O que é Dharma
Srii Srii Anandamurti
Tradução
simples e literal de Janine Milward para o texto
WHAT IS DHARMA
Srii Srii Anandamurti
Os seres
humanos são os seres mais desenvolvidos. Eles (podem) possuir o desenvolvimento
da consciência em seu mais alto nível e esse fato os torna diferenciados de
todos os outros animais. Nenhum outro ser possui tal clareza de consciência. Os
seres humanos podem distinguir entre o bem e o mal com a ajuda de sua
consciência e quando em perigo, eles podem buscar uma saída – com a ajuda dessa
consciência. Ninguém gosta de viver na miséria e no sofrimento – menos ainda os
seres humanos que procuram, através da consciência, uma saída para tais
vicissitudes. A vida sem tristeza nem sofrimento é uma vida de felicidade e de
benção e é isso que as pessoas almejam. Todo mundo está em busca da felicidade
– a verdade é que a natureza das pessoas é buscar a felicidade. Veremos então o
que as pessoas devem fazer para alcançar a felicidade e se esta é alcançada
através destas formas de busca.
Em sua busca
pela felicidade, as pessoas são, a princípio, atraídas pelos divertimentos
mundanos. Elas amam a riqueza e tentam atingir o poder e posições que
satisfaçam seus desejos de felicidade. Aquele que possui muito dinheiro não
está satisfeito apenas com isso e busca mais e mais dinheiro, e, no entanto,
mesmo possuindo muitíssimo dinheiro ainda não se acha satisfeito e ainda sai em
busca de mais e mais.... Também uma pessoa que tenha influência numa cidade
deseja estender esta influência sobre uma província, políticos estatais desejam
se tornar políticos nacionais, e se assim conseguirem suas posições, estarão
ambicionando uma posição de liderança mundial. A mera aquisição da riqueza, do
poder e de posições não satisfaz uma pessoa. A aquisição de alguma coisa que
possua seus limites simplesmente cria o desejo de mais e mais e a busca pela
felicidade parece não ter fim... a fome de possuir não tem fim: é ilimitada e
infinita.
Não importa o
quão digno ou não é este alcance de felicidade, não ajuda a fazer com que as
pessoas descansem em suas buscas por felicidade. Aqueles que lutam pela riqueza
não ficam satisfeitos enquanto não obtiverem uma riqueza ilimitada. Também não
aqueles que buscam por poder, posições e prestígio podem se sentir satisfeitos
até que essas questões sejam atingidas em proporções ilimitadas – porque são
objetos pertencentes ao mundo. O mundo por si mesmo é limitado e não pode
prover objetos infinitos. Portanto, o quanto maior é a aquisição mundana –
mesmo que seja o globo inteiro – não asseguraria qualquer coisa de permanente
ou infinito. O que então é essa coisa infinita, eterna, que poderá prover
felicidade constante?
A Suprema
Consciência é por si mesma infinita e eterna. É por si mesma sem limite. E a
eterna esperança dos seres humanos pelo alcance da felicidade pode ser apenas
satisfeita pela realização da Infinitude. A natureza efêmera das possessões
mundanas, poder e posições podem apenas levar uma pessoa à conclusão de que
nada dessas questões do mundo finito e limitado podem trazer um descanso ao
eterno desejo de alcançar a felicidade. Suas aquisições apenas dão lugar a
outras aquisições, mais e mais. Somente a compreensão da Infinitude pode trazer
a felicidade. A Infinitude pode ser apenas uma – é a Suprema Consciência.
Assim, é somente a Suprema Consciência que pode prover a felicidade constante –
cuja busca é a característica de cada ser humano. Na realidade, atrás dessa
necessidade humana está escondido o desejo, a vontade de atingir a Suprema
Consciência. Essa é a verdadeira natureza de cada ser vivente. Este é
simplesmente o dharma de cada pessoa.
A palavra dharma
significa “propriedade” (aquilo que é próprio, natural). Traduzindo do
inglês, as palavras podem ser “natureza”, “característica” ou “propriedade”. A
natureza do fogo é queimar ou produzir calor. É a característica ou propriedade
do fogo e que também determina a natureza do fogo. Similarmente, o dharma ou a
natureza dos seres humanos é alcançar a Suprema Consciência.
O grau de
divindade nos seres humanos é indicado através da transparência de sua
consciência. Cada ser humano, tendo se desenvolvido a partir dos animais,
possui, portanto, dois aspectos: o aspecto animal e o aspecto da consciência
que distingue uma pessoa do animal. Os animais mostram predominantemente sua
animalidade, enquanto os seres humanos, em função de sua bem trabalhada
consciência, também possuem a racionalidade. A animalidade nos seres humanos
lhes dá uma tendência em direção à vida animal ou às alegrias físicas. Sob esta
influencia, os seres humanos procuram por sua comida, sua bebida e as
gratificações para seus desejos físicos. Eles são atraídos por estas questões e
correm atrás delas sob a influencia de suas animalidades... Porém estas
questões não provêem felicidade – desde que se encontram dentro do conceito da
infinitude.
Os animais são
satisfeitos por estas alegrias limitadas – desde que sua necessidade não é
infinita. Não importa quão grande seja a quantidade das coisas oferecidas ao um
animal, ele pegará apenas aquilo que ele necessita e não se importará com
aquilo que sobrar. Porém os humanos certamente agirão de maneira diferente sob
estas condições. Isto estabelece, portanto, que os animais são satisfeitos
dentro do limite, enquanto o desejo dos seres humanos é ilimitado, mesmo que o
desejo de alegria para ambos seja proporcionado e governado pelo aspecto animal
da vida. A diferença entre os dois é em função é que o ser humano possui uma
consciência transparente, lúcida, clara – algo que os animais não possuem.
A natureza infinita
do homem que clama por uma felicidade absoluta existe simplesmente em função de
sua consciência. É essa mesma consciência que não é satisfeita com os prazeres
físicos de posse, poder e posição – coisas que, mesmo apesar de suas altas
proporções, são apenas transitórias. É a consciência que cria nos seres humanos
sua ânsia pela Suprema Consciência.
As coisas do
mundo – as alegrias físicas – não saciam a sede do coração humano por
felicidade. No entanto, encontramos pessoas que são satisfeitas por estes
objetos mundanos. A animalidade nas pessoas as leva em direção à gratificação
dos seus desejos animais, porém a racionalidade de suas consciências permanece
sem gratificação - desde que os objetos mundanos são transitórios e de vida
curta e não são suficientes para dar um final à ilimitada e infinita fome da
consciência humana. Existe, portanto, um constante duelo nos seres humanos
entre sua animalidade e sua racionalidade. O aspecto animal os empurra em
direção às alegrias terrenas, enquanto sua consciência, não satisfeita com
estas alegrias mundanas, os leva em direção à Suprema Consciência – a
Infinitude. Isto resulta numa luta entre o aspecto animal e a consciência. Se
os prazeres carnais derivados do poder e da posição fossem infinitos e
ilimitados, eles poderiam dar um final à eterna busca da consciência pela
felicidade. Porém, isso não acontece e é exatamente por não acontecer é que a
glória efêmera das alegrias temporais nunca pode assegurar uma paz duradoura na
mente humana e levar as pessoas ao êxtase.
É somente a
consciência transparente que diferencia os seres humanos dos animais. É então
imperativo que os seres humanos façam uso de sua consciência. Se sua
consciência está dormente atrás de sua animalidade, as pessoas podem se
comportar como os animais. A verdade é que podem se tornar ainda pior do que os
animais em função de possuírem uma consciência transparente e não fazerem uso
da mesma. Estas pessoas não merecem o status de seres humanos. Elas são animais
em forma de humanos.
A natureza da
consciência é procurar pela Infinitude ou compreender a Suprema Consciência.
Somente aquelas pessoas que fazem uso de sua consciência e seguem suas normas
merecem ser chamados de seres humanos. Portanto, cada pessoa, ao fazer uso em
sua plenitude de sua consciência transparente, ganha o direito de ser chamado
de ser humano e encontra seu dharma ou natureza própria de ser aquela que busca
pela Infinitude da Suprema Consciência. Este desejo pela Infinitude é uma
qualidade inata ou dharma que caracteriza o status de humano ás pessoas.
A felicidade é
derivada de se obter aquilo que se deseja. Se uma pessoa não consegue obter
aquilo que deseja, não pode ser feliz. A pessoa se torna triste. A consciência
transparente nas pessoas, que é a única a distingui-las dos animais, procura
pela Consciência Cósmica ou pela Infinitude. Dessa forma, as pessoas conseguem
a real felicidade somente quando elas podem atingir a Consciência Cósmica ou
entrar no processo para alcançar essa meta. A Consciência não quer as alegrias mundanas
em função dessas serem finitas e não poderem trazer satisfação à essa
Consciência. A conclusão que chegamos é que o dharma da humanidade é
compreender a Infinitude ou a Consciência Cósmica. Somente através desse dharma
que as pessoas podem usufruir da eterna felicidade e benção.
A característica ou Dharma dos seres humanos é alcançar
Bhahma. Portanto, é necessário ter a
certeza de que Brahma existe ou não – porque seria fútil tentar alcançar alguma
coisa que na verdade não existe. Se
Brahma existe, temos que saber o que é.
Toda ação que uma pessoa realiza parece ter sido executada por seus
órgãos, as Indriyas. As Indriyas são
dez. E parece que quase toda ação que uma pessoa realiza acontece a partir das
dez Indriyas. No entanto, não é bem
assim. Se a mente não trabalhar por
detrás das Indriyas, estas, por si mesmas, não podem realizar qualquer
ação. É a mente que trabalha e as dez
Indriyas são meros instrumentos através dos quais a ação é executada. A ação que se origina da mente pode somente
alcançar sua manifestação externa com a ajuda das Indriyas. Para melhor explicar este ponto, podemos
trazer o exemplo de uma pessoa olhando um livro. É somente a mente que visualiza o livro e faz
isso com a ajuda dos olhos. Se a mente
não funcionar, os olhos não poderão ver o livro. Outro exemplo: uma pessoa num estado de
inconsciência em função de anestesia ou por outra razão, não poderá ver o livro
mesmo se seus olhos estiverem inteiramente abertos. Dentro de tal estado de inconsciência, os
olhos não estão sendo afetados e, no entanto, não podem cumprir com suas
funções naturais porque o contacto com a mente está suspenso. É por esta razão que, sob a influência da
anestesia, os órgãos ou Indriyas não funcionam, embora permaneçam em perfeita
ordem. Frequentemente, quando estamos
absorvidos por pensamentos, nós não notamos uma pessoa ou reconhecemos um amigo
em pé e diante de nós. Isso acontece
somente porque, apesar de nossos olhos estarem em perfeita ordem e amplamente
abertos, a mente – que na verdade realiza todas as ações – não está fazendo uso
das Indriyas, dos olhos. É a mente que
trabalha e as Indriyas somente ajudam sua manifestação externa.
Se é somente a
mente que trabalha, vamos então ver como esta funciona através destas
Indriyas. Por exemplo, olhando um livro
é a ação que a mente está realizando com a ajuda dos olhos. Quando a mente vê o livro, o que na verdade
acontece é que a mente, com a ajuda dos olhos, toma o formato de alguma coisa
que nós chamamos de livro. Este formato
tomado pela mente é diferente da imagem que é formada na retina, porque a mente
pode ver e se tornar um livro mesmo quando os olhos estiverem fechados; porém
os olhos não podem ver quando a mente não funciona. Portanto, é a mente que toma a forma de um
livro durante a percepção visual. Esta
parte da mente que toma a forma de um livro é chamada de Citta ou aquilo que
repousa na mente. Porém, mesmo quando a
Citta toma a forma de um livro, deve haver algo a mais além de Citta e que
realiza a ação de ver. A parte da mente
que realiza o trabalho da visão é chamada de Ahamtattva ou o Eu Faço. Porém, ‘Eu’ não poderá ver nada a não ser
‘Eu’ exista. Portanto, deve haver uma
outra parte da mente diferenciada destas duas partes ora comentadas. A terceira parte da mente é a parte que traz
o sentimento do “Eu” e é chamada de Mahattattva. Sem o sentimento do “Eu” ou conhecimento de
si mesmo, nenhuma ação poderá ser realizada.
Este sentimento do “Eu” ou conhecimento de si mesmo vem de Mahattattva
ou Budhitattva. O nome coletivo para
estes três – Citta, Ahamtattva e Mahattattva – é mente ou Antahkarana ou força
psíquica introversa. Mas estas três
porções da mente são apenas manifestações externas da mente. É com esta mente que a ação de ver um livro é
realizada e isso é chamado de assimilação psíquica da Rupa Tanmatra.
Tanmatra é um
novo termo e deve ser explicado. A
fração microscópica de uma onda radiada de um objeto e recebida pelas Indriyas
é chamada de Tanmatra ou inferência.
Explicando ainda mais, podemos dizer que a idéia de um livro é
encontrada com a ajuda de Rupa Tanmatra (a vibração ideal dos nervos cria uma
imagem ou uma figura na mente) quando uma pessoa olha um livro. Porém, se os olhos estiverem fechados ou se
alguém estiver num lugar escuro, pode ainda reconhecer o livro através o
toque. Aqui, a idéia do livro é
assimilada em função de outra Tanmatra, quer dizer, a Tanmatra do toque ou da
percepção do tato. Novamente, se uma pessoa
deixa cair um livro fora de sua visão ou de seu alcance, é possível identificar
este livro através Tanmatra. Citta vem
se contactar com Tanmatras somente quando Ahamtattva assim deseja. O ato de olhar ou de identificar o livro deve
ser realizada por Ahamtattva porque Citta, por si mesmo, não possui a
capacidade de realizar tal função.
Quando Ahamtattva ou a parte da mente que trabalha quer ver um livro,
Citta entra em contacto com os órgãos da visão, quer dizer, os olhos. Os olhos recebem Rupa Tanmatra que advém do
livro. Este Rupa Tanmatra que está
sempre presente no ambiente em forma de ondas, vem em direção a Citta através
do olho, que forma uma espécie de porta que faz Citta entrar em contacto com o
mundo externo. Citta, então, toma a
forma do livro, e Ahamtattva identifica ou vê este livro a partir do formato
que Citta assumiu. Da mesma forma,
quando Ahamtattva deseja escutar alguma coisa, coloca Citta em contacto com os
órgãos da escuta, os ouvidos. Os ouvidos
recebem o som Tanmatra, que está sempre presente no ambiente físico, através o
meio das ondas sonoras. Citta, no
impacto desse Tanmatra, torna-se o som em si mesmo e Ahamtattva escuta este
som. Isso mostra que Citta toma a forma
de tudo aquilo que Ahamtattva deseja ou realiza. Podemos também compreender de outra maneira:
Citta manifesta as ações que Ahamtattva realiza.
Explicamos que
Citta, Ahamtattva e Mahattattva ou Buddhitattva constituem a mente. Citta somente possui a capacidade de tomar a
forma que Ahamtattva deseja. Da mesma
forma, Ahamtattva somente possui a capacidade de realizar as ações, somente
pode trabalhar, agir. Existe algo que
leve Ahamtattva a agir e este algo é Mahattattva ou Buddhitattva, que traz o
sentimento do “Eu”. Este sentimento do
“Eu” deriva da mente e esse “Eu” na mente leva Ahamtattva e Citta realizarem
suas respectivas funções. Sem esse “Eu”
não é possível sentir ou ver um livro mesmo que, sob a influência de
Ahamtattva, Citta tome a forma do livro.
Mas, então, este “Eu” é somente uma parte da mente. Quer dizer, existe um outro “Eu” que é o “Eu”
possessivo, ou o “Eu” que sabe que existe uma mente. A existência do “Eu” na mente somente prova
que existe uma outra entidade real que se encontra além da mente e que conhece
a existência da mente. Esse “Eu”, que é
a entidade testemunhadora e que testemunha a existência da mente e a existência
de Buddhitattava ou o sentimento do “Eu”, é chamado de Atman ou consciência
unitária. Portanto, através a
introspecção e do pensamento concentrado, uma pessoa observa que Atman e mente,
quer dizer, consciência unitária e mente, são duas entidades separadas.
Atman ou
consciência unitária e mente são duas entidades separadas, embora devam ser
relacionadas uma à outra. Num primeiro
momento, parece que estou consciente sobre minha existência. Então, este mesmo “Eu” que parece provar
minha existência me faz trabalhar, e uma parte de minha mente chamada Citta
toma a forma do livro através Tanmatras e me fazem apto/a a ver o livro. O “Eu” que me traz consciência ou o “Eu” que
testemunha a existência de minha mente e em continuidade ao “Eu” que traz o
sentimento de “Eu existo” é Atman ou consciência unitária. O “Eu” que traz o sentimento do “Eu Existo” e
que também prova a existência de Atman ou consciência unitária, é Mahattattva. O “Eu” que trabalha ou vê o livro é
Ahamtattva e a porção da mente que toma a forma do livro e traz a possibilidade
de Ahamtattva ver, é Citta. Isso mostra
que o mesmo “Eu” possui uma função diferenciada a cada estágio. Como estas diferenciadas funções do mesmo
“Eu” acontecem é um tema que precisa de maiores explicações. A afirmação “Eu existo” pressupõe a presença
do “Eu” que é a testemunha dessa existência.
A entidade testemunhante é Atman ou consciência unitária e sua presença
é estabelecida pelo sentimento de existência que uma pessoa apresenta/usa em
cada uma de suas ações. Que esta
asserção de “Eu existo” é diferente de Atman ou consciência unitária é vista a
partir do fato de que este “Eu” pressupõe a presença de meu Atman ou
consciência unitária. Este sentimento
prova que consciência unitária é somente consciência e que sem consciência, a
existência é impossível de acontecer.
Sem consciência não existe qualquer sentimento de existência. O que, então, irá testemunhar a existência do
“Eu”? Consciência é, portanto, essencial
para criar o sentimento de Mahattattva ou Buddhitattva. Para ser explícito, Mahattattva ou
Buddhitattva não pode existir sem Atman ou consciência unitária.
Porém, a
entidade testemunhadora e o sentimento do puro “Eu” parecem ser formas
funcionais diferenciadas do mesmo “Eu”.
De fato, o “Eu” que testemunha minha existência também se manifesta como
o “Eu” de “Eu existo”. O “Eu”
testemunhador é consciência unitária ou Atman e se manifesta como Mahattattva
ou Buddhitattva e, portanto, estabelece sua própria existência. É a entidade testemunhadora ou consciência
unitária que, tomando a função do “Eu” de “Eu existo”, é chamada de Mahattattva
ou Buddhitattva. Sendo assim,
consciência unitária não é somente consciência, também possui uma qualidade com
a ajuda através a qual se manifesta em funções diferenciadas. Esta qualidade não é consciência – porque, de
outra maneira, não seria necessária para que a consciência unitária se
manifeste como Mahattattva e se expresse como o “Eu” de “Eu existo”, que é
diferente da consciência unitária. Consciência
e sua qualidade são, portanto, duas entidades separadas em Atman ou consciência
unitária. Como esta qualidade é
diferente de consciência, deve ser obtida a partir de algum lugar. Devem existir outros fatores para qualificar
Atman de forma a fazê-lo manifestar-se como Mahattattva. Aquilo que traz esta qualidade a Atman é
chamado de Prakrti. Em outras palavras,
é através Prakrti qualificando Atman que este é manifestado como Mahattattva e
assume o sentimento do “Eu”.
Prakrti precisa
de explicação. Prakrti é a entidade a
qual controla os fenômenos naturais.
Prakrti não é nem natureza nem qualidade. Por exemplo, a qualidade da queima é dita
como sendo a natureza do fogo. Deve
existir alguma coisa que traz esta qualidade ao fogo; da mesma forma que existe
uma entidade que traz qualidade à consciência unitária. Aquilo que qualifica a consciência unitária é
Prakrti e não a qualidade que é apresentada através Sua influência. Prakrti é uma palavra em Sânscrito e deriva
de pra-kr+ktin e significa fazer alguma coisa de uma maneira especial. A consciência unitária estabelece sua
existência somente por ser qualificada por Prakrti. Em outras palavras, Prakrti qualifica a
consciência unitária ou Atman para lhe trazer o sentimento de existência. Energia é algo necessário para se realizar
qualquer ação. Como Prakrti realiza a
ação de qualificar Atman ou consciência unitária, Ela é a força
única/especial. Ela é o princípio que qualifica
a consciência unitária. É Prakrti que,
através Sua influência sobre a consciência unitária, lhe doa as qualidades de
funções diferenciadas. Prakrti é uma
força única/especial – um princípio.
Porém, algumas questões que surgem são: qual princípio é Prakrti e de
onde vem?
Prakrti é do
princípio de Purusa e é através seu próprio princípio que Purusa é influenciado
e qualificado. Como Prakrti é o
princípio de Purusa, Ela deve existir dentro de Purusa. De fato, é bem assim que acontece. A consciência unitária e sua Prakrti não
podem jamais serem separadas uma da outra, assim como o princípio da queima do
fogo que não pode ser separado do fogo.
Qualquer coisa que adquira uma qualidade característica a partir de
influência de um princípio ou força, não pode existir se este princípio ou força
é retirado de si. Ambos estarão sempre
juntos e assim acontece com a consciência unitária e seu princípio,
Prakrti. A consciência unitária e sua
Prakrti são inseparáveis assim como os dois lados de uma folha de papel. A única função de Prakrti é continuar a criar
diferentes formas através Sua influência sobre a consciência.
A consciência
unitária é a entidade testemunhadora e realiza sua existência somente quando é
qualificada para manifestar o “Eu” de “Eu existo”. O princípio de Prakrti que estabelece a
existência da consciência unitária através a qualificação de Purusa é chamada
de Sattvaguna, o princípio senciente, e a parte da mente a qual é, dessa
maneira, formada para trazer o sentimento de “Eu existo”, é chamado de
Mahattattva ou Buddhitattva. Será mais
correto dizer que sob a influência de Sattvaguna, a consciência unitária se
manifesta como Mahattattva ou Buddhitattva.
Toda ação
pressupõe existência. A não ser que eu
exista, não será possível que eu possa ver.
Também aqui compreendemos que “Eu” possui duas diferentes funções ou
dois diferentes aspectos. O primeiro é a
entidade testemunhadora ou consciência que, de maneira a provar ou realizar sua
existência, adquiriu o sentimento de “Eu existo”, e o mesmo “Eu” agora realiza
a função de ver. O “Eu” de “Eu existo” é
o Buddhitattva que, enquanto vê alguma coisa, traz para si a função de ver
adjuntada ao estabelecimento da existência da consciência unitária. Quando a consciência unitária é influenciada
por Prakrti, ela se manifesta como Buddhitattva. Da mesma forma, a habilidade adicional de
realizar uma ação é também causada pela influência de Prakrti sobre
Buddhitattva. Prakrti também estará
presente em Buddhitattva pelo fato de ser somente uma manifestação da
consciência unitária e Prakrti está enlaçada à consciência unitária onde quer
que exista e em qualquer forma que exista.
O princípio ou Guna de Prakrti que traz esta qualidade ou capacidade a
Buddhitattva é chamado de Rajoguna, o principio mutativo. Portanto, quando Buddhitattva é influenciado
por Prakrti, realiza duas funções ou aspectos.
O último, adquirido de Rajoguna e que traz a capacidade ou qualidade de
realizar uma ação, é conhecido como Ahamtattva.
Quer dizer, Buddhitattva se manifesta como Ahamtattva quando
influenciado por Rajoguna ou o princípio mutativo de Prakrti.
Toda ação deve
obter um resultado ao final. Por
exemplo, quando você olha um livro, o resultado é ver o livro – e como vemos o
livro já foi explicado anteriormente.
Citta, que é uma parte da mente, traz para si a produção de forma de
Tanmatra do livro e este se torna na forma de um livro. É este o livro que Ahamtattva vê. Citta toma a forma daquilo que Ahamtattva
quer que seja. Quando Ahamtattva vê um
livro, Citta se torna este livro, e quando escuta um som, Citta se torna este
som. Citta, portanto, é inteiramente
dependente de Ahamtattva para ter sua forma.
Citta fica mudando de forma ao desejo de Ahamtattva. Dessa forma, Citta deve ser muito conectado
com Ahamtattva. Como Citta é formado é
algo que precisa ser explicado. Citta,
como explicado anteriormente, é uma parte da mente e Buddtattva e Ahamtattva
são as duas outras partes. Buddhittattva
e Ahamtattva são manifestações da consciência unitária formada a partir da
influência de Sattvaguna de Prakrti sobre si e de Rajoguna sobre Buddhitattva. Em outras palavras, é a consciência unitária
que, sob a influência de Prakrti, toma a função de Ahamtattva num segundo
momento. Assim, Prakrti está presente em
Ahamtattva e pode qualificar isso ainda mais.
De fato, é a partir de Prakrti qualificando Ahamtattva que se manifesta
como Citta. A qualidade de Prakrti
influenciando Ahamtattva é chamada de Tamoguna, o princípio estático. Como resultado da influência de Tamoguna é
que Ahamtattva ou o “Eu” realiza ações, e toma para si a imagem mental do
resultado de sua ação. Isso significa
que quando “Eu” vê um livro, é esse “Eu” que se torna um livro. Um outro “Eu”, portanto, aparece sob a
influência de Tamoguna. É esse “Eu” que
toma a forma da imagem mental do livro durante a percepção. Esse “Eu” se torna como o livro ou toma a
forma de livro em Citta. Portanto, é a
consciência unitária que gradualmente se manifesta como Citta.
Nos parágrafos
anteriores, foi estabelecido pela lógica e pela razão que é apenas a
consciência unitária que, sob a influência de diferentes princípios de sua
Prakrti, gradualmente se manifesta como Citta e, como um resultado dessa
manifestação, a mente entra em cena. A
existência da consciência unitária é essencial para a mente, que é somente uma
manifestação gradual da consciência unitária sob a influência qualificadora de
Prakrti. De fato, a mente não pode ser
formada sem a presença de Atman ou consciência unitária. Porém, nós sabemos que a mente está presente
em cada indivíduo. Dessa maneira, Atman
ou consciência unitária está também presente em cada indivíduo. Existem uma multidão de individualidades
nesse universo, e como Atman ou consciência unitária está refletida em cada
ser, parecem existir muitos Atmans ou consciências unitárias. O nome coletivo para todos esses Atmans ou
consciências unitárias é Paramatman, Bhumacaetanya, Brahma ou Bhagavan. Da
mesma forma que doze unidades fazem uma dúzia, vinte fazem um tento, e o nome
coletivo para um grande número de soldados é exército, o nome coletivo para
todas as consciências unitárias é Paramatman, Bhumacaetanya ou Bhagavan. O nome Bhagavan não deveria ser construído
como uma significativa figura humana com mãos e pés poderosos. É o coletivo de todos Atmans. A palavra mais próximo em Inglês que deveria
ser usada para Atman ou consciência unitária é “Alma” – portanto, Bhagavan pode
também ser chamado de Consciência Universal ou Alma Universal. Isso mostra que Bhagavan existe e que existe
enquanto Paramatman ou Alma Universal, Bhumacaetanya ou Consciência Cósmica, ou
Brahma, A Eterna Bem-Aventurança.
A primeira
parte do texto acima foi extraído de Ananda Marga:
Elementary Philosophy
(publicado dentro do site www.anandamarga.org)
e traduzido livremente por Janine Milward.
This is an excerpt from Ananda Marga: Elementary Philosophy
by Shrii
Shrii Anandamurti. Ananda Marga Publications, Kolkata,
Published with
permission of Ananda Marga Central Publications.
© 1998 Ánanda Márga Pracáraka
Sam’gha, all rights reserved.
Também a
totalidade do Texto foi extraída de
Foto: Sítio das Estrelas
What Is Dharma?
Human beings are the highest-evolved beings. They possess
clearly-reflected consciousness, and this makes them superior to animals. No
other being has such a clear reflection of consciousness. Human beings can
distinguish between good and bad with the help of their consciousness, and when
in trouble they can find a way out, with its help. No one likes to live in
misery and suffering, far less human beings, whose consciousness can find means
of relief. Life without sorrow and suffering is a life of happiness and bliss,
and that is what people desire. Everyone is in quest of happiness; in fact it
is people’s nature to seek happiness. Now let us see what one does to achieve
it and whether it is achieved by those means.
In their search for happiness people are first attracted towards physical enjoyments. They amass wealth and try to achieve power and position to satisfy their desires for happiness. One who has a hundred rupees is not satisfied with it, one strives for a thousand rupees, but even possessing thousands of rupees does not satisfy. One wants a million, and so on. Then it is seen that a person having influence in a district wants to extend it over a province, provincial leaders want to become national leaders, and when they have achieved that there creeps in a desire for world leadership. Mere acquisition of wealth, power and position does not satisfy a person. The acquisition of something limited only creates the want for more, and the quest for happiness finds no end. The hunger for possessing is unending. It is limitless and infinite.
However dignified or lofty the achievement, it fails to set at rest people’s unlimited quest for happiness. Those who hanker after wealth will not be satisfied until they can obtain unlimited wealth. Nor will the seeker of power, position and prestige be satisfied until he or she can get these in limitless proportions, as all these are objects of the world. The world itself is finite and cannot provide infinite objects. Naturally, therefore, the greatest worldly acquisition, even if it be the entire globe, would not secure anything of an infinite and permanent character. What then is that infinite, eternal thing which will provide everlasting happiness?
The Cosmic Entity alone is infinite and eternal. It alone is limitless. And the eternal longing of human beings for happiness can only be satiated by realization of the Infinite. The ephemeral nature of worldly possessions, power and position can only lead one to the conclusion that none of the things of the finite and limited world can set at rest the everlasting urge for happiness. Their acquisition merely gives rise to further longing. Only realization of the Infinite can do it. The Infinite can be only one, and that is the Cosmic Entity. Hence it is only the Cosmic Entity that can provide everlasting happiness – the quest for which is the characteristic of every human being. In reality, behind this human urge is hidden the desire, the longing, for attainment of the Cosmic Entity. It is the very nature of every living being. This alone is the dharma of every person.
The word dharma signifies “property”. The English word for it is “nature”, “characteristic” or “property”. The nature of fire is to burn or produce heat. It is the characteristic or property of fire and is also termed the nature of fire. Similarly, the dharma or nature of a human being is to seek the Cosmic Entity.
The degree of divinity in human beings is indicated by their clearly-reflected consciousness. Every human being, having evolved from animals, has, therefore, two aspects – the animal aspect, and the conscious aspect which distinguishes a person from animals. Animals display predominantly the animality, while human beings due to a well-reflected consciousness also possess rationality. The animality in human beings gives them a leaning towards animal life or physical enjoyment. They, under its influence, look to eating, drinking and gratification of other physical desires. They are attracted towards these and run after them under the influence of their animality but these do not provide happiness as their longing for it is infinite. Animals are satisfied with these limited enjoyments as their urge is not infinite. However large the quantity of things offered to an animal may be, it will take only those which it needs and will not bother for the rest. But humans will certainly act differently in these conditions. This only establishes that animals are satisfied with the limited, while the desire of human beings is limitless, although the desire for enjoyment in both is prompted and governed by the animal aspect of life. The difference in the two is due to the possession by the human being of a clearly-reflected consciousness, something which animals lack. The infinite nature of the human urge for absolute happiness is due to their consciousness alone. It is this consciousness alone which is not satisfied with the physical pleasure of possession, power and position – things which in spite of their huge proportions, are only transitory in character. It is their consciousness which creates in human beings the longing for the Cosmic Entity.
The objects of the world – the physical enjoyments – do not quench the thirst of the human heart for happiness. Yet we find that people are attracted by them. The animality in people draws them towards gratification of animal desires, but the rationality of their consciousness remains ungratified since all these are transitory and short-lived. They are not enough to set at rest the unending and unlimited hunger of the human consciousness. There is, thus, a constant duel in humans between their animality and rationality. The animal aspect pulls them towards instant earthly joys, while their consciousness, not being satisfied with these, draws them towards the Cosmic Entity – the Infinite. This results in the struggle between the animal aspect and consciousness. Had the carnal pleasures derived from power and position been infinite and endless, they would have set at rest the eternal quest of consciousness for happiness. But they do not, and that is why the fleeting glory of temporal joys can never secure a lasting peace in the human mind and lead people to ecstasy.
It is only the well-reflected consciousness which differentiates human beings from animals. Is it then not imperative for human beings to make use of their consciousness? If their consciousness lies dormant behind their animality, people are bound to behave like animals. They in fact become worse than animals as, even though endowed with well-reflected consciousness, they do not make use of it. Such people do not deserve the status of human beings. They are animals in human form.
The nature of consciousness is to seek for the Infinite or realize the Cosmic Entity. Only those who make use of their consciousness and follow its dictates deserve to be called human beings. Therefore, every person, by making full use of his or her reflected consciousness, earns the right to be called a human being and finds his or her dharma or nature to be only the search for the Infinite or Cosmic Entity. This longing for the Infinite is the innate quality or dharma which characterizes the human status of people.
Happiness is derived by getting what one desires. If one does not get what one desires, one cannot be happy. One becomes sad and miserable. The clearly-reflected consciousness in people, which alone distinguishes them from animals, seeks the Cosmic Entity or the Infinite. And so people derive real happiness only when they can attain the Cosmic Entity or get into the process of attaining It. Consciousness does not want earthly joys because being finite none of them satisfy it. The conclusion we arrive at is that the dharma of humanity is to realize the Infinite or the Cosmic Entity. It is only by means of this dharma that people can enjoy eternal happiness and bliss.
The characteristic or dharma of human beings is to attain Brahma. It is, therefore, necessary to see whether Brahma exists or not, as it would be futile to attempt to get something which does not actually exist. If Brahma exists, we must know what It is.
Every action a person performs, appears to have been executed by his or her physical organs, the indriyas. These organs or indriyas are ten. And it appears that almost every action that a person performs appears to have been performed because of these ten indriyas. Yet this is not actually so. If the mind does not work behind them, the indriyas by themselves cannot perform any action. It is the mind which works and the ten indriyas are merely the instruments through which the work is executed. The action which originates in mind only finds its external manifestation with the help of the indriyas. To explain this we can take the example of a person looking at a book. It is only the mind which visualizes the book with the help of the eyes. If the mind does not work the eyes will not be able to see the book. For instance, a person in an unconscious state because of anaesthesia or some other reason will not be able to see the book even if his or her eyes are wide open. In such an unconscious state the eyes are not damaged, yet they cannot perform their natural function because the contact with the mind is suspended. This is why under the influence of anaesthesia, the organs or indriyas do not function, although they remain in perfect order. Often, when we are absorbed in thought, we fail to notice a person or recognize a friend standing right in front of us. This is only because, in spite of our eyes being in perfect order and wide open, the mind, which actually performs all actions, does not make use of the indriyas, the eyes. It is the mind which works and the indriyas only help in its external manifestation.
If it is the mind only which works, let us see how it acts through these indriyas. For instance, looking at a book is an action which the mind performs with the help of the eyes. When the mind sees a book, what actually happens is that the mind, with the help of the eyes, takes the shape of something we call a book. This shape which the mind takes is different from the image which is formed on the retina, as the mind can see and become like a book even when the eyes are closed; but the eyes cannot see when the mind does not function. So it is the mind which takes the form of a book during visual perception. This portion of the mind which takes the form of the book is termed citta or mind-stuff. But even if the citta takes the form of a book, there must be something other than the citta which does the work of seeing. The part of the mind which does the work of seeing is called ahaḿtattva or doer “I”. But “I” will not be able to see anything unless “I” exists. So there must be another part of the mind which is different from these two. This third part of the mind is the part which gives the feeling of “I” and is called mahattattva. Without the feeling of the existence of “I” or knowledge of the self, no action can be performed. This feeling of “I” or knowledge of the self comes from mahattattva or buddhitattva. The collective name for these three – citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva – is mind or antahkarańa or introversial psychic force. But these three portions of mind are only the outward manifestations of mind. It is with this mind that the action of seeing a book is performed, and this is termed psychic assimilation of rúpa tanmátra.
Tanmátra is a new term and should be explained. The microscopic fraction of a wave radiated from an object and received by the indriyas is called tanmátra or inference. To explain this further, it can be said that the idea of a book is grasped with the help of rúpa tanmátra (the ideatory vibration of the nerves creates an image or figure in the mind) when one looks at the book. But if the eyes are closed or if one is in a dark place, one can still recognize the book by touch. Here the idea of the book is assimilated due to another tanmátra, that is, the tanmátra of touch or tactual perception. Again if someone drops a book out of sight or out of reach, it is possible to identify it as a book through the auditory tanmátra. Citta comes in contact with the tanmátras only when ahaḿtattva wants it to. The act of looking at or identifying the book must be done by ahaḿtattva as citta by itself does not possess the capacity to perform any function. When ahaḿtattva or the part of the mind which works wants to see a book, citta comes in contact with the organs of sight, that is, the eyes. The eyes receive the rúpa tanmátra from the book. This tanmátra which is always present in the environment in the form of waves, strikes against citta through the eyes, which form a sort of door to bring citta in contact with the outside world. Citta then takes the shape of the book, and ahaḿtattva identifies or sees it as per the shape which citta has taken. Similarly, when ahaḿtattva wants to hear something it puts citta in contact with the organs of hearing, the ears. The ears receive the sound tanmátra, which is always present in the physical environment, through the medium of sound waves. Citta, on the impact of this tanmátra, becomes the sound itself, and ahaḿtattva hears that sound. This shows that citta takes the form of whatever ahaḿtattva desires or does. To put it another way, citta manifests the actions which ahaḿtattva performs.
It has already been explained that citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva or buddhitattva constitute the mind. Citta only has the capacity to take the form which ahaḿtattva wants. Similarly ahaḿtattva only has the capacity to perform actions. It can only work. There must be something to make it work. That something is mahattattva or buddhitattva, which gives one the feeling of “I”. This feeling of “I” is derived from the mind and this “I” in the mind makes ahaḿtattva and citta perform their respective functions. Without this “I” it is not possible to feel or see a book even if, under the influence of ahaḿtattva, citta takes the shape of the book. But then this “I” is only a part of the mind. That is, there is another “I” which is the possessing “I”, or the “I” which knows that there is a mind. The existence of “I” in the mind only proves that there is another real entity which is beyond mind and which knows the existence of mind. This “I” which is the witnessing entity and witnesses the existence of mind and the existence of buddhitattva or the feeling of “I”, is called átman or unit consciousness. Thus through introspection and concentrated thinking one observes that átman and mind, that is, unit consciousness and mind, are two separate entities.
Átman or unit consciousness and mind are two separate entities, yet they must be related to each other. In the first instance it appears that I am aware of my existence. Then the same “I” that appears to prove my existence makes me work, and a part of my mind called citta takes the form of the book through tanmátras to enable me to see the book. The “I” that gives me consciousness or the “I” which witnesses the existence of my mind and therein of the “I” which gives the feeling “I exist” is átman or unit consciousness. The “I” that gives the feeling of “I exist” and also proves the existence of átman or unit consciousness, is mahattattva. The “I” that works or sees the book is ahaḿtattva and the portion of mind that takes the shape of the book and enables ahaḿtattva to see it is citta. This shows that the same “I” has a different function at each stage. How these different functions of the same “I” come about needs further clarification. The statement “I exist” presupposes the presence of “I” which is the witness of this existence. This witnessing entity is átman or unit consciousness and its presence is established by the feeling of existence that one displays by one’s every action. That this assertion of “I exist” is different from átman or unit consciousness is seen from the fact that this “I” presupposes the presence of my átman or unit consciousness. This feeling proves that unit consciousness is only consciousness and that without consciousness existence is not possible. Without consciousness there can be no feeling of existence. What then is going to witness the existence of “I”? Consciousness is therefore essential to create the feeling of mahattattva or buddhitattva. To be explicit, mahattattva or buddhitattva cannot exist without átman or unit consciousness.
But the witnessing entity and the pure “I” feeling appear to be different functional forms of the same “I”. In fact the “I” that witnesses my existence, also manifests itself as the “I” of “I exist.” The witnessing “I” is unit consciousness or átman and it manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva and thus establishes its own existence. It is the witnessing entity or unit consciousness which on taking up the function of the “I” of “I exist”, is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. Thus unit consciousness is not only consciousness, it also has a quality with the help of which it manifests itself through different functions. This quality is not consciousness, as otherwise it would not be necessary for unit consciousness to manifest itself as mahattattva and express itself as the “I” of “I exist”, which is different from the witnessing entity. Consciousness and its quality are therefore two separate entities in átman or unit consciousness. As this quality is different from consciousness, it must have been obtained from somewhere. There must be some other factor to qualify átman to make it manifest itself as mahattattva. That which gives this quality to átman is called Prakrti. In other words, it is due to Prakrti qualifying átman that it is manifested as mahattattva and gets the feeling of “I”.
Prakrti needs an explanation. Prakrti is the entity which controls natural phenomena. Prakrti is neither nature nor quality. For instance, the quality of burning is said to be the nature of fire. There must be something which gives this quality to fire; just as there is some entity which gives its quality to unit consciousness. That which qualifies unit consciousness is Prakrti and not the quality which is exhibited due to Her influence. Prakrti is a Sanskrit word and is derived pra – kr + ktin and it means to do something in a special way. Unit consciousness establishes its existence only by being qualified by Prakrti. In other words, Prakrti qualifies unit consciousness or átman to give it the feeling of its existence. Energy is required to perform any action. As Prakrti performs the action of qualifying átman or unit consciousness, She is a unique force. She is the principle which qualifies unit consciousness. It is Prakrti who, by Her influence on unit consciousness, gives it the qualities of different functions. Prakrti is a unique force – a principle. But some questions which arise are: whose principle is She, and where does She come from?
Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, and it is by His own principle that Puruśa is influenced and qualified. As Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, She must exist within Puruśa. In fact She always does. Unit consciousness and its prakrti can never be separated from each other, just as the burning principle of fire which cannot be separated from fire. Anything which acquires a characteristic quality due to the influence of a principle or force, cannot exist if that principle or force is withdrawn from it. The two will always go together, and so do unit consciousness and its principle, prakrti. Unit consciousness and its prakrti are inseparable like the two sides of a sheet of paper. The only function of Prakrti is to continually create different forms by Her influence over consciousness.
Unit consciousness is the witnessing entity and realizes its existence only when it is qualified to manifest as “I” of “I exist.” The principle of Prakrti which establishes the existence of unit consciousness by qualifying Puruśa is called sattvaguńa, the sentient principle, and the part of mind which is thus formed to give the feeling of “I exist” is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. It will be more correct to say that under the influence of sattvaguńa, unit consciousness manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva.
Every action presupposes existence. Unless I exist, I shall not be able to see. Here also we find that “I” has two different functions or aspects. The first is the witnessing entity or consciousness, which, in order to prove or realize its existence, has acquired the feeling of “I exist,” and the same “I” now performs the function of seeing. The “I” of “I exist” is the buddhitattva which, while seeing something, takes up the function of seeing in addition to establishing the existence of unit consciousness. When unit consciousness is influenced by Prakrti, it manifests itself as buddhitattva. Similarly, the additional ability to perform an action is also caused by the influence of Prakrti on buddhitattva. Prakrti will also be present in buddhitattva as it is only a manifestation of unit consciousness, and Prakrti is bound to be with unit consciousness wherever and in whatever form it may exist. The principle or guńa of Prakrti which gives this quality or capacity to buddhitattva is called rajoguńa, the mutative principle. Thus when buddhitattva is influenced by Prakrti, it displays two functions or aspects. The latter, which it gets from rajoguńa and which gives it the capacity or quality to perform an action, is known as ahaḿtattva. That is, buddhitattva manifests itself as ahaḿtattva when influenced by rajoguńa or the mutative principle of Prakrti.
Every action is bound to have a result in the end. For example, when you look at a book the result is seeing the book. How we see a book was explained earlier. Citta, which is a part of mind, picks up the form-producing tanmátra of the book and itself becomes the form of the book. It is that book that ahaḿtattva sees. Citta takes the form of what ahaḿtattva wants it to be. When ahaḿtattva sees a book, citta becomes that book, and when it hears a sound, citta becomes that sound. Citta therefore is entirely dependent on ahaḿtattva for its form. Citta keeps on changing its form at the bidding of ahaḿtattva. It must then be very closely connected with ahaḿtattva. How citta is formed needs clarification. Citta, as was explained earlier, is a part of the mind, and buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are the other two parts. Buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are manifestations of unit consciousness formed due to the influence of sattvaguńa of Prakrti over it and of rajoguńa over buddhitattva. In other words it is unit consciousness which, under the influence of Prakrti, takes up the function of ahaḿtattva in the second stage. Hence Prakrti is present in ahaḿtattva and is bound to qualify it further. In fact, it is due to Prakrti qualifying ahaḿtattva that it manifests itself as citta. The quality of Prakrti which influences ahaḿtattva is called tamoguńa, the static principle. It is as a result of the influence of tamoguńa that ahaḿtattva, or the “I” that performs actions, has to take up the mental image of the result of its action. This means that when “I” see a book, it is “I” that becomes like the book. Another “I” thus comes into being under the influence of tamoguńa. It is this “I” which takes the form of the mental image of the book during perception. This “I” which becomes like the book or takes on the form of the book is citta. Thus it is unit consciousness which gradually manifests itself as citta.
In the preceding paragraphs it was established by logic and reasoning that it is only unit consciousness which, under the influence of the different principles of its Prakrti, gradually manifests itself as citta, and as a result of this, mind comes into being. The existence of unit consciousness is essential for mind, which is only a gradual manifestation of unit consciousness under the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Mind, in fact, cannot be formed without the presence of átman or unit consciousness. But we know that mind is present in every individual. Hence átman or unit consciousness is also present in every individual. There are innumerable individuals in this universe, and as átman or unit consciousness is reflected in each one, there appear to be many átmans or unit consciousnesses. The collective name for all these átmans or unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya, Brahma or Bhagaván. Just as twelve units make a dozen, twenty make a score, and the collective name for a very large number of soldiers is an army, the collective name for all the unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya or Bhagaván. The name Bhagaván should not be construed as a mighty human figure with powerful hands and feet. It is the collection of all our átmans. The nearest word in English which may be used for átman or unit consciousness is “soul”, so Bhagaván may also be called Universal Consciousness or Universal Soul. This shows that Bhagaván does exist and that It exists as Paramátman or Universal Soul, Bhúmácaetanya or Cosmic Consciousness, or Brahma, the Eternal Blessedness.
1955
Published in:
Ananda Marga: Elementary Philosophy
Ananda Marga Philosophy in a Nutshell Part 1 [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Part 11 [a compilation]
Universal Humanism [a compilation]
In their search for happiness people are first attracted towards physical enjoyments. They amass wealth and try to achieve power and position to satisfy their desires for happiness. One who has a hundred rupees is not satisfied with it, one strives for a thousand rupees, but even possessing thousands of rupees does not satisfy. One wants a million, and so on. Then it is seen that a person having influence in a district wants to extend it over a province, provincial leaders want to become national leaders, and when they have achieved that there creeps in a desire for world leadership. Mere acquisition of wealth, power and position does not satisfy a person. The acquisition of something limited only creates the want for more, and the quest for happiness finds no end. The hunger for possessing is unending. It is limitless and infinite.
However dignified or lofty the achievement, it fails to set at rest people’s unlimited quest for happiness. Those who hanker after wealth will not be satisfied until they can obtain unlimited wealth. Nor will the seeker of power, position and prestige be satisfied until he or she can get these in limitless proportions, as all these are objects of the world. The world itself is finite and cannot provide infinite objects. Naturally, therefore, the greatest worldly acquisition, even if it be the entire globe, would not secure anything of an infinite and permanent character. What then is that infinite, eternal thing which will provide everlasting happiness?
The Cosmic Entity alone is infinite and eternal. It alone is limitless. And the eternal longing of human beings for happiness can only be satiated by realization of the Infinite. The ephemeral nature of worldly possessions, power and position can only lead one to the conclusion that none of the things of the finite and limited world can set at rest the everlasting urge for happiness. Their acquisition merely gives rise to further longing. Only realization of the Infinite can do it. The Infinite can be only one, and that is the Cosmic Entity. Hence it is only the Cosmic Entity that can provide everlasting happiness – the quest for which is the characteristic of every human being. In reality, behind this human urge is hidden the desire, the longing, for attainment of the Cosmic Entity. It is the very nature of every living being. This alone is the dharma of every person.
The word dharma signifies “property”. The English word for it is “nature”, “characteristic” or “property”. The nature of fire is to burn or produce heat. It is the characteristic or property of fire and is also termed the nature of fire. Similarly, the dharma or nature of a human being is to seek the Cosmic Entity.
The degree of divinity in human beings is indicated by their clearly-reflected consciousness. Every human being, having evolved from animals, has, therefore, two aspects – the animal aspect, and the conscious aspect which distinguishes a person from animals. Animals display predominantly the animality, while human beings due to a well-reflected consciousness also possess rationality. The animality in human beings gives them a leaning towards animal life or physical enjoyment. They, under its influence, look to eating, drinking and gratification of other physical desires. They are attracted towards these and run after them under the influence of their animality but these do not provide happiness as their longing for it is infinite. Animals are satisfied with these limited enjoyments as their urge is not infinite. However large the quantity of things offered to an animal may be, it will take only those which it needs and will not bother for the rest. But humans will certainly act differently in these conditions. This only establishes that animals are satisfied with the limited, while the desire of human beings is limitless, although the desire for enjoyment in both is prompted and governed by the animal aspect of life. The difference in the two is due to the possession by the human being of a clearly-reflected consciousness, something which animals lack. The infinite nature of the human urge for absolute happiness is due to their consciousness alone. It is this consciousness alone which is not satisfied with the physical pleasure of possession, power and position – things which in spite of their huge proportions, are only transitory in character. It is their consciousness which creates in human beings the longing for the Cosmic Entity.
The objects of the world – the physical enjoyments – do not quench the thirst of the human heart for happiness. Yet we find that people are attracted by them. The animality in people draws them towards gratification of animal desires, but the rationality of their consciousness remains ungratified since all these are transitory and short-lived. They are not enough to set at rest the unending and unlimited hunger of the human consciousness. There is, thus, a constant duel in humans between their animality and rationality. The animal aspect pulls them towards instant earthly joys, while their consciousness, not being satisfied with these, draws them towards the Cosmic Entity – the Infinite. This results in the struggle between the animal aspect and consciousness. Had the carnal pleasures derived from power and position been infinite and endless, they would have set at rest the eternal quest of consciousness for happiness. But they do not, and that is why the fleeting glory of temporal joys can never secure a lasting peace in the human mind and lead people to ecstasy.
It is only the well-reflected consciousness which differentiates human beings from animals. Is it then not imperative for human beings to make use of their consciousness? If their consciousness lies dormant behind their animality, people are bound to behave like animals. They in fact become worse than animals as, even though endowed with well-reflected consciousness, they do not make use of it. Such people do not deserve the status of human beings. They are animals in human form.
The nature of consciousness is to seek for the Infinite or realize the Cosmic Entity. Only those who make use of their consciousness and follow its dictates deserve to be called human beings. Therefore, every person, by making full use of his or her reflected consciousness, earns the right to be called a human being and finds his or her dharma or nature to be only the search for the Infinite or Cosmic Entity. This longing for the Infinite is the innate quality or dharma which characterizes the human status of people.
Happiness is derived by getting what one desires. If one does not get what one desires, one cannot be happy. One becomes sad and miserable. The clearly-reflected consciousness in people, which alone distinguishes them from animals, seeks the Cosmic Entity or the Infinite. And so people derive real happiness only when they can attain the Cosmic Entity or get into the process of attaining It. Consciousness does not want earthly joys because being finite none of them satisfy it. The conclusion we arrive at is that the dharma of humanity is to realize the Infinite or the Cosmic Entity. It is only by means of this dharma that people can enjoy eternal happiness and bliss.
The characteristic or dharma of human beings is to attain Brahma. It is, therefore, necessary to see whether Brahma exists or not, as it would be futile to attempt to get something which does not actually exist. If Brahma exists, we must know what It is.
Every action a person performs, appears to have been executed by his or her physical organs, the indriyas. These organs or indriyas are ten. And it appears that almost every action that a person performs appears to have been performed because of these ten indriyas. Yet this is not actually so. If the mind does not work behind them, the indriyas by themselves cannot perform any action. It is the mind which works and the ten indriyas are merely the instruments through which the work is executed. The action which originates in mind only finds its external manifestation with the help of the indriyas. To explain this we can take the example of a person looking at a book. It is only the mind which visualizes the book with the help of the eyes. If the mind does not work the eyes will not be able to see the book. For instance, a person in an unconscious state because of anaesthesia or some other reason will not be able to see the book even if his or her eyes are wide open. In such an unconscious state the eyes are not damaged, yet they cannot perform their natural function because the contact with the mind is suspended. This is why under the influence of anaesthesia, the organs or indriyas do not function, although they remain in perfect order. Often, when we are absorbed in thought, we fail to notice a person or recognize a friend standing right in front of us. This is only because, in spite of our eyes being in perfect order and wide open, the mind, which actually performs all actions, does not make use of the indriyas, the eyes. It is the mind which works and the indriyas only help in its external manifestation.
If it is the mind only which works, let us see how it acts through these indriyas. For instance, looking at a book is an action which the mind performs with the help of the eyes. When the mind sees a book, what actually happens is that the mind, with the help of the eyes, takes the shape of something we call a book. This shape which the mind takes is different from the image which is formed on the retina, as the mind can see and become like a book even when the eyes are closed; but the eyes cannot see when the mind does not function. So it is the mind which takes the form of a book during visual perception. This portion of the mind which takes the form of the book is termed citta or mind-stuff. But even if the citta takes the form of a book, there must be something other than the citta which does the work of seeing. The part of the mind which does the work of seeing is called ahaḿtattva or doer “I”. But “I” will not be able to see anything unless “I” exists. So there must be another part of the mind which is different from these two. This third part of the mind is the part which gives the feeling of “I” and is called mahattattva. Without the feeling of the existence of “I” or knowledge of the self, no action can be performed. This feeling of “I” or knowledge of the self comes from mahattattva or buddhitattva. The collective name for these three – citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva – is mind or antahkarańa or introversial psychic force. But these three portions of mind are only the outward manifestations of mind. It is with this mind that the action of seeing a book is performed, and this is termed psychic assimilation of rúpa tanmátra.
Tanmátra is a new term and should be explained. The microscopic fraction of a wave radiated from an object and received by the indriyas is called tanmátra or inference. To explain this further, it can be said that the idea of a book is grasped with the help of rúpa tanmátra (the ideatory vibration of the nerves creates an image or figure in the mind) when one looks at the book. But if the eyes are closed or if one is in a dark place, one can still recognize the book by touch. Here the idea of the book is assimilated due to another tanmátra, that is, the tanmátra of touch or tactual perception. Again if someone drops a book out of sight or out of reach, it is possible to identify it as a book through the auditory tanmátra. Citta comes in contact with the tanmátras only when ahaḿtattva wants it to. The act of looking at or identifying the book must be done by ahaḿtattva as citta by itself does not possess the capacity to perform any function. When ahaḿtattva or the part of the mind which works wants to see a book, citta comes in contact with the organs of sight, that is, the eyes. The eyes receive the rúpa tanmátra from the book. This tanmátra which is always present in the environment in the form of waves, strikes against citta through the eyes, which form a sort of door to bring citta in contact with the outside world. Citta then takes the shape of the book, and ahaḿtattva identifies or sees it as per the shape which citta has taken. Similarly, when ahaḿtattva wants to hear something it puts citta in contact with the organs of hearing, the ears. The ears receive the sound tanmátra, which is always present in the physical environment, through the medium of sound waves. Citta, on the impact of this tanmátra, becomes the sound itself, and ahaḿtattva hears that sound. This shows that citta takes the form of whatever ahaḿtattva desires or does. To put it another way, citta manifests the actions which ahaḿtattva performs.
It has already been explained that citta, ahaḿtattva and mahattattva or buddhitattva constitute the mind. Citta only has the capacity to take the form which ahaḿtattva wants. Similarly ahaḿtattva only has the capacity to perform actions. It can only work. There must be something to make it work. That something is mahattattva or buddhitattva, which gives one the feeling of “I”. This feeling of “I” is derived from the mind and this “I” in the mind makes ahaḿtattva and citta perform their respective functions. Without this “I” it is not possible to feel or see a book even if, under the influence of ahaḿtattva, citta takes the shape of the book. But then this “I” is only a part of the mind. That is, there is another “I” which is the possessing “I”, or the “I” which knows that there is a mind. The existence of “I” in the mind only proves that there is another real entity which is beyond mind and which knows the existence of mind. This “I” which is the witnessing entity and witnesses the existence of mind and the existence of buddhitattva or the feeling of “I”, is called átman or unit consciousness. Thus through introspection and concentrated thinking one observes that átman and mind, that is, unit consciousness and mind, are two separate entities.
Átman or unit consciousness and mind are two separate entities, yet they must be related to each other. In the first instance it appears that I am aware of my existence. Then the same “I” that appears to prove my existence makes me work, and a part of my mind called citta takes the form of the book through tanmátras to enable me to see the book. The “I” that gives me consciousness or the “I” which witnesses the existence of my mind and therein of the “I” which gives the feeling “I exist” is átman or unit consciousness. The “I” that gives the feeling of “I exist” and also proves the existence of átman or unit consciousness, is mahattattva. The “I” that works or sees the book is ahaḿtattva and the portion of mind that takes the shape of the book and enables ahaḿtattva to see it is citta. This shows that the same “I” has a different function at each stage. How these different functions of the same “I” come about needs further clarification. The statement “I exist” presupposes the presence of “I” which is the witness of this existence. This witnessing entity is átman or unit consciousness and its presence is established by the feeling of existence that one displays by one’s every action. That this assertion of “I exist” is different from átman or unit consciousness is seen from the fact that this “I” presupposes the presence of my átman or unit consciousness. This feeling proves that unit consciousness is only consciousness and that without consciousness existence is not possible. Without consciousness there can be no feeling of existence. What then is going to witness the existence of “I”? Consciousness is therefore essential to create the feeling of mahattattva or buddhitattva. To be explicit, mahattattva or buddhitattva cannot exist without átman or unit consciousness.
But the witnessing entity and the pure “I” feeling appear to be different functional forms of the same “I”. In fact the “I” that witnesses my existence, also manifests itself as the “I” of “I exist.” The witnessing “I” is unit consciousness or átman and it manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva and thus establishes its own existence. It is the witnessing entity or unit consciousness which on taking up the function of the “I” of “I exist”, is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. Thus unit consciousness is not only consciousness, it also has a quality with the help of which it manifests itself through different functions. This quality is not consciousness, as otherwise it would not be necessary for unit consciousness to manifest itself as mahattattva and express itself as the “I” of “I exist”, which is different from the witnessing entity. Consciousness and its quality are therefore two separate entities in átman or unit consciousness. As this quality is different from consciousness, it must have been obtained from somewhere. There must be some other factor to qualify átman to make it manifest itself as mahattattva. That which gives this quality to átman is called Prakrti. In other words, it is due to Prakrti qualifying átman that it is manifested as mahattattva and gets the feeling of “I”.
Prakrti needs an explanation. Prakrti is the entity which controls natural phenomena. Prakrti is neither nature nor quality. For instance, the quality of burning is said to be the nature of fire. There must be something which gives this quality to fire; just as there is some entity which gives its quality to unit consciousness. That which qualifies unit consciousness is Prakrti and not the quality which is exhibited due to Her influence. Prakrti is a Sanskrit word and is derived pra – kr + ktin and it means to do something in a special way. Unit consciousness establishes its existence only by being qualified by Prakrti. In other words, Prakrti qualifies unit consciousness or átman to give it the feeling of its existence. Energy is required to perform any action. As Prakrti performs the action of qualifying átman or unit consciousness, She is a unique force. She is the principle which qualifies unit consciousness. It is Prakrti who, by Her influence on unit consciousness, gives it the qualities of different functions. Prakrti is a unique force – a principle. But some questions which arise are: whose principle is She, and where does She come from?
Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, and it is by His own principle that Puruśa is influenced and qualified. As Prakrti is the principle of Puruśa, She must exist within Puruśa. In fact She always does. Unit consciousness and its prakrti can never be separated from each other, just as the burning principle of fire which cannot be separated from fire. Anything which acquires a characteristic quality due to the influence of a principle or force, cannot exist if that principle or force is withdrawn from it. The two will always go together, and so do unit consciousness and its principle, prakrti. Unit consciousness and its prakrti are inseparable like the two sides of a sheet of paper. The only function of Prakrti is to continually create different forms by Her influence over consciousness.
Unit consciousness is the witnessing entity and realizes its existence only when it is qualified to manifest as “I” of “I exist.” The principle of Prakrti which establishes the existence of unit consciousness by qualifying Puruśa is called sattvaguńa, the sentient principle, and the part of mind which is thus formed to give the feeling of “I exist” is called mahattattva or buddhitattva. It will be more correct to say that under the influence of sattvaguńa, unit consciousness manifests itself as mahattattva or buddhitattva.
Every action presupposes existence. Unless I exist, I shall not be able to see. Here also we find that “I” has two different functions or aspects. The first is the witnessing entity or consciousness, which, in order to prove or realize its existence, has acquired the feeling of “I exist,” and the same “I” now performs the function of seeing. The “I” of “I exist” is the buddhitattva which, while seeing something, takes up the function of seeing in addition to establishing the existence of unit consciousness. When unit consciousness is influenced by Prakrti, it manifests itself as buddhitattva. Similarly, the additional ability to perform an action is also caused by the influence of Prakrti on buddhitattva. Prakrti will also be present in buddhitattva as it is only a manifestation of unit consciousness, and Prakrti is bound to be with unit consciousness wherever and in whatever form it may exist. The principle or guńa of Prakrti which gives this quality or capacity to buddhitattva is called rajoguńa, the mutative principle. Thus when buddhitattva is influenced by Prakrti, it displays two functions or aspects. The latter, which it gets from rajoguńa and which gives it the capacity or quality to perform an action, is known as ahaḿtattva. That is, buddhitattva manifests itself as ahaḿtattva when influenced by rajoguńa or the mutative principle of Prakrti.
Every action is bound to have a result in the end. For example, when you look at a book the result is seeing the book. How we see a book was explained earlier. Citta, which is a part of mind, picks up the form-producing tanmátra of the book and itself becomes the form of the book. It is that book that ahaḿtattva sees. Citta takes the form of what ahaḿtattva wants it to be. When ahaḿtattva sees a book, citta becomes that book, and when it hears a sound, citta becomes that sound. Citta therefore is entirely dependent on ahaḿtattva for its form. Citta keeps on changing its form at the bidding of ahaḿtattva. It must then be very closely connected with ahaḿtattva. How citta is formed needs clarification. Citta, as was explained earlier, is a part of the mind, and buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are the other two parts. Buddhitattva and ahaḿtattva are manifestations of unit consciousness formed due to the influence of sattvaguńa of Prakrti over it and of rajoguńa over buddhitattva. In other words it is unit consciousness which, under the influence of Prakrti, takes up the function of ahaḿtattva in the second stage. Hence Prakrti is present in ahaḿtattva and is bound to qualify it further. In fact, it is due to Prakrti qualifying ahaḿtattva that it manifests itself as citta. The quality of Prakrti which influences ahaḿtattva is called tamoguńa, the static principle. It is as a result of the influence of tamoguńa that ahaḿtattva, or the “I” that performs actions, has to take up the mental image of the result of its action. This means that when “I” see a book, it is “I” that becomes like the book. Another “I” thus comes into being under the influence of tamoguńa. It is this “I” which takes the form of the mental image of the book during perception. This “I” which becomes like the book or takes on the form of the book is citta. Thus it is unit consciousness which gradually manifests itself as citta.
In the preceding paragraphs it was established by logic and reasoning that it is only unit consciousness which, under the influence of the different principles of its Prakrti, gradually manifests itself as citta, and as a result of this, mind comes into being. The existence of unit consciousness is essential for mind, which is only a gradual manifestation of unit consciousness under the qualifying influence of Prakrti. Mind, in fact, cannot be formed without the presence of átman or unit consciousness. But we know that mind is present in every individual. Hence átman or unit consciousness is also present in every individual. There are innumerable individuals in this universe, and as átman or unit consciousness is reflected in each one, there appear to be many átmans or unit consciousnesses. The collective name for all these átmans or unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya, Brahma or Bhagaván. Just as twelve units make a dozen, twenty make a score, and the collective name for a very large number of soldiers is an army, the collective name for all the unit consciousnesses is Paramátman, Bhúmácaetanya or Bhagaván. The name Bhagaván should not be construed as a mighty human figure with powerful hands and feet. It is the collection of all our átmans. The nearest word in English which may be used for átman or unit consciousness is “soul”, so Bhagaván may also be called Universal Consciousness or Universal Soul. This shows that Bhagaván does exist and that It exists as Paramátman or Universal Soul, Bhúmácaetanya or Cosmic Consciousness, or Brahma, the Eternal Blessedness.
1955
Published in:
Ananda Marga: Elementary Philosophy
Ananda Marga Philosophy in a Nutshell Part 1 [a compilation]
Prout in a Nutshell Part 11 [a compilation]
Universal Humanism [a compilation]
COM UM ABRAÇO ESTRELADO,
Janine Milward
Foto: Sítio das Estrelas
