VEDIC LOGIC AND QUANTUM KNOWLEDGE - Theosophy.Net2024-03-29T09:06:40Zhttps://theosophy.net/forum/topics/vedic-logic?groupUrl=science&commentId=3055387%3AComment%3A121362&xg_source=activity&groupId=3055387%3AGroup%3A37177&feed=yes&xn_auth=noDear Captain ,
It is mi…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-13:3055387:Comment:1225092013-03-13T17:56:41.637ZHari Menonhttps://theosophy.net/profile/HariMenon
<p>Dear Captain ,</p>
<p> It is mine , this phrase I am glad you find it interesting - actually let me try to put it into correct perspective - </p>
<p> When we are engaged in the eliminating the inner world of dreams - it is a technique of reasoning and knowledge that I used to employ in order to obtain a clear mind ie. Mind without any ''objects '' in it so that it becomes imageless and like a blank paper .Devoid of the inner world . It is essential to isolate the Ego related to mind…</p>
<p>Dear Captain ,</p>
<p> It is mine , this phrase I am glad you find it interesting - actually let me try to put it into correct perspective - </p>
<p> When we are engaged in the eliminating the inner world of dreams - it is a technique of reasoning and knowledge that I used to employ in order to obtain a clear mind ie. Mind without any ''objects '' in it so that it becomes imageless and like a blank paper .Devoid of the inner world . It is essential to isolate the Ego related to mind and that of the consciousness of the Ego relating to the Body and the Intellect - presently all these are in an Undifferentiated state of consciousness within our ''I '' sense .</p>
<p>The reasoning and knowledge works like this :</p>
<p> Since we have waking state and Dream state and Sleep state - what essentially happens in a person is that - when we go to sleep our consciousness leaves the waking state and then enters the dream state proper and then moves on to the state of deep sleep . </p>
<p>It is not always a person will see dreams whilst going to sleep - but it is always (ie our consciousness) whether we see dreams or not - it always transits through the dream state and on waking it comes back to waking through the dream state . It is a linear relationship , just as one life is linear and non repetitive from birth through living to death . Our daily life is a micro cosmic movement of this same phenomena. And again if we contract into a smaller </p>
<p>unit - we can see that in waking state we do thinking and fantasizing etc and planning all these are in the dream consciousness and sometimes we may sit without anything in particular with a blank mind and if someone says ''what were you thinking'' you reply nothing . This roughly corresponds to the sleeping state internally but you are awake . </p>
<p>Now in dream what happens is that the impressions in memory are the content of the inner world and our senses have only half the expansion they had in the waking state - or to put it in another manner "Dream State is that state of consciousness wherein our 5 senses of knowledge and the one sense of action the larynx are half awake only ". And obviously they are fully not available in sleep as in stone . </p>
<p>The problem I faced was how to clean up the memory or the internal world , This required some practice - The reasoning was as follows - In my memory are impressions of the waking state which are replicated whenever I see dream , but whilst in dreaming I am unable to detach myself from the objects or in other words to be indifferent to the objects , and I was experiencing dream as if it were real and however much I tried to create a distance between the object and 'Myself'' as could be done in the waking world it would not be possible - I investigated deeply into this phenomena since how was I to eliminate the ego in Dream ? It was here that I found that since even in dream I am aware of the external world my dreams were aligned to that knowledge or the residuum of the waking state that I was carrying into the Dream state and this residuum was making the problem of my experiencing Dream as if it were the external world. This is what I called cross consciousness - it is a very small and subtle and very very small consciousness of the world which I had just left that lingered in memory . So the knowledge that I had now I used to erase the residuum from memory in the following manner - deep cogitation and (I mean really deep and focussed thinking was done over a period of time ) in the following manner </p>
<p>Since in dream I do no have a physical body and the physical world also is not available - it would not be possible (in the state of pure dreaming) to ''see" or experience worldly objects like bodies, hair, vehicles like cars planes, seas , shirts animals ,pots and pans etc - so here I employed the method of negation of the waking world from dream - what transpired was slowly I was as soon as closing the eyes - I would be in the dream state and start lucid dreaming - and my awareness was sharper - as in the waking world - and the reasoning worked out very well as day by day worldly things seen in dream state started becoming less and less - like houses , people etc - and the effect was really very gratifying - I started developing an unprecedented clarity and objectivity in the waking state and one without any judgement and there was a peace and indifference to objects . The impinging of objects on my consciousness was soft and more rounder not jarring or painful. And the flip side was I fell into always lucid dreaming when I transited to sleep and back into waking . Now you may wonder if the outer world and its memory were totally inoperable in dream what was the dream world then - It was colourful and one could see pleasant sites and palaces and other ''Divine " objects at will and celestials - which convinced me that the real dream state has pictures which were not man made , they just existed and the scenes were so sublime and feelings of sublimity that one cannot express or even write , it is like sort of very clear and each scenery or picture flashed with colours and feelings with a lot of information on the stage of consciousness . It is really inexplicable , but then it became a problem and I had to employ the same reasoning to wipe out this ancient and embedded world in memory though beautiful as it was a big problem and since the senses had acquired a sharpness which was subtle and much stronger than normally - hese impressions were like a "branding'' with an iron sometimes it took maybe days for a dream image to vanish - it impinged o the consciousness with so much feeling , beauty, colour and such artistic beauty that the impression was almost indelible and we start wishing for the waking consciousness!!! . Whics is more duller and insipid actually and less vibrant compared to this non concocted inner world . I use the same reasoning since the dream impressions and the ego consciousnes of the dream experiencing body was again going into seed state and laya in sleeping - by knowledge it can be erased. Till the dream state is transcended. Intense mediatation on M helps in these parts of the consciousness, </p>
<p>Cross consciousness is thus the element of ego that is conscious of the physical body (and hence the world ) that passes into the dream state and vitiates it , and the seed consciousness of the dream body passes into dep sleep and is in laya . The same happens in waking state we have a seed consciousness in our ego of the dream state which is why we can fantasize or think or plan etc . The states are distinct and separate actually we contaminate by carrying the residuum from each state to the other and then enjoy that ego .</p>
<p>This is the cross consciousness - In waking we should not have past or future , this is due to the action of this nature of ego on the memory . We have to be in the present always and every object is intuited in the Now . I personally would prefer that you do not follow me or my explanation - but you should delve deep and retrieve the knowledge that flashed in your consciousness which occured to you on reading this concept - The True knowledge would be more helpful to you than what I wrote - maybe it flashed exactly as I knew it , or with more clarity and knowledge - so find out what that exact knowledge was that flashed in you . Do not go by mine - but if you cannot get the knowledge maybe it means it was false and the background of your thought may have been some hidden memory which the words triggered - in which case you will be better off going by what I have written . These flashes have to be inquired and corrected . Every flash of knowing may not relate to the subject on hand if you are too prone to emotions - it may be some ridiculous and totally unrelated thing .Subtlety is the key to the inward journey and never be amazed or surprised with anything that you see or hear in the world or in dream - Surprise is an indication of stupidity and ignorance in a person . The last sentence is not mine it is from the Vedantas . </p>
<p></p>
<p>As a post script : succintly it due to this phenomena that we :</p>
<p>When expounding on Theosophy or other subtle things </p>
<p>a) Argue the case from a worldly example to a subtle principle in the next ie we mix up the Gross with the subtle when we write. Worldly examples are to be used only as an exception ,</p>
<p>b) So we can easily know where the writers thinking is skewed and so his knowledge in the intellect</p>
<p>c) lack of consistency between the general in the subtle and the particular in the subtle.</p>
<p> Finally I have acknowledged this term as mine since normally I ascribe everything to a prior knowledge - this was an absolute thought and hence the explanation that I have given is unique both in knowledge content and concept and practice . I am allowed some things so that just one thought which is mine will ensure that if I have maintained intellectual honesty my thoughts system will remain in the original without erosion over time as it will be assimilated in the ego of vedanta and find its resting place in a proper manner at the proper places to the correct sources within - whilst this will be an index concept which will pull in all my thoughts from universal memory into the original if required . It is how the intellect works . Whatever I have written will stay as a body within the main body of thought . This is true Intellectual property , it is a matter of indifference if anyone uses it as if their own also - then those writings will be subsumed in mine depending on the acknowledgements . The intellect is a very fascinating thing since the universe as an idea rests in it as are also the stars and various suns and galaxies - it is unbound even in reflection .. </p> Dear Captain ,
These 4 thi…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-13:3055387:Comment:1224102013-03-13T04:48:27.563ZHari Menonhttps://theosophy.net/profile/HariMenon
<p>Dear Captain ,</p>
<p> These 4 things have to be ascertained according to Shankara in relation to the Self</p>
<p>1. It is always the Known</p>
<p>2.It need not be known .</p>
<p>3. It must be known .</p>
<p>4. It cannot be known .</p>
<p> These have to be ascertained by a person of knowledge since they are quite different though they may be construed as being in Harmony or in conjunction mutually reinforcing . This is Shankaras refutation of Janism - no doubts will remain ,…</p>
<p>Dear Captain ,</p>
<p> These 4 things have to be ascertained according to Shankara in relation to the Self</p>
<p>1. It is always the Known</p>
<p>2.It need not be known .</p>
<p>3. It must be known .</p>
<p>4. It cannot be known .</p>
<p> These have to be ascertained by a person of knowledge since they are quite different though they may be construed as being in Harmony or in conjunction mutually reinforcing . This is Shankaras refutation of Janism - no doubts will remain , there is no "maybe '' or "sometimes'' types of statements - it is emphatic and he always means The Self or Brahman - according to him Maya is non existent and hence need not be discussed or ascertained - since if there is any Maya or Ignorance then right knowledge will remove it . For a man of knowledge there is no Maya , it is a word used to describe the predicament of the person who is under a delusion and wishes to remove it . </p>
<p>Again in the matter of Mathematics and Logic this is how you have to see it :</p>
<p>Mathematics or numbers is the most intuitive of all the sciences , it is an <em>empirically intuitive one </em>, No other science is so . Because it is directly connected with representation of Numbers in space , which are beyond time , It is not subject to time as other sciences and their representations are - it does not have a priori assumptions unlike other sciences , </p>
<p>the primary representation is 1 which in all cases is a true statement . IT can be directly intuited by observation and does not require any other thing to support it . Every subsequent representation of a number is an increment of the same by the same but represented differently - it is a science which was intuitively developed from necessity unlike the others , but it is also a higly theoretical science affording higher assumptions as a prioris when it departs from Numbers . Also 2 cannot exist without 1 and if we see any number we know intuitively the EXACT numbers contained in it and those which are conversely not contained in it . Unlike geometry it does not truncate space in such a way that time can be extracted from it . Time is always one dimension - it does not afford different dimensions in space . Numbers are the intuitive observations as a feeling and translated into ideas in space - they are not forms so they are a higher thing .</p>
<p>Now logic is entirely another matter - please understand that any good logical system "EXPLAINS'' the working of the faculty of Reason whereby man is superior to beasts ,They do not enunciate rules (why on earth do you have to understand them in the very SPECIFIC manner that is enunciated ? it is only a pointer on how our reason works and judgement - it is not a SCIENCE it is higher than a science , and it is concerned with Perception and Cognition and Judgement and Reason and Other things which are inner , it is not exhaustive but it is quite how we work with our inner instruments the intellect ). </p>
<p>Aneka = many . Antha = End . Vada = postulate or just a doctrine - do not spend you time on doctrines and postulates , it is a certainity that in Metaphysics iot will be overturned at a level of transcendance because Knowledge does not admit to varying and diverse doctrines , knowledge will at a certain level and above admit only Knowledge alone , The word knowledge is an action , because the root of every word is an action and the action as a root of knowledge means "To Know'' - it is impossible for you to admit that other than yourself the knower there cannot be another knower who knows you and another knower which is a regressus ad infinitum - the Self is the limit and the end . </p>
<p>If you have doubt it means that is not knowledge - it is the mind being born from consciousness like a shadow,</p>
<p>Logic and Mathematics are intuitive - there is another Higher logic which is Metalogic it is directly concerned and leads to self realization - but the angle of vision is different , it is philosophical and not intellectual . </p>
<p>Jainism was not particularly known for their knowledge of things , rather they were known for their practices , Of course the self realized Jain would not naturally upset tradition , it is so otherwise anarchy is the result . </p>
<p>There is no path - Logic is to be understood as not a subject , just as a doctor would read anatomy - it is a reality for him and he need not study it so too logic need not be ''studied'' it has to be understood as the principles of thought - or how the intellect works .</p>
<p>Again Captain keeping in view your best interests - The quest for the truth requires a STRICT adherance to PRECISION in THINKING . You cannot mix Boolean Algebra with logic all ANACHRONISMS in thought have to be avoided so that over time your thinking becomes clear .</p>
<p>Boolean Algebra is a later development and the Intellect is a prior one . You cannot club the two - Fuzzy Logic is yet later .</p>
<p>Algebra is not Logic - it REQUIRES LOGICAL THINKING</p>
<p>Boolean is a Variant of Algebra of which Algebra came first and Boolean later .</p>
<p>Fuzzy Logic is a take off on the general way the intellect sees things and so is a derived concept neither logic nor intelligent or conscious - it is just a concept and a later development.</p>
<p>You cannot compare Logic with Fuzzy Logic as concepts it will spoil your idea of time within you . You have to be extremely aware that a reality is being compared against something which has the name only , but is just a concept and not anything more .</p>
<p> In Boolean Logic is involved , but representations by Algebraic methods are also involved</p>
<p>and it is a variant within the General Science Of Mathematics - Algebra offers alternative representations and Boolean is a Variant of Algebra .One moves from the general to the particular and throws out what is not germane to the issue ,</p>
<p>So In the Aneka vada etc - You have to be aware if you were imbibing this information in English or in Sanskrit ,What is the language in which you think or choose to think . If I read a book in Malayalam precision requires that I understand it in Malayalam , now if an English thought comes by way of understanding - I have to be aware of it and see if there is any anachronism in the UNDERSTANDING . Its source may be a Sanskrit book read in English translation or a Tamil Book which thought has come in English to me since I use English more than Tamil - it will give you a pointer as to how you assimilate knowledge . </p>
<p>Shankara cannot be compared with anything else - since his was Advaita Vedanta or Non Dual , As also Kashmir Advaita - the Tenets are same - You have to either start from Non Duality or work your way up from Dual theories , you cannot compare - because it is worthless to read Jainism ,Bhattas,Nayayikas,Samknyas, Charvakas,Buddhism ,Idealists,Nihilists,Realists etc since they just do not exist in Advaita . On the other hand if you work your way up - then obviously if you are not going in for Advaita - it will end up in either the thought structures of Dvaita and Vishista Advaita at the highest , that is all but still there would not be Jainism etc etc ---- because at each level of knowledge there is a merging or subsuming of religions and theories according to the strength of the thought structure . The proof of the pudding is in its eating .</p>
<p></p> Hari, once again you have use…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-13:3055387:Comment:1224092013-03-13T03:34:45.525ZCapt. Anand Kumarhttps://theosophy.net/profile/CaptAnandKumar
<p>Hari, once again you have used an expression which I find amazing and with the potential to solve many puzzles. <em><strong>Cross-Consciousness</strong></em>.</p>
<p>I could read further but I am stuck here. Kindly expand on this. Thanks.</p>
<p>Hari, once again you have used an expression which I find amazing and with the potential to solve many puzzles. <em><strong>Cross-Consciousness</strong></em>.</p>
<p>I could read further but I am stuck here. Kindly expand on this. Thanks.</p> Thank You Hari, for this beau…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-13:3055387:Comment:1223112013-03-13T03:31:17.841ZCapt. Anand Kumarhttps://theosophy.net/profile/CaptAnandKumar
<p>Thank You Hari, for this beautiful answer.</p>
<p>A student can progress only by expressing doubts.</p>
<p>A. If one has to go by beliefs/faith then what is the purpose of logic?</p>
<p>B. The question about Boolean Logic has its roots in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekantavada" target="_blank">Anekantvada</a> (Theory of Non-Absolutism or Doctrine of Many Ends as literally translated) of Jain Philosophy of India which proposed that an end result may…</p>
<p>Thank You Hari, for this beautiful answer.</p>
<p>A student can progress only by expressing doubts.</p>
<p>A. If one has to go by beliefs/faith then what is the purpose of logic?</p>
<p>B. The question about Boolean Logic has its roots in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anekantavada" target="_blank">Anekantvada</a> (Theory of Non-Absolutism or Doctrine of Many Ends as literally translated) of Jain Philosophy of India which proposed that an end result may prove:</p>
<ol>
<li><blockquote><i>syād-asti</i>—in some ways, it is,</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote><i>syād-nāsti</i>—in some ways, it is not,</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote><i>syād-asti-nāsti</i>—in some ways, it is, and it is not,</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote><i><span title="International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration" class="Unicode" style="white-space: normal; text-decoration: none;">syād-asti-avaktavyaḥ</span></i>—in some ways, it is, and it is indescribable,</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote><i><span title="International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration" class="Unicode" style="white-space: normal; text-decoration: none;">syād-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ</span></i>—in some ways, it is not, and it is indescribable,</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote><i><span title="International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration" class="Unicode" style="white-space: normal; text-decoration: none;">syād-asti-nāsti-avaktavyaḥ</span></i>—in some ways, it is, it is not, and it is indescribable,</blockquote>
</li>
<li><blockquote><i><span title="International Alphabet of Sanskrit Transliteration" class="Unicode" style="white-space: normal; text-decoration: none;">syād-avaktavyaḥ</span></i>—in some ways, it is indescribable</blockquote>
</li>
</ol>
<p>To me this appears to be Fuzzy Logic which is a development on Boolean Logic, Though I am told that Shankara refuted Anekantvada, using logic.</p>
<p>What path a student should choose, one of pure logic or the one that offers a mix of faith/logic?</p>
<p>Or, is there an end <em><strong>of</strong></em> logic?</p> The scope of conception diffe…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-12:3055387:Comment:1220572013-03-12T08:23:13.447ZHari Menonhttps://theosophy.net/profile/HariMenon
<p>The scope of conception differs - Memory is used in the nature of Cosmic Memory and never individual memory , since it includes the reflective knowledge of the infinite as well as past karmas which are forgotten. </p>
<p>Nothing can be taken literally when you are reading the upanishads , it is addressed to the JIvatma and not the body . This is the problem of cross consciousness , one has to withdraw the mind when it wanders into a worldly type of movement , other wise you must have a…</p>
<p>The scope of conception differs - Memory is used in the nature of Cosmic Memory and never individual memory , since it includes the reflective knowledge of the infinite as well as past karmas which are forgotten. </p>
<p>Nothing can be taken literally when you are reading the upanishads , it is addressed to the JIvatma and not the body . This is the problem of cross consciousness , one has to withdraw the mind when it wanders into a worldly type of movement , other wise you must have a constant remembrance that it is written for the JIvatma and read accordingly in which case you will stop after every few words to consciously inhere in that mode of understanding . It is a problem this knowledge path just as a man sits for meditation and is troubled by various thoughts , the same occurs. Doubts are the mind , and sleepiness, inability to push the intellect and tiredness tc all happen when one is going into a subtler movement of thought , there is no other way than to surmount this lethargy of a million years , it requires tremendous effort and power . </p>
<p>The order is correct as you have mentioned - the Upanishad has the explanation of how each is subtler and why . so you should not have this problem actually . It is all inward with a couple of lines scattered to show why it is so . but those are also quite subtle in construction .Why are you making a distinction as between experience or otherwise ? This is relating to yourself , and if correctly understood by right reasoning you become the thing through knowledge !! There is no explosive or life changing experience that will blow you out into infinity and swallow your world into nothingness and put you in the true one state that you are !!, What you read and understand if done correctly will be experienced as shifts in consciousness and you obviously change for the better and ever . It does not consist of going to meet something or something coming to meet you - negation of wrong knowledge by right knowledge is enough , the knowledge by which wrong understanding was removed cannot then undergo any change , for it is the Truth . So what validation is further required ? . This is pure knowledge so obviously when you understand it correctly , you become that ie. the accumulated dirt of centuries is negated as they exist as manifest knowledge within you , It is say suppose a man has been wrongly taught by his parents that he is their son and in later life he comes to know that he was adopted , his wrong assumptions are put to rest , it is a mistaken notion that is corrected and lived as such . Like the story in "The Lion King" . the lion thought he was some other animal but he was shown his reflection and his wrong notion went away . Any mystery surrounding realization means the person has some contradictions unreconciled and he has to or it will transmute by experience through living in later life . It is a living moving experience in the heart and , in the here and now (to use a cliche which in itself endows esoterism to the knowledge). Obviously it is in the here and now everyone experiences life and not in the past and future ......the mind has to be shorn of the concept of time and everything becomes in the now and undistanced . I hope I have been helpful and not obfuscating .</p> Dear Captain,
What you have…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-12:3055387:Comment:1219682013-03-12T06:42:39.569ZHari Menonhttps://theosophy.net/profile/HariMenon
<p>Dear Captain,</p>
<p> What you have quoted me on is still true , you have to understand that demonstration of truths in the area of Metaphysics is only required for the sceptic or the man of doubt or the debater . It is not required for a person who believes . You cannot use the axiom "that which is outside is also Inside'' unless it has become an Axiom to you , this is the curious problem involved in Self Realization AND Theosophy or Philosophy or Metaphysics as people wish to call it.…</p>
<p>Dear Captain,</p>
<p> What you have quoted me on is still true , you have to understand that demonstration of truths in the area of Metaphysics is only required for the sceptic or the man of doubt or the debater . It is not required for a person who believes . You cannot use the axiom "that which is outside is also Inside'' unless it has become an Axiom to you , this is the curious problem involved in Self Realization AND Theosophy or Philosophy or Metaphysics as people wish to call it. Why any statement relating to the SELF or its descriptions CANNOT be taken as axiomatic is because - a) If you take it as axiomatic then FAITH alone is necessary and no doubts will accrue</p>
<p>b) If you require Knowledge of the same - are you not reducing the so called axiom to an idea within you and then proceeding to understand it as if an object ? It is not possible to verify this statement by such abstraction or reason or judgement - for again it is knowledge NOT of an object but of a NON OBJECT (ie nothing can be an object of its own search ) ie. the person wanting to know this fact is in essence saying that he is different from himself , it cannot be so , you would not want to know yourself again in which case it will be a superimposition done by yourself .</p>
<p>Hence the flights of fancy , If you wish to know yourself as an object obviously you have to look into a mirror , but to even contemplate such a thing is foolish , everyone is conscious of himself - why look in a mirror for that ?. If such a vulgar and materialistic reasoning is taken it would be impossible to realize the self - for it means</p>
<p>You cannot know the self without being without inside or outside and you must know the self to know that you are in effect without inside or outside - it leads to a tremendous fallacy of reasoning of mutual dependency which cannot be got out - the intellect will not yield the right process by any way .</p>
<p>This is how it is to be understood : "You are not requiring evidence of yourself as consciousness since you are a being possessed of consciousness , and consciousness cannot contain non consciousness within it , it being subtler than the temporal things (as if like space ) it is beyond time space and causation , unlike the body which is subject to causation and time and space , therefore THOUGH YOU THINK YOU ARE THE BODY BY FORCE OF HABIT , YOUR TRUE NATURE IS ONE CONSISTING OF CONSCIOUSNESS (ie.Knowledge) and there fore absolutly beyond any objectification (like akasha or space or ether ) This is the meditation and this is the realization . Proper understanding will lead to an absolute shift of your ego sense into the right locus from the body centric view. ". </p>
<p>If you take statements which are emphatic on the Self as normal statements the you are just reducing them to another a priori starting point for an "investigation'' - investigation of the self is impossible , correspondence is what is sought . </p>
<p>How can you mix up in your knowledge a science like boolean algebra which is subject to an a priori that requires an observer and a statement on the right nature of the observer (who is the thinker himself) as another object in both these cases you are denying that in your knowledge that you are non existent and depend on the body for an evidence and not knowledge , and so you will die naturally and as you think or concieve so you become - it is a very dangerous tack , you are reducing yourself to a mental concept . It is pertinent to quote Kirkegaard here - he has very aphoristically said Being before God . You are placing yourself (body consciousness included as an idea ) before God !!!.</p>
<p>He further has again in a fantastic piece of writing on Religion written - "Sin is before God''.</p>
<p>Once again I will emphasize another aspect - after having a good idea of how to "understand'' the self and statements relating to it - it has to be brought into experience , merely knowing the meaning of the words will not help - The idea contained in the above has to be firmly grasped .</p>
<p>So we must have faith in accepting descriptions relating to our true nature , and then work from the bottom up . as WHO AM I in the manner of negating the attributes one by one and experiencing the knowledge .</p>
<p>So you see there is no conditioning , the Chitta is the instrument , the conscious entity which has empirical intuition and perception and knowledge and empirical existence is the one being conditioned , obviously being conscious entities it depends we choose by what we wish to be conditioned and by what we do not wish to be conditioned , it is a matter of choice - if you are of the opinion that anything will result in a conditioning then you are no better than a beast of a man and with no particular opinion or individuality or volition . Actually there is conditioning when you accept certain things as a priori (ie as given ) and proceed to build the world from that . it does not make sense , for then why are we conscious and having intelligence .</p>
<p>True philosophy is the ascertaining of these a priori ingrained in us and these are to be unconditioned , it is a view and an angle of vision which is uncluttered and will open up the intellect . There is a Knowledge angle to things and also a practical angle , you accept only those a prioris which point upwards and is knowledge based and it settles into your psyche as your essential nature is knowledge . </p>
<p>Finally as a post script - I wish to clarify the statement made , I hope it was not ahead of its time , the thing of it is , endowed with faith you can see everything as divine , but there is a problem here , there is you and there is something that is adored in Faith , just as in meditation there is the meditator and the meditated - there is duality as if it were , knowledge alone will bring it to the non dual seat . In cases where we see people who have (as popularly perceived) as having practised faith and realized God or the Self , it is just that it is the path they are most comfortable with that they are enunciating , but they too have full knowledge of the infinite - only they adore it so much that they prefer to keep a distance and adore that which is inestimable and adorable in their opinion . They dislike merging in it completely , they dwell on the aesthetics , just as a poet or painter would do - if looked from this angle there is nothing wrong in such an attitude . Some people believe in the "Immaculate Conception" and they go in for knowledge and others prefer "The Adoration" . But in due course they too merge fully before dying . It is the tendency on part of people to qualify a thing in empirical terms - we cannot help it . The truth is the same whoever comes across it without any blemishes . Some people have the necessary tools by virtue of their life before realization so that they can expound it in a particular manner . If you look carefully in India and study how various god realized people , or even in the western world have lived - it can be seen that there is a growth in knowledge towards the end in the case of people who have come up on faith alone , and in the others they have that knowledge already . It is the same , some prefer to tell stories and parables , others prefer to educate via Yoga or Advaita or Tao Chi or any other method - the results are the same . </p> Thanks Hari for this amazing…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-12:3055387:Comment:1220562013-03-12T03:36:35.530ZCapt. Anand Kumarhttps://theosophy.net/profile/CaptAnandKumar
<p>Thanks Hari for this amazing post. Packing so much within one comment!!!</p>
<p>However some doubts arise due to the conditioning of our <em><strong>Chitta</strong></em> (inrtellect):</p>
<blockquote><p>nothing in the outside world can actually provide any indication of an intelligent and conscious and all pervading entity</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Should one then believe that the axiom, <em>"that which is outside is also inside</em>" is invalid? If true knowledge can only be discerned from…</p>
<p>Thanks Hari for this amazing post. Packing so much within one comment!!!</p>
<p>However some doubts arise due to the conditioning of our <em><strong>Chitta</strong></em> (inrtellect):</p>
<blockquote><p>nothing in the outside world can actually provide any indication of an intelligent and conscious and all pervading entity</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Should one then believe that the axiom, <em>"that which is outside is also inside</em>" is invalid? If true knowledge can only be discerned from inside then what is the use of all this exercise of learning? Or is there a relationship, Boolean or otherwise?</p>
<p>My reference was to the Chapter 7 of the <a href="http://archive.org/details/Shankara.Bhashya-Chandogya.Upanishad-Ganganath.Jha.1942.English" target="_blank">Chhandogya Upanishad</a> where the dialogue between Sanat Kumara and Narad takes place. Sanat Kumara takes Narad progressively through all tools of knowledge i.e. Name, Speech, Mind, Will, Intellect, Contemplation, Understanding, Strength, Food, Water, Heat, Ether, Memory, Spirit, Bliss, Infinite and finally Self. Each item is described as superior to the preceding one. As one can see Memory is placed far ahead of Mind, Will and Intellect and only behind subtler concepts of Spirit, Bliss, Infinite and Self. Is this outward teaching or is there Inward explanation? Or experience alone can resolve it?</p>
<p></p> Dear Captain,
Ther…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-10:3055387:Comment:1218922013-03-10T16:59:16.169ZHari Menonhttps://theosophy.net/profile/HariMenon
<p>Dear Captain,</p>
<p> There is a problem in comparing within a modern context of Computers ,Databases and raw data eSqltc- because you have to understand that nothing in the outside world can actually provide any indication of an intelligent and conscious and all pervading entity , this knowledge is gained from the conscious principle in nature which is man accompanied with the ability to abstract etc . It is inward looking one has to look inwards at one self , all the talk of…</p>
<p>Dear Captain,</p>
<p> There is a problem in comparing within a modern context of Computers ,Databases and raw data eSqltc- because you have to understand that nothing in the outside world can actually provide any indication of an intelligent and conscious and all pervading entity , this knowledge is gained from the conscious principle in nature which is man accompanied with the ability to abstract etc . It is inward looking one has to look inwards at one self , all the talk of objects and causation etc is for the understanding of the individual who is conscious so that he may know what exactly it is to be an object that is also observed. Boolean logic and SQL's are only very very remote and very inadequate parallels and would be misleading and erroneous - The Key is Consciousness (Knowledge and Will ) . Not just Vedic Logic even Western Logic will not admit to non conscious elements to be introduced in consciousness . </p>
<p> Shankaras Commentary on the Chhandyoga Upanishad is Upanishad specific , There is a word called Chitta which is the undifferentiated consciousness consisting of - Mind, Intellect,Memory and Ego . It is a four fold divison . Memory is the intellect and world in the subtle or dreaming state , it is THE WORLD ITSELF that is seen in waking. THere is no other ground for the Intellect . The Intellect is the totality of the world with all its objects which include all things seen and known ie.Experienced and Also not experienced .Memory provides the backdrop for the world in dream , there is no waking state world in dream . The channdogya upanishad is a part of the Sama Veda which is dealing with (Sthuthi) or in other words its knowledge is highly Metaphysical and the knowledge makes it entry at that level only - it is concerned with the Idea (to use the western parallel as per Plato or Schopenaeur) of the world as a universal feeling or it is if we are to take the aspect of Upasana on Om it corresponds to M as the higher principle and U as the lower principle . ie. Aesthetics and Knowledge of the action of will are the main things . Channdogya Upanishad has a lot of Vidyas in it. Tat Tvam Asi occurs there . It is the final knowledge and relates to the reflective character of the intellect . Moreover universal memory yields the secrets of the vidyas in this upanishad . Here Knowledge generated from the universal memory which is the knowledge of a NON OBJECT and not of something ''apart'' as we would think of in human terms . It is pure and first hand knowledge that can be experienced - it comes from cosmic memory and leaves no impression after experiencing unlike day to day objects as it is knowledge pure and simple which negates the wrong knowledge within us and so is our real self. </p>
<p>Vedic logic starts at the level of knowledge only - though we explained using worldly examples - ITS INCCIDENCE on knowledge is to be solely considered , because there is no other way of knowing the world with some reasonable correctness. To go by appearances is to live by error . Whatever I wrote was from the view point of Knowledge only and I have used the word Intellect to mean (Including memory) because we cannot differentiate knowledge from memory and perceptional knowledge when discussin in a non conventional way using material examples - because memory is nothing but acquired knowledge or rather experienced , but that which is heard and seen but not experienced lie in Knowledge in the intellect as generic ideas or concepts and not in memory . It is temporal - Shankarcharya always uses memory in the sense of universal memory and the examples he gives are to be understood as - Displayed by the mind as Image and Detrmined by the intellect so obviously the object is from Recall or Intellect proper . Since the reflective nature of man is the crucial thing and not the sense perception - It is totally internal , and you can in no way consider that just because you are awake and then thinking that it is the waking state , the internal process is of Dream - thinking is dream state Captain and all the things have to be seen from the angle of thought and its working consciousness- even when you read</p>
<p>a book the effect is the same as thinking , and the consciousness at which it works is the Dream consciousness- it is a very subtle science , nothing is written from the view point of the body and world . since both are objects - the world is an idea held by the idea of identity with body at its base .</p>
<p></p> I have just re-read the posts…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-10:3055387:Comment:1217432013-03-10T13:58:24.865ZCapt. Anand Kumarhttps://theosophy.net/profile/CaptAnandKumar
<p>I have just re-read the posts until 9th Feb. If I understand correctly, application of Intellect and Memory is required to discern proper knowledge, or to draw correct interpretations/conclusions of observations/experiences.</p>
<p>In a modern context, a database table consists of thousands, even millions of data items. These are like memories. Like the analogy of the tree in your post. A query is required to extract results from this table. The query then resembles Intellect, or the…</p>
<p>I have just re-read the posts until 9th Feb. If I understand correctly, application of Intellect and Memory is required to discern proper knowledge, or to draw correct interpretations/conclusions of observations/experiences.</p>
<p>In a modern context, a database table consists of thousands, even millions of data items. These are like memories. Like the analogy of the tree in your post. A query is required to extract results from this table. The query then resembles Intellect, or the application of it. The results obtained through a proper query should then become knowledge. Such system is based on what is called Boolean Logic.</p>
<p>How is Vedic Logic different from it?</p>
<p>In another context, Shankara's commentary on Chhandogya Upanishad, places memory (<em>Smara</em>) as far superior to Intellect (<em>Chitta</em>). How does it reconcile with Vedic Logic, where both are on par.?</p>
<p></p>
<p></p> Dear John,
Now that I…tag:theosophy.net,2013-03-08:3055387:Comment:1218732013-03-08T17:42:53.801ZHari Menonhttps://theosophy.net/profile/HariMenon
<p>Dear John,</p>
<p> Now that I am free and have finished the post on Quantum Knowledge , I will try to answer your question on free will , For this is a very subtle thing and I would have been jumping the gun if I were to answer this aspect , hence the delay it was intentional on my part , However we gan get into this matter as the ancients saw - it is a quite interesting thing because will is the ulterior most thing .To quote from the Vedas they define Brahman as :</p>
<p>Icchha…</p>
<p>Dear John,</p>
<p> Now that I am free and have finished the post on Quantum Knowledge , I will try to answer your question on free will , For this is a very subtle thing and I would have been jumping the gun if I were to answer this aspect , hence the delay it was intentional on my part , However we gan get into this matter as the ancients saw - it is a quite interesting thing because will is the ulterior most thing .To quote from the Vedas they define Brahman as :</p>
<p>Icchha Shakthi - Gnana Shakthi- Kriya shakthi (meaning The subtlest is Will next is Knowledge and lastly Action ).</p>
<p>They are not three different things but actually inherent in the Self and obviously Will without knowledge is worthless, Kriya shakthi means the Ability to do actions or Agency - this is a property of the Intellect which as a reflection of the Empirical self in the Intellect endows or makes the ego think that it has action within it . To elucidate this point :</p>
<p>The Intellect is an object to the Ego , So the intellect is non conscious but the Intellect has action whilst the Ego or that which is the reflection of the Self in the intellect has consciousness but no action . The ego appears conscious because of its proximity to the self and by virtue of its being reflected in the intellect it(the ego) appears to have action whilst the intellect appears to be conscious . There is amutual superimposition of the action of the intellect on the ego and the egos apparent consciousness on the intellect - due to their proximity and intermingling .</p>
<p>If a person stands in fron t of a mirror then himself , the mirror and the reflection in the mirror stand in relation just as the Self , The Intellect and the Empirical Ego (which is the reflection of the self in the intellect , ie. ignorance or Maya ).</p>
<p>This point is a bit too subtle and diffcult to understand - so I will use a slightly direct interpretation of the same thing from Schopenhaeurs fourth book comprising of his "World as Will and Idea".</p>
<p>The Universal Self is Will alone and the world and us included are a reflection of that will , as if reflected in a mirror . Now this universal will is totally free as it is unbound and not limited by anything in it . So the will is Free and it is so , this is the exact view the Vedas also have . Now within the the embodied there is always a craving for action , and action requires will - so all embodies things which are endowed with action (ie,Intellect - since action takes place in the intellect and the Ego acquires the sense of agency or doership due to its mistakenly identifying with the intellect just as it identifies with the body and the mind ). Now this action is only apparent and not a reality - </p>
<p>Going back to the mirror analogy - The reflection of the person in the mirror though identified with the person has only an apparent existence and not one of reality - it is contingent on the placing of a human being in front of the mirror . This is likened to the Self , which is reflected in the intellect - now the reflection in a mirror everyone will agree has no independant existence apart from the object being reflected (ie the Self) and so all actions of the Ego are controlled by the self ie. Willing is ment here .</p>
<p>The Human being is a representation of that will solidified , but is not free as it is bound by superimpositions - what we call willing is actually a disengagement from the universal will . The Universal Self relates to itself in the matter of will in a peculiar manner - though its will is totally free - the will that we have is subject to distortions due to the Ego (which is the mixed or undifferentiated consciousness of 'I" within us - by consciousness I mean Knowledge ) .. Unlike other aspects the will is not to be seen as ..........in an example ....but it is to be seen as in an Identity , ie the individual will is totally free just as the Universal will since there cannot be distinctions inside will itself But due to a wrong identification within the reflection of the self in the intellect first to the body , then to the mind and lastly to the intellect itself - we do not have any will individually - it is only a "feeling'' of willing due to body centric consciousness , just as in actions proper - body is only an instrument - the Intellect has action and nowhere else is action to be seen - even the Ego does not have action it only has agency due to wrong identification with the intellect . Agency is the feeling of doership and not the actual doing , the doing is by an instrument but guided by knowledge and intent . So will is non existent if a person identifies with either the body , mind or intellect .</p>
<p>He has to attain to such a point of pure knowledge whereby he overcomes this handicap and is nomore reliant on any of these three principles so that he is a real reflection of will as meant as an idea of a conscious object</p>
<p>The Vedas Treat this in the following manner -the superimposition in the Ego is consisting of Sattwa, Rajas and Tamas this is known as moolaprakrity or seed nature .this is the general nature of the embodied ego which in itself is a reflection - now by the knowledge gained Taman and Rajas can be removed as they are not inherent to the ego .Sattwa is the true nature of the reflected ego and Sattwic Ego is a perfect reflection of the Self and is universal , Now a strange thing happens - action is taken away completely in a man of knowledge and he becomes universal , but as long he has his body he continues to ''Appear to do actions'' to others but he does not do it . What actually is taking place is those karmas which were the cause for his present body and whose impressions are there since birth work their way out and he leaves the body at the cessation of the last karma . This is the fact , there is no individual willing the individual willing is a separation of power from the powerful just as an object separates time from space . It is a myth and ends with the death of the individual no will exists , it will be the impressions accumulated in his subtle body that will impel him to action again and again . It is as Western commentators say a Will to life , it is inherent in Nature , Nature strives to action , this is the separation of will from the supreme by embodiment . This striving if made for action the man "Swims against nature" ie he denies the will to life which is a negation of the bound existence and he asserts his universality . He attains by pure knowledge a point beyond time space and causation which is pure will and knowledge itself . Sice the thing to understand is Knowledge of the self which is experienced is beyond coausation and time and space and so is will . I mean pure knowledge and not secondary knowledge - it is the one which is saturated with will both are same not different.</p>
<p>It may seem difficult to even imagine such things as no action or pure knowledge and will and in the purely human terms it manifests as fears of death and , cessation of action and willing and striving - here the thing to be understood is that the Self holds everything as an Idea only nothing is real other than itself , there is no other . But it works through nature , nature is the one which strives and replaces and exercises will in the disengaged manner , though it is only an idea within the cosmic we suffer due to wrong identification - that is all .</p>
<p>It is useless to debate the freedom of will in a human being , it is the movements of a shadow only having no substance . Fleeting powerless and impotent as in a drama or movie a sham . Even if you carefully think about actions as popularly understood - it is a very strange thing - we term the movements of the body as actions , it is only the movements of an instrument of action like a hammer or axe or saw . So what happens if an object represents the extraction of time from space then actions further split the time into intervals of rest and movement which is only a further extraction or truncation of time itself !!.. So all actions rise in knowledge stay in knowledge and disappear into knowledge and nowhere else . Since in the inner world it is not a permanent transformation - the nature of the mind and knowledge is such that they do not become anything separate even when they are an object within itself it is the same thing only and with the passage of time it reverts to its source the mind or knowledge . Nobody can live in the future or past , everyone experiences in the present , it is the movement and planning by fear and reason and superimposition that we think of the past and future so what happens is that a major part of our life is lived in this fairy past and future thus not paying attention to our present and experiences - it is this one point known as the here and now which coincides with the infinite Self and can perceieved only when the same thing is a modification of itself (ie embodied) without a manifestation the Self is unknowable . There would not be any knower per se since the self alone exists and just as we are aware of ourself as a whole and not in parts - the self also need not think about itself that it is the self .</p>
<p>I hope I have put in some understandable views making sense to you .</p>
<p>Since it would be very very vey difficult for me to have explained this from my understanding and language skills - I have mixed in a lot of the vedic reasoning with the writings of schopenhaeur (4th Book of World As Will And Idea ) - because in the Vedas we consider only Knowledge and through that will - there are no dissertations on Will as it is considered unnecessary . By the tiem the Self is known (in its knowable aspects - everything about will is also known ). But it has been my experience it is mainly a Western preoccupation with the problems of will , which are not there in the Vedanta. It is due to the inability to understand the nature of the Self properly . Which is why we have a very strange example - one country with a dissertation on the war field exhorting to fight without any reservations turns out to be a very gentle and docile culture , and many others which exhort peace turns out to breed aggression . There could not be anything more strange to an onlooker .</p>
<p>Which is probably why Nietzcshe remarked quite perspicaciously as was his wont (I quote ):</p>
<p>" <em>Brahminism and Christianity</em> : There are recipies for the feeling of power, firstly for those who can control themselves and who are thereby accustomed to a feeling of power : Then for those in whom precisely this is lacking, Brahminism has catered for men of the former sort , Christianity for men of the latter ".</p>
<p> Of course I do not wholeheartedly agree with Nietzcshe , but it is a fact to a large extent . We are demonstrated and taught that there is no power in Brahman . Perceptions of power and will are not for an ordinary person , it is a very rare view given , glimpses by the manifest to people of self control of its inexhaustible power , which is why it is not talked about normally . It an aspect of the universal in its moving nature and displays of power are quite terrifying , even if seen inside - and one prefers not to have anything to do with it . It is silent and expressive without sound . It is not fear but it evokes something more than that beyond words . It is only a display for the edification of the aspirant . </p>
<p> </p>