Inside and Outside

[Guest guest]

ubject: Re: Inside and Outside

 

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?

 

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

 

Hi Pete,

 

It must be at the end of a period of

unconsciousness. Could that noticing be

the result of a learnt routine? As a

child you are taught that the drowsiness

and slow waking to consciousness is coming

out of sleep. That could be at play here.

 

If, as the advaitic theory has it, deep

sleep is known whilst it is going on, this

knowledge cannot be a noticing because

noticing requires a quasi-objective

stance. We notice some one thing amongst

others. Something is brought to our

notice.

 

My view about inference is that we

generally infer about the length of sleep

rather than the fact that we were asleep.

If we come to wake suddenly without the

usual waking up period it may be a puzzle

to us. Was I asleep there you may ask

someone.

******************************************

Pete:

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.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Michael:

How would the gap come to be known unless

by (a)inference (b)knowledge: which is

admittedly very fleeting as it is a point

instant or even timeless. Maybe only

yogis really know without inference.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Pete:

Assumption #2. Because you assumed

deep sleep is noticed, you feel free to

assume again that the featureless

blackness is somehow aware.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

 

Michael:

Granted I am theoretically led by the

nose: Brh.Up.IV.iii.28 " That it does not

know in that state is because, though

knowing then, it does not know: for the

knowers function of knowing can never be

lost, because it is imperishable. But

there is not that second thing separate

from it which it can know. " (about Deep

Dreamless Sleep/Sushupti)

 

These theories of the Self and so on are

transcendental postulates which can

neither be proved nor disproved because

they cannot be known. Their function is

integrative or they offer a picture of how

things must fundamentally be for things to

appear as they do. Even scientific

systems will have axioms which are

unprovable within that system itself. Did

Newton prove Gravity?

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Pete:

 

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.

 

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Michael:

If the Advaitin holds that an awareness of

the book in front of him can only be

because the book is a form of limitation

of pure consciousness then one form of

pure consciousness i.e.mind/witness is

aware of itself i.e. another form of pure

consciousness, the book.

 

I could hold this without being too

concerned about personal survival.

Personally I have never been bothered by

the idea of an endless round of

transmigration and in the event of my

Nirvana then there will be no one to be

concerned.

 

In summary, I am open to the idea of the

knowledge that we have been in the state

of deep dreamless sleep being an inference

from the waking up condition and in the

limit case of perfect wake up being

accessible by yogis only.

 

By the way is it not a transcendental

postulate of the materialist monist that

the brain secretes thoughts. Is this not

strictly unprovable?

 

Thanks for the stimulating challenge,

 

Michael

 

Pete