Tag Archives: consciousness

akhaNDAkAra vRRitti – Some Questions

Posted on by

I have a few questions on the concept and origin of the term akhaNDAkAra vRRitti. Will be grateful for any contribution and thoughts on my dobuts.

1.  Does the term “akhaNDAkAra vRRitti” appear in any major upanishads or Bhagavad-Gita? If so, where (citation)?

2.  Where and by whom was the term “akhaNDAkAra vRRitti” introduced for the first time in Advaita?

3.  Is the concept “akhaNDAkAra vRRitti” an attempt to extend the process of ‘Object cognition’ by the mind as explained in Vedanta Paribhasha to the stage of Self-realization?

4.  Does it occur prior to (and hence causal to) Self-realization or is the term “akhaNDAkAra vRRitti” a post hoc  explanation of  a presumed process that might have occurred in the mind on Self-realization?

5.  Does the term have a practical utility for a seeker as a sAdhana tool? If so how?

Thanks and regards,

Attention – ad tendere

Posted on by

The word “Attention” is derived from two Latin words, ad tendere, meaning “to stretch towards.”

Rupert Spira explains very clearly how attention turning towards itself is the ending of the mind.

1.  Attention Falling Back to its Source (From Rupert at Parmoor in Dec 2013) – 8:35 min:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJzIz31rt4I

2.  Attention and Awareness (From Rupert at Santa Sabina in Oct 2013) – 8:38 min:  http://non-duality.rupertspira.com/watch/attention-and-awareness

3.  The Sinking of Attention into Itself (From Rupert at Santa Sabina in Feb 2014) – 13:07 min:  http://non-duality.rupertspira.com/watch/the-sinking-of-attention-into-itself

4.  Attention is Awareness Plus an Object (From Rupert at Mercy Center, CA in Apr 2013) – 14:53 min:  http://non-duality.rupertspira.com/watch/attention-is-awareness-plus-an-object

The message in these Videos is beautifully crystal clear and truly meditational, I submit.

Attention and Inattention

Posted on by

1.   “At any given time, a massive flow of sensory stimulation reaches our senses, but our conscious mind seems to gain access to only a very small amount of it.  … …… Conscious access is, at once, extraordinarily open and inordinately selective. Its potential repertoire is vast. At any given moment, with a switch of my attention, I can become conscious of a color, a scent, a sound, a lost memory, a feeling, a strategy, an error – or even the multiple meanings of the word consciousness.” — p: 20.

2.   “Out of countless potential thoughts, what reaches our conscious mind is la crème de la crème, the outcome of the very complex sieve that we call attention. — p:21.

3.    “[I]nattention can make virtually any object vanish from our consciousness. As such, it provides an essential tool for contrasting conscious and unconscious perception.” — p: 37

From: Consciousness and the Brain – Deciphering How the Brain Codes Our Thoughts by Stanislas Dehaene, Viking, 2014, pp: 333 ISBN 978-0-670-02543-5

You may watch this 1:54 min YouTube video (thanks to the London Transport Dept.) to know how attentive you are: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubNF9QNEQLA

upadeSha sAhasrI – part 18

Posted on by

Part 18 of the serialization of the  presentation (compiled by R. B. Athreya from the lectures given by Swami Paramarthananda) of upadesha sAhasrI. This is the prakaraNa grantha which is agreed by most experts to have been written by Shankara himself and is an elaborate unfoldment of the essence of Advaita.

Subscribers to Advaita Vision are also offered special rates on the journal and on books published by Tattvaloka. See the full introduction

Who Slept Well – part 3

Posted on by

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAExperiencer of the Deep-Sleep-State

As noted in Part 2, we have three experiences in the deep-sleep state: 1. I exist, since I say I slept well; 2. I have the knowledge of homogeneous ignorance, since I say I did not know anything; 3. I was happy or I did not experience the pains of BMI, since I am not conscious of the BMI or any duality. The question remains: if the mind is not there, then who experiences these and who recollects these experiences on waking up, since the experiencer and the recollector have to be one and the same? These appear to be puzzling questions that need to be addressed. Who is going to provide the answer to this – a sleeper or a waker? For this, scripture alone becomes a pramAna, or means of knowledge, since the mind that uses logic cannot provide the answers. No objective tools can be used or would be valid to analyze the deep sleep state, since all objective entities (apart from ignorance) are absent in that state. Hence, objective scientists also have no tools available for investigation. These aspects have to be clear even when we are studying the opinions of other philosophers such as Shree Atmananda-ji , unless these opinions are shruti based. Continue reading →

More on ekajIva vAda

Posted on by

Rather than add more comments to the ‘mokSha for All’ thread, I thought it better to make this a separate post. It is the same topic but here I posed a question to AchArya Dr. Sadananda of Chinmaya Mission, Washington, whom I have known for a long time. I have interposed comments in his response and his follow-up comments have been added in green.

Dennis:

 Obviously any statement about the ‘nature’ of absolute  reality can only be made from the jIva’s standpoint; i.e. an  ‘as though’ pAramArthika statement made in vyavahAra. Thus, any talk about a world is clearly a vyAvahArika statement;  aham brahmAsmi is an ‘as though’ pAramArthika statement.

Sada:

Dennis – aham brahmaasmi is statement of understanding of the truth – it is recognition of that paaramaarthika state but expressed using the instruments available in vyavhaaha that is the BMI. It is not just vyaavahaarika statement about paramaarthika state. It is like when I say sugar is sweet – it is statement which may not mean much to a listener who may not know what sweetness means, but it means a lot to one who knows and is the statement born of direct experiential understanding – or aparoxaanubhuti. Continue reading →

upadesha sAhasrI – part 16

Posted on by

upadesha16

Part 16 of the serialization of the  presentation (compiled by R. B. Athreya from the lectures given by Swami Paramarthananda) of upadesha sAhasrI. This is the prakaraNa grantha which is agreed by most experts to have been written by Shankara himself and is an elaborate unfoldment of the essence of Advaita.

Subscribers to Advaita Vision are also offered special rates on the journal and on books published by Tattvaloka. See the full introduction

Q. 357 – Existence of Objects

Posted on by

Q.  Dear Dennis,
 
I bought and read two of your ebooks and liked them so much then I looked at your blog and came across this:

http://advaita-academy.org/blogs/DennisWaite.ashx?Y=2010&M=November

You say objects really exists, Advaita is not idealism, it is realism. I don`t understand this, in your book you use dream metaphor, you use “cinema” metaphor you even said in your book:
 
“He goes on to explain that our normal states of consciousness – waking, dream and deep sleep – are at the level of appearance. Reality is the non-dual background to these states. Just as our dreams seem real to the dreamer, so this world-appearance seem real to the waker. But, on waking, it is realized that those dreams are nothing but an illusion generated by the mind.
 
Similarly only on awakening to god-consciousness will you appreciate and realize the staggering truth that there exists nothing other than Brahman everywhere. Until that supreme state is reached, the universe will appear real. Living in your present state of ignorance you will have to accept the world that you experience. But at the same time try to contemplate and realize the truth proclaimed by Self-realized souls that Brahman alone exists.”
 
  So you changed your mind after writing the book and now you say World-appearance is real, Advaita is realism and there is no illusion at all?
 
I`m confused, can you explain? Continue reading →

Two Genres Of Thought

Posted on by
“The Problem is I can’t tell the difference between a deeply wise, nudge from the Universe and one of my own bone-headed ideas!”

(Copy right: Bradford Veley)

It looks to me that we are besieged by two genres of thought.

When I say two genres, I do not mean the yes- no- thoughts or being double minded and undecided in our view about things. Nor do I refer to split personalities. Actually it has NOTHING to do about the “content” of the thought.  What I have in mind is about the suite or family of thoughts – based on their possible source of origin (real or apparent).

As advaitin-s, we all know that everything is a manifestation of brahman. We shall use the term ‘Universal Self’ for It. The Universal Self is kUTastha – does not do or intend to do anything. It is changeless, actionless, eternal and It is Beingness-Consciousness-Infinity. We also know that we act, talk, walk, eat, breathe and live as an individual.  We shall use the term ‘self’ for this separate entity. Continue reading →