Aham

Each word in samskrtam, if you think, is packed with meaning. Just like I had earlier written about PADAARTHA and OM, Aham is a very interesting word. This word has very similar interpretation like OM. Aham, starts with 'A' the first letter, and the first vowel ofcourse, of the language. The sound of it gets generated in the deep throat. 'Ha' is the last word in the alphabet. And 'M' the anuswara is like the 'M' in OM. It terminates at the lips. So 'AHAM' represents all the words that ccould be represented with the alphanet, from 'A' to 'Ham'. That is the universe according to the interpretation we had on OM eralier. So then, Aham is the universe. That is why we say 'Aham brahmasmi', I am the cosmos.

OM

OM is a conjunct of three vowels. They are ‘a’ (as ‘u’ in ‘cup’), ‘u’ (as ‘u’ in ‘put’) and ‘m’ (as ‘m’ in ‘calm’). According to the rules of conjunction in Samskrtam, ‘a’ + ‘u’ is ‘o’ (as second ‘o’ in ‘provoke’). So ‘a’ + ‘u’ + ‘m’ is ‘OM’.

The sound ‘a’ is generated from the deepness of the throat. Below that position of throat, no sound (audible sound called ‘vaikhari’) can be produced. The sound ‘m’ is generated from the two lips fully used by touching each other. Beyond that position of mouth no sound (vaikhari) can be produced. So the first sound ‘a’ and the last sound ‘m’ of OM are produced from the innermost position and the outermost position, respectively, of the sound-production-system of our body. ‘u’ is produced from somewhere between the throat and lips, using both. So ‘u’ represents the middle.

All audible sounds in this universe are produced between ‘a’ and ‘m’ with intervening ‘u’. So OM represents all audible sounds. Every object in this universe, including energy, time and space, are ‘padartha’s. ie. Meanings of ‘pada’ or word. If all padas are produced between ‘a’ and ‘m’ then OM would represent the whole universe, because anything and everything of the universe is the meaning of a word produced with sounds between ‘a’ and ‘m’ with intervening ‘u’.

The moment we chant OM we create the whole universe in our mind. OM is considered complete with the following silence after OM. If you keep on chanting OM repeatedly, the silence between two OMs is noticeable. In chanting OM, the time taken to utter ‘a’, ‘u’, ‘m’ and the silence after them, should be the same. I have heard people chanting with short a,u and long m. Like ‘aummmmmmm’. This is wrong.

‘a’ is also considered to be the creation (srshti), since that is where all sounds originate. ‘m’ is considered to be destruction (samhara) since that is where all sounds end. Between them is ‘u’ the sustenance (sthiti). The silence followed is considered to be that which cannot be comprehended (anakhya). These four are also considered to be the waking (jagrat), dream (swapna), deep sleep (sushupti) and turiya stages respectively.

So that is why OM is considered to be the universe in its totality.

Knowledge and Self

This is an interesting argument of Indian Epitstemology, Nyaya. It is like this:

In any knowledge situation there are four components.

1. the knower or subject (pramAtA)
2. the known or object (pramEya)
3. the means of knowing (pramANA)
4. the final resultant knowledge (prajJNAna)

The knower gets the knowledge of the known, through some means of knowing. Nyaya gives detailed discussions about the different means of knowing. I will not discuss them here. My focus here is on another aspect of knowledge. Knowledge is the property of the knower and NOT the known. When I know that "this is a pot", the knowledge of pot, is in the knower, in me. The pot is not qualified by that knowledge.

This is an important distinction. Every pramEya should and will have one or more properties, like color, height, weight etc. Knowledge is also a property, which subjects only can have and not objects. Even when I know that "this is Rama", Rama the object of this particular knowledge, is not qualified by that knowledge; only I am. It is pointing your finger towards an object.
When I know that this is my hand, hand is the object not qualified by knowledge but I am.
When I think of my heart or lungs, they are the objects and I am only qualified by prajJNAna.
When I meditate on my mind, I know about my mind. So my mind is the pramEya without the knowledge and I have the prajJNAna.

So at no point I can make statements like “this is me” “this is the knower in me” “this is the pramAtA”, because the moment I say so, the knower and known get separated. Why? Because we have seen that in no situation the object can be qualified by knowledge.

So how do I know me? Obviously none of the four pramANA’s like pratyakShaM, anumAnaM, upamAnaM and shabdaM can be a tool for that knowledge, simply because the known becomes separate which can be pointed at.

Also, if it is possible to know the self, (the ‘me’), then the object also will possess the knowledge. Apparently there won’t be a means of knowing. In other words, the knower, the known and means of knowledge BECOMES knowledge! All the 4 components of a knowledge situation converges. Without a means of knowing, it would be an aha feeling. Everything becomes knowledge. That is why the Upanishads say “prajJNAnaM brahma” and “ahaM brahmAsmi”. If the first can be represented by

j = b where j is jnAna and b is Brahma

And the second by

i = b where i is the self (aham) and b is Brahma then,

i = j (I am knowledge)

That is something like the energy paradox. Long time back energy was a property of matter which is the capacity for doing work. Potential energy is posessed by a body. A body of mass is qualified by kinetic energy. But the moment we say that the mass itself is energy, the situation changes. It is no more a quality posessed by a body of mass.

The point remaining to ponder is, isn’t then the object, knowledge?

ChaturVarnya

Many words and phrases as used today, have lost their meaning due to misunderstanding, misrepresentation and misinterpretation. It would be worthwhile to think about Cahturvarnya which has undergone mutation.
Varna
First I thought, I would write about 'chatur varnyam', ='the system of classification of humans into 4', but even before venturing onto a deliberation on that word, need to articluate a bit on 'Varna', itself.
Varna means color of course. But varna means many other things too, the most famous of which is 'Akshara' = letter. This latter meaning, is not consequential to the former, meaning, Varna means letter, not because it means color. Letter and color does not have any relation.
Similarly, Varna means the four divisions into Brahmana etc. (Amarkosha 3.3.48 and 2.8.1) and that is not consequential to its meaning, color. So 'color' has nothing to do with 'the classification into 4'
So the concocted explanation some give, saying the classification into 4 given in Gita and other books from India, are based on the color of skin of people, are all fictitious.
ChaturVarnya (CV)
Varna itself means 'the classification into brahmana etc.' Hence 'chatur' in chaturvarnya is actually a repetition. In any case chaturvarnya means the classification into 4 as brahmana, kshatriya, vaishya and shudra. The most famous verse explaining CV is the one from Bhagavad Gita 4:13 which reads as follows:

"cAturvarNyaM mayA sR^iShTaM guNakarmavibhAgashaH
tasya kartAramapi mAM viddhyakartAramavyayaM"

(That is in ITRANS notation, since to my knowledge this editor does not allow devanagari fonts. Readers who are unfamiliar with ITRANS can visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITRANS for an understanding of it)

This shloka means, "the classification into four was created by me according to the properties and actions. Although I am the creator of it (this classification) know me as the non-doer, unperishable."
Elsewhere Krishna asks Arjuna to know him as everything in this universe. The Sun, Moon, oceans, good, bad, everything. He is the universe. So the "created by me" in this verse means, it is a creation of the universe, or rather in the universe it is so. That is why he is again saying "know me as the non-doer" because, it just exists so.
The gunas mentioned here are Satva, Raja and Tamah, the serene, active and passive respectively. Individuals need not be of purely one quality. There could be mixture of qualities too.
Depending on these qualities individuals would perform actions too. One who is purely of the Sativik quality and performs actions like, worship of God, teaching, etc. is Brahmana. He has the ultimate knowledge. "Brahmajnaanee thu brahmanaH". Similarly Kshatriya, Vaishya and Shoodra.
It is clear, that the classification is not by birth, but because of one's own qualities and deedes.
I go into explosive laughter when I hear people making comments like "the days of chaturvarnya is over. This is modern times, all are equal" etc.

Dharma

Dharma is another interesting word in Samskrtam. It is derived from the word Dhar, meaning to hold, to support etc. Dharma is therefore used to denote those attributes and activities which makes something. eg. to shine is the Dharma of Sun.
In most cases the Dharma of a THING can be easily derived from the Samskrta name of that THING. eg. Sun is called Bhaskara. Bhas means, shining. Kara means, one who does. So Bhaskara means one who shines. If Bhaskara stops shining then he is not Bhaskara, Sun.Dharma is what makes a Thing.
Pavana means wind. It is derived from Pav, meaning to purify. Pavana is the purifier, like winnowing of corn. For the mordernites, Dharma is the 'core competency'. Focus on your core competency, on your Dharma.
To identify your core competency, observe into yourself. What makes you? What makes you happy? What makes you content?If you don't do what, and not be what, then you wont be you, that is your Dharma.

Padartha

I was just thinking about the word Padartha in Samskrtam. It is a combination of two words, Pada meaning 'word' and Artha meaning 'meaning'. So the word itself means 'word meaning' or 'meaning of word'. Interestingly this word is used to denote 'objects'. So you could say that padartha means 'object'.
For example 'Agni' is Fire. 'Ap' is Water.

To Samskrtam, Agni and Ap are not the names of those objects or things, viz. Fire and Water. Then?
These objects or things are the meaning of the words Agni and Ap.
So a meaning manifests after the word exists. Interesting?