AVG 1.12

Chapter 1 (Guidance on self-realization): Verse 12
आत्मा साक्षी विभुः पूर्ण एको मुक्तश्चिदक्रियः ।
असंगो निःस्पृहः शान्तो भ्रमात्संसारवानिव ॥ १-१२॥

PURPORT:

The innate image of identity is observer,
all-pervading, thorough and unified.
It is ever still and of unrestrained awareness.
It is unattached, desireless and tranquil.
Through illusion, it seemingly appears
as if it were of all manifest existence.

TRANSLITERATION:

आत्मा साक्षी विभुः पूर्ण एकः मुक्तः चित् अक्रियः ।
ātmā sākṣī vibhuḥ pūrṇa ekaḥ muktaḥ cit akriyaḥ ।
असंगः निस्पृहः शान्तः भ्रमात् संसारवान् इव ॥ १-१२॥
asaṃgaḥ nispṛhaḥ śāntaḥ bhramāt saṃsāravān iva ॥ 1-12॥

MEANING:

ātmā (आत्मा) = innate nature/self
sākṣī (साक्षी) = witness/observer
vibhuḥ (विभुः) = being everywhere/all-pervading
pūrṇa (पूर्ण) = thorough/complete/perfection
ekaḥ (एकः) =  one
muktaḥ (मुक्तः) = free/unrestrained
cit (चित्) = awareness
akriyaḥ (अक्रियः) = without resort to action/a stilling of activities।
asaṃgaḥ (असंगः) = unattached/unassociated
nispṛhaḥ (निस्पृहः) = free of desire/without longing for
śāntaḥ (शान्तः) = tranquil/peaceful/calm
bhramāt (भ्रमात्) = via illusion/by error/seemingly so
saṃsāravān (संसारवान्) = of existence/of the world
iva (इव) = as if [it were so]॥ १-१२॥

COMMENTS:

The concept of the self or soul is explored here. While the self or soul can lend itself to multiple variations of interpretations that have overtones (direct or indirect) with philosophy, religion, psychology, mysticism and other related fields, the sense of 'innate identity' exemplified within these verses can be understood better based upon our models of cognition and neuroscience research. In order to set the context for the multiple references to the soul scattered throughout this poem, I want to spend a tiny bit of time developing a synopsis of how the fiction of the self might have come to a form of concrete reality over the course of evolution.

The primeval brains and the associated bodies of sentient beings primarily evolved over thousands of years for two reasons and two reasons only - the brain for homeostasis and the body-brain complex for procreation. Homeostasis to maintain equilibrium of bodily organs/functions (thus survival) and procreation to continue to advance the lineage of that particular species. Nothing more.

The limbic portions of our brains that initially evolved was not for conscious thinking, not for altruism, not for morality, not for any of that; the limbic brains evolved primarily for procreation and homeostasis. Period. The primeval limbic system also had one instinctual need genetically programmed and hard-wired - the organism's inherently felt need to survive. Living was reality. Death, endings and functional terminations did not enter the limbic brain (as the pre-frontal cortex has not developed yet). Suffering (as we understand today) was only of the physiological kind (from physical pain, hunger etc.). The psychological component of suffering (fear of death and end of life) was minimal and almost non-existent.

Over time, the pre-frontal lobes slowly evolved (after the limbic were firmly established within organisms). Most organisms developed small pre-frontal lobes but the human organism was the one that developed these brain regions to the most advanced degree. With the pre-frontal lobes came planning, contemplation, rumination and thinking. Planning and rumination naturally led to ideas of terminations, endings and an eventual solidification of the premonition that there is an end to that organisms life. Death and ideas of impermanence (an eventual end to the sentient being present on earth) started to take hold within the pre-frontal regions. Even then, the idea of a self (embodied or otherwise) was (maybe) minimally incipient.

The trans-temporal aspect to life becomes more prevalent with the pre-frontal areas obtaining a gradual cognition of the notions of past, present and future applied to the flow of time. With the addition of such temporality, the psychological components of suffering started to magnify. Grasping and clinging to life and its processes became more and more paramount. One infers that the physiological aspects of the limbic brain led minimally to the development of a self-image and any associated embodiment, whereas the psychological aspects from the slowly-integrated pre-frontal lobes led to a faster assimilation of the idea of the self.

The original reasons behind the formation of the idea of the self must have been an evolved mechanism to cling to the idea of 'continuity to life' (which, of course, the limbic brain had assumed to take for granted). The interplay between the physiological limbic and the psychological pre-frontal led to stronger identification with suffering, attachment and clinging and an even stronger identification with the self. The self slowly became ever more embodied. Reality started to be viewed through the lens of such a self. Feelings of attachment and  grasping suddenly become a convenient crutch to tamp down conceptions of suffering within such a self-model. The self-model thus developed became an internal model of the body that subsumed our affective and the emotional states. The affective states were based upon the bodily perceptions of breath, thirst, hunger, warmth and related aspects like heartbeat etc. The emotional states were a development of the body's responses to relationships and the societal extensions that result from such relationships  - extensions like common ethics, shared culture and social norms. The trans-temporal identity or the belief that the organism as a unified component can persist through time and space became ever more solidified. Understanding that all such conceptions and self-modelling is ultimately a useful and efficient neuro-computational artifice organically layered on to make sure that the organism maintains the functions of homeostasis, survival and procreation. That is really it – my humble perspective.

With this background, the words of Ashtavarka ring resoundingly true - where the innate image of identity gives the holder (of such an identity) the point of view that such an identity is all-pervading, thorough and unified within our psyche. Such is the nature of the ego - which really is the most calcified and conglomerated manifestation of this identity. The verses also indirectly point a way - a way where the seeker aims to get to a place where the innate nature of our identities is thus understood (within its larger evolutionary and illusory aspects) and the seeker strives to attain a state of awareness that can be characterized as stilling - an awareness of that allows for insight leading to a state of detached observance that is desireless and tranquil. In conclusion, in a more generalized manner, today, we find different ways to promulgate the ideas of the self: religion, belief in afterlife, forces and lores with mystic elements, occult and its variations and other forms of mythos are part of this grand continuum.