Attributes of the Brahman

[Charles Wikner]

VP Nandakumar <nandav01 at M0E3S33.NMB.NORWEST.COM> wrote:

> Can someone give a clear explanation of the three attributes of the
> Brahman - satyam, jnanam and anandam.

Any explanation will fall far short of what the terms refer to.
That said, some indication can be given to satisfy the mind.

The three terms usually used are sat, cit, and aananda (saccidaananda).

`Sat' derives from dhaatu `as' (to be): it refers to the _is-ness_
that underlies and supports the manifest creation.  The screen upon
which these words appear _is_.  It may be that it is large or small,
old or new, but whatever qualities it shows, it firstly _is_.  It is
manifest to the senses at the moment, but if you walk out of the room
it still _is_.  The same _is-ness_ was present a million years ago
and will be present in million years' time: the same cannot be said
of the computer screen.  Do not confuse _is-ness_ with manifestation:
the dinosaur _is_, although only manifest as an idea in the mind; even
if that idea disappears, the dinosaur still _is_, as a seed or potential
that could manifest again.

At the empirical level this `sat' appears simply as `I am': it is not
possible to deny this existence -- whatever would deny it must exist.
By associating qualities with that `I am', such as `I am a man', it
appears to be limited: this limitation of `I am' (aham) by something
in creation (kaara) is known as the ego (ahamkaara).

`Cit' has the sense of `awareness' or `consciousness': you are aware
of these words on the screen, you are aware of the weight of the body
on the chair, in fact you are aware of everything that is currently
presented to the mind and senses.  We place much importance on the
objects or qualities of which we are aware, but what of the awareness
itself?

At the empirical level, someone is described as `conscious' when he is
connected to the senses, is `aware' of his surroundings, and able to
respond to them.  The content of that awareness is j~naana (knowledge),
but nowadays `knowledge' has come to mean the information stuffed into
the mind through learning or experience.

`AAnanda' is generally translated as `bliss': it is the happiness and
health that underlies all of life (when the superimposions of misery
and desease have been transcended).  It is the natural desireless joy
that is present when aware of limitlessness (an-antam), when there is
no `other' that could give rise to desire and its attendant miseries,
which are nothing but limitations imposed on that aananda.  A touch of
this is experienced in happiness that arises of itself in stillness,
for example when filled with awe when witnessing a glorious sunset.
A touch of it can be seen in young lovers, at the stage where they are
content to simply hold hands or look deeply into each other's eyes.

At the empirical level, happiness generally refers to the tail-wagging
excitement that arises at the prospect of having desires fulfilled, or
the smug satisfaction afterwards.  These have their foundation in bliss,
but are a very poor reflection of it.

Where these three, sat, cit, and aananda, come together in saccidaananda,
you have `I am aware of bliss' -- and nothing else.

And you want a "clear explanation" of THAT ?!?!!!

Words _about_ it will have to do until there is experience _of_ it.

Regards, Charles.