Object and Consciousness of the Object

[Guest guest]

Madathilji wrote:

Thus, Vedanta doesn't mean to say that something *comes into

existence* at the instance of my (the limited one's) being awareness

of it. On the contrary, all things known and unknown are ever there

in Consciousness and the world is an unraveling of that Consciousness

to our limited pedestrian sentience. Once we understand this, the

veil of mAyA will naturally wrap up and retreat. One can interpose

an Ishwara here if that facilitates a convenient understanding.

 

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

 

 

Namaste Madathilji,

Thanks for your careful exposition. It

seems we agree. As I remarked: "

 

" Consider this - if the being of everything is consciousness (sat chit)

then there never was a time when this, that or the other rock or galaxy

was not consciousness. That provides a seamless connection with human

consciousness to put it at its broadest advaitic intuition. In this way a

thing does not gain consciousness or come into being by someone being

aware of it. "

 

My problem is with the idea of the individual time bound consciousness

being linked to the existence or non-existence of the object in itself.

This is what Sadanandaji appears to be saying.

 

Best Wishes,

Michael.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Michaelji:

 

After reading several times what you both (Sadaji and you) have

stated in your repeated messages, I am of the opinion that the

difference between your assertions appears semantic. What you have

stated is with the wisdom (no ignorance) and Sadaji's statement of

time-bound consciousness corresponds to an assertion with the

presence of ignorance. We once again come back to the fundamental

question on the presence of `ignorance.' The school of thought that

believes in the non-presence of ignorance will lead to your

assertion. The school of thought that believes in the presence

of `ignorance ` (there is no beginning is the assertion of the

Sastra) will lead to Sadaji's assertion. Only the Brahman knows

which school of thought is correct!

 

This is my understanding (misunderstanding!) of the assertions sited

by you and Sadaji!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote:

>

> " Consider this - if the being of everything is consciousness (sat

chit)

> then there never was a time when this, that or the other rock or

galaxy

> was not consciousness. That provides a seamless connection with

human

> consciousness to put it at its broadest advaitic intuition. In

this way a

> thing does not gain consciousness or come into being by someone

being

> aware of it. "

>

> My problem is with the idea of the individual time bound

consciousness

> being linked to the existence or non-existence of the object in

itself.

> This is what Sadanandaji appears to be saying.

>

> Best Wishes,

> Michael.

>