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
Top Related