Guest guest Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 Hi Tony, > > I'm not sure that I understand what you mean when > you say 'the appearance itself needs a mind to > project the image.' > > That sounds like solipsism to me. Like the appearance > of the world is caused by the mind. Or first you've > got a mind, and then it projects the world. If that > is true, my question would be where did the mind come > from? > > If that's what you are saying, I don't think that's > correct, as the individual mind itself is on the same > level of reality as the appearance. IOW when duality > appears it appears in one shot. Like when I have a dream, > it comes all at once in its entirety, and it includes the > minds of the different dream characters. > > I would say that it takes a mind to interpret > duality. And different types of minds see > or interpret duality differently. Like different > species experience duality differently. A > dog can smell more smells than a human, but > that doesn't mean the dog's mind is creating what > it smells. It's just interpreting what is there, > according to the dog's mind's abilities. > > There's an enmormous amount of scientific research on > this. I think horseshoe crabs see a lot of > images of the same thing of which we as > humans see only one. > > This is a big topic, and I'm not a scientist. > Suffice it to say that the ways different species > view duality are too numerous to be enumerated > (to quote your Irish writer, James Joyce) > > So what is actually here can be a question, if it > appears so variously and can be interpreted so > differently depending on the individual mind? > > What Vedanta will say is actual here is nondual > brahman, nirguna appearing 'as though' with > attributes. So recognizing that unchanging nondual in > every apparently changing 'thing' and experience > is called jnanam, self-knowledge, moksha, etc. > > What's here? It's an appearance. But your mind > didn't create it. Your mind is a part of it. > It interprets the appearance in its own way, according to > its particular make up. But the way your mind > interprets it, (views it) is given according to which > species that mind belongs to. > > And then of course, we all have our own little > twists, our individual 'takes' on what is > going on, our individual subjective projections. > > But we don't create duality. Our minds > are part of duality, and they interpret it, > Which is different from saying that duality is > a creation of the mind. > > A jnani sees and experiences duality and also recognizes > at the same time that all that is really > here is the nondual nirguna brahman unchanging. > > If you say that duality doesn't exist. Then > the mind doesn't exist. You can't say the mind > creates it. The mind is part of it. > > Where would the mind come from to create it > if it didn't arise as a part of it? > > And still all that is ever and only there > is nirguna brahman unchanging, and yes > indeed there has never been a creation > or duality or an individual mind > from the POV of nirguna. > > Durga > Namaste,Durga, A lot of advaitins say that the world or creation isn't real, it is just an appearance projected by Brahman.. My logic tells me that if this is an appearance, then it must be part of a mind...The Jnani sees all as the Self according to Ramana or NIZ...but NIZ also says the I Am is an illusion and we have to beyond consciousness.....The Jnani sees the world as Saguna Self,,,all is mind anyway and that is the problem the great Mahat the mind... If it is part of a mind then that means Brahman has a mind, which is duality...and that is impossible...so not even the appearance happened. So it must be associated with the concept Saguna Brahman which is ultimately untrue. So the final truth is only ever NirGuna...no qualities nothing... Finally where is the world and appearance in deep sleep, or better where is it in NirVikalpa Samadhi...or Sahaja NirVikalpa Samadhi, which are beyond Saguna and attributes and qualities and experience........That is my answer to the debate..............Cheers Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 17, 2010 Report Share Posted February 17, 2010 advaitajnana , " aoclery " <aoclery wrote: > > Hi Tony, > > > > I'm not sure that I understand what you mean when > > you say 'the appearance itself needs a mind to > > project the image.' > > > > That sounds like solipsism to me. Like the appearance > > of the world is caused by the mind. Or first you've > > got a mind, and then it projects the world. If that > > is true, my question would be where did the mind come > > from? > > > > If that's what you are saying, I don't think that's > > correct, as the individual mind itself is on the same > > level of reality as the appearance. IOW when duality > > appears it appears in one shot. Like when I have a dream, > > it comes all at once in its entirety, and it includes the > > minds of the different dream characters. > > > > I would say that it takes a mind to interpret > > duality. And different types of minds see > > or interpret duality differently. Like different > > species experience duality differently. A > > dog can smell more smells than a human, but > > that doesn't mean the dog's mind is creating what > > it smells. It's just interpreting what is there, > > according to the dog's mind's abilities. > > > > There's an enmormous amount of scientific research on > > this. I think horseshoe crabs see a lot of > > images of the same thing of which we as > > humans see only one. > > > > This is a big topic, and I'm not a scientist. > > Suffice it to say that the ways different species > > view duality are too numerous to be enumerated > > (to quote your Irish writer, James Joyce) > > > > So what is actually here can be a question, if it > > appears so variously and can be interpreted so > > differently depending on the individual mind? > > > > What Vedanta will say is actual here is nondual > > brahman, nirguna appearing 'as though' with > > attributes. So recognizing that unchanging nondual in > > every apparently changing 'thing' and experience > > is called jnanam, self-knowledge, moksha, etc. > > > > What's here? It's an appearance. But your mind > > didn't create it. Your mind is a part of it. > > It interprets the appearance in its own way, according to > > its particular make up. But the way your mind > > interprets it, (views it) is given according to which > > species that mind belongs to. > > > > And then of course, we all have our own little > > twists, our individual 'takes' on what is > > going on, our individual subjective projections. > > > > But we don't create duality. Our minds > > are part of duality, and they interpret it, > > Which is different from saying that duality is > > a creation of the mind. > > > > A jnani sees and experiences duality and also recognizes > > at the same time that all that is really > > here is the nondual nirguna brahman unchanging. > > > > If you say that duality doesn't exist. Then > > the mind doesn't exist. You can't say the mind > > creates it. The mind is part of it. > > > > Where would the mind come from to create it > > if it didn't arise as a part of it? > > > > And still all that is ever and only there > > is nirguna brahman unchanging, and yes > > indeed there has never been a creation > > or duality or an individual mind > > from the POV of nirguna. > > > > Durga > > > Namaste,Durga, > > A lot of advaitins say that the world or creation isn't real, it is just an appearance projected by Brahman.. > > My logic tells me that if this is an appearance, then it must be part of a mind...The Jnani sees all as the Self according to Ramana or NIZ...but NIZ also says the I Am is an illusion and we have to beyond consciousness.....The Jnani sees the world as Saguna Self,,,all is mind anyway and that is the problem the great Mahat the mind... > > If it is part of a mind then that means Brahman has a mind, which is duality...and that is impossible...so not even the appearance happened. So it must be associated with the concept Saguna Brahman which is ultimately untrue. So the final truth is only ever NirGuna...no qualities nothing... > > Finally where is the world and appearance in deep sleep, or better where is it in NirVikalpa Samadhi...or Sahaja NirVikalpa Samadhi, which are beyond Saguna and attributes and qualities and experience........That is my answer to the debate..............Cheers Tony. > The only correction I would make to the above is that > the jnani sees (as in perceives and experiences through > the sense organs) the world as saguna brahman, but *knows* > that in reality the world has for its being nirguna brahman, > that all that is really here is nirguna. > > What appears and disappears isn't ultimately real. > What is it then? Magic! > > If you want to say it doesn't exist, fine. But then > you've also said elsewhere that, " It's real while you are in it. " > > I would say that it is experienced while you are in > it, but it isn't even real when you are experiencing > it. And recognizing that is the whole point :-) > > That's the freedom. That's the liberation. > This world of experience isn't really real. > It's a magic show! It's all just an 'appearance' > of my own being. > > How did that happen? I don't know. Vedanta > talks about 'maya.' > > Do you know what the exact translation of maya is? > Ya ma iti maya. That which is not is maya. > > Is there such a thing as maya, a power which projects > the creation from brahman? I don't know. That's > the explanation Vedanta would give. But I wasn't > around (as an individual with a mind) when the > creation was projected, so I haven't a clue if > the explanation is accurate. > > What can be known directly and without a shadow > of a doubt is that this apparent creation has > for its being nirguna brahman. Thus there is > nothing but nirguna brahman, and this world > is only an appearance, like a magic show, > or a slide show, or a movie, or a dream. > > It seems to me that you think the important thing > is that there is no creation. So where does that > get you? It doesn't get you liberation. It doesn't > get you moksha. > > Recognizing that this appearance which can be > called 'the creation,' in fact has nirguna > brahman as its reality does give you liberation. > > And this isn't hypothetical or conceptual knowledge, > it's actual direct and immediate knowledge of what is. > > Durga Namaste, Durga the jnani uses the purified vijnanamayakosa to perceive the world. The mukta realises Saguna and NirGuna simultaneously, but as long as he/she has a prarabda body then the body mind construct operates but the Jnani knows it is unreal....for it is only the body mind experiencing. In NirVikalpa there is no Self or Saguna...so it never happened...In fact Saguna has no direct connection with the projected appearance either and all is not an appearance on NirGuna as it didn't happen at all--- Ajata.........Tony., 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.