Vrtti-sãrûpyam itaratra
Otherwise, the seer is dissolved within mental activity
——————————————————————————————————–
BACKGROUND
When the see-er (As opposed to something ‘seen’) is not merged in his original self (see sutra 3) he is caught up with his mental activity. This is to say that the se’er still assumes that he is the thinking, feeling, subjective self. This is what we know and prefer to call the normative (state of mind).
Also it is important to note here that Patanjali is still referring to this process objectively. He understands full well the subject-object problem and how language can pose as an obstacle when not used correctly. There is an obvious attempt on his part to choose his words carefully when stating this sutra.
To be dissolved or caught up with your mental activity is to say that you become involved with your-self. Since the self doesn’t actually exist, the entire phenomenon is purely illusory. The sanskrit term for this illusion is ‘maya’. Scientifically speaking, the self is a sort of virtual-reality construct created through the function of consciousness. (Metzinger, Ego Tunnel)
In my own research, I have always tried to compare notes between descriptions made by confirmed mystics about the mystical experience to look for inconsistencies in their descriptions of the mystical state.
- First to see if such a ‘state’ actually exists. Various different cultures have recorded the state. Terms such as the Tao, Samadhi, Nibbana denote more or less the same state of being. The descriptions seem consistent.
- The state of enlightenment differs in degrees from ‘flashes‘ to complete ‘immersion‘. These flashes are often felt even by normal people and I believe these are what we call ‘in-sights‘ in the original sense. A purely noumenal event . The experience of immersion apparently cannot be described in any way possible, because language breaks down without a first-person point of reference. We are also completely tied in to our state. Which is to say that to be able to describe the state would be to be in it. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa tried to document the feeling once with his disciples, but every time he tried to describe it he just entered that state and by the time he pulled out of it, he could not describe it any more.
- The state seems attainable, however here’s the problem. Who is to attain it ? If I can cancel this self from the question, then there is no-one to attain no-thing. Therefore it’s safe to say that this attainment happens randomly, based on certain parameters such as the potential of the organism to pass into that state, but certainly not from effort on the part of the being. Also when attainment occurs, the term itself is moot. The state describes non-dualailty, and as such there can be no-one to have attained anything.
- One can be born in an enlightened state and may not know what we call the normative state. Passing in and out of our normative state may seem strange to those born enlightened. Look up Indian Masth’s, people who are born with an ability to constantly stay in a god-intoxicated (Hindi: Masth) state.
- The enlightened state seems to be physiological and has no apparent effect on the person’s nature. That is, that the state of enlightenment is a biological change and is not biased to morality in any sense. Morality is a social concept and has nothing to do with nature actually. Therefore an enlightened person will still retain habits and personality traits from before enlightnment. One thing has nothing to do with the other. In India we somehow always assume that an enlightened person is also morally godlike, even a god himself.
Given my catholic upbringing I had automatically assumed that a god-intoxicated state is a good thing or a preferable state. (I keep thinking I’ve dismissed every shred of theism in me but I always spot some influence) But it seems that it is ALSO a state, and every bit as vulnerable in some aspects as our normative one. On the enlightened self however, since there is no self or self of reference there can be no vulnerability. Because there is no-thing there to be.
