Posts Tagged ‘Henri Bergson’
Saasmita Samadhi Yoga Final Stage?
The Final type/Stage of Yoga,Patanjali Calls as ‘Saasmita’
Consciousness.
In this stage, Personal Consciousness alone remains.
Gross elements like Objects and subtle elements, Objects like thoughts disappear.
When Pure Consciousness , the attribute of Atman or the Individual Self alone remains,there is yet another level one should reach.
That is merging or returning to the original state of Reality or Brahman, the macro principle.
The Brahman is the Ultimate Reality and the individual Reality is but a reflection of it.
This is what is stated in the Mahavaakyas,
Aham Brahmaasmi,
Soham Asmi,
Pragyanam Brahma.
The Consciousness is a stream.
Henri Bergson calls it as ‘elan vital’
The Principal Upanishads, List.
This Consciousness appears at the individual level because of non Knowledge,Avidya.
(In Indian Philosophy, Knowledge is defined as the removal of ignorance)
Once Ignorance is removed knowledge of Reality ,nay, Reality dawns.
Those who attain the Saasmita Samadhi are called ‘Prakritilayar’, ‘one who s in tune with Nature’
Here, of the three Gunas or dispositions(I use the normal meaning, not the term in a Philosophical sense), only the Sathva , pure, clear,remains.
In Savitraka Samadhi, Sathva, Rajas and Tamas are present, but controlled.
In Savichara Samadhi, Tamas is absent.
Ananda Samadhi has Sathva remains dominate, Rajas less active.
In Saasmita Samadhi,only Sathva remains.
But to attain Self realization , one should transcend the three Gunas.
The merging or return to Brahman is not Duality.
The Reality is One.
How this can be explained?
It is like the relationship between heat and Fire.
One can not dispense with another.
In some cases, as in Microwave cooking, the Heat is felt and not the Fire which is the cause .
Here the cause , Fire is invisible, the energy is visible , not the source.
All these States constitute the Savikalpa Samadhi, except Ssaasmita Samadhi , where one is nearer to Nirvakalpa Samadhi which is the State where the Individual Consciousness merges with the Reality , Brahman.
http://ramanan50.wordpress.com/2013/05/05/savichara-ananda-samdhis-yoga-sutra/
Related articles
- Yoga Sutra 1.17 Samadhi Contemplation (sunnyace.wordpress.com)
‘No Heaven..Some thing Out of Nothing’-Hawking Non-sense.
True.
But there are people who made the Computer.
Reality is the Ultimate Cause.
A Scientist should know that there has to be cause for Every thing.
( Indian Philosophy has a different approach on this point)
Inability to distinguish between Religion and Metaphysics is a failing of Hawking,
What the Ultimate Cause is, in the Realms of Philosophy.
The very fact he is harping on Fear of death is an indication of his fear.
By denying the unknown he is trying o overcome his fear.
Let him have the luxury.
For more details on the subject read the blog at the end of this story.
Story:
“I regard the brain as a computer which will stop working when its components fail. There is no heaven or afterlife for broken down computers; that is a fairy story for people afraid of the dark.”
“I have lived with the prospect of an early death for the last 49 years. I’m not afraid of death, but I’m in no hurry to die. I have so much I want to do first,” he told the newspaper.
Stephen hawking , in his forthcoming book the Grand Design makes interesting observations.While he , in his earlier book,Brief history of Time seemed to take a philosophical position, which is unwarranted, as scientists normally concern themselves to their discipline instead of trying to explain things from their discipline,in his latest book he has taken the position that God is not necessary for the creation of Universe.
The absurdity of this argument lies in the fact that he has taken or rather seems to take the concept of God according to Christianity.
Creation , according to The Bible, is to have begun at a fixed point of Time.
This is not logically tenable.
Can he define ‘Some thing’ and ‘Nothing’?
Every effect has a cause, every Effect has more than one Cause ;a Cause may be a result of another Cause and an Effect may be a Cause for another Effect.
In the first case, we credit an Event/Effect with a specific Cause relatively for this case for this cause may be a result of another cause.
In the second case the reverse is true.Causes are classified into Immediate Cause, Concomitant Cause.Material Cause,Efficient Cause etc.No single entity is responsible for any Effect .Similar is the case with Effects.
Law of causality in nothing but a tool of mind to find a pattern for our convenience of understanding and classification.Things happenirrrespective of the fact whether we recognise them , classify them or not.
Things/Events happen-Period.
Unified Theory is as good as Chaos Theory.Both are equally true , depending on our perception.
As Immanuel Kant has observed Space and Time are the two spectacles through which we perceive.Take away the these twin concepts(in fact they are one), you can perceive or conceptualize nothing.
Therefore the causality is a myth.
Again Law of causality depends on two factors,Law of uniformity of nature and Law of Causation.
We know, or rather we think we know that the the law of of Uniformity of Nature will be there tomorrow as in Sun appearing to morrow.At best we may say it has happened till date and MAY be so to morrow.That is all.
We have already seen that law of Causality is a myth and only a convenient tool as science is .
Therefore the argument for First cause is not tenable(God).
Then how do we explain the Universe and Mind?
As said earlier things happen, happened ,and shall happen.
We are in the flow ,as Henri Bergson called it,elan vital-Stream of Consciousness.
We can not pin point a point of Time when this originated
Please refer my Blog on Time-a non linear theory for details.
Hence Hawking is right in so far as the concept of God as Christianity sees it.
Not philosophically correct.
Spinoza explains the Reality( God) thus.
“Substance is that which exists independently of any thing else and which does not need the conception of any thing in order to be conceived”
Hinduism states that reality is without Cause,it is the First cause.It has no attribute.It is immanent.beyond human intellect.It is indescribable,It can not be known.it can only be experienced.It can not be defined but can be described by negating-not this, not this.
Hinduism states that things were, are and shall be.(The Bhagavad Gita).
Universe evolved both matter and Mind by the Sparsa( loosely trnslated means touching,grazing) of inanimate matter Prakriti or nature( not Nature) or qualities and dynamic or Flowing Energy Purusha.
They graze due to lila or playfully(loose translation) with out any specific purpose or purposeless may be a purpose.
Out these are formed the seeming first cause, mahat and 24 principles are evolved for the Creation.It does not Time reference.
“Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing,” the excerpt says. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to … set the Universe going.”-Hawking in his latest Book.
Exactly.This what Hinduism is about.
The dichotomy between western and oriental thought is due to the basic difference in the basic concept of Knowledge.
In the west knowledge is to be gained.A positive concept.-philosophically speaking.
In the east it is the removal of ignorance.
West follows the dictum Nihilo nihil Fit’( out of nothing comes).
East”This is full,That is Full; having taken Full out of Full, Full remains Full”
Hawking is right on the denial of God as conceptualized by Christianity ;wrong from the Indian and philosophical standpoint.
The Brain: The Mystery of Consciousness.
The Physiological /Neurological explanation of consciousness is nothing more than that has been stated in philosophy, adding strength to the ditctum’The more you seem to know the less you know’.
The problems cited in the article are the questions raised in Philosophy and answers have been attempted.
The problem is one of Perception.
Do we see/perceive things because we have senses or we are aware of the senses because objects are there?
How do we perceive things at the very first instance?
Do we perceive because of the qualities of objects?
This may not be true for if you peel away all the qualities of objects one by one nothing remains.
Then what is it we perceive?
Again what we perceive is subject to change in which case how do we recognize it the same as such at different points of Time?
Consciousness as has been rightly observed is more than awareness.
Indian Philosophy states thus.
We have sense organs,eyes,ears,nose,tongue and skin.
We also have five organs of awareness(loose translation of Gnana,which really means Knowledge), namely the sense of seeing ( as distinct from eyes),hearing,smelling,tasting and touching.
We also have mind which is the activity of the brain,
Intellect which distinguishes between correct and the incorrect , between Right and Wrong.
We also have Chitta that guides Intellect.
Beyond is ‘ I’ or Ahankaara..
Self or Atman is the embodiment of Being, Chitt and Bliss.
The Universal Chit is present is present in every being and is reflected as individual Chit in the individual because we are conditioned by Space and Time.
Henri Bergson calls the Chit as ‘elan vital’
Rene Descates calls it proof for the existence of the Self.
Spinoza calls is Substance, defining it as’ that which does not need the existence of anything or which does not need the conception of anything else in order to be conceived’
Mimasa of Indian Philosophy calls it the Karma or action reaction cycle and Kant as categorical Imperative.
Consciousness is an attribute of Reality;Reality is not conditioned by it.
The difference between Mind and Matter is one of degree not of kind.All things are made up of vibrations,lesser the vibrations grosser the object becomes; greater , it becomes subtle or mind.( Miamsa and Buddhism)
Story:
The young women had survived the car crash, after a fashion. In the five months since parts of her brain had been crushed, she could open her eyes but didn’t respond to sights, sounds or jabs. In the jargon of neurology, she was judged to be in a persistent vegetative state. In crueler everyday language, she was a vegetable.
So picture the astonishment of British and Belgian scientists as they scanned her brain using a kind of MRI that detects blood flow to active parts of the brain. When they recited sentences, the parts involved in language lit up. When they asked her to imagine visiting the rooms of her house, the parts involved in navigating space and recognizing places ramped up. And when they asked her to imagine playing tennis, the regions that trigger motion joined in. Indeed, her scans were barely different from those of healthy volunteers. The woman, it appears, had glimmerings of consciousness.
Try to comprehend what it is like to be that woman. Do you appreciate the words and caresses of your distraught family while racked with frustration at your inability to reassure them that they are getting through? Or do you drift in a haze, springing to life with a concrete thought when a voice prods you, only to slip back into blankness? If we could experience this existence, would we prefer it to death? And if these questions have answers, would they change our policies toward unresponsive patients–making the Terri Schiavo case look like child’s play?
The report of this unusual case last September was just the latest shock from a bracing new field, the science of consciousness. Questions once confined to theological speculations and late-night dorm-room bull sessions are now at the forefront of cognitive neuroscience. With some problems, a modicum of consensus has taken shape. With others, the puzzlement is so deep that they may never be resolved. Some of our deepest convictions about what it means to be human have been shaken.
Something out of Nothing?God is not required?
Stephen hawking , in his forthcoming book the Grand Design makes interesting observations.While he , in his earlier book,Brief history of Time seemed to take a philosophical position, which is unwarranted, as scientists normally concern themselves to their discipline instead of trying to explain things from their discipline,in his latest book he has taken the position that God is not necessary for the creation of Universe.
The absurdity of this argument lies in the fact that he has taken or rather seems to take the concept of God according to Christianity.
Creation , according to The Bible, is to have begun at a fixed point of Time.
This is not logically tenable.
Can he define ‘Some thing’ and ‘Nothing’?
Every effect has a cause, every Effect has more than one Cause ;a Cause may be a result of another Cause and an Effect may be a Cause for another Effect.
In the first case, we credit an Event/Effect with a specific Cause relatively for this case for this cause may be a result of another cause.
In the second case the reverse is true.Causes are classified into Immediate Cause, Concomitant Cause.Material Cause,Efficient Cause etc.No single entity is responsible for any Effect .Similar is the case with Effects.
law of causality in nothing but a tool of mind to find a pattern for our convenience of understanding and classification.Things happenirrrespective of the fact whether we recognise them , classify them or not.
Things/Events happen-Period.
Unified Theory is as good as Chaos Theory.Both are equally true , depending on our perception.
As Immanuel Kant has observed Space and Time are the two spectacles through which we perceive.Take away the these twin concepts(in fact they are one), you can perceive or conceptualize nothing.
Therefore the causality is a myth.
Again Law of causality depends on two factors,Law of uniformity of nature and Law of Causation.
We know, or rather we think we know that the the law of of Uniformity of Nature will be there tomorrow as in Sun appearing to morrow.At best we may say it has happened till date and MAY be so to morrow.That is all.
We have already seen that law of Causality is a myth and only a convenient tool as science is .
Therefore the argument for First cause is not tenable(God).
Then how do we explain the Universe and Mind?
As said earlier things happen, happened ,and shall happen.
We are in the flow ,as Henri Bergson called it,elan vital-Stream of Consciousness.
We can not pin point a point of Time when this originated
Please refer my Blog on Time-a non linear theory for details.
Hence hawking is right in so far as the concept of God as Christianity sees it.
Not philosophically correct.
Spinoza explains the Reality( God) thus.
“Substance is that which exists independently of any thing else and which does not need the concept of any thing in order to be conceived”
Hinduism states that reality is without Cause,it is the First cause.It has no attribute.It is immanent.beyond human intellect.It is indescribable,It can not be known.it can only be experienced.It can not be defined but can be described by negating-not this, not this.
Hinduism states that things were, are and shall be.(The Bhagavad Gita).
Universe evolved both matter and Mind by the Sparsa( loosely trnslated means touching,grazing) of inanimate matter Prakriti or nature( not Nature) or qualities and dynamic or Flowing Energy Purusha.
They graze due to lila or playfully(loose translation) with out any specific purpose or purposeless may be a purpose.
Out these are formed the seeming first cause, mahat and 24 principles are evolved for the Creation.It does not Time reference.
“Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing,” the excerpt says. “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist. It is not necessary to invoke God to … set the Universe going.”-Hawking in his latest Book.
Exactly.This what Hinduism is about.
The dichotomy between western and oriental thought is due to the basic difference in the basic concept of Knowledge.
In the west knowledge is to be gained.A positive concept.-philosophically speaking.
In the east it is the removal of ignorance.
West follows the dictum’Ex Nihilo nihil Fit’( out of nothing comes).
East”This is full,That is Full; having taken Full out of Full, Full remains Full”
Hawking is right on the denial of God as conceptualized by Christianity ;wrong from the indian and philosophical standpoint.
