Verse 26: What are the eleven special objects that arise from a sattvic Ahamkara?

buddhi-indriyaṇi cakṣuḥ srotra-ghrāṇa-rasana-tvak-ākhyāni |
vāk-pāṇi-pāda-pāyū-upastāḥ karma-indriyāṇi-āhuḥ ||

indriya – instrument / organ-of-sense

buddhi – discerning intelligence
cakṣus – sense of seeing
śrotra – sense of hearing
ghrāṇa – sense of smelling
rasana – sense of tasting
tvak – sense of touching

karman – action
vāc – act of sounding
pāṇi – act of grasping
pāda – act of locomotion
pāyu – act of excretion
upastha – act of regeneration

Ten of the eleven are objects-of-sense.

  1. How does Ahamkara manifest? How does “I am” actually become present?
  2. The capacities to sense and act are how “I am” is established. This happens through objects-of-sense.
  3. However, since all sensing is done in the service of Spirit an object-of-sense is actually a way for Spirit to manifest. An object-of-sense is therefor an indicator of the presence of Spirit.
  4. Spirit, however, is mediated through Discerning Intelligence (Mahat/Buddhi) so the objects-of-sense can also be said to be instruments of discernment.
  5. There are 10 objects-of-sense (Indriyas): 5 knowledge organs-of-sense and 5 action organs-of-sense.
  6. The 5 knowledge objects of sense are:
    1. That which senses form I will call “eye”
    2. That which senses sound I will call “ear”
    3. That which senses smell I will call “nose”
    4. That which senses taste I will call “tongue”
    5. That which senses touch I will call “skin”
  7. The 5 action objects of sense are:
    1. That which makes sounds I will call “speech”
    2. That which holds / grasps I will call “hand”
    3. That which moves I will call “feet”
    4. That which excretes I will call “anus”
    5. That which procreates I will call “generative organ”
  8. These words tempt me to think of the physical organs with which they correspond. However, upon closer inspection, I find this is not accurate.
  9. I contemplate, for example, “hand” as my physical hand. What is it?
    1. Is it the skin, the muscles, the bones? Is it the fingers, palm and back of the hand?
    2. Is it the nerves that originate deep in my nervous system and reach my finger-tips?
    3. Is there a part of my brain which can be considered a part of my “hand”?
    4. If that part of my brain is connected to other parts, are they also a part of my “hand”?
    5. Is grasping merely a physical manifestation – as in grasping a round object plucked from a tree?
    6. Or is grasping also a mental capacity that realizes that the round object I plucked from a tree is an apple?
    7. And after eating the apple, when it is physically integrated with me, the apple I am thinking of, is that also grasping?
  10. Through this inquiry I discover that my intuitive grasp of “hand” is not as clear or firm as I’d assumed. Hence the alternative framing of “that which grasps”.
  1. There is an inside and an outside

Leave a Reply