Tag Archives: dream

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 3

Posted on by

Explicit rejection of the notion that the world disappears in deep-sleep,

*** Read Part 1 *** *** Read Part 2 ***

Q: So the statement by A. J. Alston is missing the point?

The real point that Śaṅkara is making is that, despite the fact that the mind, and apparently the world, are both absent in deep sleep, awareness (ātman) is always present. Hence, the real substrate of both mind and world is ātman/Brahman. Is this correct and, if so, what does Śaṅkara actually say here (including Sanskrit)?

A: Yes — that is exactly right, and stated that way it becomes clear that Alston’s objection (though sensible at the empirical level) is largely missing Śaṅkara’s point.

Śaṅkara is not arguing from absence of the world to non-existence of the world.
He is arguing from the invariance of awareness across all states to its status as the sole independent reality, with mind and world reduced to dependent manifestations.

Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 2

Posted on by

*** Read Part 1 ***

I decided that, by only making short posts (up to 1500 words) at the rate of one per week, readers might lose the thread (or lose interest) so I will now post longer ones that cover complete questions and answers. So this one is quite long, at over 1800 words.

The Bomb under the Bed

Here is the statement from Śaṅkara (translated by Alston in his book ‘Śaṅkara on the Creation’) that might raise doubts:

“The proposition to be proved is, ‘This whole duality seen by the imagined mind is itself nothing but mind’. The reason advanced is that when the mind is present, duality is also present (agreement, anvaya), and when the mind is not present, duality is not present (difference, vyatireka).” (Gauḍapāda kārikā 3.28-31)

Q: Using the Nyāya logic of anvaya-vyatireka to prove that the waking world is unreal because it disappears in deep-sleep does not seem remotely convincing. Yet Śaṅkara seems to go along with this, despite apparently being a master logician and philosopher. Are you able to explain this? If so, can you break down the argument into simple steps to show how it is possible to justify?

Continue reading →

Anvaya-vyatireka – Part 1

Posted on by

Explanation of key terms in Advaita – No. 4

I was not intending to generate a ‘definition’ of the term, since I thought it would be too short. However, a supposed translation from A. J. Alston’s excellent ‘Śaṅkara on Creation’ caused me to question ChatGPT on the subject and the response was very enlightening. Further clarification, and a correction of ChatGPT’s continuing tendency to fabrication, provided some valuable insights into our perennial discussions on the supposed disappearance of the world on enlightenment and on the supposed Brahman-equivalence of the deep-sleep state. Any readers who still try to maintain those beliefs should perhaps skip these posts. (The thought that the topic would be too short has been proved wrong – there will now be up to 6 parts to the discussion! But I promise that it is an interesting one!)

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part 15)

Posted on by

Part 14

Part 16

4.3.15 to 4.3.17                                                                                                            After enjoying the dream world, a jiva goes to deep sleep or to the waking state. During dream he is only a bhokta though seemingly attached to action. There is no real attachment. He is not a karta and does not earn karma. The Upanishad says that similar to the dreamer, the Self is not attached to any action.

4.3.18                                                                                                                             Self is like a big fish. As the fish swims alternately between two banks without becoming affected by what happens on the bank, the Self moves between the dream and waking states without being affected by what happen in these states.

Continue reading →

Brihadarankya Upanishad (Part14)

Posted on by

Part 13

Part 15

Chapter 4 Section 3 4.3.1 to 4.3.5                                                                                  In a series of questions Janaka asks YVK about the lights which a person uses for worldly transactions. Most obvious is the sunlight. When sun has set, it is the moonlight. When both sun and moon have set (Amavasya), it is the light of fire. When sun, moon, fire are unavailable, speech serves as the light to transact. Speech (sound) includes odour.

Continue reading →

The Barren World

Posted on by

In my last post, I promised that I would provide another (clinching?) argument as to why the world does not disappear on enlightenment. Here it is. I use this in the book that I have just completed, which provides lots of examples of how many modern teachers misrepresent the various topics in Advaita, leading the seeker on a merry path that is unlikely to lead to enlightenment. (I have only just sent this to the publisher so it will not appear until the end of next year at the earliest. It will be called: ‘Finding the Self: A Guide Through the Minefield of Modern Advaita’.

The metaphor often used by those who maintain that the word does disappear is the rope-snake. The ignorant traveler sees a snake in front of him and is afraid. When light is shone onto the object, it is revealed as a rope and, they say, the snake ‘disappears’. Similarly, the ignorant seeker initially believes that the world is real. But when the knowledge of Advaita illuminates the issue, the world disappears. (Interestingly, they do not say, by direct analogy, that what was thought to be the world is realized to be Brahman, which would be the true situation.)

Continue reading →

BrihdArnyaka Upanishad (Part 5)

Posted on by

Part 4

Part 6

2.1.18                                                                                                                         During dream, the mind projects a dream world out of latent tendencies in it formed out experiences in the waking state. There are 72000 nAdis (like blood vessels) emanating from the heart through which prAna shakti travels to different parts of the body. The sense organs are not functional as they are resolved in the nAdis. The jIva (the reflected consciousness in the mind) travels through the nAdis and experiences the dream world projected out of the latent tendencies in the mind. In the dream, what are the ‘achievements’ of the jIva. He is, as it were, a king or a noble brAhmana or an animal. There are states of high and low. The achievements are false. It is to be noted that the jIva remains in the nAdis and does not reach the heart. If it reaches the heart, then it is the state of sleep.

Continue reading →

Waking Vs Dream

Posted on by

We treat the waking state as real and dream state as unreal. ‘Day dreaming’ is used when a person imagines in the waking state. GaudpadAcharya in his karikA on MAndukya Upanishad refutes the ‘unreality’ of dream and shows that the two states are on equal footing.
I Utility
Objection: Dream objects have no utility in waking state.
Refutation: To a dreamer, dream water is useful, not the water in waking state.
II Reality
Objection: Dream objects are unreal because they may not exist in the waking state.
Refutation: Even though dream objects may not be seen in the waking state, yet they are as real to a dreamer as objects in the waking state are to the waking person.

Continue reading →

The Limitations of Metaphor

Posted on by

Advaita teaching frequently makes use of metaphor in its explanations of the various topics. These are indisputably invaluable, although there is also the danger of taking them beyond the realm of their applicability and either drawing erroneous conclusions or simply failing to see the point that is being made. This also highlights the necessity of using the metaphor that is most appropriate for conveying the message. Take the example of sarvam khalvidam brahma – all this (world) is really Brahman.

We might start with the ubiquitous rope-snake metaphor. We think we see a snake but the light is poor. (We think we see a world of separate objects, but we haven’t yet gained the Self-knowledge of Advaita – our perception is covered by ignorance.) When we bring torchlight to shine into the darkness, we see that it is really a rope. (Having been taught Advaita, we realize that the world is really name and form of Brahman.)

Continue reading →

Q.558 Knowledge and Experience

Posted on by

Q: I am still confused about the relative value of experience and knowledge. Some teachers seem to say that scriptures only give you ‘intellectual’ knowledge and you then have to convert this into actual ‘experience’ in order to become enlightened. But then there are metaphors like rope-snake and dream-waking. The snake that we experience is not real and we have to wake up from the dream. This means gaining knowledge, doesn’t it?

A: You cannot experience the Self/Brahman/Absolute. But then neither can you ‘know’ it in the usual sense of the word. Reality is non-dual. The empirical, experienced world of duality is an appearance; name and form of Brahman. All of this can be intellectually understood by the mind. When it is firmly believed to be true, without any doubt, that is enlightenment.

You should also understand that it is not the case that ‘all of this is unreal’. ‘Unreal’ is not the correct adjective. Every empirical perception is name and form of Brahman and therefore ultimately real. Just not ‘real’ as its perceived ‘object’. This is why the world does not disappear on enlightenment. The scriptures tell us ‘sarvam khalvidam brahma’ – all of this is Brahman. So, if it disappeared, it would mean that Brahman disappeared!

Continue reading →