PDA

View Full Version : Neither Gross nor Subtle is Consciousnesses



brahman
15 January 2013, 05:17 AM
Dear fellow-seekers,

Close scrutiny of the statement “the self exists” will show the simple meaning of it. It means only that one has in mind the vivid experience of a certain quality of awareness to which he gives the name ‘Self.’

Another will say, “Matter exists.” He too refers to a subjective entity experienced as a quality of awareness to which he gives the name “matter.”

Regardless of the terms given in each case to the subjective entity, the quality of the two experiences may be very similar: in both cases refer only to the experience of a specific configuration of awareness in the respective minds.

Now we have two different sets of ideas. One pertains to the gross aspects and the other to its subtle aspect. These are termed sthUla स्थूल and सूक्ष्म sUkSma respectively in vedic literature.

The sthUla is that kind of knowledge which is structured with impressions derived from our sensory system; form, color, physical dimensions, weight etcetera.

The awareness which is sUkSma is a form of comprehension arrived at by relating concepts which exists as ideas in the mind, without much reference to the presence of objective data. (Note: Even when a physical object is present in its gross aspect, one can transcend the physical impression cast by the object on the senses and lift one’s mind to subtle planes of varied significance and meaning.)

In general sense we can say that the existence of what is gross is an external factor in our conscious life, while the existence of the subtle can be considered as internal.

In another instance when people say, “God exists,” they have in mind a normative idea and belief –structure of what God is. They experience in their emotional life a sense of wonder and adoration towards the concept of God, and in the external manifestation of inner values they see a perfect correspondence with subjective concept. For them the one-to-one correspondence between the normative idea structure and the objective existential experience is accepted as the existence and very often the proof of existence of God.

When others say, “There is no God,” they too conceptualize an idea structure to use as a criterion to verify the possible existence of God. In this they will include such items as perfect order, uncompromising justice, a clear revelation of the Absolute truthfulness, the compassionate protection all beings, and so on. After forming this structure and including in it other values of a purely conceptual nature, they look for one-to-one corresponding in the world of objectivity. Unfortunately, what they have structured in their minds as God has little or no nothing corresponding to it in the external world, so they vehemently deny the existence of God.

In both of the above cases concerning the existence of God, the people resorted to the criterion of a normative idea-structure to say YES or NO. The God who is asserted to be real and the God who is denied reality are both only byproducts of the reasoning faculty of man.

These distinctions between the gross and the subtle aspects should not be held too rigidly. Clearly, although these distinctions can be drawn, they are in fact and in operation experienced by the same conscious reality Caitanya चैतन्य , that manifest both as the existence (objective or सद्घन Sadghana) and the ideation (subjective or चिद्घन Cidghana).

If the proponents of these arguments (Matter-Self, and existence and denial of God as mentioned above) had known they were quarrelling only about the incompatibility of their ideational structures-merely a semantic issue- they might have agreed to suspend hostilities.
---------

Human misery is wrongly thought to arise merely from human action. In fact, it is the effect of a basic illusion which is cosmic in its dimensions, and an all pervading ignorance which has no beginning in the sense that we can say mankind began (anaadi). This ignorance and illusion is fundamental to the emergence, structuring and ongoing development of the cosmos. Hence it is inseparable from the abiding principle, the ONE Caitanya चैतन्य.

When the question of conscious awareness at the gross and the subtle levels are considered, it is necessary that one should have a proper understanding of what is truly existent and what is merely fanciful imagery of mind.

It cannot be therefore attacked in a piecemeal fashion.

Recommended read (http://www.estudantedavedanta.net/Vedanta%20Paribhasa%20of%20Dharmaraja%20Adhvarindra%20-%20Swami%20Madhavananda%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf)

Love:)




For the purpose of self study and pondering.

Mana
15 January 2013, 05:40 AM
हरिः ओम्


Namaste Brahman,

Thank you for your thoughtful and inspiring post. I shall look to read the book that you suggest.

The non differentiation or rather integration of knowledge, of which you wisely speak.
Do you think it to be a function of a ratio between manas and buddhi in the entire populous?

I tend towards a view of conciousness in which we all as parts of the whole, remain as fragments or jiva, of the jīvātman; is it not necessary for
humanity to exist in this state of flux, in which some run on integrated knowledge, others differentiated. That we need both linear and non linear
thinkers, so as to advance with foresight and determination. Dependant upon the climate and other worldly conditions. Is not the state of flux
between predominant linearity and the need for global vision, the human condition its self; as such it is śivas beating heart?

The infinite boundary between prakriti puruśa, flowering to give life.

Thank you for your thoughts.


praṇāma

mana


ॐ नमः शिवाय

devotee
15 January 2013, 10:02 PM
Namaste Brahman,

A very good and important subject has been touched upon by you. Thanks. :)

I agree fully that we start fighting due to our own constructs of God in our mind. If we agree that our imagery of God may have nothing to do what God is ... as reality may be far different from imagination ... we can resolve our differences peacefully.

If we see how the Reality is described in Bhagwad Gita, Upanishads and Veda Samhitas ... we will have to agree that the description is not in same wordings.

MAndukya Upanishad makes it clear that Ishvara or God is Unified Mass of Consciousness (PrjnANghana). But it doesn't stop us from making a mental construct of what Consciousness is and there we go wrong.

OM

brahman
16 January 2013, 04:03 AM
I tend towards a view of conciousness in which we all as parts of the whole, remain as fragments or jiva, of the jīvātman; is it not necessary for
humanity to exist in this state of flux, in which some run on integrated knowledge, others differentiated. That we need both linear and non linear
thinkers, so as t[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR]o advance with foresight and determination. Dependant upon the climate and other worldly conditions. Is not the state of flux
between predominant linearity and the need for global vision, the human condition its self; as such it is śivas beating heart?

The infinite boundary between prakriti puruśa, flowering to give life.



mana
[/SIZE]

ॐ नमः शिवाय


Dear Mana,

Exactly. When a seed is sown in moist earth it swells and bursts, and tender shoot emerges which projects itself upward while the embryonic root system begins its downward projection. The action of photosynthesis cannot take place in the roots but the root system alone can supply the plant with necessary water and other nourishment found only in the earth. Thus there is a complementarity between the two environments of light and darkness. Total agreement to the statement.

On the other hand it makes little sense if one does not follow this with an explanation of how the beating heart of śiva is experienced as a concrete fact.

It is true that everything appearing in a dream comes from the imagination of the dreamer. But dream have no contiguity. It is not possible to continue the dream of the previous night on the following one.

The things which a magician seems to create cannot satisfy the transactional needs of our everyday life; only concrete experience can do that.

Therefore, a proper philosophical study cannot omit the concrete facts of life and the problems arising from them.

The external world of man is what he himself can do, manipulate, transact, understand, or at any rate accept, because of his conditioning. There is much he can do, but for Success(S), he needs at least a minimum understanding of the uniformity of the laws which govern the world order.

We can pick apples from an apple tree, and coconuts from a coconut palm, but we cannot pick apples from a coconut palm. Our external world needs some structuring of regularity, order, and predictability or we could not long survive it.

The present work(link) is in accordance with the topic being discussed, that is the epistemological order of Vedanta. Love:)




.

Mana
16 January 2013, 09:28 AM
हरिः ओम्


Namaste brahman,

I am thrilled that we are in agreement; its heart warming to see that we recognise the same phenomena.

You are absolutely right that solid proof is of the essence; I tend to forget how life's experiences alter to such a degree our
perspectives. That which we know in our heart is not necessarily seen by others and expecting others to see the same thing
is blindness to which I fall prey often. I suppose that we are all guilty of this at times to a certain extent. Yes we must learn
and adapt to the world in which we reside; but then again there is also a natural balance, to be respected,
and at times disobeyed.
This is a chaotic system, one that I feel will never be ordered other than in cycles. To my mind science will soon demonstrate
this phenomena within the human condition its self. I hope to learn to master the discipline of constructing solid philosophical
proof, to write about at concisely and to master Jyotiś; in order try to time these events.

BUT!!!

"Love is the answer and the key!" ~Swami Lakshmanjoo

Thank you kindly for your consideration.


praṇāma

mana


ॐ नमः शिवाय

brahman
17 January 2013, 04:32 AM
You are absolutely right that solid proof is of the essence; I tend to forget how life's experiences alter to such a degree our
perspectives. That which we know in our heart is not necessarily seen by others and expecting others to see the same thing
is blindness to which I fall prey often. I suppose that we are all guilty of this at times to a certain extent. Yes we must learn
and adapt to the world in which we reside; but then again there is also a natural balance, to be respected,
and at times disobeyed.
This is a chaotic system, one that I feel will never be ordered other than in cycles. To my mind science will soon demonstrate
this phenomena within the human condition its self.[/SIZE][/FONT][/COLOR] I hope to learn to master the discipline of constructing solid philosophical
proof, to write about at concisely and to master Jyotiś; in order try to time these events.[SIZE=2][SIZE=2][SIZE=2][SIZE=2][SIZE=2][SIZE=2]


mana


[SIZE=3]ॐ नमः शिवाय

Dear Mana,

That is true; we shall not ask anyone to differ from making one’s own decision, for everyone prefers freedom from obligations.

At the same time we cannot forget the characteristic foundation of our own individual personality, Svadharma, it is glorifying when one determines one’s Svadharma with absolute certitude. That is being performed here.

Regarding the statement of the cyclic order of the Universe, api na kaschit veda enam ca eva(but even hearing no one understands THIS at all) BG 2: 29 is also kept in mind.

Unique means of certitude in Vedanta:

Getting g satisfied to have and propound a type of knowledge that from an enlightened viewpoint can be seen to be more properly described as ignorance. The mere description of the absolute gives only a theoretical understanding and intellectual appreciation. It should be followed by one’s own ‘direct’ experience. (Ref: "yat sAkShAt aparokShat brahma" .

[B]So in Vedanta, or integral wisdom of the Absolute, it is essential that the student should clearly see the alternating movements of the entire psyche in an ascending and descending order. Love:)