Sanskrit – Dead or Alive?

When a language is no longer spoken natively by any culture, it is said to be a “dead” language. Some such languages become lost in a few generations, like some First Nations languages of North America. Others are maintained by academics for historical records. Still others may live on in certain forms. Latin, for example, is still used for scientific naming in Biology.

Sanskrit falls into a different category though. Unlike any current language, Sanskrit is the language of nature itself. It describes nature in natures own language. While it is not currently widely spoken by people, it lives on in nature itself.

In a prior post on Name and Form, I described how one can listen to Sanskrit on subtle levels of awareness and experience what the original phrases described.

Further, Sanskrit is the language of the Veda itself, the structuring knowledge of all existence. In other words, nature itself is built from Sanskrit. Or more exactly, the sounds we call Sanskrit. Some sages describe that even your body is built of Sanskrit phrases, the nadis being sutras of sound.

Imagine the healing benefit of sounds that contain the correct structure of the physiology. The instruction set for a healthy state. Imagine diagnostics that only need to listen the right way. Such sounds only need to be produced and received correctly.

Further, we are said to be in a time where many laws of nature have been long dormant, their Veda unspoken and unheard. But those laws are awakening, bringing to life greater ability and possibility. This is how the environment will rise from darkness into light and the golden age become obvious for many.

This fall, I’ll be learning some native Sanskrit in the Devanagari script. This will allow me to read some of the texts directly rather than through an interpreter. Even just the study is said to be a spiritual practice in itself. But above all, Sanskrit is not a written language. Devanagari is just a script description of the sounds themselves. The key is the sounds – it is an oral language. Nature expresses in sound first.

For a little background, you may enjoy these 2 links.

Sanskrit – a Sacred Model of Language by Vyaas Houston compares the origins and influence of Sanskrit and English. It’s an excellent review of the ego’s effect on language.

Lest you consider Sanskrit some old foreign language, consider that many English words originated with Sanskrit. The oldest known historical writings are in Sanskrit. Some historians believe that Sanskrit was the foundation of the Middle Eastern languages that evolved into the proto-European languages, one of which became English.

English words that have come from Sanskrit

Davidya

The Mahavakyas

Earlier this year, I spoke of the Mahavakyas – phrases traditionally used to assist an aspirant in the shift into unity. The Unity shift is one of the intellect, the recognition that I am That, Thou art That, All This is That. Everything is One.

Because this is an intellectual shift, it tends to be an aha kind of moment, a moment of recognition that the object and subject of perception are one and the same. What phrase or circumstance causes that aha will vary widely. It may be a formal Mahavakya or a circumstance or a moment of clarity.

But along with and behind this aha moment is also a process taking place. A series of lesser realizations that drop the barriers to unity. So even if someone shifts on this or that, they will still see a progression or deepening of understanding as part of the process. Or they will recognize it in retrospect.

In the prior article, I listed the 4 from Shankara, as mentioned on Wikipedia. In a discussion with a friend, it became clear this list is actually backwards. As the “I am That” phrase above illustrates, “I” is where it should start.

1. Aham Brahmasmi – “I am Brahman”
(Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.10 of the Yajur Veda)

2. Tat Tvam Asi – “Thou art That”
(Chandogya Upanishad 6.8.7 of the Sama Veda)

3. Ayam Atma Brahma – “This Self (Atman) is Brahman”
(Mandukya Upanishad 1.2 of the Atharva Veda)
(also as Sarvum Kalvidam Bramha – “All This is That”)

4. Prajnanam Brahma – “Consciousness is Brahman” or “That alone Is”
(Aitareya Upanishad 3.3 of the Rig Veda)

Note that one comes from each of the 4 primary Vedas, progressing in subtlety. This also maps the full realization of the higher states of consciousness – Self realization, God realization, Unity and Brahman consciousness.

The 4 related realizations were in the correct order:
Aham Vishvam: I am the Universe
(Taittiriya Upanishad 3.10)
Devo Hum: I am the Devata
Aham Shrivhir: (sp?)    I am the Cosmic Body
Veda Hum: I am the Veda

Davidya

Profound Intention

Recently, I have heard 2 experiences describing how thoughts rise up or we follow thoughts down in meditation. They described a series of 8 spirals or whirlpools. That there’s 8 layers of resolution or refinement to rising and falling thoughts. Most people will experience this as a general gradual settling or notice a progressively more concrete thought. There may be some sense of stepping down but not quite so specific as a spiral slope.

We can see various models of growth as a spiral. And I’ve observed how the sun is also moving through space so our planet is not simply orbiting the sun but spiralling along with it. Similarly with subatomic particles where the nucleus is moving so the electrons are spiraling along in their fields of possibility. Nature is full of spirals and they define the golden ratio.

We can note that Vaisheshika describes 8 fundamental qualities and Sankhya is in 8 layers. The 8 stages would generally be described as a blend of these – the 5 elements, mind, ego and intellect. In other words, it depends on how you’re looking as to how you might describe the layers. As we settle, we divest the prior layer until there is just discrimination – something is intended. It is not separate, just flowing within the whole.

We can observe that at more subtle and less defined values of thinking – what some may call intuition or inspiration for example – thoughts are more powerful and effective. We can notice that spending a lot of time fussing over something is much less effective than some occasional deep consideration that leads to clarity.

What’s really interesting though is the bottom layer, the flow. Above that, there is individualization, ego. Individual thoughts. A stream of attention requires a succession of thoughts. But they are still segmented. And easily distracted. At the basic level, it is simply a flow, like water. Unsegmented, unbroken. This is how creation actually creates and sustains what we experience of the world. Why the world doesn’t seem to come and go or drift out of focus when attention is on something else. Individuation only happens on top of that sustaining flow.

If we can think as creation does, we’re able to create a continuous flow of attention. In some ways, it’s not even really “thinking” anymore, just attention. Imagine Sanyama from the Yoga Sutras with attention and intention in a continual flow. This I think is the secret of the yogis who perform apparent miracles like walking through fire or levitating. Being able to flow like and with creation rather than being segmented. But it can take some practice. We have a long history and habit of dividing, even against ourselves.

Davidya