Guest guest Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Namaste, The following piece of verse explores an ancient prakriya towards advaitic truth. It makes no direct reference to advaitic scriptures, but may perhaps be found to ask some questions that are shared in common. Ananda Space, time and cause ===================== Structured space ---------------- All structures in the world are made of different parts that co-exist. Each part exists in its own place, as it relates to other parts located differently in space. As co-existing parts relate across their spatial differences, they form a world of structured space, through networks of relationship. This world of space is made of points which co-exist at the same time. But time is made quite differently. It's made of moments that pass by. Passing time ------------ No moment ever co-exists with previous moments that have gone or later moments not yet come. Each moment thus exists alone, when other moments are not here. The world of space is known through mind: in which there are no points of space, but only moments that pass by. There is no structured space in mind. Here, there is only passing time. Each state of mind is known alone, with other states not present here. What's known in mind is known in passing, in the absence of all else that has now passed and disappeared or is expected to appear. How then can any cause continue, through these changing states of time that we experience in our minds? How is change known? -------------------- What changes is what's known by mind. But what of that which knows the mind? To know that states of mind have changed, some 'thing' that knows must carry on. That knowing something must stay present through the change of mental states. It must stay present as each state replaces states that have passed on. And it must stay on present as new states get to pass on, and get replaced in turn by further ones. What is that knowing which remains -- which stays on present through the change of mental states that come and go? Consciousness ------------- That knowing is called 'consciousness'. It is an ever-present light on which each state of mind depends. Without that light called 'consciousness', no state of mind could come or go. It lights each form that is perceived. It lights each name that mind conceives, each meaning that's interpreted. It lights each valued quality that's judged and felt to motivate our acts of body, sense and mind. It's not itself a form perceived, nor any name that mind conceives, nor any meaning that our minds interpret and elaborate. It's not itself a quality whose value can be judged or felt by any kind of changing act performed by body, sense or mind. It's just that knowing principle which lights each act that comes and goes -- each changing form perceived by sense, each changing name conceived by thought, each changing quality that's judged by intuition in the mind. That light stays present in the mind, illuminating all the forms, and all the names and qualities which come and go in course of time. The turning of attention ------------------------ All forms and names and qualities keep getting changed. Each one appears when mind's attention turns to it. Each one then also disappears when mind's attention turns away. That is just how they come and go, at every moment in the mind. But, as the mind's attention turns from one appearance to the next, consciousness stays present there, illuminating everything that may appear or disappear in anyone's experience. The underlying background ------------------------- As light itself, that consciousness is what remains, while forms and names and qualities keep getting changed. It's that which stays itself unchanged, completely independent of the changing things that come and go before its unaffected light. All names and forms and qualities are lit by it, while it remains unformed, unnamed, unqualified. It is the background of all change, all difference and variety. It carries on beneath the change of form and name and quality. >From it, all changing show must rise producing all that may appear. To it, what's shown must then return -- as everything that may be shown is seen and thought about and felt, and thereby taken right back in. Cause and effect ---------------- Whatever comes and goes away is an effect whose cause continues underneath the show of change. All cause is found by turning back to underlying consciousness, beneath the seeming show of change produced by body, sense and mind. To understand what causes change, there must be a reflection down into that background consciousness. All cause arises up from there, expressing just that consciousness. In fact, there's no direct effect connecting different states of time. Each state expresses consciousness -- which carries on beneath all time, where time does not at all apply. As previous states become replaced by later states, they each express that underlying consciousness, which is their sole connecting ground. Thus, states of time can only be connected indirectly, through an underlying timelessness where consciousness is found alone with nothing else mixed into it. Knowing in identity ------------------- Seen from the world of changing show, that consciousness appears to be a holding ground which carries all the seeds of time's causality. But seen more truly in itself, that consciousness is nothing else but knowing in identity. It is that knowing which is known without an act of any kind between what knows and what is known. That knowing only can be known as one's own self, by realizing one's own true identity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Ananda Wood <awood (AT) vsnl (DOT) com> wrote: From Sankarraman Sir, Might I seek clarification on some of the aspects. I am retaining your verses below which I seek the clarification required in capital letters in the context of the particular view contained in the verse. ===================== Passing time ------------ No moment ever co-exists with previous moments that have gone or later moments not yet come. Each moment thus exists alone, when other moments are not here. WHEN YOU SAY THAT EACH MOMENT EXISTS ALONE AND UNRELATED TO THE PREVIOUS MOMENTS, IT MEANS THAT MOMENT EXISTS ONLY AS CONSCIOUSNESS, AND NOT AS A THOUGHT OR MEMORY. BUT IN OUR PERCEPTIONS WE SEE ONLY THOUGHTS REQUIRING INTERPRETATION IN RELATION TO PREVIOUS THOUGHTS. HOW DO YOU RECONCILE YOUR CONCLUSION WITH THE ACTUALITY? The world of space is known through mind: in which there are no points of space, but only moments that pass by. There is no structured space in mind. Here, there is only passing time. Each state of mind is known alone, with other states not present here. JUST AS THERE ARE SPACES OUTSIDE THE MIND IN WHICH THE OBJECT IS SITUATED, THERE IS SPACE IN THE MIND ALSO. THAT EACH STATE IS KNOWN ALONE, WHEN THERE ARE NO OHTHERS, SEEMS TO BE KNOWN ONLY IN RETROSPECT AS A CONCLUSION, AND NOT AT THAT TIME OF THE HAPPENING. What's known in mind is known in passing, in the absence of all else that has now passed and disappeared or is expected to appear. IF THE ABOVE IS TRUE, IT MEANS THAT IT IS NOT A STATE OF THE MIND, BUT SOMETHING BEYOND TIME. ANYTHING THAT IS KNOWN IS ONLY IN RELATION TO SOMETHING THAT HAS DISAPPEARED BUT HELD IN THE MEMORY, AND SOMETHING THAT IS ANTICIPATED. How then can any cause continue, through these changing states of time that we experience in our minds? IS THERE A CAUSE? OR IS IT THAT THE PASSING STATES BEHIND WHICH A CAUSE IS TRACED, ITSELF UNREAL? How is change known? -------------------- What changes is what's known by mind. But what of that which knows the mind? To know that states of mind have changed, some 'thing' that knows must carry on. That knowing something must stay present through the change of mental states. It must stay present as each state replaces states that have passed on. And it must stay on present as new states get to pass on, and get replaced in turn by further ones. What is that knowing which remains -- which stays on present through the change of mental states that come and go? THE FACT OF THE CHANGE IS KNWON ONLY THROUGH MEMORY, WHICH IS ONLY AGAIN A THOUGHT. IS MEMORY REAL? Consciousness ------------- That knowing is called 'consciousness'. It is an ever-present light on which each state of mind depends. Without that light called 'consciousness', no state of mind could come or go. It lights each form that is perceived. It lights each name that mind conceives, each meaning that's interpreted. It lights each valued quality that's judged and felt to motivate our acts of body, sense and mind. It's not itself a form perceived, nor any name that mind conceives, nor any meaning that our minds interpret and elaborate. It's not itself a quality whose value can be judged or felt by any kind of changing act performed by body, sense or mind. It's just that knowing principle which lights each act that comes and goes -- each changing form perceived by sense, each changing name conceived by thought, each changing quality that's judged by intuition in the mind. That light stays present in the mind, illuminating all the forms, and all the names and qualities which come and go in course of time. ARE THERE TWO STATES: THE ONE THE LIGHT, AND THE OTHER OBJECTS ILLUMINED BY THE LIGHT? OR IS IT THAT THERE IS ONLY THE LIGHT, THE SO-CALLED OBJECTS, APPARENTLY ILLUMINED BY THE LIGHT ALSO CONSTITUTING THE LIGHT? The turning of attention ------------------------ All forms and names and qualities keep getting changed. Each one appears when mind's attention turns to it. Each one then also disappears when mind's attention turns away. That is just how they come and go, at every moment in the mind. But, as the mind's attention turns from one appearance to the next, consciousness stays present there, illuminating everything that may appear or disappear in anyone's experience. The underlying background ------------------------- As light itself, that consciousness is what remains, while forms and names and qualities keep getting changed. It's that which stays itself unchanged, completely independent of the changing things that come and go before its unaffected light. All names and forms and qualities are lit by it, while it remains unformed, unnamed, unqualified. It is the background of all change, all difference and variety. It carries on beneath the change of form and name and quality. From it, all changing show must rise producing all that may appear. To it, what's shown must then return -- as everything that may be shown is seen and thought about and felt, and thereby taken right back in. AGAIN SINCE THE OBJECTS DO NOT EXIST IN THE ABSENCE OF ATTENTION, IS NOT ATTENTION ALONE REAL, WHICH IS NOT ATTENDING TO SOMETHING? THERE IS ONLY THE ATTENTION WITHOUT ANYBODY ATTENDING. Cause and effect ---------------- Whatever comes and goes away is an effect whose cause continues underneath the show of change. All cause is found by turning back to underlying consciousness, beneath the seeming show of change produced by body, sense and mind. To understand what causes change, there must be a reflection down into that background consciousness. All cause arises up from there, expressing just that consciousness. In fact, there's no direct effect connecting different states of time. Each state expresses consciousness -- which carries on beneath all time, where time does not at all apply. As previous states become replaced by later states, they each express that underlying consciousness, which is their sole connecting ground. Thus, states of time can only be connected indirectly, through an underlying timelessness where consciousness is found alone with nothing else mixed into it. SINCE THERE IS NO ONE DISCRETE STATE OF EFFECT THAT CAN BE TRACED AS A CAUSE, THERE IS NO CAUSATION, BUT ONLY THE WHAT IS. Knowing in identity ------------------- Seen from the world of changing show, that consciousness appears to be a holding ground which carries all the seeds of time's causality. But seen more truly in itself, that consciousness is nothing else but knowing in identity. It is that knowing which is known without an act of any kind between what knows and what is known. That knowing only can be known as one's own self, by realizing one's own true identity. THE TRUE IDENTITY IS ONE WHRE THERE IS NO DISTINCTION AS BEING AND KNOWLEDGE. with respectful regards Sankarraman Talk is cheap. Use Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls. Great rates starting at 1¢/min. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 advaitin, Ananda Wood <awood wrote: > > Namaste, > > The following piece of verse explores an ancient prakriya towards > advaitic truth. It makes no direct reference to advaitic scriptures, > but may perhaps be found to ask some questions that are shared in > common. > > Ananda > Namaste, Ananda-ji What a wonderful digest of the entire advaita, in such clear English words! PraNAms to all advaitins profvk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk wrote: > > advaitin, Ananda Wood <awood@> wrote: > > > > > > > > The following piece of verse explores an ancient prakriya towards > > advaitic truth. It makes no direct reference to advaitic scriptures, > > but may perhaps be found to ask some questions that are shared in > > common. > > > > > > Namaste, Ananda-ji > > What a wonderful digest of the entire advaita, in such clear English > words! Namaste, Some scriptural references of interest are at: http://www.boloji.com/hinduism/038.htm The Vedic Quest Concerning the Universe, Space & Time http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/32.html Regards, Sunder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 29, 2006 Report Share Posted July 29, 2006 Namaste ! What a cool shower of 'verses ' prsented on this hot summer day of July ! After reading this *Soulful' poem , these words of Taittriya Upanishad comes to mind " There is a bridge between time and Eternity; and this bridge is Atman, the Spirit of man. Neither day nor night cross that bridge, nor old age, nor death nor sorrow." Of special interest is this eterana Truth in these lines That knowing only can be known as one's own self, by realizing one's own true identity Thank you Anandaji for a time well spent on penning some eternal Truths of Vedanta ! with warmest regards Aum shanti! Aum shanti! Aum Shantihi! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Namaste Shri Sankarraman, Thank you for the questions raised in your message #32234 of July 29. Here's how I'd go about investigating them. (Your questions are shown below in capital letters, as in your message. Where the verse you are questioning is needed, it is shown in ordinary text immediately above the relevant question, again as in you message. And my responses are in ordinary text, following each of your questions.) WHEN YOU SAY THAT EACH MOMENT EXISTS ALONE AND UNRELATED TO THE PREVIOUS MOMENTS, IT MEANS THAT MOMENT EXISTS ONLY AS CONSCIOUSNESS, AND NOT AS A THOUGHT OR MEMORY. BUT IN OUR PERCEPTIONS WE SEE ONLY THOUGHTS REQUIRING INTERPRETATION IN RELATION TO PREVIOUS THOUGHTS. HOW DO YOU RECONCILE YOUR CONCLUSION WITH THE ACTUALITY? In saying that each moment exists alone, this is meant as an observation of what actually happens in our mental experience. In actual fact, no two different moments ever occur together in the passing stream of mental states; and yet we perceive and interpret our momentary thoughts as though they extend over time, with the past and the future somehow included in the form of memory and anticipation. My observation here is that memory and anticipation are strictly contained within the passing present. They do not in fact extend into the past and the future, in the way that we habitually assume. So this habitual assumption is mistaken, and it turns out that our habitual ideas of memory and anticipation are false appearances, resulting from mistaken beliefs. The question then is how to correct the mistake. If memory and anticipation can't provide any direct link between two different moments then what can? At this stage of the argument, no conclusion is being drawn. There is only a question raised, about the continuity of time. JUST AS THERE ARE SPACES OUTSIDE THE MIND IN WHICH THE OBJECT IS SITUATED, THERE IS SPACE IN THE MIND ALSO. THAT EACH STATE IS KNOWN ALONE, WHEN THERE ARE NO OHTHERS, SEEMS TO BE KNOWN ONLY IN RETROSPECT AS A CONCLUSION, AND NOT AT THAT TIME OF THE HAPPENING. If there is space within the mind, there must be co-existent points, existing together at the same time. But to observe such co-existent points, one has to be observed after another, at different moments of time. And this returns us back to the same problem as above, that memory and anticipation do not rightly enable us to connect two different observations that our minds have to perceive at two different moments of time. So we are back at the same question that has been already raised, about the continuity of time. No conclusion has been reached; only a question raised again. What's known in mind is known in passing, in the absence of all else that has now passed and disappeared or is expected to appear. IF THE ABOVE IS TRUE, IT MEANS THAT IT IS NOT A STATE OF THE MIND, BUT SOMETHING BEYOND TIME. ANYTHING THAT IS KNOWN IS ONLY IN RELATION TO SOMETHING THAT HAS DISAPPEARED BUT HELD IN THE MEMORY, AND SOMETHING THAT IS ANTICIPATED. Yes indeed, the question of 'knowing' is now being raised. And, as you point out, it implies a continuity that carries on through time. How then can any cause continue, through these changing states of time that we experience in our minds? IS THERE A CAUSE? OR IS IT THAT THE PASSING STATES BEHIND WHICH A CAUSE IS TRACED, ITSELF UNREAL? Yes indeed, again. What's meant by 'cause' comes into question here. What is that knowing which remains -- which stays on present through the change of mental states that come and go? THE FACT OF THE CHANGE IS KNWON ONLY THROUGH MEMORY, WHICH IS ONLY AGAIN A THOUGHT. IS MEMORY REAL? As you say, memory is just a thought, and its reality is very much in question here. That light stays present in the mind, illuminating all the forms, and all the names and qualities which come and go in course of time. ARE THERE TWO STATES: THE ONE THE LIGHT, AND THE OTHER OBJECTS ILLUMINED BY THE LIGHT? OR IS IT THAT THERE IS ONLY THE LIGHT, THE SO-CALLED OBJECTS, APPARENTLY ILLUMINED BY THE LIGHT ALSO CONSTITUTING THE LIGHT? The knowing light of consciousness is not a passing state. It's that which lights all passing states that come and go. They do not shine by their own light, but only by reflecting back to consciousness. Thus, each of them must disappear immediately; as it shows up reflecting light that's taken back into the depth of consciousness. From it, all changing show must rise producing all that may appear. To it, what's shown must then return -- as everything that may be shown is seen and thought about and felt, and thereby taken right back in. AGAIN SINCE THE OBJECTS DO NOT EXIST IN THE ABSENCE OF ATTENTION, IS NOT ATTENTION ALONE REAL, WHICH IS NOT ATTENDING TO SOMETHING? THERE IS ONLY THE ATTENTION WITHOUT ANYBODY ATTENDING. What we call 'attention' is a bit of a confusion. It is a mixing up of two very different things. One is a turning of the mind that keeps on changing, as it becomes transformed into a great variety of differentiated objects. The other is a consciousness to which no change applies, as it stays present through all change. That consciousness is purely subjective. It is the one subject -- utterly unmixed with any changing object that is seen or thought or felt, through any partial faculties of body, sense or mind. It's only that pure subject which can rightly be called 'real'. Not any attention that gets turned in different ways, so that it may seem to be present in one place and absent in another. Thus, states of time can only be connected indirectly, through an underlying timelessness where consciousness is found alone with nothing else mixed into it. SINCE THERE IS NO ONE DISCRETE STATE OF EFFECT THAT CAN BE TRACED AS A CAUSE, THERE IS NO CAUSATION, BUT ONLY THE WHAT IS. Where cause is ultimately found, all its effects show it alone, and thus causation disappears. That knowing only can be known as one's own self, by realizing one's own true identity. THE TRUE IDENTITY IS ONE WHERE THERE IS NO DISTINCTION AS BEING AND KNOWLEDGE. Yes, but that true identity is found by carefully distinguishing just what it is, from all the confusions that we heap mistakenly upon it. So it has to be investigated by a relentless questioning that somehow must persist beyond all trace of compromise. A reasoning discernment must somehow turn upon itself so ruthlessly that no confusion there remains, of mixed-up things which need some more distinguishing. Mere words or ideas like 'consciousness' or 'reality' or 'truth' must never be treated as answers that are sought, but rather as means of raising questions in a search that must leave them utterly behind. It is one's own identity that must come into question, beneath one's own mistakes. Here, as a sadhaka comparing notes with other sadhakas, I must confess that this is a common warning of which I feel the need to remind myself. Ananda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2006 Report Share Posted July 30, 2006 Ananda-ji : namste ! when Sri Sankararman posed those questions to you on these verses, i was wondering how you are going to handle akll those questions ! may i say that you came out looking pretty good ! My English teacher used to say in High school ' you should never ask an poet the meanings underlying his poem and a painter ( an artist ) the explanation of his abstract painting . ' It is asking William Blake the meaning behind these lines : Auguries of Innocence To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower, Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour Try to interpret this poem and you will see that Blake was a born Vedanti ! was it not Leonardio DA vinci who said "The mind of the painter should be like a mirror which always takes the colour of the thing that it reflects, and which is filled by as many images as there are things placed before it." and this is true of SRI anandaji's verses ! eaxch one of us will understand these lines That knowing only can be known as one's own self, by realizing one's own true identity. i luv these words Mere words or ideas like 'consciousness' or 'reality' or 'truth' must never be treated as answers that are sought, but rather as means of raising questions in a search that must leave them utterly behind.) i can confess i am a struggling struggling sadhiks in that 'twilght' zone ! thank you for the 'time ' well spent in cyber 'space' 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.