Psychology And Vedanta - Part 2

An Interview With Swami Dayananda Saraswati

Q. Can you describe the relationship between the self and the mind and define these terms as they are understood in Vedanta?

Swamiji: In Vedanta, we have words like indriyaani, manah, buddhi, cittam, and ahamkarah. We have to understand it that way. From there, we come to what we mean by mind, etc. The five senses of perception (indriyaani) are hearing, seeing, smelling, tasting, and the sense of touch all over the body. Then, we have the faculty of thinking behind these five senses. This faculty is in the form of thought modifications. It is what we call vrtti. Vrtti means a thought, thoughts or thought-forms. We further define vrtti by three main types, although there are so many of them. One type is mana, another is buddhi, and the third type is citta. Thus, we are defining the vrtti’s as a three-fold manifestation. Mana is generally referred to as the mind. Emotions, desires, doubt, and vacillations are all mana. Then we have another type of thinking where there is deliberate enquiry. When there is resolution, decision and will, we call it buddhi. The process of reasoning and inference, etc. all comes under that. Then recollection and memory, we call citta. So these three – mana, buddhi, and citta we call antahkarana or, in general, mind. The one who owns the mind is the ego (aham). This is the individual—the ‘I’ thought or the one who employs the mind. Therefore, the ego (ahamkara) is the sense of “I-ness”. Any ownership, knowership, enjoyership, doership—all “ships” belong to (aham). We always look at the ego through the mind, the buddhi, the citta and the body, or the senses.

Even with reference to the external world, you look at yourself as “I am a son; I am a daughter; I am a husband or I am a wife”. When you look at yourself from an external standpoint, it is the ego. We are just giving a definition of this ego from different standpoints. The ego (ahamkaara) is the self for the time being. Vedanta questions whether this ego can really be the self, since in deep sleep you do not have the ego. But then, you find that you are there.

It means you are able to relate to that sleep as ‘my sleep’ when you say, “I slept like a log”, etc. You were there in sleep, correct? So, I was there before sleep, I am here after sleep and in sleep, also, I was there. This is one way of saying it. In a certain way, you can also say, “I was aware of my sleep.” “I slept” is an experience. “I slept well” is an experience. That “I didn’t see anything in particular” is also an experience. So, in deep sleep, I was there. In a moment of joy, I am there. The ego that I know—the individual ‘I’, the self that I am familiar with—is not there. Therefore, from various standpoints, when you look at what the self is, Vedanta says, “The ego is the self: the self is not the ego”. The self is the invariable in all situations. Whether you have doubt or emotion, whether you are exploring or have deliberate thinking or decision making, whether you recollect or remember, it is the self that is invariable in all your experiences. In all situations, one thing is present, and that one thing is what you want to be present. “I am” is present because all these are experiences are strung in the self. The self that is present in all these experiences is the eternal, timeless self.

Vedanta says that the self is simple consciousness as such. While the ego is consciousness, consciousness appears as though variable in the ego. What the ego is, and what the ego is aware of are both the same self. So the mind is the self. The mind is consciousness. Every thought is consciousness. The “I”-thought or ego-thought also is consciousness. The thought of any object is consciousness; when the mind thinks of a tree, the tree thought is consciousness.

So consciousness is invariable and it is the self. Is that consciousness which is the very self alone, related to the mind? In what way is it related to the mind? Really speaking, it is not related to the mind. The mind is related to the self in the sense that the mind is the self, having no independent existence separate from the self. But the self is not the mind. Just like this table is purely wood and never apart from wood, while the wood itself is not merely the table. The wood will continue to be even when the table ceases to be. This is the relationship, the relationship between what is and what appears to be.

Q. How does Vedanta define ‘ego’, and how is the individual ego created or developed according to Vedanta?

Swamiji: Vedanta doesn’t look at the ego as an independent entity devoid of identification with other relational things like the physical body, the breath (praana) the five sense organs, the mind, the intellect (buddhi), and memory (citta). Without identifying with any of these, where is the ego? The ego has to lean on something or the other. The ego itself consists of the sum of past memories or experiences (samskaaraas), our own dispositions and redilections, etc. which, taken together, makes a person different from all others. It is variable also; so it never stays the same. Now it’s a happy ego, now it’s a confused ego, now it has got some clarity. With reference to certain facts, the ego is clear. With certain other things, it is not very clear. And it is sometimes conditioned by one’s own unconscious (kashaaya). One’s emotional life especially, and sometimes the ego’s response to the world is dependent upon its’ own kashaaya. This includes it’s own knowledge, past memories; it’s own upbringing and also the culture, society, and so on. This ego includes all of these.

The response of the ego to an external situation or an internal situation depends upon a number of factors. Therefore, there is no big discussion in Vedanta about its development. Vedanta doesn’t talk about psychology so much. It only deals with psychology to the extent that it has to for a sane, objective, and dispassionate life. It doesn’t deal with it as a subject matter, but there is adequate discussion about the emotional life and how one can be more objective.

There are complete discussions dealing with neutralizing likes and dislikes by understanding the values which help to promote healthy attitudes, and thus, emotional maturity. For all these, there is discussion. But there is not a very big discussion on the development of the ego. There is considerable discussion on how one obtains language skills and how a child picks up a language. There is a lot of linguistic or language based discussion in Vedanta because Vedanta is using the medium of language for unfolding the truth of the self, the world and God.

Q. (a) What is meant by bondage or self-ignorance and what is the root cause for this? (Include an explanation of mutual superimposition)

Q. (b) Can you explain why the condition of living in the state of bondage leads to causing emotional pain and suffering?

Continued In Part 3....