Modeling Time (MTS-4: Towards a Mathematical Theory of Spirituality Based on Advaita

[Guest guest]

Hello Hershji,

You have been making the point if I take it correctly that there

is discovered by deep sleep a distinction between cosmic and local time. May I

tentatively suggest that the Deep Sleep state as proffered by philosophers is an

idealised limit condition of absolute nescience. cf.Brh.Up. IV.iii.30. In that

condition there would be no Witness(Sakshi) because there is no mind if we take

the Sakshi to be as Vedanta Paribhasa defines it pure consciousness with the

limiting adjunct of the mind and individual because the mind is individual.

However I would suggest that a little trace of the witness remains no matter how

deep the sleep. My reasons for doing so are psychological. Must there not be

some physical reactivity in order that the body may respond to the environment?

A mother who could not be woken by a brass band will awaken immediately to a

baby's cry. Another point is that alpha rythyms in the brain furnish a basic

metronome which play a part in establishing the circadian rythym which all

mammals have.

 

Now I accept completely the Deep Sleep argument which Shankaracarya places so

much reliance on but I see it as the ideal end point of a series and not

something we just fall into nightly. It is perhaps significant that Ramana was

notoriously hard to wake from 'the sphere of Brahman'.

 

Best Wishes,

Michael

[Guest guest]

advaitin, ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...>

wrote:

>

> Hello Hershji,

> You have been making the point if I take it

correctly that there

> is discovered by deep sleep a distinction between cosmic and local

time. May I

> tentatively suggest that the Deep Sleep state as proffered by

philosophers is an

> idealised limit condition of absolute nescience. >

> Now I accept completely the Deep Sleep argument which

Shankaracarya places so

> much reliance on but I see it as the ideal end point of a series

and not

> something we just fall into nightly. It is perhaps significant

that Ramana was

> notoriously hard to wake from 'the sphere of Brahman'.

>

> Best Wishes,

> Michael

 

Namaste,

 

Very simply deep sleep is nescience of course it is still a veil.

The Spere of Brahman is not a place at all unless you mean savikalpa

samadhi. It is my understanding that Ramana was in Nirvikalpa of the

highest order and thus had no real 'veil' connection. In fact as

Ramana was a Mukta there was nothing to experience anything at all.

He was the Absolute Sakti Mind, it was only the Prarabda of the body

that 'awoke' it...........ONS..Tony

[Guest guest]

Michael-JI

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You have been making the point if I take it correctly that there is

discovered by deep sleep a distinction between cosmic and local time.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Deep sleep was an example raised in one of the posts to justify that

time is always present even during deep sleep. The argument was that

when I awoke, time was there. I have no problem with that. It is true

time was there when I awoke. But my problem was where was this time

DURING deep sleep?. During a period of deep sleep my subjective

awarness is of a void/a blank/ a darkness. There is no time or

phenomenal world or anything else in my awareness during that period.

When I awoke , time came into being. Thus time comes into being when

my ego awakens. Ego is my mind. Hence time is a mental concept.

 

 

The real point I am trying to make is that Time, Space,Causation are

all mental concepts of the Jiva which arise with the "I" awareness

and disappear when the "I" awareness is not there as in deep sleep.

 

 

As per this logic, in deep sleep there is an absence of the concept

of time (time/space/causation all disappear) and hence there is no

awareness of time for the jiva. By "local time" I mean that each of

us has a subjective awareness of time which can be different from

universal time. The Jiva is not aware of time in deep sleep. His

time awareness as also his awarness of the phenomenal world

starts when he starts dreaming or wakes up. This is when his

false "I" awakes. This is what Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi says in

his "Spiritual Instruction" available at : http://www.ramana-

maharshi.org/books.htm

 

 

<quote from Ramana Maharshi: "Spiritual Instruction">

 

5. What is the authority for saying that the entire moving and

unmoving worlds depend upon oneself?

 

The Self means the embodied being. It is only after the energy, which

was latent in the state of deep sleep, emerges with the idea of 'I'

that all objects are experienced. The Self is present in all

perceptions as the perceiver. There are no objects to be seen when

the 'I' is absent. For all these reasons it may undoubtedly be said

that everything comes out of the Self and goes back to the Self.

 

<end quote>

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

However I would suggest that a little trace of the witness remains no

matter how

deep the sleep. My reasons for doing so are psychological. Must there

not be

some physical reactivity in order that the body may respond to the

environment?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

As per Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi the Self (the real self) shines by

itself when the mental concepts, in the form of tendencies are absent

in the states of deep sleep. The following quote is again taken

from "Spiritual Instruction". There it is explained in a chart form

by comparing a CINEMA SHOW to the SELF.

This seems to be the physical reactivity you are talking about-

basically "The City Never Sleeps". The real self is always conscious.

 

<quote from Ramana Maharshi: "Spiritual Instruction">

 

3. How can there be a connection between the Self which is pure

knowledge and the triple factors which are relative knowledge?

 

This is, in a way, like the working of a cinema as shown below:-

 

 

 

Just as the pictures appear on the screen as long as the film throws

the shadows through the lens, so the phenomenal world will continue

to appear to the individual in the waking and dream states as long as

there are latent mental impressions. Just as the lens magnifies the

tiny specks on the film to a huge size and as a number of pictures

are shown in a second, so the mind enlarges the sprout-like

tendencies into tree-like thoughts and shows in a second innumerable

worlds. Again, just as there is only the light of the lamp visible

when there is no film, so the Self alone shines without the triple

factors when the mental concepts in the form of tendencies are absent

in the states of deep sleep, swoon and samadhi. Just as the lamp

illumines the lens, etc., while remaining unaffected, the Self

illumines the ego (chidabhasa), etc., while remaining unaffected.

 

<end quote>

 

 

rgds

Hersh

[Guest guest]

Dear Hersh ji,

 

 

Deep sleep was an example raised in one of the posts

to justify that

time is always present even during deep sleep. The

argument was that

when I awoke, time was there. I have no problem with

that. It is true

time was there when I awoke. But my problem was where

was this time

DURING deep sleep?. During a period of deep sleep my

subjective

awarness is of a void/a blank/ a darkness. There is no

time or

phenomenal world or anything else in my awareness

during that period.

When I awoke , time came into being. Thus time comes

into being when

my ego awakens. Ego is my mind. Hence time is a mental

concept.

 

----------

 

here i would like to add few words,

 

Not only time but all the three factors time,space and

causation are mental concenpts. They spring up with

the mind and dissolve with its annihilation. Another

point noted to be noted here is the concept of time in

dream. We all know that sometimes we spend years in

hours perhaps entire life-span of ours in just half an

hour or an hour in the dream. Time moves so quickly in

dream and yet we feel the continuity and we perceive

it as real as long as we are in dream. This clearly

shows that the time is relative concept.

 

But i have a word to say with regard to cosmic time. I

feel that when it comes to waking state all our minds

are attuned to a particular cosmic mind. Here we

cannot but have one cosmic time also. You can say that

the time stops when one is in deep sleep or swoon but

the we all know that the moment the jiva wakes up he

has to return to the cosmic time of the waking state

whether he wants or not. It is just like one sleeping

while watching a moovie one may feel that there is

nothing happening but moment one gets up he has to see

the film with the diffrential time spent in sleep the

film does not stop or strat from where he had stopped

watching due to sleep so is the case with the waking

state. I have a reminiscense of a yogi who came after

samadhi. He attained the heighest nirvikalpa samadhi

by the grace of his guru and spent 9 hours in that.

After he came back from that state he was feeling that

there was no passage of time at all. But when he

became fully conscious he knew that 9 hours had

passed. Here what i mean to say is once you are on the

plane of waking state none of us can escape the cosmic

time.

 

As it is rightly said beyond law is freedom and within

law is bondage. So if we are in the waking state we

have to be bound by nature and its laws. Assume that

each jiva has got his own time and rules regading the

operation of nature what a chaos it will become. We

can only transcend the cosmic time but there are not

two times like local time for jiva and cosmic time for

Eshwara in a praticular state of consiousness.

 

 

HARI OM TAT SAT

 

Yours in the Lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

 

 

 

 

FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.

http://farechase.

[Guest guest]

--- br_vinayaka <vinayaka_ns wrote:

>

> From

G.Sankarraman

>Apropos sri vinayaka's statement,

>

>" Deep sleep was an example raised in one of the

> posts

> to justify that

> time is always present even during deep sleep. The

> argument was that

> when I awoke, time was there. I have no problem with

> that. It is true

> time was there when I awoke.", I have to state that

the distinction of the process of time as one of

individual and cosmic, as that of waking state and

dream, as that of subjective and objective- the entire

differentiation has been dismissed by Bhaghavan

Ramana. Bhaghavan says that the pronouncement of the

individual while in the waking state of the reality or

unreality of the time of dream, on grounds of its

being fitful, not being orderly unlike the waking

state, has no relevance to the dream state, which is

itself a waking state in its own right, it being

branded as a dream state only being by virtue of

comparison of one state with the other. All the three

states, , have to be looked at in the light of the

fact of one, 'I', alone being the unbroken reality in

all the three states. In Pancadasi, a vedantic

treatise composed by Vidyaranya, greatly praised by

Bhaghavan, it is stated that the Witness remains

unbroken in all the periods of time, in all the cycles

of time, days, weeks, months, years, and even aeons.

The concept of Cosmic Time is itself only a working

hyposthesis recommended by the scriptures, it having

no relevance, as far as self-knowledge is concerned.

We find ourselves only as individuals courting an

objectice world, and assume that the world is common

to all of us forgetting that all individuals of the

show are only dreamed characters, each individual

posing himself to be a subject vis-a-vis the other

individuals. Even Sankara upholds only the complete

unreality of a common world, as he says that the

existence of such a world in the perception of the

wakeful individuals while one had been asleep, and did

not see such a world, is only subjective, the

individual being used to the reality of an unreal

thing by virtue of avidya. The distinction of

existence as one of individual and cosmic is only

empirical, and has no relevance to self-enquiry which

demands a highly ardous task of looking at one's deep

subjective source, not paying attention to the

objects. The philosophical speculations of the

existence of the Cosmic Time etc, is making us only to

enter into some bylanes losing track of the royal path

of Self-enquiry advocated by Bhghavan. Incidentally,

Sankara's making a distinction of the waking and dream

states-which Gaudapada did not do-is only for purposes

of denying the views of the Vignana vada and

Madhyamika schools of Buddhism, which do not accept

even an ontological basis for the existence,

everything being attributed to only momentary states

of intellect or the Sunyata. This position of Sankara

is only dialectical, his essential position being the

unreality of the trinity of jiva-iswara-jagat, in the

light of which all these philosophical distinctions

have no relevance.

with warm regards,

sankarraman

 

 

 

 

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Sankarraman-ji,

 

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran>

wrote:

> We find ourselves only as individuals courting an

> objectice world, and assume that the world is common

> to all of us forgetting that all individuals of the

> show are only dreamed characters, each individual

> posing himself to be a subject vis-a-vis the other

> individuals.

 

I feel pain when I cut my finger with a knife. Irrespective of the

ontological status you would like to give to the pain, the pain is

felt. Call it unreal if you like, but it is felt all the same. When

in my dream I see another person cut his finger, there is nobody that

feels any pain simply because both the individual and the pain don't

exist except in my own dreaming mind. Now tell me with regards to

this mail, do you hold to the position that there is no one that

wrote this mail, that there were no thoughts in any individual's mind

that put these words into this post, considering that you yourself

never experienced these thoughts? If the answer is yes, then what is

it that makes you persist in replying to this mail? If this question

appears personal, it is only because solipsism leaves me with little

option but to ask questions in a way that would appear personal.

 

(Please don't turn my question around, as done commonly by those that

espouse solipsism, and tell me that whoever sees whatever should

answer for what he or she sees. Since you are the one that is

professing solipsism, it is only fair that you should answer for the

position you are avowing. As far as I am concerned, such a question

would hardly be of relevance considering that I hold on to the

position that there are distinctions between my thoughts and the

objects of my thoughts (the obverse side of my thoughts in what may

be called vritti-jnana) and that the truth of these objects must

conform to the features presented by the One all-pervasive Self that

pervades all beings as their individual selves. That One Self in

which all features find their ground is the reference for the truth

of the objects that may be in my thoughts as an individual being.)

 

I would say that you have extended the meanings of Bhagavan Sri

Ramana Maharshi's statements beyond the scope for which they were

meant. There is a sense in which the waking state is like the dream

state, and there is a sense in which the waking state is different

from the dream state. The analogy of the dream is only for the

purpose of pointing out the feature that is common to both of them –

the existential dependency of both states on the Self. In other

words, the Self is the ground of both the states and the objects that

appear in both states. The Self must be unbound from all limitations

before one knows what the Self as the ground is, for the Self is the

self of all beings and not the self left over by negating other

individuals 'in the show'. Bhagavan Ramana Maharshi's statements are

not to be taken as support for the constricted notion of solipsism.

 

> Even Sankara upholds only the complete

> unreality of a common world, as he says that the

> existence of such a world in the perception of the

> wakeful individuals while one had been asleep, and did

> not see such a world, is only subjective, the

> individual being used to the reality of an unreal

> thing by virtue of avidya.

 

What Shankara upholds is a moot point considering that he says both

things: that the world is real and that the world is unreal. There is

a dialectical tension in Shankara and both poles of the dialectic

have to be taken together for the meaning to be revealed.

 

When you say that "the existence of the world is only subjective", I

would ask: What is meant by the terms 'objective' and 'subjective'?

How does Shankara use the terms 'object' and 'subject'?

 

 

Lastly, since you quote Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi, these quotes

may also be of interest in the present context:

 

15 April 1937

----------------

Question: "But how out of Truth does illusion, falsehood spring up?"

 

Bhagavan: "Maya is not falsehood, although it has the appearance of

it, but the active side of Reality."

 

 

4 January 1937

-----------------

A disciple remarks that Sri Bhagavan often says that Maya and Reality

are the same. How can that be?

 

Bhagavan: "Shankara was criticised for his views without

understanding him. He said that (1) Brahman is real, (2) The Universe

is unreal, and (3) Brahman is the universe. He did not stop at the

second, because the third explains the other two. It signifies that

the universe is real if perceived as the Self, and unreal if

perceived apart from the Self. Hence Maya and Reality are one and the

same."

 

 

Warm regards,

Chittaranjan

[Guest guest]

--- mahesh <mrp992003 wrote:

> This bundle of hinduism consists of : All our Gods,

> all 4 Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabharat, Ramayan, all

> our Traditions, All our Culture, all our Philosophy,

> understanding, rituals we are proud of and other

> things you can think of is in it.

>

> this bundle we are holding so dearly for many

> Centuries proudly and lovingly which makes us feel

> Ego bloated anytime we want has produced following

> results to all of us as Hindus.

>

> 1. Untouchability

> 2. Castism

> 3. Intellectual Slavery

> 4. Illiteracy

> 5. one Billion People

> 6. Motherless children

> 7. disease and deaths

> 8. discriminations

> 9. dirt, filth, unhygienic life

>

> Only when Intellectual Slavery Abolished ------

> Hindus Progressed for the last few decades after

> suffering centuries, most importantly "information

> revolution".

> Irrespective of our excuses we come up with above 9

> points to explain; this bundle should have taken

> care of. IF we say these 9 points have reasons and

> it is because of some people doing this and that is

> not sufficient. Because this Bundle of Hinduism

> should have taken care of and overcome those hurdles

> and should have shown Resilience. We only feel self

> satisfied by giving excuses for the past deeds and

> continue feed our egos with our past. The above 9

> points can never be God given gifts. They are man

> made. No more tongue twitings verbalogy or

> explanations to our sufferings . Lets meditate on

> this points.

> Please be silent for a minute. NOW.

>

 

 

Dear Mahesh Ji,

 

Namaskar,

 

I fully agree with you as far as the evils mentioned

by you. But i would like to ponder over certain

points.

 

1. Untouchability

 

YOU SAY THAT THE UNTOUCHABILITY IS ONLY UNIQUE TO OUR

NATION and OUR RELIGION? IT IS NOT SO. Every where

people are selfish. You find untouchability based on

cast here. and in the west based on DOLLAR. It is the

same mentality every where. What explanation can you

give to the troture given to nigroes by the americans

so called most intellectual and civilised people in

the world?

What about the ill treatment of the non christian

people in the name of heathens? and for these things

can you blame the Jesus of Nazareth? who was love

incarnate and laid his life for the sake of humanity?

 

 

> 2. Castism

 

Castism is a social institution. In earlier times it

was based on the temperment and qualification of the

people. Nowhere in the scriptures you can find that

the caste is based on birth. If you can kindly let me

know. In mahabarata Yaksha asks the question to

yudhistira Who is the real brahmin? And the yudhistira

reples -Janma jayate shudra Karma jayate dwijaha. By

birth evey one is shudra bo ones own deed one gets the

brahmin hood. Why these views are not told by the so

called the brahminic scholars? It is simply because it

will affect their self interest. That is all. We

should blame selfish brutes for these things instead

of religion. Now where is the caste you tell me.

Brahmins are employed the are not even visyas but

shudras because visya is a person who does some

pioneering work and shudra just assists. You decide

now what brahmins are doing? Of course there are gems

in that caste also donot take that i have aversion for

that caste. Infact best teachers of mankind are

produced by that caste.I had the privilege to be

associated with the best minds of the same cast which

upheld the above view. Here what i mean to say is that

the caste was based on qualification and due to

degeneration in the morality of people it was made

heriditory. No blame goes to Sanatana Dharma.

In chandogya you can see even Satyakama did not knew

who his father was but he was imparted heighest

knwoledge becasue he said the truth. His guru says you

are a real brahmin because brahmin alone can tell the

self damaging truth.

> 3. Intellectual Slavery

 

This again is the evil done by the well to do and the

learned people by not distributing the knowledge

sacred or secular to the common mass for their own

selfish end. How can you blame the religion for that?

>

4. Illiteracy

 

Same explanation given above holds good.

 

 

5. one Billion People

 

What is the differnce of man and the beast it is the

knowledge. It is rightly said the traits of animals

are ahara, nidra bhaya and mithuna. The so called

satva incarnates have pushed these poor fellows so

down that they have completely forgotton that they are

men even. What else can they do aprat from these four

things?

> 6. Motherless children

 

I think you are not aware of what is happening in

schools and highschools (forget about the college) in

the west. You will feel disgusted if you know how the

bachelors and the spinsters live in the west. for this

can you balme christianity which preached -Blessed are

pure in heart for they shall see god?!! And this is

the sign of a CIVILIZED nation!

> 7. disease and deaths

> 8. discriminations

> 9. dirt, filth, unhygienic life

 

For these points also the blame goes to selfish man

not to the sacred religion.

 

You should remember that the real essense of hinduism

consists in the Vedas and the Upanishads which are the

mine of strength. All other works like ramayana

mahabarata, puranas tantras even the most popular

vedanta sutras of vyasa are subservient to the

Upanishads and the vedas. It is very clearly said in

the scriptures that whenever there is a dirrerence of

opinion between shruti and smriti shruti eva gariyasi

ie the view held by the shruti shuould be taken. You

should remember that smritis like manu smritis are

written in a particular epoch of time and it was

customised according to the then pervailing

circumstances. But subsequently the same smritis were

thrusted inspite of its obsoleteness. That is why

swami vievkananada said once that he want to write new

smriti for modern times.

 

In the upanishads there is no scope for weakness. It

calls the men of whole world as children of immortal

bliss ( including non-hindus in no religion you will

find this catholicity.) And people are blaming that it

created untouchism!! Kindly read and coment on the

hindu religion in that case at least intellectually

you will be honest.

 

As for as your point:

 

 

Only when Intellectual Slavery Abolished ------

Hindus Progressed for the last few decades after

suffering centuries, most importantly "information

revolution".

 

Here i agree 100% with you. The same thing was told by

swami vivekananda a century ago. He said that the

cause of our degeneration is due to isolating our

selves from the rest of the world. He said that the

youth of india should visit countries like japan,

united states etc. He opined that the natures law is

give and take. We should learn the material science

from the west and shuld try to improve the standrad of

living especially of the poor people and at the same

time we should give them our spiritual tresures which

they desperately require.

 

He said that the modern sanyasins and the patriot

youth should go from village to village spreading not

only spiritual treasures but also secular education.

And all of us know how many instittutions have

answered to his call by doing these things. He said

untill and unless you uplift the masses the country

does not have any futuere. He went to such an extent

that he said -stop worshipping you 33 crore gods and

goddesses the only god that is to be worshipped is our

contry men. He earnestly told his disciples to

sacrifice even their salvation for the regeneration of

our Mother india. IS HE NOT A HINDU AND IS HE NOT

PRACTICAL? We always spend our time in fault finding

and simple sit untill and unless it personally affects

us. This is not time for keeping silence but to ACT.

Sacrifice oruself for the sake of the poor, the

downtrodden and miserable. Then only our motherland

will become one of the best nations of the world in

both spiritualy and in material advancement.

 

HARI OM TAT SAT

 

Yours in the Lord,

 

Br. Vinayaka.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Start your day with - Make it your home page!

http://www./r/hs

[Guest guest]

--- br_vinayaka <vinayaka_ns wrote:

> --- mahesh <mrp992003 wrote:

>

> > This bundle of hinduism consists of :

]From

Sankarraman

 

This may not be the forum to discuss these issues,

this forum being confined to spiritual matters; this

is not to suggest the idea of undermining the need to

have social awareness to come down upon the evils

rampant in Hinduism pointed out by the gentleman;

there is a lot of truth in what he says. But the

gentleman had better dwell upon the oft repeated

aphoristic statement of J.Krishnamurthy that one is

not different from the world; and that one has

brought about all these evils through bringing about

division at the psychological level, the

differentiation at the physcial levels being the

aftermath of the basic psychological divsion. All

systems like communism have failed in eradicating all

these evils. Let the gentleman read what Ramana says

when an overzealous social reformer expatiates on

untouchability. What the gentleman could do would be

to transform himself at the individual level; in the

process, he will be aware of the basic nature of

egoism, self-aggrandizement, the basic identification

with the body-mind complex, all this having ushered in

the evils of the type very much condemned by the

gentleman. Any action at the peripheral level cannot

bring about any change. All of us are basically

selfish, even though we may wear the mask of religion,

and give upadesa to others. When it comes to the

subjective enquiry, if we are honest in acknowledging

our inner nature, we will know that we are only , as

individuals, responsible for the evils of the society.

If one is deeply affected by the evils of the society,

one will actually renounce money and possession, since

one will know that all are partners of a

self-projected collective exploitation, a mutual

exploitation.

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

FareChase: Search multiple travel sites in one click.

http://farechase.