Advaita Vedanta scientific and rational

[Sriram257]

" similarly A known A or A not Knowing A is a Paradox with that Crux of A always aware of itself! "

Question still remains do you consider Brahman to be an object of experience ?

There is a story of a King who forgot his own Kingship, then later he remembered his own Kingship. So my question here is that where is the paradox here ? It was his own Kingship that he has recognised, he has not got knowledge of something other than himself. He did not know himself and later came to know himself.

So the logic of your paradox fails here.

[devotee]

Namaste Sriram,

Your objection will then be how can the experiencer and the experienced be same. The answer is that they can be same, but this cannot be decided merely on the basis of logic.

What happens is that when we say that anything is logical or otherwise, we take axioms applicable to waking state and then try to judge a phenomenon as logical / illogical. That is why we are unable to understand the actual phenomenon and how and why this happens.

I have found that Dream phenomenon can explain to a great extent on this issue. "Dream" is a phenomenon which is created by mind i.e. conditioned consciousness and with careful study of dreams we can understand how consciousness works (not fully but to some extent) which can at least prove that "our logic" cannot be applied to Reality as It is. In a dreamer's dream, in reality, there is Only one consciousness i.e. of the dreamer. However, the dreamer sees many objects and characters (even enemy characters) in the dream which are projected and powered by his own consciousness. While dreaming he forgets what he really is. The characters in the dream are able to differentiate among themselves, act without taking any clue from the dreamer and the dreamer doesn't know what the characters would do the next moment. So, apparently, One Consciousness of the dreamer creates and experiences Itself as many conditioned consciousnesses of so many characters (which apparently have their own minds and "self(s)") and objects.

When we don't know the characteristics of any material, we cannot say for sure how it should act. We don't know the characteristics of Consciousness exactly and therefore, applying our logic on how it works will result into fallacious results.

OM

[Sriram257]

Awesome this is what I have been saying all along thanks for summarising my point. However I refuse to accept that consciousness or Brahman is some thing whose characteristics is to be understood. As stated previously Brahman or consciousness is that into which everything resolves. Brahma Vidya is the only thing that can be called science every thing else is nescience.

[devotee]

Namaste,

I was expecting Grames to respond but perhaps he is busy somewhere else. Some members have shown interest in this discussion and wanted this discussion to continue fruitfully. So, I will proceed with my points ... if Grames joins back, it would be welcome.

In my opinion, the terms we use in discussion must be thoroughly analysed and understood before we proceed because the subject is extremely subtle and difficult to grasp. Let us understand these words :

What is Scientific ?

Science is the field of study concerned with discovering and describing the world around us by observing and experimenting.

Anything which is logical and can be proved through logical arguments (arguments should be based on observations and experiments) is scientific.

*********************

Consciousness

"Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. It has been defined as : sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind. Despite the difficulty in definition, many philosophers believe that there is a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is. As Susan Schneider wrote in The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness: "Anything that we are aware of at a given moment forms part of our consciousness, making conscious experience at once the most familiar and most mysterious aspect of our lives."

Ref : [/I][/B]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness

• Dictionary defines Consciousness as :

noun1.the state of being conscious; awareness of one's own existence, sensations, thoughts, surroundings, etc.

2.the thoughts and feelings, collectively, of an individual or of an aggregate of people:the moral consciousness of a nation.


3.full activity of the mind and senses, as in waking life:to regain consciousness after fainting.


4.awareness of something for what it is; internal knowledge:consciousness of wrongdoing.


5.concern, interest, or acute awareness:class consciousness.


6.the mental activity of which a person is aware as contrasted with unconscious mental processes.

7.Philosophy. the mind or the mental faculties as characterized by thought, feelings, and volition



*****************

Based on above explanation and definition of Consciousness we should agree that :

a) Without Consciousness we cannot be aware of our existence and also cannot know whatever is going around "us".
b) With this we further conclude that if any object can perceive presence of another object or feel anything or take any course of action due to change of situation ... it must have consciousness.

We will deal with other terms in next posts.

OM

[devotee]

Namaste,

There are other terms like "Real" / "Unreal" and "Existence" "Non-existence" which also must be understood carefully to discuss the subject of Advaita VedAnta.

What is Real ? Advaita VedAnta defines Real as, "That which is changeless. That which cannot be created or destroyed." If anything is perceived as something at one point of time and as something else at another point of time, then it is not real. Then there is something which is real. Moreover, in our common understanding we think that anything is real if we can perceive its existence by our sense organs like, by seeing, hearing or touching etc. But this definition is flawed because our sense organs can perceive something which actually is not there. How ? I will give some examples :

a) Scientifically, no two molecules can "touch" each other as at less than a given distance, two unbonded molecules very strongly repel each other. However, still we feel the "touch" of things and can describe whether an object is soft / hard or solid or liquid etc.

b) There is no color in reality. Perceptions of all colors are produced by impulse generated by optical nerves when electromagnetic light-wave falls on our retina. an electromagnetic wave of a certain wavelength produces effect of one color and another produces another. However, in reality, all electromagnetic waves are just forms of energy and have no colors in real sense. This is also proved by the fact that the same color can be perceived different by two persons if one of the two is "color-blind". This term, "Color blind" doesn't mean that the person is really "color blind" ... it only means that his mind interprets electromagnetic wave of certain wavelength differently than what is interpreted by the majority of the world. It is like something is written in Chinese and if I don't see those characters, they seem just some meaningless art to me but to one who knows Chinese can see the message with those characters. The characters are the same and I am right in my own way and the person knowing Chinese is right in his own way.

c) Smell : It is similar to our perception of "color" in the universe. There is no smell in any atom / molecule in real sense. When molecules of a certain "smelly" thing strike our "nose smell-sensing nerves" we perceive certain smell. However, this smell may not be the same for a dog, a man, a cow for the same object.

So, our sense organs cannot be relied upon for testing reality of anything. We cannot say that if we can't see or touch or smell something then it has no existence. Something can always exist even we don't perceive it. Also, our perception of an object is not because the object is like that in reality but it is due to the special way our mind is designed to perceive that thing.

OM

[devotee]

Namaste,

The biggest issue raised against Advaita VedAnta is that how One appears as Many and how can this world be accepted as illusory ? The exact answer lies in the Nature of Brahman and that doesn't act as per logic of this world we live in and that is the problem. However, we can understand this phenomenon by critical observing and analysing our Dreams. Let's take example of a dream :

a) Let's us assume that I see a Dream where I am travelling with my family in a train. I watch happy scenes inside the train enjoying the journey with my family and suddenly the train meets serious accident. I lose my family and my limbs and the dream becomes tragic. Now, let's analyse this dream :

i) There is Only one Consciousness and that is that of the Dreamer. It was the same before watching the Dream, during the Dream and even after the Dream. This Consciousness works as the Witness while the Dream is in progress and that is how we remember the details of the dream. So, the Dreamer's Consciousness remains changeless during the whole process.

ii) There are many characters in the dream. The character of my wife, son, daughter, the train, the fellow travellers etc. My wife acts in her own way and she doesn't act as I desire in the dream or during the dreaming process. She acts as an independent individual. She takes her own decision and even goes against my wishes ... may be she picks up fight with me during the journey on certain issue. Now, what is "She" in the dream ? Is she just like an actor who is not conscious but acts like a character in a Cinema ? If that was so, then her role must be written by someone who is conscious and must have been enacted before. However,. as I am unaware of how she would behave and also due the fact that she goes against me during the dreaming process ... indicates that she doesn't act a pre-decided role and even though she has no Consciousness of her own, she acts exactly as if she is fully conscious entirely independent from me. Therefore, we must admit that she behaves like a Conscious being which is different from me. This is because she is able to differentiate herself from me and others ... and also "I", as dreamer and the actor in the dream differentiate her as a different conscious being.

The same is the condition with my son, daughter and all the passenger and also the train. The train behaves exactly as a Train should behave and even goes against my wishes even in my wildest dreams i.e. meeting a serious accident etc.

===> By definition, if anything or any being can identify other object as "other" i.e. different from itself then there must be consciousness in that object. That is if anything and any being is aware of its existence and existence of "others" ... there must be consciousness within the object and the being. Therefore, apparently every being and object in the dream must have a different consciousness.

===> However, we have already agreed upon the fact that there is, in Reality, Only One Consciousness and that is the Dreamer's Consciousness. This Dreamer's Consciousness is responsible for apparent consciousness in the dream characters. This phenomenon is peculiar to Consciousness and it is called "ChidAbhAsa" in the language of Advaita VedAnta. ChidAbhAsa can be understood as "Reflected Consciousness" i.e. apparent many Consciousnesses of many characters which has Only one substratum i.e. the Consciousness of the Dreamer.

This phenomenon only explains the peculiar characteristics of Consciousness that One Consciousness can create illusion of many Consciousness even when the Original Consciousness remains undivided and unchanged.

OM

[devotee]

Namaste,

To get a better perception of ChidAbhAsa, one may refer to these links : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chidabhasa
http://www.advaita-vision.org/seven-...asa/#more-4055
http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/panch/panch_08.html

**************

Now that said, let's see the scriptural support for what we have discussed so far. So, far on this forum I have been quoting from Upanishads and Bhagwad Gita. However, in this thread I will use verses from Srimad-Bhagwatam which is considered a Vaishnava Scripture and all Vaishnavas accept it as their authority. Chapter 6 to 29 of the Eleventh Skandha of Bhagawatam has been compiled as Uddhava Gita and I will quote from that.

There is but One Reality

Chapter VIII, Verses 18-21 : Lord Krishna is asked by the Devatas led by Lord BrahmA : "Who are You ?". In Verse 22 Lord Krishna says :

"O Sages, if your question refers to the AtmAn, then the Reality being One and undivided, such a question is inadmissible".

In Verse 24 He says : "Understand this rightly that by mind, speech, sight and other organs, I alone am cognised and nothing else".

In verse 30-31 He says : " Till a man's notion of multiplicity (that there are many real beings and things) is put to stop by reasoning, he is as good as asleep even though awake - for he is ignorant - as one fancies oneself awake in the dream. As objects other than the AtmAn are unreal, diversity caused by them is false as also Its to other Lokas (heavenly abodes with its causes as the case of man seeing dreams."

In Verse 34 : "One should look upon this universe as a hallucination, being a phantasm of the mind, now seen and the next moment destroyed - like dream, and extremely shifting like a circle of fire. It is the One Consciousness that appears as multiple form."

Chapter XVII verses 54-56

"As imaginations and dream-perceptions are unreal, so also, O Uddhava, is the relative existence of sense-experience of the AtmAn. Even though the sense-world is unreal, the relative existence of a man who dwells on sense-objects is never at an end as troubles come in the dream."

"O Uddhava, look upon the delusion of plurality as caused by the non-perception of AtmAn."

XVIII, verses 60 :

"The world consisting of friends, neutrals and foes affects a man with pleasure and pain, is a phantasm of his mind owing to ignorance and nothing but that."


On reflected Consciousness

Chapter XIII, verse 32 : The One Supreme Self alone dwells in the bodies and in one's own body as the moon is reflected in so many vessels of water. And all bodies are of the same nature.

What is Real ?

Chpater XIV, verse 16 : That which, when one object is transformed into another, abides at the beginning, middle and the end and remains when those objects return to their cause, is verily the Reality.

Chapter XIX verses 17 :

That from which a thing originates and into which it dissolves, abides also in the intermediate stage. That alone is Real. The modifications have a mere phenomenal existence, as in the case of metallic and earthen wares.

How Brahman projects this world

Chapter XXII verse 22

"This world of changes which was originally non-existent is a RAjasika projection of the Brahman and appears because of It (i.e. Brahman). But the Brahman is Self-existent and Self-effulgent. Hence the Brahman alone appears in multiple forms and organs and the gross elements."

Why so ? because of this argument given by Lord in the preceding verse :

"That which is neither before nor after is also non-existent in the interim. It is a mere name. I am of the opinion that whatever (the World/Jiva etc.) is caused or brought to light by some other thing (i.e. Brahman) must be that (i.e. Brahman) and nothing else."

XXIII Verses 35 - 36 :

"This AtmAn is self-effulgent, birthless, unknowable, Knowledge, Absolute, Omniscient, One (there is nothing else except this), indivisble and beyond speech for under Its direction speech and the PrAnas function."

"The delusion of the mind consists in this that it imagines duality in the Absolute AtmAn, for except one's own Self the duality has no foundation."

OM

[smaranam]

Namaste

FYI, what Devoteeji is calling "Uddhava GeetA Chapter 8+" is essentially Shrimad BhAgavat Canto 11, Chapter 13+
The "Uddhava GeetA" begins with SB 11.5 (Canto 11 Chapter 5) where SaNakAdi kumAr and Devas visit Shri KrshNa in DwArIkA and glorify Him, then ask questions. After this Uddhav asks and KRshNa answers.

So the verses above are SB 11.13.21,22, 30.... , SB 11.22.xx just keep adding 5 to the chapter numbers in the post above.

Also this post may be considered complimentary to the subject here : Especially Point #3 : AtmA inside is AtmA outside (SB 6.16.6 - 11, SB 11.22.11 - Uddhav Gita Chap 17)
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...682#post104682

---
Uddhav makes KRshNa repeat many things He told Arjuna as well such as VibhUti Yoga, sAnkhya, yoga dhyAna jnAna bhakti and much more -- archanA, varNa+Ashram dharma, vidyA definitions of (sham dam et al daivI guNa), advaita, yoga siddhis which Uddhav says are bestowed on Yogis by Shri KRshNa (NArAyaNa), (where desirelessness is one of many siddhis), and KRshNa also explains what is sAtvic and what is nirguNa, moral stories of self-realization, story of DattAtreya... Therefore this dialogue is called Uddhava GeetA.
---

om namo bhagavate vAsudevAya ~

[devotee]

Thank you, Smaranam ! You have aptly connected the missing dots in setting relation of Uddhava Gita with Srimad Bhagwatam.

OM

[Sriram257]

"From advaita pov, it shouldn't be! But this answer is not acceptible to you guys! If it is acceptible, advaita and its preaching breaks to dust or paradox.

This is acceptible position of TattvaVada where God is expereinced by the Grace of God (dharmaButa Janana)."

If I wanted to disprove another Siddhanta I would have easily done it, it's preaching would have been broken to dust and all I would here is the same rambling.


"The paradox or the crux you are conveniently by passing is that, The Brahman here never ever forgets He is Brahman! "

I have answered this already previously , the logic of the waking state cannot be applied to Brahman, Brahman not only has no forgetfullness nor remembrance. Your only question remains who gets the realisation, since Brahman cannot have forgetfulness, therefore you again turn and ask for the locus of Ajnana.

Since you are more concerned with logic I will give you the logic. Jiva is the locus of Ajnana, it is like the relation between seed and tree. You may blame this as "Anavasta Dosha" or infinite regress. Well I would say that even Tattva Vada and even Vishistadvaita falls into the same trap since both cannot answer the beginning of karma and Janma. The relation between karma and Janma is like the tree and seed, if this is acceptable to you then applying the same case to Jiva and Ajnana should have no issues.

Advaita is not a believe it is the Supreme Science.

Science is not simply about "quasars" or "fields". You my friend have not even gone into the basics of why we use science ?

It is an inquiry into the world, science is nothing but an inquiry into the world, why are we inquiring into the world. To find out the truth. What is the truth ? It is that which does not change. That which does not change is the Brahman. This is a scriptural statement, should I take this merely on faith or should I verify it for myself.

I must verify it for myself. How is that done, by inquiry this is where we have Sampradaya and teaching methodology.

Where as in Tattva Vada or any Bhakti school that any loka like Goloka or Vaikunta exists has to be taken merely on faith nothing more. So I fail to see how it is rational.

In Advaita we have investigation and inquiry. Where ever we have proper and rational investigation into the nature reality and truth, it is called science.

Hence Advaita is definitely science and an absolute one.



Hare Krshna[/QUOTE]