What is the Scientific Understanding of 'Who am I?' Know Yourself

Do you know yourself?

We say, ‘I am John.’

We also say, ‘My name is John.’

So indirectly, we say that we are this body.

But we never say, ‘I am this body.’

We say, ‘This is my body.’

We also say, ‘This is my arm, my leg, my eyes, my ears etc…’

Then who is ‘I’ and who is ‘my’?

Have you ever Googled it?

Before you search anymore, read this conversation between Param Pujya Dadashri and a German couple Susan and Lloyd:

Param Pujya Dadashri asked them, “Would you like to be immersed in ‘I’ or ‘My’? There are ponds of this ‘I’ and ‘My’. Those who have been immersed in the pond of ‘I’ have never died, while those who are immersed in the pond of ‘My’ have never lived.” So they said, “We want it to be such, that we will never have to die again.” So I explained, “There is no worry in ‘I’. Don’t worry for ‘My’. ‘I’ is immortal, ‘My’ is mortal.” Therefore, separate ‘I’ and ‘My’! Within just half an hour they understood this and they were delighted.”

This will have confused you more, right? Okay, so let us simplify it a bit by looking at Param Pujya Dadashri’s live conversation with a spiritual seeker.

Dadashri: What is your name?

Questioner: My name is Chandubhai.

Dadashri: Are you really Chandubhai?

Questioner: Yes.

Dadashri: Chandubhai is your name. Isn’t Chandubhai your name? Are You Yourself Chandubhai or is your name Chandubhai?

Questioner: That is just a name.

Dadashri: Yes, so who are You? If Chandubhai is your name, then who are You? Are You and your name not separate? If You are separate from your name, then who are You? Do you understand what I am trying to say? If you say, “These are my eyeglasses,” then you and the eyeglasses are separate, aren’t they? Similarly, do you still not feel that You are separate from your name?

Just as if a shop were to be named ‘General Traders’, there is no off ence in that. However, if we were to say to the shop owner, “Hey General Traders, come here!” then the shop owner would respond, “My name is actually Jayantilal, and General Traders is the name of my shop.” So the name of the shop owner is separate, and the shop owner is separate, the merchandise in the shop is separate; everything is separate, isn’t it? What do you think?

Questioner: That makes sense.

Dadashri: Whereas here, people insist, “No, I myself am Chandubhai.” So here, not only are you the sign on the shop but you are also the owner of the shop! ‘Chandubhai’ is just a means of identification.

From your very childhood, people kept calling you 'John' and you have come to believe, "I am John." You believe this name to be you. In reality you are not that, but you insist that you are 'John' because everyone tells you so. Since you do not know who you really are, you believe yourself to be the name that you have been given. This has had a very powerful psychological effect on you. This effect is so deeply ingrained within you, that you believe that you are 'John'. This belief is wrong, and because of this wrong belief, you have spent countless lives 'sleeping with your eyes open' (oblivious to your real identity). 

*Chandubhai = Whenever Dadashri uses the name 'Chandubhai' or the name of the person Dadashri is addressing, the reader should insert his or her name for exact understanding.

What falls under ‘I’, What falls under ‘My’ and What is the Soul definition

At the moment, are you identifying with ‘my’? Are you the ‘I’ alone, or is the ‘my’ there alongside?

Questioner: The ‘my’ is bound to be there alongside, isn’t it!

Dadashri: What are all the things that fall under ‘my’ for you?

Questioner: My house and all the things inside my house.

Dadashri: Are all of those things considered to be Yours [of the Self]? And who does the wife belong to?

Questioner: She is also mine.

Dadashri: And whose children are these?

Questioner: They are also mine.

Dadashri: And whose watch is this?

Questioner: It is also mine.

Dadashri: And whose hands are these?

Questioner: These hands are also mine.

Dadashri: Then you will also say, “My head, my body, my feet, my ears, my eyes.” You refer to all these parts of the body as ‘mine’, but who is it that says ‘mine’? Have you never thought about that? You say, “My name is Chandubhai,” and later you say, “I am Chandubhai”; do you not feel there is a contradiction in this?

Questioner: Yes, I do.

Dadashri: You are Chandubhai; currently, both ‘I’ and ‘my’ are encompassed in that. The two railway lines of ‘I’ and ‘my’ are completely separate; they always run parallel, they never merge. Nevertheless, you believe them to be one. Having understood this, separate the ‘my’. Set aside everything that falls under ‘my’. For example, [you say,] “My heart”; so set that aside. What other things do we need to separate from this body?

Questioner: The feet and all the sensory organs.

Dadashri: Yes, everything. The fi ve sensory organs (gnanendriya; the body systems through which the knowledge of sight, hearing, touch, smell, and taste is acquired) and the fi ve organs of action (karmendriya; the eliminative organs, genital organs, feet, hands, and tongue).

And then do you say, “My mind” or “I am mind”?

Questioner: I say, “My mind.”

Dadashri: Do you not say, “My intellect”?

Questioner: Yes.

Dadashri: And you say, “My chit (the subtle component of vision and knowledge in the inner functioning instrument which is composed of the mind, intellect, chit, and ego),” don’t you?

Questioner: Yes.

Dadashri: Then do you say, “My egoism,” or do you say, “I am egoism”?

Questioner: My egoism.

Dadashri: 

If you say, “My egoism,” then you will be able to maintain separation to that extent. However, you do not know what lies beyond this, what part is Yours. So then complete separation does not happen. You only know what is Yours to a certain extent. You only know the gross parts; you do not know the subtle parts at all. As a matter of fact, the subtle parts need to be deducted, then the subtler parts need to be deducted, then the subtlest parts need to be deducted; that is a task only for the Gnani Purush.

However, if you keep on subtracting away each of the spare parts, then it is possible to separate the ‘I’ and the ‘my’, isn’t it? If you keep on deducting ‘my’ from ‘I’, what is it that finally remains? If you set aside the ‘my’, then what is it that ultimately remains?

Questioner: The ‘I’.

Dadashri: So that ‘I’ is precisely what You are! That is all. That ‘I’ needs to be realized.

Questioner: So after such a separation, am I to understand that whatever is left over, that is what ‘I’ am?

Dadashri: Yes, whatever remains after the separation, that is who You are. The ‘I’ is what You actually are. This will need to be examined, won’t it? So isn’t this an easy method, provided the ‘I’ and ‘my’ are separated?

How are ‘I’ and ‘My’ separate?

“I” is God (the Self) and “my” is illusory attachment (maya). “My” is relative to “I.” “I” is real. Without the Gnani Purush (One who has fully realized the Self and is able to impart the Knowledge of the Self to others), you will never be able to know the original Self; however, “I” and “my” are completely separate. If everyone, understood just this much, most of their problems would lessen considerably. This is a science. This is a fundamentally unique spiritual research of Akram Vignan. “I” and “my” are absolutely separate. “I” is the natural state of the Self, whereas “my” is a sense of ownership.

Only a Gnani Purush (Self-Realized one) can Separate the Self and the non-Self thus causing Spiritual Enlightenment

Suppose both gold and copper are mixed together in this ring. If you take it to your hometown and ask your family members, “Please separate the gold and the copper for me!” Then would all the people there separate them for you? Would anyone do so?

Questioner: Only the goldsmith would do so.

Dadashri: The one whose occupation pertains to this, the one who is an expert in this, that person would separate the gold and the copper; he would separate one hundred percent of the gold. This is because he knows the gunadharma (intrinsic properties with a specifi c function) of both, he knows that, ‘Gold has these gunadharma and copper has these gunadharma.’ Similarly, the Gnani Purush Knows the gunadharma of the Self and of the non-Self.

The gold and copper in this ring are in the form of a mixture, so it is possible to separate them. If gold and copper were to become a compound, then it would not be possible to separate them. Otherwise, the properties would end up becoming completely different. Similarly, the Self and the non-Self are a mixture, and they are not in a compound form. This is why it is possible to identify their inherent nature once again. Had they become a compound, the individual inherent nature would never be found again. The gunadharma of the Self would not be found, nor would the gunadharma of the non-Self be found, and a third, entirely new gunadharma would emerge. However, this is not the case. This is simply a mixture that has formed. That is why when the Gnani Purush separates the two, the Self is realized.