Guest guest Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva wrote: > > > Namaste Shyam-ji, > Dream as a critique of reality only works if the dream is taken as reality > in the dream. Plainly it isn't as taking something traumatic in the dream > as real would create the stress that traumatic events do. But it is not > even a traumatic event in the dream as we move from falling off a cliff to > being at home by the fire with not a care in the world. > > What I am saying is that we are not as bemused in the dream world as the > standard illustrations propose that we are. It is well known that we can > build external stimuli into the dream story. How could we do this unless > we were somehow aware of them? The dream state is not a sealed off world > in which judgement is completely suspended. > > Best Wishes, > Michael. Namaste Michael, To me it is just consciousness playing and expanding in the kosas that's all. There is no real difference between the waking and dream states. People do get scared in dreams as you know they call them nightmares.We have no more control over the figures and images in a dream than we do in the slow-dream or waking state. Although sometimes we can be aware somewhat that we are in a dream, and some of the events are traumatic. Judgement in a dream is just as real as judgement in the waking state---just an illusion that's all.......Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Namaste Shyam-ji, Dream as a critique of reality only works if the dream is taken as reality in the dream. Plainly it isn't as taking something traumatic in the dream as real would create the stress that traumatic events do. But it is not even a traumatic event in the dream as we move from falling off a cliff to being at home by the fire with not a care in the world. What I am saying is that we are not as bemused in the dream world as the standard illustrations propose that we are. It is well known that we can build external stimuli into the dream story. How could we do this unless we were somehow aware of them? The dream state is not a sealed off world in which judgement is completely suspended. Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 Namaste Respected Members, The way I have heard the dream analogy used by my teacher, and by her guru, Swami Dayananda, is really to illustrate what Ishwara is, (what manifest reality is.) Everything in the dream comes from me, is sustained by me, and resolves into me. And yet all the while nothing has actually happened to me. Furthermore everything in the dream is a manifestation of my knowledge. I can't dream something in a dream of which I don't already have knowledge. No part of the dream, whether sentient or insentient, is separate or away from me. In fact, it is me. I am the material of the dream, the intelligence and the material. And the dream comes all at once. In an instant, the whole thing is there, space, time and everything therein. I have heard Pujya Swamiji say that this world, this jagat is a manifestation of infinite knowledge, which displays as infinite order and intelligence. We can see this manifest in every tiny particle of the creation. And it is a marvel! Everywhere we look what do we see? Order, intelligence, variety, a display. And what is all of this creation really? What is it made of? It is made of brahman. It comes from brahman, is sustained by brahman, resolves into brahman, without changing or touching brahman in any way. So that is the way I have heard the dream primarily used in teaching. As a device to get us to understand and appreciate what the jagat is, what Ishwara is. Pranams, Durga Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 advaitin , " aoclery " <aoclery wrote: > > > > advaitin , ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva@> wrote: > > > > > > Namaste Shyam-ji, > > Dream as a critique of reality only works if the dream is taken as reality > > in the dream. Plainly it isn't as taking something traumatic in the dream > > as real would create the stress that traumatic events do. But it is not > > even a traumatic event in the dream as we move from falling off a cliff to > > being at home by the fire with not a care in the world. > > > > What I am saying is that we are not as bemused in the dream world as the > > standard illustrations propose that we are. It is well known that we can > > build external stimuli into the dream story. How could we do this unless > > we were somehow aware of them? The dream state is not a sealed off world > > in which judgement is completely suspended. > > > > Best Wishes, > > Michael. > > Namaste Michael, > > To me it is just consciousness playing and expanding in the kosas that's all. There is no real difference between the waking and dream states. People do get scared in dreams as you know they call them nightmares.We have no more control over the figures and images in a dream than we do in the slow-dream or waking state. Although sometimes we can be aware somewhat that we are in a dream, and some of the events are traumatic. > Judgement in a dream is just as real as judgement in the waking state---just an illusion that's all.......Cheers Tony. > Dear Mr Michael Any discussion is possible only on some principles or propositions or Ideals.So called I is it self the consciousness.Where there is duality discussion is possible like seer and seen.These two reflects both in dream state and waking state with a difference of seeing in waking state.Advaitha philosophy stresses on seeing but not the seer or seen since both are the accumulation of past which was framed in time and space.As is language functions over trio i,e seen-seer-seeing but seeing only is living rest two are dead.Unfortunately people are interested in dead things. You may see this and comment For the means of knowledge to operate, it requires the notion of a doer, and the notion of a doer is the result of superimposition on the unattached brain. In other words, as soon as one falsely identifies the self as a mind, i.e. an agent, or doer, then all fields that operate are in the field of ignorance. Science, means of knowledge etc, since they require a distinct doer, are therefore bound in the field of ignorance. Simply to say that the instinctive behavior of humans in the empirical field is due to a series of misconceptions due to non-discrimination between the subject and the non-subject, and that humans share this behavior with the rest of the animal kingdom. Now humans, apart from their faculty of discrimination, must be different somehow, and therefore not subject to ignorance? In his brief introduction, sankara tells us the reason we cannot attain enlightenment. It is because it is in our nature to mix up the real and not real and therefore perceive a world of duality with multiple knower/doers/subjects and things to be known/done/objects. In particular, we falsely confuse the eternal Truth that is our innermost self and is The Witness with no role in empirical life, to be acting as an agent. This confusion is innate to us, and is a matter of common experience requiring no proof. It is beginning less and endless in the sphere of the empirical universe. This confusion or superimposition is the basic ignorance that results in this world of duality. The world of duality fashioned by ignorance is termed to be illusion, as it can only be perceived once this basic superimposition has occurred. And all activities include the secular and scientific fall into the field of ignorance as they must presuppose a distinct doer. The purpose of the philosophy texts is to point out this ignorance as essentially the nature of a false mental notion, and remove all misconceptions, to reveal the nature of Truth. A thorough understanding of imposition is required as a first step, therefore, is vital to understand the texts of philosophy and Wittgenstein in particular. It is for this reason that this text is held in such high regard, and deserves to be studied by all serious students of philosophy. Verbatim is super imposed over real for certainty. Thank you sekhar 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.