ṛtaṃ

[deafAncient]

Namaste to all,

I'm reading the book, Hindu Dharma, and I have decided to set up an IAST/Sanskrit dictionary in order to cut down on the bandwidth needed to look up words repeatedly (as I live in the country and have a data cap on my account). It makes me learn the words very closely.

I looked up the word, ṛtaṃ, and I was surprised to find another parallel to my thinking. I came up with this several years ago in realizing why it doesn't make sense for a Christian or other adherent to pray to a respective God for a safe trip through an area racked with dangerous flash floods during a weekend or to help a football team win a game.

There IS a reason that the world does not have supernatural intervention as far as how motion and physical manifestation works. If there was, there would be no way to predict with any certainty the consequences of a moving action.

Riding a bicycle - the bicycle flips over on a downhill grade, the rider falling off, with no obstacles on the ground, pedaling at a reasonable speed, nothing wrong with the bike, and the brakes were not applied. Just happens. The rider is left with the feeling that he could experience this again without warning. No way to tell, because you can check the path of the trail, the mechanics of your bike, and you will still never know when it will happen again. This is no way to live, and it stifles the willingness to be creative and take risks.

There IS a reason this reality operates via autopilot on natural phenomena relationships that work together the way they do to make our world possible. Having the world runs the way it does makes you responsible for your actions and the consequences. It also makes you responsible for understanding how things work and why they do, at least enough to make those experiences predictable with a minimum of alternate results. How else would it be possible to build a building structure that takes advantage of building material characteristics and how gravity works on them? How else would you machine parts in the shop if copper were able to randomly become harder or softer than the metal used as a machining tip, in a moment's notice without changing its temperature or chemical composition? It's just, one minute, you can machine a valve thread, the next, it tears up your cutting bits. What are you going to do? "Just wait a minute, as it might decide to soften up again. ... I guess I'll have to go home and try again tomorrow." Reality would not work like it does in that scenario.

All in all, you would not be able to trust the world you live in, because your natural actions cannot be predicted. Maybe you'll try to jump over a small log, and you end up jumping 100 feet up and getting killed. One day, assuming the same bicycle, same gears, same general well-being, the same path, and the same weather on the same planet, you're averaging 12 MPH. Another day, the same thing instead results in averaging 70 MPH, and ten minutes later, with nothing changing, you can only do 5 MPH no matter how hard you can pedal.

Somebody was smart in creating this world. Beyond belief. A lot of thought was put into this...

[yajvan]

namaste and hello,

can you offer your definition of ṛtaṃ ?

thank you

[deafAncient]

I found this definition a few days ago, which caused me to write the above.

P { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }The principle of natural order which regulates and coordinates the operation of the universe and everything within it. Denotes the mental perception and realization of truth.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté


Let's see if we can go a little deeper with this notion of ṛtaṁ.
ṛtaṁ = ṛta ; and ṛta has the following definitions

• proper , right , fit , apt , suitable , able , brave , honest
• worshipped , respected
• true, truth personified
• divine law (dharma) , faith , divine truth
• it also means 'met with , afflicted by' when we spell it with a long a (ṛtā)

If we look to the yogadarśana of patañjali ( the yoga-sūtra-s) Chapt 1, 48th sūtra, we find this:
ṛtaṁ-bharā prajñā. This means essential cognition i.e. how one perceives the world, is filled with truth. Let's look a bit deeper:

ṛtaṁ ऋतम् + bharā भर + prajñā प्रज्णा = ṛtaṁ (luminous, insightful unalloyed, pure) + bharā ( bearing, bestowing, carrying) + pra (great) + jñā ( to know).
Hence the core offer of the sūtra:
One perceives only the Truth. Some call this unalloyed, unvarnished great truth and becomes a part of one's daily vision. This is the practical value of knowledge + experience
and lies within ṛtaṁ.

So where does this ṛtaṁ-bharā prajñā come from ? It comes from ( as a bi-product) of one firmly esatablished in yoga, the subject matter of the yogadarśana of patañjali.
Now , when one looks at the world , it is ~finally ~ properly/correctly/clearly perceived.

And what would that correct and stainless vision be ? We will leave that for another time, but think of the implications. Only and always seeing the ~full~ picture. Think of a community or a nation based on this principle. The highest level of life would be lived - 100% expression of dharma to its fullest.

iti śivaṁ

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

If we look to the yogadarśana of patañjali ( the yoga-sūtra-s) Chapt 1, 48th sūtra, we find this:
ṛtaṁ-bharā prajñā. This means essential cognition i.e. how one perceives the world, is filled with truth. Let's look a bit deeper:

ṛtaṁ ऋतम् + bharā भर + prajñā प्रज्णा = ṛtaṁ (luminous, insightful unalloyed, pure) + bharā ( bearing, bestowing, carrying) + pra (great) + jñā ( to know).
Hence the core offer of the sūtra:
One perceives only the Truth. Some call this unalloyed, unvarnished great truth and becomes a part of one's daily vision.

Prior to this condition (of ṛtaṁ) it mildly infers that what we see/cognize is in fact a bit off the mark or inaccurate of the stainless truth.
A simple example: A ---> B --->C--->D

A. Someone talks and we listen;
B. the information goes in to our consciousness
C. within our consciousness there are all of our values, impressions, bias's, likes and dis-likes , prejudices and the like , all bundled within this thing we call ego. It acts as a filter and the listening goes though this filter. Our comprehension of what is heard is via what is 'strained' though this filter of ego.
D. It comes out the other side ( figuratively speaking of course) and our understanding is colored by all the influences that occurred within point C above.
Did we actually comprehend and cognize that actual truth of what came from the sender's lips ? This is debatable.
Think of all the times ( even on HDF) where a person has said something and it has been mis-interpreted. How many times in a face-to-face conversation does a person find themselves saying ' this is what I mean' -or- asking 'what do you really mean ? '. See the point ?

Now, let's contrast that to the firm establishment of consciousness seated in yoga ( pure awareness or the constituent of ṛtaṁ ).

One speaks and what is heard is not only the depth and breath of the words but the intent behind the words; the feelings, the other individual's consciousness comes though, landing on the cognitive power of that individual established in ṛtaṁ.
When these sound forms and impressions come in they are not deposited on ego as ego is not there. It is not in the way. So a clear path to this vast ocean of Being is there for maximum comprehension.

This is the true value of ṛtaṁ - not only in hearing , but seeing, reading , interacting. Only the truth or essence (sāraḥ) is available to this person.

iti śivaṁ

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
namasté

ṛtaṁ ऋतम् + bharā भर + prajñā प्रज्णा = ṛtaṁ (luminous, insightful unalloyed, pure) + bharā ( bearing, bestowing, carrying) + pra (great) + jñā ( to know). Hence the core offer of the sūtra:
One perceives only the Truth

There is another view on this matter. In the post above the notion of ṛtaṁ within the world of interactions ( of one's perception to the world at large) is a practical one. Yet too there is deeper significance as I see it.
The person firmly established in yoga , in ṛtaṁ , only sees the truth. This truth is none other then all-pervasive Being residing everywhere. It is none other the the extension of one's own SELF pervading within and without ( all of creation). This is why the wise have always talked of wholeness. This Being permeating all without break or pause. This is what this person experiences - fullness ,niravaśeṣatas (completely , totally, fully) some call pūrṇapātrapratibhaṭa ( fullness or a full vessel i.e. overflowing , supreme). This say the wise is the ultimate truth.

iti śivaṁ

[deafAncient]

Namaste Yajvan,

Dhanyavaad for the answer regarding ṛtaṃ...

As soon as I started reading post #4, I realized that my Ancient worldview had diverged from that of SD's deeper notion of ṛtaṃ. Or maybe it is a language-less precursor to it. Here's why I see it that way.

"One perceives only the Truth. Some call this unalloyed, unvarnished great truth and becomes a part of one's daily vision. This is the practical value of knowledge + experience and lies within ṛtaṁ."

This, to me, is a stated position of a person who is civilized. The content of this post is a bit of a reach for me, not because I don't believe it or don't agree with it, but I don't know how to connect my Ancient Self with the information contained herein. I feel as though I was someone who lived in a forest her entire life and have basic knowledge of life and "heard about SD from one of the neighbors who walks for three days to a very, very large village." Like I was someone who's never been to a city, only a small village maybe 3 or 4 times in the entire life. This is approximately where I am at this point in my life. I've heard of it, but I only have a glimmer, perhaps an inaccurate one for lack of living it myself, of SD.

I've had to read this four times, not because I don't comprehend the reading, but because I had to lay out mentally what is in front of me in that post and see from another perspective. Just now, while typing this response, it does make sense now, but again, it feels like it is a result of civilization, especially after thousands of years of living with one another and learning from the mistakes, leading to a distilled body of knowledge that benefits society as a whole. The refinement is hugely evident to me just now! Again, I have what is a very archaic mindset, anthropologically-speaking. It is still language-less, at one with the world around me. I still find myself reducing conversation within to silence after several days of isolation from people (as I live in the country and just resigned from the farm and am preparing to pull my house or travel trailer to another area as soon as I get confirmation) (though when I read, I hear the words in my head). I also find myself practicing lip and breath-control exercises, like I was playing my didgeridoo, but without it, instead of the traditional "om" for long periods of time because it puts me in this place or helps me to stay centered here.

[deafAncient]

Namaste Yajvan,

In regards to post #5,

I had to read it twice again in order to realize that this is some sort of logic that reveals the nature of conversation between two people. It is true that a person, the Self, attempts to communicate to another self through the veneer of the mind, knowledge, memories, and imprints, all of which affects how the message gets out, and the person receiving the words will decode it in reverse, only with the receiver's version of the mind that filters the information to the Self. It's almost like TCP/IP, in that information from above (desires, needs, etc.) gets sent down through the layers from application layer to hardware layer (the mouth, vocal chords, facial and hand expression) before it is transmitted through the air, and is received at the hardware layer (ears and eyes at the least) before it is passed back up to the Self above the application layer. Sometimes, something doesn't make sense or is not heard clearly because of a speech impediment or hearing loss, then the transport layer has to send back confirmation to "say that again, as I didn't understand or hear clearly," and the transport layer of the speaker tries to alter the delivery of the message if needed to make it clearer and send it back down to the hardware layer and continuing on.

I think that the biggest danger in interculture conversations is that the meaning can be altered or misunderstood, as is certainly the case with western scholars like Cripal, Courtright, and Doniger. Because of their Westernized, Christianized mindset, what they understand or interpret what they hear/read is vastly different from the sacred writings and scriptures of SD and the guru's perspective on these same writings. This might even be the case between Sanaatanis of different sampradāyas that are different in views and philosophies.

In regards to post #6,

You said, "This is why the wise have always talked of wholeness. This Being permeating all without break or pause."

This more or less describes what I experience, but without the language and the training needed to return to that state from a civilized, language-learned state, because I'm already there. If I were raised with normal hearing and had the lenses of civilization put on me, I certainly would need such concepts of SD to help me return there, because I would have been exposed to language BEFORE my memories start forming and forget a time when I was without 1) language, 2) socialization, and 3) religion, the three lenses of civilization that colors or obscures the clear path back to that place of wholeness without pause or break.

Again, as mentioned in other posts, I stayed in that state of mind of a baby or a Native because I wasn't found to be deaf until I was seven and a half years old, and I remember things more than five years prior to that (including crawling on the floor of an airliner in the late 60s and the details with that and once holding a wheat penny which appeared to cover over half of my entire left hand (I am left-handed)). I can remember looking at things as they seemed much large to me as a child than today. A classroom in middle elementary during our 25th year reunion is such an example. Everything in that building seems much smaller now. I know people who don't remember before eight years of age!!

It may be that I have clear access to those memories and that state because my memories of that time are not cluttered with the additional memories of learning a language head-on, learning the clear do's and don't's of interacting with people, never mind going to some church and being taught it. I would think that it would overwhelm a child's mind to the point that the previous state of being gets forgotten. It may not be the whole story, but it sure would make accessing those memories a lot easier because I don't have the extra information in the way.