United States or China ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
On account of the impossibility of origination. The above Sutra raises the doubt. The theory of the Bhagavatas is that from Vasudeva, who is the highest Brahman and the highest cause, there originates the individual soul called Sankarshana; from Sankarshana the internal organ called Pradyumna; and from Pradyumna the principle of egoity called Aniruddha.
For in modern psychology, not excluding the branch of it where efforts are made to penetrate into deeper regions of man's being, nothing is less well understood than the true nature of man's egoity.
If man be solely a body, its loss indeed places the final period to identity. But if prophets down the millenniums spake with truth, man is essentially of incorporeal nature. The persistent core of human egoity is only temporarily allied with sense perception. Although odd, clear memories of infancy are not extremely rare.
Compare, e.g. the text which first says that the earth is merged in water, and further on 'the elements are merged in the Mahat, the Mahat in the Unevolved, the Unevolved in the Imperishable, the Imperishable in Darkness; Darkness becomes one with the highest divinity. And 'He of whom the earth is the body, &c. up to 'he of whom the Unevolved is the body; of whom the Imperishable is the body; of whom death is the body; he the inner Self of all beings, free from all evil, the divine one, the one God Narayana. And Earth, water, fire, air, ether, mind, intellect, egoity thus eightfold is my nature divided.
This is also the reason why the consciousness of Egoity does not persist in the states of deep sleep and final release: in those states this special form of consciousness passes away, and the Self appears in its true nature, i.e. as pure consciousness. Hence a person who has risen from deep, dreamless sleep reflects, 'Just now I was unconscious of myself. Summing up of the purvapaksha view.
Pradyumna, and Aniruddha are the beings ruling over the individual souls, internal organs and organs of egoity, there can be no objection to their being themselves denoted by those latter terms, viz. individual soul, and so on. The case is analogous to that of Brahman being designated, in some texts, by terms such as ether, breath, and the like. And on account of contradiction.
Where, on the other hand, the Holy One declares the ahamkara a special effect of the Unevolved to be comprised within the sphere of the Objective, he means that principle which is called ahamkara, because it causes the assumption of Egoity on the part of the body which belongs to the Not-self.
Brahman which is nothing but pure non-differenced Being, rests exclusively on the empirical assumption of Egoity and so on, and is false; while reality belongs to the causal Brahman which is mere Being. It follows that there is no such thing as an effect apart from its cause; the effect in fact is identical with the cause.
Hence, what constitutes the inward Self is not pure consciousness but the 'I' which proves itself as the knowing subject. In the absence of egoity, 'inwardness' could not be established for consciousness. The conscious subject persists in deep sleep. We now come to the question as to the nature of deep sleep.
Such egoity constitutes the ahamkara also designated as pride or arrogance, which causes men to slight persons superior to themselves, and is referred to by scripture in many places as something evil.