Spirituality Studies 31 Monique Rebelle was described in Sanskrit as ahaṃkāra – “I-maker”. Classical texts such as the Vivekacūḍāmaṇi (c. 8th century CE) describe ahaṃkāra as false identification with oneself as the doer (Vivekacūḍāmaṇi v. 108–110). In the Bhagavad Gītā, ahaṃkāra entangles the soul in action and obscures its witnessing nature (Bhagavad Gītā 3:27). Michael James describes Ramana Maharshi’s view of ego as “a formless phantom that dissolves into the Self” (James 2024, 9). Ramana Maharshi also calls ego “nothing but a bundle of thoughts” (Maharshi 1973, v. 347), while Tolle describes it as “a mental construct producing a false sense of separation” (Tolle 1999, 30–31). Some modern psychology aligns with this view: Jung considers the ego a small center subordinate to the Self (Jung 1981, 21), and transpersonal psychology acknowledges experiences beyond the ego (Maslow 1971, 42; Grof 1993, 15). I therefore describe ego technically as the dominance of the first three cakras within the subtle body, focusing consciousness on material, emotional, and mental domains while the influence of higher cakras is ignored or misinterpreted; the third-cakra mind cannot transcend the limits of its own subjective judgment. Pure Intellect. Because definitions of mind and intellect often overlap, clarification is necessary. In my usage, the “mind” (Sa. manas) – described in the Upaniṣads as coordinating sensory impressions (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1:3:3–4) – corresponds to the third-cakra mind. Intellect corresponds to the discriminating faculty responsible for discernment and Self-realization (Kaṭha Upaniṣad 1:3:10). I add the adjective “pure” to emphasize its objective, witnessing function, free from emotional or conditioned interference. A parallel distinction exists in Tibetan Buddhism between sems and ye shes (Higgins 2016). Since the pure intellect associated with the seventh cakra is not swayed by temporary identifications, it resembles Primordial Knowing. This mind operates through detached observation and discernment rather than association or goal-oriented thinking, playing a decisive role in advanced Self-inquiry. 2.3 Time Understanding the concept of Kuṇḍalinī is essential when discussing its role in clearing the third cakra and dissolving the ego. The Upaniṣads attribute the creation of time to one supreme God, who is hidden in all beings (Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad 6:2). In the Mahāyāna tradition, time has no inherent existence (Nāgārjuna 1995, 257). In Yogācāra Buddhism, time is a construction of the mind (Vasubandhu 1982, 54). According to a verse in the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, time arises from mental discrimination, and when discrimination of the mind ceases, time ceases (Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra v. 75). In Advaita Vedānta, time is part of the illusory world (Śaṅkara 1962, 2:3:28). Eckhart Tolle, along with some other contemporary spiritual teachers, also consider time an illusion (Tolle 1999, 59). Time is a created concept, yet the linear, third-cakra mind perceives it as real. The illusion of time and of perceived reality becomes evident when Kuṇḍalinī explores the sixth cakra – a topic for separate discussion. Time, in my view, is a sub-dimension of the third dimension of perception; just as the first dimension (material) includes sub-dimensions of length, width, and depth, the third dimension includes time. It is the measure that makes our reality persistent – it binds our thoughts with memory and solidifies them in our mind. When Kuṇḍalinī successfully moves through the third cakra and clears it, one realizes the state commonly called “the present time.” A more suitable term would be “no time” or “without time,” as this is when the mind exists beyond the structure of time, which, as the experience moves into higher chakras, proves illusory anyway. This paradox can be explained further in the discussion about the sixth cakra and the sixth dimension of perception.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTUwMDU5Ng==