Dṛgdṛśyaviveka: A philosophical investigation into the nature of the 'Seer' and the 'seen'

By (Aśram Vidyā Order) Raphael (Editor)

The Dṛgdṛśyaviveka, which is attributed to ŚAṄKARA, invites us to discern (viveka) between Real and non-real, between the ātman (Self), the "Seer," and the non-ātman (non-Self), the "seen," between Infinite and finite, between Life and death. The human being's greatest conflicts stem from

• Language: English
• Publisher: Aurea Vidya
• Release date: Jun 24, 2020
• ISBN: 9781931406284

Book preview

Aurea Vidyā Collection*

–––––––– 10 ––––––––

*  For a complete list of Titles, see page 149

All Rights © Āśram Vidyā

Via Azone 20 – 00165 Rome, Italy

This book was published in Italian as Drigdriśyaviveka, by Associazione Ecoculturale Parmenides (formerly Edizioni Āśram Vidyā), Rome, Italy

.

The proceeds from this book – to which there are no Author's rights – will be used for reprints. The contents of this book may not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher, except for the quotation of brief passages in criticism, by citing the source

ePub ISBN: 978-1-931406-28-4

ISBN 978-1-931406-09-3

Library of Congress Control Number 2007907803

On the cover, Two-faced Janus, Vatican Museums, Vatican City

On the back cover, Svāmi Nikhilānanda, How to Discriminate the Seer from the seen, Appendix 2. Adrien Maisonneuve, Paris

Dṛgdṛśyaviveka

A philosophical investigation into the nature of the ‘Seer’ and the ‘seen’

by

Raphael

AUREA VIDYĀ

One must discern between Being and being this or that: between ‘I am what I am’ and ‘I am this or that’, between revealing oneself without name and form and living for a name and a form. Only an act of profound discrimination can allow us to recognize the essential nature of our true Being.

Raphael

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Notes to the Text

Introduction

Dṛgdṛśyaviveka

Subject, object and the modifications of the mind (1-3)*

Cit-Consciousness (4-5)

Jīva reflection of consciousness (6)

Identification (7-12)

The two powers of māyā: projection and veiling (13-15)

Sākṣin-Witness (16-21)

The six kinds of samādhi (22-30)

The various types of karma: saṁcita, āgāmin, prārabdha (31)

The three theories regarding the jīva (32-33)

The four vedic mantra (34-37)

The jīva in the waking and dream states (38-41)

Universal jīva and individual jīva (42-46)

Transliterated Sanskrit Text

Bibliographic Appendix

Glossary

Raphael: Unity of Tradition

*The figures refer to the numbering of the sūtras

NOTES TO THE TEXT

The English Text

1.Square brackets [ ] are ours. They enclose terms and phrases that are understood in the text, as well as supplementary material that is considered helpful for a better understanding of the work.

2.Round brackets ( ) enclose the original Sanskrit of words and phrases that are under examination and that belong to the sūtras.

3.Roman type is used for Sanskrit words (Brahman, Ātman, Hiraṇyagarbha, māya, etc.) in the sūtras, which otherwise appear in italic type. This pattern is reversed in the commentary.

5.The same noun will have an upper-case initial if it refers to a divine Form (Vāyu) and a lower-case initial if it refers to an element or form (vāyu).

The Sanskrit Text

1.The transliteration of the Sanskrit text from the original devanāgarī follows the currently accepted criteria and, apart from a few exceptions, does not separate the words.

2.References to verses in the Upaniṣads and other texts are given in accordance with the traditional numbering system used in the texts, such as Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad II.II.8-9.

The Phonetic Formation of the Letters

According to their mouthpositions

Guide to Pronunciation.

INTRODUCTION

If we take a piece of clay and make a jar from it and this jar one day becomes aware of itself, it will say: I am a jar.

If we dissolve the jar and re-knead the clay and make a statue and one day the statue becomes conscious of itself, it will say: I am a statue.

If we dissolve the statue and re-knead what gave origin to the jar and to the statue and make a pyramid of it and this becomes aware of itself, it will say: I am a pyramid.

But if the jar, the statue and the pyramid – spatial and temporal constructions qualified by certain forms – could really become aware of their primordial and existential unconscious substratum they would say: I am formless, homogeneous clay that takes form now as a jar, now as a statue, now as a pyramid.

Beyond every formal structural ‘modification’ and beyond all ego or form or quality the substratum which is pure Existence (sat) lives eternally.

Sat is that undivided essence which is always identical to itself and gives life and appearance to all that exists or, better still, to all that is perceived. There is no ‘empirical ego’, whatever condition it may belong to, which does not feel within itself, in an innate way, this eternally pulsing presence. Descartes states: ‘I can doubt everything, except the fact that I think, therefore I really exist.’¹ This existence does not need either demonstration or philosophical or scientific arguments. The very existence of the ego or human being (as an entity separated from the universal context) is, as a matter of fact, a reflection of sat at the ontological level.

‘What does not exist cannot be brought into existence; what exists cannot cease to exist. This ultimate truth was revealed by those who saw the essence of all things.’

‘Know that That from which all of this [universe] radiates, is indestructible. No one can cause the destruction of the imperishable Being.’

‘It is never born, nor does it ever die. Since it has always been, it cannot cease to be. Unborn, permanent, imperishable, ancient, it is not slain even when the body is slain.’²

Śaṅkara asks himself: What is Being? What is non-being?

In his commentary to the above-mentioned ślokas he states that non-being (abhāva) is that which does not really exist, has no intrinsic life of its own and insufficient reason. This definition includes all the expressions of existence upon the sensible plane. If we analyze every experience, we note a chain of effects which, in turn, are mere modifications or alterations; from this we can deduce that the objective, empirical world has only a changeable and phenomenal value.

The universe is only an ‘uninterrupted flow of images, forms’. But a modification is just a somewhat different aspect from its cause; basically it is the cause that presents itself in a new event or framework. Now, we cannot take in cause and effect at a single glance: we can see one or the other. Empirical experience is based upon this concept of cause and effect; the perceptible shows itself as a hierarchy of this binomial, but what is now effect will appear later as cause, and a cause will prove to be an effect. In the end these two terms can be equated as they belong to the same denominator; they are simple categories that change constantly and therefore cannot have absolute Reality. Beyond cause, effect and cause, and so on, there is the supreme, unalterated Foundation by means of which the visible and the invisible can manifest.

Non-being or causal becoming is māyā, phenomenon, which is not ‘illusion’ in the Western sense of the word, but a word whose etymological meaning is ‘that which flows, changes every moment, which appears and disappears.’³

According to Advaita Vedānta, the universe of names and forms (cause, effect, cause,