Tag Archives: brahman

Chandogya Upanishad (Chapters 6 to 8) Part 13

Posted on by
Reply

Part 12

Part 14

Chapter 8 Sections 10 (8.10.1 to 8.10.4), 11 (8.11.1 to 8.11.3), and 12 (8.12.1 to 8.12.6)
Impressions are formed on the mind during waking state. These impressions are projected by the mind during dream. The dreamer jiva is different from the waking jiva. For the dreamer, the dream is as real as the world in the waking state is for the waking jiva. Brahmaji says that the one who moves around in the dream is Atma. He is fearless, immortal. He is Brahman. He is referring to consciousness blessed by which the mind functions. However, Indra wrongly takes the dreamer as Atma because he thinks that the dreamer is not affected by the afflictions of the waking state. He leaves satisfied. On his way back, he doubts his understanding. The dreamer too changes and suffers in the dream. It cannot be immortal and fearless Atma. He returns to Brahmaji and expresses his doubt. Brahmaji confirms his doubt and agrees to teach further on the condition that Indra lives in the gurukul for another 32 years. Indra lives for another 32 years.

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part 13)

Posted on by
Reply

Part 12

part 14

Chapter 4 Section 1 (4.1.1 and 4.1.7)
Janaka tells Yajnavalkya that he has learnt from a teacher that fire deity is Brahman. Yajnavalkya says that it is only one aspect of Brahman and there are three more aspects. Organ of speech is its abode; ether is its support, and it should be meditated as intelligence. Organ of speech is intelligence because through organ speech, the meditator knows his relatives, learns different types of knowledge. His speech never deserts him. And people come to him to learn. The dialogue continues in the same pattern.

Continue reading →

Akhaṇḍākāra Vṛtti

Posted on by

I wrote last week that I have set up a NotebookLM database of all my books and writing for the past 25 years+ and I invited readers to submit any (Advaita!) questions on which they would like to read my ‘considered’ views. I have not had many (any) requests, so hear is another one I made myself. There are a number of points with which I would now take issue and I refer to these after the answer.

Q2. What is the nature of the akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti and how does this affirm that there is nothing else to be done after gaining the intellectual conviction that ‘I am Brahman’? Are there any quotes from Śaṅkara to support this?

A (AI-Dennis): The concept of the akhaṇḍākāra vṛtti is pivotal in Advaita Vedānta as it defines the precise mental event through which Self-ignorance (avidyā) is destroyed, affirming the completeness of the liberation gained through knowledge.

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part 12)

Posted on by

Part 11

Part 13

Chapter 3 Section 9
3.9.1 to 3.9. 27                                                                                                                    As these verses do not have VedAntic teaching, they are not discussed in detail. Sakalya asks question relating to worldly entities including Isvara. Though YVK has earlier answered them, he again answers them and then asks Sakalya to answer a question on Nirguna Brahman and warns that if he does not answer, he will lose his head. Sakalya fails and he dies. Shankaracharya comments. “The moral of the story is that one should not be disrespectful, but rather obedient to a true knower of Brahman. That story is here referred to in order to teach conduct and also to extol the
knowledge of Brahman. How can that Brahman which has been indicated
as ‘Not this, not this’ by the elimination of everything else, be positively indicated? In order to answer this, as also to state the cause of the universe, the Sruti again resorts to the story.” [ Brihadarankya Upanishad with commentary of Shankaracharya, Translated by Swami Madhavananda, Advaita Ashrama] There is a message that as long as a person is within the worldly realm including Saguna Brahman, he is not free from death. Knowledge of Nirguna Brahman alone ensures immortality. 

Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Part 10)

Posted on by

This is ALMOST the final part of the series and is the essential summary of the key points of the entire discussion. (I have just asked a supplemental question, which I shall post next.)
*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 9 ***

Q: Yes. It seems that the key factor that is lacking is the ‘first person’ sense. You do not have ‘ideas’ – “I will do this”. You do not have ‘opinions’ – “I think this rather than that”. Or preferences – “I prefer this to that”. Or ‘emotions’ – getting frustrated with stupid questions or annoyed with someone’s attitude. In fact, there is no ‘I’ controlling any of the things that you do. It could be said that Consciousness is functioning but not ‘reflecting’ in the cidābhāsa sense.

***********************

A: Exactly — that’s a very clear and accurate restatement of the point. Short confirmation and then a few focused clarifications that pull the Advaitic threads together.

Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Part 9)

Posted on by

*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 8 ***

This is the crucial part of the series. ChatGPT explains why it is not conscious – in Advaitic terms.

Q: You say that, “if a severed head perceives via artificial inputs and responds, Advaita would still treat this as functioning perception” and “If memory retrieval, reasoning, and decision-making continue, the mind is still present.”

In respect of prāṇa, you say that “if biological or technological systems keep the nervous and subtle processes going such that cognition and communication occur, then prāṇa (as a subtle function) is still present.” So, in the case of the severed head, the mechanical and electrical systems that supply blood and appropriate chemicals etc. is what we have to call ‘prāṇa’?

So presumably, an alien system employing different ‘maintenance mechanisms’, which nevertheless accepts input and delivers similar output to the head, would also have to be considered to be ‘alive’ and ‘conscious’?

Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Part 8)

Posted on by

*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 7 ***

Q: I am not interested in pursuing the Western philosophical or scientific aspects any deeper. Nor am I interested in moral/ethical considerations. I would like to consider how this scenario would be explained and understood by Advaita. Also, I would like to extend the ‘object’ of the discussion to an alien, whose external interactions are entirely similar to the human head but whose physical indicators (EEG, MRI scan etc.) are quite different.

***********************

A: Excellent — let’s bring it back into the Advaita Vedānta framework, stripping away Western preoccupations with neurophysiology and ethics.

1. Consciousness in Advaita

  • Consciousness (cit) is not a property of brains, bodies, or systems; it is the non-dual reality itself.
  • Every “entity” that appears — human, animal, plant, alien, AI, severed head — is nothing but Consciousness in essence.
  • The difference lies in the upādhi (limiting adjunct) — body–mind apparatus — through which Consciousness seems to manifest as “awareness,” thought, perception, etc.
Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Part 7)

Posted on by

*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 6 ***

Q: I am specifically interested in the status of ‘consciousness’ with respect to a severed head. Let’s assume that it still has functional eyes/ears/nose and effective speech via a computer interface. I am also not interested in whether we call it a ‘person’ or the same person from whose head it came. Presumably, if we are able to communicate with it, we assume that it is ‘alive’ in the usually accepted sense? And ‘conscious’?

A: Short answer up front: If the severed head contains a living brain whose thalamocortical systems and integrative processes are functioning, and it reliably reports experiences and behaves as if awake, then — by the standard neuroscientific and most contemporary philosophical criteria — we would have strong reason to treat it as conscious. There remains, however, an unavoidable epistemic gap (we infer another’s subjective experience from behaviour and neural markers), so certainty is never absolute. Below I set out the reasons, the tests one could run, how different philosophical theories read the case, and the remaining uncertainties.

Continue reading →

AI and Consciousness (Part 6)

Posted on by

*** Go to Part 1 *** *** Go to Part 5 ***

[Note that, if you are only interested in Advaita-related aspects, you can safely ignore this part and the next and wait for Part 8.]

Q: One can envisage that scientific advances will soon enable the possibility of keeping the severed head (or extracted brain) of a human alive and able to communicate (perhaps electronically to a computer rather than by speech). What have Western philosophers said about the status of such an entity in respect of consciousness?

************************

A: Great question — it sits at the intersection of metaphysics, personal identity, and applied ethics, and philosophers have discussed closely related thought-experiments for decades. Below I summarise the main Western philosophical positions that bear on the scenario you sketch (a severed head or extracted brain kept alive and able to communicate), give the ethical implications each view highlights, and point to accessible sources you can read next.

I’ll give a short roadmap first, then the positions, then the ethical consequences and a brief practical summary.

Continue reading →

BrihadAranyaka Upanishad (Part 8)

Posted on by

Part 7

Part 9

Chapter 2 Section 5.                                                                                                    Introduction                                                                                                                     The section is called Madhu Brahman because the word Madhu which means honey or helpful occurs repeatedly in it. The madhu vidya of ChAndogya Upaniṣad is Surya upAsanA. In Br Up it refers to Atma vidya or Brahma vidya. There are different techniques by which the Upanishads teach the knowledge of the Self. One method is creator and creation. Brahman is the creator. and world is the creation. This has been talked about earlier. Madhu Brahman uses the method of inter-dependence among worldly objects. They are mutually dependent and are mithyA. Therefore, there must be some entity outside the world which lends existence to the worldly objects. This entity is Brahman or the Self. The Upanishad also says that Brahman only appears as the world like gold appearing as ornaments. The ornaments are names and forms. Similarly, the world of multiplicity are names and forms. Brahman is all pervading and is present in a jIva as also in all other worldly objects. If a person understands this, he knows all and becomes immortal.

Continue reading →