As has become a norm (or so it seems) these days, my Sunday mornings are spent driving up to my Tai Chi teacher's home with my friend Evgeny for semi-private lessons. We have been learning some interesting and mind-expanding Tai Chi Exercises.
Anyhow, before I digress further, let me also state that Evgeny has been taking Yoga lessons from an Indian Yogi (from Chennai) called Yogi Ram. Yogi Ram teaches in the Siddha school (which is said to have common roots as that of Babaji's Kriya Yoga). So, my earnest friend has been learning about both Tai Chi and Yoga. In course of our discussions (which we inevitably have during the half-hour drive each way), we came upon the topic of Karma, Maya and Tao/Brahman.
Now, the reader needs to beware that neither of us are in anyway masterful authorities on these subjects, but are merely humble students in the path of Brahman and Tao.
In any case, let me proceed with a brief description of our discussion and subsequent questions/doubts that arose. Perhaps one of our Medhavis will be able to shed some light?
Evgeny said that the Yogi told him about Paschimottasana and how it supposedly burns Karma and aids in freeing the practitioner from the clutches of the Karmic cycle. So that brought about the question, why Karma and what is it's role in the grand scheme of things?
As Taoists and Vedantins/Yogins we are familiar with the idea that there is no duality in actuality, but rather that everything is One (Brahman, Tao, call it what you may). If that be the case, then what is this material universe and what is it's role?
NOTE: I will use the word Brahman to represent both Brahman and Tao (for there is no difference between the two in my mind).
Karma and Maya
So, simply put, as the self differentiates from the Brahman, the ghostly apparation (that was) the material universe is actualized. The more the self (now differentiated from Brahman) does actions, the result is increase of delusion, solidifying the ethereal material universe further, entrenching the self into this loop of infinite regression. This process of entrenchment is called Maya.
We are familiar with the Theory of Karma, about the Cycle of Karma and about it's various categories. There is Sanchita Karma (accrued Karma or accumlated Causality), Prarabdha Karma (karma that is already in action or activated causality) and Agami Karma or Kriyamana Karma (the Karma that is being created or future causality). This Cycle or Wheel of Karma is animated by our thoughts and actions (which includes both actions and inactions). The Theory is at a simplistic level of understanding (namely, mine), about Cause and Effect. What we do (and think) has an effect. This Causality travels from one lifetime to another and this is in effect the cause of Re-incarnation.
So how do we explain Karma? In order to explain Karma, we had to bring up the concept of Maya. From the layman's perspective, Maya is the reality that is created due to our ignorance of the fact that we are all One (Brahman). This Ignorance (Avidya) gives rise to the material world as we know it, along with the experiential elements. All these exist and reinforce the delusion of separation (from the Brahman), the Ego (which is the delusion). Try and visualize this --
The Material universe and the self exists (or infinite material universes) only as a possibility which is manifested by the Avidya of the being. The Avidya is strengthened by the actions (which are a result of this delusion). The effect of these actions is Karma.
So if this were a simplistic flowchart, it would be like this --
So, simply put, as the self differentiates from the Brahman, the ghostly apparation (that was) the material universe is actualized. The more the self (now differentiated from Brahman) does actions, the result is increase of delusion, solidifying the ethereal material universe further, entrenching the self into this loop of infinite regression. This process of entrenchment is called Maya.
So the purpose of the spiritual practice is to re-integrate the self back into Brahman, thus gradually dissolving the material universe and the mechanism of Maya and Karma, until eventually one day nothing except Brahman remains.
The way to go about dissolving the material universe and the self back into Brahman is Meditation. So in our Tai Chi practice or Yoga practice (or meditation practice), we use the body or the breath or a mantra or a sound or a visual prop (Light, Yantra, Diety and so on) as a tool to induce silence (slow down the thoughts and expand the gap between thoughts) to realize the true nature of the self -- which is Brahman. This silence is achieved because the active mind is kept busy working in a continuous loop of focussing on the body, breath, mantra, diety, yantra (whichever the prop) until the thoughts can be observed (by the witness) and their patterns, gaps between the thoughts and so on. As we spend more time in the gap between thoughts, the true nature of Brahman shines forth (the eternally aware consciousness). As one becomes stable in this gap, the gap elongates until only the gap remains (and the thoughts are merely like gusts of the wind or fluffs of clouds that base off the vast expanse of the sky).
All this was fine and dandy, until this thought snuck up on us -- If all that exists is Brahman (I will use the word Brahman to mean both Brahman and Tao from this point on), then what is the purpose of this duality that we experience in our everyday (mundane) existence?
All this was fine and dandy, until this thought snuck up on us -- If all that exists is Brahman (I will use the word Brahman to mean both Brahman and Tao from this point on), then what is the purpose of this duality that we experience in our everyday (mundane) existence? Why this elaborate machination, this great Maya. Some of those who have gone before us have called this Lila (or God's divine play). Some have said all this is the dream of the divine mind. Most have said that there is no point in trying to figure this out using mundane consciousness/intelligence. Once the self re-integrates back with Brahman, the reason will become evident.
But this intellect is such a nag...it doesn't want to let up. Evgeny, an accomplished chemist and Quantum Mechanist ventured to describe the concept of String Theory and the Quantum surface/soup. He described this as an efferevescent surface (imagine a bubbling soup)and each of these bubbles as the self. Once the bubble (self) rises from above the body of the soup, it somehow becomes deluded into thinking it is separate from the soup it self. As it bursts and falls back into the soup (Brahman), it becomes evident to it again that there was no differentiation between itself and the soup (Brahman).
But why this Soup and why the bubbles? One reason that comes to mind is that the boiling soup cannot help being what it is and the bubbles are a natural result. There doesn't have to be a reason why, it simply is. Is this explanation of life and the universe really as simple as that?
Who knows? Anyone venture to shed some light on this?
TrackBack URI for this entry 
Subscribe to this comment's feed 
written by P. Desikan, 2008-11-14 20:55:15
How right you are!
You say
'All human beings can experience as Brahman as true human self is nothing but Atman and from upanishad we know that
Atman = Brahman.
Science cannot know Brahman as ways of of science are based on duality that is subject and object.'
The experience is possible for ALL men including scientists. Whatever methods have been employed up till now by men in the path of science would not enable such experience. But Scientists too can catch up on the right methods some day!
Mankind has been packing in methods to seek truth in specific compartments far too long in my opinion.
Regards. Partha.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Raju, 2008-11-14 20:43:05
I believe it is OK to say that first person subjective experience is required. However it may be better to say it that truth of Brahman is know only in non-dual experience of Self. This experience is self-illuminating. All human beings can experience as Brahman as true human self is nothing but Atman and from upanishad we know that
Atman = Brahman.
Science cannot know Brahman as ways of of science are based on duality that is subject and object. Humans have realized limitation of science in quantum world. This world including human mind and senses are manifestation of Brahman and cannot be used to know Brahman. Man cannot use lower level tools to know higher level truth. It is for this reason one needs to go beyond senses and thought where there is nothing but non-dual perception of Self. This is how Sri Ramkrishna Paramhans experience Brahman.
Thanks,
Rajendra Rajput
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dwai Lahiri, 2008-11-14 17:44:55
But I cannot do that to Mogambo simply because in Mogambo's Universe, Mogambo is the center while in Riverine's, she is. Until both Mogambo and Riverine are together able to perceive that the senses are bounded by a bundle of nerves - the better they are, the vaster the Universe appears - it is not possible - nor necessary - for Riverine to shift Mogambo's compass needle.
Dear Riverine,
You have hit upon a very important point. The centrality of the First-Person subjective experience. Without it, any amount of 3rd-person objectivity will not be of any use. For, in order to get to the objectivity, a subject experiencer is necessary.
Newton started thinking about Gravity after the mythical apple dropped on his head. The list goes on and on.
In other words, the subjective experience is what triggers the inquiry.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dwai Lahiri, 2008-11-14 17:42:24
But science has evolved considerably from the days when mere experiment, observation and inference would have done to arrive at aspects of possible truth.
Science now believes in the need for an observer to establish presence of anything such as a particle. Science believes that the entire universe could have evolved from a singularity and could perhaps go back into it. Science also believes in uncertainties regarding the actual nature of the most fundamental forms of matter. Very modern scientific thought has started looking into consciousness. And the day is not far when they will decide that the universe exists in any form whenever it is sensed to exist in that form or understood to exist in that form.
Bravo!
-
- +0
-
-
written by Riverine, 2008-11-14 01:22:05
But I cannot do that to Mogambo simply because in Mogambo's Universe, Mogambo is the center while in Riverine's, she is. Until both Mogambo and Riverine are together able to perceive that the senses are bounded by a bundle of nerves - the better they are, the vaster the Universe appears - it is not possible - nor necessary - for Riverine to shift Mogambo's compass needle.
-
- +0
-
-
written by P. Desikan, 2008-11-14 00:33:00
But science has evolved considerably from the days when mere experiment, observation and inference would have done to arrive at aspects of possible truth.
Science now believes in the need for an observer to establish presence of anything such as a particle. Science believes that the entire universe could have evolved from a singularity and could perhaps go back into it. Science also believes in uncertainties regarding the actual nature of the most fundamental forms of matter. Very modern scientific thought has started looking into consciousness. And the day is not far when they will decide that the universe exists in any form whenever it is sensed to exist in that form or understood to exist in that form.
Warm regards. Partha.
-
- +0
-
-
written by mogambo, 2008-11-13 22:03:17
gangp
first person experience is not only mode of proof
the universe is the universe because majority accepts it as universe
so universe exists even if single first person experience cant understand it
riverine
Precisely where I was arriving. However, the Universe would not be just as what is in memory which is only based on the five senses. The feeling of helplessness over life due to one not being independent of the senses would push one to either extreme self-pity and further suicide or, in rare cases of very very mature minds, to higher contemplation using the one faculty still remaining: the idea would be to transcend the senses and being independent of them.
or one would compile and record a list of observations based on objective study of various phenomenon till the universe becomes what it is
it also grows based on level of understanding and observability
sounds like modren science no?
In such a situation, the Universe as perceived by the senses and as acknowledged by the sciences (until now) would seem just as unreal as it is materially real within the boundaries of these five senses. What would be seen as true and 'eternal' about the Universe is neither the memory, nor the senses, nor the individual -- as the faculties causing and reinforcing the individual as being distinct from the rest of the Universe vanish -- nor life itself. The transcendental Brahman alone is.
but the universe and everthing in it is because of general agreement
thats the way it has been from history of mankind and thats why it is accepted as the baseline
if single or minority of faculty loose the ability to sense universe they are called mad or mentally ill
universe does not vanish
but if you can say to mogambo that universe will vanish for everyone then mogambo can understand
-
- +0
-
-
written by Riverine, 2008-11-13 18:59:33
it exists before rise of memory it exists after memory ends
Precisely where I was arriving. However, the Universe would not be just as what is in memory which is only based on the five senses. The feeling of helplessness over life due to one not being independent of the senses would push one to either extreme self-pity and further suicide or, in rare cases of very very mature minds, to higher contemplation using the one faculty still remaining: the idea would be to transcend the senses and being independent of them.
In such a situation, the Universe as perceived by the senses and as acknowledged by the sciences (until now) would seem just as unreal as it is materially real within the boundaries of these five senses. What would be seen as true and 'eternal' about the Universe is neither the memory, nor the senses, nor the individual -- as the faculties causing and reinforcing the individual as being distinct from the rest of the Universe vanish -- nor life itself. The transcendental Brahman alone is.
I guess there is a meeting point in our ideas there...
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dr. Pradip Gangopadh, 2008-11-13 17:55:35
If the first person experience does not exist then what does it mean to say that the universe is eternal? For whom is the universe eternal?
-
- +0
-
-
written by mogambo, 2008-11-13 17:09:30
Re. Brahman here is my reasoning: Assume that one has experienced the Universe, by chance has lost all the five senses, implying one cannot hear, see, smell, touch or taste. In effect, one has no communication in any direction with the Universe and it is just the same as the Universe being non-existent. Yet, having had all the sensual experiences of the Universe before, one has a memory of the Universe and therefore knows that the Universe is. Still, how long would it be before one realises taht all that was part and parcel of the senses is transitory and that there is something beyond that? Summary: Without the five senses the very Universe vanishes. What then? Does that make the Universe any simpler than Brahman that transcends man's capacity to perceive? On the other side, how true is the Universe before the birth of memory?
Mogambo has only one question
why is it that if you the experiencier dont feel or see or hear to taste or sense the universe will make it simpler?
it is the first person experience that will not exist
does it mean that universe will not exist?!!?
the universe, as mogambo hears being repeated on various articles here is eternal than how does it not exist?
it exists before rise of memory it exists after memory ends
-
- +0
-
-
written by Riverine, 2008-11-13 08:15:17
This post is such a reflection of my own confused thoughts yet so clear in presentation, I am in awe! The why? and What is? are perennial questions. The seers that have transcended the mere 5 senses have given the answers to all this, but it is impossible to understand/experience what they did from the sensory plane. The answer lies in experiencing alone.
Re. Brahman here is my reasoning: Assume that one has experienced the Universe, by chance has lost all the five senses, implying one cannot hear, see, smell, touch or taste. In effect, one has no communication in any direction with the Universe and it is just the same as the Universe being non-existent. Yet, having had all the sensual experiences of the Universe before, one has a memory of the Universe and therefore knows that the Universe is. Still, how long would it be before one realises taht all that was part and parcel of the senses is transitory and that there is something beyond that? Summary: Without the five senses the very Universe vanishes. What then? Does that make the Universe any simpler than Brahman that transcends man's capacity to perceive? On the other side, how true is the Universe before the birth of memory?
-
- +0
-
-
written by P. Desikan, 2008-11-12 09:46:21
If other good friends had decided that progress of material science beyond pre- Galileo, pre Newton or pre-Einstein levels of understanding would have been far simpler and therefore far more acceptable, the stand gets to be more interesting.
Yet other friends would prefer to trust their own senses unaided by complex instrumentation or theories for verifying whose reliability they have to depend on testimonies and exertions of others.
What is real is real, whether only some have understood and only some of it, or whether none of it can really be comprehended by anyone. It does not matter to the singularity or its expansive manifestations how much of it is understood to what extent by whom.
Some of us prefer to take the words and opinions only from men in scientific endeavour, even when they do not follow all the steps. Some others believe in the capacity of truth to reveal aspects of itself to seekers in the experiential realm. The lay world has been struck again and again by several common bits of truth being realized by both processes.
Warm regards. Partha.
-
- +0
-
-
written by karigar, 2008-11-11 21:21:55
But as human beings, we're compelled to posit a separation between "I" and the "World" even when realizing often that both are manifestation of a singular Reality...Brahman being taken as cognate for Reality, the One Reality...
Modern Science is only slowly shaking off the Materialist Straitjacket that it had started out with, ever since European Enlightenment. The World is Real, of course, but it is much more than the 'Material world' that we can apprehend via the limited apparatus of our 5 senses...Quantum Physics is explaining the way..
-
- +0
-
-
written by advocatus1, 2008-11-11 19:09:59
Why do you assume though, that Universe is simpler solution than Brahman !? :-) Honestly, sounds the other way around to me. And it all goes to the definitions of the two. Are they different? Is the dark side of the hill different and possible to exist without the light side (that's what "yang" and "yin" actually mean).
In any case - I just enjoyed a non-quantum soup :-)
I don't understand yin and yang and all that stuff. I understand this :
based on what we know from Modern science we have discovered that the universe and all life evolved to be what it is today. From a single point of incredible mass it exploded into various galaxies, stars, planets etc.
On one of these planets of one of these solar systems a single-celled organism was formed and this evolved to become the life-forms on this planet earth.
The brains of these evolving creatures too evolved and in the process developed an ability to construct stories around the stimulus it recieved from its surroundings. This is called consciousness, which is the ability to tell a story. This is why different people have different stories to tell.
God, Brahman was invented by this story-telling mind, in order to explain the things it did not understand in the past. As this mind evolved, it realized that everything is natural phenomenon and there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for everything, only a matter of time.
Why is Brahman the simpler solution?
-
- +0
-
-
written by dwai, 2008-11-10 22:53:09
It seems like what I had suspected is true -- one can only know the reason behind all this after Maya has been transcended.
Advocatus, Evgeny,
I agree with Evgeny. It seems like the easier solution is that everything IS Brahman and there IS a causative source of all creation. Otherwise, if we leave the Source of the Universe to chance, it becomes even more complicated, as in what created that chance and so on.
What do you think?
-
- +0
-
-
written by evgeny, 2008-11-10 20:39:53
Why do you assume though, that Universe is simpler solution than Brahman !? :-) Honestly, sounds the other way around to me. And it all goes to the definitions of the two. Are they different? Is the dark side of the hill different and possible to exist without the light side (that's what "yang" and "yin" actually mean).
In any case - I just enjoyed a non-quantum soup :-)
-
- +0
-
-
written by advocatus D, 2008-11-10 19:09:28
What is the purpose of this elaborate system? If you apply occam's razor, it seems obvious that the material universe is real and Brahman is unreal, because the simplest solution is the right solution. Nothing can be simpler than the fact that Material Universe is real.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Dr. Pradip Gangopadh, 2008-11-10 13:38:47
Let me post the following conversation of Sri Ramakrishna:
Q: Is the universe unreal?
A: Why should the universe be unreal? That is a speculation of the
philosophers. After realizing God, one sees that it is God Himself who has become the universe and all living beings.
The Divine Mother revealed to me in the Kali temple that it was She who had become everything. She showed me that everything was full of Consciousness.The Image was Consciouness, the altar was Consciousness, the water-vessels were Consciousness, the door-sill was Consciousness, the marble floor was Consciousness - all was Consciousness. I found everything inside soaked, as it were, in Bliss - the Bliss of Satchidananda.
After realizing God, one sees all this aright - that it is He who has
become the universe, living beings, and the twenty four cosmic principles. But what remains when God completely effaces the ego can not be described in words. As Ramprasad said in one of his songs, 'Then alone will you know whether you are good or I am good!' A man sees one way through reasoning and in an altogether different way when God Himself shows it to Him.
- Sri Ramakrishna
The Advaita experience of Brahman is only true when one has attained the ego-less state which is beyond the influence of Maya Shakti. One can not say that the universe is unreal and only Brahman exists as long as one is within the influence of Maya Shakti. The universe and its living beings are natural expressions of Maya Shakti of Brahman. It is not possible to say beyond that.
Regards
Pradip da
-
- +0
-
-
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Thanks Partha,
In my view we have difficulty as non-duality is beyond thinking. Description of non-duality is not same as experiential knowledge of non-duality. We also forget that human mind has capability to operate both in the world duality and non-dual world (Brahman). Unfortunately we don’t develop this capability or use methods useful for non-dual experience.
Here are some minor corrections
I believe it is OK to say that first person subjective experience is required. However it may be better to say that truth of Brahman is know only in non-dual experience of Self. This experience is self-illuminating. All human beings can experience Brahman as true human self is nothing but Atman and from Upanishad we know that Atman = Brahman.
Science cannot know Brahman as ways of science are based on duality that is subject and object. Humans have realized limitation of science in quantum world. This world including human mind and senses are manifestation of Brahman and cannot be used to know Brahman. Man cannot use lower level tools to know higher-level truth. It is for this reason one needs to go beyond senses and thought where there is nothing but non-dual perception of Self. This is how Sri Ramakrishna Paramhans experienced Brahman.
Thanks,
Rajendra Rajput