The Philosophy of the Panchadasi: 1. Swami Krishnananda

==========================================================================================

Tuesday 17, December 2024, 12:04.
The Philosophy of the Panchadasi: 1. 
Swami Krishnananda.

============================================================================================

Chapter 1: Discrimination of Reality'1.

The world consists of objects, and every object is a content of positive or negative perception and cognition. The special feature of each object is that it is distinguished from the other by characteristics that are ingrained in it in a particular manner. This is why we see the world variegated in colours, sounds, tastes, touches, and smells. The difference is in the existence somewhere of some characteristics outside the range of others at other places. Thus, for example, we mark a difference between a cow and a tree, because we do not find in a cow the features of a tree, and those of a cow in a tree. Objects manifest a mutual exclusion of one another. It is this that enables us to know the multitudinousness that the world is.

We also conceive such difference as that between God and the individual, God and the world, one individual and another, the individual and the world, in addition to the differences among the various contents of the world. There is a difference of limbs in the body. There is difference among individuals of the same species as also individuals of different species. There is external and internal variety. We may here raise a question as to what it is that knows that there is difference, and how is difference known at all? We have an immediate answer that a kind of consciousness in us is the knower of the different objects outside as also inside, and this difference is also known by consciousness itself. The world can be known by nothing other than consciousness. Though the objects differ in their external features, we do not find any difference among the various types of consciousness. There is distinction of sounds, colours, etc., but there is no distinction between the consciousness of sound and the consciousness of colour, and so on. This, then, means that the knowing consciousness is one and the same, though things are multifarious and possess changing characters. One and the same consciousness sees, hears, tastes, touches and smells, and it is also possible to be conscious of the consciousness of all these. Consciousness is a synthetic unity of apperception, it is all at once. Though the eyes cannot hear and ears cannot see, etc., and each sense has one particular function to perform, consciousness is the unity of them all. It is one and indivisible, and it is responsible for all the experiences in the world.

This same predicament is observed in the state of dream, also. The difference of the waking state is only in the permanency of experience which it reveals. While dream experience is short, the waking one is comparatively long. But there is no difference in the constitution, the make-up, or the construction of the two states. Yet, it is seen that the consciousness does not differ. Though there is difference between waking and dreaming, there is no difference between the consciousness of waking and the consciousness of dreaming. This is testified by the experience that one and the same individual wakes and dreams, and asserts: “I dreamt.” While the waking state is due to actual perception through senses, dream is brought about by the memory of waking state on account of the impressions of the latter imbedded in the mind, which manifest themselves on suitable occasions. Consciousness has no forms or shapes.

Also, taking into consideration the condition of deep sleep, it is seen that there is, in it, for all practical purposes, no consciousness at all. One wakes up from sleep and exclaims: “I knew nothing, but I enjoyed happiness, I had wonderful rest.” Notwithstanding that there was no consciousness or knowing in deep sleep, there is a persistent memory of one's having slept and experienced joy therein. There is a total absence of experience from the point of view of consciousness, but the effect in the form of memory of having slept is enough evidence that there was some sort of experience even in deep sleep. The continuance of impression is the outcome of a continuity in basic being. When there is no experience, there is no memory, too. But it cannot be denied that we have a memory of sleep. This leads to the conclusion that the condition of deep sleep is one of a conscious experience, though this consciousness is not to be construed in the ordinary sense of the term. When we affirm that there was all darkness in sleep, it means, we knew darkness. Else, we would not be making such an assertion. To know darkness there must be knowledge, and knowledge is identical with the luminous intelligence with which the states of waking and dreaming are also experienced. There is, therefore, an unbroken continuity of consciousness in the states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep. And, as it is different from the objects it knew in waking and dreaming, it is also different from the darkness or ignorance which it knew in deep sleep. But, it never differs from the consciousness of either state. From this it may be concluded that the same consciousness persists for days and nights together, for months and years and centuries and aeons, for ever and ever. It has no beginning, middle or end. It is absolute.

*****

Continued

=============================================================================================