Guest guest Posted February 15, 2004 Report Share Posted February 15, 2004 Thank you Nairji for the kind words. But all this is only armchair clarity - it doesn't percolate so much into my life which is trapped by the ensnarement of ego with all its desires and attachments and intrigues. Regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste Chittaranjanji. > > Congrats. What a flourish, clarity and lofty thinking! You said it > all with these two sentences: > > "Thus, in the physical world, the brain is the cause of perception, > not because of any intrinsic capacity in the brain to influence or be > influenced by the world, but because the Transcending Cause that > orders phenomena manifests the brain as the seat of a certain causal- > nexus within the schema of the world. It is in this wise that the > brain becomes a "cause" of perception.". > > PraNAms. > > Madathil Nair > _ > > "advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik" > <chittaranjan_naik> wrote: > > It is generally believed that consciousness is an > > emergent "phenomenon" arising out of certain processes in the > brain, > > and ................ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 15, 2004 Report Share Posted February 15, 2004 Namaste Chittranjanji. That is the biggest understatement of the year so far. Clarity is clarity whether of armchair or padmAsanA variety. We often find that many who are considered spiritually accomplished or advanced lack it badly. And about ego, by being able to understand life's ensnarement in its clutches, you have already gone a long way on the road to subduing it. The rest is a matter of time, for which here is wishing all the best. Please rest assured that all sincere expressions in philosophy are a percolation of the spiritual into life. They are judged by their clarity. Your post in question, as the ones we had before, is an excellent example. PraNAms. Madathil Nair _______________________ advaitin, "Chittaranjan Naik" <chittaranjan_naik> wrote: .........But all this is only armchair > clarity - it doesn't percolate so much into my life which is trapped > by the ensnarement of ego with all its desires and attachments and > intrigues. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2004 Report Share Posted February 16, 2004 Namaste Venkatji, You wrote: I could follow you perfectly till you came to this passage in your last message: Quote The brain/mind is the material cause of human consciousness but Consciousness is the constituitive reality of all this. Unquote 1. I understand material cause as the stuff of which a thing is made. How can the stuff of consciousness be Brain/ Mind? 2. If Brain/mind are the stuff of consciousness and consciousness is the constitutuve reality of all this - If 'all this' includes Brain/Mind as well, then there is a problem of circularity. Thanks Venkat for your careful reading. I was making the contrast between 'consciousness' (lower case) and Consciousness (upper case). The sort of awareness that the human being has is based on the brain he happens to have i.e. a certain visible spectrum, hearing range etc. My expression of this fact as material cause was an incorrect way of putting it and misleading. The papers on Panpsychism can be found on http://www.u.arizona.edu/~chalmers/online1.html Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2004 Report Share Posted February 16, 2004 advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste Benji. > > I know that ancient flying machines are off topic here. Yet, there > is this irresistible urge to continue. > > A technological base starting from screwdrivers is our current > demand. But, how about an Erich von Daniken scenario - although he > has been accused of scientific charlatanism? What Dr. Gopalakrishnan > presents (By the way, he is Honorary Director. Sorry my abbreviation > confused you to reading it Honourable, an adjective we normally > reserve for less knowledgeable Ministers.)are well-framed equations > in the form of easily recallable Sanskrit verses. > > Appreciate your good words about my alleged eloquence. > > PraNAms. > > Madathil Nair Namaste, Debunking one thing means debunking it all. If one read the ancients one would understand that the stories of pre Vedic flying machines is extant through many spiritual literatures. For example the flying machine described by Ezekiel in the Bible and his ride in it, and many other references to strange machines. The machines in the Ramayana predate the catastrophes that destroyed the civilisations at that time and ushered in a new kind of humanity. It is only today with genetic engineering and cloning that one can understand the kind of beings existing millenia ago, particularly prior to their final demise about 9000. B.C.E. Hanuman and the other beings described in the Ramayana were perhaps the majority of intelligent beings on the planet at the time. There have been many advanced cultures on the planet, for example Hiranyakasipu is reputed to have penetrated scientifically the heart of matter, and that was yugas ago........ONS..Tony Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 16, 2004 Report Share Posted February 16, 2004 The birth of the 100 Kauravas in Mahabharatha is similar to the cloning or test-tube method. As the story goes, it was droNAchArya who did the job. Its interesting to note that the meaning of the samskrita word 'droNa' in dronAchArya is VESSEL. Sorry for the digression. Hari Om - "Tony OClery" <aoclery > The machines in the Ramayana predate the catastrophes that destroyed > the civilisations at that time and ushered in a new kind of humanity. > It is only today with genetic engineering and cloning that one can > understand the kind of beings existing millenia ago, particularly > prior to their final demise about 9000. B.C.E. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Dear all, Namaste, It is understood that everything is there in Vedas whihc we have in the present world. Vedas are far ahead to our normal human thinking. Is it true ? I seek members to throw light on this aspect please. With respects, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2004 Report Share Posted February 17, 2004 Namaste: The saying that "everything is there in Vedas - the past, the present and future" is True with correct understanding. Vedas are the direct revealations from the Brahman to the Brahman and they are about the Brahman! Accroding to the Upanishads, the Brahman is the knower of the Brahman. The rishis who attain the 'Self-realization' hear (experience) the direct revealations (Vedas) at the feet of mediation. The saying quoted above only refers to 'direct revealations' and does not refer to any written texts. Those who follow the Hindu Religion have great faith in 'Vedas - the scriptural text.' They do believe that these scriptural texts speak the Truth and contain everything that we need to know about our past, present and future. Faith is an integral part of any religion and Hindu religion is no exception. But at the Upanishadic statement quoted above in the first paragraph is True and it goes beyond faith and religion. Interestingly the Upanishads make the bold clarification that one has to finally give up everything - philosophy, scriptures and all external knowledge in order to attain Self-realization. Advaita philosophers often quote the pole-valut example - the jumper needs to give up the pole while crossing, similarly self-realization requires give up everything! Warmest regards, Ram Chandran advaitin, "vasu145" <vasu145> wrote: > Dear all, > > Namaste, > > It is understood that everything is there in Vedas whihc we have in > the present world. Vedas are far ahead to our normal human thinking. > > Is it true ? I seek members to throw light on this aspect please. > > > With respects, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 18, 2004 Report Share Posted February 18, 2004 Namaste Michaelji, Thank you for your comments. I have found this topic of reflexive consciousness and history very interesting, ever since I developed a liking for history. Maybe one day the topic will be up for discussion. With regards, Chittaranjan advaitin, ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...> wrote: > Namaste Chittaranji, > Excellent post on the brain. There > is a move against the idea that consciousness emerges > as complexity increases. Chalmers inclines > towards that countervailing tendency as does > Rosenberg. Essays are to be found on Chalmer's > consciousness site under the panpsychist heading. The > core > intuition would be that consciousness is not the sort > of thing that could emerge or evolve. In broad > advaitic terms everything is pervaded by > consciousness as its constituitive reality. It is > non-different from consciousness and therefore knows > itself. However this knowledge is not reflexive, it > does not know that it knows itself. This is the > 'sat' stage. The pressure to express its nature is > the mainspring of evolution and it gives rise to > increased complexity. As to what the precise > mechanism that allows the self-aware consciousness to > pass over to the reflexively self-aware consciousness > is could be debated for a long time. Prepare to trace > the anfractuosities of the bicameral brain, language > developement, short-term memory etc. Suffice to > say that at a certain point the human begins to talk > into his own ear - the 'cit' stage. The next stage > is to trace consciousness back to its source - > > efflorescent ananda. > > The brain/mind is the material cause of human > consciousness but Consciousness is the constituitive > reality of all this. It is non-dual and is not > evident > due to superimposition. You say: "Thus, it would be > true to say that something in the world is a cause of > another only in so far as this is the manner of > ordering the world, and not because the cause is > something intrinsic in the object." This is a deep > saying and no doubt we will return to these issues in > the future. > > Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.