Philosophy and Religion / J. C. Chatterji: Kashmir Shaivism

Jagadish Chandra Chatterji

Kashmir Shaivism

Part II. The Main Doctrines of the System.

B.—The Limited Individual Experience. VIII. The Principles of Materiality.

32-36. The Five Bhutas.

This stage reached, the Purusha or as we may now call it, the Soul, is nearly ready for its round of existence and experiences as a full fledged individual. There remains but one more step to take to accomplish this fully. This last step may be spoken of as the Materialisation of the Soul i.e. of the Purusha with its endowments.

And it happens in the following way:—¹

In the last stage the objects of experience were, as we have seen, of a general character—sound-, feel-, colour-, flavour- and odour-as-such without the perception of any variations in any of them. But however much these may be perceived as objects of the senses in the beginning, i.e., when they are first produced, they gradually cease to be the objects of such perception in obedience to the same principle which makes the Experiencer lose sight of the 'All-this' of the Shuddha-Vidya state, or of the Generals of the Buddhi at a later stage of manifestation: the same principle which we find in operation also in daily life, ultimately due to Maya, the 'Self-hiding' aspect of the Divine Shakti. We find in our daily experience that if we are face to face with a merely homogenous something without any variation in it, we gradually lose sight of it as such a thing—unless we are endowed with, or have already developed in us, that Vidya Shakti² of the Yogin which, being the opposite of Maya, can remain fully alive to it and can keep holding it before him as vivid and clear object of experience. We find that when placed in such a situation, our minds eagerly seek a change in it—a variation or variations in the object of experience—or we fall asleep, which however leads to the same result, inasmuch as sleep itself means a change in the experience to be followed by a still further one when we wake up. Following this principle then, when the Soul is face to face with the mere sound-as-such for a time, it ceases to notice it at all, however much the Soul may have been affected thereby when it first arose as an object of experience, in exactly the same way as sound would cease to be perceived consciously if any of us now found himself drowned in an absolutely homogeneous sea of sound from all directions without any variation whatsoever. Such a volume of sound would certainly be perceived as such by him when it first burst out; but after a while his ears would get accustomed to it and he would either not notice it—it growing into a normal surrounding—or he would fall asleep, only to wake up to perceive a change. Or, it may happen—as it certainly does and must happen at the stage of evolution we are considering, there being at that stage no reason why the soul should fall asleep—that the Soul already having an experience of sound and now not noticing it any longer, eagerly seeks to hear it again. But it can do so only by conceiving variations in it: such conception on its part of a variation or variations being possible because there is contained in the general conception all the elements of the particulars, in much the same way as the colour rays are already contained in the white light of the Sun; or, for the matter of that, the whole of the Universal Variety is contained in the single experience of Parama Shiva.

Thus it is that from the general perception of the sound-as-such there arises the perception of the sound-particulars.

Similarly from the perception of Feel-, Colour-, Flavour- and Odour-as-such there also arise the perceptions of the several particulars or varieties of these.

Not only this. Along with the manifestation of varieties in the generals of these sense-objects, there are also produced some very important results. What these are and how they are produced would be best understood if we could, in imagination, put ourselves now in a position which would be similar to what must have been the situation when these varieties were first experienced by a Soul.

Let us imagine ourselves to be present face to face with, indeed to be drowned in, a sea of homogeneous sound which has already become, in the way described above, no sound at all, that is, has ceased to form an object of perception; and let us also imagine that there are no other objects whatsoever, as would be the case under the circumstances we are trying to picture, the other generals of Feel, Colour, Flavour and Odour having equally and for equal reasons ceased to be perceived. Then let us further imagine that there suddenly arises, or, which is the same thing, is perceived a variety of sounds. What would be the experience that would instantly, instinctively and necessarily accompany or rather follow, this perception of a variety of sounds, as it were, all over the Soul, as it would now be, there being as yet no localised sense of hearing as there is as yet no physical body. It goes almost without saying that it would be the experience of a something that goes in all Directions (dishah); that is to say of Wide Expanse or Empty-Space (Avakasha in Sanskrit, as distinguished from filled Space which gives rise to the experience of relativity of Positions or positional relations, (Desha in Sanskrit). For, the moment such sounds are perceived that very moment, it will also be realised that they are proceeding from all directions, corresponding to the perception which will be experienced, for reasons stated above, all over the Soul.³ That is to say from the experience of variety in the uniformity of Sound-as-such, there would result also the experience of Wide Expanse or Space. This Wide Expanse, that is this Something spreading in all directions, however, is the same as 'Nothing.' This 'something' going out in all directions, therefore being practically 'No-thing', the experience of it also results, in practice, in one of Vacuity or Empty-Space as said above. In Sanskrit it is called Akasha, by which is meant both a something which goes out in all directions and makes all Space or locale possible; and also Vacuity or Empty-Space. It may perhaps be translated by Ether, (rather, Etheriality), as this is also conceived as existing and spreading in all directions, taking note however of the fact that while what is spoken of as ' Ether' is regarded in the West as having movements—even though they may be merely vibratory movements—and as the medium for the transmission of light, Akasha as conceived in Hindu Philosophy (at least of some schools)⁴ has no movements whatever, nor has it any such function. Inasmuch as this Akasha, Ether or Etherial factor, though very real, i.e. as real, say, as the solidity of the earth, is for all practical purposes and as realised in experience (not merely inferred from other facts of experience) a mere 'Nothing' or Vacuity, we may also call it the Principle of Vacuity.

It is this realisation of the Akasha or Ether i.e. this experiencing the Principle of Vacuity, in the way mentioned above, which is described in the technical language of the system, when it is said that

"From variety produced in the Tanmatra of
Sound there is produced Akasha,"

And this is said, because there need be no other experience whatsoever for the realisation of these varieties of Sound but that of 'all directions', of Wide Expanse, or, what is the same tiling, of an indefinite something going out in all directions. There may be other experiences, as indeed, there will be at a later stage; but these need not necessarily be there or necessarily precede that of Akasha.

Further, the experience of Akasha is a necessary one, following inevitably and necessarily, as we have seen, from that of the varieties of Sound.

Next let us suppose that we are drowned in a sea of uniform temperature i.e., the simplest and lightest form of Feel which has already ceased to be perceived as an object, and that there are as yet no other objects but the already produced varieties of Sound—as would be the case under the circumstances we are considering. Then, let us further suppose that there arises a variety in this uniform and homogeneous temperature and we begin to feel more hot or more cold, a freezing or burning sensation. What would be the necessarily and inevitably consequent experience and how should we feel these varieties in temperature most? It would be, as but a little reflection will show, the experience of movements like that of air or the aerial atmosphere; that is, of what may be called aeriality—technically Vayu (lit. the air). There need not necessarily be any other experience whatsoever for the realisation of variations in temperature but that of aeriality or movements, like the air-currents, although there may be, as later on there will be, other experiences as well, accompanying that of variations in temperature. And being a necessary accompaniment of this nature, the experience of aeriality is said to be produced from the experience of variations in that of Feel-as-such.

Or, speaking technically, from the Variations produced in the Sparsha-Tanmatra, there comes into manifestation, Vayu i.e. Aeriality.

Let us again suppose we are face to face with an all-enveloping mass of Colour-as-such which, for reasons mentioned above, has already ceased to form an object of experience, although there may be present in the experience at this stage, the already produced perceptions of the variations of Sound and Feel and of Akasha and Vayu, Then, let us imagine there suddenly arises the experience of a variety of Colours. What would be the necessarily consequent experience when this is realised? The obvious answer would perhaps be that it is the experience of Form and Shape (Rupa) without which no shade of Colour is ever perceived. But a little reflection will show that it would really be the experience of a something, some power or energy, which builds up, transforms or destroys such forms. For, when there suddenly arises a patch of Colour in the vacancy of the horizon, it no doubt is seen as a shape or form of some sort. But this form ' may be said to be the same thing as the Colour, because without it colour, as thus perceived at the time, has hardly any meaning. And therefore the perception of colours of this type means really the same thing as the perception of forms; so much so that, instead of saying that there arose the experience of a variety of Colours one might as well say there arose the experience of a variety of forms.⁵ The experience of form, cannot be called a consequent experience in the same way ag Akasha is the consequent experience of a variety of Sounds, or Aeriality is that of the variation in Feel. It is rather an identical experience—the experience of a particular colour being the same as that of a particular form. The experience which is really a consequent one in this case, is that of a something, some power or energy which produces, transforms, or destroys these forms: for, as the colour-forms are experienced in succession, they are perceived as coming into existence, changing and disappearing, giving rise to the experience of a something which so produces, changes or destroys them—burns them into, or out of, a shape or shapes. This burning something, burning and flaring up into various shapes and forms or burning them out, is technically called Agni in Sanskrit (lit. Fire), by which term, however, we must not understand anything—and it cannot be too strongly emphasised, in view of the numerous and gross misconceptions that have been formed of its meaning—but this energy or power of which the only function is combustion or chemical action (Jvalana or Paka) which again means simply building, producing or reproducing and destroying shapes, bringing shapes and forms into existence from what is formless, and changing one form into some other or many others and vice-versa.

Thus it is, that from the experience of variety in Colour-as-such, there arises the experience of the form-builder (the formative agency or simply Formativity). Or speaking technically, from variety produced in the Rupa-tanmatra, there comes into manifestation Agni, the form-building, (and therefore the form-destroying) Principle, or Formativity.

Next, let us imagine that our experience of Flavour-as-such, which has already ceased to be an object of perception, changes into that of a variety of Flavours. The necessarily consequent experience to this would be, as can be easily seen, that of 'moisture', i.e., liquidity; for what is tasted, i.e., different flavours, is always found accompanied with the feeling of moisture without there necessarily being any other sensation accompanying it.

This need not be regarded as a strange idea on account of the fact that, unlike the senses of sight, hearing and feeling-by-touch, the sense of tasting plays such a small and unimportant part, and that it seems simply absurd to assert that, from this comparatively unimportant experience of tasting a variety of flavours, there is produced so vast a result as the experience of liquidity, which forms so great a portion of the physical world.

For, we must not forget, that at the stage we are considering, there is as yet no physical body of the soul and the senses are therefore not localised as they are in the body. The sense of taste as well as that of smell, are, therefore, like all other senses, as it were all over the Soul, instead of being confined to a small portion of the extended organism such as the palate or the nose in the body. Besides, as we should not forget either, the soul itself, in these stages, is merely an Anu a non-spatial point. These sensations therefore of taste and smell are at this stage as all filling and overwhelming as any other.

It is this idea which is technically put when it is said:

"From variety produced in the Rasa-tanmatra Principle of Stability and Solidity, or, which is the same thing, the stable or solid thing.“

There is nothing absurd in this statement; for, as said above and as may be repeated once more, the sensation of the varieties of smell, as experienced by the Soul at this stage is, as it were, all over it and is as all-filling and overwhelming as any other.

Thus from the experiences of variety in the five general objects of perception there are produced also the five important factors or principles of experience, namely, Akasha or Etheriality, Vayu or Aeriality, Agni or Formativity, Ap or Liquidity and Prithivi or Solidity; in other words, the ingredients of what we call the physical world (in so far as it is purely physical and actually experienced),—ingredients which are collectively called in Sanskrit by the technical name of the Bhutas (lit. What have been, or happened, or the ever 'Have beens', and never 'Ares', or the Ghosts, namely, of the Real. ⁶

The only thing which may perhaps be considered as not included in the above general facts is what is spoken of as Vitality or Life—that which builds up organic forms—which also is found manifest in the physical world. It is, however, not really omitted; for as we have seen that, from the highest and ultimate point of view, Prana or vitality is only the Shiva Tattva which serves as the inner life of the universe as the Shakti, which produces all the diversity of forms. At a lower stage, as we have also seen, it is Ahankara which holds together organic forms and is therefore what appears as vitality or Prana in the physical world. Leaving aside, then, the consideration of vitality or Prana as a separate factor, which besides is hardly a physical element, we have in the ten classes of ingredients named above every thing of which the physical universe consists. For the latter, as actually experienced, is, as can be easily shown, only an aggregate—in countless combinations and permutations—of

1. Varieties of Sound,
2. Varieties of Feel,
3. do of Colour (i.e., Form),
4. do of Flavour, and
5. do of Odour,

—things which are collectively called in Sanskrit the Vishayas, i.e., 'objects' or what 'lies variously in front' and perceived as concomitant with, or, which is the same thing, as inherent in, the principles of the Akasha, Vayu, Agni, Ap and Prithivi, that is, of Etheriality, Aeriality, Formativity,⁷ Liquidity and Solidity.

There is absolutely nothing else which is an ingredient of the physical universe, as actually experienced, which is not to be found included in these.

And they come into manifestation from the Tanmatras when varieties are produced in the latter.

And if the Physical Universe consists of these factors, the other factors, explained above, are all of which the Super-physical Universe is made.

These factors, as said above, are called the Tattvas, i.e., the Principles into which the endless variety of things we experience, or can ever experience, can be reduced. They, in all possible combinations and permutations, make up the universe, physical and super-physical, that is, all actual or possible experience.

The Tattvas may, for the sake of convenience, be recapitulated here in the reverse order as follows:—

I. The five physical orders called the Bhutas, namely, the principles of the experience of

1 … … a. Solidity (Prithivi),
2 … … b. Liquidity (Ap),
3 … … c. Formativity (Agni),
4 … … d. Aeriality (Vayu), and
5 … … e. Etheriality (Akasha).

II. The five Powers or Capacities of activity called the Karmendriyas, namely, the capacities of

6 … … a. Resting and enjoying passively or re-creating (Upasthendriya),
7 … … b. Rejecting and discarding (Payvindriya),
8 … … c. Locomotion (Padendriya),
9 … … d. Handling, i.e., operating as with the hands (Hastendriya), and
10 ... … e. Voicing or expressing (Vagindriya).

Ill. The five Generals of the Specific Sense-perceptions called the five Tanmatras, namely,

11 … … a. Odour-os-such (Gandba-Tanmatra),
12 … … b. Flavour-as-such (Rasa- do),
13 … … c. Colour-as-such (Rupa- do),
14 … … d. Feel-as-such (Sparsha- do), and
15 … … e. Sound-as-such (Shabda- do).

IV. The five powers or Capacities of Perception called the five Buddhindriyas or Jnanendriyas, namely, the powers of

16 … … a. Smelling (Ghranendriya,),
17 … … b. Tasting (Rasanendriya),
18 … … c. Seeing (Darshanendriya),
19 … … d. Feeling-by-touch (Sparshendriya), and
20 … … e. Hearing (Shravanendriya).

V. The three psychical or mental factors of

21 … … a. Manas
22 … … b. Ahankara, and
23 … … c. Buddhi.

VI. 24. The Prakriti—that is, the general source of all the above, consisting of the three Affective Features of Sattva, Rajas, and Tamas, held in mutual neutralisation or equipoise.

Vll. 25. The Purusha or the limited individual Spirit with its fivefold envelopment i.e., the five Kanchukas, viz:

26 … … a. Kala,
27 … … b. Vidya,
28 … … c. Raga,
29 … … d. Kala, and
30 … … e. Niyati.

VIII. 31. Maya—the producer of the Purusha and Prakriti.

IX. The three orders of the 'Pure Way' viz:

32 … … a. Sad-Vidya or Shuddha-Vidya,
33 … … b. Aishvarya or Ishvara Tattva, and
34 … … c. Sadakhya or Sada-Shiva Tattva.

X. The ever-existent, mutually inseparable realities of

35 … … a. the Shakti Tattva, and
36 … … b. the Shiva Tattva.

Or, in the order of what may be called, for want of a better phrase, their relative distances from the Ultimate Reality, that is, Parama Shiva, they are as follows:—
I. The ever-existing, mutually inseparable realities of

1 … … a. the Shiva Tattva, and
2 ... … b. the Shakti Tattva.

II. The three Orders of the, ‘Pure Way', viz:

3 … … a. Sadakhya or Sada-Shiva Tattva,
4 … … b. Aishvarya or Ishvara Tattva, and
5 … … c. Sad-Vidya or Shuddha-Vidya.

III. 6. Maya —the producer of the Purusha and Prakriti.

IV. 7. The Purusha or the limited individual Spirit with its fivefold envelopment, or the five Kanchukas. viz:

8 … … a. Niyati,
9 … … b. Kala,
10 … … c. Raga,
11 … … d. Vidya, and
12 … … e. Kala.

V. 13. The Prakriti—that is, the general source of all the five Kanchukas, as well as of all that follows,—consisting of the three Affective Features of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas, held in mutual neutralisation or equipoise.

VI. The three, psychical or mental factors of

14 … … a. Buddhi,
15 … … b. Ahankara, and
16 … … c. Manas.

VII. The five Powers or Capacities of perception called the five Buddhindriyas or Jnanendriyas, namely, the powers of

17 … … a. Hearing (Shravtulendriya),
18 … … b. Feeling-by-torch (Sparshendriya),
19 … … c. Seeing (Darshanendriya),
20 … … d. Tasting (Rasanendriya), and
21 … … e. Smelling (Ghrallendriya).

VIII. The five Generals of the Specific Sense-perceptions called the five Tanmatras, namely,

22 … … a. Sound-as-such (Shabda-Tanmatra),
23 … … b. Feel-as-such (Sparsha- do),
24 … … c. Colour-as-Such (Rupa- do),
25 … … d. Flavour-as-such (Rasa- do), and
26 … … e. Odour-as-such (Gandha- do).

IX. The five Powers or Capacities of activity called the Karmendriyas, namely, the capacities of

27 … … a. Voicing or Expressing (Vagindriya),
28 … … b. Handling i.e. operating as with the hands (Hastendriya),
29 … … c. Locomotion (Padendriya),
30 … … d. Rejecting and discarding (Payv-Indriya), and
31 … … e. Resting and enjoying passively or re-creating (Upasthendriya).

X. The five physical orders called the Bhutas, namely, the principles of the experiences of

32 … … a. Etheriality (Akasha),
33 … … b. Aeriality (Vayu),
34 … ...c. Formativity (Agni),
35 ... ...d. Liquidity (Ap), and
36 … … e. Solidity (Prithivi).

Above and beyond them all, that is to say, transcending them all, and yet pervading and permeating them all, there stands Parama Shiva or Para Samvit, the supremest Experience, beyond and unaffected by all time, space and relation, but yet alone making the existence of the manifested universe, constituted of the Tattvas, possible.

And this is so because the process whereby all this is produced is, as said at the very outset, not, one of actual division, but one of logical thinking or experiencing out—that process of thought of which each successive step pre-supposes and involves the whole of the preceding ones, which also remain intact, though, it may be, quite in the back-ground.

And, therefore, what is true of Parama Shiva in this respect, is also true of every one of the Tattvas mentioned above in regard to the Tattvas which follow from it immediately or through the intervention of other Tattvas—a point which cannot be too strongly emphasised. That is to say, as Parama Shiva pervades all the Tattvas and the whole of the Universe, and yet remains for ever the same and unaffected by them, as it were standing beyond them all, transcending them all, so does each Tattva in regard to all the other Tattvas which succeed it. It pervades and permeates them all and yet remains ever the same—has still an existence of its own as it ever had, even after the Tattvas as its immediate and mediate products have come into manifestation.

But, as each preceding (i.e. previously manifested or experienced) Tattva, while remaining what it is, still permeates and pervades all the succeeding ones, it happens that there is present in each successive Tattva the whole of the preceding ones also. Each successively manifesting Tattva thus lives, moves, and has its entire being, as may be truly said, in the ones preceding it. That is to say, wherever there exists a lower Tattva, i.e., a Tattva of greater restriction (being produced from one of a wider scope), there are also all the other and higher ones, in full manifestation and holding the lower, as it were, in their bosom, they existing as so many concentric circles of gradually decreasing extent—or, from another point of view, standing, like a number of mathematical points all occupying the same position and yet somehow maintaining their individuality, in the heart of the lower as its very life and soul. Thus the whole range of Tattvas are present in their entirety even in the lowest of them. In other words, the lowest Tattva involves all the higher ones as each successively lower Tattva involves the ones which precede it.

The process of the production of the Tattvas may, therefore, be spoken of, as it indeed is, as one of involution, the Reality or Parama Shiva being more and more involved, as, so to speak, it descends towards the stage at which it appears as the physical.

It is also a process—besides being one of logical experiencing out and of Involution—of differentiation, or rather, multiplication. For the Ultimate Reality, by repeatedly involving itself, produces not a single limited unit merely, but a multiplicity of such units. For, it will be remembered, that out of the thirty-six Tattvas enumerated in the list given above, the first mentioned two main groups, i.e., down to Sad Vidya (no. 5), are universal. Maya also is Universal in a sense; for there is only one and the same Maya for all individual Purushas, even though they may not, indeed do not, realise her as one and identical, in the same way as the Experiencers of the Pure Order realise their respective objects of experience in a given stage as one and identical in every respect.⁸ But from the Purusha—with its fivefold Kanchuka or veil—downwards, the Tattvas are all limitedly individual; that is to say, they are not only many but mutually exclusive. Thus the product in the Purusha-Prakriti stage is not a Universal all-comprehending something or somethings but an infinite number of Purusha-Prakriti twins, which limit each other and are mutually exclusive. All the other products also, following the pairs, are similarly many, limited and mutually exclusive. Thus, there are produced, not a single triad of Buddhi, Ahankara and Manas, a single decad of Indriyas, and single quintad each of the Tanmatras and Bhutas, but an endless number of triads, decade and quintads—as many as there are Purusha-Prakriti twins—which ultimately become involved in and as these subsequently produced Tattvas.

Finally, this countless number of individual, limited and mutually exclusive Buddhis, Ahankaras and Manases, of the decads of the Indriyas and of the quintads of the Tanmatras and Bhutas, are each an Anu, as the limited Purusha itself is an Anu, a non-spatial point, almost like a mathematical point. As each becomes more and more involved and ultimately results in the Bhutas, and among them again in the Prithivi Tattva, what he really becomes—even though and while he remains what he as a Purusha is and what he as each of the intermediate links has become—is an Anu, namely an Anu of Prithivi.⁹ Thus it happens that what are produced by this process of logical experiencing out and of involution and its final results in the direction of involution and differentiation,—are an infinite number of Anus of the various classes of Tattvas, from the Purusha, wrapped in his fivefold Kanchuka, down to the Prithivi. And as they thus come into manifestation, they act and react on one another, producing a still further complication, of which the real nature will be considered a little later on. For our present purpose it will be enough just to note this fact, that, coming out into existence as so many classes of Anus, the Tattvas interact between themselves, and are each of them, for all practical purposes, so many separate and mutually exclusive limited entities.

This, however, is only one aspect of their existence—the distributive aspect. They have a collective existence as well and we have to note that fact too. In the collective aspect of their existence, each class of Tattvas forms a single unit, having an existence and behaviour of its own which are other than those of the distributive, i.e. separate, Tattvas of the class.

The idea may be illustrated by the example of the cells of a living body. There the cells have each an individual life and existence of its own, which for all practical purposes is independent of others and is self-contained. Yet they together form a single unit, a single living organism, which also has a definite life and existence of its own, not as a mere collection of many units, but as a single Unity, even though it is formed collectively by the aggregate of the individual cells.

These collective entities are termed the Lords of the Tattvas, the Tattveshas or their Presiding Deities, Adhishthatri Devatas.

The more important of these collective entities or the Tattveshas are the following: —

1. Shri-kantha or Shri-Kantha-natha in the Prakriti Tattva; and
2. Brahma in the region of the Physical Tattvas.¹⁰

Thus there are produced the Tattvas or the general factors, or principles constituting the Universe of experience, down to the world of solids, and thus do they exist as Anus as distributive entities, but as mighty beings as collective wholes. And all this is done by a process of logical Experiencing out and of Involution and differentiation.

And once this is done, the Divine Shakti, i.e., the Universal Energy takes, as it were, an upward turn and begins to evolve and re-unite what has thus been involved and differentiated.

Before, however, going into a consideration, however briefly, of this question of Evolution, and leaving the subject of the Tattvas, let me just point out two very important facts in regard to them.

The first is that the Tattvas, as recognised by the Trika, are not mere philosophical abstractions which neither have any practical bearing on life nor are capable of realisation by most human beings. Their rational comprehension is no doubt not possible without philosophical reflection. But there is not one of us,—not even the least reflecting and most incapable of forming any intellectual comprehension of the Tattvas—who is not actually using them every moment of his life (even though he may not be aware of the fact), and is therefore not experiencing them in a way. Indeed, one is forced to experience them, however dimly and unthinkingly, inasmuch as they all stand as the permanent background and ever-present pre-suppositions of experience at every moment of one's life.

For instance, as I am writing this and occasionally looking out of my window, I am perceiving a brick building at a distance and a tall and fine date-palm tree waving in the wind, its leaves sounding pleasantly as they are moving. Now in this very perception even of these trivial things, I am experiencing, however dimly and implicitly, the existence of the whole series of the Tattvas. I am experiencing the Prithivi, AP, Agni and Vayu as Tattvas, in so far as I am thinking of the objects before me as solid, more or less moist—the tree having more moisture, i.e., liquidity in it than the dry bricks of the building,—of both the objects as having forms and of the one as moving with a movement which I am inferring is aerial by having previous experience of aeriality, and of the other as not affected much by it.

I am experiencing Akasha as I am realising they are being perceived in a direction or directions, and as occupying and filling a certain area, of space, while there is 'Nothing' about them.

The existence of the Tanmatras is being realised, however vaguely and subconsciously, every moment I am referring the particular varieties of the Odour and Flavour (as I am thinking of the delicious fragrance and sweet taste of the fruit and of the sugary juice of the date palm, and am comparing them with the poverty of these in the building), of the Colour and Feel (the cool of the date leaves and their shade, however scanty, and the heat of the building as it can grow hot in the summer months in these parts of India¹¹) and of the particular Sounds the waving date branches are making—I am referring these varieties to the general conceptions of Odour-, Flavour-, Colour-, Feel- and Sound-as-such, this reference alone enabling me to think of them as particulars, namely, the particulars of the Generals which the Tanmatras are.

The Indriyas are being realised as I am perceiving the tree and the building by means of the special senses of sight and hearing (the sound of the leaves) and symbolically speaking about them (for writing is nothing else) and am handling this pen.

I am experiencing the existence of Manas as a Tattva when I am selecting out of, i.e. to the exclusion of, a whole mass of other sensations, only a certain group, and am, with this selected group, picturing these objects, i.e. imaging them, in my mind. I am experiencing the Manas also when I am turning my attention now to the building and then to the tree and then again to the paper I am putting down my thoughts upon. Manas is being experienced also in the fact that the sense-perception of colours—the only one of the kind, excepting the occasional sound of the leaves, I am at present having of the tree and the building—is passing constantly away like the flow of a river and what I am really having, at every conceivable fraction of a second, is a fresh sensation of which the duration is far, far shorter than the sensation of the prick of a needle, and that, while this is what I am really receiving, I am still making, of what is only a series of successive points of sensation-pricks, a continuous whole, and realising it as a picture spread out in a space. (This however is not an actual experience but the result of psychological analysis).

The existence of Ahankara is being recognised in the fact that, while I am actually perceiving only a colour-form spread out in space, I am substantiating this form by associating with it my own experiences of Solidity, Moisture, Odour, Flavour and the like—things which I am not now actually perceiving and which I am drawing from the store-house of my own possessions of previous experience: For what else is Ahankara but the totality of these possessions which alone give me my individual character as a particular person born and brought up in a particular country and surroundings?

The presence of the Buddhi is being realised in the fact that I am referring to a general class the picture, which is thus substantiated by associating with it other and previous of my own; and as I am thinking of the one that it is a tree and of the other that it is a building, I am able to do so only because there already exists somewhere in the background of my being and Consciousness such an experience of the Generals. And Buddhi being none other than this experience of the Generals, I am realising Buddhi as I am making such a reference.

The existence of Prakriti is being recognised in the fact that while the perception of the tree with its waving leaves and branches against the lovely blue sky induces in me a feeling of pleasure, I am thinking how it would have induced me, if I were a child, to be so active as to climb up its scaly trunk for the fruit, and thus make me suffer all that painful feeling which such a procedure might involve; and how also the same very innocent looking tree could have been the occasion of throwing me, as such a fruit gathering child, into a state of feeling stunned and senseless, if, while plucking the fruit, I were struck heavily on the head by one of its waving branches or were stung by a swarm of hornets which not unoften build their nests on such trees. In other words, I am realising Prakriti as I am at present feeling pleasure at the sight of the tree—which feeling as I am realising it, is, as it were, welling up in me from a deeply buried source in my nature, and am also thinking how there are in me the potentialities of a moving pain and of a stunning feeling leading to immovability; for Prakriti is no other than the Potentiality of these in me.

The Purusha is being recognised in what realises itself, however dimly, as the reality which, remaining motionless and changeless, and as it were, standing still somewhere in the background of my being, witnesses, so to say from behind, the operations, i.e. the movements of the Senses, Manas, Ahankara and Buddhi as the tree is being perceived, and experiences the play of the Prakriti as the feelings, pleasant, painful or otherwise, which the perception of the tree is producing in me.

The Kanchukas of the Purusha are recognised in the fact that the Purusha, that is, myself as the ' witness ', feels itself limited as regards: —

a. Simultaneity of perception (Kala)—the Purusha having such perception in succession only, now of the tree, now of the building and then again of the paper, desk and so on in the room in which I am writing;
b. Freedom as to where, how and what the should or should not experience, so that it, is bound by certain restrictions of condition, of occasion, locality, cause and sequencer—it being obliged to perceive only the tree and the building here on this occasion as I am seated here and to be affected by them in a particular way or ways, so long there exist certain conditions (Niyati);
c. Interest, so that it can keep itself engaged in only a few things at a time (Raga)—letting go its interest from the tree when engaged in writing down these thoughts, and being obliged to forego the latter task when contemplating about the tree and the building;
d. The Sphere of its consciousness i.e., its purview, so that it can have its perceptions (i.e. visions of the ideas or images as they are induced, or, as it is said, 'reflected', in the Buddhi) only within a restricted area (Vidya)—it has perceptions of only what lies within a limited horizon, such as the date palm, the building, the walls of the room and a few other things; and
e. Power of accomplishment, so that it could not, even if it would, make or unmake the tree or the building as it is composing these lines as it pleases. (Kala)

Maya is being realised in the fact that, while what are being perceived as the tree and the building are really part and parcel of me, my own sensations and imaginations, substantiated by materials from my own Ahankara and pictured against the background of my own Buddhi—which are really and finally but an aspect of myself—they are still being perceived as separated from me and from each other, one placed here and another there, “measured out” away from me and from each other.

So far, it is evident, the realisation of the Tattvas is direct in every individual human being, in the sense that they, coming into play, weave themselves into the experience which individuals, as limited and mutually exclusive beings, have in any given situation or sphere of existence. The realisation of the remaining Tattvas, from the Sad-Vidya upwards to the Shiva Tattva, and beyond them still, the realisation of Parama Shiva, is not so direct. They are realised ordinarily, rather, as the most general and universal principles and presuppositions of experience, in such a way that these principles, when taken by themselves, would give to experience no individual colouring whatever, so as to make one set of experiences, in any given stage, in any way whatsoever different in content from any other set. That this is so will be quite evident if we have fully understood what has been said before regarding the nature of these higher Tattvas and of Parama Shiva. For it will then be seen that of these Tattvas:—

i. The Sad-Vidya is really only a principle of correlation between the Experiencer and the Experienced as a universal whole—a something which holds these two aspects of Experience, as it were, in perfect equilibrium in which both are seen in equal prominence. Such a principle, it is obvious, is one and the same for all, but not limitedly individual in the same way as is, for instance, the Vidya, (one of the Kanchukas) or the Buddhi. My Vidya or Buddhi is not the same as yours. For my Vidya or Buddhi as an individual property enables me to have a set of experiences which is different in content from yours, and which as such excludes, to some extent at least, what is not mine but is yours. This could not be possible if your Vidya or Buddhi were exactly one and the same thing with mine. For then there would be no reason why your Vidya or Buddhi should give you an experience from any part of which I should be shut out by my Vidya or Buddhi.

This is, however, not the case with the Sad-Vidya which, as a general, i.e. universal principle, only shows itself as the power which equally correlates both you and me as experiencers to what we both have as the experienced. Your relation, as the experiencer, to your own set of the experienced is no greater or no less—no more or no less strong—than my relation, in the same kind of capacity, to my set of the experienced. What therefore establishes this relation, both between you and your 'experienced' and between me and my 'experienced,' is really the some general or common thing or principle.

This being the nature of the principle of correlation between the Experiencer and the Experienced, i.e. of the Sad-Vidya, it is very unlike the Vidya or Buddhi which in you gives to you, let us say, a wider field of experience than the one in me does to me.

Similarly:—

ii. The Aishvara is really the Principle of general objectivity in which the subjectivity, or the 'I', is practically merged, i.e., with which it is identified. And this general and universal principle of objectivity is the same in all, unlike the specific groups of objectivity which you and I, as limited and mutually exclusive individuals, experience;

iii. The Sadakhya is the general principle of Being without any individual colouring;

iv. The Shakti-Tattva is the general principle of Negation; and

v: The Shiva-Tattva is the general principle of the pure 'I', from which not only all individual colouring and all objectivity has been eliminated, but in which the very notion of Being, as implied in 'am', has been suppressed; while

vi. Parama Shiva is that Reality which is the most Supremely Universal, and but for which neither the Negation of the 'Am' and of all objectivity, nor their subsequent emergence into view can have any meaning. Leave out Parama Shiva as the most Supremely Universal Reality, and there would be no more meaning in the appearance and existence of the Tattvas than there would be in the evolution and existence of the 'ions', and then of the atoms, as recognised by Western Chemistry, if the existence of the Universal Ether were denied. It has been made clear, I hope, that the appearance and existence of the Tattvas are as necessary for experience, (or, which is the same thing, for the existence of the Universe) as the 'ions' and 'atoms' are for the existence of things physical; and the same logic which demands the recognition of a Universal Ether in the case of the latter demands also the recognition of Parama Shiva in regard to the former.

And if we understand in this way the true nature of the Tattvas from the Sad-Vidya upwards and of Parama Shiva, we shall also see how even these Tattvas and Parama Shiva are realised in a way (though not certainly like the other Tattvas) in every experience, however trival. For then we see how:—

The presence of the Sad-Vidya is to be recognised in the fact that there is a correlation between the perception of the tree and the building on the one hand and myself on the other—the correlation of subject and object, of the Experiencer on the one hand, and, of the Experienced on the other, as distinguished from all means of experience such as the Senses, Manas, Ahankara and the Buddhi. There is no reason why or how this correlation between two such diametrically opposed groups should ever be established, if there were not in me something of which the Experiencer in me on the one hand and the Experienced, on the other, are the two factors or sides which are already thus united as one correlated whole and yet are distinct, i.e. differentiated, facts so as to be recognised as two. This something is the Sad-Vidya.

The presence of the Aishvara is similarly to be recognized in that of which these two are the aspects so correlated by the Sad-Vidya and in which the aspects must already exist as an undifferentiated whole, the one i.e. the subject, the 'I', being merged into the other.

The Sadakhya is also there inasmuch as, while I am perceiving the tree and the building, I am not only realising, however subconsciously, that I am myself a 'Being', a changeless reality which always is, but I am also thinking of the tree and the building, as somethings which are— that is, I am thinking that there is in them a something which is real and changeless or indestructible. This idea of Being which I am associating with the perceptions of the tree and the building can never be got anywhere in the world of sense perception, where all things are fleeting and constantly changing, and therefore is not born of an experience which is to be found stored up in the Ahankara. It is therefore already and always existing in me as the notion of being, that is as one of the most general of all conceptions; and as such constitutes the Sadakhya.

Then again there can be recognised the presence of both the Shakti and Shiva Tattvas in me—rather my existence in them—inasmuch as there is and must be the experience of the pure ‘I,' apart even from the experience of the simple 'I am', i.e., of Being. For the experience of ‘I am' or of Being is constantly presupposing the experience of the pure 'I', without, the relation which is implied in the copula 'am.' But it could not be thus presupposed if it were not already there in me. And because the Shiva Tattva is none other than this pure 'I', which is without even a thought of an ‘am', therefore every moment the pure 'I' is being presupposed, the Shiva Tattva is being realised, however dimly and vaguely, in experience. And if there is the presence of the pure 'I' in me—or rather of the 'me' in the pure 'I'—there must exist in me also that which 'Negates' the experience of the 'am'. And it is this Negating Power which is the Shakti Tattva in me.

Finally, because the pure 'I' of the Shiva Tattva and the Negative Power of the Shakti Tattva cannot but be the two aspects of one and the same thing,—from which they can never be dissociated, any more than they can be dissociated from each other, each being related to the other as Power to the Powerful,—therefore that Something of which they are but aspects must also be there in me, i.e., behind and permeating all that I experience as my personal being, as well as all the objects and means of experience. It is this Something which is the Parama Shiva in me.

Thus it is that all the Tattvas are not only always present in me, and 'I', as a limited person, am present in the higher ones of them, but every one of them is actively participating in every experience I am having—even such a trivial experience as the perception of a tree and a building which I am looking at out of my window.

The Tattvas are, therefore, being realised, most dimly no doubt, at every moment of our lives, even by those of us who can hardly form any clear and rational idea of them.

They are being realised, that is, as they are acting as the guiding and determining principles and essential factors of our every-day experience; namely in the following way:—

1. The Prithivi, AP, Agni, Vayu and the Akasha Tattvas are acting as the general experiences, respectively, of all Solidity, Liquidity, the merely chemical form-building Energy, Aeriality and Directions or empty Space; while the Tanmatras are acting as the general experiences of Odour, Flavour, Colour, Feel-by-touch and Sound as such:—these two groups serving constantly as the principles and essential elements of all our purely physical experiences.

2. The ten Indriyas—the five powers of Perception and five powers of Action—are acting as the principles and essential elements of all our sense organs and active muscles of the body.

3. The Manas, Ahankura and Buddhi are working as the principles and essential means of all the mental and psychical experiences on the part of the individual soul.

4. The Prakriti is manifesting herself as that principle in us which, as the deeply buried and hidden source and fountain of all feelings—pleasure, pain and callousness—is constantly welling up in one or other of these forms as the individual soul is having its physical and psychical experiences.

5. the Purusha is acting as that principle in our daily life which—standing as it were in the back-ground of the Indriyas, Manas, Ahankara and Buddhi and face to face with Prakriti—realises itself as the subject which is being affected by these experiences, i.e., which is either enjoying them, suffering from them or is being so struck down by them as to become insensible; in other words, in other words which is being affected by these three types of the modifications of the Prakriti.

6. The five Kanchukas are acting constantly as those limitations in us which characterise the soul as an individual and limited entity, and which are inseparably sticking to it, all the time it is having experiences as a limited subject, and without which it can, as such a limited subject, never have any experiences whatsoever.¹²

7. Maya is being realised inasmuch as she acts as the principle which imposes these limitations on what is really and essentially unlimited by either Time, Space or Form, and as that which makes one realise a separation between himself as the Experiencer and the objects which are experienced and thus serves as the cause of experiencing a plurality where there is really none.

8. The Sad-Vidya is acting as the Principle of correlation between the Experiencer and the Experienced, which would otherwise not only remain unconnected with each other, but there would be no reason whatsoever why what are mutually so different in nature, as are the Experiencer and the Experienced, should be able to affect each other at all; or there should be any knowledge and experience at all.

9. The Aishavara is acting, if such a term can at all be used in connection with this and the following Tattvas, as the Principle in which the Experiencer and the Experienced, when so correlated, stand unified; for what are thus correlated, like the two poles of a magnet, imply an essence of which, as a unity, they are the poles.

10. The Sadakhya is serving as the principle which enables any of us to experience, i.e., to feel, think and speak of, anything, including oneself as an individual, as a Being.

11. The Shiva Tattva is showing itself as the Principle of the pure 'I' as distinguished from the personal Ego of the Ahankara; while the Shakti Tattva is being realised as the Principle which divests the Shiva Tattva of everything else, so that it can become the principle of the pure ‘I'.

12. While these Tattvas are thus constantly acting and showing themselves as the Principles and essential and general factors of our daily and hourly experiences—which are but the various combinations of these principles and elements—the Parama Shiva stands behind and beyond them all, as well as comprising them all, as their one and supremest Synthesis.

The second fact which I should point out about the Tattvas, before leaving them to consider other topics of the Trika, is that, if the Tattvas and Parama Shiva are thus always with every one of us, nay if we are every one of us in them and made up of them, and if, on that account, we are constantly realising them, though only in a dim and vaguely abstract fashion, without ever, or hardly ever, being able to imagine their real grandeur and sway, this is not the only way in which they are realised, or that there is no other means by which their full sway and true grandeur can be experienced. On the contrary, there certainly is such a means. This means consists in that method of self-culture, mental, moral, spiritual and even physical, which constitutes what is called Yoga, in the true sense of the term, and which enables a Spirit to shake off the very limitations that make of the real Experiencer such a limited entity and to rise to those regions of experience which the highest Tattvas are. Those who train themselves by this method of Yoga, and who are therefore called Yogins, can and do realise the Tattvas by direct experience as clearly as, indeed more clearly than, we perceive the physical and sense-objects; and as they thus realise them, they experience the Tattvas in their real nature and grandeur which we, considering them but rationally, can only dimly guess, arguing in our minds, how each successively higher synthesis (as the higher Tattvas are of the lower ones, and as a Tattva is of the particulars of a class) must be ever increasingly more, and not less, grand and glorious, than the physical universe in all its grandeur can ever be, and how it must be far otherwise than the bare abstraction which a Tattva, when merely inferentially conceited as a principle, appears to be.

Indeed it is the Hindu Philosopher emphatically declares,—by means of Yoga-experience, that the Tattvas and their true nature first came to be known and taught; and not by mere logical inference. Logic and reasoning were applied to them only after they had thus been realised by direct experience, in order just to show how their existence and reality can also be rationally established, and how they need not and should not be taken as mere matters of faith or revelation.

However that may be, the point which should be noted here is that the Tattvas are regarded not as mere philosophical abstractions and logical inferences from the ordinary sensible and physical experiences of human beings as limited individuals. They are, on the contrary, realities which can, while as the principles of our daily experience they are present with us at every moment of our lives, be realised in all their grandeur and glory, in and as direct and positive experience, by that self-unfoldment to which true Yoga leads.

While the Tattvas, as both the guiding principles and the constitutive factors in the daily lives of every one of us, are thus participating in every experience, however trivial, which every one of us is having at every moment of his life, they are not, from the Purusha with his five Kanchukas downward, the same for every limited and individual experiencer—a fact which has been pointed out before and which may be repeated here. They are, on the contrary, different for different experiencing entities, each experiencing entity having, so to say, its own set or series of the Tattvas. They are no doubt alike, so that one set may be spoken of as the same as any other set, in the same sense that the repeated performances of a dramatic piece, i.e., a set or series of dramatic actions, songs, and the like, by a particular dramatic company, are spoken of as the same performance, although as a matter of fact they are but performances which are really all different, although quite alike one to the other. In the case of the Tattvas, both as the principles of experience on the part of the different limited souls as well as such experiences themselves on their part, considered as so many separate but similar performances, the one performing company, to borrow simile from the Sankhya, is Maya.¹³ It is one and the same Maya which, while she ever remains what she is, gives for each limited a separate performance. Each such performance given separately for each Purusha constitutes both the principles of experiences and the experiences themselves, on the part of that particular Purusha, because the experiences are only the various combinations, permutations and differentiations, of the principles. Such a performance constitutes, in other words, what really and literally is the Universe of that particular as a limited being. And because these separate performances for separate Purushas are, under similar circumstances, so much alike—given as they are by the same company of Maya—they are mistaken for a single performance. Thus it comes to be believed that it is a single universe that we all, as limited beings, experience, while as a matter of fact everyone of us has a separate and distinct universe of his own.¹⁴

And if with all the obvious and well-known differences in the contents of our several experiences as mutually exclusive and limited beings, we can still think and speak as the same of these contents, i.e., of our various universes, which are none other than these several sets of the contents of the several experiences on our part, it goes without saying that the experiencers of the Pure Order experience a universe which is quite identical. For as we shall see later, there too is, in a sense, a plurality of experiencers, though there is absolutely no difference in the contents of their several experiences.

Even then, what they experience severally is not one but several, though absolutely identical, performances—in the sense that these are absolutely alike in all and every respect. And the one performing company in their case is the Divine Shakti as such—She who holds in her womb the whole of the Universe, both of the Pure and Impure Orders, as an eternal potentiality, and goes on reproducing it eternally and severally for the several experiencers, so long as there are any in manifestation.

Bub although the Tattvas and Universes as experiences are thus different for different experiencers, they in each stage yet form a unity—have, as said above, a collective existence which behaves as, and constitutes, as a matter of fact, a single entity—as ultimately the whole is a single unity in and as Parama Shiva. That is to say, the Tattvas have both a distributive and a collective existence—the former as many units and the latter as a single unit.

And as the experiencers have a collective existence, their 'universes' also have similar existences forming the experiences of the collective entities at the different stages. But while such distributively and collectively existing universes must be very different in the region where limited beings have distributive experiences, there can be hardly any such differences where the experience is not limited but universal, being constituted of every thing there is to experience at any given stage, and without any restriction as to duration and extension, i.e., is timeless and spaceless.

Footnotes

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE