Inside and Outside

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 2/18/05 3:52:37 AM, ombhurbhuva writes:

 

 

> M:> Deep Sleep would never be 

> noticed under that

> >regime because there is no subject to have

> before him a mental object.  So it  seems

> that the

> >featureless blackness must be aware of

> itself as such.  The Mandukya Upanisad has 

> >something to

> >say on this.  I will root it out tomorrow.

>

> Michael.

>

Hi Michael,

Let me play devil advocate and point

out the obvious unproved assumptions

in the above statement.

 

Assumption 1: Deep sleep is noticed.

When is it noticed? As it happens, or

at the moment of awakening, as the

ending of a period of unconsciousness?

 

The brain is very good at filling gaps

with fake perceptions. We all have

a blind spot at the center of each eye

where the optic nerve is connected, yet

we are unaware of it because the brain

fills that gap by stretching the image

you're viewing over the gap, just as

a computer would. So it very well

could be that what we notice on

waking up is the gap in consciousness

and then, the brain glosses it over.

 

Assumption #2. Because you assumed

deep sleep is noticed, you feel free to

assume again that the featureless

blackness is somehow aware.

 

Sometimes is amusing to watch the

conceptual contortions Advaitins

perform to prove the universality

of awareness, like saying that

" Awareness is not aware of itself. "

If is not aware of itself, is not awareness.

Why insist in calling it awareness? They have

no other reason than to cater to those who

want to survive at any cost under any form.

 

Pete

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

AC wrote:

Very interesting, Michael !

 

Could you please say little more on:

 

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

The other odd thing about our 'knowledge'

that we have been in a state of deep sleep

is that no matter how long we have been in

that state ACCORDING TO THE EEG MACHINE IT

IS ONLY A POINT INSTANT IN CONSCIOUSNESS

because it has no features to give it

duration.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

 

with warm regards,

ac.

 

& & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & & &

 

Hi AC.

I am not going so far as to say

that brain activity is mind activity or

that they are non

dual or whether the division into mind and

brain is inevitable but false or

whatever. Let me

just look at deep sleep as an event. It

has a 3rd. person aspect and a 1st.person

aspect. The

EEG machine is the one and the report of

the waking person is the other. The

waking person can

only infer from external evidence the

length of the sleep: that he was asleep,

he just knows.

 

The interest of the Vedantin in the

sushupti phase is that it demonstrates the

falsity of the

Mental Subject/Mental Object model of

knowledge. Deep Sleep would never be

noticed under that

regime because there is no subject to have

before him a mental object. So it seems

that the

featureless blackness must be aware of

itself as such. The Mandukya Upanisad has

something to

say on this. I will root it out tomorrow.

 

Michael.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...> wrote:

> In Nisargadatta ,

> " anders_lindman "

> <anders_lindman> wrote:

> >

> > Nisargadatta ,

> ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...>

> wrote:

> > > Anders wrote:

> > > My view of deep sleep is that we can

> > > actually never know if we ever

> > > have been in deep sleep. What we call

> deep

> > > sleep is a memory

> > > experienced now, or we could call it a

> gap

> > > in linear memory experience

> > > now.

> > >

> > >

> %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

> > > %

> > >

> > > Hi Anders,

> > > I'm new to the group though some

> > > will know me from elsewhere. The

> > > knowledge that we have been in a state

> of

> > > deep sleep is regarded as very

> important

> > > in Vedanta but on what is this

> knowledge

> > > based? Can it really be a memory for

> by

> > > definition we have to be conscious to

> have

> > > experiences which we later recall in

> the

> > > form of memories. What we didn't

> > > experience we can't remember.

> > >

> > > The other odd thing about our

> 'knowledge'

> > > that we have been in a state of deep

> sleep

> > > is that no matter how long we have

> been in

> > > that state according to the EEG

> machine it

> > > is only a point instant in

> consciousness

> > > because it has no features to give it

> > > duration.

> > >

> > > Stranger and stranger there is no ego,

> > > mind or witness (saksin) in deep

> sleep.

> > > Truly it is some sort of blank,

> nescient,

> > > dark samadhi.

> > >

> > > Best Wishes, Michael

> >

> > Hi Michael,

> >

> > What I was pointing to is that all we

> know is what we know now.

> > Memories about having been asleep (or a

> gap in memory) is necessarily

> > not the same as if we actually have

> experienced it. This means that we

> > maybe have not experience _anything_ in

> an actual past, but instead

> > what we experience as the past is only a

> quantum field experienced now.

> >

> > This idea is very difficult to wrap

> one's mind around because the mind

> > thinks: " of course I have done this and

> that in the past.....I can

> > feel that the Big Mac and Co I ate half

> an hour ago is still in my

> > stomach, and I even have a stain of

> dressing left on my

> > shirt.......and now you are telling me

> that I have not eaten that

> > hamburger meal??? "

> >

> > What I am saying is: perhaps we have

> never eaten any meal, never been

> > asleep, never been younger than we are

> now... All we know, _all_ we

> > know is what we know now, and _only_

> now. With this view there never

> > has been any EEG recording done. Never,

> ever!

> >

> > " No one has ever bought any shoes. " --

> Tony Parsons

> >

> > /AL

>

> PS. To really understand the possibility

> of what I am pointing to, it

> must, along the line with this

> investigation, also be pointed out that

> there never has been any Tony Parsons

> either. Tony Parsons is a person

> now and only now. The " past " Tony Parsons

> is a quantum information

> structure that gives a cohersive

> appearance of a seamless past,

> reaching back to the Big Bang, which is

> not a " real " past at all, but

> a timeless quantum " now " . This " now "

> contains the entire history

> record from the " beginning " of the

> universe up to present day. This

> " now " happens now. Even the past happens

> now, is " created " now. What

> appear like 16 billion years is " created "

> in " zero " seconds. " Infinite

> time compression "

>

> This timeless now is a web of information

> that makes up what is.

> Information in itself does not contain

> time. If you have an MP3 file

> on your computer with 3 minutes of music,

> that MP3 file does not

> contain time, but the information in the

> file is structured in a way

> that gives the appearance of time, and

> even when the file is played

> and sound is coming out of the

> loudspeakers there is no 3 minutes of

> music. The sound is now and only now.

>

> /AL

>

> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>

> Hi Anders,

>

> Living in the absolute now would not be

> very adaptive. There is no truck in the

> middle of the road where I'm crossing now

> but my path and its will intersect if I

> move now. Living a little ahead of now is

> what keeps us alive and also helps to

> return that killer serve.

 

Professional tennis players, for example, return serves from a state

of intuition and flow, not from a state of thinking. They are in that

moment utterly " here and now " .

 

> The reaction time to the totally

> unexpected gives a sense how plastic

> 'now' is. Have you noticed how you will

> see or hear it and then jump out of your

> skin. There's a definite time lapse.

>

> From a metaphysical point of view Vedanta

> recognises that time is tri-valent. The

> real is spoken of as that which is

> unsublated (uncontradicted) in all three

> moments of time i.e. past, present and

> future.

>

> I have the feeling that if I were to live

> in the absolute now there would be a

> white-out into pure being or the

> atemporal. Do you consider that the psi

> factor plays a part in our conception of

> time? I have some mild experience of this

> in the form of precognition. However you

> can't know that it's precognitive until

> you experience it *again*. But it's also

> the case that the future must be somehow

> now too or else it could not be lived now.

> In that respect I admit your point.

>

> Michael

 

I am not familiar with the psi factor.

 

Predicting the future is a part of what is happening now, and that

prediction is, what it seems, based on the past. My idea is that the

past is only now, and predictions about the future including eventual

real precognitions, are also what is now.

 

Of course there is a past. But what I question is if someone _ever_

has been in the past other than what appears now. My idea that the

past is only now.

 

For example, I think about what happened at work today, what I said to

this or that person e t c. With the idea that there is only now my day

at work has never happened in the past. That past is happening _now_.

I think of my childhood, and that childhood happens now, and only now.

I cannot really say that there has been a past. No person can say that

there actually is a past that is somewhere not in this moment. What we

know is in this moment, and in this moment only. All the past is in

this moment.

 

/AL