Freedom versus Death: The essence of Upanishadic teaching

[Left Coast]

I did some edit.

But most common sense question will be “Who knows the neuronal process?”

My answer remains the same: we do. What is self-awareness, but the ability to make an object of one's own subject?

 

[shivsomashekhar]

That is not incorrect. mAyA is neither real nor unreal. It is ignorance.

Ignorance is real.

 

[atanu]

If we figured that our consciousness came to be through an evolutionary process, .....?

How is this different from "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."?

 

[rational experiences]

How is this different from "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."?

That status was a story themed by all living males about God the stone fusion in fission, and the image of his own man/male self was because it was given oxygen which in the upper gases burning, water cools it.

At the ground fission is given our oxygen also....if you used scientific wisdom.

 

[atanu]

Ignorance is real.

Yes. Effect of ignorance is real. But, real is 'sat' -- that which does not change from time to time. Ignorance can be removed. So, it is called 'mithya' -- neither asat nor sat. Neither untrue nor true.

 

[rational experiences]

Yes. Effect of ignorance is real. But, real is 'sat' -- that which does not change from time to time. Ignorance can be removed. So, it is called 'mithya' -- neither asat nor sat. Neither untrue nor true.

Are you ignorant first?

No.

Do you become ignorant!

The answer is yes....for it was learnt.

 

[atanu]

i'm googling these terms for more in depth understanding. i may have more questions. thanks for the insights

You may directly study Mandukya Upanishad, preferably the translation by Swami Prabhannda and Isherwood.

 

[sayak83]

Note: I have consciously posted this under 'Science and Religion', expecting some scientific input. However, mods may move this post appropriately, if required.

We are all deluded that we are the body that generates the mind. We come to believe that we (the selves) take birth as bodies which enjoy some fleeting bliss and many travails and eventually die painful deaths. This is the common materialistic worldview.

The Vedantic-Advaitic-Idealistic view is diametrically opposite and may come as an unbelievable shock to those who hear of it for the first time. As per the Vedanta, in deep sleep, we are pure potential awareness — nothing is known in deep sleep since the realm is non-dual; it being devoid of any sort of contrast of sound, touch, taste, sight, or smell. It is pure dense potential awareness. From the pure potential awareness of the deep sleep arises the subtle dream body to which the mind attaches and experiences a subtle world. This manifestation is entirely mental, devoid of input from senses. But, while in a dream, our experiences of pain or joy are not unreal. Only on waking, we come to know the unreality.

Again when dream transitions to waking, senses open up and in association with mind, it shows us a gross world and a gross body that is used for experiencing inputs from five senses — sound, smell, sight, taste, and touch. The touch function is killing, it delineates a boundary as if — necessary for sexual enjoyment etc. — and this leads to the idea “I am this body”. This association and all associated pains will last till the death of the body unless one enquires deeply and gets rid of the false notion “I am this body” and finds that “I am” is distinct.

Till the ignorance “I am this body” lasts, all actions take place to fulfil the needs of the body and mostly these actions conflict with actions originating from other bodies.

The funny thing is this. It is a fact that we (as body-mind) have not created our faculty of awareness, of mind, of intellect and of senses — and the multiform universe. All these are given to us. Remember that in deep sleep we exist blissfully as non-dual potential awareness wherefrom all these arise. The Mind-Intellect knows not as to how these creations arise. But the mind believes that the created objects are real and that the awareness with which it discerns the objects to be a product of the seen objects. The mind tries to fabricate stories as to how the seen mental sensual objects have created the “I am” awareness. This is, in my understanding, a magical faith. The mind is fooled into believing that the very objects that mind-senses perceive are the sources of the self-awareness. The materialistic presumption that a mind born of a mechanism can understand the mechanism of its own birth, is in my opinion, an absurd belief.

However, once a person hears the aforesaid that unborn awareness is the reality upon which all mind-sense objects subsist, there is a chance that intellect may analyse the facts. The intellect may guide the mind to introvert and find its own source. A fraction of folks will succeed and will be freed of the bondage of the notion of birth-death for the self. But hearing of the Vedanta is auspicious for all.

This, in my opinion, is the essence of the Upanishadic teaching that can tear away the veil of ignorance, known as mAyA.

...

A possible counter would be to say that the self or consciousness simply ceases to exist during deep sleep (turned off as a computer can be turned off) and switches back into existence during dream and waking states. Thus a materialist will say that the very fact that the self/consciousness turns off and turns on every night shows that it is a derivative activity of that which is always present...the material brain and its structures.
How would you answer this objection?
(Several neuroscientists and, interestingly, Buddha have made this objection)

 

[viole]

Note: I have consciously posted this under 'Science and Religion', expecting some scientific input. However, mods may move this post appropriately, if required.

We are all deluded that we are the body that generates the mind. We come to believe that we (the selves) take birth as bodies which enjoy some fleeting bliss and many travails and eventually die painful deaths. This is the common materialistic worldview.

The Vedantic-Advaitic-Idealistic view is diametrically opposite and may come as an unbelievable shock to those who hear of it for the first time. As per the Vedanta, in deep sleep, we are pure potential awareness — nothing is known in deep sleep since the realm is non-dual; it being devoid of any sort of contrast of sound, touch, taste, sight, or smell. It is pure dense potential awareness. From the pure potential awareness of the deep sleep arises the subtle dream body to which the mind attaches and experiences a subtle world. This manifestation is entirely mental, devoid of input from senses. But, while in a dream, our experiences of pain or joy are not unreal. Only on waking, we come to know the unreality.

Again when dream transitions to waking, senses open up and in association with mind, it shows us a gross world and a gross body that is used for experiencing inputs from five senses — sound, smell, sight, taste, and touch. The touch function is killing, it delineates a boundary as if — necessary for sexual enjoyment etc. — and this leads to the idea “I am this body”. This association and all associated pains will last till the death of the body unless one enquires deeply and gets rid of the false notion “I am this body” and finds that “I am” is distinct.

Till the ignorance “I am this body” lasts, all actions take place to fulfil the needs of the body and mostly these actions conflict with actions originating from other bodies.

The funny thing is this. It is a fact that we (as body-mind) have not created our faculty of awareness, of mind, of intellect and of senses — and the multiform universe. All these are given to us. Remember that in deep sleep we exist blissfully as non-dual potential awareness wherefrom all these arise. The Mind-Intellect knows not as to how these creations arise. But the mind believes that the created objects are real and that the awareness with which it discerns the objects to be a product of the seen objects. The mind tries to fabricate stories as to how the seen mental sensual objects have created the “I am” awareness. This is, in my understanding, a magical faith. The mind is fooled into believing that the very objects that mind-senses perceive are the sources of the self-awareness. The materialistic presumption that a mind born of a mechanism can understand the mechanism of its own birth, is in my opinion, an absurd belief.

However, once a person hears the aforesaid that unborn awareness is the reality upon which all mind-sense objects subsist, there is a chance that intellect may analyse the facts. The intellect may guide the mind to introvert and find its own source. A fraction of folks will succeed and will be freed of the bondage of the notion of birth-death for the self. But hearing of the Vedanta is auspicious for all.

This, in my opinion, is the essence of the Upanishadic teaching that can tear away the veil of ignorance, known as mAyA.

...

Did you , or some Vedantic-Advaitic-Idealistic philosopher, have this during a dream?

Ciao

- viole

 

[rational experiences]

Did you , or some Vedantic-Advaitic-Idealistic philosopher, have this during a dream?

Ciao

- viole

I understand the concept of what is said, until you get irradiated sacrificed and wake up to the fact that the Sun did not create life it removed it.....then you live in a dream state organized by everyone else's pre conceived ideals until they all get awoken by the same circumstance.

So those who awake try to warn those still asleep.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Did you , or some Vedantic-Advaitic-Idealistic philosopher, have this during a dream?

Ciao

- viole

If only you understood the irony of your question.

 

[Koldo]

How is this different from "And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul."?

Historicity?

 

[Tambourine]

Yes. Effect of ignorance is real. But, real is 'sat' -- that which does not change from time to time. Ignorance can be removed. So, it is called 'mithya' -- neither asat nor sat. Neither untrue nor true.

That sounds like a very Greek way to look at things, like Parmenides believing that Being is eternal and unchanging, and therefore, that which is not eternal and changes over time is not really in existence.

But how can we even grasp the idea of immutability and eternity, if not as opposition to change and mortality? It appears to me that it would not be possible for us to believe in something that is unchanging and eternal, were it not for us existing as mortal beings of change.

 

[atanu]

A possible counter would be to say that the self or consciousness simply ceases to exist during deep sleep (turned off as a computer can be turned off) and switches back into existence during dream and waking states. Thus a materialist will say that the very fact that the self/consciousness turns off and turns on every night shows that it is a derivative activity of that which is always present...the material brain and its structures.
How would you answer this objection?
(Several neuroscientists and, interestingly, Buddha have made this objection)

Yes. But see if some people wish to designate the seen as the seer, it must be their problem.

Regarding the Buddha. He taught no self in any born and compounded object. So, he taught drilling down to Nirvana, rejecting Vijnana risen on account of mental-sensual contacts but taking the support of Prajnana. The Nirvana that one attains, rejecting all compounded objects allows discernment of Liberation from Samsara. If Nirvana was not intrinsically endowed with competence for discernment then the arahant would not know of the freedom from the bondage of samsara.

Vedantists, on the other hand, reject every object that can be pointed as 'this', by employing the mechanism of 'Neti-Neti (Not This Not This) and attains ones nature as Brahman of intrinsic nature of consciousness.

I do not see any difference except in words.
...

 

[atanu]

Did you , or some Vedantic-Advaitic-Idealistic philosopher, have this during a dream?

Ha ha. I laughed heartily.

It is like a lion's roar in a dream -- although you are scared to death, yet the roar wakes you up. Anyway, this is certainly not for you. Just ignore.

 

[sayak83]

Yes. But see if some people wish to designate the seen as the seer, it must be their problem.


...

I agree with your basic thesis. I am saying that argument regarding deep sleep would look flimsy to a materialist. So something else would be needed.

 

[atanu]

I agree with your basic thesis. I am saying that argument regarding deep sleep would look flimsy to a materialist. So something else would be needed.

Agree. To a mind deeply entangled in the notion "I am this body", the idea of consciousness being the Ontological Primitive will appear absurd. But that will not be same for the thoughtful scientists, IMO.