Namaste Atanu
In a sense we have progressed much form the original topic and I am not sure if others are interested, so I would be happy to take this off-line to focus better if you feel that would be more comfortable.
Permit me to approach the answer in a new angle with the question based on the last line of your quote: “who is it that knows (the Self)?”
I understand the “Fourth” to mean turiya, which is equal to chit or divine consciousness and is in Sat
chitandanda, which is Brahman. In other words they are the same from an Advaitin perspective. Please correct me if you do not agree or we will be talking about different things.
Above in your quotation, we are presented with a list which pretty much implies that turiya (or divine consciousness from now on) is nothing which can be thought of. It is “unthinkable, un-inferable, action-less”. So the divine consciousness cannot be a thought. Consciousness however can still be known as the quote confirms: “this is to be known”, This “knowing” is a vital point. We should not confuse thinking with knowing here. What we know may arise as thoughts, but for the sake of finding consciousness let’s say that the knowing itself is “behind” the thoughts. Consciousness is the silent witness which knows the mind, thoughts, senses and the body (name and form). Similar to the hierarchy given by Makundaji in
post number 2:
"So the hierarchy in descending order is as follows.
Atma
|
Buddhi (Intellect)
|
Manas(Mind)
|
Indriya(Senses)
|
Deha(Body)"
Atman is that divine consciousness which “knows”. I don’t imply knowing facts, like the population of Dehli, but knowing all mind and sense data. Mind has thoughts. When you sit in silence, who is it that witnessing (knows) the thoughts of the mind?
When the mind rests (in deep sleep) that which witnesses the mind rests in itself: in bliss, in pure consciousness. That which knows is always there and it knows itself through the reflection of prarkiti through the mind. Conscious being is confirmed to be in deep sleep as when one awakes one says “I slept blissfully although I remember nothing!”. That is why I say “prakriti is in me (consciousness)” Because when I am in deep sleep, prakriti no longer exists to be known by consciousness. (This part needs further explanation but please lets consider the above if you wish).
However it not incorrect to say that Brahman or consciousness is in everything and surrounds everything. The only difference is the point of view. Here is a creative illustration for enjoyment: Shakti says "I see you lord in everything, in all forms and yet beyond them too". Shiva says "I see you Shakti in me, permeated by me as the sustaining force, experier and enjoyer without separation" Together they say "I am Brahman: satchitananda".
Bookmarks