Clark. Buddhism in Translations. New York: Atheneum, 1963.

Witz, Klaus G. The Supreme Wisdom of teh Upaniṣads: An Introduction. Delhi:

Motilal Banaridass Publishers Private Limited, 1998.

87