God as consciousness?

[atanu]

Now there is an apparently contradicting point made by Sri Adi Shankara, where he states that the Atman is the doer, on the grounds that the Vedas imply there is a direct benefit to someone (i.e. Atman) in carrying out the sacrifices. This seems, on first look to be a big contradiction to the teaching of the Gita i.e. Gunas and nature being the doer.

However there is an answer.

What is equally interesting is the fact that one is never apart from that nature. All is one, that Brahman. It is due to turiya (turya) that all has arisen. In addition to this Adi Shankara (I think) concludes that Atman is singular and not plural. In other words there is only one Atman, and that Atman is Brahman i.e. also nature. So the circle is complete. Yes nature is the doer, and turiya is not, but what is nature? Nature is Atman which is Brahman which is turiya. There is no duality just a different ways of explanation "until the penny drops".

Regarding the first part. Shankara says that all acts are on account of adhAsya. That atma is a doer is not mentioned anywhere by shankara. However, in stages, atma is the body, atma is the mind, and ultimaely atma is the atma. So, which atma is the actor, if any?

Actually there is a need to separate out the Turya from its effects. The source is the effects but the effects are not the source.

Regarding, the second part I agree. Whatever path one follows is immaterial since the Truth is indivisible one, its nature is indivisible one, and dukkha in the nature part is also one. So, by following any path, if dukkha is mitigated then one benefits since there are not many in truth.

...

 

[atanu]

Atanu ji, what do you mean by augurs well, please? Do you mean predicts the future?

Nooooo. :areyoucra.

Then it is Turya alone that is known as all good.

...

 

[atanu]

What is equally interesting is the fact that one is never apart from that nature. All is one, that Brahman.

I wish to ask whether you and your thoughts are identical? Whether you and your dreams are identical? Whether dreams change your essential reality?

Scripture teaches us to know the Turya. It is unchanging and it is partless.

It appears to be a difficult concept but it is not. Once the ignorance that I am perishable and continously changing is dispelled, then how does it matter what changes you see as the unchangeable?
...

 

[Onkara]

I cannot find a translation for adhAsya, but assume it to mean apparent to match the blue.

I will try to find the source of that statement, I feel it I have absorbed it from someone else's commentary (dangerous stuff rather than verbatim at this stage ), but none the less you are correct.

Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.17
‘That in which the five groups of five and the akasa rest, that very Atman I regard as the
Immortal Brahman. Knowing that Brahman, I am immortal.’

 

[atanu]

I cannot find a translation for adhAsya, but assume it to mean apparent to match the blue.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/vedanta-dir/108221-error-perception-action.html

Brhadaranyaka Upanishad IV.iv.17
‘That in which the five groups of five and the akasa rest, that very Atman I regard as the Immortal Brahman. Knowing that Brahman, I am immortal.’

atanu starts dreaming.

 

[Onkara]

I wish to ask whether you and your thoughts are identical? Whether you and your dreams are identical? Whether dreams change your essential reality?

Scripture teaches us to know the Turya. It is unchanging and it is partless.

It appears to be a difficult concept but it is not. Once the ignorance that I am perishable and continously changing is dispelled, then how does it matter what changes you see as the unchangeable?
...

I agree with the point you are asking, I don't think you require specific answers here?

This is where the doctrine of no-creation/creator, or ajAti vAda, can be considered. It does not matter, ultimately nothing matters because what changes is apparently within the unchangeable Self, but if we try not to do something and we will be reminded that even that choice is not up to us. We are just getting on with it, it is almost foolish to ask for a reason why

 

[atanu]

-----but if we try not to do something and we will be reminded that even that choice is not up to us. We are just getting on with it, it is almost foolish to ask for a reason why

I once argued with a sage like this. He said "what we?" I then judged that an ocean does not primarily consider itself to be a 'we' along with the waves.

...

 

[Onkara]

lol, very good
Sometimes I wonder why these threads go on. They seems to go in circles. The sages ares correct (as we have recently discussed elsewhere) when it is said, "Time is up, step out of the circle and switch off the mind. " The fact that the mind is on or off is really irrelevant as there is no "doer" to make that choice. So why does this go on, I can only conclude it is Spanda.

 

[zenzero]

Friend onkara,

Sometimes I wonder why these threads go on. They seems to go in circles. The sages ares correct (as we have recently discussed elsewhere) when it is said, "Time is up, step out of the circle and switch off the mind. " The fact that the mind is on or off is really irrelevant as there is no "doer" to make that choice. So why does this go on, I can only conclude it is Spanda

The point to be conscious of is the very fact that till the mind is *one* is and as soon as that mind stills out of any reason/method, Truth IS!

Love & rgds

 

[Onkara]

Hello Zenzero

is and as soon as that mind stills out of any reason/method, Truth IS!

I am not clear on the last part of your sentance quoted above, please could you explain or edit "stills out of any reason", do you mean when the mind starts thinking it stops us from seeing the truth?

I realise that it is thinking which "muddies the water" and stops truth from being clear.

The question becomes does it matter, does it really make any difference if there is thinking going on as one can still know that it is thinking which distracts the truth which lies underneath?

 

[zenzero]

Friend Onkara,

I am not clear on the last part of your sentance quoted above, please could you explain or edit "stills out of any reason", do you mean when the mind starts thinking it stops us from seeing the truth?

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pointers to the same have been offered from the beginning in almost all posts.
It is that simple. Still the MIND and TRUTH simply IS!
All religions are nothing but mere ways or paths to STILLING the MIND and that state of mind is called MEDITATION /satori/samadhi/etc.
Usually one reaches there by concentration i.e. fixing the mind on one point , picture of a god, japa, etc.
If one gets hit suddenly or some extraordinary incident takes place that draws immediate attention the mind STILLS but one is not conscious at the moment of such stillness of the mind and similarly there are many moments in everyday life that one's mind stills but unconsciously and that is why have always stated that evolution continues one evolves or gets carried away by the eternal evolution in this process.
Personal understanding is that the SELF has been historically given weightage and so individual perceptions have found the ground and so *atma* have found place whereas since atma is nothing but part of the mahatma which again is simply an understanding.

Love & rgds

 

[Onkara]

Yes, thanks ZZ, I know you are right about stilling the mind

 

[sneha123]

Hello friends,,,thanks you for your experience ,,,,nice and heavy work..it seems to be the foundation for everything and yet nothing that arises or is known by consciousness is as eternal as consciousness itself. Mind goggling stuff ........than i like that.............:bow::bow:

 

[atanu]

Friend Onkara,

EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Pointers to the same have been offered from the beginning in almost all posts.
It is that simple. Still the MIND and TRUTH simply IS!
All religions are nothing but mere ways or paths to STILLING the MIND and that state of mind is called MEDITATION /satori/samadhi/etc.
Usually one reaches there by concentration i.e. fixing the mind on one point , picture of a god, japa, etc.
If one gets hit suddenly or some extraordinary incident takes place that draws immediate attention the mind STILLS but one is not conscious at the moment of such stillness of the mind and similarly there are many moments in everyday life that one's mind stills but unconsciously and that is why have always stated that evolution continues one evolves or gets carried away by the eternal evolution in this process.
Personal understanding is that the SELF has been historically given weightage and so individual perceptions have found the ground and so *atma* have found place whereas since atma is nothing but part of the mahatma which again is simply an understanding.

Love & rgds

Where is my special friend Zen? I miss you.

But, I, with all might oppose the above portion in blue fonts. Atma as a word OK, I agree. But Atma as signifying the ground where from the Aham arises is more evident than any other evident thing.
...

 

[zenzero]

Friend atanu,

Since the *dyan* nowadays lies more on dyan itself than communication so is the lack of presence here.
Rgds the atma was trying to get across that historically instead of stating that the individual is only a part of that whole has always been giving stress as an individual identity and that has given rise to EGO more than anything else.
Everyday when we have others around calling our name our hearts gladden instead of taking it as a pointer to the consciousness that is within the body labelled with another name of the whole.
Over to you friend atanu!

Love & rgds

 

[atanu]

Friend atanu,

Since the *dyan* nowadays lies more on dyan itself than communication so is the lack of presence here.
Rgds the atma was trying to get across that historically instead of stating that the individual is only a part of that whole has always been giving stress as an individual identity and that has given rise to EGO more than anything else.
Everyday when we have others around calling our name our hearts gladden instead of taking it as a pointer to the consciousness that is within the body labelled with another name of the whole.
Over to you friend atanu!

Love & rgds

May your dhyan be successful and may its peace and joy spill over to me too.

Regards

 

[zer0]

Well... That is an interesting concept and one I have been considering. However, I have raised to myself several questions about this concept.

1. Who and What has consciousness?
2. Can God exist where consciousness does not?
3. If I tap into my pure consciousness (what the Vedas call Turiya) and you tap into you're pure consciousness are we in the same consciousness?
4. If your answer to number 3 is yes then if I kill myself, shouldn't you die? Or at least a part of your consciousness.
5. If you answered no to number 3 then what makes it God?
6. If every conscious thing died tomorrow, would God cease to exist?

 

[Madhuri]

Well... That is an interesting concept and one I have been considering. However, I have raised to myself several questions about this concept.

1. Who and What has consciousness?
2. Can God exist where consciousness does not?
3. If I tap into my pure consciousness (what the Vedas call Turiya) and you tap into you're pure consciousness are we in the same consciousness?
4. If your answer to number 3 is yes then if I kill myself, shouldn't you die? Or at least a part of your consciousness.
5. If you answered no to number 3 then what makes it God?
6. If every conscious thing died tomorrow, would God cease to exist?

Simple answer:

1) Everything is consciousness.
2) God is limitless, there is no possibility of God being where consciousness is not, since all of existence is consciousness.
3) & 4) Whether we 'tap into' our consciousness or not does not change that we are consciousness. Matter and Spirit are consciousness. Matter changes (ie/ physical decomposition) but the soul is eternal. This means that the question of death is irrelevant as you and I will never die.
5) God is both the Creator and the Created. God can be referred to as the Whole (of existence), and yet something Other as well.
6) No such thing as death. Consciousness is eternal. God is eternal. We're all eternal.

From a Vedic perspective, all of existence is manifest from Consciousness, this consciousness being God. What you think of as spirit or matter and energy is but forms of consciousness. The body is formed of consciousness. The concept of death is an illusion, the physical changes, does not 'die'. The individual transitions from one body to another. It never 'dies'. Consciousness does not 'die'. God is eternal. We are a part and parcel of God. We are eternal souls.

 

[zer0]

Simple answer:

1) Everything is consciousness.
A rock is consciousness? Is this animism?
2) God is limitless, there is no possibility of God being where consciousness is not, since all of existence is consciousness.
If existence is consciousness and God is consciousness then God is all of existence. If this is so, then when I am unconscious, I.e. lacking the consciousness of my self, I perceive a period of non-existence. Is God there?
3) & 4) Whether we 'tap into' our consciousness or not does not change that we are consciousness. Matter and Spirit are consciousness. Matter changes (ie/ physical decomposition) but the soul is eternal. This means that the question of death is irrelevant as you and I will never die.
Eh... I find this concept to be fallacious but I haven't quite devised the parameters of how it is a fallacy. I won't deny it or accept it though. It just seems to be flawed some how.
5) God is both the Creator and the Created. God can be referred to as the Whole (of existence), and yet something Other as well.
I like the way Patanjali put it

"It is not possible for the mind to be both the perceived and the perceive simultaneously." - 4.20 The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali

In the same sense how can it be possible for a creator to be both the object of the creation and the creator simultaneously? Your whole theory of God is slowly turning into what I've began to refer to not as the deity of God but as the Phenomenon of God.

6) No such thing as death. Consciousness is eternal. God is eternal. We're all eternal.

Death, my friend, is very real and I guarantee you it has little to do with Consciousness. Even if Consciousness is eternal, death is still real. Death is the loss of this worldly existence. I guarantee you that everyone I know who has died, has lost this worldy existence, and I too have lost them. To say death is not real is the first step of denying ones own reality.

From a Vedic perspective, all of existence is manifest from Consciousness, this consciousness being God. What you think of as spirit or matter and energy is but forms of consciousness. The body is formed of consciousness. The concept of death is an illusion, the physical changes, does not 'die'. The individual transitions from one body to another. It never 'dies'. Consciousness does not 'die'. God is eternal. We are a part and parcel of God. We are eternal souls.

I feel that you're turning Consciousness into something other than what it has been known to be my friend. How about this. If there were only one conscious being in the entire universe, would your idea of consciousness be applicable? Thank you as well for your timely and considered reply, it is appreciated.

 

[zenzero]

Friend ZerO,

If there were only one conscious being in the entire universe, would your idea of consciousness be applicable?

Consciousness IS in forms and no-forms.
What is seen, perceived, discussed etc is not IT as one inform considering itself to be a separate entity due to the mind created delusions/maya/illusion then the consciousness within or individual consciousness can be said to merging with universal consciousness and BEING IT though in reality there are no two and if it is one or none cannot be discussed as after being nothing can be communicated about IT as it contains the communicator itself!
Love & rgds