Guest guest Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote: > > > Shyam-ji wrote: > This does not mean that there is no " waking up " - when we say the person > woke up > from the dream world into the waking world, it means that the dream world > got > sublated, and was seen to be mithyA. > > |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| > As a member of this group wish to say some thing.As you all know the same Gita (Bhagavath geetha) explained and propagated in three ways.Basic interpretations were also changed according to explanations.To strengthen the interpretations there were several examples and narrations to confuse the readers.All these things are limited to space time pro gramme. At least now let us open and truthful to our selves. thank you sekhar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Shyam-ji wrote: This does not mean that there is no " waking up " - when we say the person woke up from the dream world into the waking world, it means that the dream world got sublated, and was seen to be mithyA. |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| Namaste Shyam-ji, The implication here is that we take the dream to be true while we are in it and that it is only on waking up that we judge it to be a false creation. This standard view requires justification because after all the events of a dream are often traumatic yet none of us suffer from post traumatic stress disorder due to events in a dream. If they were events that were _felt as events_ in the dream state then that fear would continue to be evoked even while we were awake. But that is not the case. My suggestion is that events in a dream are just like the reveries of the waking state, significantly called day-dreaming, only slightly more powerful and less in the control of our mind. They have an impetus all of their own. To summarise then: we do not _feel_ events in the dream precisely the _same_ as events in the waking state. The use of the analogy of proportionality - dream : waking state :: waking state : realised state is just that, an analogy. There is no exact parallel between the two with respect to truth or reality. It is merely a device or useful tool to give us a sense of what is beyond our normal awareness. Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote: > > > Shyam-ji wrote: > This does not mean that there is no " waking up " - when we say the person > woke up > from the dream world into the waking world, it means that the dream world > got > sublated, and was seen to be mithyA. > > |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| > > Namaste Shyam-ji, > The implication here is that we take the dream to be true while we are in > it and that it is only on waking up that we judge it to be a false > creation. This standard view requires justification because after all the > events of a dream are often traumatic yet none of us suffer from post > traumatic stress disorder due to events in a dream. If they were events > that were _felt as events_ in the dream state then that fear would > continue to be evoked even while we were awake. But that is not the > case. My suggestion is that events in a dream are just like the reveries > of the waking state, significantly called day-dreaming, only slightly more > powerful and less in the control of our mind. They have an impetus all of > their own. > > To summarise then: we do not _feel_ events in the dream precisely the > _same_ as events in the waking state. The use of the analogy of > proportionality - dream : waking state :: waking state : realised state > is just that, an analogy. There is no exact parallel between the two with > respect to truth or reality. It is merely a device or useful tool to give > us a sense of what is beyond our normal awareness. > > Best Wishes, > Michael. > Namaste Michael, I think that both the dream and so called waking state are dream substance but one is more stable and has duration. Also one is in the subtle body with no physical connection to the the material body. This is why there is no post traumatic stress from dreams.....no material body.----The mind is out of the body so to speak, as in anaesthesia. Although some children still will fear a nightmare especially a recurring one... It is just consciousness expanding into all the kosas in its usual way full of permutations...It reflects off whatever is available...like sunlight it needs something to reflect off..to be evident. Ultimately it is all one dream that didn't happen anyway.,.Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Hi Michael, I think you are missing the point that the dreamer is sublated as well as the dream. The dreamer was a part of the dream. So it would be the dreamer who would have had PTSD after waking. Since he is no longer here there is no such thing. (Although the memory may still cause perspiration and fast heartbeat!) Also, I think the purpose of the dream analogy is to make us appreciate that the waking state and dream states are both mithyA; both characterized by ignorance and error. Best wishes, Dennis P.S. I really, really don't have time to get involved in any discussion. I shouldn't have responded to this really - no self-discipline! advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of ombhurbhuva Wednesday, October 14, 2009 3:28 PM advaitin Dream Reality Namaste Shyam-ji, The implication here is that we take the dream to be true while we are in it and that it is only on waking up that we judge it to be a false creation. This standard view requires justification because after all the events of a dream are often traumatic yet none of us suffer from post traumatic stress disorder due to events in a dream. .. <http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=15939/grpspId=1705075991/msgId=4 6636/stime=1255527038/nc1=1/nc2=2/nc3=3> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 Pranams Michael-ji I am afraid that was a tad crytpic for me. The wake-state is a different order of reality than the dream state - when you awake, you sublate your dream-world completely. In the dream a person may have been a soldier fighting in a raging war - the same soldier with a dream progress of a few dream years may have dream developed a dream PTSD. Upon waking up that entire dream scenario has now been sublated - there was no " real " soldier to begin with and so there is no question of any PTSD for an illusory war that the illusory soldier never fought! I dont think it has anything to do with the " strength of feeling " - a dream thirst may be just as intense as a wake thirst - but a dream thirst upon waking up is dismissed as being unreal, ONCE the person has COMPLETELY woken up. In exactly the same way, when the doubtless conviction of silver really being nacre arises, then any pravrtti towards that " silver " immediately ceases - the " silver-that-was-seen " having now been sublated, regardless of the strengh of attractiveness of that silver as it was being seen. My apologies if what you meant/implied was something altogether different. Hari OM Shri Gurubhyoh namah Shyam --- On Wed, 10/14/09, ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote: ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva Dream Reality advaitin Wednesday, October 14, 2009, 10:28 AM |||||||||||| ||||||||| ||||||||| Namaste Shyam-ji, The implication here is that we take the dream to be true while we are in it and that it is only on waking up that we judge it to be a false creation. This standard view requires justification because after all the events of a dream are often traumatic yet none of us suffer from post traumatic stress disorder due to events in a dream. If they were events that were _felt as events_ in the dream state then that fear would continue to be evoked even while we were awake. But that is not the case. My suggestion is that events in a dream are just like the reveries of the waking state, significantly called day-dreaming, only slightly more powerful and less in the control of our mind. They have an impetus all of their own. To summarise then: we do not _feel_ events in the dream precisely the _same_ as events in the waking state. The use of the analogy of proportionality - dream : waking state :: waking state : realised state is just that, an analogy. There is no exact parallel between the two with respect to truth or reality. It is merely a device or useful tool to give us a sense of what is beyond our normal awareness. Best Wishes, Michael. Recent Activity 4 New Members 1 New Photos 1 New FilesVisit Your Group Give Back for Good Get inspired by a good cause. Y! Toolbar Get it Free! easy 1-click access to your groups. Start a group in 3 easy steps. Connect with others. .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.