This can be seen from two perspectives: 1) lower or empirical, and 2) higher or spiritual (I try to avoid the word ‘metaphysical’). I am not going to consider what Christianity or Islam hold about any of these two perspectives, only the non-duality of Advaita Vedanta (Buddhism does not contemplate individual existence per se). According to the Advaitic tradition the individual self (jiva) can be considered as a reflection of the higher Self and then his/her faculties (basically memory, mind, and sense of self) as well as all bodies are separate and individual – this pertains to ordinary, transactional life. This is the realm of ignorance (avidya). Continue reading
Q: I’m aware that I’m on (very) shaky ground when I talk/think about brahman. But there’s something that’s been bugging me for a long time now about the ‘definitions’ of brahman I’ve read.
Brahman is always described as changeless and eternal.
Let’s start with ‘changeless’. When I think (conceptualize, make images) about a changeless ‘force’ (for want of a better non-object word), I envision something static and dead, without animus, without vitality. Absolute zero, utter lack of motion/vibration, fixed-ness. But I can’t put this static-ness together with brahman, the ‘mother of all existence and vitality’. How could utter stillness give rise to such a vibrant universe?
Onto ‘eternal’. Why does brahman have to be eternal? Why couldn’t it have arisen with the Source Event (Big Bang, etc.) and evolved into its ‘current’ fullness? Likewise, why couldn’t it end with the collapse of the universe back to a zero-dimensional point?
So changeless and eternal elude/confuse me. But I suspect that’s because I’m trying to image-ine them, which is an oxymoron: conceptualizing the non-conceptual. Continue reading
[One of our esteemed Readers, Shri V. Madhava, has been kind to send an off-line message to me a few days ago saying “I enjoy reading your writings and just finished reading the article “Living in the moment eternally Part 2”. Wondering if there is a Part 3 as there seems to be a broken link…” Reason enough, I guess, to continue on with my chatter — ramesam.]
Let us recall that living in the Now is an important trait of a jIvanmukta. J. Krishnamurti wondered if we could have an experience but not record it in our brain as a memory so that all our experiencing will be ever in the Present, in the innocent Now, afresh and always anew from moment to moment. Continue reading
Truth will set you free: Time Does Not Exist by Hans Meijer
Why time does not exist
When we ask ourselves why we think time exists, most of us would say: because we see everything changing, always. And so it is: everything in and around us is constantly changing, from beginning until the end.
The question however is: is the reason for this perpetual change to be found outside the changing subject (caused by a phenomena called time) or is all change coming from inside the changing subject itself?
I don’t think that it is hard to see that the latter is correct. That which makes things change (the cycle of life) to a flower, a human being or an animal is set by the characteristics of that particular life’s form and not by an outer cause such as time. What we call ‘time’ is just a method for measuring the ‘perpetual change’.
Because of our need to measure this perpetual change we decided to divide the ‘cyclic changes’ such as seasons and day and night, into months, twenty-four hours, minutes etc. These well-known changes are caused by the ever-moving planetary positions within our solar system and not because there exists such a thing as ‘time’.
So, there are no minutes, but we decided that after counting 60 (seconds) we say that a minute has passed. Based on minutes we calculate hours, days, months, years, centuries etc.
In this way we can count the number of heartbeats per minute, years from birth to death and we even can calculate the number of years from the Big Bang until today.
But we also say: ‘it seems as if time has stood still (in that old village), nothing has changed`.
Actually there is only NOW – in which all that is manifested appeared, changes and disappears. Continue reading
Immanuel Kant published the first edition of The Critique of Pure Reason in 1781, with an extensively rewritten second edition appearing in 1787. Between those editions he also published a shorter “easier” introduction to his philosophy, Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics (1783). With the later appearance of The Critique of Practical Reason (1788) and The Critique of Judgement (1790), Kant had articulated a complete system of philosophy of incredible depth and complexity, wholly original and unique in its solution to the age-old problems of reason, ethics, and logic. So great was the importance of this Prussian professor, we may justifiably think in terms of pre-Kantian and post-Kantian philosophy. Many have disagreed with his conclusions and offered refutations on one level or another, but all who have come after Kant have been required to address him. Continue reading
[Nobody has obviously noticed or pointed out that the continuation articles have not been posted for two years! So I am proceeding with the Series of articles here a bit hesitantly as I am not sure of the Reader-interest. In these two years my computer lost the “memory” of my notes and files stored on the subject (thanks to the hackers from Nigeria). I am hence obliged to go by whatever material I could harness in the ‘now’ from my computer. Part – 1 here. Part – 3 here . ]
The main question of interest for us here is “How does the body of a Self-realized man live eternally in the ‘Now’ and function in the day to day life of eating, moving, acting and interacting in the absence of ‘memory’ of past experience/knowledge for recognition? What does “Now” mean for him/her? Is the “Now” on a temporal dimension?”
Whether we are consciously aware of it or not, it is impossible to lead a normal life in the world without memory. Maybe it is simply responding to when your name is called or you have to find a solution to a much more complicated problem of technology, memory plays a significant role. Therefore, before we venture to answer the questions on the functioning of a jIvanmukta‘s body, one could be curious to know about the lives of those who are at a disadvantage in their worldly life because they do not have an access to their memory anymore . I shall list briefly a few such cases which are well studied by scientists. Their lives may look yet times hilarious and often poignant and heartbreaking but always harrowing to their care givers. Continue reading
A: You need to be a bit more specific here. But you are in any case talking about the empirical level of experience, not absolute reality. Time (and hence ‘events’) is within the former; it is not absolutely real. Similarly, there are no separate ‘objects’ (or ‘people’) in reality. Whether or not an event is ‘meaningful’ is going to be a subjective opinion! If you want my subjective view, there are probably only two meaningful events: when you commit to Self-inquiry and when you realize the truth! Continue reading
Kva bhAti dikkAla kathA vinAsmAn
dikkAla lIleha vapurvayam chet
na kvApi bhAmaH na kadApi bhamaH
vayam tu sarvatra sadA cha bhAmaH —18
asmAn vinA dikkAla kathA Kva bhAti = without us where does the saga of space-time shine?edikkAla lIleha vapuH vayam chet = when we identify with the body, the play of space-time begins; na kvApi bhAmaH na kadApi bhamaH = we do not exist in a place; we do not exist at a time; vayam tu sarvatra sadA cha bhAmaH = we exist everywhere at all times.
Where does the saga of space-time shine without us? When we identify with the body, the play of space-time begins. We do not exist in a place, we do not exist at a time. We exist everywhere at all times.
Atma is not localized at a place or time. Space and time are appearances in the self. Yet, due to ignorance we find ourselves localized in the space time framework. On gaining knowledge we know that it is only the body which is limited by space and time. The self is limitless spatially and temporally. Continue reading
Attention surely is timeless. If I am listening, I am all there. Being totally in the present, I am not thinking ‘about’. That may come afterwards. But in the moment of giving attention, listening, I am there, in the present; I am Presence itself. I am not in time; the past plays no part whatsoever in giving attention, in being aware, nor does speculation on the future. If I have even the least expectation (as desire or fear), I am not fully attentive but indulge myself within the realm of thought. I am indeed totally fulfilled in the moment. What prevails is a state of total freedom, and death has lost its sting.
भूतम् भविष्यच्च भवत् स्वकाले
तद्वर्तमानस्य विहाय तत्त्वम् ।
हास्या न किम् स्यात् गत भावि चर्चा
विनैक सन्ख्याम् गणनेव लोके ॥—१७
bhUtam bhaviShyachcha bhavat svakAle
tadvartamAnasya vihAya tattvam
hAsyA na kim syAt gata bhAvi charchA
vinaika sankhyAm gaNaneva loke—17
bhUtam bhaviShyachcha = the past and the future; bhavat svakAle = are in their own time,
present tadvartamAnasya vihAya tattvam = giving up the truth of that present; hAsyA na kim
syAt gata bhAvi charchA = will the discussion on past and future not be laughable; vinaika
sankhyAm gaNaneva loke = like counting in the world without the number one.
The past and the future are in their own time, present. Giving up the truth of that present , will not the discussion on past and future be laughable, like counting without the number one in the world?
What is time? It is a subjective phenomena. The sense organs are equipped to perceive objects. The ‘is-ness’ of the object is understood and this is not limited by time since it is eternal.When an object is perceived, the is-ness is known. Is indicates the present tense. It is never the past nor ever the future. ‘Now’ is the word we use to indicate the present. The essence of ‘now’ is the self alone. How? Let us look into it. Continue reading