Care to Discuss this? Consciousness

[atanu]

---at some point.

No, light need not have mass for black holes to pull it in. The basic quanta of light, photons, have no mass or charge. Light does, however, carry energy. Remember the famous equation E=mc^2. So, energy carried by light has a mass equivalence and cannot escape blackholes.

A.

Namaste Agnideva and to all,

Yes, I think so. Quantum-mechanical calculations have deduced that this universe of apparent huge mass has no mass. Quarks self generate, mix, create, and also vanish. Possibly, mass/weight is manifestation of attraction and repulsion that crop up within this mass less infinite chidakasha. But who cares?

--------------

Trying to use science (which is a way to try to understand nature) to rationalise meditative knowledge will surely lead to disaster. This was pointed by Galileo to Church, who were so fixated on the earlier apparently settled scientific/philosophic concepts that they declared Galileo a heretic. And later ate humble pie.

It is better to meditate and thus equipped with tranquility continue to do whatever is required -- be it scientific enquiry.

There is no need to rationalise shruti, that is my view. Shri Willie et al.'s smart observations notwithstanding, since genuine innocent enquiry and cynicism based on settled bias can be easily discriminated.

-------------------------

Similarly,

If only Shri VC says that he cannot discern whether he exists or not, then only we can accept his questions on consciousness as innocent questions. This is so since Shri Sarabhanga clarified in a small sentence: Consciousness is the essence of 'I am'.

Om

[saidevo]

Namaste everyone.

Now that we are at it, what are your opinions about Conscience vis-�-vis Consciousness? Conscience is the mana shAksi, the witness born by the mind to our activities. I remember to have read an advice by Kanchi Paramacharya that the mind should only remain a witness and not try to judge, hence the term mana shAksi.

Since the mind itself comprises manas, chit and ahamkAra, where does this conscience fit in? When we do something wrong, the conscience pricks us. Morally upright and wise people are called the conscience keepers.

Please let me have your opinions about this faculty of conscience and its connection to consciousness.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste everyone.

Now that we are at it, what are your opinions about Conscience vis-à-vis Consciousness? Conscience is the mana shAksi, the witness born by the mind to our activities. I remember to have read an advice by Kanchi Paramacharya that the mind should only remain a witness and not try to judge, hence the term mana shAksi.

Since the mind itself comprises manas, chit and ahamkAra, where does this conscience fit in? When we do something wrong, the conscience pricks us. Morally upright and wise people are called the conscience keepers.

Please let me have your opinions about this faculty of conscience and its connection to consciousness.

Namaste saidevo,
When you first mentioned this my thoughts did not go to conscience, but to mind. Why so? This mind, mana, from some of the readings I have pursued suggests the mind is a fluctuation ( per Patanjali); Once stilled or arrested it goes away.

Others have said that mind is not a source of knowledge, perhaps not a reliable source; It is an instrument of action that can help knowledge enter into the human system and then illumine it for use. I do not see these two points as opposing, only giving some dimension to 'mind'.

This is where I see 'conscience' come to play - that which illuminates. Hence the words of Kanchi Paramacharya that the mind should only remain a witness, may apply. Yet our judging comes quickly.
One can say 'mind' is not doing this , it is buddhi, the intellect supported by viveka, or discrimination. That said then which functions do you wish to attribute to the mind?

This mind, for those looking to realize Atman/SELF may be on a short leash and soon to be extinguished ( I hope).

Just a thought - let see what others have to say on this matter.

pranams,

[atanu]

Namaste everyone.

--Please let me have your opinions about this faculty of conscience and its connection to consciousness.

Namaste Saidevoji,


This is an excellent aspect that you have brought to notice. There is mention of Viveka as the Supreme, within the consciousness. It is the Seer. When the Seer is known, all is then Seer only.

That is how it is, when I-ME-Mine' is truly thrown away as a lie.

Brahma (Consciousness as creator) is not another from Rudra (Pure Consciousness), but Rudra (as Manyu--anger arising of Viveka) tears away one head to make the creator Brahma (which is the thinking mind) and deny to it the omniscience. Those who are intent on creation as 'I-Me-Mine", will have no omniscience and no remembrance of the fullness before the small i developed and lusted.

Please enlighten us on this matter. Some upanishads (i think Br. Ar. Upanishad) have specific mention on this.

Om Namah Shivaya

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Saidevo et al.

Brahma is one, and in absolute unity with Brahma there is unimpaired Consciousness, beyond any dualistic notions of morality or conscience.

Yama is two (twain or twin), and the divided creation is ultimately bound by the restraints of Yama.

yama and yamanI (yamA or yamI) are the essential pair ~ the reins of divine restraint.

This yamau (yamanIyama or yamaniyama) may also be considered as yama + niyama, and Patanjali elaborates them as follows:

ahiMsAsatyAsteyabrahmacaryAparigrahA yamAH [Yoga Sutra 2.30]

shaucasaMtoSatapaHsvAdhyAyeshvarapraNidhAnAni niyamAH [Yoga Sutra 2.32]

The yamAH are normally counted as a list of five “Restraints”:

ahiMsA satyA asteya brahmacarya aparigrahA

Which is normally interpreted as: “Harmlessness, Truthfulness, Not Stealing, Chastity, and Poverty”

However, merely by prolonging a single vowel (from ya to yA), the following truth is revealed:

ahiMsAsatyAsteyAbrahmacaryAparigrahAyamAH

ahiMsA satyA aste yAH brahmacaryA parigrahAH yamAH

“Harmlessness and Truthfulness, unto Death, which (are) the Foundations of Divine Life, the Restraints”

No man can attain Brahma without first passing Yama!

When we know that we are being untruthful or causing injury, it is then that our Conscience (the yamadUta) pricks ~ and it is wise to take heed of this warning.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

It is clear that Consciousness is the essence of “I am”.

Namaste sarabhanga,
Yes, what you say is true.

Another view as I see it, Consciousness is the essence of all things in the final analysis. This is not a foreign idea to HDF. The Aitareyaopanishad has a nice sutra (5.2) that expands this idea. I use Swami Sivananda's view as I think he does an exceptional translation with it:

That which is known as the heart(hridayam), this mind (mana), consciousness ( Sivanananda uses samjnanam for this, which I like), mastery, knowledge of arts, comprehension (prajnanam), power of retaining the import of books (medha), percpetion, fortitude (dhtitih), reflection (matih), indepentdent power of thinking, distress of mind caused by dis-ease (jutih), memory and volition (smriti and sankalpha), application, any pursuit for maintenance of life, desire, (kama), even of women (vasah), all these ( iti savani or thus all) are indeed beome the names of consciousness ( prajnanasya).

I rather like this Upanishad - because in our present string of thought in this particular thread, it assists us with this notion of consciousness. Yet in this sutra Sivananda ji closely associates consciousness ( prajnanasya) and comprehension (prajnanam). What are your thoughts on this? can we take apart the words a bit and see , at their roots, if this holds water?

I am intrigued that this consciousness, we apply daily (some say it applies us daily!) is so close to us, that it is not a 'drop in the bucket' to describe; And it is so robust. We have the ability to think about thinking, and to become aware of our own awareness. This is the key of why (IMHO) we can then experience consciousness all by it self
and that is the SELF.

For me, and I have remained consistent in my view on this , consciousness applied is that of being conscious. Yet for some that too is abstract. Yet awareness is not. My teacher has always associated pure awareness = pure consciousness and also = pure intelligence. This purity is found in the Transcendent, niguna Brahman.

So , at the end of the day, this consciousness is pure, without bounds, and is of infinite intelligence as it is the raw materials of perfect order in this universe - from the sub-atomic particles to the galaxies found in akasha. Yet in me, in us, its this simple awareness, this delicate level of life that we say we are living, because we are aware of our surroundings, space, and time.

How could one not be in awe of this Brahman, this fullness?

[sarabhanga]

Namaste Yajvan,

The �3rd state� of Consciousness is known as prAj�a, and the genitive (�of the 3rd state�) is prAj�asya.

The Aitareyopanishad, however, uses the term pra-j�Ana (�great knowledge or wisdom�) and the genitive praj�Anasya (�of great wisdom�).

praj�A (�wisdom�) is the basis of the world. Verily, praj�Ana (�great wisdom�) is brahma.

As �deep sleep�, prAj�a is pra-aj�a (�very unconscious�), and this is quite different to the �great intelligence� of pra-j�A.