Care to Discuss this? Consciousness

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

I add my bit so that the matter may proceed with more questions.
Beneath that modified consciousness (wave) exists the real one.
Om

Namaste Atanu (et.al)


Waves and oceans are used in the Upanishads to define the richness and vastness of consciousness. We thank you Atanu for this post this, as you bring 3 things for consideration: The wave, the ocean and avastha (states). Care to kick around some of these ideas?

The Wave - I see the wave as the individual. When the wave rises out of the ocean, it is as it it thinks I am wave; hey look! there are other waves, look at all of them! None of the waves look down to see the connection to the vast ocean. The waves rise and change shape, some crash into the rocks (karma I guess?) some fall back to the ocean. Yet the true value of the wave is the expression of the ocean to rise up.

Yet, as Kaos said several posts ago - its all about quantity and quality.
We as the wave may not have the mass of the ocean, but we are the exact quality, in every manner. We are the stuff of the ocean. This ocean is the ocean of consciousness that connects all things. Each wave, each being.

And these avastha's or 3 states some call prajna, taijasa and visva [wake, dream and sleep] , do care to comment on these? We will get to turiya from here, but do you care to prepare the soil first?

pranams,

[saidevo]

Namaste.

The wave, the ocean and avastha (states). Care to kick around some of these ideas?

The wave and the ocean are opposites: the wave is not the ocean, and the ocean is not the wave. Yet they coexist, perhaps eternally. For this coexistence, a state or relationship is required, which keeps the multiplicity of the unity going.

The waves are only a fraction of the ocean, just as the universe is only a fraction of Brahman. The course for a wave is to rise, spread and fall, and this cycle goes on. The underlying ocean is static, though it projects the waves on itself.

The waves are bound by the cycle of rise and fall inside the cycle of time set in space. The ocean is not so bound. However much a wave rises in its worldly heights and feels proud about it, it should yet fall back into its source. The wave that realizes this truth of its impermanence would rather skim along the surface of the ocean, turned inward, with no ambitions of its own, ready to fall back anytime to its source.

The waves are packets of Discrete Consciousness derived from the Absolute Consciousness of the ocean. A wave that limits itself into its own individual consciousness never realizes that it is a part of the ocean. It is to realize its unity with the ocean that the wave is given the three states of existence.

If we stretch this analogy a little further, we find that the ocean itself stands on land! So we may say that the land that supports the ocean is the Nirguna Brahman and the ocean the Saguna Brahman that spawns the Jivas of waves.

The ocean is the Self, the 'A' (Atma) of the sacred letter AUM. The wave is the Not-Self, the 'U' (AnAtma); the 'M', niSedha or negation is the bond, the relation or the state between them that emanates creation and destruction. Thus the whole picture is evolved from the single sacred letter AUM.

[Znanna]

Namaste,

To me, the wave is the ocean and vice versa.

What is the ocean but a commingling of many many drops which are moving in synchronicity?

I think the massive, infinite whole is a reflection of its parts. Like a hologram, each angle is the entire yet a piece.

YMMV



ZN

[willie]

Say what? This only shows that the people who wrote these book had a very poor understanding of the waves and oceans.

Waves are mainly caused by wind, underwater disturbances like seismic events and to some extent the moon and tides.

A wave can move as a current underwater till it encounters the shore, where it rises up to become a wave. Waves break over because the top part moves faster than the bottom part when a shore slope is encountered.

In the US the great lakes can have some vicious waves during storms so saltwater is not a requirement.

[Nuno Matos]

Namaste Willie


Thank you!
But let me remind you that if theres a use for metaphors the field of Philosophies and human Psychology are its natural houses.
Metaphors are natural human forms of Self expression they enrich intellect and communication.
What is mean by waves and the ocean is the same that saying that we are individual manifestations of a common genetic code. Here the genetic code in abstract ( in its static potential) represents the ocean and the individual manifestations of it the waves.
As they say (the great masters) Shiva without is Shackti is a Shava. So an ocean without waves will not be an ocean as far as we know.
So i believe that the ocean contains in it self the possibility of the wave. The wave is a part of it ( its Jiva), the question is does the wave have conscience of that? That shes a part of the ocean. I think most waves dont have that kind of conscience i think it must be a special wave like the big waves that come to shore in Hawai to have that kind of conciuseness. The same with humans. Never the less they are what they are...Waves, a part of the sea.
Go for it all!


Om namah shivaya!

[saidevo]

Namaste ZN.

To me, the wave is the ocean and vice versa.

What is the ocean but a commingling of many many drops which are moving in synchronicity?

I think the massive, infinite whole is a reflection of its parts. Like a hologram, each angle is the entire yet a piece.

YMMV
ZN

I understand and appreciate your point. Yes, the ocean and the wave are the same. It is a paradoxical truth, as in the case of a hologram that the part is the same as the whole. Just like the seed and the tree are the same.

However, there is one distinction. In a laser hologram, the part represents the full in its entirety, so the full can be created from the part, which is not the case with Brahman and Atman. Here Brahman creates the Atmans and the world and pervades them, making them identical to That in quality. In quantity, however, the Atmans and the World can never sum up to Brahman, so they move on to accommodate another set of them, and the musical chair of life and creation goes on and on, eternally. Thus the ocean and wave are opposites, not in their difference, but in their size, in the same way the terms big and small are antonyms.

[atanu]

Hari Om
~~~~~
Namaste Atanu (et.al)

--
The Wave - I see the wave as the individual. ---

Yet, as Kaos said several posts ago - its all about quantity and quality.
We as the wave may not have the mass of the ocean, but we are the exact quality, in every manner. We are the stuff of the ocean. This ocean is the ocean of consciousness that connects all things. Each wave, each being.
-----
pranams,

Namaste All,

Yes wave may be equated to an individual and the ocean to the consciousness/Brahman. But wrt to quality and quantity, I cannot agree. Sometime back some intuition struck me with a great force and I will try to replicate here. I may fail. I am not saying that the example is new. But the example was illuminated when I contemplated on the following.

Just keep a ring or a bangle of gold in front of your eyes and decide what the thing is. It is correct that the thing is a bangle. But then what is a bangle? It is name of a shape, where, in this case the material is gold. It is just a shape made out of Gold that we call bangle.


I do not have any doubt on Upanishadic teaching that all this is 'form and name', wherein the material is consciousness, which is a state of the SELF. Losing, the concepts of name and shape, as in samadhi and sleep, what remains is the material, whose will (UMA) makes the material come up as different shapes.

One will find in Mandukya Upanishad:

5. When one sleepeth and yearneth not with any desire, nor seeth any dream, that is the perfect slumber, who is become Oneness, who is wisdom gathered into itself, who is made of pure delight, who enjoyeth delight unrelated, to whom conscious mind is the door, Prajna, the Lord of Wisdom, He is the third.

6. This is the Almighty, this is the Omniscient, this is the Inner Soul, this is the Womb of the Universe, this is the Birth and Destruction of creatures.


Pragnya is the womb, wherefrom comes everything and wherein exists everything. It is the Lord. Yogi who can see the Pragnya to be ONE and ALL, can then enquire "To who this Pragnya belongs?".

---------

What I wish to convey is that a wave is an expression of shakti of ocean -- the material. But a wave is not a being, that a comparison of quantity and quality can be made between ocean (which is ONE WHOLE including the wave) and a wave, which merlely is a shape of expression of joy of the OCEAN. Wave is a name of dancing ocean. It is a concept. The real material is ONE WITHOUT A SECOND. Comparison of quantity and quality can only happen in states beneath Pragnya, since even Pragnya is ONE WITHOUT A SECOND.

On the other hand, when it is clearly known that beneath the concept of shape, the wave is nothing but the material -- the ocean, then again ONE WITHOUT A SECOND. That is full and this is full. Full only remains. It is my settled opinion, that comparisons are possible is states but not in reality, which is advaita Self. Of course there will be people like Nirotu who will say "In Creation ------", without examining whether there is creation or not?

Om Namah Shivaya


To repeat the exercise:

Just keep a ring or a bangle of gold in front of your eyes and decide what the thing is. It is correct that the thing is a bangle. But then what is a bangle? It is name of a shape, where, in this case the material is gold.

[atanu]

---

Waves are mainly caused by wind, underwater disturbances like seismic events and to some extent the moon and tides.

---

Say what Willie? Wave would not form in absence of water and air. Water would not exist in absence of fire, which would not exist in absence of air. All these would not exist in absence of ether. Nothing would exist in absence of Mahat, which would not exist in absence of Hiraynagarbha.

And if the Seer was not there, then Hiryanagarbha would be nought.

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste All,

Yes wave may be equated to an individual and the ocean to the consciousness/Brahman. But wrt to quality and quantity, I cannot agree. Sometime back some intuition struck me with a great force and I will try to replicate here. I may fail. I am not saying that the example is new. But the example was illuminated when I contemplated on the following.

Just keep a ring or a bangle of gold in front of your eyes and decide what the thing is. It is correct that the thing is a bangle. But then what is a bangle? It is name of a shape, where, in this case the material is gold. It is just a shape made out of Gold that we call bangle.


I do not have any doubt on Upanishadic teaching that all this is 'form and name', wherein the material is consciousness, which is a state of the SELF. Losing, the concepts of name and shape, as in samadhi and sleep, what remains is the material, whose will (UMA) makes the material come up as different shapes.

One will find in Mandukya Upanishad:

5. When one sleepeth and yearneth not with any desire, nor seeth any dream, that is the perfect slumber, who is become Oneness, who is wisdom gathered into itself, who is made of pure delight, who enjoyeth delight unrelated, to whom conscious mind is the door, Prajna, the Lord of Wisdom, He is the third.

6. This is the Almighty, this is the Omniscient, this is the Inner Soul, this is the Womb of the Universe, this is the Birth and Destruction of creatures.


Pragnya is the womb, wherefrom comes everything and wherein exists everything. It is the Lord. Yogi who can see the Pragnya to be ONE and ALL, can then enquire "To who this Pragnya belongs?".

---------

What I wish to convey is that a wave is an expression of shakti of ocean -- the material. But a wave is not a being, that a comparison of quantity and quality can be made between ocean (which is ONE WHOLE including the wave) and a wave, which merlely is a shape of expression of joy of the OCEAN. Wave is a name of dancing ocean. It is a concept. The real material is ONE WITHOUT A SECOND. Comparison of quantity and quality can only happen in states beneath Pragnya, since even Pragnya is ONE WITHOUT A SECOND.

On the other hand, when it is clearly known that beneath the concept of shape, the wave is nothing but the material -- the ocean, then again ONE WITHOUT A SECOND. That is full and this is full. Full only remains. It is my settled opinion, that comparisons are possible is states but not in reality, which is advaita Self. Of course there will be people like Nirotu who will say "In Creation ------", without examining whether there is creation or not?

Om Namah Shivaya


To repeat the exercise:

Just keep a ring or a bangle of gold in front of your eyes and decide what the thing is. It is correct that the thing is a bangle. But then what is a bangle? It is name of a shape, where, in this case the material is gold.

Nasmaste Atanu,
First let me say thank you for thinking this through... the post on this is gaining strength and direction. So for us to develop these notions before we get to Brahman, Atman, avastha (states), etc is a good thing.
I think we all can agree, we are developing, poking at the things we understand. It is not about right or wrong ideas, but getting a common view so we can actually take this consciousness discussion to more meaningful levels.

That said let me lay out a few ideas and contribute:

• I concur on the bangle ; for me it is an expression of the gold. No matter how many times we chose to melt it down and remold it to a new shape e.g. a ring, an earring, a gold nail, etc. in essence it is still the gold.
• Regarding the wave. For me the analogy works; I am not trying to convince anyone that this is the riveting metaphor that holds the concept of consciousness to jiva together. I see the wave as and expression of the ocean. Saidevo and ZN see it just a bit differently but not so different as it blows up the meaning that is inferred. So the wave/ocean as a tool allows us to have a common ground, as does the bangle.
• Now we start getting closer to the true values of the conversation... of the expression of consciousness and how one discusses it. This [IMHO] is the diamond , the gold of the discussion. That is, one can see this is pure consciousness in total or one can see this as the Samkayan's view it, as Purusha and Praktriti - but we're not there just yet.
• If I can ask us to hold off just a few more posts on this, because there still needs to be a discussion to gain more comfort & compare and contrast the notion of this consciousness we use - that is this following notion;
• The seer ( me, and you) the organs of perception ( our eyes, our senses, etc) and the object that is seen or experienced are all one thing. Why do I mention this ? This is the practical side of this conversation - this is, where the wave and the ocean analogy meet, the bangle and the ring meet. This is what this is saying - that me, the seer, the experiencer, is part and parcel part of the seeing process and the object that is being seen. Tieing creation together.
• We need to explore the above because this is a fundamental understanding for future conversations on Brahman+Atman+Consciousness. If we go to this level of discussion with out the practical implications of our personal experience of seer-and-seen, we have done a dis-service to the reader. We would be going to an abstract level with no 'ladder' to get ourselves in and out of. Making this a a real experience is key, a daily idea that one can ponder in the shower, or on the train to work... this is the value I am in hopes we can tease out of this grand conversation. To make it real , every day. I hope I can ask for your [ all of you posting to this thread ] assistance on this. This is the diamond that is locked inside the rock.... lets see if we can get it out.

pranams,

[atanu]

Hari Om
~~~~~

-----The seer ( me, and you) the organs of perception ( our eyes, our senses, etc) and the object that is seen or experienced are all one thing. -----pranams,

Namaste Yajvan Ji,


Again I add a bit. The seer -- me and you, does not work for me, since ego cannot be the seer. The ego is the questioner. Whatever is seen I only see. The doubters also I only see. The opposers I only see. The supporters I only see. My body I only see. Others who verify existence of my body as me, I only see.

But this "I" has not been found on extensive enquiry. The lifeless body does not say I and none of the sense organs or the brain are capable of saying "I". There is infinitely more to this I.


It is a mystery.

XII-12: May He, the Lord, join us with beneficial remembrance – He who is superior to all, who has been revealed in the Vedas, who is the Supreme Seer and who sees Hiranyagarbha who is the first among the gods and who is born before all the rest.

XII-13: Other than whom there is nothing higher, nothing minuter, nothing greater, by that Purusha – the One who stands still like a tree established in heaven – all this is filled.

Om Namah Shivaya