prakāśatvam

The phrase “saccidānanda” has become almost a cliché. The existence (sat) aspect, and ānanda (bliss) aspect are often explained. But, what does cit (consciousness) mean?

The dṛg-dṛśya-viveka talks about cit as bhānam --

asti bhāti priyaṁ rūpaṁ nāma cetyaṁśapañcakam | ādyaṁ trayaṁ brahmarūpaṁ jagadrūpaṁ tato dvayam || 20

and the vākya-sudhā commentary explicitly links this to cit, and prakāśa --

asti = vidyate, bhāti = prakāśate, priyaṁ = premāspadam … saccidānanda-rūpanāma-lakṣaṇa …

so we now see that cit = bhānam = prakāśatvam. The mānasollāsa on the dakṣiṇāmurti-stotram asks a pertinent question using the latter terminology. Where do astitvam and prakāśatvam have their basis?

asti prakāśata iti vyavahāraḥ pravartate | taccāstitvaṁ prakāśatvaṁ kasminnarthe pratiṣṭhitam || 1.4

and it also starts giving us some answers a little later on. Whatever illuminates the dream also illuminates the waking state --

svapne prakāśo bhāvānāṁ svaprakāśānna hītaraḥ | jāgratyapi tathaiveti niścinvanti vipaścitaḥ || 1.11

To provide a little more clarity, we can look at the commentary which explains this a little furthur:

svapne bhāvānāṁ dṛśyānām arthānām prakāśaḥ svaprakāśād adhiṣṭhānātmaprakāśāt na hi itaraḥ svatantraḥ | svasattāhīnasya svataḥ sphuraṇasya api abhāvāt ityarthaḥ ||

i.e. in a dream, what illumines the dream objects? Nothing other than the very consciousness that has projected into a dream state. The dream objects have no separate existence. The dream state has no separate consciousness.

Thus, the concept of consciousness, and illumination are strongly tied together. We have a tendency to take the notion of consciousness as illumination (prakāśatvam / bhānam) literally. After all, the vedas themselves use this illustration (atrāyaṁ puruṣaḥ svayaṁjyotiḥ), and this is often repeated by other vedantic texts like the aparokṣānubhūti (ātmā prakāśakaḥ svacchaḥ).

However, this should not be taken literally. In the aparokṣānubhūti, śaṁkarācārya clearly tries to clarify the situation --

ātmanastatprakāśatvaṁ yatpadārthāvabhāsanam | nāgnyādidīptivad dīptirbhavatyāndhyaṁ yato niśi || 22

Illumination is an illustration used to depict a means of knowledge, as it were. It is not a literal illumination like a fire. After all, the cit nature of the self allows us to experience all aspects of the world around us – including both daylight and darkness. If consciousness were of the nature of light, it would destroy the darkness altogether. Our experience tells us otherwise. We are able to experience darkness, and it is our consciousness that “illuminates” this experience. This is how the illumination aspect of the self must be understood.

The hastāmalakīya-bhāṣyam also throws some light on this:

raviḥ ādityaḥ yathā yena prakāreṇa prakāśatvena lokānāṁ ceṣṭāyāṁ spandane nimittaṁ hetuḥ, tathaiva adhiṣṭhātṛtvena yo nimittaṁ, so’ham ātmeti arthaḥ .. 1