Karma in Advaita

[shivsomashekhar]

What kind of 'Chetana'? There is a human, animal or even a vegetation 'Chetana'. That is basically a chemical / electric 'Chetana', though that too depends on the 'Chetana' of Brahman. The 'Chetana' of Brahman is different*. Much work needs to be done on that.

* Fundamental interaction - Wikipedia, Unification (physics) - Wikipedia, Fundamental interaction - Wikipedia, Fifth force - Wikipedia

In Advaita there is only one Chetana. There is no room for anything else. And this is the crux of the doctrine.

This is the only way Advaita can logically be correct. Else, it is just bheda-abheda falsely claiming to be non-dual.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

In Advaita there is only one Chetana. There is no room for anything else. And this is the crux of the doctrine.

This is the only way Advaita can logically be correct. Else, it is just bheda-abheda falsely claiming to be non-dual.

Who's Chetana? Mind giving a description of this Chetana.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

Who's Chetana? Mind giving a description of this Chetana.

Chetana is the Sanskrit work for Consciousness

Also, read up on Vijnanavada - a flavor of Buddhism that comes strikingly close -
Vijñānavāda | Encyclopedia.com (The basic postulate of the school is that consciousness itself is the fundamental and only reality, and that the apparent diversity of the empirical world is the product of instability and obscuration in the individual field of consciousness)

 

[Aupmanyav]

In Advaita there is only one Chetana. There is no room for anything else. And this is the crux of the doctrine.

Yeah, there is only one 'chetana', that of the Brahman. Human 'chetana' is an illusion, like all things human.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

So what does Brahman do with this chetana, when jagat and jivas remain unmanifested in seed form after pralaya?

 

[Aupmanyav]

So what does Brahman do with this chetana, when jagat and jivas remain unmanifested in seed form after pralaya?

Pralaya is what they mention in Hindu scriptures, the universe folding up. Science does not know if there is non-existence or what happens in non-existence. That is not a question that can be answered today, humans will need to wait for a future when this can be answered. Since this universe has come up, so, IMHO, it is reasonable to think that after the non-existence phase there will be another phase of existence. Perhaps it is a cycle (as mentioned in Hindu scriptures). Again, IMHO, the two phase are necessary, because the other option is to believe in eternal existence of the universe - which is not reasonable. That ends in the question "from where did it crop up?". Vaishnavas say, the Lord sleeps. Perhaps that is non-existence.

Perhaps it is some kind of wave-funtion colapse.

 

[Viswa]

From an Advaitic perspective, who set in motion the law of karma?

Is it Saguna Brahman
or
Nirguna Brahman?

Did the upanishadic sages like Uddalaka, Yajnavalkya or later scholars like Gaudapada, Shankara etc. comment on the origin of "law of karma"?

Many of you will probably say, that since this vyavaharika/jagat/waking-state, is merely an illusion/dream when seen from the absolute point of view, there comes no question of rebirth, death, karma, etc.
Yes, its true that when seen from an absolute POV, its like a dream. Unless we wake up to the ultimate reality it will continue as a dream.

... But here i would like to add something, based on what i've read in some modern day Advaita web articles.

The vyavaharika satya or jagat along with its karma, rebirth etc. is not completely mithya. Its not completely true either.

As long we live in this world and keep on believing this dream to be true... the jagat, rebirth, law of karma will keep on operating for us. This means they're not completely mithya.

When advaitins say it is mithya, they simply mean its not what it seems ... (i.e. this jagat along with its varieties is only an apparent reality superimposed on the formless, birthless, karma-less brahman).

In advaita, the jagat is neither completely mithya nor completely true. Its just an apparent, transactional and impermanent reality, and not the ultimate reality.

My point is, if jagat is not totally mithya, then law of karma (which operates in this jagat) is also not totally mithya.
So my question is, who set in motion the law of karma?

Greetings Greg.

Karma is Bondage to Action. Any action happens in the world, any (Good or Bad or Beauty or Disgusting or Dharmic or Adharmic or War or Peace), and one gets "Bonded" to that action sets 'birth-life' in motion, to experience results of such bondaged actions. If one does any act, any, without any 'will' to happen like 'this', don't seek any results from such action and do it for the duty sake, not to make people happy or not to protect them from sadness - no result oriented thought while doing such action, that action don't make "Bondage" - so no Karmic Law acts to one such.

So, it is the "Individual" creates Karmic effects by "Bonding" to "Actions and it's results". In this sense, "I am not the doer and Prakriti/Nature/Gunas acts and I witness all, Nothing is there did/to be done to any, Nothing is there to seek/attain/achieve by me" is said.

Staying away from seeking results/actions/people, staying away from Bondage towards actions/results/people/things, sets/realize the freedom one is/being, free from Karmic effects, Unattached. If it/people/things are there, let it be. If they go away, let it be. Not Attached to it in it's leave. Not Aversion to it in it's presence. If they are remaining peaceful, let it be. If they are fighting with each other, let it be. No sense of responsibility. No need to change them. Just remain peaceful/content with me, whatever happens inside/outside.

 

[shivsomashekhar]

So what does Brahman do with this chetana, when jagat and jivas remain unmanifested in seed form after pralaya?

Brahman = Chetana.

This is where Advaita differs from other schools of Vedanta.

The concept of Jagat includes time. If there is no Jagat, there is no time. You are keeping the two separate, which leads to a very incorrect view of Advaita.

 

[The Crimson Universe]

Greetings Greg.

Karma is Bondage to Action. Any action happens in the world, any (Good or Bad or Beauty or Disgusting or Dharmic or Adharmic or War or Peace), and one gets "Bonded" to that action sets 'birth-life' in motion, to experience results of such bondaged actions. If one does any act, any, without any 'will' to happen like 'this', don't seek any results from such action and do it for the duty sake, not to make people happy or not to protect them from sadness - no result oriented thought while doing such action, that action don't make "Bondage" - so no Karmic Law acts to one such.

So, it is the "Individual" creates Karmic effects by "Bonding" to "Actions and it's results". In this sense, "I am not the doer and Prakriti/Nature/Gunas acts and I witness all, Nothing is there did/to be done to any, Nothing is there to seek/attain/achieve by me" is said.

Staying away from seeking results/actions/people, staying away from Bondage towards actions/results/people/things, sets/realize the freedom one is/being, free from Karmic effects, Unattached. If it/people/things are there, let it be. If they go away, let it be. Not Attached to it in it's leave. Not Aversion to it in it's presence. If they are remaining peaceful, let it be. If they are fighting with each other, let it be. No sense of responsibility. No need to change them. Just remain peaceful/content with me, whatever happens inside/outside.

Yes Gita says the same thing. Don't consider yourself the doer. Don't expect the fruits of actions. Remain equipoised in all situations and you'll be free from the cycle of karma. :=)

Now suppose i'm walking down the street and i come across a bank.
I tell myself "Hey, i'm not really the body/mind. I'm simply the actionless Atman/Brahman.
... So, why not "I" the actionless witness continue to remain as a actionless witness, and let this body/mind that I'm clinging onto, do what it feels like (for e.g. rob the bank)."

Do you think "I" the witness will comitt any sin from this action?

 

[The Crimson Universe]

Brahman = Chetana.

This is where Advaita differs from other schools of Vedanta.

The concept of Jagat includes time. If there is no Jagat, there is no time. You are keeping the two separate, which leads to a very incorrect view of Advaita.

I'm aware that jagat comes in the plane of maya (time, space, causation).
So are you saying that there exists no jagat or time... and only Brahman/Chetana exists?

 

[shivsomashekhar]

So are you saying that there exists no jagat or time... and only Brahman/Chetana exists?

No. There is a universe, past and present that we directly witness. We cannot dismiss them as unreal.

Per Advaita, Consciousness (aka Brahman aka Chetana) projects all of this.

There is only one consciousness - yours. It is projecting everything - including the world you see, other people and it is also projecting the past. The latter is very important to understand and is worth repeating - your consciousness is projecting the past. None of these projected objects have independent existence - apart from your consciousness.

This is not some metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. It is an intellectual realization as mentioned by Shankara numerous times.

 

[Viswa]

Yes Gita says the same thing. Don't consider yourself the doer. Don't expect the fruits of actions. Remain equipoised in all situations and you'll be free from the cycle of karma. :=)

Now suppose i'm walking down the street and i come across a bank.
I tell myself "Hey, i'm not really the body/mind. I'm simply the actionless Atman/Brahman.
... So, why not "I" the actionless witness continue to remain as a actionless witness, and let this body/mind that I'm clinging onto, do what it feels like (for e.g. rob the bank)."

Do you think "I" the witness will comitt any sin from this action?

Hey. Good one. Yes, Gita says so and also many like Yoga Vasishta. Not the doer anyone, like a dream/illusion everything, so how can a doer in an apparent reality!!. If one's bondage to all actions/people/things gets reduced to zero, then no seeking of liberation desired - whether moksha happens or not - don't care - as nothing affects one.

It's not about "telling" oneself "I am not the body/mind/etc", but relieving oneself from "bondage" towards body/mind/universe/actions/people/knowledge/experiences. See, if one wants to derive any pleasure from any action (like the eg. you said about robbery), then still a bondage towards Money that, "It will help me attain something - like things/etc.", is still there.

Bondage matters. Seeking pleasure matters. Not repeating/telling "I am not the body/etc.". If one really sees "I have no pleasure to derive from these actions/things/people", one gets delighted in Bliss. Bliss is experienced in actionless Mind. When one is Blissful or satisfied with oneself, no pleasure from Money/women/Fame/Followers/Slaves - are seeked. No thoughts give upon them as the mind is purely satisfied with Bliss.

Mind always seeks pleasure from movement from action/people/things/thoughts, from sense objects through sense organs. If it dives in full of Bliss, no action is thought upon at that moment - pure awareness.

 

[Viswa]

Hey. Good one. Yes, Gita says so and also many like Yoga Vasishta. Not the doer anyone, like a dream/illusion everything, so how can a doer in an apparent reality!!. If one's bondage to all actions/people/things gets reduced to zero, then no seeking of liberation desired - whether moksha happens or not - don't care - as nothing affects one.

It's not about "telling" oneself "I am not the body/mind/etc", but relieving oneself from "bondage" towards body/mind/universe/actions/people/knowledge/experiences. See, if one wants to derive any pleasure from any action (like the eg. you said about robbery), then still a bondage towards Money that, "It will help me attain something - like things/etc.", is still there.

Bondage matters. Seeking pleasure matters. Not repeating/telling "I am not the body/etc.". If one really sees "I have no pleasure to derive from these actions/things/people", one gets delighted in Bliss. Bliss is experienced in actionless Mind. When one is Blissful or satisfied with oneself, no pleasure from Money/women/Fame/Followers/Slaves - are seeked. No thoughts give upon them as the mind is purely satisfied with Bliss.

Mind always seeks pleasure from movement from action/people/things/thoughts, from sense objects through sense organs. If it dives in full of Bliss, no action is thought upon at that moment - pure awareness.

You must note the "Bondage towards Knowledge".

Some, keep on seeking knowledge - as they get bored on being lonely. Satisfaction, won't arise from Knowledge, as there is no end for knowing things. New Philosophy, New Science, New Testament, New Vedanta will keep on arising from the way of "Thoughts/Perception" of Old.

No end for Knowledge, and Knowledge is to be used for attaining Satisfaction with oneself. It's like a thorn used to remove the thorn of Ignorance, and both must be thrown away if Ignorance is pulled out, as Ramakrishna said. When Ignorance is pulled out, one will surely experience Bliss. Then, Nidhidhyasana. Not to Shravana and Manana many new things as one gets bored in remaining in it. It's not a boring but the highest everlasting happiness in delighting in oneself, which devotion and everything points to. One day Peace dawns.

Knowledge seeking is the unknown highest bondage, which one has to forgo when one gets satisfied. There is no end for Knowledge, as no end for experiences. It should be a way to "Sat-Chit-Ananda", but not towards "I want to know many things/everything - it's characteristics/etc." No Satisfaction will arise from this knowledge seeking. Only remaining Blissful and Peace, gives real Satisfaction.

Namaste.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Now suppose i'm walking down the street and i come across a bank.
I tell myself "Hey, i'm not really the body/mind. I'm simply the actionless Atman/Brahman.
... So, why not "I" the actionless witness continue to remain as a actionless witness, and let this body/mind that I'm clinging onto, do what it feels like (for e.g. rob the bank)."
Do you think "I" the witness will commit any sin from this action?

All actions are in Vyavaharika and Vyavaharika has its rules. So, the body will be held responsible for its actions.
In Paramarthika, you do not exist, neither does the bank, and nothing has been robbed of anything.
All projections are 'maya'.

 

[Martin]

No. There is a universe, past and present that we directly witness. We cannot dismiss them as unreal.

Per Advaita, Consciousness (aka Brahman aka Chetana) projects all of this.

There is only one consciousness - yours. It is projecting everything - including the world you see, other people and it is also projecting the past. The latter is very important to understand and is worth repeating - your consciousness is projecting the past. None of these projected objects have independent existence - apart from your consciousness.

This is not some metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. It is an intellectual realization as mentioned by Shankara numerous times.

If it is just my consciousness projecting the world, then why does everyone else experience things in the same way? Why does my projection agree with the projections of those around me?
Or is Brahman projecting a general reality, and we all share in it, or something?

 

[The Crimson Universe]

No. There is a universe, past and present that we directly witness. We cannot dismiss them as unreal.

Per Advaita, Consciousness (aka Brahman aka Chetana) projects all of this.

There is only one consciousness - yours. It is projecting everything - including the world you see, other people and it is also projecting the past. The latter is very important to understand and is worth repeating - your consciousness is projecting the past. None of these projected objects have independent existence - apart from your consciousness.

This is not some metaphysical mumbo-jumbo. It is an intellectual realization as mentioned by Shankara numerous times.

If i end up in a coma and my consciousness/chetana goes blank, i'll stop projecting images, objects, world etc.

They will no longer be projected by the false me (jiva), but these same things will be projected by other waking jivas. Isn't it?

And suppose all jivas ends up in coma and lose consciousness and stops projecting the world, don't you think the world will exist even then?
I mean all the hospitals, all the beds, all the jivas lying on those beds will still continue to exist. What are your thoughts?

 

[Martin]

If i end up in a coma and my consciousness/chetana goes blank, i'll stop projecting images, objects, world etc.

They will no longer be projected by the false me (jiva), but these same things will be projected by other waking jivas. Isn't it?

And suppose all jivas ends up in coma and lose consciousness and stops projecting the world, even then the world will exist.
I mean all the hospitals, all the beds, all the jivas lying on those beds will still continue to exist. What are your thoughts?

I struggle with this too. I can understand that my experience ("my world") depends on being conscious. I can understand that everything I experience is a transient appearance to "my" consciousness.
What I don't understand is how my world is basically the same as everybody's else world. How is it that what appears to my consciousness is basically the same as what appears to everyone else's consciousness?
If it's an illusion, then it must be a shared illusion. And if it's not an illusion, then how is this different from a materialist or scientific view of consciousness?

 

[Viswa]

everybody's else world.?

Everyone Else? What do you mean by everyone? By mere movements? By words heard from somewhere else different from you, mean there is someone other than you? Does perception by five sense organs means there is someone other than you? From the words you read in this post, you think there is someone other than you typing this reply?

How you know there is more than you? What is the definition of "Someone/others/everyone"?

When I read all the replies, I don't see someone other than me. But just movements. Movements of Three Gunas. I reach no person/one while I speak. I hear not from people while I listen. I sense no person other me.

When Viswa speaks, it's not me speaking but it's Sattvic dominates others, to make everything Sattvic. And in all acts, all time, only these dominate other ones and try to take control. Sattvic Guna dominates and sees, Knowledge/Peace must be uttered to other gunas, so that other gunas might subside and Dharmic remains in all actions.

I am beyond all actions, beyond all sense organs. Whatever perceived is all Gunas/appearances. No person is perceived in this actions, by senses/mind/etc., - all Appearances. No Everybody. No Someone. No Other. So, No Love for Other, No Fight with Other, As there is "Not-two", all appearances, all play of Gunas, nothing perceived through senses implies "There is some other" just because it not arise in mind but reach mind through senses.

Don't trust Senses.

 

[Martin]

Everyone Else? What do you mean by everyone? By mere movements? By words heard from somewhere else different from you, mean there is someone other than you? Does perception by five sense organs means there is someone other than you? From the words you read in this post, you think there is someone other than you typing this reply?

How you know there is more than you? What is the definition of "Someone/others/everyone"?

When I read all the replies, I don't see someone other than me. But just movements. Movements of Three Gunas. I reach no person/one while I speak. I hear not from people while I listen. I sense no person other me.

When Viswa speaks, it's not me speaking but it's Sattvic dominates others, to make everything Sattvic. And in all acts, all time, only these dominate other ones and try to take control. Sattvic Guna dominates and sees, Knowledge/Peace must be uttered to other gunas, so that other gunas might subside and Dharmic remains in all actions.

I am beyond all actions, beyond all sense organs. Whatever perceived is all Gunas/appearances. No person is perceived in this actions, by senses/mind/etc., - all Appearances. No Everybody. No Someone. No Other. So, No Love for Other, No Fight with Other, As there is "Not-two", all appearances, all play of Gunas, nothing perceived through senses implies "There is some other" just because it not arise in mind but reach mind through senses.

Don't trust Senses.

Yes, I assume that you, Viswa, have typed this reply. What's your explanation for what is happening, if not that?
Are you just a figment of my imagination, and how would I know?
It's fine to question assumptions, but I would like to to know what your assumptions are. How do you explain the high degree of consensus in our shared experience of the world?
What mechanism is involved?

 

[The Crimson Universe]

I struggle with this too. I can understand that my experience ("my world") depends on being conscious. I can understand that everything I experience is a transient appearance to "my" consciousness.
What I don't understand is how my world is basically the same as everybody's else world. How is it that what appears to my consciousness is basically the same as what appears to everyone else's consciousness?
If it's an illusion, then it must be a shared illusion. And if it's not an illusion, then how is this different from a materialist or scientific view of consciousness?

Its got to be a shared illusion. That's the only thing i can think of.
If it wasn't then all of us probably wouldn't have registered the same appearances.

This shared illusion is projected by the One cosmic consciousness (Brahman) that is really ME.

Its ME the formless, that became many limited forms (like Martin, Greg and the rest).

The scripture Chandogya Upanishad states-
"It (Being, or Brahman) thought: ‘May I be many; may I grow forth.’ It created fire. That fire thought: ‘May I be many; may I grow forth.’ It created water and so on...(6:2:3)"

Unlike science, Consciousness in Advaita is not the product of our individual minds. Rather our individual minds are pervaded and animated by this omnipresent cosmic consciousness, which is eternal and continues to exist & function by projecting the world, even if our individual minds ceases to function properly like in the case of a coma.

Why does my projection agree with the projections of those around me?

When you say (my) projections and (others') projections, you're speaking from the point of view of jivas (individual beings).

Jivas don't really project anything because they are actually insentient, made up of mind, body, sheaths. They're like empty shells or vessels which are being animated when pervaded by the One infinite spirit or One cosmic consciousness. Just like electricity turning on various lifeless machineries.

Or is Brahman projecting a general reality, and we all share in it, or something?

Yes that is my belief too.
There are no separate unique consciousness like yours, mine or others in Advaita. There's only ONE undivided stream of cosmic consciousness, shared by all the jivas or false selves.
And when we share this consciousness, we also share the projections that comes with it :=)