Are the intelligence and ego just transformations of the mind or are they constitutionally different?

Are the intelligence and the ego just transformations of the mind, which just act in different ways? Answer, when we come to the question of ontology, ontology means nature of existence. And, functionality refers to the nature of how things function. So, when we come to the, when we are at the gross material or physical realm, then we can see that, okay, this is solid, this is liquid, this is gaseous or whatever, like that, we can pursue the structure with our senses and we can understand that there are differences.
So, for example, if we have air and we have water, there is not just a difference in nomenclature, there is not just a difference in the way they function, there is a difference in the very nature of their existence. But when we go to subtle things, we cannot process the subtle things the same way as we process gross things. So, now the standard example, which is given for the whole subtle body is like a computer software.
Now, if I want to say that, if I look at the hardware, I can say that the monitor is made of some particular material and the keypad is made of some other material, there are differences there. Now, if I want to go deeper and I look at, say, the software part, so there is a system OS is there and then there are general programs like a system OS, Microsoft Windows 7 or 8 or whatever. Then we have specific software like Office or we have more specific applications like Flash Player.
Now, they all have different names, they all have different functions. But if you go into terms of what they are made of, are they different? Ultimately, they are all digital codes. They are just patterns of one zero, which is stored in the electronic circuitry somewhere.
So, the software, in a functional sense, it is different. In an ontological sense, it’s just a pattern of zeros and ones. So, is it exactly different or not? We cannot apply the criteria for differentiation that we apply at a gross level to the subtle level because the nature of subtle reality is different.
So, now if we look at the system of classification, Krishna talks about these three subtle elements mind, intelligence and ego in 7.4 7.4 7.4 But then, again, when he talks about a hierarchy in 3.42 7.4 7.4 7.4 So, when he talks about this hierarchy, at that time he doesn’t talk about the ego, he says about the body the senses Indriyebhyaparammana about the senses of the mind Manasastuparabuddhe above the mind is intelligence and above the intelligence Yobuddhe parapastusa and that refers to the soul. So, above the intelligence is the soul. So, in this hierarchy, Krishna doesn’t talk about the false ego.
The Upanishads also reiterate this hierarchy. Prabhupada’s purport talks about the Upanishadic verse which says above the soul is the super soul. So, in this hierarchy, the false ego is not mentioned.
So, in the 11th canto, in the Uddhava Vita, Vishwanath Jagatapuran in his commentary writes that actually the system of Sankhya, where there is classification of matter into various elements, that can be done differently by different sages. So, some sages may classify material nature into 24 elements, which is the standard that we hear, but others may classify it into 16 elements, some may classify it into 13 elements. So, that differentiation can happen depending on the way things are classified.
So, therefore, from a functional point of view, we know definitely that there is a difference between the mind, intelligence and ego. Now, from the ontological point of view, from the point of view of nature of existence, are they different or are they one? So, the important point is that with respect to subtle reality, it is difficult for us to apply the rules of gross reality over there. So, as far as I have seen, I have not come across any explicit statement talking about whether they are essentially different or one.
But, if we look at the continuity, Bhumi, Raa, Poon, Alo, Vayu, Kham, we know these are not just differences in terms of name, they are all differences in terms of nature also. And Krishna is giving this in the same hierarchy. So, those who want to make a logical inference, they can make a logical inference and just as these are different, they are also different.
So, therefore, intelligence, mind and ego are also different. So, that position can also be supported as an inference. But, from the point of view of subtle elements, there are several places, even in the Puranjan pastime, where the intelligence is talked about and the mind is talked about.
Some places the ego is not talked about. The Puranjan pastime can be interpreted in different ways. But the point is that rather than talking about whether they are same or they are different, because both positions, one can quote from scripture and support.
The most important thing for us to understand is that subtle realm is something which we can’t really access. So, in terms of understanding what it is, how we can connect with this, how we are applying it. So, we can use our, we can, from a functional point of view, we try to bring the mind under the control of the intelligence.
That is what we can do and that is what we should focus on. But, both positions can be supported by quoting scripture and my understanding is that things in subtle realm, we cannot just extrapolate from the gross realm and apply the same systems. So, it could be that at the subtle realm, just like in software, essentially its codes are similar but nobody will mistake a software, an application for OS because they are so different.
But at the same time, at one level, they are similar. So, like that, the function of the mind and intelligence are substantially different. But then, they are in some way similar.
So, let’s focus on the functional aspects of things and learn to control the mind with the intelligence. Now, in the third canto, when Krishna talks about it, he talks about, can we call it intelligence and ego are phases of the mind? Not exactly because it is described that that point cannot be sustained. We can say that all three are variations of the same thing.
We could say that there is one subtle realm which from functional point of view differentiates in three things. But is the mind the original? Not exactly. The Bhagavatam doesn’t talk about it that way.
It describes how in the Pradhana, when it contacts the mode of goodness, it produces the mind. When it contacts the mode of passion, it produces the intelligence. Or rather, it’s the false ego.
Sorry, not Pradhana. The false ego, when it contacts with the goodness, it produces mind. False ego contacts with the passion, it produces intelligence.
And then, false ego, when it contacts with the mode of ignorance, produces the senses. Subtle senses. Not the gross senses but subtle senses.
So, from this point of view, if we look at the way things are unfolding as described in the Bhagavatam, the false ego comes first. So, in that sense, we could say that the mind and intelligence are variants of the false ego. If you just want to go from the chronological point of view.
But it’s clearly described that this plus a combination of this will lead to this. So, just like we say that Lord Vishnu, when he comes in contact with Shiva, no, Lord Vishnu when he comes in contact with the mode of ignorance, then Lord Shiva manifests. So, are they different? Are they same? They are different, no doubt.
But at the same time, they are not completely different. Lord Shiva’s position is significantly similar to that of Vishnu. And to consider him entirely different from Vishnu is also offensive according to Jiva Goswami.
So, same way, we could say that the false ego is the fundamental. And even in the process of yoga, the Bhagavatam describes that, say, when Maharaja Yudhishthira is meditating, so that he can attain self-realization. So, it’s described that he withdraws the elements back.
So, he withdraws the senses into the subtler element. And then like that, first he withdraws the senses into the mind, the mind into the intelligence, and the intelligence into the ego. So, that means that surely it’s not the mind that is transformed into intelligence and ego.
It is that from the ego, intelligence and mind are coming. And it is into the ego that they are withdrawn. So, at least from a chronological point of view of origination, the false ego comes first and then subsequent elements come.
Now, what is the extent of the differentiation or similarity between them? That is something which is, which will require deeper study. But from our practical point of view, we know the different functionalities and focus on learning this inner dynamics so that we can go and control the mind with the intelligence and eventually we conquer, we break through the ego and attain self-realization. Thank you.