Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

Automatic Remembrance

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Various images and analogies have been

used in Vedanta to give a sense of the

self. It has been called the Fourth in

the Mandukya Up. as though it were

additional to the other three states or

modalities of consciousness, waking,

dreaming, and deep sleep. In fact it is

not separated from any of the three

states and may be regarded as their

substratum. 'Turiya (the Fourth) has for

its valid proof, the single belief in the

Self'. The analogy of material identity

is sometimes used; clay is the basic stuff

out of which platters, jugs, dishes are

made; gold is the identity of ornaments

and so forth. Clearly if

consciousness/self/Turiya is the

unchanging identity of the person, the

same thing cannot have two beginnings in

time and thus it is preserved through the

state of deep sleep. That indicates that

it is not to be viewed as the subject of

a state of consciousness. There are no

neural correlates of consciousness in the

sense that on the one hand you have a

state of the brain and on the other hand

you have a state of consciousness.

 

Is the Upanisad saying that the belief in

the Self is the proof of the Self? In

his commentary on that part of the

Mandukya Upanisad, Sankara refers to the

Brhadaranyaka Up. I.iv.7:

 

" This (universe) was then

undifferentiated. It differentiated only

into name and form - it was called such

and such, and was of such and such form.

So to this day it is differentiated only

into name and form - it is called such

and such, and is of such and such form.

This Self has entered into these bodies

up to the tip of the nails - as a razor

may be put in its case, or as fire, which

sustains the world, may be its source.

People do not see It, for (viewed in its

aspects) It is incomplete. When It does

the function of living, It is called the

vital force; when It speaks, the organ of

speech; when It sees, the eye; when It

hears, the ear; and when It thinks, the

mind. These are merely Its names

according to functions. He who meditates

upon each of this totality of aspects does

not know, for It is incomplete, (being

divided) from this totality by possessing

a single characteristic. The Self alone

is to be meditated upon, for all these

are unified in It. Of all these, this

Self alone should be realised, for one

knows all these through It, just as one

may get (an animal) through its foot-

prints. He who knows It as such obtains

fame and association (with his

relatives). "

 

'Turiya (the Fourth) has for its valid

proof, the single belief in the Self'.

Tentatively, could that mean that by the

very fact that we have a concept of the

self, there must be a self or that its

existence causes belief in it. The word

belief is used because knowledge or

evidence is not appropriate. In any case

" the remembrance of the Self comes

automatically....It could not arise

otherwise " (Sankara)

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Nisargadatta , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@e...>

wrote:

> Various images and analogies have been

> used in Vedanta to give a sense of the

> self. It has been called the Fourth in

> the Mandukya Up. as though it were

> additional to the other three states or

> modalities of consciousness, waking,

> dreaming, and deep sleep. In fact it is

> not separated from any of the three

> states and may be regarded as their

> substratum. 'Turiya (the Fourth) has for

> its valid proof, the single belief in the

> Self'. The analogy of material identity

> is sometimes used; clay is the basic stuff

> out of which platters, jugs, dishes are

> made; gold is the identity of ornaments

> and so forth. Clearly if

> consciousness/self/Turiya is the

> unchanging identity of the person, the

> same thing cannot have two beginnings in

> time and thus it is preserved through the

> state of deep sleep. That indicates that

> it is not to be viewed as the subject of

> a state of consciousness. There are no

> neural correlates of consciousness in the

> sense that on the one hand you have a

> state of the brain and on the other hand

> you have a state of consciousness.

>

> Is the Upanisad saying that the belief in

> the Self is the proof of the Self? In

> his commentary on that part of the

> Mandukya Upanisad, Sankara refers to the

> Brhadaranyaka Up. I.iv.7:

>

> " This (universe) was then

> undifferentiated. It differentiated only

> into name and form - it was called such

> and such, and was of such and such form.

> So to this day it is differentiated only

> into name and form - it is called such

> and such, and is of such and such form.

> This Self has entered into these bodies

> up to the tip of the nails - as a razor

> may be put in its case, or as fire, which

> sustains the world, may be its source.

> People do not see It, for (viewed in its

> aspects) It is incomplete. When It does

> the function of living, It is called the

> vital force; when It speaks, the organ of

> speech; when It sees, the eye; when It

> hears, the ear; and when It thinks, the

> mind. These are merely Its names

> according to functions. He who meditates

> upon each of this totality of aspects does

> not know, for It is incomplete, (being

> divided) from this totality by possessing

> a single characteristic. The Self alone

> is to be meditated upon, for all these

> are unified in It. Of all these, this

> Self alone should be realised, for one

> knows all these through It, just as one

> may get (an animal) through its foot-

> prints. He who knows It as such obtains

> fame and association (with his

> relatives). "

>

> 'Turiya (the Fourth) has for its valid

> proof, the single belief in the Self'.

> Tentatively, could that mean that by the

> very fact that we have a concept of the

> self, there must be a self or that its

> existence causes belief in it. The word

> belief is used because knowledge or

> evidence is not appropriate. In any case

> " the remembrance of the Self comes

> automatically....It could not arise

> otherwise " (Sankara)

>

> Michael

 

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

 

Wonderful, Great!

 

Just one thing. Any belief can be taken as proof of Turiya's

existence. Beliefs are from the mind or thoughts. Turiya is beyond

the mind or thoughts. Only direct experience of it is the proof of

its existence. The one who leaves permanently in Turiya is

considered a true guru. Here comes the divine Lineage. But of course

all this can be learned in few days. Just by reading Ramana, if you

have good intellectual skills!?! Absolutly not! Too bad :0)

 

Love

Odysseus,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...