Time

[Guest guest]

Hello!

 

However the

> difficulty with this is that any experience whatever

> will involve the

> notion of before and after.

 

Yes. WHEN do I know a " past " ? WHEN do I know a

" future " ? The only thing that convinces me of a past

is memory. The only thing that convinces me of a

future is anticipation of a future.

 

Before and after can't exist outside the present. They

have no meaning apart from the present (can I even

find the present?).

 

It takes the present moment in which a memory of a

past event can be contained. That past event happened

in a/the present. So there is no past since I only

experience a trace, a memory of it in the present. The

past cannot exist except in the present--and even

then, it's only memory.

 

I keep talking about the future, but I never seem to

get there! Has anyone? Have we ever said " Ah! Here I

am, finally in the future! " . No. Never. All I ever

know is an eternal present. I can't find a boundary

anywhere, past or future. Even to speak of this

present moment is impossible. How long does the

present moment last? Once I pin it down--ah, there it

is, here's this present moment!--it's gone, but was

never there in the first place.

 

So maybe we exist outside the construct of time and

apply notions such as ageing, birth/death, etc.,

playing this game all along.

 

An old joke said: " God had to invent time so

everything wouldn't happen all at once. "

 

I suggest that time is a construct, a play-thing, that

we need at this realm of existence. We need our

watches so we can get to work " on time " . We took on

this voluntary limitation and then maybe we forgot

that we took it on?

 

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Guest guest]

advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote:

 

> Let's have a look at the concept of time and how it is attained.

...........

 

Respected All,

 

I may be permitted to make four different points on this topic.

These points are not inter-related but will add to the big picture as

it emerges:

 

1. Time is a mental construct:

 

I am giving below some extracts of an article of mine published in

Aug 2004.

 

" All of us are familiar with another character of the world that we

live in. It is the arrow of TIME. What is this arrow of time? Is it

really there? How do we see it?

 

Ours is a three dimensional world. That is to say that our eyes (and

the associated stereovision, stereo sound) basically see the physical

parameter of distance, viz., length in three directions. If we were

only two-dimensional creatures, we would not have been able to see

length, breadth and width all at once. We can see only two of the

dimensions and the third has to be interpolated by incremental

sections like in the Magnetic Resonance Imaging. That is to say that

the extra dimension is seen in steps, one after another and NOT all

the dimensions at once. As two-dimensional creatures, if we look at a

chair, we see two sides of it and gradually build an image of the

depth of the chair mentally, but seeing only a cross-sectional area

of two dimensions at any given point. So it is the mind that

intervenes to compensate for our two dimensional restriction.

 

We have listed a few physical and chemical characteristics of the

world we live in. We have various sense organs for their detection:

 

 

Physical parameters:

Light and colors - Eyes

Distance - Eyes

Sound - Ears

Heat - Skin

Pressure - Skin

 

Chemical parameters:

Taste - Tongue

Smell - Nose

 

 

Have you ever wondered what is that organ or tissue that we are built

with to detect time? None I am afraid. Because of the inherent

limitation of our three dimensional capability, our mind provides an

imaginary continuity and helps us to see an extra dimension. We call

that extra dimension as TIME. If the mind does not interpose, there

is no 'time' in the sense that we see it (as an arrow) though it is a

dimension. When the mind is snubbed or stunned, as in an altered

state of consciousness (say under anesthesia) or when the mind faces

sudden life-threatening situations, it loses all sense of time. The

body is able to perform umpteen numbers of tasks in a sudden

dangerous situation. Accomplishing so many tasks in such a short time

at times of catastrophes is a wonder commonly experienced by all of

us. When the mind gets snubbed, there is no sense of time that

remains. Therefore, arrow of time is only a mental imaginary

construct and not a fundamental property of the world we live in!

 

As we see the world in progressive steps of three dimensions, the

mind gives the connectivity by linking one cross section as emerging

out of its predecessor, the first as the cause of the second. A cause

and effect relationship is established and the mind is trained to

interpret all events in this fashion. The continuation of cause -

effect duo gets further amplified to cyclicity and even rebirth. If

the mind does not provide this continuity, there is neither a

cyclicity nor rebirth. All events have taken place all at once. We

see three dimensions and a fourth by interpolation in the mind. The

total brain has always been there, not the incremental sections of

MRI scans in time. So also the total chair has always been there, not

incremental sections of depth in time as visible to a two dimensional

creature. "

 

2. Same Brain Areas process Past and Future:

 

According to Dr. Kathleen McDermott, an associate professor of

psychology in the School of Medicine at Washington University, there

is " strong support for a relatively recent theory of memory, which

posits that remembering the past and envisioning the future draw upon

many of the same neural mechanisms. " She talked of brain activity in

amnesiacs and children when they think of past and future in her

research work published about a year ago.

 

3. Book-keeper:

 

Prof. John Wheeler, the famous Physicist said that " Time was the book

keeper of change. "

 

4. Most of the members here must be aware of Gaudapadakarika which

discusses past and present as equally unreal. So I am not quoting

from it.

 

With best of regards,

ramesam

[Guest guest]

Hi Steve.

 

Beautifully presented.

 

There is only an ever-present present and THAT we are!

 

Shri Ramesam, I like your scientific enquiry. But, I have problem

when you say that the arrow of time is a mental construct. The

problem is that mind itself is a construct. It can't be a mental

construct because we are reffering to mind. Then what construct is

it? That is the sixty-four million dollar question. It could be the

first construct of ignorance - awareness misunderstood. Devoid of

the construct called mind, we are just pure Awareness, an ever-

present present called timelessness where everything (memory of the

past, experience of the present and visualization of the future) are

a NOW.

 

It may be that the mind is born first, then time/space and events or

all together simultaneously. We can't be sure. The question itself

is drenched in ignorance and, therefore, absurd.

 

We are under the tyranny of constructs. This needs to be realized.

No wonder, the ancients named time kAla and equated it with the God

of Death! Transcending the constructs (mind and time) therefore is

Immortality, our ticket to the ever-present present where all the

events ARE but don't TAKE PLACE, as taking place presupposes time.

That is exactly what Advaita promises.

 

Michael-ji has indeed set a fireball rolling! We need the

constructs of mind and time to understand ignorance which has

constructed them.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

______________

 

-- In advaitin , Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote:

>

> I keep talking about the future, but I never seem to

> get there! Has anyone? Have we ever said " Ah! Here I

> am, finally in the future! " . No. Never. All I ever

> know is an eternal present. I can't find a boundary

> anywhere, past or future. Even to speak of this

> present moment is impossible. How long does the

> present moment last? Once I pin it down--ah, there it

> is, here's this present moment!--it's gone, but was

> never there in the first place.

.......>

> An old joke said: " God had to invent time so

> everything wouldn't happen all at once. "

>

> I suggest that time is a construct, a play-thing, that

> we need at this realm of existence. We need our

> watches so we can get to work " on time " . We took on

> this voluntary limitation and then maybe we forgot

> that we took it on?

[Guest guest]

Hi Madathil,

 

We are under the tyranny of constructs. This needs to

be realized.

 

Good Grief, yes! I have so many constructs going in a

360 degree circle...everywhere I look there is a

construct! There is my perception of x and then there

are other ways to perceive x!

 

Constructs I see: (this is NOT exhaustive! I'm not big

enough to exhaust this!)

 

Time

Space

Matter

Government

Religion

History

Philosophy

Science

Politics

Nations

Cultures

Races

Truth

eggs

curry

rice

Chateaubriand

eggplant

Belgian ale (well, Belgian ale MAY be real and not a

construct!)

me...

 

to name a few.

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[Guest guest]

Madathil Rajendran Nair <madathilnair wrote:

 

We need the

constructs of mind and time to understand ignorance which has

constructed them.

 

 

Namaste.

In a way, if you think about it, ALL the constructs come as a package in

duality, while in Oneness there are none.

 

For e.g. imagine if the object existing in the universe were an atom A. Imagine

the atom to be indivisible, incompressible etc. There is no other particle

other than the atom.

 

For such an atom, there is no concept of distance/space, for there is nothing

for it to saythat 'such and such a thing is 5 inches away from me'. Because

whatever exists, is filled by it only, the concept of 'outside' isnt there, and

hence the particle is Infinite.

 

Same with time. There is nothing changing in it for it to say that X happened

" before " Y, since the concept of before and after doesnt exist for it. Same can

be shown about causation where the concept event A is the cause of Y doesnt

exist.

 

Now, imagine another similar particle B introduced in with A. Now the 'distance'

between A and B " creates " space. The time it takes for for anything to reach

between A and B, or any event to occur between A and B " creates " time, and any

interaction between the two " creates " causation.

 

So, in a way, ALL the constructs are created at the same instance by duality.

(here 'instance' is not a measure of time, nor is 'creation' used to indicate

space/causality, they are used merely as a means of communication).

 

In One ness there are no constructs. The sum-total of ALL these constructs is

Maya.

 

In a way, Indian philosophers had shown the continuity of space and time (as

well as causation) before Einstein, although not mathematically.

 

 

Pranam,

~Vaibhav.

 

 

 

Explore your hobbies and interests. Click here to begin.

 

 

[Guest guest]

--- ramesam <ramesam wrote:

 

> advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote:

>

> > Let's have a look at the concept of time and how it is attained.

> ..........

>

> Respected All,

>

> I may be permitted to make four different points on this topic.

> These points are not inter-related but will add to the big picture as

> it emerges:

>

> 1. Time is a mental construct:

 

Shree Ramesan - Needless to say, I fully agree with you.

 

That animals operated within time - is no argument. - I mentioned about the

experiments

conducted on people kept in deep caves with no chronological time - they

operated on the

biological basis. Instinctive is reaction to the sense data by the operator

beyond the

senses - Aham visvaanaro bhuutvaa praNinaam deham aasritaH - I am as vishvaanara

enlivens

the body and all body functions are dictated by me. Vishvaanara is a conscious

entity.

Here it is not senses nor even the mind but operated by the global mind - Global

mind is

mind too within vyavahaara.

 

Steve - you are correct - Present alone is timeless. That is what eternity

stands for.

 

In fact advaita Vedanta fits better with time as mental concept. In the present

alone all

duality ceases since ego lives on past and future. Look at our bio-data - It

speaks for

itself. In fact we can live only in the present and work only in the present and

in the

present there is no time- hence karmani eva adhikaaraste follows, I have choice

in action

only. Results are future to the action and I have no control.

 

Transcending ego involves intense observation or awareness of it and that can be

done

only looking at the thoughts which are mostly centered on the past or future -

but the

very observation is present - that is where one can uncondition the mind too.

Japa yoga

also zeros-in on that - In the present alone the creator and the created or the

observer

and the observed become one and that is the consciousness the object limiting

consciousness and subject limiting consciousness merge into homogeneous

consciousness -

where saakshii and saaksyam also into one.

 

Advaita does not dismiss that which is logical and scientific too. They are all

within

vyavahaara - all part of jagat mithyaa. Vedas as pramaaNa has to be understood

correctly

as Sastri's recent note shows. It is pramaaNa for that which is beyond the

other

pramaaNa. Unless the compelling reason to negate the other pramaaNas by saastra

pramaaNa,

their fields are very much specified. Hence the definition 'anadhigata' is

included as

part of the definition. For more details see the part 1 and 2 of Knowledge and

the Means

of knowledge.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

H.N.Sreenivasa Murthy

Pranams to all.

Reference : Posting 39600.

 

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote: [Reference 39600]

" It is pramaaNa for that which is beyond the other

pramaaNa. Unless the compelling reason to negate the other pramaaNas

by saastra pramaaNa, their fields are very much specified. "

 

Dear Sri Sadananda,

The second sentence in the above excerpt is confusing to me.

 

Is it ever possible for one pramana to negate another pramnas?

I request you kindly to explain in detail the idea contained in

the second sentence viz. " Unless the compelling reason to negate the

other pramaaNas by saastra pramaaNa, their fields are very much

specified. "

 

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

>

> 1. Time is a mental construct:

>

> Shree Ramesan - Needless to say, I fully agree with you.

>

>...... Aham visvaanaro bhuutvaa praNinaam deham aasritaH - I am as

vishvaanara enlivens

> the body and all body functions are dictated by me. Vishvaanara is

a conscious entity. ......

 

 

Respected Sirs,

 

As we cross seven missives in this interesting thread, perhaps one

should brace oneself for some differences. But before I come to

differences, I may be allowed to make a few more general points:

 

1. Neuroscientists observed through fMRI and other " advanced

brain imaging techniques that remembering the past and envisioning

the future may go hand-in-hand, with each process sparking strikingly

similar patterns of activity within precisely the same broad network

of brain regions. " In plain English, this can be understood to mean

that it makes no difference for the brain processes whether it is

past or future `we' are thinking about.

2. There is a general approach to understand `present' as that

infinitesimal fraction of time that lies between two bounds – one

bound on the left, say, signifying the end of past and another bound

on the right, say, standing for the start of future. People tried to

estimate that fraction as the duration of time that a stimulus takes

to produce a cognizable perception. Some defined it as `kshana.' It

could depend on the saccades of the eye, which gathers information

only in broken snap-shots. Each saccade may last about 20 msec.

 

Without trying to elaborate extensively, (as it requires too much

space and also because it is difficult for me to recall where exactly

within those 32,000 verses), a reading of Yogavaasishta gives me the

impression that instead of viewing the `present' in terms of those

msecs, suppose you shift the left and right boundaries.

 

Push the left boundary to far left and the right boundary to far

right. You have extended the span of `present.' Suppose you stay in

that widened span and push the bounds to infinity on either side.

You are then a " Jivanmukta. " Of course, there is no physical or

mental shifting of the bounds involved. `All thinking' in fact stops

and there is nothing that you do except just observe, feel the " what

is " - whatever that is one need not call it `present'!

 

3. Mr. J. Krishnamurti repeatedly points out the difference

between the biological time and psychological time. In fact he even

uses the two words Reality and Truth to mean distinctly different

things. Body growth, aging, a seed becoming tree etc. show

biological time. But to be in Truth does not require any time. One

may talk of preparation, purification of mind etc. etc. all of which

involve `psychological time', which is non-existent. You are in

Truth instantaneously – no time involved. One of the oft quoted

example of his is: If you find you are angry, that very moment of

observing yourself to be in anger freed you from anger. No

psychological time involved. Such total observation itself is

complete action.

 

The so-called psychological time, as he says is only a hope, thought.

 

4. Quantum particles have no respect for 'time' as we understand

time. They can travel from past to future to present to past etc.

However, larger bodies are subjected to the inexorable Second Law of

Thermodynamics. In an ever increasing entropy in a closed system, we

have to face the asymmetric arrow of time. But then is the Universe

a closed system or energy exchanges take place at the D-brane level

in several of those extra-dimensions is all theoretical conjecture

now. We can take up this issue separately.

 

Now coming to the points where I beg to slightly differ from some of

the posts of our respected and highly learned members:

 

Right at the outset let me please say that I do not mean any

offence. I am just trying to express in more concrete words, what

appears to me as a fact. Nothing is meant personal. I am trying to

convey something deeply felt by me.

 

1. Shri Nair Sir says that mental construct is also within the

realm of `ignorance.' As ever so gently and subtly remarked by Shri

Steve Sir, even to say that something is within the realm

of `ignorance' can also be `ignorance' along with the attendant

statement that there lies some other thing beyond ignorance! (Every

one knows the metaphor – the search of a blind man in a dark room for

a black coat that is after all not there). So is there not a danger

here, Sir, that we may get trapped in a circular argument.

 

2. Respected Shri Sadananda Sir says: " Instinctive is reaction

to the sense data by the operator beyond the senses - Aham visvaanaro

bhuutvaa praNinaam deham aasritaH - I am as vishvaanara enlivens the

body and all body functions are dictated by me. Vishvaanara is a

conscious entity. " Then he takes a leap to a Global mind.

 

All creatures including us (and the men who were in the expt cited by

him) function on the basis of `circadian rhythms'. As was pointed

out by Shri Michale Sir in the very first post, these are the in

built biological clock mechanisms at cellular level. Though they are

figuratively said to be biological clocks, it is not that they work

as clocks keeping time. Energy in the form of light activates

certain proteins and in turn they turn on some genes which give

further instructions to various organs for its body maintenance.

Successful experiments are recently conducted to alter the response

of these light-sensitive proteins ( I can give the reference of the

research paper if wanted).

 

Evolutionarily speaking, eye was the fist specialized cell to gather

energy in the form of light. It was placed far back in the front of

the head. As primates developed, the position of the eye shifted

towards the front and its function too changed. In man eye has

become an `information gatherer' and not an `energy gatherer.'

 

So there is no need to invoke an undefined `vaiswanara' . Now comes

my bigger objection. Shri Sadananda Sir quoted the first of half of

Bhagavad-Gita verse (Ch 15, Sloka 14). He left the second part.

 

The verse under reference has nothing to do with biological or other

circadian rhythms. It is about digesting the food. Even Shankara

commented on this verse: (I am not familiar with Itrans etc, pl

excuse me) aham eva vaiswanarah udarastah agnih bhutva – `ayam agnih

vaiswanarah yah ayamantah purushe yenedamannam pachyate [brih u 5.9.1]

…'

 

Clearly the statement is about `fire in the stomach.'

 

My own article titled " You Don't Belong Here " (Consecration, Sep-Oct,

2005) gives a different significance. When life first started on the

earth, it was not oxygen-dependent. So in a way oxygen was a poison

for our very ancient ancestors. Later on living creatures adopted to

live in oxygen environment. Still, they cannot digest the food they

eat.

 

Quoting from the above article:

" The main food synthesized and used by all living creatures on earth

(whether the extremophiles or plants or us) is carbohydrates –

combination of carbon, hydrogen and oxygen. Not silica, iron and

other elements available in plenty on earth. In fact, you cannot

digest by yourself the food you eat, had our non-oxygen-breathing

ancestors been not lovingly helping you! Sitting in the dark,

caustic/acidic oxygenless recesses of our stomach or intestines, they

(acidophilus, lactobacillus, bifidus) help convert all that poison

you eat to a usable form. "

 

And I quoted the Gita sloka 15 - 14!

 

With best of regards,

ramesam

[Guest guest]

--- ramesam <ramesam wrote:

 

> 2. Respected Shri Sadananda Sir says: " Instinctive is reaction

> to the sense data by the operator beyond the senses - Aham visvaanaro

> bhuutvaa praNinaam deham aasritaH - I am as vishvaanara enlivens the

> body and all body functions are dictated by me. Vishvaanara is a

> conscious entity. " Then he takes a leap to a Global mind.

 

 

Shree Ramesam - PraNams

 

Here is my understanding:

 

I concur with most of your presentation - only some clarification from my point.

 

The second part of the sloka is

prANApAna samaayuktaH pachAmyannam caturvidham||

 

Having become VaisvAnara, the second line of the sloka refers to as aham as

vaisvAnara

doing prAnApAna samaayuktaH - prANa and apAna are not all inclusive but

representative

of all panca prANas - prANa, apAna, vyAna, UdAna, SamAna (these are all part of

VaisvAnara)- all the five are represented by the leaders PrANa and ApAna (since

digestive

systems is being specifically referred here) thus in the second part Krishna

gives

example with respect to only digestive process. The rest of cell divisions that

you

mentioned as per time schedule all come within the physiological functions and

their

byproducts - where the rest of panca prANas involved directly or indirectly.

Hence they

are not different or exclusive from the example I gave as part of local to

global

control. I am not the one who really switched from local to global - actually

Krishna

himself did for me - as He himself is coming down from global to local - in the

sloka

itself. Since I am more interested in Him, I went the other way!

 

This aspect is also made clear in the MandUkya in one shot- in the description

of waking

state or the first paada - both from the local and global - the Upanishad

switches - from

ekonavishati mukHaH to SaptAngaH - VaisvAnara and Vishwa; tejasa and Hiranya

Garbha,

prAjna to Iswara - both are involved from microcosmic level to macrocosmic level

-

In the statement aham vaisvAnarobhUtvA - Krishna identifying both at macro scale

as aham

and micro scale as VaisvAnara - hence the switch from local to global is what is

intended

in the sloka too.

 

Instinctives actions are controlled by Iswara only - so is all our physiological

or

biological factions. Human mind does not directly enter as will-er or actor

-where

cause-effect and hence time concept that we are concerned applies. Whether it is

jiivan

mukta or ignorant person - the physilogical functions are still controlled by

Krishna

only as vaisvAnara -that is whether we know it or not. The point I have made is

the

knowledge of time by biological funtions does not enter unless the mind of the

man gets

involved.

 

Hope I am clear.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

You are quite right Shri Ramesam. I said mind could be the first

construct of ignorance. That has the danger of a circular argument

because my comment itself is in the realm of ignorance.

 

For that matter, all our Vedantic forays towards Truth take place in

the realm of ignorance (avidya). That is adhyAsa. Are you then

telling us that vedantins are like the blind looking for a non-

existent black coat in a pitch dark room.

 

Whatever your answer, will you kindly suggest a way out in order that

we can avoid the dreaded circularity?

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

______________

 

 

advaitin , " ramesam " <ramesam wrote:

>

> 1. Shri Nair Sir says that mental construct is also within the

> realm of `ignorance.' As ever so gently and subtly remarked by

Shri

> Steve Sir, even to say that something is within the realm

> of `ignorance' can also be `ignorance' along with the attendant

> statement that there lies some other thing beyond ignorance!

(Every

> one knows the metaphor – the search of a blind man in a dark room

for

> a black coat that is after all not there). So is there not a

danger

> here, Sir, that we may get trapped in a circular argument.

[Guest guest]

Hello!

 

So is there not a

danger

> here, Sir, that we may get trapped in a circular

argument.

 

Maybe it's simply the case that all constructs,

including time, are useful modes for us at this level

of existence? Maybe they are in reality " lies " that

are necessary here? And maybe they are useful as long

as we don't for get that they are helpful lies.

 

I could draw a circle on the the ground, in the dirt,

stand within the circle, forget that I have drawn the

circle and then lament the sorrow of my imprisonment.

Yet, when I first drew the circle it might have been

part of a game, for fun, or for some other reason to

delineate a boundary...ah, but then I forgot all about

the original intent...

 

Then we could talk endlessly about the properties of

the circle, how it orginated, what we might do about

it, invent meditations, visualizations, philosophies

about the circle and search for ways out of our

imprisonment, write books about it...ha! this is

getting funnier the more I write, so I'll stop here...

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[Guest guest]

Namaskaram,

 

yes, it was interesting and was just seeing how far it will lead to and then

suddenly you stopped

 

like our present day battery operated watches !!

 

:-))

 

 

 

 

 

 

Steve Stoker <otnac6 wrote: Hello!

 

So is there not a

danger

> here, Sir, that we may get trapped in a circular

argument.

 

Maybe it's simply the case that all constructs,

including time, are useful modes for us at this level

of existence? Maybe they are in reality " lies " that

are necessary here? And maybe they are useful as long

as we don't for get that they are helpful lies.

 

I could draw a circle on the the ground, in the dirt,

stand within the circle, forget that I have drawn the

circle and then lament the sorrow of my imprisonment.

Yet, when I first drew the circle it might have been

part of a game, for fun, or for some other reason to

delineate a boundary...ah, but then I forgot all about

the original intent...

 

Then we could talk endlessly about the properties of

the circle, how it orginated, what we might do about

it, invent meditations, visualizations, philosophies

about the circle and search for ways out of our

imprisonment, write books about it...ha! this is

getting funnier the more I write, so I'll stop here...

 

________

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unlimited freedom, unlimited storage. Get it now

 

 

[Guest guest]

yes, it was interesting and was just seeing how far it

will lead to and then suddenly you stopped

 

like our present day battery operated watches !!

 

:-))

 

...yes, maybe non-existent time pretends to stop

when the construct called a " battery " dies an

impossible death?....isn't everything we're talking

about in the realm of Maya? Maya may be having great

fun with this! Maybe we can join in the laughter.

 

 

______________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

 

> Whatever your answer, will you kindly suggest a way out in order

that we can avoid the dreaded circularity?

 

 

Respected All,

 

Respected Shri Nair Sir,

 

Thank you very much for a very thought-provoking comment and a

searching question.

 

Sir, I am embarrassed. The question really puts me on a spot!

 

If I do not answer it, it would imply that I have been talking out of

my hat and therefore, I should shut up.

 

If I attempt to answer, it would imply that I am feigning to occupy a

high pedestal and trying to preach! Unintentionally I may be annoying

some persons committed to a system as you tagged in your question a

condition to any possible reply of mine.

 

It's a catch 22 situation.

 

I know that you know that I do not have something that you already do

not know!

 

Some things have before now come up in various posts of the members

(including Shri Steve Sir's leela (enjoy the divine play) concept).

 

I may rephrase or reword certain of the " what to do? " ways of `escape'

that you referred to. But that has the potential of spinning of to

other kinds of debate from what Shri Michael Sir intended originally.

 

Please tell me what I shall do. Shall we wait for Shri Michael Sir's

reaction before I venture further into my statements? Will it be a

digression?

 

While talking of the first post of Shri Michael Sir, I would like to

bring his attention to his statement :

 

" Experience itself involves time in that it is

given as tensed - I did, I am doing, I will do. It is clear then that

experiencing presupposes that there be a sense of time. "

 

I may be allowed to refer to the works of Prof. Nishbet and a few of

the Harvard University scientists. The linking of thought pattern to

time is a peculiarity of our language and the culture we are

accustomed to. It is not a fundamental way the brain works. I am

quoting below from a popular type article of mine ( " Pure Mind " ,

Consecration, Jan-Feb 2006):

 

" Your language, your culture, the way you are brought up, educated and

trained will all influence your understanding what you perceive. Look

at Fig.11. Out of the three pictures, a, b and c which two pictures

are more related to one another? Most of us will say `a and c'.

Reason? Both appear ready to kick the football. But some native

Indonesians will answer as `a and b'. Their reason? When a ball is

kicked it has to reach the goal. Psychologists say this difference

shows the influence of language on the way one thinks. We can

differentiate events temporally whereas they can do only spatially.

….. Most of the analytically oriented western educated people will

focus their sight on the central point - like the building – whereas

orientalists will notice the background trees and beauty, as

established by Prof. R. Nisbett. He observed, " East Asians are

inclined to be holistic in their reasoning and perception. They focus

more broadly on the field in which central objects are located, they

attend to relationships and similarities among elements in the field,

they are less concerned with categories and rules, and they rely on

dialectical reasoning. "

 

Dr. Masaki Yuki, a behavioral scientist at Hokkaido University, Japan

also did interesting work on the influence of culture on perception.

 

With best of regards to all,

ramesam

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shri Ramesam.

 

I admire your candor. You are quite unlike people of my ilk who

refuse to acccept the situation if they are out on a limb.

 

Please don't worry. Even if you have an explanation that falls

outside the scope of vedanta, you are welcome to present it. There

is no condition tagged. Besides, I suspect we have already strayed

far outside Michael-ji's original purport. There is, therefore, no

harm giving a little more work to the wings of our imagination.

 

By the way, I seem to have an answer well within the scope of

vedanta. It would go somewhat like this.

 

What goes by the name of mind is in fact awareness. When it is

sensory knowledge, we posit awareness behind the sense organs and

call it mind. When we are aware of our thoughts, we call it mind

again. When we reason and rationalize, we call it intellect. When we

recall, it is christened memory. All these are basically awareness

and instances of knowledge of one kind or another taking place. So,

when we say that mind is a construct, what we refer to is the label

or phantom that goes by that name which we apprehend as responsible

for our various transactions. It does not refer directly to the basic

awareness that we are - the jAnAmi (I know) of Shankara which I

referred to in a previous post here a couple of days ago and which he

says is the only thing that self-shines and which everything else in

this universe shines after.

 

The construct labelled mind (memory, intellect etc. going with it) is

something that shines after the fundamental " I know " (jnAna) because

I KNOW I HAVE IT (MIND).

 

In self-realization, it is the mind that goes universal. One needs

the mind till the very end of enquiry. Intellect is said to be the

stick with which the fire of Knowledge is stoked and it burns out in

the process when the Fire shines in all Its effulgence and glory. The

primal construct of mind is thus our last offering in the Fire of

Knowledge when the night of ignorance ends.

 

Providence has been kind enough to leave us some star shine even in

the darkness of ignorance. We can thus apprehend and avoid the

terrible pits of circularity.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

_________________

 

 

 

advaitin , " ramesam " <ramesam wrote:

>

> ....If I attempt to answer, it would imply that I am feigning to

occupy a

> high pedestal and trying to preach! Unintentionally I may be

annoying

> some persons committed to a system as you tagged in your question a

> condition to any possible reply of mine.

>

> It's a catch 22 situation.

>

.......>

> I may rephrase or reword certain of the " what to do? " ways of

`escape'

> that you referred to. But that has the potential of spinning of to

> other kinds of debate from what Shri Michael Sir intended

originally.

>

> Please tell me what I shall do. Shall we wait for Shri Michael

Sir's

> reaction before I venture further into my statements? Will it be a

> digression?

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Madathil Rajendran Nair "

<madathilnair wrote:

>

> Please don't worry. Even if you have an explanation that falls

> outside the scope of vedanta, you are welcome to present it. There

> is no condition tagged. Besides, I suspect we have already strayed

> far outside Michael-ji's original purport. ............

 

 

Respected Shri Nair Sir and Respected All,

 

With the encouraging words of Respectable Shri Nair, I shall venture

here to present some of my thinking on the point.

 

Perhaps a long list of Disclaimers and probably a longer Preface is

in order before I proceed further. I shall take it that it does not

matter between friends and any clarifications that are needed can

come up later.

 

ABOUT BODY:

" Life " cannot manifest all by itself and it needs a life-form (a

body) to show up.

 

I would like to state right at the outset that whatever various

Swamis say or claim, distress, suffering, unhappiness and problems of

the physical body will not go away as long as the body has to depend

on another entity (e.g. oxygen (for certain types of living things),

food (or some energy source) for all types of `Living things'). The

predator – prey killer instinct comes into play right there.

Therefore, violence ensues. Misery is guaranteed for the prey.

Games of self-protection and survival tactics necessarily evolve. In

the fight or flight scenario, one who has to flee instinctually

develops `coping mechanisms'. When the organism is endowed with a

mind (which by itself is a survival tool – we shall not get now

involved with detailed explanations for this statement), the organism

weaves several stories of `escapes' to comfort itself.

 

So, that " Ever Happy Blissful State " is never there for the body.

Promises or Pursuit of any such happiness is a myth. The " I " of mine

may disassociate with the body, delink itself with the suffering or

happiness of the body. " I " may become " universal. " But let us admit,

whatsoever " I " may do, whatsoever may happen to " I " , the body's

suffering (or experiencin the world) cannot be wished away. The

bodies of the greatest stalwarts who achieved such disassociation

of " I " and body also suffered as history shows us. Shankara suffered

from something like fulminating ulcerative colitis with blood motions

(going by what the former Dewan of Mysore and fomer Head of Sringeri

wrote in Shankara Viajyam), the bodies of Ramakrishna, Ramana,

Nisargadatta Maharaj, J.Krishnamurti had cancer. We may offer

unverifiable explanations or give elaborate reasons or invent clever

words for such a suffering, but the facts cannot be denied.

 

ABOUT MIND:

Writers of Vedanta books use the English word `Mind' as equivalent to

many different Sanskrit words.

 

The main proponent of Yoga Marg, Patanjali, in his first Sutra

defined Yoga (union) as the stoppage of chitta vritti or in other

words, the modifications of chitta. Many Vedantic texts call

the `modifications' themselves as mind. Yogavaasishta says that with

the ending of the modifications, mind itself ceases to be. A state

of null-mind (amanaska yoga) is said to be the highest goal of all

yogas. It has to come about naturally, like a ripened fruit falling

off a tree. According to one text, this can happen for one who is

adept in the five yamas (five yamas defined in Sutra 30, Part 2 of

Yoga sutras).

 

Without going into diverse usages of the word `mind' by various

authors and to simplify our discussion, I shall go by the mail #

39627 of Respected Shri Nair Sir. `Awareness' gets the name Mind

when the former assumes certain functional faculties in a living

organism (say humans), mind in turn getting different names depending

on the faculty it is working on.

 

Though, `mind' does not have an accepted definition scientifically,

it is generally understood to be what the brain does.

 

THE FOUR-OUTCOME MODEL:

 

[i have already made quite a number of provocative statements. Some

of them may need more explanation. Some of them may be unacceptable

to our members. However, I shall move fast in order to come to the

crux of the issue. I am giving below a modified version of a write

up of mine published in 2004.]

 

Broadly speaking, at an aggregate level, a human being can be viewed

to be composed of two entities (just for the sake of understanding

this notional model, not neurophysiologically):

 

(i) An ensemble of all the sensory and action organs - collectively

called " the Body " ; and

 

(ii) An ensemble of all our knowledge, experience, memory, culture,

thoughts, emotions, 'qualia' - collectively called " the Mind. "

 

These two entities can be either in an active state (existent) or in

rest (inert or non-existent) state. The two entities and the two

states together can give rise to four outcomes.

 

The four outcomes are:

 

(a) Mind and body both active: Wakeful state.

 

(b) Mind active but body inactive: Dream state.

 

© Mind and body both inactive: Deep sleep, buddhistic

satori, nirvikalpa samadhi, and finally death depending upon how

inert or nonexistent, the condition of the entities is.

 

(d) Mind inactive or nonexistent

or totally at rest, but body active: Nirvana or non-dualistic

Brahmi state. In this state, life and its processes continue in the

body but the mind and the ego are non-existent or totally inactive.

 

Just as one slips from wakeful state to sleep and dream states

without any effort, the fourth state too can be experienced without

any particular `effort'. One does not have to do specially anything

for it! And if I am allowed to say, all of us indeed are

experiencing the fourth state every day as we have been experiencing

the other three states. I can cite a few examples, if required.

 

Can the body act when the mind is inert in the fourth state? We have

the answer in the Bhagavad Gita. The actor in such a state remains

satisfied with whatever comes of its own accord `effortlessly'.

 

" Content with what comes to him, unaffected by the pairs of

opposites, even-minded (non-reacting inert state), though acting, he

is not bound (Bhagavad Gita IV - 22). "

 

Such an action is inaction!

 

The sensory signals (visual, audio, etc.) inputted into the

respective cortex of the brain take a few hundred milliseconds before

they are interpreted to give rise to a meaningful understanding of

what we see, hear, et cetera. In that fraction of a second,

perception and other cognitive processes take place within the

brain. If the signals through the sensory organs are received but if

subsequent processing is eliminated by the thalamus, neocortex, et

cetera, the sensory organs will be acting as mere peep-through

windows.

 

No meaning is given to the signals by the self. Nor a spatial

separation between the source of the signal and the " self' as a

distinctly different receiver of the signal is felt. No distinction

of ambient objects is experienced by the observer from the signals

emanating from various objects. In this state obviously, only a

Oneness exists between the signal receiver and the signal emitters

without a line of distinction between different objects. Therefore,

this state when the mind (and attendant neurophysiological processes)

is absent may be the state of Nirvana. The person will have no

distinguishing perception of identity and will be inseparable from

all things around that makes One Great Whole.

 

LINKING TO THE QUESTION OF `TIME' RAISED BY SHRI MICHAEL SIR:

 

We have already seen that it makes no difference for the brain

whether we `think' of past or future. We have also seen that

thinking in terms of time (temporally) is a peculiarity acquired

because of our language and culture. So `thinking' per se is related

to time. So thought is time. If there is no thought, obviously

there is no time. Hence Time is Thought.

 

When the brain is not thinking, it is in `Present'. In that state

brain is tremendously active with full " attention " to everything, all

the different regions of brain coordinating, binding together the

incoming signals. (Neuroscience does not, as yet, know how

this `binding' of different sensory elements happens in the brain).

There is no sense of a separate " I " sitting there and watching

things. You are just watching without any thought. The present

extends metaphorically to infinity on either side. You are just in

that beauty, glory, that indefinable silence amidst all the

cacophony!

 

With best regards to all,

ramesam

[Guest guest]

" Please don't worry. Even if you have an explanation that falls outside the

scope of vedanta, you are welcome to present it. There is no condition tagged "

 

Pranams shri Nairji

 

I just want to clarify whether this is to be considered a valid guideline for

this group, coming as it does from one of the moderators?

 

Prior guidelines issued by the team of moderators have been fairly clear and

categorical in defining the scope of discussions in this august forum.

 

Pranams

Hari OM

Shyam

 

 

Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

[Guest guest]

--- ramesam <ramesam wrote:

 

>

> LINKING TO THE QUESTION OF `TIME' RAISED BY SHRI MICHAEL SIR:

>

> We have already seen that it makes no difference for the brain

> whether we `think' of past or future. We have also seen that

> thinking in terms of time (temporally) is a peculiarity acquired

> because of our language and culture. So `thinking' per se is related

> to time. So thought is time. If there is no thought, obviously

> there is no time. Hence Time is Thought.

 

> When the brain is not thinking, it is in `Present'. In that state

> brain is tremendously active with full " attention " to everything, all

> the different regions of brain coordinating, binding together the

> incoming signals. (Neuroscience does not, as yet, know how

> this `binding' of different sensory elements happens in the brain).

> There is no sense of a separate " I " sitting there and watching

> things. You are just watching without any thought. The present

> extends metaphorically to infinity on either side. You are just in

> that beauty, glory, that indefinable silence amidst all the

> cacophony!

 

Ramesamji - PraNAms.

 

Just some thoughts to contemplate.

 

Time requires two events for it to be defined- two sequential events observed by

an

independent observer. With single event time cannot be defined. There was a

paper in

Phil. Mag. sometime back in seventies - with the title ' No time please' as some

scientists were using time as stand alone variable. Time is not absolute

variable - it is

with reference to some initial state. - that was his complaint, which is true.

 

When I started looking at the puzzling aspect of time, I used to think that

thinking is

time- since thought is finite involving limiting ends- beginning and end and we

have a

period defining the time - also a thought is flow and flow involves continuity.

But the

problem is the observer to be independent of the event to mark the flow or mark

initial

and final. There lies the problem in defining thinking with time.

 

That is why I talked about observer riding on NOW. In NOW or at Now there is no

time

since there is no gap in NOW - it is dynamic state of BEING - that is the SAT

swaruupam.

Hence if the observer of the thought is riding on the thought then the thought

has no

time - it has only NOW.

 

Not only in deep sleep when there are no thoughts hence we do not have time, we

also do

not FEEL time when we are riding on NOW. Mind has to stop back and look from

memory and

compare NOW with THEN to define the time gap. Hence people when they are

seriously

involved in action or on contemplation, their full attention is only on NOW and

they will

be surprised to learn later that how much time was passed while they were

involved in

their work - to recognize the time they spend, they had to stop and look back.

This is

more so when people are reading a very interesting novel. We do not know how

time flies

quickly. Thoughts may be moving when one is reading the novel, but one is

intensely

riding on the NOW on the thought flow - It may be like surfer surfing on the

crest of the

waves.

 

Vedanta says one can ONLY realize in NOW and Here - 'ihaiva' - since what is

there all

the time is only NOW and Here. We cannot realize in the past and not in future

but only

in NOW. For anything else we need some static reference. Now is the dynamic

present where

presence of the self alone rides! Hence Now is truly Eternal. Actually this is

the

medication to live in Now without the mind running to past or future since all

actions

are in NOW and the very living is in NOW. While the ego mostly lives on the past

or

future. It does not have much existence in the present. Hence for JK and others

meditation involves observing the mind as it functions. That involves being in

the

present - NOW - as the thoughts flow.

---------

As an interesting exercise to all the advaitin readers - can you keep focussing

on now -

every moment - by moment - mind wants think back about past events or future

expectations

- but bring it back to the present - which may require effort in the beginning

but

naturally it will come even for few moments - then you see the beauty - you

cannot but

shift your attention the consiousness that I am which is NOW - it is not I was

or I will

be - It is the dynamic presence of I am NOW - That my friends is true

Meditation. - To do

that of course the mind should be free from attachments since attachements are

related to

past or future. That is chitta suddhi. The more we live in the present the more

we

transcend the time itself. WE are in 'I am' - ever existing BEING - attached

-ing to BE

is to insure riding on NOW.

 

See Vedanta is very practicle.

 

My praNAms again Ramesamji for your stimulated post that triggerd my thinking

on NOW.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

Hello!

 

can you keep focussing on now -

every moment - by moment - mind wants think back about

past events or future expectations

 

Yet, even if the mind is thinking back on past events

or future expectations, that can only happen NOW, in

the timeless present. The present must BE, it is

PRIME, so I think no past exists except NOW, future

expectation can only happen NOW...so we're always

only, forever present--whether we like it or not! I'm

always only now, no matter what. I can't escape that

even when I forget that. Although the forgetting can

also only happen NOW. Culture, language, and education

(the learned ignorance of us all!) gives us useful

lies by which to live at this plane of existence but I

always have to come back to my " double mindedness "

staying out of the extremes of absolute/relative. Time

exists because of clocks! Clocks don't exist in deep

sleep!...one guy's opinions, anyway...disclaimer as

ususal...I like the term " useful lies " . It seems to

describe much of what we think, do, believe,

attempt...

 

So maybe there is/isn't time...If I can figure out who

wants to know about time, maybe the whole question

dissolves?? I'm comfortable with paradox. Seems to be

where it's at!! Ha! Best wishes, Steve.

 

 

______________________________\

____

Be a better friend, newshound, and

know-it-all with Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile./;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[Guest guest]

There was recently a study conducted on the subjective relativity of

the speed of time (my words). This

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-12/bcom-dts121007.php link

link is about the news article. I read about this on SlashDot

http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/12/12/169208 (not a

place I would expect many people from this list to be frequenting).

 

The summary is - we have all seen how in times of extreme stress, time

seems to slow down and everything seems to be happening in slow

motion. This experiment was conducted to prove that this is *not* the

case.

 

It would seem that this shows that time is an arrow that is moving

inexorably in one direction.

 

Right?

 

Also, it would seem, that any impressions that we have of things

happening in slow motion (like near-death experiences or, dare I say

it, the moment of self-realisation) are tricks of our own mind.

 

Sai

[Guest guest]

Personally I have always felt deep down that time does not truly exist, it is a

mere mental construct of humans. Do animals measure time, not as far as I know,

trees? They merely eat, sleep, etc when they need to. Change occurs and if this

is what we call time then so be it. For some reason humans need to measure

change and so we invented this thing called time, seconds, minutes, etc. Maybe

if we didn't measure time most of us would not look inexorably towards our

deaths and merely accept when it is time to leave this body and accept when we

feel hungry, eat and when tired, sleep, etc. I feel this relative time

phenomenon is merely our connection to change and our attachment to those things

other than self. When we are in connection to self or in samadhi this time does

not exist. My thoughts anyway.

 

John

 

 

Indian Rediff <indianrediff

advaitin

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 1:19:39 PM

Re: Re: Time

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

There was recently a study conducted on the subjective relativity of

 

the speed of time (my words). This

 

http://www.eurekale rt.org/pub_ releases/ 2007-12/bcom- dts121007. php link

 

link is about the news article. I read about this on SlashDot

 

http://science. slashdot. org/article. pl?sid=07/ 12/12/169208 (not a

 

place I would expect many people from this list to be frequenting) .

 

 

 

The summary is - we have all seen how in times of extreme stress, time

 

seems to slow down and everything seems to be happening in slow

 

motion. This experiment was conducted to prove that this is *not* the

 

case.

 

 

 

It would seem that this shows that time is an arrow that is moving

 

inexorably in one direction.

 

 

 

Right?

 

 

 

Also, it would seem, that any impressions that we have of things

 

happening in slow motion (like near-death experiences or, dare I say

 

it, the moment of self-realisation) are tricks of our own mind.

 

 

 

Sai

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<!--

 

#ygrp-mkp{

border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:14px 0px;padding:0px 14px;}

#ygrp-mkp hr{

border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}

#ygrp-mkp #hd{

color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:bold;line-height:122%;margin:10px 0px;}

#ygrp-mkp #ads{

margin-bottom:10px;}

#ygrp-mkp .ad{

padding:0 0;}

#ygrp-mkp .ad a{

color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}

-->

 

 

 

<!--

 

#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc{

font-family:Arial;}

#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc #hd{

margin:10px 0px;font-weight:bold;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}

#ygrp-sponsor #ygrp-lc .ad{

margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}

-->

 

 

 

<!--

 

#ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial, helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}

#ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;}

#ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial, helvetica, clean,

sans-serif;}

#ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;}

#ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;}

#ygrp-text{

font-family:Georgia;

}

#ygrp-text p{

margin:0 0 1em 0;}

#ygrp-tpmsgs{

font-family:Arial;

clear:both;}

#ygrp-vitnav{

padding-top:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;margin:0;}

#ygrp-vitnav a{

padding:0 1px;}

#ygrp-actbar{

clear:both;margin:25px 0;white-space:nowrap;color:#666;text-align:right;}

#ygrp-actbar .left{

float:left;white-space:nowrap;}

..bld{font-weight:bold;}

#ygrp-grft{

font-family:Verdana;font-size:77%;padding:15px 0;}

#ygrp-ft{

font-family:verdana;font-size:77%;border-top:1px solid #666;

padding:5px 0;

}

#ygrp-mlmsg #logo{

padding-bottom:10px;}

 

#ygrp-vital{

background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:2px 0 8px 8px;}

#ygrp-vital #vithd{

font-size:77%;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:bold;color:#333;text-transform:upp\

ercase;}

#ygrp-vital ul{

padding:0;margin:2px 0;}

#ygrp-vital ul li{

list-style-type:none;clear:both;border:1px solid #e0ecee;

}

#ygrp-vital ul li .ct{

font-weight:bold;color:#ff7900;float:right;width:2em;text-align:right;padding-ri\

ght:.5em;}

#ygrp-vital ul li .cat{

font-weight:bold;}

#ygrp-vital a{

text-decoration:none;}

 

#ygrp-vital a:hover{

text-decoration:underline;}

 

#ygrp-sponsor #hd{

color:#999;font-size:77%;}

#ygrp-sponsor #ov{

padding:6px 13px;background-color:#e0ecee;margin-bottom:20px;}

#ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{

padding:0 0 0 8px;margin:0;}

#ygrp-sponsor #ov li{

list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;font-size:77%;}

#ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{

text-decoration:none;font-size:130%;}

#ygrp-sponsor #nc{

background-color:#eee;margin-bottom:20px;padding:0 8px;}

#ygrp-sponsor .ad{

padding:8px 0;}

#ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{

font-family:Arial;font-weight:bold;color:#628c2a;font-size:100%;line-height:122%\

;}

#ygrp-sponsor .ad a{

text-decoration:none;}

#ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{

text-decoration:underline;}

#ygrp-sponsor .ad p{

margin:0;}

o{font-size:0;}

..MsoNormal{

margin:0 0 0 0;}

#ygrp-text tt{

font-size:120%;}

blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;}

..replbq{margin:4;}

-->

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

This thread brings to mind a short piece of verse which is appended

below.

 

Ananda

 

 

Space, time and consciousness

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

 

How do we know a world of space,

where different objects co-exist

in structural relationship?

 

We know this world in course of time,

as passing states replace each other

in the process of each mind.

 

And mind is known from consciousness,

whose knowing lives unchangingly,

beyond all thought of passing time.

[Guest guest]

Hello Sai,

 

Also, it would seem, that any impressions that we have

of things

happening in slow motion (like near-death experiences

or, dare I say

it, the moment of self-realisation) are tricks of our

own mind.

 

Then are you saying that time is objective, that it

exists without someone to perceive it? And that our

perception of time is wrong, when it seems to speed up

or slow down? If so, then where is the authority

outside subjective experience that can say " You're

wrong. Time moves along at a steady pace, neither

speeding up or slowing down? " If you can find that

authority, I'd love to speak to it!

 

The answer cannot be another person or a scientist

with his or her instruments. Those instruments are

merely extensions of our already existing senses and

all the instruments do is measure. Measurement itself

is subjective, a shared hallucination. We've decided

that a piece of wood, a ruler, measures one foot or

twelve inches. Arbitrary definition, " consensus

reality " , yet we agree on it. But it has no objective

reality nor does time, other than our agreement on it!

I can't look out my window and find " one foot "

anywhere in the universe. Nor can I find time

anywhere. So, at least it seems to me, time is a

useful lie...one guy's ruminations and opinion!

 

 

 

 

 

 

______________________________\

____

Looking for last minute shopping deals?

Find them fast with Search.

http://tools.search./newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

[Guest guest]

Namaste Shri Ramesam.

 

Thanks for the following:

 

1. Ensuring that your reply is absolutely restrained unlike

your 'vedantaspeak' missile.

 

2. Your conclusion quoted below with which I can very much vibe and

which is close to my heart:

 

" There is no sense of a separate " I " sitting there and watching

things. You are just watching without any thought. The present

extends metaphorically to infinity on either side. You are just in

that beauty, glory, that indefinable silence amidst all the

cacophony! "

 

I am going out of station for about five days. I may have something

to say about knowledge of vedanta vs. physical suffering. I would

rather defer it till my return.

 

I notice that my request to you to go outside vedanta if necessary

has raised some eyebrows. Dr. Shaym-ji, I am sorry and I apologize.

There is no change in list policy and guidelines. I did what I did

noticing Shri Ramesam's enthusiasm and, not for a moment, did I

realize I was committing a big offence. I withdraw my request and

appeal to everyone to strictly adhere to List guidelines.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

On May 30, 2008, at 5:54 AM, Stefan wrote:

 

Whenever I have looked at " time " closely, in an effort to " catch " the

perception of time " itself " , in an effort to identify " time " itself or

one of its aspects as anything apart from a mere term, the following

has happened: the putative sensing of time faded away until it

completely disappeared. It seems I am not able to directly perceive

time itself.

 

P: Well, this is one of those philosophical problems

created when we think abstract words represent things

that exist by themselves. It would be like trying to see

vision itself apart from being conscious of what you see,

or seeing movement when nothing moves. Time is just

a word for the speed at what change is perceived. So

there is no one Time, but time is relative to each observer.

 

There are subatomic particles which last only a few atto-

seconds ( a billionth of a billionth of a second) such rate

of change is too fast even for light. Light can only travel

the length of 3 hydrogen atoms in such time.

 

At my snail human pace, I went for a walk today. With each

step my view changed. A new tree, a new flower, a car going

by, and gone in a flash. Only preserved in memory a few seconds.

Now, I can't remember all those flowers, all those cars. They

are gone. We only remember what we must, most of the time:

Our name, our home, how to get back. When that is gone,

all sense of direction and time is gone. We are a summation

in memory of events which flash by.

 

 

 

http://cerosoul.wordpress.com

 

enlightenedfiction

 

Pete