[Advaita-l] What is the Carrier of Vasanas?

Sharath T Poojary sharat4u1 at rediffmail.com
Tue Dec 25 23:00:09 CST 2007

Dear Sir,

Thank you so much for your reply. What you say is correct. Each individual will have to search the answer for himself because there are different levels of answers depending upon the grasping level of an individual. But all the levels still point at the same truth.

Many helpful people told me that sukshma sarira leaves the body. Even I have read that in literature. But, I am somehow unable to reconcile this with other facts. And it is not correct to blindly accept a fact, even if they are mentioned in the most sacred of literatures. Because, that is just "Knowledge" but not "Realization". Say, I tell you there is a peacock outside. If you blindly believe me, you just have knowledge of the peacock. But, when you yourself peep out of the window and see the peacock for yourself, you have relalized what actually a peacock is. In short, knowledge is second-hand and realization is first-hand.

After thinking a lot on the sukshma sarira concept, I think that there is definitely a subtle meaning to outer apparent meaning. It is not straight forward. I mean, the actual meaning is NOT literal. I will give an example. A sage knows, both the world and a personal God belongs to the category of MITHYA (Vyavaharika and Pratibhasika Satyam). A common man asks the sage...."Sir, please tell me if GOD is really there?" The Sage replies....."Your God is as real as you are!"

Here is the CATCH! Now the common man will be happy, thinking that his GOD is real. This conclusion is based on that fact that the man is taking it for granted that he himself (body) is real. BUT, the Sage actually meant that, as you (man) are UNREAL (mithya), so is your personal God. So, this is how a Single statement can have completely opposite meaning depending upon how it is interpreted.

In case of the Sukshma sarira concept, what is bothering me is this...let me again explain with an example.

Say, we take a glass (transparent) for Antahkarana, and a red colored wall for Brahman (just an example). Now, due to the transparency, the brahman appears through that glass. If we have DIRT sticking on the glass, it obscures the visibility of the background. This is the eaxmple of how we are. The DIRTY glass is the GLASS+Antahkarana, which blocks the full appearance of Brahman. A clear glass is a JIVANMUKTA. A Broken CLEAR glass is a VIDEHAMUKTA. Now, my question is, if we break the glass, the DIRT is still there on the broken glass shards. Does the DIRT leave the glass to settle on another? If yes, this means DIRT is SENTIENT! This is the problem.

What I think is that there is some different way of interpreting what is written in the literatures. We should be careful while taking the literal meaning.


On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 sriram wrote :
>Dear Sri Sharath
>Your question is logical.But according to Brahma sutras the Pranas carry the vasanas and exit through the brahmaranthram.If you go through the chapter regarding what happens to the pranas and the soul you will get an
>answer to your genuine pursuit.Faith is the key as all this is subjective knowledge.Each one has to research individually and the knowledge is so subtle words will not be adequate to describe the outcome.This is my analysis.
>R.Krishnamoorthy.----- Original Message ----- From: "Sharath T Poojary" <sharat4u1 at rediffmail.com>
>To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Sent: Friday, December 21, 2007 9:19 PM
>Subject: [Advaita-l] What is the Carrier of Vasanas?
>>Dear Sir,
>>Thank you for answering my doubt. You explanation of the the antahkarana is lucid and clear to understand. However, my doubt still remains there. As antahkarana is of the body (influenced by food and the environment it is subject to), will it not be destroyed when the body is destroyed? Example: If I take an Engine for BODY and it's property of vibration (when ON) as ANTAHKARANA, then will not the vibration STOP if I destroy the Engine itself?
>>Antahkarana cannot be there in the absence of body. This is because Antahkarana is the subtle essence, but of the body itself.
>>So if antahkarana is destroyed with the body, who MOVES from that dead body to another? If the answer is still antahkarana, then is it something independent of body?
>>Dear sir, please tell me what exactly moves from one body to another.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list