Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté



    As of late much of my attention has been going to this subject. That is, pramāda & pramāṇa of Self (ātman). What do these words mean ?
    • pramāda of ātman - negligence , carelessness about, error i.e. forgetfulness of one's own Self. The yoga of ignorance. The ~union~ (yoga) of the Self with the non-Self.
    • pramāṇa¹ of Self (ātman) - a means of acquiring pramā¹ or certain knowledge of Self.
      The recognition of one's own Self or some call svarūpa - one's own form or shape or real nature
      in full. That is, in ignorance (pramāda) w
      e know only the spark; with the blossoming of pramāṇa we come to know the whole flame.
    Why so and what can we say or sumise from pramāda & pramāṇa ? The next few posts will offer a few ideas on this matter.

    iti śiva

    words
    • pramāṇa
      • Within vedānta there are generally 6 considered:
        • pratyakṣa - perception by the senses
        • anumāna - inference
        • upamāna ,- analogy or comparison
        • śabda or āpta-vacana , verbal authority , revelation
        • an-upalabdhi or abhāva-pratyakṣa - non-perception or negative proof
        • arthāpatti , inference from circumstances
      • the nyāya system considers 4 , excluding the last two from above
      • the sāṃkhya views is of 3 - pratyakṣa , anumāna, and śabda
    • pramā - right knowledge; correct knowlege; to understand
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  2. #2
    Join Date
    November 2010
    Posts
    1,278
    Rep Power
    1637

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    It would be useful in any discussion of prama and pramana, to know how the concept of knowledge is conceived and discussed in Indian philosophy.

    Indian philosophy believes that knowledge is episodic in nature. i.e. to say that I/he/she has knowledge, is to say that a certain episode or event has occurred. Indian philosophy does not subscribe to the view that knowledge is dispositional. An example of dispositional knowledge is that I have dispositional knowledge that Delhi is the capital of India even when I am asleep and have no event/episode occurring within my brain, etc. that corresponds to Delhi being the capital of India.

    In Indian philosophy, thus, I do not have (episodic) knowledge that Delhi is the capital of India when I am asleep.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté

    Quote Originally Posted by wundermonk View Post
    It would be useful in any discussion of prama and pramana, to know how the concept of knowledge is conceived and discussed in Indian philosophy.

    Indian philosophy believes that knowledge is episodic in nature. i.e. to say that I/he/she has knowledge, is to say that a certain episode or event has occurred. Indian philosophy does not subscribe to the view that knowledge is dispositional. An example of dispositional knowledge is that I have dispositional knowledge that Delhi is the capital of India even when I am asleep and have no event/episode occurring within my brain, etc. that corresponds to Delhi being the capital of India.

    In Indian philosophy, thus, I do not have (episodic) knowledge that Delhi is the capital of India when I am asleep.

    Here are my views on this matter...
    In sanātana dharma you ARE knowledge, pure knowledge. Its ~fabric~ is pure consciousness, which is the ~personality~ of Being.
    (I will offer a point of view on this matter but do not think it is the right moment as yet); that said, the only episode to know this is re-recognition of one's own Self ( code for Being, atman)

    When one's awareness (consciousness applied) is turned outward (sūtta-parāṅ¹), then there is diversity and the world, which we come to know in discrete packets (episodes as you call it). When the awareness is allowed to settled down within itself or turned inwards (sūttāntara¹) then this fertile field of pure awareness comes into play.
    This all has to be expanded upon so one sees the ripe fruit that can come from this...
    That said, I thought muruganar-ji¹ has said it quite elegantly (poignantly is probably a better term):

    That consciousness, the Reality, exists as 'you'; but instead of you becoming still (sūttāntara - my word not muruganar-ji's) as that consciousness through that consciousness , you are ruining yourself by enquiring into the nature of that world that has arisen from that consciousness that is yourself.

    I see this as very insightful. It ( to me) is one paragraph that defines the human condition and the rise of relative knowledge in the world.

    iti śivaṁ

    words
    • sūtta-parāṅ = sūtta+parāṅ = entirely given + directed outwards or towards the outer world
    • sūttāntara = sūtta + āntara = entirely given + inwards, interior
    • muruganar-ji - considered rāmaṇa mahaṛṣi's key putrīya (disciple or śiṣya)
    Last edited by yajvan; 28 January 2014 at 08:08 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  4. #4

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    Namaste,

    Yavan Ji thank you for this thought provoking posting.
    If I might ask a question as to your interpretation: When you say "Relative knowledge", do you perhaps imply differentiated knowledge, or are you referring to knowledge of the relative nature of knowledge?

    Thank you kindly for your clarification.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté

    Quote Originally Posted by Mana View Post
    Namaste,
    Yavan Ji thank you for this thought provoking posting.
    If I might ask a question as to your interpretation: When you say "Relative knowledge", do you perhaps imply differentiated knowledge, or are you referring to knowledge of the relative nature of knowledge?

    Thank you kindly for your clarification.
    What you ask has some finer points... relative knowledge is predicated on differentiated ( fractured, limited) consciousness. It is the world of objects , size, speed, differences of big , small, good/bad, up/down, in/out, wake/dream/sleep, etc. and therefore relative. It is relative because you can only say something is fast compared to something is slow - something is big compared to something that this small.

    The relative nature of knowledge within the differentiated level of awareness is by nature a comparison of various levels of knowledge that is gained outside the wholeness of Self, of Being. It is not including the wholeness ( pūrṇā¹) ; it is the investigation of the ~many~ apart from the whole. So, it is relative... this does not say it is not useful - what would we do without physics, chemistry, etc ?

    Yet the knowledge of the whole (bhūman¹) by default contains within it all the diversity of the limited ( or relative field of life). This knowledge to know it, is to be it. It is not an object of inspection.

    This is where there is some difficulty. We are groomed to be the good student, to inspect, and measure, quantify. Yet this fullness is beyond measure. As muruganar-ji¹ has said, that consciousness, the Reality, exists as 'you' . We are going to look for our hat and its on our head already and we continue to look and look. This is the pickle of being human. We wish to find home as one sits in their own kitchen.

    iti śivaṁ
    • pūrṇā - filled , full , filled ; whole, complete , all , entire
    • bhūman - plentifully , abundantly
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  6. #6
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté

    If we look to the īśavāsyopaniṣad¹ it informs us of ātmahano janāḥ i.e. the person or creature ( janāḥ ) that is the killer (hano) of the Self or ātman.
    Not knowing one's Self (ātman) and living in ignorance is equal to one that has killed one's Self. Within this HDF string it is equal to
    pramāda of ātman - negligence , carelessness about, error i.e. forgetfulness of one's own Self. This is the gravity the upaniṣad-s offer us regarding this matter.


    And what of pramāṇa¹ of Self (ātman) ? One is looked upon as the vīra¹ some use the term dhṛṣaj while others call him/her dhīra.
    The word dhīra¹ is that of dhī+ra . The fire (ra) of intelligence (dhī) that is kindled within.

    iti śivaṁ

    words
    • īśavāsyopaniṣad = īśavāsya upaniṣad - we find this knowledge in the 3rd śloka
    • pramāṇa = pramā - right knowledge; correct knowledge; to understand
    • dhīra is rooted in dhṛ meaning steady , constant , firm , resolute , brave , energetic , courageous , Self-possessed
    • vīra - heroic , powerful , strong , excellent
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  7. #7
    Join Date
    November 2010
    Posts
    1,278
    Rep Power
    1637

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    See above
    Couple of points/thoughts:

    (1)What is the difference between knowledge and consciousness?

    (2)Is knowledge intentional? i.e. is knowledge always "of" something other than itself? Related to this - what would pure consciousness be? It seems to me pure consciousness is not "of" something other than itself.

    (3)Can pure consciousness be an object of another cognition?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté


    Quote Originally Posted by wundermonk View Post
    Couple of points/thoughts:

    (1)What is the difference between knowledge and consciousness?

    (2)Is knowledge intentional? i.e. is knowledge always "of" something other than itself? Related to this - what would pure consciousness be? It seems to me pure consciousness is not "of" something other than itself.

    (3)Can pure consciousness be an object of another cognition?
    These are most excellent questions... as is the statement you made in post 2:
    I do not have (episodic) knowledge that Delhi is the capital of India when I am asleep.
    This sleep needs to be considered at a later date; a very telling level of being.

    Addressing your questions on knowledge and consciousness.
    We are taught that knowledge is structured in consciousness. Nothing is outside of consciousness is another way to say it.

    Is knowledge intentional ? I think you clarify the question, 'is knowledge of some thing other then itself ?' Consciousness has a Self-referral quality to it. In kaśmiri śaivism the notion is that Being in-and-of-itself has this quality of Self-referral - that is , it is considered spanda. This word means vibration, throbbing , throb , quiver. It is the quality that Being (consciousness) is aware of itSelf. So, it does not have to be outward facing.
    We find this notion in the bhāgavad gītā , chapter 9 , 8th śloka:

    prakṛtim svām avastabhya
    visrjami punaḥ punaḥ |
    bhūta-grāmam imaṁ kṛtsnam
    avaśaṁ prakṛter vaśāt ||

    This says, curving back (leaning, resting-upon or avaṣṭabhya) onto my SELF (svām) I create (visṛjāmi) again and again (punaḥ punaḥ) |
    All this (kṛtsnam) which exists ( manifestation and variety bhūta-grāmam) , that comes into creation (prakṛti) is done by my authority or command (vaśāt) ||

    The quality of the Supreme ( pure & stainless consciousness) has to Itself this Self-referral property.

    Yet we as humans are mostly outward facing (sūtta-parāṅ¹). The orientation of 3's (tripuṭā) are front and center i.e. me, you, them or it. We sometimes say 1st person, 2nd person and 3rd person. Our thoughts reside in these 3 arena-s all day until we fall asleep and even 1st person (me-ness) is no longer there.

    Can pure consciousness be the object of another ? Pure consciousness is the ~apparatus~ that allows the perception of 'other' to be experienced. It is final, and there is nothing that takes it to be the object. This is why so many adhikārin-s (aspirants of liberation) may miss the point. They are looking for an object to experience as the Self. That in some way there is 'you' and there is this Self that is an object to experience. This final 'you' and this Self are non-different.

    There is a bit more I'd like to offer on knowledge and consciousness and it comes to us via the brilliance of śrī siddharameśvara maharāj¹ ; I will offer it in the next post.


    iti śivaṁ

    • sūtta-parāṅ = sūtta+parāṅ = entirely given + directed outwards or towards the outer world
    • Śrī siddharameśvara maharāj , guru of śrī nisargadatta maharāj ; śrī ranjit maharāj was a co-disciple
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  9. #9
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté

    There is a bit more I'd like to offer on knowledge and consciousness and it comes to us via the brilliance of śrī siddharameśvara maharāj¹ ...


    śrī siddharameśvara maharāj¹ offers the following -

    Knowledge or consciousness presents itself to the aspirant in two ways:
    • When there is an object in Consciousness it becomes 'objective knowledge' and
      one will experience it as knowledge of objects.
    • When there is no object, it is experienced as objectiveless knowledge or 'pure consciousness'
    - - - -
    The point to be made is this - when there is an object it is objective knowledge; when there is no object there is simply 'knowledge' which is pure awareness. So, by looking at it this way we can see how knowledge and pure awareness are aligned.

    One must consider what an object is... sure it is a ball, car, sky, family members, house. But it too are thoughts , they are ~objects~ that are subtle, as are feelings and emotions.
    When all objects are extinct within the mind-frame, then what is left with pure awareness, pure knowledge;
    As this awareness allows objects to be known,and can be called is pure knowledge.
    This is why the wise can infer that knowledge is structured in consciousness.

    iti śivaṁ


    1. śrī siddharameśvara maharāj - we will find this information in the book titled Master of Self-realization, An Ultimate Understanding, p. 41. ISBN 978-578-02789-0
    Last edited by yajvan; 28 January 2014 at 08:13 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  10. #10
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    66
    Posts
    7,705
    Rep Power
    186

    Re: pramāda & pramāṇa ...

    hari o
    ~~~~~~
    namasté

    Yet we as humans are mostly outward facing (sūtta-parāṅ). The orientation of 3's (tripuṭā) are front and center i.e. me, you, them or it. We sometimes say 1st person, 2nd person and 3rd person. Our thoughts reside in these 3 arena-s all day until we fall asleep and even 1st person (me-ness) is no longer there

    This sleep mode of being is quite revealing to the one that may be practicing ātmaiṣṭa¹. I will yield to how ramaṅa mahaṛṣi offers this insight and share it with the reader ( I will add my comments in parentheses along the way):
    ramaṅa mahaṛṣi : before we proceed further do you admit you exist in your sleep ?
    questioner: yes , I do.
    ramaṅa mahaṛṣi: you are the same person that is now awake, it that not so ?
    questioner: yes.
    ramaṅa mahaṛṣi: so, there is a continuity in sleep and the waking state. What is the continuity ? It is the state of pure being.
    questioner: but I am not aware in my sleep.
    ramaṅa mahaṛṣi: true, there is no awareness of the body or of the world (objects). But you must exist in your sleep in order to say now 'I was not aware in my sleep'. Who says so now (at this moment of questioning) ? It is the wakeful person. That is to say the individual (ego) who is now identifying the Self (ātman) with the body says that such awareness did not exist in sleep.
    - - - - -
    The point is, it is the ego that says 'but I am not aware in my sleep'. It is the ego that says ' I am the one that sees' and when this ego does not see anything in sleep it loses hold of the person, of the tight connection of impersonating the Self.
    When we are awake and the ego is fed all day, it is this differentiated awareness. It roams in the forest of the senses. At each turn there is something to eat. Even in dream state it has ~food~. Yet in deep sleep the ego has nothing to eat and consciousness becomes undifferentiated and rests in its natural state. There is no object to experience ( no feelings, body-awareness, objects for consumption) so it (the ego) says I was totally unaware of anything. This is true -
    totally unaware of A N Y T H I N G , any object of experience. But what remains ? Being, perfect homogeneous Being.

    This Being's (sat¹) fabric is pure (stainless¹) awareness. In us we may say it is pure silence - this is beyond keeping one's lips sealed. That is why within the upaniṣad-s we are told uccāra-rahitam vastu - Reality is devoid ( indescribable ) of utterance.

    So, one asks, yajvan what fun can there be in only understanding that sleep is undifferentiated awareness if I cannot do anything with it; that I have to wait some 16 hrs. before I dive back into this undifferentiated awareness.

    So begins one's practice or sādhana to make this undifferentiated awareness a regular experience for all time.
    My teacher called it restful alertness; ramaṅa mahaṛṣi has called it 'distinguished sleep' . He says, it is the glorious state wherein the mind (ego) has died , even deep sleep will become God-consciousness.

    There are more technical names for this state of being - one being samādhi¹. But how is this connected to the original post of pramāda & pramāṇa of Self (ātman) ? When one cycles though wake, dream, and sleep and does not have an inclining of one's own Self, this is pramāda (negligence). But when one says wait a minute, even in this cycle of wake , dream and sleep there is this Being and here is one way to begin to think about it... this becomes the dawning of pramāṇa.

    iti śivaṁ

    words
    • ātmaiṣṭa = ātma+ iṣṭa = Self + saught i.e. the pursuit of Self.
    • sat - that which really is , entity or existence , essence (sārāḥ)
    • stainless - niṣkalaṅka - without blemish
    • samādhi - union , a whole , aggregate ; wholeness; one-pointedness.
    Last edited by yajvan; 28 January 2014 at 06:24 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •