Care to Discuss this? Consciousness

[atanu]

On the fourth state , I heard an interview with a german race car driver that sort of goes along the lines of it . ------
Some may have done it at work , got so busy that you look up and 2 or 3 hours have passed and all you remember is what you were doing..

Sorry that may not be the fourth.

[atanu]

One who never slumbers is the fourth.


http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...ed=1#post14539


Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~~

Namaste,

We are moving right along... Some key posts by atanu helps advance this discussion:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/sho...4532#post14532

If I may I wish to select a few points for this, and ask Atanu and others to give their comments. These principles/experience from the Upanishads add great value...let me comment ( thank you atanu for offering these up on the other post): Reality Of The 3rd State - as both these posts go hand and hand.

• The knower, who is awake in the deep sleep dream less state, in third state of Pragnya, is Turiya himself.
• The knower who remains awake in deep sleep is filled with the light of Sun.
• The knower who realises that shadowless, bodiless, colourless, pure, Immutable being who is awake in dreamless sleep attains the supreme Immutable Itself.

The knower (that would be us, some call the seer) who is awake in deep sleep, ( the 3rd state) is turiya - the decoding of this is is given in the next bullet point i.e. The knower who remains awake in deep sleep is filled with the light of Sun. That is, turiya is self-luminous it does not rely on other sources for its own Being, for its own light.

This 'awake' is pure consciousness itself, wakefulness, awareness, the raw materials of consciousness. This is the light behind the 35mm film analogy used 20 posts ago. This turiya is self-sufficient - independent of the other 3 states of consciousness. This is the SELF the rishi's speak of.

This answers ZN's question , on who is realizing whom. The Self is SELF-sufficient. The SELF realizes itself to itSELF - so says Adi Shakara and Katha and Mundaka Upanishad.

It does not rely on any other thing for its existence - it is independent of the relative field of life ( dimensions, weight, height, likes-and -dislikes, values, people, society, science etc etc); This is one reason the sages call it liberation. One becomes liberated from the day-in-day-out changes of the first 3 qualities of consciousness - wake, dream, and sleep and become grounded in turiya, the 4th. This is the reality - it is non changing, consistent, stable ( but these are words again). It is SELF luminous, extremely subtle, unbounded.


It remains every present with the native when established - wake , dream sleep happens, but now the ever present turiya is established, this is being grounded in the SELF; some call this SELF referral; If I were Maslow this would be called SELF actualization; this 4th is not overshadowed by the other 3 states of conscioousness.

How does one then go about ones daily business ? Restfully Alert as many say; this would be ZN's comment of yesterday ( which I thought was spot on) she called this "effortless balance".


Lets spend more time here if you wish. We are now in the heart of the matter. For many this may again maybe foreign, but please ask questions, come up with your thoughts and ideas on this matter. This level of Being is fundamental to knowing Brahman, to SELF=pure consciousness=His Divinity.



" To know the world you forget the SELF, to know the SELF you forget the world".

pranams,

[atanu]

Namaste,

I like to fancy myself creative, at times

I don't know this turiya, but I'd like to put out the notion that when something is everywhere and nowhere, it doesn't really matter what direction one approaches from, since approach itself creates distance and one is already there!

Perhaps I'm putting the cart ahead of the horse again...

"Be Here Now" - Baba Ram Dass

Regarding "clear", or "clarity of intent" ...this is a pointed (masculine) approach, I think. Alternatively, there is "effortless balance" which is the feminine counterpart. Ideally, they are one and the Same, en-twined.


Love,
ZN

Namaste,

No, you are not putting the cart before the horse. Self is Svatasiddha. Self is always realised. However, the thoughts related to i-me-mine cover it up. Till this i-me-mine perceives to have karma, the Svatasiddha and i are on the opposite shores.

Can't help.

Regards,

Om Namah Shivaya

[Znanna]

Namaste,

No, you are not putting the cart before the horse. Self is
Svatasiddha. Self is always realised.

However, the thoughts related to i-me-mine covers it up. Till this i-me-mine perceives to have karma, the Svatasiddha and i are on the opposite shores.

Can't help.

Regards,

Om Namah Shivaya

Namaste, dear atanu,

Where I differ substantially with what I understand the Hindu "karma" to mean, is that IMO all time, all lives happen simultaneously ... the notion of linear time and therefore discreet lifetimes doesn't work within my perception.

Also, to clarify, my comments on "clarity of intent" and "effortless balance" were directed towards the *steps* that some keep asking for elaboration about. In meditation, these are more attributes than goals ... if one is distracted enough to be wondering at the time.



Love,
ZN


/but perhaps I've jumped to conclusions as to what you mean by I-me-mine?

[saidevo]

Namaste.

The knower, who is awake in the deep sleep dream less state, in third state of Pragnya, is Turiya himself.

The knower who remains awake in deep sleep is filled with the light of Sun.

The knower who realises that shadowless, bodiless, colourless, pure, Immutable being who is awake in dreamless sleep attains the supreme Immutable Itself.

Perhaps we may try a fancy analogy to understand how it might be in the Turiya and Deep Sleep states.

Suppose I wear a special astronaut suit that covers me all over from head to foot. The speciality of the suit is that it is self-illuminating, shedding its soft white light all around uniformly and brightly. I can tune the brightness of the light and shine more or less of it.

I walk in a large, dark hall with sufficient light to illuminate all around and keep me walking. What do I see in the dark hall? I see the objects--the furniture, paintings, fans, walls, etc. illuminated by the light from me. I try to see myself, directing the light on my outer self, and yes, I have an idea how I look like, though in patches. Fortunately there is a set of parallel mirrors that give me a full view of my outer self.

Then I slowly increase the volume of brightness. White light streams all around me. The objects become dimmer and dimmer, as it happens with what I see of my body parts. At one stage, when the white light is brilliant enough, I don't see the objects and even the walls have become dim and translucent. With a curious feeling of how I would look like now, I walk on to have a look in the mirror--wait, where are the mirrors?

With further increase in the brightness, even the walls fade away, and everything is nothing but white light. I know I am there still, though I can't see myself. I begin to feel elated as the brightness of the white light increases, drowning everything into itself.

Such could be the nature of deep sleep and turiya, the latter with a conscious feeling of elatedness and bliss.

[Kaos]

The word “true” in my first statement is admittedly redundant ~ I only used it for emphasis. I am happy to adjust the wording.

I can see no particular division between Religion and Science, and I would say that spiritualists who scoff at ALL science are equally as misguided as scientists who scoff at ALL religion.

Therefore, you still imply that there are "true" spiritualists and "true" scientists as opposed to "false" spiritualist and "false" scientists.

Unlike most people, I have live both as a Hindu Sannyasin and (in earlier years) as an atheist scientist. Ten years of post-graduate research in Science, and ten years of immersion in Sadhu culture, perhaps gives me some reasonable perspective from both sides of the equation.

response removed by me pls see reason for editing...satay

[vcindiana]

Hari Om
~~~~~

Namaste,


Does any one wish to discuss the fabric of consciousness? As I read many posts we at HDF have a great desire to know the Divine, to know our Ishtadevata. We all have great respect for Isvara as far as I can see.

So what does this have to do with this post? The Divine, in it final form is consiousness, awareness, pure awareness. We possess this and use it everyday, that is why we can experience the Divine, because we are mode of this.

This is a very delicate state of awareness, very subtle. So if one wishes to know more about the Divine ( to the best of our human capacity) it mades sense to discuss this in an open forum.

Now who says the Divine [Brahman] is consciousness? The Upanishads. Others? Vishisita. Is the Divine more then consciousness? Absolutey. Yet this is the fundamental, least common denominator of all that is, Consciousness.

So I did not want to start the conversation unless others would find it of value.

Let me know if this is worth the pursuit.


pranams,

what does Hindu scripture say about Consciousness? You say Divine or Brahman is Consciousness. what does it mean? I am a very practical person Please provide me a personal experience or example of such encounter. Then I will narrate my encounter if you Care to read. Thank you

[yajvan]

Hari Om
~~~~~

what does Hindu scripture say about Consciousness? You say Divine or Brahman is Consciousness. what does it mean? I am a very practical person Please provide me a personal experience or example of such encounter. Then I will narrate my encounter if you Care to read. Thank you

Namaste vcindiana,

this whole post is predicated on this discussion; of what consciousness is, how one views it in light of the shastra's and agamas, our experince of it, etc. Your answer is visible in the reading of the posts in this string,
then consider this post and conversations of Atanu's and the required scriptures that are there: ( thank you Atanu)
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1819

followed by this turiya conversation:
http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=1822

This will give you a 360° view of the full discussion, the audit trail , the implications, and the level the conversation it has taken over the last 7 days.

You will see all that you need above... if this does not meet your expecations, then restate your question as then you will have apriori knowledge as a foundation.

dhanyavaad,

[Kaos]

Since you do seem to find some major difference between Science and Religion, can you please provide your definition of these terms. I know that the methods are somewhat different (and that both camps tend to scoff at the other), but what is there in the essence of these concepts that really makes them irreconcilable?

Namaste sarabhanga,

As already mentioned earlier, let me repeat, "science talks of the relativeness, and yet does not say what is the absolute" The only absolute is brahman.

Science cannot go to what is beyond science. There is a limit to the scientific quest. At best, religion and science are complementary but to claim that Religion and Science is one and the same is inaccurate.

When science has finally measured and described accurately and in detail the mechanics of such nagging questions such as, what is mind, not to mention consciousness, let me know...

Then we can proceed with.

second last sentence edited by me...satay