AVG 2.7

Chapter 2 (The Seekers Joy at Self-Cognizance): Verse 7

आत्माज्ञानाज्जगद्भाति आत्मज्ञानान्न भासते ।

रज्ज्वज्ञानादहिर्भाति तज्ज्ञानाद्भासते न हि ॥ २-७॥

PURPORT:

The world appears to be perceived so

due to a poverty of self-awareness;

the impression disappears when

there is knowledge of the self.

Similarly, the snake is perceived so

due to non-cognition of the rope; and

disappears with its recognition.

TRANSLITERATION:

आत्म अज्ञानात् जगत् भाति आत्मज्ञानात् न भासते ।

ātma ajñānāt jagat bhāti ātmajñānāt na bhāsate ।

रज्ज्व् अज्ञानात् अहिः भाति तज्ज्ञानात् भासते न हि ॥ २-७॥

rajjv ajñānāt ahiḥ bhāti tajjñānāt bhāsate na hi ॥ 2-7॥

MEANING:

ātma (आत्म) = the self-model/the self-awareness/self

ajñānāt (अज्ञानात्) = from the ignorance of [referring to the self here]

jagat (जगत्) = universe

bhāti (भाति) = appears to be/perception of/knowledge of

ātmajñānāt (आत्मज्ञानात्) = from the knowledge of the self-model/from the knowledge offered by the awareness of the self

na (न) = not

bhāsate (भासते) = to occur to the mind/to appear to the mind ।

rajjv (रज्ज्व्) = rope/cord

ajñānāt (अज्ञानात्) = from the non-cognizance of/stemming from the ignorance of [referring to the rope here]

ahiḥ (अहिः) = snake

bhāti (भाति) = appears to be/perception of/knowledge of

tajjñānāt (तज्ज्ञानात्) = from the recognition of that/from the awareness of that [referring to the rope here] [compound of tat meaning ‘that’ and jñānāt meaning ‘from the recognition/awareness/perception of’]

bhāsate (भासते) = to occur to the mind/to appear to the mind

na (न) = not

hi (हि) = indeed/certainly/verily ॥ 2-7॥

COMMENT:

These verses further pry at the nature of reality, our awareness of reality and the self-model generated by our minds in response to conditioning, phenomenal interactions and sensory inputs. The very first line ('world appears to be perceived so due to a poverty of self-awareness') expertly teases out the indeterminacy as it applies to 'reality'. An indeterminacy of the metaphysical kind where, on analysis, entities neither exist nor not exist. Conventional reality that we encounter in everyday phenomenological processes clearly indicate that it will be absurd to posit that entities within objective reality are non-existent - the chair that I sit on right now is a solid wooden structure that supports my physical form - to characterize the chair as otherwise will lead to charges of incipient idiocy. On the other hand, it is seen that entities do not exist (in the deepest sense of that metaphysical term ‘exist’) when entities are analyzed as being devoid of any inherent existence and as lacking any form of 'true foundational essence' - a chair is only a chair since we classify, categorize and designate it so and our conditioned minds are habituated to characterize the article of furniture thus - there is no enduring quality or essence behind the concept of 'chairness' to be found within this universe, however hard one might look for such a quality (the same way there is no enduring inherent quality of selfhood, godliness, soul, creator or spirit). Yet, the self-model we generate over our formative years hardens and lends itself to a substantialist and essentialist perspective to our phenomenological experiences. It is this process of assigning substantiality and essentiality that leads to identification with the ego, the resultant attachment and the manifested possessiveness. Our awareness of reality is clouded by these factors.

Even as we understand that the small sliver of objective reality that we encounter (the part that we call conventional reality - eg. the chairs of the world) is but a poor and partial representation of objective reality, it is clear that the representation generated thus is exquisitely tuned by our evolutionary forces for us to continue to engage in two of the most fundamental activities that all sentient beings in this universe strive towards: procreation of the species and homeostasis to maintain various internal equilibria. Even as we understand that the full panoply of reality might itself never be knowable, we continue to actively believe and engage with the active hallucination created for us by our minds so that these two overarching objectives of sentient beings are accomplished. The evolutionary forces are thus tuned to mesh the twin objectives of procreation and homeostasis to the organisms inherent 'drive to stay alive'. This drive is reinforced every second by the mind actively engaging the organism in the following hypothetical feedback cycle: “there is a future state of being out there extrapolated from present state of sensory inputs; that future state contains 'you'; this 'you' will continue to breathe, live and exist in that future state; let me use all of the conventional reality made interrogable by the sense organs to construct this state of continuity; let me update this every second so that a semblance of continuity within conventional reality is achieved”; or, in other words, a state of active hallucination maintained and propagated every second of our waking and dreaming lives.

The continual flux of self-generated mental activity* that occurs within the mind in terms of recycling thoughts, emotions and memories help to further reinforce the active hallucination carried out by the mind by additionally embellishing the active narrative generated with appropriate strands of memories, emotional attachments (to memories) as well as learning and conditioning. This is a continuous process that happens from the time we are infants to the time we pass on to our elemental basics. Evolutionarily, I am of the view that the prefrontal mind (the thinking, planning and strategizing part of our brains) developed this model to counter the overwhelming feeling of impermanence that constantly assails the pre-frontal from all sides. Impermanence in terms of the continual decay that visits every existent entity to the flux that entities undergo up until the eventual dissolution of all entities (sentient or otherwise) to elemental basics.

Given this background of the generated self-model and the mind-wandering aspects of our phenomenological being, how do we attain a measure of equanimity? The overarching philosophy behind Janaka's lines here and the process (in my perspective) is to develop a specific contemplative mode - a mode that allows one to consciously experience the world from an inherently selfless perspective. The mode where one understands phenomena and our own actions by removing the self from the subjective and objective aspects of our being. I have seen the phrase ‘seeing out of emptiness’, observing without an observer’ and ‘impartial insight from choice-less awareness’ in this regard – all are good to describe this state of being. A mental posture of discernment and recognition where the observer neither increases nor decreases anything from what is present based upon the observers conditioning; instead, the observer indulges in a form of targeted examination of ‘thusness’ within the backdrop of inter-connectedness and impermanence. The observer in this mode will not act as an ‘agent of action’; instead the observer will only be what the word says and means – an OBSERVER who clearly understands that things experienced are neither real nor are unreal. Almost akin to the concept of turning the contemporary idea of eidetic reduction** on its head – where one works to eidetically reduce phenomena to a place where the reduction process leads one to an empty, essence-less awareness of reality (instead of finding an underlying essence). So, back to where we started, as Janaka alludes to – understanding the nature of reality as indeterminacy of the metaphysical kind where, on analysis, said entities neither exist nor not exist.

NOTES:

*The waking mind is often occupied with self-generated mental activity that are minimally inhibited by events in the present moment. These self-generated thoughts (called mind-wandering) allow us to connect our past and futures together, help with long-term planning and a source of creative inspiration. Although self-generated thoughts may be disruptive to the tasks of the moment, it is seen that autonomous self-generation of thought allows for the freedom to move from the here and now to a planned future state and thus reflects an evolutionary adaptation that allows the mind to perform actions that are not simply a reflexive response to the outside world.

** Eidetic reduction is a technique in the study of essences in phenomenology whose goal is to identify the basic components of phenomena. Eidetic reduction requires that a phenomenologist examine the essence of a mental object, be it a simple mental act, or the unity of consciousness itself, with the intention of drawing out the absolutely necessary and invariable components that make the mental object what it is. This reduction is done with the intention of removing what is perceived, and leaving only what is required. Eidetic reduction is a form of imaginative variation by which one attempts to reduce a phenomenon into its necessary essences. This is done by theoretically changing different elements (while mentally observing whether or not the phenomenon changes) of a practical object to learn which characteristics are necessary for it to be it without being something else. If a characteristic is changed, and the object remains unchanged, the characteristic is unnecessary to the essence of the object, and vice versa. That which cannot be eliminated is part of the example's essence.

REFERENCES:

Thomas K. Metzinger: Why Is Virtual Reality Interesting for Philosophers?

Thomas K. Metzinger: Are you sleepwalking now?

Thomas K. Metzinger: Minimal Phenomenal Experience The ARAS-model theory: Steps toward a minimal model of conscious experience as such.