Waking Up (Part 2)

Posted on by

Part 2 of the review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris

Read Part 1

Science

Another problem which adds to the book’s confusion is the attempt to utilize science, supposedly to improve upon or correct the ancient (and therefore bound to be mistaken) views of the original philosophies (be these Advaita or Buddhism). Harris explains that “Throughout this book, I discuss certain classical spiritual phenomena, concepts, and practices in the context of our modern understanding of the human mind.” Why would one want to do this? It is missing the point completely. The truth cannot be found in the mind; rather the mind is a tool with which we may discover the truth.

I explain in my article ‘Science and Consciousness’ that science can never explain the nature of ‘I’ because I am the subject, doing the investigating. The subject can never objectify himself. It is true that I can investigate both the body and the mind because I am neither of these. But this also means that understanding the human mind is not going to help in an ‘investigation’ of spirituality; it is simply not relevant to ‘who I really am’. Furthermore, if Harris is ‘talking about the nature of experience itself’, he is not talking about ‘I’, since I am the experiencer. Finding out about household electric light circuits and how they work tells me nothing at all about the one who operates the light switch.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 23

Posted on by

Part 22

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-5 Katha Upanishad

6-5-29 Katha 2.2.12 to 2.2.15 Self is non-dual. A wise man knows that Self in his body is same as in other bodies. He is therefore free from duality which is the cause of suffering. A Self-realized person is established in bliss unlike an ignorant person. The Self which is of the nature of consciousness lends sentiency to sense organs and sentient sense organs lends sentiency to other parts of the body. Sentiency enables them to fulfil varied desires. An intelligent person is however not interested in ephemeral material desires. He is seeker of Self-knowledge which ensures permanent happiness and peace. By Self-knowledge, he claims that his true nature is Self, the consciousness. Consciousness is self-luminous. Nothing can illumine it. It is the light of lights. In its presence, sun, moon, stars, lightening and fire shines. It is all-pervasive and beyond the realm of worldly objects, whether sun, moon, etc.

Continue reading →

Dṛṣṭi- sṛṣṭi-vāda

Posted on by

There has just been a brief discussion on the Advaitin List under the heading of ‘Quotes from samkshepa shaareeraka’. This was effectively on the perceived consequences of accepting the theory of dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda – the creation theory that claims that the world is the mental imagination of the jīva; a theory equating to the Western belief of solipsism. Sri ‘Sudhanshu Shekhar’ made the original post and Sri ‘Bhaskar YR’ represented the objections (with which I agree). Rather than joining in, I thought I would ask ChatGPT for an ‘opinion’ and its response seems to me to be very reasonable. (I even find myself more disposed to DSV than I was before!) Here is the exchange:

Q: How do Advaita believers in dṛṣṭi- sṛṣṭi-vāda explain how they can discuss the topic with other believers and non-believers?

A: In Advaita Vedānta, particularly within the framework of dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda (the doctrine that perception precedes creation), explaining and discussing the philosophy with others presents an interesting challenge. Since dṛṣṭi-sṛṣṭi-vāda asserts that the world arises in accordance with the perceiver’s experience, the question arises: how can multiple individuals engage in a discussion if each person’s world is subjectively projected?

Continue reading →

Waking Up

Posted on by

Here is another old book review, this one from just over 10 years ago. It is for the book Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris.
It is an even longer review than the last, so will require at least 3 parts. Here is Part 1.

The Meaning of the Word ‘Spiritual’

Regardless of how well a book is written, and how interesting its content, if it is non-fiction it seems that its value should be judged upon how successfully it achieves its stated objective. As far as potential readers are concerned, the objective is traditionally determined from a book’s title. And, in this case, it appears that the intended purpose of this book is to teach us about ‘Spirituality’ whilst avoiding any ‘religious’ overtones.

This tells us that the author acknowledges that ‘spirituality’ is usually associated with religion. It suggests that, not only does he believe that it need not be so associated, but also he thinks that he can teach us about spirituality without needing to say anything at all about religion. Before starting to read the book, therefore, it would be useful to know exactly what is meant by the term ‘spirituality’.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 22

Posted on by

 

Part 21

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-5 Katha Upanishad

6-5-25 Katha 2.1.12 to 2.1.15 JivAtamA, i.e., embodied Self is as though situated in the heart of the body. It is Consciousness that illumines thoughtful and thoughtless states of the mind. The heart is of the size of the fist and the mind is imagined of the size of the thumb. The non-dual Self is the Lord of the past, present and the future. Although it appears to be limited in size, it is the limitless, all-pervading and is non-dual. The space within the pot is viewed as limited space. Upon inquiry, we understand that the expression limited space is a delusion. The space is neither inside nor outside the pot, but all pots are within the space. In the same way, Consciousness is neither within nor without the heart; everything is within consciousness. After knowing that I am the limitless consciousness, I never feel insecure. It is this Consciousness that Nachiketa has sought to know in the third boon.

Continue reading →

Being: the bottom line (Conclusion)

Posted on by

(Read Part 1)

Another misleading claim is that “there’s no one bound and therefore no liberation from bondage.” This sounds very clever and obvious and is very likely to be accepted without question by the listener, adding still more to the ammunition against the traditional Advaitin position. But everything should be questioned! Advaita is a supremely logical and scientific philosophy if followed correctly and glib statements such as the above must be looked at carefully. (And it is acknowledged that ‘glib’ here is a ‘loaded epithet’!) Traditional Advaita does not, in fact, claim that there can be liberation from bondage. In fact, it is stated openly that there is not actually anyone bound. What is said is that there can be the realisation that there is no one who is bound – and that is liberation.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 21

Posted on by

Part 20

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-23 Katha 2.1.5 to 2.1.10 Some technical terms used by the Upanishad need explanation. Brahman is all-pervading Original Consciousness (OC). It is AtmA at the individual level. The OC manifests through matter, the Reflecting Medium (RM). It is Reflected Consciousness (RC). OC is only one, but RCs are as many as RMs. The quality of RC depends upon RM. The OC remains unaffected. The material universe is divided into three pairs: three belonging to the microcosm and three belonging to macrocosm. Consciousness reflects in any of the six mediums. There are 6 mediums RM1 to RM6 and six reflected consciousness RC1 to RC6. At the individual level, there are three mediums: RM1 (physical -gross), RM2 (mental-subtle) and RM3 -causal.

Continue reading →

Being: the bottom line

Posted on by

Since I am busy writing my next book (for a change), I have been looking through the past 25 years of written essays and reviews, looking for material that is not currently available anywhere. And there does seem likely to be quite a bit. So I will be (re-)publishing some of this over the next few months. The first of these is a two-part (quite long!) review of the book by Nathan Gill (who sadly died some years ago), I wrote the review back in 2006 but it is still relevant – possibly more so.

A Review of the book “Being: the bottom line” by Nathan Gill and a critique of Neo-Advaita.

This is a courageous book in that it openly tackles some of the most difficult questions that neo-Advaita has to answer and it doesn’t shy away from those that are phrased in the most challenging ways. It is also a dangerous book, in that it appears, superficially, to be providing satisfactory answers. Nevertheless it is a valuable book, albeit not perhaps for the reasons the author intended, in that there are some very searching questions and Nathan’s attempts to answer them expose the vulnerability of the neo-Advaitin position.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 20

Posted on by

Part 19

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-14 Katha 1.3.11 The unmanifested (Avyakta) is higher than mahat, the Purusha is higher than the unmanifested. Purusha is the highest. He is the highest goal.
At the end of a cycle of creation called pralaya, the world resolves in Brahman and is in potential and causal state. It is the ‘unmanifested’ mentioned in the mantra above. It is the maya power of Brahman. Brahman is also called Purusha. In the next cycle of creation, cosmic subtle body is the first born and creation of names and forms unfolds in stages. The cosmic subtle body is Hiranyagarbha, also called mahat. The unmanifest causal body is superior to Hiranyagarbha. Beyond this unmanifest, there is another unmanifest called Brahman (BG 8.20) or Purusha. The universe has two states, namely, unmanifest (potential form) and manifested names and forms. To know Brahman is the highest human goal, i.e., moksha.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 19

Posted on by

Part 18

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-5 Katha Upanishad

6-5-9 Katha 1.2.25 The mantra reads: How can one know thus as to where It (the Self) is, for which both the Brahmin and the Kshatriya become food, and for which death takes the place of a curry? Brahma Sutra 1.2.9 clarifies who is the eater. Is it fire or the individual soul, or is it the supreme Self? The doubt is because Nachiketa has asked Yama about three entities-fire, individual soul, and the supreme Self.

Continue reading →