<no subject>

[Guest guest]

Friends;

 

 

Here are comments preceding Dr. Subhash Kak's (Louisiana State University),

translation of the Shiva Sutras. Dr. Kak is a physicist. The full work

can be found at www.hscc.net/sanskrit/jaguar/xdvng/shivasuutra.html.

 

"Our knnowledge of the physical world is based on empirical associations.

These associations reveal the laws of the physical world. But how do we

study the nature of Consciousness? There is no way to observe one's own

awareness because we are aware through the associations with the phenomental

world. The Vedas deal precisely with this central question of the nature

of knowledge.

 

The consciousness aspect of the Vedas was emhasized most emphatically by

Dayananda (1824-1883) and Aurobindo (1872-1950). It is seen with directness

in the Upanishads. For an overview of the Vedic tradition see the recent

book coauthored by me (Feuerstein, et al 1995); this book summarizes new

insights from archaeology and history of science.

 

It has been less than a century that the theories of relativity and quantum

physics have brought the observer centerstage in physics. It is not

surprising, therefore, that the Vedic ideas, with their emphasis on

cognition, have been a source of enduring inspiration in modern science. As

is well known, the idea of brahman in the Vedas being a representation of

all possibilities, as in the statement praj~nana/dm brahman, was the

inspiration in the conception of the wavefunction of quantum theory defined

as a sum of all possibilities (Moore, 1989; Kak, 1995b).

 

Modern science has had great success in explaining the nature of the

physical world. But these successes have not brought us any closer to the

resolution of the mystery of consciousness. In the application of quantum

theory to the macroworld and in the neuropsychological explorations of the

brain, one cannot any longer ignore the question of the observer. The

notion that the mind emerges somehow out of the complexity of the

connections inside the brain is too simplistic to be taken seriously. It is

like Baron Munchhausen pulling himself out of the bog by his own bootstraps!

 

If mind merges from matter, how does it obtain autonomy? If the world is

governed by laws then how do we have free will? If our autonomy (free will)

is an epiphenomenon then are we walking shadows? Should one consider

consciousness to be the ground stuff of reality? If that is so then what is

the connection between consciousness and the physical world?

 

Issues to ponder...

 

 

Madhya

[Guest guest]

Madhya Nandi wrote:

> If mind merges from matter, how does it obtain autonomy? If the world is

> governed by laws then how do we have free will? If our autonomy (free will)

> is an epiphenomenon then are we walking shadows? Should one consider

> consciousness to be the ground stuff of reality? If that is so then what is

> the connection between consciousness and the physical world?

>

> Issues to ponder...

 

Thank you Madhya. Wonderful link. Your query inspires me to post this

piece I wrote on the K-List about 2 years ago. I believe it had been 'floated'

around

on a number of the newsgroups. Someday I will revise it and make it clearer but

until

then...

 

Intent=MC (squared)

 

Let's say that Intent is All That Is.

If Intent is divided then the result of that division is nothing.

Divided, or *personal* intent is always incomplete.

Why? Because it is a deviation from just Intent.

 

I'd liken Intent to Einstein's E(energy) from his famous equation.

 

When this energy is divided(or at least *seems* to be) the polarity

creates denseness, or gravity if you will.

 

This gravity is an implosion of sorts and implodes so much in on itself

that mass is formed.(mass is just a term for very dense energy).

 

We learn, have insights, intuit all the time(pun intended) that this

energy is what is Real and the seemingly separate forms it takes through

division is not Really the case at All.

 

An interesting thing about mass (and mass is like personal intent)

is that as one attempts to speed it up to hopefully light speed,

something peculiar occurs. (I'd point out that the speed of light

is a reflection of a strange phenomena called Timelessness.)

 

This mass (or personal intent if you will) gets heavier, thus slowing

down.

 

The Universe tells us something interesting about personal intent

in Her physical manifestation, the universe.(if

one likens the energy of personnel intent to the dense energy of mass).

 

As we commit ever more energy into the personal it resists.

We can try forever but completion always eludes personal intent.

 

So personal intent is not real. It is illusion, shadow, ego, whatever

by very nature of the truth that it is *never complete.*

It cannot last forever.

 

Here is a law Mother Universe shares through physics.

The only way we can get mass (any mass) to achieve light speed

(which is a model for eternity) is to apply ALL the ENERGY of the

*entire universe* to push that bit of mass we'd like to enter

eternity(for God knows whatever reason.)

 

That is All Intent that ever was, is, and will be, must be *Unified*

and directed toward that *One goal* of propelling mass into Eternity.

 

The transcendence of duality.

 

Personal intent is as much of a

shadow as is the physical universe.

 

(You already knew that. I just thought it interesting that Einstein's

equation can reflect that.)

 

There is only Intent.

That is the only real intent that is ever completed.

 

What does Intent intend?

Intent of course.

 

Note: "Love" & "Awareness" are all interchangeable with Intent.

[Guest guest]

Madhya Nandi wrote:

> If mind merges from matter, how does it obtain autonomy? If the world is

> governed by laws then how do we have free will?

 

As part of the world, as bodies, we do not have free will. Freedom

'belongs' to Spirit (=consciousness). A sage is called 'liberated'

because he identifies with Spirit and not with a body.

> If our autonomy (free will)

> is an epiphenomenon then are we walking shadows? Should one consider

> consciousness to be the ground stuff of reality? If that is so then what is

> the connection between consciousness and the physical world?

 

The physical world has no absolute reality. I see matter as 'condensed'

awareness which, during the process of evolution gradually changes into

consciousness (consciousness: being aware of being aware(ness)).

E.g. I see gravity as a (very dim!) kind of awareness: matter aware (but

NOT conscious!) of matter. Awareness is everywhere: in the look of my

dog, birdsong, atomic and chemical reactions, you name it!

> Issues to ponder...

> Madhya

 

Yes, and very basic issues at that!

 

Regards,

Jelke.