PDA

View Full Version : What is Mind?



yajvan
17 October 2007, 06:27 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste ,
I have been thinking [again!] on this matter of mind. This is top of mind due to my re-reading of the Yoga Sutras.

The 2nd sutra, yogash citta-vrtti-nirodah,

clearly points out that yoga is nirodha [cessation, cancellation, null, dissolution, stillness, emptiness, or extinguished, aresting, etc] of the mind...

Yet what is this thing called mind? I have some ideas, but if you pressed me on it, I could not say with a high level of accuracy what it is, even though I am an active user of this tool. That is I am not the final authority on this.

Heres some things that one may think of when 'mind' comes to mind:

that which houses one's thoughts and feelings
that which thinks and reasons
That which applies intelligence via the intellect faculty
That which applies creativity
That which houses past impressions (vasanas)I do not think the brain is the mind, but is the physial construct that allows the mind to occur. And this brain is part of the total over mind; composed of brain + the nervious system , so its just not in the skull, but thoughout ones body-being.

And is mind consciousness? For me, it is not, even though the mind takes use of this consciousness. That is, conciousness continues in this world with or without mind, yet condensed consciousness becomes ego.

Or does consciousness produce mind?

Can we live without it? Sure seems that yoga sutras suggest this is advisabale. So is there a certain part of mind that is nirodha or 100% gets tossed when Yoga is achieved?

In the Chandogya Upanishad ( chapt 5.1) the pranas are disputing who is superior. Various pranas left i.e. the eyes, ears, speech. MInd also left and came back after one year. Mind said how did you manage without me?
The other pranas said , we lived just like children, unthinking, yet breating, speaking, seeing and hearing.


Any thoughts from your side on what you think Mind is, and in yoga ( union or moksha) , is total mind arrested, or some part may remain?

pranams,

Znanna
17 October 2007, 06:37 PM
Namaste,

Coincidentally, this evening, this article was brought to my attention:

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/neuro/neuro00/web3/Chivers.html



So what has making the observation of striate cortex damage causing blindsight taught us? It certainly shows us that consciousness is only a part of what goes on in the brain, and that consciousness is not needed for behavior. The observation does not, however, tell us where consciousness is located. The observation could support theories of consciousness being in one structure, of various types of consciousness being in different structures with vision's consciousness in the striate cortex, or of consciousness that is not localized at all. We have learned that we cannot answer the question of where consciousness is with only this observation. Although the observation has taught us an important lesson about consciousness, there is a great deal about consciousness that we cannot learn from this observation alone.


ZN

Kaos
18 October 2007, 12:53 PM
Namaste yajvan, Zn and all,


This is an intriguing topic. Allow me to jump in and join the conversation.
Perhaps, we can all share our views on this matter.


According to Buddhism, the mind is a sense organ.
The six indriyas, or sense organs are: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind.

However, when we speak of "mind", whose mind are we talking about?
I think, it would be helpful to consider who we really are.


Am "i" the mind?

I think not, since my mind changes from time to time.
I do not have the same mind that I had when I was 5 years old.

Therefore, who am "i" and whose mind is this?

Any comments are most welcome.

yajvan
18 October 2007, 01:47 PM
Namaste yajvan, Zn and all,


This is an intriguing topic. Allow me to jump in and join the conversation.
Perhaps, we can all share our views on this matter.


According to Buddhism, the mind is a sense organ.
The six indriyas, or sense organs are: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body and mind.

However, when we speak of "mind", whose mind are we talking about?
I think, it would be helpful to consider who we really are.

Am "i" the mind?

I think not, since my mind changes from time to time.
I do not have the same mind that I had when I was 5 years old.

Therefore, who am "i" and whose mind is this?

Any comments are most welcome.

Namaste K,
as you mention " am 'i' the mind? ". I will assume lower case 'i' means that which changes all the time, the 'me' that fluxuates, that has ups-and-downs, pleasures and pains, smells, touches, feels, and thsese on any given day can produce all differnt types of emotions and feelings.

I Can then see why Patanjai would say yogash citta-vrtti-nirodah, or nirodha [cease, cancel, extinguish, arrest] the mind... Be without it. If so, then capital 'I' is then predominant - Being, Brahman, Purusa, etc.

Moving the clouds (i) away from the sun (I) would be a physical example. So, 'i' = ego, and all that. 'I' = Brahman, Purusa. Your thoughts [and others who wsih to jump in] ?

And do you think mind is separate from Intellec? t... many times people say the mind, and emotions and Intellect as of they were different compartments... any views on this?


pranams,

saidevo
19 October 2007, 10:41 AM
Namaste everyone.

Let us have some interactive, free thinking on the human mind and its ramifications, inquiring into its what, where, how, why, and when. Such inquiry might perhaps help us understand better this awesome gift of God to man.

The what, where, how, why, and when aspects of the mind overlap and merge into each other, so let us discuss briefly these individual aspects and then try to have an overall picture of mind.

I have stated what are apparent to my limited knowledge. Members may please elaborate and add clarity to the lines of inquiry initiated here.

What is the Mind?

In common parlance, mind is a faculty, a natural power that can be specialized. It is a conduit or channel for buddhi, the intellect. It is also the channel for the flow of the 'stream of consciousness' a term used by Science and Western philosophy to indicate the random flow of thoughts.

Thoughts! Mind can be described with just this one word. So what is a thought? And who is the thinker?

The dictionary defines the term 'thought' as a 'process of thinking' and 'think' as 'a way to conceive in the mind', and 'conceive' as 'to become pregnant with and develop', 'to understand, apprehend'.

Now we have some idea: a thought is something conceived in the mind into a form to put into action. A thought is normally put into action in words and/or deeds, but the thinker may also desist from any action on a thought. And since 'conceive' also means 'to understand', it is implied that the thinker understands the thoughts he/she puts into action. And then 'conceive' also means 'to apprehend' which is 'to hold in custody', so thinker needs to exercise some restraint on his/her thoughts.

Thoughts flow through the mind ceaselessly like a wild stream. The fluidity of thoughts is better described by the example of a wind rather than water, to account for the capriciousness, expansion and randomness of the flow.

If thoughts flow through the mind, is the mind then just a container that holds and regulates the flow of thoughts? This idea renders some objectivity to mind but mind is more subjective in nature. There is also question of how and wherefrom these thoughts originate and if they are all contained in the mind.

And what about emotions? Some of the emotions are noble like love, compassion and altruism but most are base? Still both kinds originate in the mind and flow to their destination.

Where is the Mind?

In the human body, which is the most conspicuous part of human vestures, two organs are associated with the mind: the brain and the heart. In common parlance, the brain is associated with thoughts and the heart with emotions. Both these organs are embedded in the complex network of the human nervous system that maps to every pore in the human body.

The brain and heart are nothing without the nervous system that connects the five senses for input of impressions and output of expressions. Again, of the five senses, most output expressions are by means of the mouth and bodily action in which the other senses combine to act.

Mind survives death of the body (in the form of frozen impressions or vAsanAs). Therefore, the brain and heart and the nevous system can only constitute the physical apparatus of the subtle mind, which resides in the manomaya koSa (mental vesture) in the sUkSma sharira (astral body).

How does the Mind function?

Mind has four functions: manas is the sensory, processing mind; chitta is the storage of impressions; ahamkAra is the 'I-maker' and buddhi is the intellect/wisdom that decides, judges and discriminates.

Manas is the lower mind that supervises and directs the ten senses. It cannot judge or decide about its expressions which is the job of buddhi. The memory bank of past impressions is the chitta. The ahamkAra, the 'I-maker' is the ego that identifies the specific instance of the other functions with a person. It is the ego that makes the mind subjective. If there is no ahamkAra then the humans will be like robots with no individual selection, idenfication and processing of the other functions. The buddhi is the higher mind that is above emotions and passions.

Why is the Mind given to a human being?

The term man or manuSya (human) itself is derived from manas or mind. Man is called a thinking or rational animal. Why is the mind so important and vital to a human being? The most logical answer to this questions is obtained by the Hindu concepts of karma and reincarnation. The mind is given to the human being to experience the karmic effects of the impressions accumulated over many lives.

When does the Mind actually form in a human being?

How does the mind form and grow in human birth? Obviously, since as Hinduism and many other religions say, the soul enters the embryo the moment it is conceived, the past impressions of earlier births in the chitta part of the mind are hidden in the infant that is born. But the infant's body has to grow to implement the functions of its mind. Two organs and senses that are readily available for the infant to partake in its mental function are its eyes and ears. We may say that for an infant its mind develops with its body.

An infant also dreams! The astral senses required to function in its dream may be said to develop faster than its physical counterparts because the reincarnating ego of the soul acquires the mental and astral vestures earlier to the physical vesture. The astral vesture of the infant has to develop faster than even its mental vesture because the infant needs to express its needs by emotional outputs in the form of crying and smiling.

An infant's thought processes are formed progressively by interaction with the physical world. Therefore, while the chitta might be ready to act, the other three functions that require the body for their expressions can develop only progressively.

An overall picture

Now that we have an idea of what, where, how, why, and when of the human mind, we are now in a position to form the overall picture of the mind, perhaps in this way:

1. The mind has two components: the lower mind and the higher mind. Emotions and passions are processed by manas which is the lower mind. Wisdom and intellect are given by buddhi which is the higher mind. The lower mind is and must be ruled over by the higher. Where the reverse is the case, the human becomes an animal completely.

2. What is the connection of the mind to the soul or Atman? Atman as an individual unit or spark of brahman, who is the Cosmic Consciousness, manifests through three channels: The Will is the icchA shakti or the power of Desire, Wisdom is the jnAna shakti or the power of knowledge and Activity is the kriyA shakti or the power of creation. This triad is further expressed through the channels of mind and senses. In all these expressions, however, the Atman does not undergo any change. It simply remains as a witness, forming the substratum of all the manifestations and expressions.

3. What happens when the mind ceases to function? When the mind is void of all thoughts or just has the thought of its Creator, it merges with the Atman, which is the ultimate spiritual experience and liberation for a human soul. Once the soul attains this state even when it is bound to a body, the mind comes under its full control that ensues destruction of existing past impressions and creation of no new impressions and becomes a channel for the divine will.

For an elaborate discussion on the mind, its functions and control, check http://www.swamij.com/fourfunctionsmind.htm and other articles in the Website.

yajvan
19 October 2007, 05:45 PM
Namaste everyone.

In common parlance, mind is a faculty, a natural power that can be specialized. It is a conduit or channel for buddhi, the intellect. It is also the channel for the flow of the 'stream of consciousness' a term used by Science and Western philosophy to indicate the random flow of thoughts.

Thoughts! Mind can be described with just this one word. So what is a thought? And who is the thinker?

The dictionary defines the term 'thought' as a 'process of thinking' and 'think' as 'a way to conceive in the mind', and 'conceive' as 'to become pregnant with and develop', 'to understand, apprehend'.




Namste saidevo,
a good piece of information... may I probe a bit more.

You have mentioned what the mind does...
natural power that can be specialized. It is a conduit or channel for buddhi, the intellect.

Yet I do not see your POV on what it is. Yes, it thinks and applies intelligence for intellect. Yet what is mind by itself, without it doing ? We know it is not the physical construct e.g. brain and nerve tissue, etc.

It seems to me that mind is a word used to group the things mentioned... the mind is a name for collection of mind-stuff.

Hypothesis
Mind is the Σ (sum) of Intellect + Feelings + emotions + thought and thought storage + rationalization + memory +....
When this is bundled together we can call it mind.

Thoughts?

Eastern Mind
19 October 2007, 06:12 PM
5 areas of mind
conscious: where the senses are, taking in info
subconscious : the memory mind, organiser of the conscious
sub subconscious: gliches in the subconscious i.e: two strong samskaras create a third even stronger 'blob' of currents
superconscious: direct cognition, intuition
subsuperconscious: memories of the superconscious

Of course it is more complicated than this, awareness flows through each, and stays in each, with the last two depending moreso on spiritual advncement. Aum Namasivaya

yajvan
19 October 2007, 06:27 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~
5 areas of mind
conscious: where the senses are, taking in info
subconscious : the memory mind, organiser of the conscious
sub subconscious: gliches in the subconscious i.e: two strong samskaras create a third even stronger 'blob' of currents
superconscious: direct cognition, intuition
subsuperconscious: memories of the superconscious

Of course it is more complicated than this, awareness flows through each, and stays in each, with the last two depending moreso on spiritual advncement. Aum Namasivaya

Namste EM,
thanks for the post... if I look at the above:
■ we have taking in info.... via the senses. got it.
■ memory and organizing , yep.
■ samskaras (a.k.a. vasanas) - yep.
■ cognition and intuition - yet cognition can happen via the senses, but i see where you are going here.
■ memories of super consciousness, okee-dokee.

Okay - I see the list...where is feelings+ emotions ( not a mind item) + Thinking +intellect?

I would not classify thinking or intellect in with the senses...as those tattvas are data collection that feeds mind.

your take ?

pranams,

Eastern Mind
19 October 2007, 06:34 PM
Yajvan: This is all from Subramuniyaswami's writings. He also put it in 3 strata, instinctive, intellectual, and superconscious. I don't remember as well as I should but within that he explains how the intellect works. Yet there is only one mind. Most of the intellect, as I see it, is just the subconscious storing data from reading books, listening etc., yet experiences also can teach, and a smaller portion of our intellect comes from that, only if we are able to filter those experiences through the superconscious. Aum Namasivaya

saidevo
20 October 2007, 12:06 AM
Namaste Yajvan.



It seems to me that mind is a word used to group the things mentioned... the mind is a name for collection of mind-stuff.

Hypothesis
Mind is the S (sum) of Intellect + Feelings + emotions + thought and thought storage + rationalization + memory +....
When this is bundled together we can call it mind.


You cannot define intellect, feelings, emotions, thought, etc. without the mind, because they all are manifestations of the mind. So mind is much more than just a name for the group of these things.

Then what is mind, as a manifest entity? What is the nature and structure of the mind? Is it matter, energy or both? To what extent is it an extension of Individual Consciousness, which is the individual Atman and substratum of the mind and body?



You have mentioned what the mind does...
natural power that can be specialized. It is a conduit or channel for buddhi, the intellect.

Yet I do not see your POV on what it is. Yes, it thinks and applies intelligence for intellect. Yet what is mind by itself, without it doing ? We know it is not the physical construct e.g. brain and nerve tissue, etc.


My POV is that mind is a definite, manifest entity, usually grouped with the ten senses. Buddhi is an individualized unit of Mahat, the Cosmic Intelligence. Atman is an undivided unit of Brahman, the Cosmic Consciousness, that forms the substratum of everything including the mind and remains as just a witness in the background.

To understand the nature and structure of mind, let us try the analogy of the Internet and the PC (personal computer), but like all analogies, this cannot be stretched beyond a point.

The Internet, as a record of good and bad things, can be compared to the Akashic Record of thoughts and actions of mankind, consituting an overall Chitta (storage). Now, the Internet is localized to the PC and its contents flow through the PC's memory and stored in the hard disk. If we consider the PC as an individual unit of consciousness like the Atman, the Operating System that drives the PC is its Will or IcchA Shakti. The various packages of software like the browsers, the word processors, spreadsheets and so on constitute the Activity or KriA Shakti. The knowledge and impressions obtained by the PC in its activities of interaction with the Internet are stored in the hard disk which constitutes the Chitta as matter and JnAna Shakti as energy.

The CPU with its volatile memory and processing units constitute the brain of the PC and the internal clock that ticks at 18.2 times a second constitutes the heart that regulates the cycles of activities in the PC. The input and output devices of the PC such as the keyboard, mouse, monitor, printer, modem, hard disk and optical disk drives constitute the senses of the PC.

What the PC is switched off, it goes into 'deep sleep' with everything frozen. When it is swtiched on, it 'wakes up' and gets ready for its routine activities. Does the PC have a dream state? Perhaps this is the 'standby' mode given by the operating system like Windows to conserve the power and other resources of the PC. In dreams, we use far powerful resources more intensively but there is no wear and tear to the physical body, whose participation in dreams is minimum.

In this set up, how is the 'mind' of the PC structured? The Chitta is the storage of impressions in the hard disk. The CPU as the brain of the PC draws from this storage and plays with it. The internal clock as the heart regulates this activity in cycles, to allow multi-tasking or processing of multiple thoughts. The PC's 'senses' convey impressions and expressions. Once it has a connection, the PC has access to the massive impressions stored on the Internet.

What is lacking in this set up? The Buddhi, or the discriminating part. Since the PC has no intelligence on its own, it has no Buddhi, and this is where the analogy ends. It is for the user to provide the preferences of discrimination.

Thus, the PC's 'mind' has many abstractions: at the highest level, it is thoughts and impressions (the software that retrieves records from the hard disk and the Internet). At an intermediary level, it is hardware, solid matter, comprising ICs, microchips, wires, metal plates, glassware and so on. At the lowest level it is all energy: electrical pulses in the micro chips, electrical energy in its circuitry, magnetic and optical patterns in its storage units, and colorful pixels of light and ink in its output expressions.

In the same way, the human mind is both energy and matter, abstracted at different levels. Just like the PC picks up its starting routines from the hard disk and ROM and always stay connected to them, so does the mind pick up for its activity from the impressions stored in the Chitta. Once it wakes up in the dream or wakeful states, it is active by what is called associative thinking, which seems random, but is actually more akin to the HTML (Hypertext Markup Language) used in Web pages, where the pointers in the main text lead to other texts.

Hinduism and Theosophy accept that there are seven planes or worlds of nature and that each plane has its own Ultimate Physical Atom that constitute the matter of the plane. The ParamANu is the most fundamental of all matter of all planes; it constitues the Adi or Satyam plane, where the matter has its highest vibrational frequency. Matter becomes more and more gross down the other planes, whose UPA is constituted in terms of the number of ParamANu (for the physical plane the atom is supposed to have 49^6 or nearly 14 million ParamAnus).

Mind is thus mapped to the mental plane. All thoughts originate there, acquire what are called thought-forms (we mostly think in figures), these thought-forms descend to the astral plane, acquire the colors of emotion and then propagate in the physical brain, heart and the nervous system for physical action or reaction.

A child builds castles on the sands, modelling after its experiences in the real world. Man builds devices to imitate human mind and intelligence, but they have their own limitations because any man-made device cannot equal or excel the God-made man himself.

Eastern Mind
20 October 2007, 10:10 AM
So here's another question to ponder. Is there only one mind, period, and when we are building our individual minds through experience etc, we are merely pulling portions of the one universal mind out, sort of, and using that portion that we pull, as our own? (This theory would certainly help explain how simultaneous discoveries happen.) We also know that only a small portion of our brain is actually in use. What's in the rest? Aum Namasivaya

Kaos
20 October 2007, 01:26 PM
Interesting discussion yajvan, saidevo, EM and all.
Thanks for your informative posts.

According to Buddhism, mind is neither physical nor a by-product of physical processes. The mind is a formless continuum that is a separate entity from the body. When the body disintegrates at death, the mind does not cease.

Our superficial conscious mind does not cease, but instead dissolves into a deeper level of consciousness called the "very subtle mind".
This continuum, this very subtle mind has no beginning and no end.



Let's keep up with the discussion, as we try to learn and gain more insights into the nature of "mind". Your inputs are much appreciated.

yajvan
20 October 2007, 03:29 PM
Namaste Yajvan.
Then what is mind, as a manifest entity? What is the nature and structure of the mind? Is it matter, energy or both? To what extent is it an extension of Individual Consciousness, which is the individual Atman and substratum of the mind and body?


Namaste saidevo,

excellent responses by all... ( K, EM, etc.). I think we are getting to the crux of this conundrum. It is very difficult to talk of this entity mind, without metaphors and examples.
K offers mind is neither physical nor a by-product of physical processes. The mind is a formless continuum that is a separate entity from the body, from the Buddist perspective, and EM offers more questions e.g. potions of the Universal Mind ( as I tend to agree - if all this is indeed Brahman, it must include Mind, yes?)

So, why is this pursuit of value for us to understand? Its something we use every day. If you asked me to define my car, I could do that to a 99.99% accuracy level; a very complex machine that can be broken down to parts, energy, motion, steel, aluminum, etc. Yet this mind that we use all the time has us kinda still scratching our heads on the matter.

Why pursue? This mind is something the Patanjali says keeps us from knowing our SELF. He says suppress it, be without it. Yet we are not certain what parts we will be without! Hold it - don't throw that part out, I like that part, no, hold it I think I may need this feeling for later or that memory to my gym locker http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/images/icons/icon7.gif. Yet this muni of enlightened vision and many more say this mind is the obstacle.

If we dump the mind AND if Intellect is connected to it ( I think saidevo you suggest it is part of Mahat or the Comic Intellect, yet this then saying it is not part of manas, or mind? or on loan?) what facility do we have when we're done cleaning house e.g. the mind?

Here is the Implication Of This Matter
Does all of the functioning of us then switch to the Universal Mind, Intellect, etc. and Brahman drives ? I can see without a doubt how prakriti can take care of the body without our interference , this is clear to me. And Krsnsa says be without the 3 gunas. This too makes sense as we exit from the 3 guna influence in the mind, and reside in the SELF.

Yet of the mind? If the mind is Universal Mind ( and I am all for it), why then would each rishi, each guru, swami, each realized being, and exponent of Reality not have the same concepts and philosophy of Brahman, of Siva? of Mother Divine? of Shakti? IF accessing the same mind? the same database.

Extending Saidevo's Personal computer concept, we're going from individual pc's and now hooking directly and functioning from the Main Frame. We are now the mainframe as we gave up the PC and that architecture.


This is a pickle , No?
'There is not even one Rishi whose opinion can be accepted by all' says
Yudhishthira [Yaksha Prasna, – found in Araneya Parva, Mahabharata]

How does one rationalize this?

http://www.rudraksha-ratna.com/images/mantra_images/M6.gif
Om Sri Ramaya Namah

pranams,

Eastern Mind
20 October 2007, 04:23 PM
Yajvan: What I think is that we do need to hold parts of the mind, yet get rid of others. All the gridded intellect part, other than that which keeps us spiritual can be done away with. Subramuniyaswami said that one's subconscious should be like a pane of glass. Clear, not muddled with various astral colours. If you read about auras and their colours, they tell you both the conscious mind the individual is in, and also the subconscious mind. The subconscious aura is more of a blob in the middle of the big aura of the conscious. The parts of the instinctive layer that we need are the ones like hunger that fulfill the maintenance of the body, and the instinct to realise the Self, but only at the beginning stages of the path. I guess even that has to be dropped to actually realise the Self. But all the ones like anger, fear, lust, greed, pride, the lower emotions, we need to learn how to control. They eventually will drop off, but the first step is just control. (not in a repressive way of course, then its a volcano waiting to come out, and comes out with more force or lack of direction) The great sages often did not 'think' before responding with wisdom, and just spoke directly from the superconscious with direct cognition.
I do believe in one universal mind, created by Siva, which we tap into.

atanu
21 October 2007, 07:00 AM
Namaste All,

Let me add my bit.

Classically mind is said to be jada like all observable objects (like body) but it is said to be pure sattwa so it is able to reflect consciousness (for the consciousness) whereas the body which is more of a tamasic object cannot do so. Mind is the intermediate between consciousness and the objects and when one observes the thoughts cropping up, the mind itself becomes the observed object.

So, some gurus like Ramana Maharshi teach that on observing and enquiring into the source of mind (which is non-different from Aham Kara -- the first "I" call), the mind is not found. It is held to be a power and not an object by Ramana Guru, who of course holds all other objects that reflect in mind as also trans-figuration of Atman alone. Considering that ultimately, the Atman is the reality, this view is finally the correct view. This view is similar to the Buddhist view, except that herein, Brahman the immutable, is considered and the mind is said to rise in immutable Brahman.

I add my intuitive bit. Mind is unique two way mirror that the Atman constructs trans-figuratively, out of itself, to enjoy the delicious objects that it has further plans to construct. Advaitin will say that Atman does not create anything and that the mind is the first product of Maya made of Sattwa Guna, which reflects the consciousness, since it is the purest matter. Mind deludes when one considers it to be an instrument of the body and mind liberates when it is known to be an instrument of Atman that has localised itself for some purpose.

RV5.3.3. For the glory of thee, O Rudra, the life powers make bright thy birth into a richly manifold beauty. When that highest step [The supreme plane of the three.] of Vishnu is founded within, thou guardest by it the secret name of the Ray cows.

Mind is said to be dark matter, not self luminous (similar to Moon). Atman is said to be self luminous (similar to Sun). However, it is Atman that illumines the Sun as well. Western philosophers consider mind to be intelligent and different from matter (Descartes) or to be a property of the body (Materialists). Both views are not acceptable to Vedanta which accepts the Atman as the only intelligence. And the crucial part comes when Atman is known as Advaita. Probably no other religion has this view of One Atman and its One Pragnya, which is the Lord, the Jiva, and the Universe.

That is why Yoga Sutra and all other meditative teachings exhort us to make the mind free of waves and let the Atman (or Purusha) act directly. Nirodha of the mind waves is not arresting the intellect, but unshakling it by making the individual mind disappear (Guru Ramana teaches that Nirodha or arresting is not a correct connotation). Logically also, in deep sleep when there is no mind, one is happy but one fails to partake happiness because one is lying with Yogamaya. So, uprooting the individualised i (mind) allows one to bypass the darkness of Yoga Maya but remain as self luminous Self.


Vedanta also teaches that this Atman (or Purusha) is Brahman. On disappearance of individual mind, whatever thoughts sprout, non-volitionally, belong to Brahman/Ishwara and not to the small "i". Guru Vashista, in Rig Veda, sings eulogy to Vishnu who cries "I am Cipivista". Mind is only one degree away from Atman, whereas the observed objects are said to be four degrees away from the Atman. So, Guru Ramana teaches observation and enquiry into the I, which is the beginning of mind manifesting.

Om

yajvan
21 October 2007, 11:26 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste All,

Classically mind is said to be jada like all observable objects (like body) but it is said to be pure sattwa so it is able to reflect consciousness (for the consciousness) whereas the body which is more of a tamasic object cannot do so. Mind is the intermediate between consciousness and the objects and when one observes the thoughts cropping up, the mind itself becomes the observed object.

Om


namaste atanu (et.al).
I think we are making progress here overall...
It seems, mind is manas tattva (called samkalpasadhana) - and this tattva brings forth thought. Yet for this thought to arise, the 'inventory' requires at times, bhuddhi tattva , the intellect. It also requires that of Ahamkara tattva , that of the ego ( of me, small 'i'). Intellect contributes discrimination, ego , everything else i.e. emotions, feelings, fears, etc.

re: EM's comment - The great sages often did not 'think' before responding with wisdom, and just spoke directly from the superconscious with direct cognition.
Yes, I agree. this is the goal - no thinking from individual status 'me'. I think we can all agree , without 'mind' [ some call this cittapralaya or thoughtlessness ] the working of speech and response come from Universal SELF - this is most desirable. This is what atanu raises in his post:
On disappearance of individual mind, whatever thoughts sprout, non-volitionally, belong to Brahman/Ishwara and not to the small "i".

If the mind is Universal Mind ( and I am all for it), why then would each rishi, each guru, swami, each realized being, and exponent of Reality not have the same concepts and philosophy of Brahman, of Siva? of Mother Divine? of Shakti? If accessing the same mind? the same database.
Could it be lesh avidya? for those that are new to this term, it is the remnants of ignorance that are left. Say one has a butter-ball in their hands. They put this ball down, yet remain on their hands is this film, the remains of holding the ball. Like that, when Moksha dawns, there is a residue of ignorance that remains - this keeps the tattvas intact, so one is not completely absorbed into Brahman. This is how my teacher has explained it.

pranams,

Eastern Mind
21 October 2007, 01:36 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~



If the mind is Universal Mind ( and I am all for it), why then would each rishi, each guru, swami, each realized being, and exponent of Reality not have the same concepts and philosophy of Brahman, of Siva? of Mother Divine? of Shakti?

pranams,
Namaste Yajvan et al: This is a good question. Personally I think they do all have the same concepts. And as you said, they would carry over from their own subconscious training, remnants of the small "i". Some are more realised than others as well. In my readings about the Self, you don't just realise it once, but you realise it over and over again, and are able to explore new worlds as the siddhis come. The other big thing, in my humble opinion, is who they are speaking to. Certain students need certain things. From that superconscious direct cognition, that mind from which a realised soul would speak from, would simultaneously be feeling, and tuning into the audience. I've seen this first hand, when a swami gave a very different speech to a different audience. Its like me adjusting my language level consciously (or subconsciously with much experience) when I am teaching Grade 2 or Grade 8. So a Vaishnava swami while speaking to Vaishnavas would speak to them, (Vishnu is God, worship him as the Godhead) but if he were invited in Hindu solidarity to speak at a Smarta of Saiva conference, he might say, "Siva is God" as that would be what he was feeling in the crowd. In many ways realised souls are just mirrors reflecting back what you already know or think. Another take. Aum Namasivaya.

saidevo
21 October 2007, 11:54 PM
Mind in Hindu Texts

[From the book The Science of Peace by Bhagavan Das
downloadable at: http://www.archive.org/details/scienceofpeace029498mbp (22.7 MB)]

Functions-Faculties of Mind

Vedanta speaks of the tetrad of the inner organ, antaH karaNa-chatushtaya--viz, manas, buddhi, ahamkAra, chitta.

Yoga speaks of Chitta with the three shIlas or characteristics.

Nyaya mentions Buddhi and Manas separately (Sutra I.i.9), makes jnAna or cognition (together with other phenomena) a 'mark' or characteristic of Atma (I.i.10), identifies Jnana with Buddhi (I.i.15) and states the distinguishing characteristic of manas to be prevention of more than one 'knowledge' (or 'experience') occurring at one time (I.i.16).

But Nyaya-Bhashya (on I.i.16) says: "Memory, reasoning, acceptance of testimony, doubt, intuition, dreaming, Jnana or knowledge, inferential conjecture, experience of pleasure, desire, etc., are 'marks' of Manas; and besides these, also this one peculiarly, viz., the non-occurrence of more than one 'knowledge' at a time."

And Nyaya-vartika-tatparya-tlka (on the same) seems to identify Buddhi (which as said above is expressly declared in the Sutra to be identical with Jnana) with Manas, thus:

buddhirGYAnasAdhanamiti | budhyate.aneneti vutpatyA mana ucyate |

The reconciliation and explanation of all these may be found in the statements that:

Chitta consists of Buddhi, Ahamkara, Manas,' which make up the 'inner organ'; and of these, Manas expresses rajas; Ahamkara, tamas; and buddhi, sattva.' -- Shiva Sutra Vimarshini, iii.1 and Spanda Karika Vivrti, iv.20

Desire-Force as Jivas

Shiva Sutra Vimarshini and Yoga Vasishtha (Chudala Upakhyana) elaborate on this concept thus:

-- This three-functioned mind or Chitta is aNu, atomic, because it 'breathes', aniti, expands and contracts, and keeps moving incessantly, atati, and hence is called the AtmA-jIva-aNu;

-- Atma, really Omnipresent, therefore motionless, appears as moving (atat) when, colored by desire, vAsanA, it puts on a-khyAti (a-vidyA, a-jnAna), non-knowledge or forgetfulness of Its-Own-Nature, and, instead of Omnipresent, becomes aNu, a limited atom;

-- when enveloped in the triple organ and the five tan-mAtras, it is the experiencer-Chitta;

-- this sheathing is due to desire, will to live: the essence and core of mind may well be said to be desire'; while, no doubt, the three aspects of the mind are co-equal, yet, if a 'distinction between the prophets' may be made at all, we would have to say that very soul of soul is desire; for desire, emotion, the ruling passion, makes the individuality, the peculiarity and character of the person, is the individualising, finitising, characterising, distinguishing principle; any given person feels his separate existence most fully and keenly when he is expressing a particular emotion most intensely; creation of krtyAs, (Tibetan tulku) 'artificial' elementals and Devas, by means of mantras, i.e., manana, ideation, with intense desire, is only an illustration of this fact, as also the theosophical doctrine of 'individualising' of souls from lower into human kingdom under stress of intense emotion, like 'crystallisation' under stress of chemicophysical forces corresponding to emotions; 'desire is the shakti par excellence, shakti-tama;' cognition and action are shaktis only with the energy borrowed from desire.

Mind is World-Process

Yoga Vasishta (III.ch.84) says:

'The Chit-element in Chitta, is seed of omniscience; the Jada-element in it, is all this Jagat, moving illusion. Chitta, mind, contains all the World-Process within itself. It should be reflected upon, controlled, cultivated, refined'.

After all, is it not literally true, that every experience, and all that is contained or implied in it and by it, all its contents, is a mood of mind, a vrtti of antah-kararaNa, i.e., of the Self identified with, or imagining It-Self as, anttah-karaNa? To think, to say, 'this is my-self's experience, that is another-Self's experience, this mountain is outside of Me' is not all this, My experience or thought? Is not all distinguishing of one-Self and another-Self, together with both the thus distinguished selves, within the One Self which distinguishes? Indeed there is Only One Self which includes all selves and all not-selves, all thoughts and all things, all subjects and all objects.

Aspects of Mind

It is true that the ancient works lay stress on the indivisible oneness of mind, manas, in all its psychoses i.e., the psyche's functionings, moods, modes; thus:

'Love and passionate desire, resolve, doubt, faith, disbelief, patience, impatience, modesty, clear insight, fear--all these are but Manas, mind.' -- Brhad-Aranyaka, 1.v.3

These psychoses (mind's functions, mentations), are typical of the scores mentioned in different works of various schools of philosophy; e.g., Alochana, pure sensation, and pratyaksha, perception (which are the basis of all other mental operations, as said, in Sankhya Karika,30, and in Nyayabhashya, I.i.8),

adhyavasAya, or ascertainment, abhimAna, egoistic desire, sankalpa or vyavasAya, resolve, viparyaya or viparyAsa, error, samshaya, doubt, vikalpa, imagination, svapna, dreaming, nidrA, sleep, praty-avamarsha or pratyabhijnA, recognition, ichchhA, desire, rAga, liking, dvesha, disliking, krti, volition, abhi-sandhi, determination, anubhava, experience, presentation, smrti, memory, etc. all these are only moods of the one mind.

Names Vary with Functionings

From the Maha Upanishad and Yoga Vasishtha:

'Self-born Brahma spreads out the worlds by Manas. Wherever there is sankalpa-ideation, there is Manas at work. There is no difference between the two. When ideation ceases, Self As-One remains. It is indicated by such names as Atma. By and in ideation, Space-Time-Motion appear, and Chit-consciousness becomes kshetra-jna, cogniser of the 'field', the 'This'. Ideating vasana-desires, it becomes 'aham-kAra'-ego-ism; that, making determinations, free of doubt, a-kalanki, becomes 'buddhi'; that, forming an 'image', becomes 'manas': that, densifying, crystallising, becomes indriyas, sensor-and-motor-organs; these make up the body. Thus the jIva-soul, binding itself with bonds, like the silkworm imprisoning itself in a cocoon spun by itself, falls lower and lower into denser and denser matter. This one and the same Manas- Mind, according to its various functionings, is named now 'manas', now 'buddhi', now 'jnana ', again 'ichchhA', then 'kriya', now 'aham-kAra', now 'chitta', or prakrti, or maya, or malam, or karma, bandha, puri-ashtaka, or a-vidyA. All these are but various names of various functionings of one and the same ideating Manas-Mind'.

Still it is possible to distinguish three broad classes of functionings among these phenomena. This is explained in Tantra-loka ix., Prasna Upanishad IV.8, Sankhya Karika 23.24.37, Shabda Kalpa Druma, art. Antahkarana, Devi Bhagavatam VII.xxxii.. (For the actual verses, check pages 268-269 of the book).

So far there is no difficulty. There is a clear consensus in the above texts, that Buddhi is that faculty of the mind whose function is to ascertain facts, adhyavasaya, bodha, syati, nishchaya;

Aham-kara, to ego-ise, to connect all experiences with self, to reduce them to the sake of the selfishly-desiring self, abhimAna, sam-rambha, mati, garva;

Manas, to resolve upon which course to follow between doubtful alternatives, kalpana, mantavya, eshanA, ichchha, klrpti, samshaya or sankalpa-vikalpa;

Chitta, to memorise, to connect before and after, past and present and future, and also all the three, in itself, smarana, anu-sandhana.

Clearly the three first correspond to jnana, ichchha, kriya. But when we look for direct texts, we find some perplexing inconsistency in assigning the correspondence of gunas with the aspects. Tattva Sandoha, a Kashmira Shaiva work, for example, joins kriya and manas to tamas instead of rajas. Spanda Karika Vivrti (iv.20), however, assigns the correspondences correctly. Vatsyanana, Kama Sutra I.ii.44 uses abhimAna in the sense of desire, expressly, which Kautilya also repeats in Artha Shastra.

Perpetual Gyration of the Three

We may, on the whole, take the following to be the net result. Buddhi is the principle or faculty of cognition, knowing, understanding, intellection, reason, which ascertains and decides, 'this is so'; it corresponds to sattva; Samskrt names for its operations are, adhyavasAya, nishchaya, bodha, jnAna, upa-labdhi, etc.

Aham-kara is the principle or faculty of desiring (whereby the separateness of one-self is primarily accentuated), wishing (willing being, so to say, midway between wishing and acting), and of self-reference, individuation, personalisation, egoism, hence self-complacence, pride, etc.; it corresponds to tamas; Samskrt words for its functionings are ichchhA, abhi-mAna, sam-rambha, garva, eshanA (in the sense of vasana, craving, etc.).

Manas is the principle or faculty of action, volition, conation, determination (of what to do), resolve (after vacillation), attention (after distraction); it corresponds to rajas; Samskrt words for its activities are kriya, eshanA, (in the sense of seeking, anu-eshanA, going after), samshaya-vimarsha, sankalpa-vikalpa.

Chitta is the summation of the three, with the special feature or function of memory (and expectation), connecting before and after; Samskrt words here are chetayate, smaraNaam, anu-sandhAnam. The name Chitta, for individual mind or soul, is appropriately formed from the root-word Chit which means consciousness generally, ChetanA, Chitti. The Universal Consciouness or Chit, including all time, past, present, and future, is obviously the locus and the means of all memory. A portion, a slab, so to say, of this Universal Consciousness, gathered into a separate aggregate, with a definite reach backward and forward in time, becomes a Chitta; in this individual 'memory'--and an individual is but a 'memory,' a biography, a number of experiences in a certain order, so that individuality is lost and disappears, when, and to the extent that, memory is lost and disappears--the three other functions, of buddhi, etc,, are all incorporated.

The order of succession and rotation of the three classes of psychoses, cognitive, affective, conative, is indicated in the following:

'Out of knowledge arises desire; out of desire, krti (or prayatna), i.e., volition: out of that, effort; out of that, action.' -- Shandilya

'First comes knowledge (of a thing); then the wish to obtain it; then the purposeful effort, abhi-sandhi; then the action; then the fruit.' -- Mahabharata., Shanti Parva, ch.204

jnAnati, knows; then icchati, desires; then yatate, endeavours--this is one of the commonplaces of Nyaya. It is obvious that intention, purpose, will, volition, conation, innervation, exertion, muscular effort, are all intermediate states of transition from desire to action.

In Puranic mythical and anthropomorphic symbology, for purposes of concrete devotional worship, Vasudeva-Krshna (an incarnation of Vishnu-sattva, representing knowledge, wisdom); his brother Sankarshana-Balarama (of Rudra-tamas, representing the anger-half of desire); his son Pradyumna (of Kama-Eros, representing the love-half thereof); and his grandson A-niruddha (the 'unrestrained', representing action, rajas), stand, respectively, for chitta, buddhi or mahat, the two subdivisions (anger and love) of ahamkAra, and for manas respectively (Bhagavata, III, xxvi.)

Intermediate Stages

'Smrti, memory, has the past for object; mati, expectation, opinion, the future, the coming; buddhi, perception, the present, that which is immediately before it; pra-jnA, the higher mentation, thinking, ranges over and covers, simultaneously, all three divisions of time'. -- Nyaya

'Wish to hear i.e., to learn, scientific curiosity', attentive listening i.e. absorption of knowledge, apprehension, retention, inferential reasoning and acceptance of a fact, (similar) rejection or refutation (of an alleged fact), understanding of purport and purpose, knowledge or grasp of the essential truth (of a subject)--these are the eight functions of dhih, intelligence'; (from dha, to place, to do, to deposit; dhiyante pad-arthAh asyAm iti dhih, that in which all meanings of words, i.e., notions of things meant by words, are deposited; dhi is a synonym for buddhi).'

'Sensation, perception, concrete or factual knowledge, abstract thought or conceptual knowledge or generalisation, retentive intelligence, view (or outlook, doctrine), resolute fortitude (or determination), opinion, independence of mind, propensity, memory or recollection, imaginative ideation, volition, asu or prANa or innervation (of a motor organ or muscle, with nerve-energy, by volitional effort for action), kAma-desire, vasha-capability or will-power all these are only different names (of different aspects or functions) of pra-jnAna-consciousness'. -- Aitareya, III.2

Mind is Brahma, is All

'By manas-mind, man resolves, 'may I study mantras', and studies; 'may I do (such-and-such) acts', and does; 'may I desire children and domestic animals, and (the joys and riches of) this world and also the next', and desires; manas is the soul, the Self, is all this world (i.e. all these worlds, all this, all objects); it is Brahma; manas should be meditated on, propitiated, worshipped, given devotion to (i.e. should be purified, elevated, strengthened)'; 'Chitta remembers'. -- Chhandogya, vii.3 and vii.5

The same three functions, jnana-ichchhA-kriyA, cognition-desire-action, with the fourth all-connecting all-including memory-expectation-consciousness, are clearly indicated in these sentences of the Chhandogya. Incidentally, it may be noted that Plato, in 'Republic, Bk. iv', (Jowett's translation), distinguishes "three principles of the Soul, Reason, Desire, and Passion or Spirit or Anger"; which is very feeble; in view of what Indian tradition says, from Upanishats downwards; "passion or spirit or anger" is only one part of 'desire', and "reason" only one part of 'cognition', and 'volition-action' is not discerned and counted at all by Plato.

Mahabharata, Shanti-parva, chs: 238, 254, 258, (also 203, 268, 281, and others) says:

'Mabat-Manas manifested first, fast-rushing, far-travelling, ever-going, desiring-and-doubting (affirming-and-denying, imagining-and-effacing).' ... 'Beyond Manas is buddhi; beyond buddhi is Atma' ... 'When buddhi undergoes emotion or any definite functioning with reference to a specific object, it becomes manas.' ... 'Buddhi determines, resolves, ascertains, makes sure; manas expounds, specifies.'

May this Mind be Holy

There is a grand hymn to Manas, of six mantras (verses), in Yajur-Veda, which emphasises the all-enmeshing quality and speed of the mind:

'This Mind of mine, which wanders far when (I am) awake, and comes back (to me) when (I am) asleep; which is the one Light of lights; which is known as pra-jnAna and chetas and dhrti, (knowledge, desire-memory, and will-volition-action), Immortal Inner Light of all living beings, without which nothing can be done, which encompasses all past, present, and future worlds, in which are interwoven all the minds of all beings may that Mind of mine ever ideate holy thoughts, ever function auspiciously, beneficently'.

Chitta has been said in some of the above texts, to connect all three divisions of time. As memory, it is cognition of an object with the additional cognition of 'past-ness', in the sequence of its experience; as expectation, of future-ness; as direct perception, of presentness; (see The Mahatma
Letters, p. 194, re Time). Other texts assign the same power to prajnA; others to buddhi; they ascribe reasoning also to the two: it is obvious that reasoning, inference, proceeds from past experience to future similar experience, connects memory and expectation. The incessant flow and flux, the kaleidoscopic assumptions of ever new forms and figures by the very same few pieces of differently coloured glass, which goes on perpetually in these subtle regions of the mind, has been referred to before; each function passes into another, imperceptibly as it were.

atanu
22 October 2007, 01:25 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~
namaste atanu (et.al).
-----
If the mind is Universal Mind ( and I am all for it), why then would each rishi, each guru, swami, each realized being, and exponent of Reality not have the same concepts and philosophy of Brahman, of Siva? of Mother Divine? of Shakti? If accessing the same mind? the same database.
Could it be lesh avidya? for those that are new to this term, it is the remnants of ignorance that are left. Say one has a butter-ball in their hands. They put this ball down, yet remain on their hands is this film, the remains of holding the ball. Like that, when Moksha dawns, there is a residue of ignorance that remains - this keeps the tattvas intact, so one is not completely absorbed into Brahman. This is how my teacher has explained it.

pranams,

Namaste Yajvan,

First case. Laya Samadhi, like sleep, does not uproot the ego sense, which is called a granthi. In that case, absorption into Brahman is not complete and the diversified universe will sprout as diverse and not as One Brahman.

Second case. Following the teaching of Mandukya that 'The advaita atma must be known', we may safely conclude that knowing advaita atman is being advaita atman (devoid of individual ego). This is also spoken of in Gita as immortality. And this was the main difference that Shankara had with VA proponents of his time.

But for a teacher, who is jivan mukta who has uprooted the individual ego, the recourse to language will definitely create some diversity though the intent and content is One. Vak is One at OM level only.

I do not see any problem.


Om

Eastern Mind
22 October 2007, 05:52 PM
There is a story of Subramuniyaswami's guru, Yogaswami of Sri Lanka, while on pilgrimage to South India, meeting with the beloved Ramana Maharshi. The story goes that they just sat in 'summu iru' together for a few hours, neither saying anything. When asked later, one or both said to the devotee, "nothing to say" . Aum Namasivaya

atanu
23 October 2007, 04:27 AM
There is a story of Subramuniyaswami's guru, Yogaswami of Sri Lanka, while on pilgrimage to South India, meeting with the beloved Ramana Maharshi. The story goes that they just sat in 'summu iru' together for a few hours, neither saying anything. When asked later, one or both said to the devotee, "nothing to say" . Aum Namasivaya

Namaste Eastern Mind,

Ramana was very drastic on a few points. He taught that silence is the most potent communication. Words, he said, were like glowing of bulbs, which obstruct the flow of electricity and reduce the potential difference.

For highest achievers, all transmission between Maharshi and others was through silence, since he never considered that there was another. So, he could not teach and assume a position of Guru also.

Surprisingly, he had a silent meeting with Somerset Maugham.

Regards,

Om

yajvan
23 October 2007, 09:06 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste Eastern Mind,

For highest achievers, all transmission between Maharshi and others was through silence, since he never considered that there was another. So, he could not teach and assume a position of Guru also.

Surprisingly, he had a silent meeting with Somerset Maugham.

Regards, Om

Namaste atanu, EM (et.al)
yet that silence is rich with Supreme Consciousness... If we were talking as Kasmir Saivites, this offering of Maharshi and the native, the native would be ready and sambhavopaya would be the method.

This is also called icca sakti or the Will of God, His sakti or energy. There is no means or procedure the sadhu needs to exercise. He is ready ( ripe) for the Grace of the Master. They say in this condition you ( the sadhu) does not exist only the Master, only that Supreme State. This is why silence is the means... what needs to be said?


pranams,

yajvan
24 December 2007, 11:11 AM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste,
this string is something we started in October... many had views on what the mind is ( or is not). I thought to add one idea that is found in the Yoga Vasișțha.

Sri Ram asks, tell me what the mind really is.
Vasișțha replies, Even as empty inert nothingness is known as space, mind is empty nothingness. Whether the mind is real or unreal it is that which is apprehended in objects of perception. Rama, thought is mind; this is no distinction between the two.

Yoga Vasișțha, On Creation Chap 3.4

pranams

yajvan
27 December 2007, 08:21 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,

"Mind' is a common subject in the Yoga Vasișțha. I thought to add a few ideas on this matter for your consideration.

Vasișțha muni speaking to Sri Ram:

Motion is natural to prana and when it moves in consciousness mind arises; then the conditioning¹ keeps the prana in motion. When one (of them) is arrested, (then) both fall. - Yoga Vasișțha, Upasanti Prakaranam 5.91

Mind is only perception, and perception is movement in consciousness. The expression of this movement is action and the fruition follows this. Mind is an intention arising in the omnipotent and infinite consciounsss. Though non-different from the infinite consciousnessm it thinks that is is. Yoga Vasișțha, Utpatti Prakaranam 3.96

pranams


1. Conditioning in part, are vasanas that reside in us. More on vasanas if interested, at: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=77&page=9&highlight=vasanas

Bob G
27 December 2007, 11:16 PM
mind is ever shifting patterns seen by ever lasting spirit.

yajvan
28 December 2007, 04:56 PM
Hari Om
~~~~~


Namaste,

Vasișțha muni speaks to Sri Ram:

This mind is inert and is not a real entity: hence it is forever dead! Yet beings in this world are killed by this dead thing. How mysterious is this stupidity! The mind has no self, no body, no support and no form, yet by this mind is everything consumed in this world. This indeed is the great mystery. - Yoga Vasișțha, Upasanti Prakaranam 5.13

Bob G
29 December 2007, 08:16 AM
Good quote Yajvan!

And I'd add if I may that It will always remain a great mystery to "mind" which can never solve it.

(where as Spirit knows instantly without effort)