A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
17 views
Skip to first unread message
Bhakti Vijnana Muni, PhD
Jan 14, 2017, 12:14:41 AM1/14/17
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. In your extended dual aspect monism, i.e. eDAM, you
have critiqued Visistaadvaita
philosophy for its neglect of the non-theistic harmonization of Reality. You
say, “We simply cannot ignore the contribution of science in our lives. [1]”
You have tried to cater to the viewpoints of both the theists as well as
atheists. For example, you say that theists can assume the dual aspect Brahman
as God. Atheists can assume Brahman as dual aspect entity at fundamental level
such as physicist’s vacuum, deep quantum potential or Bohm’s Implicate Order
from where all universes (including human beings) emerge via co-evolution [2].
Your (RLP Vimal’s) concept of eDAM
As you have proposed a ‘modified Visistadvaita’ through your eDAM, the
natural question to ask is why do you think, that the visistaadvaita philosophy needs a modification from eDAM and if
indeed so then in what respect. The dual aspects that you in [1] refer to are
the physical aspects (e.g neural networks in brain) and the mental aspects
(e.g. subjective experiences). In your opinion among all philosophies in
religion and science, this modified Visistadvaita
proposed by you has the least number of problems. In this regard you have taken up the issues
of inseparability as very important. For example you refer to your Dual-Aspect
Monism, where mind and matter are the inseparable aspects of the same entity
state [3].
In defining concepts of matter,
you have pointed out to the distinctions among the concept of Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristotle’
from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept. In
the former matter has a form and potentiality for experiences, and you have
accepted this concept of matter within your theory of eDAM. Then you
distinguish it from Kanaada-Democritus’
concept (that matter is made up of atoms and which is pursued in science) which
has the implication that matter is non-experiential within this framework. As
this is faced with the hard problem of consciousness, you do not accept this
within eDAM [4].
Further with that background, in
defining the concept of consciousness, you state to have used the
Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristotle’s concept of matter that consciousness is the
mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in
the first person perspective (1pp) [5].
While concluding from
Sankaracharya’s advaita philosophy that
the fundamental Reality is consciousness, i.e. the mental entity, you have
mentioned that the advaita system
does not explain by any step by step process that how the matter is created
from a non-material entity mind (Brahman). And therefore this constitutes a serious
explanatory gap within the Sankara’s Advaita system. You have noted that this
is the reverse of the explanatory gap found in materialism that mind can be
created out of matter [6]. And so you have taken the cue from Buddha and
Nagarjuna and followed a middle path which is your theory of Dual Aspect Monism
[7]. Your dual-aspect monism proposes that
there are varying degrees of dominance of aspects depending of the entity-level
and context is the middle path. This means that ‘the concept of the varying
degrees of the manifestation (appearance/strength) of aspects’ means that the
degree of ‘the appearance and/or strength of aspects’ varies depending on the
levels of entities [8]. At each level, the manifestation of aspects is through
dependent co-origination [9] i.e., through co-evolution, adaptation, natural
selection, co-development and sensorimotor tuning.
But it is clear from your paper that
you do not accept the Reality of Brahman as fully independent Truth. Your dual
aspect monism does not accept that God/ Brahman is omnipotent, omnipresent and
omniscience, who can affect each one of us and hence we must pray to him [10].
To substantiate your position you have asked the question Who created
God/Brahman? And you have stated that the usual answer that Brahman is eternal
and hence non-causal, is considered unacceptable to many. And that is the reason
I feel you have taken recourse to the principle of dependent co origination
because it denies any central or supreme position to any particular entity.
Thus even though you think that visitadvaita is close to your dual
aspect monism, there are major differences between Visistadvaita and eDAM. Therefore you consider that visistadvaita like other world religions
suffers from a built in interaction substance dualism. For example you state
that the soul separates from the body at the time of death [11]. The truth however
is that visistadvaita is a consistent
and elegant philosophy, well honored in India and now all over the world by
different scholars. However your inability to appreciate its foundational
consistency and beauty stems from your misunderstanding of the true concept of
Brahman as explained in Sri Ramanuja’s system.
Thus in your framework of modified visistadvaita which is a result
of your dual aspect monism, you think that the problem is resolved when we can
think that the mental aspect of Brahman causes mind and the physical aspect
causes matter. From this dual aspect monistic view you further conclude that
all entities including us, fermions and bosons are all Brahman [12]. But that
is surely not the philosophy of visistadvaita
propounded by Sripad Ramanuja Acharya.
The Critique of Vimal’s Philosophy of eDAM
The main difference between Vimal
and Ramanuja seems to be on the use of the concept of Dual Aspect by Vimal. Sripad
Ramanuja’s Monism is established on the basis of the concept of visista. But Vimal’s monism is attempted
on the basis of the idea of dual aspect. Moreover it appears that Vimal has chosen a middle path from that
of Buddha and Nagarjuna [13], who are quite clearly non-Vedantic in their
approach, and therefore non-theistic. Vimal’s idea of manifestation of objects
is through the concept of dependent co-origination. As far as I know the
concept of dependent co origination is also founded upon the Buddhist line of
thought [14], where the origin is said to be empty or Void [15]. In Buddhist
thought everything is changing and dependent. That is the character of reality
explained in Buddhism. It was mainly used to target into the causes of
suffering but it was also considered as applicable to everything that
constitutes Reality. So this then within Buddhism provides the basis for the
quest for solution to all problems which we are entangled with. Within this Bauddha Samanvaya (Harmonization) of
dependent co-origination of everything there cannot be any centre occupying the
supreme position. Therefore, in solving one’s own problems the
question/problems of ‘others’ becomes very important, and we cannot totally
forget the problems of others.
But In Vedanta clearly the origin
is Brahman. Brahman is not an absolute emptiness. Brahman is purna, or Complete in itself. In the Vedantic
thought the process of negation will not lead to voidism or absolute emptiness.
When we negate something it does not produce a void. For example when a cow
eats grass, the grass does not become annihilated. Rather grass which was as if
existing for itself, now serves the purpose of the cow as its part and parcel
through the process of digesting. So by eating the cow negates the being of the
grass as existing for itself. Therefore everything in nature is posited as if
it is existing for itself. But by the process of negation that independent
positing of entities is being negated in various ways and forms by nature. In
this way everything exists for some higher and higher purposes in Nature, in
which everything is appearing and vanishing as transitory moments. Therefore
Reality is dynamic and it is never fixed. Thus everything is being negated for
a higher purpose than that which is for itself. When we come to negation of all
such negations, we arrive at the purpose of Absolute, or the Brahman. Therefore
Brahman is cause of all causes or that which constitutes the Ultimate purpose. Everything
exists for the satisfaction of the Absolute. Sripad Ramanuja has quite clearly
shown that only Brahman is independent and everything is dependent upon Him
(Brahman). Brahman depends only upon Himself and there is no other cause that
is outside of Him or external to Him. We cannot limit Brahman because if we try
to limit Brahman, Brahman finds itself beyond its limit as well. Therefore if
we say what is beyond Brahman, then the answer is Brahman itself. Therefore questions posed ‘like
who created God (Brahman)?’ neglect the position of Brahman as the cause of all
causes and the Absolute Truth. Brahman is not some finite entity that can be
limited by some boundary. Hegel, the German philosopher summarized this
beautifully by saying, “Reality is by itself and for itself.” But such cannot be said of
the finite entities like Table, chairs or ordinary living entities. All
causes ultimately are to be traced to be dependent on Brahman. But Brahman is
by itself, or is the substantial truth of all reality. Thus the entities are
not only inseparable but also they are all dependent on Brahman for their being
and becoming. This is the major difference between Vedanta’s principle of
Brahman as the Cause of all Causes (sarva
karana karanam) and Buddhism’s principle of dependent co origination. This
is also therefore not in line with Visistaadvaita
philosophy when Vimal claims that the concept of dependent co- origination can solve the
so called problems of Visistadvaita, merely
because the aspects or entities are inseparable. If Visistadvaita is being modified in this way it entails a complete
misunderstanding of the underlying principle of visistadvaita which the author (Vimal) should address.
Therefore my suspicion is that
this term ‘dual aspect’ in Vimal’s philosophy also has some influence from the
idea of dependent co-origination
and neglects the position of Brahman as cause of all causes. The mind and brain
are of course appear to be inseparable in the organic unity of life processes
in nature as long as life continues. But in Vedanta we have the principle of
reincarnation by which it is clearly established that the subtle form
comprising of soul covered with the mental structure disentangles with the more
gross elements – i.e. brain and body at the time of death. In fact we must ask
by what means reincarnation takes place. In fact there are also living entities
that do not possess any distinctive brain system. Yet they are also
intelligent. For example the trees, single celled organisms etc. are all
intelligent. We can understand these intelligent concepts of living organisms
through the living process which can be written down as an algorithm in terms
of the material elements like the atoms and molecules. But the source of this
algorithm cannot be pinned down to these material elements. In biology the conventional
concepts of Central dogma are for this reason found to be untenable. For
example in Wikipedia entry about Robert Rosen, an American biologist, it is
mentioned, “He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot
always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect
of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino
acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important
factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down. [16]”
Additionally we must mention that the concept of internal teleology is quite
clearly an inseparable part of such causal processes.
Regarding the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristotle
concept of matter, it is quite true that they have not explained matter in the
way of modern atomistic view of science. According to Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta
Swami Prabhupada, “Matter is a symbol of undeveloped consciousness. [17]”
Therefore this system can only be understood from the concept of the organic
whole. But that does not mean that we can regard that matter can produce
consciousness. We need to clearly study the logic of life processes to
understand this. The category of acit
potency or material energy is never the source of life in the Vedantic thought.
Yet the acit potency is dependent
category and an attribute in the philosophy of Ramanuja. So we cannot regard
matter and mind as being merely dual aspect of the same entity. When there is
death there is no more consciousness in the dead body. Neither does the residual dead cell act in any
conscious manner. They just disintegrate according to the laws of entropy.
Therefore this body and the life principle have no intrinsic relation to
each other after death. But how matter is produced is an important question. As
we can see when the life principle is present, the body of the organism
develops and changes. We have already suggested that no one has done any
precise experiment to ascertain whether the law of conservation of mass and
energy in case of life is obeyed. According to the Vedantic thought there must
be a discrepancy and this discrepancy can be experimentally determined.
Therefore what is the problem to think that the whole world of material plane
can come from the potencies of Original life, which is the theistic position of
the major World Religions. Therefore the problem of Unity is solved through the
axiomatic principle of Vedanta (i) Life comes from Life, and (ii) Matter comes
from Life.
When you state that consciousness
is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a
brain-process in the first person perspective, it is certainly true that the
brain mind system is intricately involved in the different expressions
of phenomenal consciousness. Yet the brain cannot be the source of
consciousness. Rather when life is present, it produces the inseparable brain
mind system within the organic unity of the concept of species. As we know that
every cell is sentient, we can only say that in the living process the
different organs produce each other. Yet it is the life principle which is a higher
and superior category in Vedanta, without which there will be no such process.
It is this living entity which holds together the separated material energies
in the life process. Hence the life process has a much deeper conceptual
relation to Reality. Therefore the natural process of life is inconceivable
within physics and chemistry. Chemistry never becomes life in nature.
Some Notes on Visista-advaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja
First let us try to understand
something about the philosophy of Visistadvaita.
This is a system of Philosophy given by Sripad Ramanujacharya and this
critiqued the then and dominating thesis of the kevala advaita system of Adi Sankaracharya. The first point
therefore should be to understand the distinction between advaita and kevala advaita.
The advaita philosophy has been there
in India from time immemorial. It did not begin with Sripad Adi Sankaracharya
and neither did he coin the term advaita.
Advaita means the non-dual truth. But Sankaracharya’s explanation of advaita is called kevala advaita or Monism. In this explanation the phenomenal
reality was an unreality or illusion stemming from avidya or ignorance. Sankaracharya had dismissed plurality by
focusing on avidya for establishing
his explanation of advaita or
non-dualism. But advaita did not
always mean Monism in Indian Philosophical traditions. It is the Sankara’s advaita in which the term means monism
and therefore it has been categorized not just as advaita but with a qualifier as kevala-advaita.
Thus it was distinguished from the philosophy of Suddha Advaita by the line of teachers in Sripad Sridhar Swami’s theistic
tradition and other vaishnava acharya’s to protect the real meaning of Advaita as was and is being taught in
the theistic schools of India from the onslaught of the Sankara’s reductive
philosophy of Monism, where all is reduced to One.
Sripad Ramanuja Acharya gave the
concept of Organic Whole in his philosophy of Visitaadvaita. In this he has achieved the great reconciliation of
the One with the Many. Sankara had concluded that the Many is illusory
manifestations of the One due to the function of Maya or avidya (ignorance). And therefore Sankara had stressed on the
Reality One and the illusion of the Many.
Therefore Sankara’s philosophy is that of reductive idealism and he
stresses only on the principle of identity that exists between the One and the
Many based upon the principle of ignorance. He neglects or makes the
distinction between one and many a product of illusion, giving distinctions no
reality [18].
But Sripad Ramanuja Acharya has stressed
that the principle of distinction is a reality. It is not merely a result of
illusion as held in Sankara’s line of thinking. Sripad Ramanuja has stressed
the reality of both Many as well as the One. The ‘many’ are not the illusory
manifestations of the one but they are held in their inseparable relation of
dependence on the One. In this way Sripad Ramanuja returned the atman or the soul back to the Vedantins,
which was previously lost in the Brahman of Sankara’s kevala advaita system of thought [19].
Therefore matter, souls and
Brahman are all real in Ramanuja. The world of matter and souls is treated as
attributes of the Brahman. The technical Sanskrit term for attributes is visesanas. The first point is that
Brahman is not merely an attributeless homogenous stuff of consciousness.
Brahman is Supra Personality or the best of Personalities, or Adi Purusha or Purushottama. He is endowed with infinity of auspicious attributes.
He is all knowing, all powerful, all merciful as well as the transcendent
Supreme Being. The world of souls (cit)
and the world of matter (acit) are
regarded as His chief attributes (visesanas).
And He is the fundamental Substance (visesya).
From this view of the complex whole (called Vaisitya
drstya), Brahman is One without a
second. Only from this point of view is Ramanuja’s view Monistic, and therefore
this kind of Monism is quite different from Sankara’s attributeless Monism.
Therefore Ramanuja’s Monism is called visista
Advaita. From the angle of vision of the attributes (visesanas), they are different from Brahman, but all time they are always
dependent on Brahman and inseparable from Brahman. The distinction and
plurality of the souls persists with their dependence on God. Their distinction
does not go against their dependence on God. The Brahman of Ramanuja "is
an organic unity in which, as in all living organisms one element predominates
over and controls the rest. [20]”
The subordinate elements are
termed visesanas and the predominant
element visesya. Because the visesanas cannot exist by themselves
separately, the complex whole (visista)
in which they are included is described as a unity. Hence, the name of Ramanuja
philosophy is Visistadvaita.
Therefore Reality according to Ramanuja is not merely a bare identity as held
in Sankara. Reality is an identity-in-difference and the difference is not
unreal. The identity element holds the difference and makes for the unity and
there is a coordination of identity and difference. In Ramanuja’s system the
world of souls and matter are co eternal with God, but not external from Him. Matter or prakriti through pradhan
and mahatattva comes from Brahman as
one of its energies and is called bahiranga
or external energy (appearing external or separate as Maya) thus it is an
eternal potential but not intrinsic to Him as his antaranga or spiritual energy. The relation between matter,
souls and God in Ramanuja’s system is called aprthaka siddhi. This relation is an eternal one and it maintains distinctions between
entities that are in intimate and inseparable relation to each other. Therefore
Brahman is the inner immortal ruler and this is based upon the concept of the
indweller (antaryami). Moreover Brahman
is not unknowable [21]. Ramanuja discovered the epistemological plane called adhoksaja in which such knowability
becomes possible.
During the state of dissolution,
the world of souls and matter remain in a subtle form within the Lord. This
aspect of Lord is called karanavastha,
or the causal state. In the effect stage, it is called karyavastha. In this stage the world of souls, get attached to the
world of matter and are said to be born. In this way the effect is not
something entirely different from the cause. The cause itself gets transformed
onto effect and this is called parinamavada.
Parinaama means change. So as soon as
we ask does that mean God Himself changes into the world of matter and souls. And if so
does that not taint Him as something defective. But Ramanuja avoids all these
defects and still maintains the concept of change through the category called dharmabhuta jnana, or attributive
knowledge. It is not that the Lord changes or the souls change. The Lord and
the souls are of the nature of substantive knowledge or jnana. Besides this the Lord and souls have an attributive called dharmabhuta jnana. What changes is the
attribute (visesana) called the dharmabhuta jnana, or the attributive knowledge
and not the substantive jnana. This dharmabhuta jnana is substance as well
as attribute. It is substance in the sense that it undergoes changes and
produces effects which are called material cause. It is however not the inert
matter. It is this dharmabhuta jnana
which operates through the mental faculties and produces knowledge. Not only
knowledge but also internal states like desires and aversion are also regarded
as the transformation of this dharmabhuta
jnana. As it is this attributive knowledge that changes there is no
necessity of parinaamavada for God.
Thus the change in the attribute does not taint or effect the Lord in anyway. Ramanuja
is neither a follower parinaamavaada nor
that of vivartavaada [22]. This point
is also accepted and supported by Srila Bhakti Vinoda Thakura in his Bhagavad-Gita commentary where he has clearly mentioned that
the Gaudiya philosophy does not adhere to Brahma-Parinaamavad.
But that the Gaudiyas are the proponents of Shakti-parinaamavad.
What is transformed is not the Brahman, but the potency. Therefore the cosmos
is not directly a transformation of Brahman. Rather the cosmos is a
transformation of shakti or potency,
hence the name shakti-parinaamavaad. Thus
for Ramanuja, Lord is the Supreme Reality and all others including the chit as well as the acit are dependent upon Him. Every word in the veda has for its plenary significance, the
Lord. It is only in the secondary sense that the words of the veda refer to the things of
the world, but in the deeper significance of the words are called Vedanta-vyutpatti and it always refers
to Brahman or God [23].
The entire world of Reality
according to Ramanuja can be categorized as dravyas
(substance) and adravyas (attributes).
Thus colour, sound, taste, etc. all come under the category of attributes and
these go on to constitute prakriti.
Potency is also an adravya or the
attribute. Besides the attributes there are six substances (dravyas) which can be classified under
the categories of material or non material. The non-material entities are (i)
God, (ii) jiva, (iii) Nitya Vibhuti, (iv) dharmabhuta jnana. Time as experienced in the material plane and prakriti constitutes the material
variety of substances. Prakriti which
is comprised of three modes of material nature stops at the borderline of nitya-vibuti, which is transcendental
nature (super prakriti) under the
control of the Lord. Time is within Brahman for Ramanuja and space is derived
from prakriti [23].
The predecessors of Ramanuja,
like the alvars as well as the followers have always presented a theistic
concept of Vedanta and explained the philosophy of love of God in their
writings. To them, the Holy Ramanujaites, God is not merely a theoretical
abstraction but a fact of the experience of the surrendered souls who have
developed love of Godhead. Their main theme is the greatness of God and His
glory as well as His presence in everything. They stress that the mercy of the
Lord as unconditional and all comprehensive. Mercy is higher than Justice. Sripad
Ramanuja Acharya was a great genius and a many sided scholar and the foremost
of the visistadvaita dialecticians.
According to Ramanuja knowledge always has a corresponding object. There is
never an objectless cognition. Ramanuja also explained that the cognition of an
attributeless object is a mere fiction. A non-qualified object can never be the
object of cognition.
Conclusion
Vimal attempts a modification of Visistadvaita without considering many
of the essential elements of the philosophy of Sri Ramanuja. Therefore the
problems that are cited by him like the Ist pp, cannot be solved within modified visistaadvaita. The reason is that he
relies more on the concept of dependent co origination. However the Brahman according to Vedanta is the janmady asya yatah – the source of all
that be. The atheistic position has been scrutinized well by Ramanuja,
especially when he faced the Buddhists philosophers of his time as well as the
Sankarites and others. Therefore it is incorrect to dismiss visistadvaita simply by saying that it
does not cater to a non-theistic harmonization of reality. No non-theistic
harmonization has ever been achieved. The problems of consciousness are major
question mark over such attempts. However the theistic position clearly
outlines guidelines for ascertaining how matter can come from life. Therefore
only the theistic position has the proper capacity to produce the harmonization
that is necessary for a truly rational and comprehensive understanding of
reality.
References
[1] Vimal,
R.L.P., Vimal, M., U., P. Introducing extended Dual-Aspect Monism (Dvi-Pakṣa
Advaita) Framework in Religion: Prāṇa Pratiṣṭha,
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283243225, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4356.4249,
October, 2015, pp. 2.
[2] ibid, 1.
[3] ibid 1., pp. 3.
[4] ibid., 3.
[5] ibid 1., pp. 4.
[6] ibid 1., pp. 8.
[7] ibid 1., pp. 8.
[8] ibid 1., pp. 12.
[9] ibid 1., pp. 12.
[10] ibid 1., pp. 9.
[11] ibid 1., pp. 1, 9.
[12] ibid 1., pp. 9.
[13] ibid 1., pp. 8.
[14] Tilakaratne,
A., Director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, 133/19,
Nawala Road, Narahenpita, Colombo 05 Sri Lanka. refer to
the article: ‘Dependent Co-origination:
The Buddhist Approach to Reality’, http://www.beyondthenet.net/slabs/articles/Dependent.pdf
[15] quoted
in [14], “If empty is not seen then reaching what has not been reached, the act
of terminating suffering as well as the relinquishing of all defilements also
will not be seen.” (Nagarjuna, XXIV: 38-39).
[17] Prabhupada
A.C., Bhaktivedanta Swami, quoted in http://gitabase.com/eng/LTRS/1976/2/76FE,
letter to Sripad Madhava Das [Brahmachari
name of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja].
[18] P.
Nagaraja Rao, The Schools of Vedanta, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavanm, Bombay, 1943,
pp. 73.
[19] ibid, 18.
[20] ibid, 18.
[21] ibid, 18, pp. 73-75.
[22] ibid, 18, pp. 75-76.
[23]ibid, 18, pp. 76.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Jan 14, 2017, 5:50:27 PM1/14/17
to PhD Bhakti Vijnana Muni, Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
THANKS for your interest in the eDAM/Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita framework and providing excellent critique.
I am in the process of addressing your comments, and I will let you know as soon as it is completed.
Cheers and Happy New Year!
Kindest regards,
Ram
14 Jan. 2017
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Bhakti Vijnana Muni
Apr 19, 2017, 7:04:06 AM4/19/17
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear
RLP Vimal,
Namaste.
Thanks for sending in your paper written in 2011, in which you have added my
response and your replies recently. I sincerely appreciate your detailed
response. We were also travelling a lot and hence it is a delayed response.
1.0 Dual Aspect Monism
I
had the opportunity to look at the Dual
aspect Monism webpage from Wikipedia [1] which Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri
Maharaja, our Gurudeva had shown us. It was interesting to know that Pauli and
Jung’s work resulted in the conjecture of dual
aspect monism (DAM). It posits that different aspects including the mental
and physical may show a complementarity in quantum physical sense. John
Polkinghorne also was inclined to DAM. Certainly therefore it is a current
problem meriting a serious study.
Atmanspacher
wrote vextensively on DAM and from the work of Paul Berneys explained
complementarity as, “Two descriptions are
complementary if they mutually exclude each other, yet are both necessary to
describe a situation exhaustively.”[2]
The
Vedantic Concept has a term called Pradhan
for the unmanifested sum total of the material elements. Pradhana is not the Brahman of Vedanta. Brahman has no material
qualities and that is why it is called nirguna.
The Vedantic causality principle is that Brahman (The Absolute Truth) is sarva karana karanam or cause of all
causes [3].
DAM
view is quite different in that it posits that causality principle depends on
the existence of mutually exclusive epistemic domains for matter and psyche,
both of which however may be necessary for a complete understanding.
However
the definition of the Absolute truth is that it cannot be limited by such
boundaries. Absolute is that which finds itself even outside its boundary. Such
however cannot be implied in the DAM concept. Moreover it does not answer the
question how consciousness is deduced from the ontic state and just posits it
as an extrapolation from the usual complementarity principle discovered in the
quantum physics.
Lets
us review some of the views that led to the development of DAM.
2.0 Polkinghorne’s views on DAM
DAM
is an outcome of the philosophical thinking led by developments like
complementarity principle in QM. Polkinghorne explained from Physics that the view
of nature is more cloud-like than clock-like and mechanistic explanations were
not very appropriate. He said, “There is
only one stuff in the world (not two—the material and the mental) but it can
occur in two contrasting states (material and mental phases, a physicist might
say) which explain our perception of the difference between mind and matter.”
[4] For Polkinghorne the nearest analogy to God is the idea of Quantum Vacuum. The reasons for a DAM
thinking for him are [5]:
(i)
intelligibility of the universe,
(ii)
the anthropic fine tuning of the universe,
and
(iii)
the wider humane reality.
Freeman
Dyson felt Polkinghornes’s views were, “polished and logically coherent.” [6]
3.0 Atmanspacher on Pauli and Jung conjecture
Atmanspacher
is a noted scholar on the so called Pauli Jung conjecture. He wrote in his
paper much about the history of DAM. According to him Pauli and Jung thought that
duality of mental and material aspects, is specified in terms of a
complementarity. Bohm also had such ideas, e.g., he said, “At each level of subtlety there will be a “mental pole” and a “physical
pole” [7]. He thought that the deeper reality is something beyond either
mind or matter.
3.1 Physics and Psyche as complementary
principles
Pauli
said, “It would be most satisfactory if
physics and psyche could be conceived as complementary aspects of the same
reality.” [8] Atmanspacher notes in his paper [9] that the notion of complementarity
was coined by James to account for the split modes in consciousness. Later Bohr
extended it into physics in terms of wave-particle duality. Further Bohr’s main
concern was to extend this duality beyond physics. And Pauli propagated the
idea that, “the issue of complementarity
within physics naturally leads beyond the narrow field of physics to analogous
conditions of human knowledge” [10].
One
aspect of complementarity in Physics concerns the non-commutative nature of the
incompatible variables. The other aspect is the necessity of two mutually
exclusive descriptions of reality that cannot be combined into a single
description in terms of two-valued Boolean Logic. So the DAM proponents contend
that this kind of truth should also be true for domains that are beyond
physics. This logic implies that the compliment of a proposition is different
from its negation. An example of such a compliment is belief-doubt (rather than
belief-disbelief). Further DAM proponents believe that there can be more than
one compliment for a proposition. Thus it allows formal propositions that are
complimentary in this sense. In this way in QM several new issues like
incompatibity, incommensurability and incomparability and opposites have become
a reality.
If
these are extended to domains like psychology, DAM proponents suggest that
science may be struggling in these areas. This is because it is forced to deal
with them in a kind of patchwork type of disunity. However it may be a result
of some kind of complimentarity. Therefore alone they may be insufficient but
taken together both sides (the physical and the mental sides) may explain
reality exhaustively. Thus the empirical contexts for observing them exclude each
other.
Atmanspacher
delineates four main points in Pauli’s concern [11]:
(i)
Relation between local realism and holism in
quantum physics,
(ii)
Relation between consciousness and the
unconsciousness in Jung’s philosophy,
(iii)
the common, psychophysically neutral ground
of both the mental, conscious realm and the physical, local realm, and
(iv)
Relation between these realms as a
consequence of or as mediated by their common ground.
3.2 Measurement Problem in modern Physics
One
of the very important concerns of modern physics is the measurement problem in
Quantum Mechanics. Pauli wrote that, “It
might be that matter, for instance considered from the perspective of life, is
not treated \properly" if it is observed as in quantum mechanics, namely
totally neglecting the inner state of the \observer".[12]
In
this regard Pauli referred to the incompleteness problem of quantum mechanics.
Pauli noted that although Einstein recognized this, his proposition in terms of
classical field theory was not sufficient. For Pauli such problems indicate the
relations between the inside and the outside, which is completely neglected in
physics [13].
Of
course nowadays the non-local correlations have been discovered. First by
Bell’s hypothesis which has been later confirmed by the experimental work of
Alain Aspect [14]. It implies that in any system which contains descriptions in
terms of non-commutating observables, some non-local correlations will be
found. This is taken to indicate that before the act of measurement the
measured system is in a holistic state [15]. This also means indirect inference
of knowledge of the state of the system prior to measurement due to
measurement.
This
indicates what Bohr had already explained. Any intervention changes the state
of the observed system in a finite and an uncontrollable way [16, due to Bohr
in 1935]. But this also means and that Bohr had also explained that local
realism is also a necessity for a proper explanation of reality, i.e. experiment
and their respective outcomes. It implies we need both local realism as well as
non-local correlations for comprehensive explanations of reality.
According
to Atmanspacher the process of measurement represents a link between epistemic states and ontic states. Here ontic states refer to
holistic concept of reality in which states are associated with intrinsic
properties and are operationally inaccessible. For Atmanspacher, “Measurement suppresses the connectedness
constituting a holistic reality and generates approximately separate local
objects constituting a local reality.” Pauli in this regard referred to
Heisenberg’s statement, “As Heisenberg
has emphasized, quantum mechanics rests on a sharp cut between observer or
instrument of observation on one hand and the system observed on the other."
[17]
Yet
Quantum theory as such does not refer to the mental domain of human observers
or to cognitive features in general. This is because the general consideration
is that any non-intentional inanimate environment can be understood as a
measuring device and no consciousness is necessary for measuring a quantum
state. But when we consider issues like controlled experiments, several
features come out like experiment design, choices in selection of observables
and interpretation of data, all which have dependence on thoughts and
intentions of human observers, none of which is a part of the formalism of QM.
4.0 The incompleteness of physics within the
totality of life
Consciousness
cannot be understood as an ingredient of physical measurements, even after quantum
mechanics. For Pauli this incompleteness of quantum theory (with regard to the
measurement problem) within physics should be understood rather as “the incompleteness of physics within the
totality of life." [18] Pauli and Jung highlight the importance of
measurement in providing the link between the local and holistic realities in
physics. And they think that this is mirrored in the acts by which subjects
become aware of the local mental objects, but it must start from the holistic
contents of psychology.
Further
for them behind this epistemically accessible physical and mental domain there
is something ontic behind these mind-matter distinctions. Thus the mentally
unconscious is prior to the transition to a conscious state. According to Jung,
“Rather, everything divided and different
belongs to one and the same world, which is not the world of sense but a
postulate” [19].
These
are some of the basic foundations of Pauli-Jung postulate, the foundation of
DAM.
5.0 The Unresolved Problem of Epistemology in
Physics and related problems in DAM
In
this way we can see that DAM recognizes the problems both in the epistemic
domain as well as the ontic domain. For DAM, even though we can see that the
ontic domain is beyond the sense domain, it is possible to make statements of
knowledge by inference. But it does not explain how the complimentary features
arise? Neither does it state very comprehensively what that ontic domain is in
its full comprehension. It merely accepts the observable truths and from that
accepts the so called complimentary features as mutually exclusive epistemic
domains.
Although,
we do not really understand the total process that leads to this complementary
picture in our epistemic domains, DAM extrapolates the idea to the mental
domain from inferences within Physics somewhat arbitrarily. It does not explain
the process by which the complimentary features arise. For a comprehensive
idea, we must explain not only the results (what is going in and what is going
out) but also the totality – the beginning, the process and the result.
Unfortunately we do not have such an idea in Physics. That’s why Julian
Schwinger mentioned in his book, The
Symbolism of Atomic Measurements that, “We
send electrons, protons into the various kinds of nucleons, where we perform
experiments in which these particles enter a certain very small region. We make
no attempt to describe what goes on there and simply try to finally
characterize what emerges when the particles are separated again. Is the
purpose of theoretical physics to be no more than a cataloging of all the
things that can happen when particles interact with each other and separate? Or
is it to be an understanding at a deeper level in which there are things that
are not directly observable (as the underlying quantized fields are) but in
terms of which we shall have a more fundamental understanding? Well, this
question - idealized, frankly, beyond all recognition - is in a sense the deep
philosophical problem that confronts theoretical physics. [20]” He even
rejected the notion of the Grand Unification based upon the theory of Quantum
theory. He rejected notions of ‘Grand Unification’ and of ‘Superstrings’ not
because of their structure but because he saw them as preposterous
speculations, based on the notion that nothing new remains to be found from 1
TeV to 1019 GeV [21].
6.0 A more Philosophical approach
Thus
it requires a more rational approach to scientifically comprehend the truth of
reality which comes about as containing simultaneously the contradictory sides.
Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja has mentioned in his website www.gwfhegel.org)
[22] that the process involves three stages, viz., (i) The Stage of Abstract Understanding which is
abstract determination of the separate sides of the contradiction without
understanding the relation between the two sides, (ii) The stage of Negative Reason in which the
dialectical relation of the two sides is determined. In this process the
existence of the abstract independence of two sides in the stage of
Understanding is dissolved and a dialectical relation is reasoned, (iii) Positive Reason: this dialectical
relationship is raised into a dynamic reality. The ability to reason in these
stages prepares the thoughtful to come to its True Concept.
This
means that when we study something we start with being. Then we take the opposites,
i.e. being and its negation, i.e. non being and in this process we separate
them out from one another. But in this process we are left with something that
is already the opposite of itself. Thus in the process of understanding, it is abstracted
from its oppositional relation. After that it is posited as if it is something
on its own. Thus it becomes the opposite of what it actually is. But in truth it
exists as it is only in an oppositional relation.
But
if thought removes that relation from itself then what is produced out of it is
really something opposed to what it actually is. Thus understanding results in an abstraction. This kind of being is
therefore an abstract being and it is therefore a thought which is not yet very
well developed. In this way we can realize that there is no such a thing as a
being on its own.
When
we think like this it is only an abstraction. By itself without this
oppositional relation, it is only an isolated idea. For example the idea of ‘North’
already contains the idea of ‘South’ implicitly in it as an oppositional
relationship. On its own North has no meaning. It is only an isolated or
abstract being that did not consider its dialectical oppositional relationship
with South, which is its non-being. But when these two moments are considered
in their unity as an opposing relation it is called becoming. This is the true comprehension
of the actual situation. So the same can be said for any opposition if we
consider it carefully in this way. An opposition ties one thing with a specific
other. So there is a necessary relation involved, that relation has a dynamic
structure which thought can uncover and leads to a higher conception that
unifies them [23].
In this way by a proper rational approach the body/mind
opposition can be comprehended in a higher synthesis or unity called
consciousness. The problem is that QM is not really a theory about
consciousness. Atomic theory as we understand today concerns itself with waves
and particles. It is not really a theory about consciousness. The theory is
wrought with much speculation arising from some quarters because of the
unnecessary confidence that everything can be explained by it.
7.0 Vedantic Thought
The
Vedantic thought quite clearly establishes that consciousness is not a result
of mere chemical activity. Thus quantum processes will not result in life
because it does not produce living activity. Therefore life constitutes a
higher order activity in nature. We do not find conscious activity outside
life. But we do see that when the living entity dies there is no more
consciousness left.
In
the living form we find the unity between consciousness and matter. This unity
exists from the very conception of life in the womb in the form of a zygote.
Later the different limbs differentiate and lastly the dead matter remains as a
residue after death. Thus the unity of life is this Genus process itself which
cannot be produced outside this species process.
However,
in quantum theory we may see various types of complementarity like wave –
particle duality merely by deciding to do a different observation or by switching
the sequence of the measurements. But we have not achieved this type of
complementarity in the life process outside the living domain.
Thus
eDAM somewhat takes a adhoc stand about the ontic state and further there is no
proof to extrapolate such ideas to life processes. Even quantum mechanics
infers the subjective element from the problems of measurement and yet it does
not deduce consciousness as a product of atomic interactions. Therefore
consciousness is required to explain the measurement process but it does not explain
what consciousness is, neither does it explain how it arises. Thus modern
science misses the reality of the subjective half of the reality because it
thinks the consciousness arises from material interactions.
The
idea of the harmony of opposites is well considered in Vedanta. Yet Brahman, or
the Absolute Person (Adi purusha) is
explained as the cause of all causes. Further Absolute is Sentient. Both the cit (the infinitesimal conscious energy)
and the acit (material energy) are
His dependent energies. Matter is described as a symbol of undeveloped
consciousness. Therefore it is not inconceivable that Matter can come from
Life. Or Life follows a higher order of logic (such as free will) than material
energy. According to Srimad Bhagavatam, “No
one in the material world is perfect, and an imperfect person could not
describe this material universe accurately, even after continued speculation.”
[24]
However some confusion could be resolved if
we take a look at the definition of Pradhan
of Vedanta Philosophy.
8.0
Pradhan: the Primordial State of
material energy in the Vedantic concept
In one of your statements you have mentioned
that the Unmanifested state of the primal
entity has inseparable mental and physical aspects. However, in the
Vedantic Concept, the mental and physical aspect is a much later state. There
was no objective existence at that time of these elements in that state.
Everything was merged in the primordial state (which is called Pradhan) and there was no objective
existence of these.
However this Pradhan lies in one corner of the spiritual space called the Causal
Ocean (The Karana Sagar). The
material aspects are not a part of Brahman. In Brahman there is no existence of
the material modes of material nature and therefore Brahman is distinct from
the pradhana (the unmanifested state
of material elements in a subtle state). The pradhana is said to be unmanifested because at this stage the cause
and effect are not yet clearly manifested and so the reaction of the total
elements does not take place. Pradhana
is also distinct from time because in the time element there are actions and
reactions in the form of creations and annihilations. It is the condition
immediately previous to its manifestation that is called Pradhana.
Therefore Brahman is not the same as the
unmanifested state of material energies. What you refer to as Brahman in bottom
up approach refers probably may somewhat refer to the pradhana. But this pradhana
does not refer to the living entities because although the designations of the
living entities are conditional the living entity itself is eternal or nitya. The unmanifested state of the
material energy is called the Pradhana
and not Brahman. Brahman has no material form or content. Yet the pradhana or the material energy is
dependent on the Brahman, that much is conceded. The material energy cannot act
by itself. Therefore it needs the help consciousness to act. Therefore
consciousness existed much before the existence of material universe. Therefore
the manifestation of the universe needs the glance of the plenary aspect of the
Brahman over the primordial state of material energy called Pradhana, and gradually the three modes,
ego, intelligence, mind and the gross elements appear as permutations and
combinations of these processes stage by stage.
The Brahman is therefore called nirguna or that which has no qualities
related to material energy. But Brahman has its own form as well but that form is
not material. The form of Brahman has to do with its own purpose. Therefore
Brahman is the form of sat (eternal existence),
chit (full consciousness) and ananda (full satisfaction).But when
Brahman acts on the Pradhana the
three modes of material nature become manifest and the material energies
expand.
Sometimes certain sages call this expanded
material energy as saguna Brahman to
distinguish it from the nirguna
Brahman where there is no touch of the material energy. Saguṇa Brahman is described by the Sāṅkhya system of
philosophy as consisting of twenty-five elements, including the time factor
(past, present and future). So this is distinct from the Nirguna Brahman [3].
9.0 Conclusion
Hence we should not prematurely apply
the concepts of eDAM to Brahman when we are still trying to figure out the material
energy in its unmanifested state, which is call as Pradhana in Vedanta. DAM faces challenges in describing the nature
of the Ontic state, which should be recognized and then we can clearly take an
approach to solve the more difficult problems using the guidelines of Vedanta.
References
[2] Polkinghorne, J., (1994). “Science and
Christian Belief”, SPCK Publishing; 1st Ed. edition (February 24, 1994), app.
21.
[4] Atmanspacher, H., (2012).
"Dual-Aspect Monism à la Pauli and Jung", Journal of Consciousness
Studies. 19 (9-10): 96–120(25).
[5] Polkinghorne, "An Intelligible
Universe", Euresis Journal, Vol.1, Summer 2011. http://www.euresisjournal.org/public/article/pdf/polkinghorne.pdf
[6] Freeman Dyson, "Is God in the
Lab?", The New York Review of Books, 28 May 1998.
[7] Bohm, D. (1990): A new theory of the
relationship of mind and matter. Philosophical Psychology 3, 271–286.
[8] Pauli, W. (1952): Der Einfluss
archetypischer Vorstellungen auf die Bildung naturwissenschaftlicher Theorien
bei Kepler. In: Jung, C. G. & Pauli, W. (eds.), Naturerkl¨arung und Psyche.
Z¨urich, Rascher Verlag, pp. 109–194.
[9] Atmanspacher, H., Primas, H., Pauli’s
ideas on mind and matter in the context of contemporary science, http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.510.2544&rep=rep1&type=pdf
[10] Pauli, W. (1950): Die philosophische
Bedeutung der Idee der Komplementaritat. Experientia 6, 72{81. English
translation in Enz, C.P., von Meyenn, K. (eds.) Wolfgang Pauli. Writings on
Physics and Philosophy, pp. 79, 1994.
[11] Ibid., 4.
[12] Ibid., 4. Pp. 9.
[13] Ibid., 4. Pp. 9.
[14] Ibid., 4. Pp. 9.
[15] Ibid., 4. Pp. 9.
[16] Bohr, N. (1935): Can quantum-mechanical
description of physical reality be considered
complete? Physical Review 48, 696{702.
[17] Ibid., 4. Pp. 10.
[18] Ibid., 4. Pp. 11.
[19] Ibid., 4. Pp. 14.
[20] Schwinger, J., “Quantum Mechanics: On
Symbolism of Atomic Measurements”, pp. 25, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
2001, ISBN 978-3-642-07467-7, DOI 10.1007/978-3-662-04589-3.
[23] The section 4.0 contains some thoughts
from ideas that were discussed by Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, PhD over
Skype.
On Wednesday, January 18, 2017 10:20 AM, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni ji,
Thanks for your excellent critique, which has sharpened the extended Dual-Aspect Monism (eDAM, Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) framework
My responses to your critique are given in Section 3.6 (3.6.1 to 3.6.7) of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal, 2011).
Your feedback will be highly appreciated.
Cheers!
Kindest regards,
Ram
17 Jan. 2017
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Deepak Chopra
Apr 19, 2017, 12:35:55 PM4/19/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
My take today
Mind / Body/ Universe are human constructs
There is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/361650313.4280637.1492595191018%40mail.yahoo.com.
David Schwartzman
Apr 19, 2017, 6:28:34 PM4/19/17
to Online Sadhu Sanga
My take today
The labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.
This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemist
Professor Emeritus
Howard University
Author of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/361650313.4280637.1492595191018%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7AF-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA%40chopra.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 20, 2017, 12:24:14 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
What came first consciousness or science ?
What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 20, 2017, 12:24:14 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
From: Deepak Chopra
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 6:44:33 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 6:44:33 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptions
No one has ever proved the existence of matter
Matter is non material
It's made of nothing
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 20, 2017, 12:24:14 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Matter-first (materialism) science is a bottom-up approach from pre-Big Bang to Big Bang to the current period of co-evolution, dependently co-origination, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning. This is just opposite to fully manifested consciousness-first (idealism), which is a top-down approach. Both have serious problems: materialism rejects consciousness-in-itself, and idealism rejects matter-in-itself. They are riding in different boats of foundational metaphysics in opposite direction. They will never meet and hence this materialism vs. idealism debate is a never ending and is a useless mental exercise in my view. Dualism has its own 8 serious problems, which cannot be resolved. Therefore, the only hope is the least problematic 5-component extended dual-aspect monism (eDAM) metaphysics elaborated in 5 articles: (Vimal, 2008b), (Vimal, 2010c), (Vimal, 2013), (Vimal, 2015g), (Vimal, 2016d). This eDAM foundational metaphysics brings science and religions closer and is worth spending time on it.
Kind regards,
Vimal
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. In your extended dual aspect monism, i.e. eDAM, you have critiqued Visistaadvaita philosophy for its neglect of the non-theistic harmonization of Reality. You say, “We simply cannot ignore the contribution of science in our lives. [1]” You have tried to cater to the viewpoints of both the theists as well as atheists. For example, you say that theists can assume the dual aspect Brahman as God. Atheists can assume Brahman as dual aspect entity at fundamental level such as physicist’s vacuum, deep quantum potential or Bohm’s Implicate Order from where all universes (including human beings) emerge via co-evolution [2].
Your (RLP Vimal’s) concept of eDAM
As you have proposed a ‘modified Visistadvaita’ through your eDAM, the natural question to ask is why do you think, that the visistaadvaita philosophy needs a modification from eDAM and if indeed so then in what respect. The dual aspects that you in [1] refer to are the physical aspects (e.g neural networks in brain) and the mental aspects (e.g. subjective experiences). In your opinion among all philosophies in religion and science, this modified Visistadvaita proposed by you has the least number of problems. In this regard you have taken up the issues of inseparability as very important. For example you refer to your Dual-Aspect Monism, where mind and matter are the inseparable aspects of the same entity state [3].
In defining concepts of matter, you have pointed out to the distinctions among the concept of Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’ from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept. In the former matter has a form and potentiality for experiences, and you have accepted this concept of matter within your theory of eDAM. Then you distinguish it from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept (that matter is made up of atoms and which is pursued in science) which has the implication that matter is non-experiential within this framework. As this is faced with the hard problem of consciousness, you do not accept this within eDAM [4].
Further with that background, in defining the concept of consciousness, you state to have used the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’s concept of matter that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective (1pp) [5].
While concluding from Sankaracharya’s advaita philosophy that the fundamental Reality is consciousness, i.e. the mental entity, you have mentioned that the advaita system does not explain by any step by step process that how the matter is created from a non-material entity mind (Brahman). And therefore this constitutes a serious explanatory gap within the Sankara’s Advaita system. You have noted that this is the reverse of the explanatory gap found in materialism that mind can be created out of matter [6]. And so you have taken the cue from Buddha and Nagarjuna and followed a middle path which is your theory of Dual Aspect Monism [7]. Your dual-aspect monism proposes that there are varying degrees of dominance of aspects depending of the entity-level and context is the middle path. This means that ‘the concept of the varying degrees of the manifestation (appearance/strength) of aspects’ means that the degree of ‘the appearance and/or strength of aspects’ varies depending on the levels of entities [8]. At each level, the manifestation of aspects is through dependent co-origination [9] i.e., through co-evolution, adaptation, natural selection, co-development and sensorimotor tuning.
But it is clear from your paper that you do not accept the Reality of Brahman as fully independent Truth. Your dual aspect monism does not accept that God/ Brahman is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience, who can affect each one of us and hence we must pray to him [10]. To substantiate your position you have asked the question Who created God/Brahman? And you have stated that the usual answer that Brahman is eternal and hence non-causal, is considered unacceptable to many. And that is the reason I feel you have taken recourse to the principle of dependent co origination because it denies any central or supreme position to any particular entity.
Thus even though you think that visitadvaita is close to your dual aspect monism, there are major differences between Visistadvaita and eDAM. Therefore you consider that visistadvaita like other world religions suffers from a built in interaction substance dualism. For example you state that the soul separates from the body at the time of death [11]. The truth however is that visistadvaita is a consistent and elegant philosophy, well honored in India and now all over the world by different scholars. However your inability to appreciate its foundational consistency and beauty stems from your misunderstanding of the true concept of Brahman as explained in Sri Ramanuja’s system.
Thus in your framework of modified visistadvaita which is a result of your dual aspect monism, you think that the problem is resolved when we can think that the mental aspect of Brahman causes mind and the physical aspect causes matter. From this dual aspect monistic view you further conclude that all entities including us, fermions and bosons are all Brahman [12]. But that is surely not the philosophy of visistadvaita propounded by Sripad Ramanuja Acharya.
The Critique of Vimal’s Philosophy of eDAM
The main difference between Vimal and Ramanuja seems to be on the use of the concept of Dual Aspect by Vimal. Sripad Ramanuja’s Monism is established on the basis of the concept of visista. But Vimal’s monism is attempted on the basis of the idea of dual aspect. Moreover it appears that Vimal has chosen a middle path from that of Buddha and Nagarjuna [13], who are quite clearly non-Vedantic in their approach, and therefore non-theistic. Vimal’s idea of manifestation of objects is through the concept of dependent co-origination. As far as I know the concept of dependent co origination is also founded upon the Buddhist line of thought [14], where the origin is said to be empty or Void [15]. In Buddhist thought everything is changing and dependent. That is the character of reality explained in Buddhism. It was mainly used to target into the causes of suffering but it was also considered as applicable to everything that constitutes Reality. So this then within Buddhism provides the basis for the quest for solution to all problems which we are entangled with. Within this Bauddha Samanvaya (Harmonization) of dependent co-origination of everything there cannot be any centre occupying the supreme position. Therefore, in solving one’s own problems the question/problems of ‘others’ becomes very important, and we cannot totally forget the problems of others.
But In Vedanta clearly the origin is Brahman. Brahman is not an absolute emptiness. Brahman is purna, or Complete in itself. In the Vedantic thought the process of negation will not lead to voidism or absolute emptiness. When we negate something it does not produce a void. For example when a cow eats grass, the grass does not become annihilated. Rather grass which was as if existing for itself, now serves the purpose of the cow as its part and parcel through the process of digesting. So by eating the cow negates the being of the grass as existing for itself. Therefore everything in nature is posited as if it is existing for itself. But by the process of negation that independent positing of entities is being negated in various ways and forms by nature. In this way everything exists for some higher and higher purposes in Nature, in which everything is appearing and vanishing as transitory moments. Therefore Reality is dynamic and it is never fixed. Thus everything is being negated for a higher purpose than that which is for itself. When we come to negation of all such negations, we arrive at the purpose of Absolute, or the Brahman. Therefore Brahman is cause of all causes or that which constitutes the Ultimate purpose. Everything exists for the satisfaction of the Absolute. Sripad Ramanuja has quite clearly shown that only Brahman is independent and everything is dependent upon Him (Brahman). Brahman depends only upon Himself and there is no other cause that is outside of Him or external to Him. We cannot limit Brahman because if we try to limit Brahman, Brahman finds itself beyond its limit as well. Therefore if we say what is beyond Brahman, then the answer is Brahman itself. Therefore questions posed ‘like who created God (Brahman)?’ neglect the position of Brahman as the cause of all causes and the Absolute Truth. Brahman is not some finite entity that can be limited by some boundary. Hegel, the German philosopher summarized this beautifully by saying, “Reality is by itself and for itself.” But such cannot be said of the finite entities like Table, chairs or ordinary living entities. All causes ultimately are to be traced to be dependent on Brahman. But Brahman is by itself, or is the substantial truth of all reality. Thus the entities are not only inseparable but also they are all dependent on Brahman for their being and becoming. This is the major difference between Vedanta’s principle of Brahman as the Cause of all Causes (sarva karana karanam) and Buddhism’s principle of dependent co origination. This is also therefore not in line with Visistaadvaita philosophy when Vimal claims that the concept of dependent co- origination can solve the so called problems of Visistadvaita, merely because the aspects or entities are inseparable. If Visistadvaita is being modified in this way it entails a complete misunderstanding of the underlying principle of visistadvaita which the author (Vimal) should address.
Therefore my suspicion is that this term ‘dual aspect’ in Vimal’s philosophy also has some influence from the idea of dependent co-origination and neglects the position of Brahman as cause of all causes. The mind and brain are of course appear to be inseparable in the organic unity of life processes in nature as long as life continues. But in Vedanta we have the principle of reincarnation by which it is clearly established that the subtle form comprising of soul covered with the mental structure disentangles with the more gross elements – i.e. brain and body at the time of death. In fact we must ask by what means reincarnation takes place. In fact there are also living entities that do not possess any distinctive brain system. Yet they are also intelligent. For example the trees, single celled organisms etc. are all intelligent. We can understand these intelligent concepts of living organisms through the living process which can be written down as an algorithm in terms of the material elements like the atoms and molecules. But the source of this algorithm cannot be pinned down to these material elements. In biology the conventional concepts of Central dogma are for this reason found to be untenable. For example in Wikipedia entry about Robert Rosen, an American biologist, it is mentioned, “He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down. [16]” Additionally we must mention that the concept of internal teleology is quite clearly an inseparable part of such causal processes.
Regarding the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le concept of matter, it is quite true that they have not explained matter in the way of modern atomistic view of science. According to Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, “Matter is a symbol of undeveloped consciousness. [17]” Therefore this system can only be understood from the concept of the organic whole. But that does not mean that we can regard that matter can produce consciousness. We need to clearly study the logic of life processes to understand this. The category of acit potency or material energy is never the source of life in the Vedantic thought. Yet the acit potency is dependent category and an attribute in the philosophy of Ramanuja. So we cannot regard matter and mind as being merely dual aspect of the same entity. When there is death there is no more consciousness in the dead body. Neither does the residual dead cell act in any conscious manner. They just disintegrate according to the laws of entropy. Therefore this body and the life principle have no intrinsic relation to each other after death. But how matter is produced is an important question. As we can see when the life principle is present, the body of the organism develops and changes. We have already suggested that no one has done any precise experiment to ascertain whether the law of conservation of mass and energy in case of life is obeyed. According to the Vedantic thought there must be a discrepancy and this discrepancy can be experimentally determined. Therefore what is the problem to think that the whole world of material plane can come from the potencies of Original life, which is the theistic position of the major World Religions. Therefore the problem of Unity is solved through the axiomatic principle of Vedanta (i) Life comes from Life, and (ii) Matter comes from Life.
When you state that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective, it is certainly true that the brain mind system is intricately involved in the different expressions of phenomenal consciousness. Yet the brain cannot be the source of consciousness. Rather when life is present, it produces the inseparable brain mind system within the organic unity of the concept of species. As we know that every cell is sentient, we can only say that in the living process the different organs produce each other. Yet it is the life principle which is a higher and superior category in Vedanta, without which there will be no such process. It is this living entity which holds together the separated material energies in the life process. Hence the life process has a much deeper conceptual relation to Reality. Therefore the natural process of life is inconceivable within physics and chemistry. Chemistry never becomes life in nature.
Some Notes on Visista-advaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja
First let us try to understand something about the philosophy of Visistadvaita. This is a system of Philosophy given by Sripad Ramanujacharya and this critiqued the then and dominating thesis of the kevala advaita system of Adi Sankaracharya. The first point therefore should be to understand the distinction between advaita and kevala advaita. The advaita philosophy has been there in India from time immemorial. It did not begin with Sripad Adi Sankaracharya and neither did he coin the term advaita. Advaita means the non-dual truth. But Sankaracharya’s explanation of advaita is called kevala advaita or Monism. In this explanation the phenomenal reality was an unreality or illusion stemming from avidya or ignorance. Sankaracharya had dismissed plurality by focusing on avidya for establishing his explanation of advaita or non-dualism. But advaita did not always mean Monism in Indian Philosophical traditions. It is the Sankara’s advaita in which the term means monism and therefore it has been categorized not just as advaita but with a qualifier as kevala-advaita. Thus it was distinguished from the philosophy of Suddha Advaita by the line of teachers in Sripad Sridhar Swami’s theistic tradition and other vaishnava acharya’s to protect the real meaning of Advaita as was and is being taught in the theistic schools of India from the onslaught of the Sankara’s reductive philosophy of Monism, where all is reduced to One.
Sripad Ramanuja Acharya gave the concept of Organic Whole in his philosophy of Visitaadvaita. In this he has achieved the great reconciliation of the One with the Many. Sankara had concluded that the Many is illusory manifestations of the One due to the function of Maya or avidya (ignorance). And therefore Sankara had stressed on the Reality One and the illusion of the Many. Therefore Sankara’s philosophy is that of reductive idealism and he stresses only on the principle of identity that exists between the One and the Many based upon the principle of ignorance. He neglects or makes the distinction between one and many a product of illusion, giving distinctions no reality [18].
But Sripad Ramanuja Acharya has stressed that the principle of distinction is a reality. It is not merely a result of illusion as held in Sankara’s line of thinking. Sripad Ramanuja has stressed the reality of both Many as well as the One. The ‘many’ are not the illusory manifestations of the one but they are held in their inseparable relation of dependence on the One. In this way Sripad Ramanuja returned the atman or the soul back to the Vedantins, which was previously lost in the Brahman of Sankara’s kevala advaita system of thought [19].
Therefore matter, souls and Brahman are all real in Ramanuja. The world of matter and souls is treated as attributes of the Brahman. The technical Sanskrit term for attributes is visesanas. The first point is that Brahman is not merely an attributeless homogenous stuff of consciousness. Brahman is Supra Personality or the best of Personalities, or Adi Purusha or Purushottama. He is endowed with infinity of auspicious attributes. He is all knowing, all powerful, all merciful as well as the transcendent Supreme Being. The world of souls (cit) and the world of matter (acit) are regarded as His chief attributes (visesanas). And He is the fundamental Substance (visesya). From this view of the complex whole (called Vaisitya drstya), Brahman is One without a second. Only from this point of view is Ramanuja’s view Monistic, and therefore this kind of Monism is quite different from Sankara’s attributeless Monism. Therefore Ramanuja’s Monism is called visista Advaita. From the angle of vision of the attributes (visesanas), they are different from Brahman, but all time they are always dependent on Brahman and inseparable from Brahman. The distinction and plurality of the souls persists with their dependence on God. Their distinction does not go against their dependence on God. The Brahman of Ramanuja "is an organic unity in which, as in all living organisms one element predominates over and controls the rest. [20]”
The subordinate elements are termed visesanas and the predominant element visesya. Because the visesanas cannot exist by themselves separately, the complex whole (visista) in which they are included is described as a unity. Hence, the name of Ramanuja philosophy is Visistadvaita. Therefore Reality according to Ramanuja is not merely a bare identity as held in Sankara. Reality is an identity-in-difference and the difference is not unreal. The identity element holds the difference and makes for the unity and there is a coordination of identity and difference. In Ramanuja’s system the world of souls and matter are co eternal with God, but not external from Him. Matter or prakriti through pradhan and mahatattva comes from Brahman as one of its energies and is called bahiranga or external energy (appearing external or separate as Maya) thus it is an eternal potential but not intrinsic to Him as his antaranga or spiritual energy. The relation between matter, souls and God in Ramanuja’s system is called aprthaka siddhi. This relation is an eternal one and it maintains distinctions between entities that are in intimate and inseparable relation to each other. Therefore Brahman is the inner immortal ruler and this is based upon the concept of the indweller (antaryami). Moreover Brahman is not unknowable [21]. Ramanuja discovered the epistemological plane called adhoksaja in which such knowability becomes possible.
During the state of dissolution, the world of souls and matter remain in a subtle form within the Lord. This aspect of Lord is called karanavastha, or the causal state. In the effect stage, it is called karyavastha. In this stage the world of souls, get attached to the world of matter and are said to be born. In this way the effect is not something entirely different from the cause. The cause itself gets transformed onto effect and this is called parinamavada. Parinaama means change. So as soon as we ask does that mean God Himself changes into the world of matter and souls. And if so does that not taint Him as something defective. But Ramanuja avoids all these defects and still maintains the concept of change through the category called dharmabhuta jnana, or attributive knowledge. It is not that the Lord changes or the souls change. The Lord and the souls are of the nature of substantive knowledge or jnana. Besides this the Lord and souls have an attributive called dharmabhuta jnana. What changes is the attribute (visesana) called the dharmabhuta jnana, or the attributive knowledge and not the substantive jnana. This dharmabhuta jnana is substance as well as attribute. It is substance in the sense that it undergoes changes and produces effects which are called material cause. It is however not the inert matter. It is this dharmabhuta jnana which operates through the mental faculties and produces knowledge. Not only knowledge but also internal states like desires and aversion are also regarded as the transformation of this dharmabhuta jnana. As it is this attributive knowledge that changes there is no necessity of parinaamavada for God. Thus the change in the attribute does not taint or effect the Lord in anyway. Ramanuja is neither a follower parinaamavaada nor that of vivartavaada [22]. This point is also accepted and supported by Srila Bhakti Vinoda Thakura in his Bhagavad-Gita commentary where he has clearly mentioned that the Gaudiya philosophy does not adhere to Brahma-Parinaamavad. But that the Gaudiyas are the proponents of Shakti-parinaamavad. What is transformed is not the Brahman, but the potency. Therefore the cosmos is not directly a transformation of Brahman. Rather the cosmos is a transformation of shakti or potency, hence the name shakti-parinaamavaad. Thus for Ramanuja, Lord is the Supreme Reality and all others including the chit as well as the acit are dependent upon Him. Every word in the veda has for its plenary significance, the Lord. It is only in the secondary sense that the words of the veda refer to the things of the world, but in the deeper significance of the words are called Vedanta-vyutpatti and it always refers to Brahman or God [23].
The entire world of Reality according to Ramanuja can be categorized as dravyas (substance) and adravyas (attributes). Thus colour, sound, taste, etc. all come under the category of attributes and these go on to constitute prakriti. Potency is also an adravya or the attribute. Besides the attributes there are six substances (dravyas) which can be classified under the categories of material or non material. The non-material entities are (i) God, (ii) jiva, (iii) Nitya Vibhuti, (iv) dharmabhuta jnana. Time as experienced in the material plane and prakriti constitutes the material variety of substances. Prakriti which is comprised of three modes of material nature stops at the borderline of nitya-vibuti, which is transcendental nature (super prakriti) under the control of the Lord. Time is within Brahman for Ramanuja and space is derived from prakriti [23].
The predecessors of Ramanuja, like the alvars as well as the followers have always presented a theistic concept of Vedanta and explained the philosophy of love of God in their writings. To them, the Holy Ramanujaites, God is not merely a theoretical abstraction but a fact of the experience of the surrendered souls who have developed love of Godhead. Their main theme is the greatness of God and His glory as well as His presence in everything. They stress that the mercy of the Lord as unconditional and all comprehensive. Mercy is higher than Justice. Sripad Ramanuja Acharya was a great genius and a many sided scholar and the foremost of the visistadvaita dialecticians. According to Ramanuja knowledge always has a corresponding object. There is never an objectless cognition. Ramanuja also explained that the cognition of an attributeless object is a mere fiction. A non-qualified object can never be the object of cognition.
Conclusion
Vimal attempts a modification of Visistadvaita without considering many of the essential elements of the philosophy of Sri Ramanuja. Therefore the problems that are cited by him like the Ist pp, cannot be solved within modified visistaadvaita. The reason is that he relies more on the concept of dependent co origination. However the Brahman according to Vedanta is the janmady asya yatah – the source of all that be. The atheistic position has been scrutinized well by Ramanuja, especially when he faced the Buddhists philosophers of his time as well as the Sankarites and others. Therefore it is incorrect to dismiss visistadvaita simply by saying that it does not cater to a non-theistic harmonization of reality. No non-theistic harmonization has ever been achieved. The problems of consciousness are major question mark over such attempts. However the theistic position clearly outlines guidelines for ascertaining how matter can come from life. Therefore only the theistic position has the proper capacity to produce the harmonization that is necessary for a truly rational and comprehensive understanding of reality.
References
[1] Vimal, R.L.P., Vimal, M., U., P. Introducing extended Dual-Aspect Monism (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) Framework in Religion: Prāṇa Pratiṣṭha, https://www.researchgate.net/p ublication/283243225, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4356.4249, October, 2015, pp. 2.
[2] ibid, 1.[3] ibid 1., pp. 3.[4] ibid., 3.[5] ibid 1., pp. 4.[6] ibid 1., pp. 8.[7] ibid 1., pp. 8.[8] ibid 1., pp. 12.[9] ibid 1., pp. 12.[10] ibid 1., pp. 9.[11] ibid 1., pp. 1, 9.[12] ibid 1., pp. 9.[13] ibid 1., pp. 8.[14] Tilakaratne, A., Director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, 133/19, Nawala Road, Narahenpita, Colombo 05 Sri Lanka. refer to the article: ‘Dependent Co-origination: The Buddhist Approach to Reality’, http://www.beyondthenet.net/sl abs/articles/Dependent.pdf[15] quoted in [14], “If empty is not seen then reaching what has not been reached, the act of terminating suffering as well as the relinquishing of all defilements also will not be seen.” (Nagarjuna, XXIV: 38-39).
[17] Prabhupada A.C., Bhaktivedanta Swami, quoted in http://gitabase.com/eng/LTRS/1 976/2/76FE, letter to Sripad Madhava Das [Brahmachari name of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja].
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 20, 2017, 12:24:14 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptions
No one has ever proved the existence of matter
Matter is non material
It's made of nothing
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 20, 2017, 4:58:34 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.
Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
[23] The section 4.0 contains some thoughts from ideas that were discussed by Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, PhD over Skype.
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni ji,
Thanks for your excellent critique, which has sharpened the extended Dual-Aspect Monism (eDAM, Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) framework
My responses to your critique are given in Section 3.6 (3.6.1 to 3.6.7) of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal, 2011).
Your feedback will be highly appreciated.
Cheers!
Kindest regards,Ram17 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Saturday, 14 January 2017 5:50 PM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegrou ps.com> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
THANKS for your interest in the eDAM/Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita framework and providing excellent critique.
I am in the process of addressing your comments, and I will let you know as soon as it is completed.
Cheers and Happy New Year!
Kindest regards,Ram14 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. In your extended dual aspect monism, i.e. eDAM, you have critiqued Visistaadvaita philosophy for its neglect of the non-theistic harmonization of Reality. You say, “We simply cannot ignore the contribution of science in our lives. [1]” You have tried to cater to the viewpoints of both the theists as well as atheists. For example, you say that theists can assume the dual aspect Brahman as God. Atheists can assume Brahman as dual aspect entity at fundamental level such as physicist’s vacuum, deep quantum potential or Bohm’s Implicate Order from where all universes (including human beings) emerge via co-evolution [2].
Your (RLP Vimal’s) concept of eDAM
As you have proposed a ‘modified Visistadvaita’ through your eDAM, the natural question to ask is why do you think, that the visistaadvaita philosophy needs a modification from eDAM and if indeed so then in what respect. The dual aspects that you in [1] refer to are the physical aspects (e.g neural networks in brain) and the mental aspects (e.g. subjective experiences). In your opinion among all philosophies in religion and science, this modified Visistadvaita proposed by you has the least number of problems. In this regard you have taken up the issues of inseparability as very important. For example you refer to your Dual-Aspect Monism, where mind and matter are the inseparable aspects of the same entity state [3].
In defining concepts of matter, you have pointed out to the distinctions among the concept of Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’ from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept. In the former matter has a form and potentiality for experiences, and you have accepted this concept of matter within your theory of eDAM. Then you distinguish it from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept (that matter is made up of atoms and which is pursued in science) which has the implication that matter is non-experiential within this framework. As this is faced with the hard problem of consciousness, you do not accept this within eDAM [4].
Further with that background, in defining the concept of consciousness, you state to have used the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’s concept of matter that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective (1pp) [5].
While concluding from Sankaracharya’s advaita philosophy that the fundamental Reality is consciousness, i.e. the mental entity, you have mentioned that the advaita system does not explain by any step by step process that how the matter is created from a non-material entity mind (Brahman). And therefore this constitutes a serious explanatory gap within the Sankara’s Advaita system. You have noted that this is the reverse of the explanatory gap found in materialism that mind can be created out of matter [6]. And so you have taken the cue from Buddha and Nagarjuna and followed a middle path which is your theory of Dual Aspect Monism [7]. Your dual-aspect monism proposes that there are varying degrees of dominance of aspects depending of the entity-level and context is the middle path. This means that ‘the concept of the varying degrees of the manifestation (appearance/strength) of aspects’ means that the degree of ‘the appearance and/or strength of aspects’ varies depending on the levels of entities [8]. At each level, the manifestation of aspects is through dependent co-origination [9] i.e., through co-evolution, adaptation, natural selection, co-development and sensorimotor tuning.
But it is clear from your paper that you do not accept the Reality of Brahman as fully independent Truth. Your dual aspect monism does not accept that God/ Brahman is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience, who can affect each one of us and hence we must pray to him [10]. To substantiate your position you have asked the question Who created God/Brahman? And you have stated that the usual answer that Brahman is eternal and hence non-causal, is considered unacceptable to many. And that is the reason I feel you have taken recourse to the principle of dependent co origination because it denies any central or supreme position to any particular entity.
Thus even though you think that visitadvaita is close to your dual aspect monism, there are major differences between Visistadvaita and eDAM. Therefore you consider that visistadvaita like other world religions suffers from a built in interaction substance dualism. For example you state that the soul separates from the body at the time of death [11]. The truth however is that visistadvaita is a consistent and elegant philosophy, well honored in India and now all over the world by different scholars. However your inability to appreciate its foundational consistency and beauty stems from your misunderstanding of the true concept of Brahman as explained in Sri Ramanuja’s system.
Thus in your framework of modified visistadvaita which is a result of your dual aspect monism, you think that the problem is resolved when we can think that the mental aspect of Brahman causes mind and the physical aspect causes matter. From this dual aspect monistic view you further conclude that all entities including us, fermions and bosons are all Brahman [12]. But that is surely not the philosophy of visistadvaita propounded by Sripad Ramanuja Acharya.
The Critique of Vimal’s Philosophy of eDAM
The main difference between Vimal and Ramanuja seems to be on the use of the concept of Dual Aspect by Vimal. Sripad Ramanuja’s Monism is established on the basis of the concept of visista. But Vimal’s monism is attempted on the basis of the idea of dual aspect. Moreover it appears that Vimal has chosen a middle path from that of Buddha and Nagarjuna [13], who are quite clearly non-Vedantic in their approach, and therefore non-theistic. Vimal’s idea of manifestation of objects is through the concept of dependent co-origination. As far as I know the concept of dependent co origination is also founded upon the Buddhist line of thought [14], where the origin is said to be empty or Void [15]. In Buddhist thought everything is changing and dependent. That is the character of reality explained in Buddhism. It was mainly used to target into the causes of suffering but it was also considered as applicable to everything that constitutes Reality. So this then within Buddhism provides the basis for the quest for solution to all problems which we are entangled with. Within this Bauddha Samanvaya (Harmonization) of dependent co-origination of everything there cannot be any centre occupying the supreme position. Therefore, in solving one’s own problems the question/problems of ‘others’ becomes very important, and we cannot totally forget the problems of others.
But In Vedanta clearly the origin is Brahman. Brahman is not an absolute emptiness. Brahman is purna, or Complete in itself. In the Vedantic thought the process of negation will not lead to voidism or absolute emptiness. When we negate something it does not produce a void. For example when a cow eats grass, the grass does not become annihilated. Rather grass which was as if existing for itself, now serves the purpose of the cow as its part and parcel through the process of digesting. So by eating the cow negates the being of the grass as existing for itself. Therefore everything in nature is posited as if it is existing for itself. But by the process of negation that independent positing of entities is being negated in various ways and forms by nature. In this way everything exists for some higher and higher purposes in Nature, in which everything is appearing and vanishing as transitory moments. Therefore Reality is dynamic and it is never fixed. Thus everything is being negated for a higher purpose than that which is for itself. When we come to negation of all such negations, we arrive at the purpose of Absolute, or the Brahman. Therefore Brahman is cause of all causes or that which constitutes the Ultimate purpose. Everything exists for the satisfaction of the Absolute. Sripad Ramanuja has quite clearly shown that only Brahman is independent and everything is dependent upon Him (Brahman). Brahman depends only upon Himself and there is no other cause that is outside of Him or external to Him. We cannot limit Brahman because if we try to limit Brahman, Brahman finds itself beyond its limit as well. Therefore if we say what is beyond Brahman, then the answer is Brahman itself. Therefore questions posed ‘like who created God (Brahman)?’ neglect the position of Brahman as the cause of all causes and the Absolute Truth. Brahman is not some finite entity that can be limited by some boundary. Hegel, the German philosopher summarized this beautifully by saying, “Reality is by itself and for itself.” But such cannot be said of the finite entities like Table, chairs or ordinary living entities. All causes ultimately are to be traced to be dependent on Brahman. But Brahman is by itself, or is the substantial truth of all reality. Thus the entities are not only inseparable but also they are all dependent on Brahman for their being and becoming. This is the major difference between Vedanta’s principle of Brahman as the Cause of all Causes (sarva karana karanam) and Buddhism’s principle of dependent co origination. This is also therefore not in line with Visistaadvaita philosophy when Vimal claims that the concept of dependent co- origination can solve the so called problems of Visistadvaita, merely because the aspects or entities are inseparable. If Visistadvaita is being modified in this way it entails a complete misunderstanding of the underlying principle of visistadvaita which the author (Vimal) should address.
Therefore my suspicion is that this term ‘dual aspect’ in Vimal’s philosophy also has some influence from the idea of dependent co-origination and neglects the position of Brahman as cause of all causes. The mind and brain are of course appear to be inseparable in the organic unity of life processes in nature as long as life continues. But in Vedanta we have the principle of reincarnation by which it is clearly established that the subtle form comprising of soul covered with the mental structure disentangles with the more gross elements – i.e. brain and body at the time of death. In fact we must ask by what means reincarnation takes place. In fact there are also living entities that do not possess any distinctive brain system. Yet they are also intelligent. For example the trees, single celled organisms etc. are all intelligent. We can understand these intelligent concepts of living organisms through the living process which can be written down as an algorithm in terms of the material elements like the atoms and molecules. But the source of this algorithm cannot be pinned down to these material elements. In biology the conventional concepts of Central dogma are for this reason found to be untenable. For example in Wikipedia entry about Robert Rosen, an American biologist, it is mentioned, “He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down. [16]” Additionally we must mention that the concept of internal teleology is quite clearly an inseparable part of such causal processes.
Regarding the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le concept of matter, it is quite true that they have not explained matter in the way of modern atomistic view of science. According to Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, “Matter is a symbol of undeveloped consciousness. [17]” Therefore this system can only be understood from the concept of the organic whole. But that does not mean that we can regard that matter can produce consciousness. We need to clearly study the logic of life processes to understand this. The category of acit potency or material energy is never the source of life in the Vedantic thought. Yet the acit potency is dependent category and an attribute in the philosophy of Ramanuja. So we cannot regard matter and mind as being merely dual aspect of the same entity. When there is death there is no more consciousness in the dead body. Neither does the residual dead cell act in any conscious manner. They just disintegrate according to the laws of entropy. Therefore this body and the life principle have no intrinsic relation to each other after death. But how matter is produced is an important question. As we can see when the life principle is present, the body of the organism develops and changes. We have already suggested that no one has done any precise experiment to ascertain whether the law of conservation of mass and energy in case of life is obeyed. According to the Vedantic thought there must be a discrepancy and this discrepancy can be experimentally determined. Therefore what is the problem to think that the whole world of material plane can come from the potencies of Original life, which is the theistic position of the major World Religions. Therefore the problem of Unity is solved through the axiomatic principle of Vedanta (i) Life comes from Life, and (ii) Matter comes from Life.
When you state that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective, it is certainly true that the brain mind system is intricately involved in the different expressions of phenomenal consciousness. Yet the brain cannot be the source of consciousness. Rather when life is present, it produces the inseparable brain mind system within the organic unity of the concept of species. As we know that every cell is sentient, we can only say that in the living process the different organs produce each other. Yet it is the life principle which is a higher and superior category in Vedanta, without which there will be no such process. It is this living entity which holds together the separated material energies in the life process. Hence the life process has a much deeper conceptual relation to Reality. Therefore the natural process of life is inconceivable within physics and chemistry. Chemistry never becomes life in nature.
Some Notes on Visista-advaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja
First let us try to understand something about the philosophy of Visistadvaita. This is a system of Philosophy given by Sripad Ramanujacharya and this critiqued the then and dominating thesis of the kevala advaita system of Adi Sankaracharya. The first point therefore should be to understand the distinction between advaita and kevala advaita. The advaita philosophy has been there in India from time immemorial. It did not begin with Sripad Adi Sankaracharya and neither did he coin the term advaita. Advaita means the non-dual truth. But Sankaracharya’s explanation of advaita is called kevala advaita or Monism. In this explanation the phenomenal reality was an unreality or illusion stemming from avidya or ignorance. Sankaracharya had dismissed plurality by focusing on avidya for establishing his explanation of advaita or non-dualism. But advaita did not always mean Monism in Indian Philosophical traditions. It is the Sankara’s advaita in which the term means monism and therefore it has been categorized not just as advaita but with a qualifier as kevala-advaita. Thus it was distinguished from the philosophy of Suddha Advaita by the line of teachers in Sripad Sridhar Swami’s theistic tradition and other vaishnava acharya’s to protect the real meaning of Advaita as was and is being taught in the theistic schools of India from the onslaught of the Sankara’s reductive philosophy of Monism, where all is reduced to One.
Sripad Ramanuja Acharya gave the concept of Organic Whole in his philosophy of Visitaadvaita. In this he has achieved the great reconciliation of the One with the Many. Sankara had concluded that the Many is illusory manifestations of the One due to the function of Maya or avidya (ignorance). And therefore Sankara had stressed on the Reality One and the illusion of the Many. Therefore Sankara’s philosophy is that of reductive idealism and he stresses only on the principle of identity that exists between the One and the Many based upon the principle of ignorance. He neglects or makes the distinction between one and many a product of illusion, giving distinctions no reality [18].
But Sripad Ramanuja Acharya has stressed that the principle of distinction is a reality. It is not merely a result of illusion as held in Sankara’s line of thinking. Sripad Ramanuja has stressed the reality of both Many as well as the One. The ‘many’ are not the illusory manifestations of the one but they are held in their inseparable relation of dependence on the One. In this way Sripad Ramanuja returned the atman or the soul back to the Vedantins, which was previously lost in the Brahman of Sankara’s kevala advaita system of thought [19].
Therefore matter, souls and Brahman are all real in Ramanuja. The world of matter and souls is treated as attributes of the Brahman. The technical Sanskrit term for attributes is visesanas. The first point is that Brahman is not merely an attributeless homogenous stuff of consciousness. Brahman is Supra Personality or the best of Personalities, or Adi Purusha or Purushottama. He is endowed with infinity of auspicious attributes. He is all knowing, all powerful, all merciful as well as the transcendent Supreme Being. The world of souls (cit) and the world of matter (acit) are regarded as His chief attributes (visesanas). And He is the fundamental Substance (visesya). From this view of the complex whole (called Vaisitya drstya), Brahman is One without a second. Only from this point of view is Ramanuja’s view Monistic, and therefore this kind of Monism is quite different from Sankara’s attributeless Monism. Therefore Ramanuja’s Monism is called visista Advaita. From the angle of vision of the attributes (visesanas), they are different from Brahman, but all time they are always dependent on Brahman and inseparable from Brahman. The distinction and plurality of the souls persists with their dependence on God. Their distinction does not go against their dependence on God. The Brahman of Ramanuja "is an organic unity in which, as in all living organisms one element predominates over and controls the rest. [20]”
The subordinate elements are termed visesanas and the predominant element visesya. Because the visesanas cannot exist by themselves separately, the complex whole (visista) in which they are included is described as a unity. Hence, the name of Ramanuja philosophy is Visistadvaita. Therefore Reality according to Ramanuja is not merely a bare identity as held in Sankara. Reality is an identity-in-difference and the difference is not unreal. The identity element holds the difference and makes for the unity and there is a coordination of identity and difference. In Ramanuja’s system the world of souls and matter are co eternal with God, but not external from Him. Matter or prakriti through pradhan and mahatattva comes from Brahman as one of its energies and is called bahiranga or external energy (appearing external or separate as Maya) thus it is an eternal potential but not intrinsic to Him as his antaranga or spiritual energy. The relation between matter, souls and God in Ramanuja’s system is called aprthaka siddhi. This relation is an eternal one and it maintains distinctions between entities that are in intimate and inseparable relation to each other. Therefore Brahman is the inner immortal ruler and this is based upon the concept of the indweller (antaryami). Moreover Brahman is not unknowable [21]. Ramanuja discovered the epistemological plane called adhoksaja in which such knowability becomes possible.
During the state of dissolution, the world of souls and matter remain in a subtle form within the Lord. This aspect of Lord is called karanavastha, or the causal state. In the effect stage, it is called karyavastha. In this stage the world of souls, get attached to the world of matter and are said to be born. In this way the effect is not something entirely different from the cause. The cause itself gets transformed onto effect and this is called parinamavada. Parinaama means change. So as soon as we ask does that mean God Himself changes into the world of matter and souls. And if so does that not taint Him as something defective. But Ramanuja avoids all these defects and still maintains the concept of change through the category called dharmabhuta jnana, or attributive knowledge. It is not that the Lord changes or the souls change. The Lord and the souls are of the nature of substantive knowledge or jnana. Besides this the Lord and souls have an attributive called dharmabhuta jnana. What changes is the attribute (visesana) called the dharmabhuta jnana, or the attributive knowledge and not the substantive jnana. This dharmabhuta jnana is substance as well as attribute. It is substance in the sense that it undergoes changes and produces effects which are called material cause. It is however not the inert matter. It is this dharmabhuta jnana which operates through the mental faculties and produces knowledge. Not only knowledge but also internal states like desires and aversion are also regarded as the transformation of this dharmabhuta jnana. As it is this attributive knowledge that changes there is no necessity of parinaamavada for God. Thus the change in the attribute does not taint or effect the Lord in anyway. Ramanuja is neither a follower parinaamavaada nor that of vivartavaada [22]. This point is also accepted and supported by Srila Bhakti Vinoda Thakura in his Bhagavad-Gita commentary where he has clearly mentioned that the Gaudiya philosophy does not adhere to Brahma-Parinaamavad. But that the Gaudiyas are the proponents of Shakti-parinaamavad. What is transformed is not the Brahman, but the potency. Therefore the cosmos is not directly a transformation of Brahman. Rather the cosmos is a transformation of shakti or potency, hence the name shakti-parinaamavaad. Thus for Ramanuja, Lord is the Supreme Reality and all others including the chit as well as the acit are dependent upon Him. Every word in the veda has for its plenary significance, the Lord. It is only in the secondary sense that the words of the veda refer to the things of the world, but in the deeper significance of the words are called Vedanta-vyutpatti and it always refers to Brahman or God [23].
The entire world of Reality according to Ramanuja can be categorized as dravyas (substance) and adravyas (attributes). Thus colour, sound, taste, etc. all come under the category of attributes and these go on to constitute prakriti. Potency is also an adravya or the attribute. Besides the attributes there are six substances (dravyas) which can be classified under the categories of material or non material. The non-material entities are (i) God, (ii) jiva, (iii) Nitya Vibhuti, (iv) dharmabhuta jnana. Time as experienced in the material plane and prakriti constitutes the material variety of substances. Prakriti which is comprised of three modes of material nature stops at the borderline of nitya-vibuti, which is transcendental nature (super prakriti) under the control of the Lord. Time is within Brahman for Ramanuja and space is derived from prakriti [23].
The predecessors of Ramanuja, like the alvars as well as the followers have always presented a theistic concept of Vedanta and explained the philosophy of love of God in their writings. To them, the Holy Ramanujaites, God is not merely a theoretical abstraction but a fact of the experience of the surrendered souls who have developed love of Godhead. Their main theme is the greatness of God and His glory as well as His presence in everything. They stress that the mercy of the Lord as unconditional and all comprehensive. Mercy is higher than Justice. Sripad Ramanuja Acharya was a great genius and a many sided scholar and the foremost of the visistadvaita dialecticians. According to Ramanuja knowledge always has a corresponding object. There is never an objectless cognition. Ramanuja also explained that the cognition of an attributeless object is a mere fiction. A non-qualified object can never be the object of cognition.
Conclusion
Vimal attempts a modification of Visistadvaita without considering many of the essential elements of the philosophy of Sri Ramanuja. Therefore the problems that are cited by him like the Ist pp, cannot be solved within modified visistaadvaita. The reason is that he relies more on the concept of dependent co origination. However the Brahman according to Vedanta is the janmady asya yatah – the source of all that be. The atheistic position has been scrutinized well by Ramanuja, especially when he faced the Buddhists philosophers of his time as well as the Sankarites and others. Therefore it is incorrect to dismiss visistadvaita simply by saying that it does not cater to a non-theistic harmonization of reality. No non-theistic harmonization has ever been achieved. The problems of consciousness are major question mark over such attempts. However the theistic position clearly outlines guidelines for ascertaining how matter can come from life. Therefore only the theistic position has the proper capacity to produce the harmonization that is necessary for a truly rational and comprehensive understanding of reality.
References
[1] Vimal, R.L.P., Vimal, M., U., P. Introducing extended Dual-Aspect Monism (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) Framework in Religion: Prāṇa Pratiṣṭha, https://www.researchgate.net/p ublication/283243225, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4356.4249, October, 2015, pp. 2.
[2] ibid, 1.[3] ibid 1., pp. 3.[4] ibid., 3.[5] ibid 1., pp. 4.[6] ibid 1., pp. 8.[7] ibid 1., pp. 8.[8] ibid 1., pp. 12.[9] ibid 1., pp. 12.[10] ibid 1., pp. 9.[11] ibid 1., pp. 1, 9.[12] ibid 1., pp. 9.[13] ibid 1., pp. 8.[14] Tilakaratne, A., Director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, 133/19, Nawala Road, Narahenpita, Colombo 05 Sri Lanka. refer to the article: ‘Dependent Co-origination: The Buddhist Approach to Reality’, http://www.beyondthenet.net/sl abs/articles/Dependent.pdf[15] quoted in [14], “If empty is not seen then reaching what has not been reached, the act of terminating suffering as well as the relinquishing of all defilements also will not be seen.” (Nagarjuna, XXIV: 38-39).
[17] Prabhupada A.C., Bhaktivedanta Swami, quoted in http://gitabase.com/eng/LTRS/1 976/2/76FE, letter to Sripad Madhava Das [Brahmachari name of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja].
[18] P. Nagaraja Rao, The Schools of Vedanta, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavanm, Bombay, 1943, pp. 73.[19] ibid, 18.[20] ibid, 18.[21] ibid, 18, pp. 73-75.[22] ibid, 18, pp. 75-76.[23]ibid, 18, pp. 76.
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20139A50349A68100B98649C80180%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
Bruno Marchal
Apr 20, 2017, 4:58:34 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 19 Apr 2017, at 19:17, David Schwartzman wrote:
My take todayThe labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.
Is not the 4 millions years of evolution not also in the brain, in that case? You still assume a physical universe independent of the laws of thought, but as I say below, that run into problems.
This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
That philosophy can be shown incompatible with the digital version of Descartes' Mechanism. You need magic, or actual infinities in the brain to make matter able to select computations among all their realisation in arithmetic. I can give references.
Long live to Immaterialist (arithmetic) Neo-Neo-Darwinian Science where the laws of the physical appearances emerges from the highly structured web of dreams existing in a tiny part of the arithmetical reality!
I am aware that this can sound hard to listen for a (weak) materialist (a believer in the primacy of physics, or in primary matter), but if we can survive with a digital brain then physics is not the fundamental science: it reduces to a statistic on all computations "seen-from-inside", with "seen-from-inside" defined by the non logic of machine self-reference (third person selves and first person selves). I used the term "computations" in the arithmetical sense of Post, Turing, Church, Kleene, ...
I would not say that mind/body/universe are *human* construct, like Deepak Chopra said below, but I do say that mind/body/universe *and* human are universal machine or universal number constructs.
Bruno
David Schwartzman, biogeochemistProfessor EmeritusHoward UniversityAuthor of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Bhakti Vijnana Muni
Apr 20, 2017, 4:58:34 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear friends (Dr. RLP Vimal and Dr. Schwartzman),
Namaste. The concerns of RLP
Vimal are well taken. RLP Vimal has raised the important question that can we
have something like matter in itself or consciousness in itself. Of course we
had pointed out in the earlier email that such a result is only an abstraction. It is only an isolated idea which does not consider the dialectical oppositional relationship with its other. An opposition ties one thing with a specific other. So there is a necessary relation involved. And that relation has a dynamic structure which thought can uncover and leads to a higher conception that unifies them.
The issues related to naïve
realism (materialism) and subjective idealism are due to the two different
kinds of reductions that are carried out. We would like to point out that the
philosophy of Vedanta is not equal to that of subjective idealism. Of course
materialism or naïve realism is already being found inadequate in advanced
modern science, especially led by the problems encountered in the measurement
problems of quantum physics.
Subjective idealism (or naïve
idealism) tries to reduce all of reality to the finite consciousness based on
“I think”. In order to come to the proper concept of reality and overcome the
limitations of the subjective idealism or naïve idealism, one has to go beyond
the finite consciousness, i.e. ‘the finite I think’ and go beyond it and see it
as only a small infinitesimal unit of reality.
As there are many such units,
then what is the ontology of the Whole. What is the nature of the Whole that
includes many such finite ‘I thinks’. To rediscover this is the task of
philosophy and science. This requires an advancement beyond Kant and very
careful analysis of the situation. In fact in the last email we had referred to
this necessity, when the three stages of rational development were pointed out
as [1] :
(i) The Stage of Abstract Understanding which is abstract determination of the
separate sides of the contradiction without understanding the relation between
the two sides,
(ii) The stage of Negative Reason in which the dialectical relation of the two sides
is determined. In this process the existence of the abstract independence of
two sides in the stage of Understanding is dissolved and a dialectical relation
is reasoned,
(iii) Positive
Reason: this dialectical relationship is raised into a dynamic
reality. The ability to reason in these stages prepares the thoughtful to come
to its True Concept.
Thus
if we carefully study the systematic development of philosophical approach to
reality as presented here, this is far removed from Subjective idealism. Rather
reason does not abandon the
dialectical relation between the two sides (subject and the object), but rather
determines it and does not reduce one side to other. But reason in the stage of positive
reason raises this dialectical relationship into a wholistic and dynamic
reality. And by this approach of an in depth Conceptual rational development of
reason can it be properly reasoned that the body/mind opposition can be
comprehended in a higher synthesis or unity called consciousness. Thus we need to carefully note that the idea
of consciousness in Vedanta is a view of Organic wholism and not subjective
idealism.
As far as Dr. Schwartzman’s
opinion about Darwinism and materialism is concerned, his stand neglects any
substantial consideration of thought in constituting biological reality. Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm.
Thanking
you,
Bhaktivijnana
Muni, PhD
References
[1] www.gwfhegel.org
The webpage of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja. PhD.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/909138707.4292081.1492644058616%40mail.yahoo.com.
Bruno Marchal
Apr 20, 2017, 8:44:47 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 20 Apr 2017, at 07:07, 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
I agree with Chopra, here. The point is that nobody has given any evidence for primitive matter.
But nobody can doubt consciousness. Indeed, to have a genuine doubt, we have to be conscious.
Best regards,
Bruno
Kind regards,Rām----------------------------------------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
From: Deepak Chopra
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 6:44:33 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptionsNo one has ever proved the existence of matterMatter is non material
It's made of nothing
My take todayThe labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemistProfessor EmeritusHoward UniversityAuthor of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/282238421.4607245.1492664849105%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
<image001.png><OutlookEmoji-1483997936424_email-signature-plain.jpg.jpg>
Murty Hari
Apr 20, 2017, 8:44:47 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Ram,
I asked the same question once before. Of course, matter is not made of nothing because Deepak himself repeatedly says that matter is modulation of consciousness.
I justify his statements "Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptions" and "Matter is non material" as follows:
In today's quantum mechanics, all matter (some of which is perceived directly by senses and called classical) is made up of quantum particles. A quantum particle is said to be a packet of de Broglie phase waves, each of which is supposed to have a speed greater than that of light in vacuum. Thus the phase wave is a mathematical abstraction, it is non-material in that you cannot perceive it by senses. So, one may say all matter is made of ideas.
Syamala
From: "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:57 AM
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/282238421.4607245.1492664849105%40mail.yahoo.com.
priyedarshi jetli
Apr 20, 2017, 8:44:47 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Proofs apply to mathematical theorems not to things like matter or consciousness. And even in mathematics if something cannot be proven it does not mean that it is not true. Take Fermat's last theorem for example. It took 300 years to prove it. It is like saying that if no one had ever climbed the peak of Mount Everest it did not exist. The metaphoric statement of the type Deepak Chopra makes is meaningless. There is a very old fallacy that is commonly used: No one has proven that God does not exist. Therefore, God exists. It is an obvious fallacy. In any case the burden of proof lies on the one who accepts the existence of God or a non-material consciousness for that matter and not on those who do not accept them. The fallacy is surely obvious to those who are committing them as well. They are a disguise for covering up the issue. The issue is that once stated as alternative hypotheses, idealism, dualism, materialism and perhaps other isms regarding the mind body problem are dogmas. None of these hypotheses can be proven and all attempts to prove them beg the question. But among dogmas we can choose the one that seems most plausible to us. To me the materialist or physicalist dogma is the most plausible. There is no emergent mental (non-physical) world, there is no non-physical or mystical forces that causally act on the physical world. The physical is causally closed. To deny this people often equate 'physics of the day' with 'everything that is physical'. I need not spend time to dispel this fallacious equivocation. We need only reflect on the statement that "everything is in principle explainable physically."
Priyedarshi
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20139A50349A68100B98649C80180%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/282238421.4607245.1492664849105%40mail.yahoo.com.
Murty Hari
Apr 20, 2017, 8:44:57 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, PhD Bhakti Vijnana Muni
Dear Dr.Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
Namaste. Thank you for your scholarly analysis. I hope I am correct in interpreting your following statement
"Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm."
as an illustration or manifestation of Organic wholism.
As I understand Ram's eDAM, it does not include action of mind/thought on matter/brain. He simply attaches thought=like aspect to every material entity. While all actions and interactions are carried on by matter, mental aspects have no effect on any part of any process.
Best Regards
Syamala Hari
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/705385895.5368506.1492667636497%40mail.yahoo.com.
Serge Patlavskiy
Apr 20, 2017, 8:44:57 AM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:
>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?
[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
So, may I as Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
Thanks in advance,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Eric Reyes
Apr 20, 2017, 8:44:57 AM4/20/17
to nonlo...@chopra.com, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear all,
I would like to suggest something here, so many on this forum are attempting to explain the infinite and infinitesimal complexities of matter and spirit, body, mind, soul, consciousness and the unconscious. And Deepak seems to want to throw all that aside and suggests that nothing of matter subtle or gross actually exists, except for consciousness which according to him is all one non personal oneness of bliss. My own opinion is that neither of these approaches is being realistic, and I'll try to explain why.
First, Deepak's theories make no sense when put to any test, he postulates that nothing in the world exists, but we are all aware that it does, even if transitory and temporary we know something is there, we are there, the body is there, mind, universe, stars and sun, oceans etc. And we know that we didn't create all of that, something else must be the source. So it's nice to think that all phenomena are our own creation as he states, but obviously something else is there to discover.
Then the physicists and other scientists are so expert at breaking down the complex functioning of that phenomena which Deepak is claiming does not exist, that is true. But how to actually empirically explain the origins of such phenomena to get to the actual root of it? Obviously this cannot be done through speculation, why? Because our minds and intellect used for speculation are themselves products of the material process itself, and the product cannot fully explain the source, logically. Therefore Deepak's attempt to simplify things. But again that falls short, he's only partly right after all, true that consciousness is more subtle than matter, superior to matter, subjective. But we ourselves as consciousness are not the source of all matter, else we would not be "bamboozled" by it as he likes to say, one cannot be bamboozled by something he has himself created, not possible if he is the source of that.
That does leave the one logical explanation, and which I believe Bhakti Madhava Puri has been trying to explain further, that we ourselves as limited subjective conscious entities are ourselves objects of a greater unlimited subjective consciousness, infinite absolute consciousness which is the source of both individual consciousness and matter both subtle and gross. That's my conclusion anyway, it makes sense in explaining reality, I welcome any comments on this. I do have admiration for the subtle complexities of all the physicists' and philosophers' explanations on this forum but this is my own contribution, I think it makes sense. In this world we are simply the conscious agent, the minds, bodies, even thoughts, we are not the source of all these, they are under control of and the property of something else, someone else. To accept that idea is to me the key.
Regards, Eric Reyes
[23] The section 4.0 contains some thoughts from ideas that were discussed by Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, PhD over Skype.
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni ji,
Thanks for your excellent critique, which has sharpened the extended Dual-Aspect Monism (eDAM, Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) framework
My responses to your critique are given in Section 3.6 (3.6.1 to 3.6.7) of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal, 2011).
Your feedback will be highly appreciated.
Cheers!
Kindest regards,Ram17 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Saturday, 14 January 2017 5:50 PM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegrou ps.com> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
THANKS for your interest in the eDAM/Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita framework and providing excellent critique.
I am in the process of addressing your comments, and I will let you know as soon as it is completed.
Cheers and Happy New Year!
Kindest regards,Ram14 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. In your extended dual aspect monism, i.e. eDAM, you have critiqued Visistaadvaita philosophy for its neglect of the non-theistic harmonization of Reality. You say, “We simply cannot ignore the contribution of science in our lives. [1]” You have tried to cater to the viewpoints of both the theists as well as atheists. For example, you say that theists can assume the dual aspect Brahman as God. Atheists can assume Brahman as dual aspect entity at fundamental level such as physicist’s vacuum, deep quantum potential or Bohm’s Implicate Order from where all universes (including human beings) emerge via co-evolution [2].
Your (RLP Vimal’s) concept of eDAM
As you have proposed a ‘modified Visistadvaita’ through your eDAM, the natural question to ask is why do you think, that the visistaadvaita philosophy needs a modification from eDAM and if indeed so then in what respect. The dual aspects that you in [1] refer to are the physical aspects (e.g neural networks in brain) and the mental aspects (e.g. subjective experiences). In your opinion among all philosophies in religion and science, this modified Visistadvaita proposed by you has the least number of problems. In this regard you have taken up the issues of inseparability as very important. For example you refer to your Dual-Aspect Monism, where mind and matter are the inseparable aspects of the same entity state [3].
In defining concepts of matter, you have pointed out to the distinctions among the concept of Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’ from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept. In the former matter has a form and potentiality for experiences, and you have accepted this concept of matter within your theory of eDAM. Then you distinguish it from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept (that matter is made up of atoms and which is pursued in science) which has the implication that matter is non-experiential within this framework. As this is faced with the hard problem of consciousness, you do not accept this within eDAM [4].
Further with that background, in defining the concept of consciousness, you state to have used the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’s concept of matter that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective (1pp) [5].
While concluding from Sankaracharya’s advaita philosophy that the fundamental Reality is consciousness, i.e. the mental entity, you have mentioned that the advaita system does not explain by any step by step process that how the matter is created from a non-material entity mind (Brahman). And therefore this constitutes a serious explanatory gap within the Sankara’s Advaita system. You have noted that this is the reverse of the explanatory gap found in materialism that mind can be created out of matter [6]. And so you have taken the cue from Buddha and Nagarjuna and followed a middle path which is your theory of Dual Aspect Monism [7]. Your dual-aspect monism proposes that there are varying degrees of dominance of aspects depending of the entity-level and context is the middle path. This means that ‘the concept of the varying degrees of the manifestation (appearance/strength) of aspects’ means that the degree of ‘the appearance and/or strength of aspects’ varies depending on the levels of entities [8]. At each level, the manifestation of aspects is through dependent co-origination [9] i.e., through co-evolution, adaptation, natural selection, co-development and sensorimotor tuning.
But it is clear from your paper that you do not accept the Reality of Brahman as fully independent Truth. Your dual aspect monism does not accept that God/ Brahman is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience, who can affect each one of us and hence we must pray to him [10]. To substantiate your position you have asked the question Who created God/Brahman? And you have stated that the usual answer that Brahman is eternal and hence non-causal, is considered unacceptable to many. And that is the reason I feel you have taken recourse to the principle of dependent co origination because it denies any central or supreme position to any particular entity.
Thus even though you think that visitadvaita is close to your dual aspect monism, there are major differences between Visistadvaita and eDAM. Therefore you consider that visistadvaita like other world religions suffers from a built in interaction substance dualism. For example you state that the soul separates from the body at the time of death [11]. The truth however is that visistadvaita is a consistent and elegant philosophy, well honored in India and now all over the world by different scholars. However your inability to appreciate its foundational consistency and beauty stems from your misunderstanding of the true concept of Brahman as explained in Sri Ramanuja’s system.
Thus in your framework of modified visistadvaita which is a result of your dual aspect monism, you think that the problem is resolved when we can think that the mental aspect of Brahman causes mind and the physical aspect causes matter. From this dual aspect monistic view you further conclude that all entities including us, fermions and bosons are all Brahman [12]. But that is surely not the philosophy of visistadvaita propounded by Sripad Ramanuja Acharya.
The Critique of Vimal’s Philosophy of eDAM
The main difference between Vimal and Ramanuja seems to be on the use of the concept of Dual Aspect by Vimal. Sripad Ramanuja’s Monism is established on the basis of the concept of visista. But Vimal’s monism is attempted on the basis of the idea of dual aspect. Moreover it appears that Vimal has chosen a middle path from that of Buddha and Nagarjuna [13], who are quite clearly non-Vedantic in their approach, and therefore non-theistic. Vimal’s idea of manifestation of objects is through the concept of dependent co-origination. As far as I know the concept of dependent co origination is also founded upon the Buddhist line of thought [14], where the origin is said to be empty or Void [15]. In Buddhist thought everything is changing and dependent. That is the character of reality explained in Buddhism. It was mainly used to target into the causes of suffering but it was also considered as applicable to everything that constitutes Reality. So this then within Buddhism provides the basis for the quest for solution to all problems which we are entangled with. Within this Bauddha Samanvaya (Harmonization) of dependent co-origination of everything there cannot be any centre occupying the supreme position. Therefore, in solving one’s own problems the question/problems of ‘others’ becomes very important, and we cannot totally forget the problems of others.
But In Vedanta clearly the origin is Brahman. Brahman is not an absolute emptiness. Brahman is purna, or Complete in itself. In the Vedantic thought the process of negation will not lead to voidism or absolute emptiness. When we negate something it does not produce a void. For example when a cow eats grass, the grass does not become annihilated. Rather grass which was as if existing for itself, now serves the purpose of the cow as its part and parcel through the process of digesting. So by eating the cow negates the being of the grass as existing for itself. Therefore everything in nature is posited as if it is existing for itself. But by the process of negation that independent positing of entities is being negated in various ways and forms by nature. In this way everything exists for some higher and higher purposes in Nature, in which everything is appearing and vanishing as transitory moments. Therefore Reality is dynamic and it is never fixed. Thus everything is being negated for a higher purpose than that which is for itself. When we come to negation of all such negations, we arrive at the purpose of Absolute, or the Brahman. Therefore Brahman is cause of all causes or that which constitutes the Ultimate purpose. Everything exists for the satisfaction of the Absolute. Sripad Ramanuja has quite clearly shown that only Brahman is independent and everything is dependent upon Him (Brahman). Brahman depends only upon Himself and there is no other cause that is outside of Him or external to Him. We cannot limit Brahman because if we try to limit Brahman, Brahman finds itself beyond its limit as well. Therefore if we say what is beyond Brahman, then the answer is Brahman itself. Therefore questions posed ‘like who created God (Brahman)?’ neglect the position of Brahman as the cause of all causes and the Absolute Truth. Brahman is not some finite entity that can be limited by some boundary. Hegel, the German philosopher summarized this beautifully by saying, “Reality is by itself and for itself.” But such cannot be said of the finite entities like Table, chairs or ordinary living entities. All causes ultimately are to be traced to be dependent on Brahman. But Brahman is by itself, or is the substantial truth of all reality. Thus the entities are not only inseparable but also they are all dependent on Brahman for their being and becoming. This is the major difference between Vedanta’s principle of Brahman as the Cause of all Causes (sarva karana karanam) and Buddhism’s principle of dependent co origination. This is also therefore not in line with Visistaadvaita philosophy when Vimal claims that the concept of dependent co- origination can solve the so called problems of Visistadvaita, merely because the aspects or entities are inseparable. If Visistadvaita is being modified in this way it entails a complete misunderstanding of the underlying principle of visistadvaita which the author (Vimal) should address.
Therefore my suspicion is that this term ‘dual aspect’ in Vimal’s philosophy also has some influence from the idea of dependent co-origination and neglects the position of Brahman as cause of all causes. The mind and brain are of course appear to be inseparable in the organic unity of life processes in nature as long as life continues. But in Vedanta we have the principle of reincarnation by which it is clearly established that the subtle form comprising of soul covered with the mental structure disentangles with the more gross elements – i.e. brain and body at the time of death. In fact we must ask by what means reincarnation takes place. In fact there are also living entities that do not possess any distinctive brain system. Yet they are also intelligent. For example the trees, single celled organisms etc. are all intelligent. We can understand these intelligent concepts of living organisms through the living process which can be written down as an algorithm in terms of the material elements like the atoms and molecules. But the source of this algorithm cannot be pinned down to these material elements. In biology the conventional concepts of Central dogma are for this reason found to be untenable. For example in Wikipedia entry about Robert Rosen, an American biologist, it is mentioned, “He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down. [16]” Additionally we must mention that the concept of internal teleology is quite clearly an inseparable part of such causal processes.
Regarding the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le concept of matter, it is quite true that they have not explained matter in the way of modern atomistic view of science. According to Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, “Matter is a symbol of undeveloped consciousness. [17]” Therefore this system can only be understood from the concept of the organic whole. But that does not mean that we can regard that matter can produce consciousness. We need to clearly study the logic of life processes to understand this. The category of acit potency or material energy is never the source of life in the Vedantic thought. Yet the acit potency is dependent category and an attribute in the philosophy of Ramanuja. So we cannot regard matter and mind as being merely dual aspect of the same entity. When there is death there is no more consciousness in the dead body. Neither does the residual dead cell act in any conscious manner. They just disintegrate according to the laws of entropy. Therefore this body and the life principle have no intrinsic relation to each other after death. But how matter is produced is an important question. As we can see when the life principle is present, the body of the organism develops and changes. We have already suggested that no one has done any precise experiment to ascertain whether the law of conservation of mass and energy in case of life is obeyed. According to the Vedantic thought there must be a discrepancy and this discrepancy can be experimentally determined. Therefore what is the problem to think that the whole world of material plane can come from the potencies of Original life, which is the theistic position of the major World Religions. Therefore the problem of Unity is solved through the axiomatic principle of Vedanta (i) Life comes from Life, and (ii) Matter comes from Life.
When you state that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective, it is certainly true that the brain mind system is intricately involved in the different expressions of phenomenal consciousness. Yet the brain cannot be the source of consciousness. Rather when life is present, it produces the inseparable brain mind system within the organic unity of the concept of species. As we know that every cell is sentient, we can only say that in the living process the different organs produce each other. Yet it is the life principle which is a higher and superior category in Vedanta, without which there will be no such process. It is this living entity which holds together the separated material energies in the life process. Hence the life process has a much deeper conceptual relation to Reality. Therefore the natural process of life is inconceivable within physics and chemistry. Chemistry never becomes life in nature.
Some Notes on Visista-advaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja
First let us try to understand something about the philosophy of Visistadvaita. This is a system of Philosophy given by Sripad Ramanujacharya and this critiqued the then and dominating thesis of the kevala advaita system of Adi Sankaracharya. The first point therefore should be to understand the distinction between advaita and kevala advaita. The advaita philosophy has been there in India from time immemorial. It did not begin with Sripad Adi Sankaracharya and neither did he coin the term advaita. Advaita means the non-dual truth. But Sankaracharya’s explanation of advaita is called kevala advaita or Monism. In this explanation the phenomenal reality was an unreality or illusion stemming from avidya or ignorance. Sankaracharya had dismissed plurality by focusing on avidya for establishing his explanation of advaita or non-dualism. But advaita did not always mean Monism in Indian Philosophical traditions. It is the Sankara’s advaita in which the term means monism and therefore it has been categorized not just as advaita but with a qualifier as kevala-advaita. Thus it was distinguished from the philosophy of Suddha Advaita by the line of teachers in Sripad Sridhar Swami’s theistic tradition and other vaishnava acharya’s to protect the real meaning of Advaita as was and is being taught in the theistic schools of India from the onslaught of the Sankara’s reductive philosophy of Monism, where all is reduced to One.
Sripad Ramanuja Acharya gave the concept of Organic Whole in his philosophy of Visitaadvaita. In this he has achieved the great reconciliation of the One with the Many. Sankara had concluded that the Many is illusory manifestations of the One due to the function of Maya or avidya (ignorance). And therefore Sankara had stressed on the Reality One and the illusion of the Many. Therefore Sankara’s philosophy is that of reductive idealism and he stresses only on the principle of identity that exists between the One and the Many based upon the principle of ignorance. He neglects or makes the distinction between one and many a product of illusion, giving distinctions no reality [18].
But Sripad Ramanuja Acharya has stressed that the principle of distinction is a reality. It is not merely a result of illusion as held in Sankara’s line of thinking. Sripad Ramanuja has stressed the reality of both Many as well as the One. The ‘many’ are not the illusory manifestations of the one but they are held in their inseparable relation of dependence on the One. In this way Sripad Ramanuja returned the atman or the soul back to the Vedantins, which was previously lost in the Brahman of Sankara’s kevala advaita system of thought [19].
Therefore matter, souls and Brahman are all real in Ramanuja. The world of matter and souls is treated as attributes of the Brahman. The technical Sanskrit term for attributes is visesanas. The first point is that Brahman is not merely an attributeless homogenous stuff of consciousness. Brahman is Supra Personality or the best of Personalities, or Adi Purusha or Purushottama. He is endowed with infinity of auspicious attributes. He is all knowing, all powerful, all merciful as well as the transcendent Supreme Being. The world of souls (cit) and the world of matter (acit) are regarded as His chief attributes (visesanas). And He is the fundamental Substance (visesya). From this view of the complex whole (called Vaisitya drstya), Brahman is One without a second. Only from this point of view is Ramanuja’s view Monistic, and therefore this kind of Monism is quite different from Sankara’s attributeless Monism. Therefore Ramanuja’s Monism is called visista Advaita. From the angle of vision of the attributes (visesanas), they are different from Brahman, but all time they are always dependent on Brahman and inseparable from Brahman. The distinction and plurality of the souls persists with their dependence on God. Their distinction does not go against their dependence on God. The Brahman of Ramanuja "is an organic unity in which, as in all living organisms one element predominates over and controls the rest. [20]”
The subordinate elements are termed visesanas and the predominant element visesya. Because the visesanas cannot exist by themselves separately, the complex whole (visista) in which they are included is described as a unity. Hence, the name of Ramanuja philosophy is Visistadvaita. Therefore Reality according to Ramanuja is not merely a bare identity as held in Sankara. Reality is an identity-in-difference and the difference is not unreal. The identity element holds the difference and makes for the unity and there is a coordination of identity and difference. In Ramanuja’s system the world of souls and matter are co eternal with God, but not external from Him. Matter or prakriti through pradhan and mahatattva comes from Brahman as one of its energies and is called bahiranga or external energy (appearing external or separate as Maya) thus it is an eternal potential but not intrinsic to Him as his antaranga or spiritual energy. The relation between matter, souls and God in Ramanuja’s system is called aprthaka siddhi. This relation is an eternal one and it maintains distinctions between entities that are in intimate and inseparable relation to each other. Therefore Brahman is the inner immortal ruler and this is based upon the concept of the indweller (antaryami). Moreover Brahman is not unknowable [21]. Ramanuja discovered the epistemological plane called adhoksaja in which such knowability becomes possible.
During the state of dissolution, the world of souls and matter remain in a subtle form within the Lord. This aspect of Lord is called karanavastha, or the causal state. In the effect stage, it is called karyavastha. In this stage the world of souls, get attached to the world of matter and are said to be born. In this way the effect is not something entirely different from the cause. The cause itself gets transformed onto effect and this is called parinamavada. Parinaama means change. So as soon as we ask does that mean God Himself changes into the world of matter and souls. And if so does that not taint Him as something defective. But Ramanuja avoids all these defects and still maintains the concept of change through the category called dharmabhuta jnana, or attributive knowledge. It is not that the Lord changes or the souls change. The Lord and the souls are of the nature of substantive knowledge or jnana. Besides this the Lord and souls have an attributive called dharmabhuta jnana. What changes is the attribute (visesana) called the dharmabhuta jnana, or the attributive knowledge and not the substantive jnana. This dharmabhuta jnana is substance as well as attribute. It is substance in the sense that it undergoes changes and produces effects which are called material cause. It is however not the inert matter. It is this dharmabhuta jnana which operates through the mental faculties and produces knowledge. Not only knowledge but also internal states like desires and aversion are also regarded as the transformation of this dharmabhuta jnana. As it is this attributive knowledge that changes there is no necessity of parinaamavada for God. Thus the change in the attribute does not taint or effect the Lord in anyway. Ramanuja is neither a follower parinaamavaada nor that of vivartavaada [22]. This point is also accepted and supported by Srila Bhakti Vinoda Thakura in his Bhagavad-Gita commentary where he has clearly mentioned that the Gaudiya philosophy does not adhere to Brahma-Parinaamavad. But that the Gaudiyas are the proponents of Shakti-parinaamavad. What is transformed is not the Brahman, but the potency. Therefore the cosmos is not directly a transformation of Brahman. Rather the cosmos is a transformation of shakti or potency, hence the name shakti-parinaamavaad. Thus for Ramanuja, Lord is the Supreme Reality and all others including the chit as well as the acit are dependent upon Him. Every word in the veda has for its plenary significance, the Lord. It is only in the secondary sense that the words of the veda refer to the things of the world, but in the deeper significance of the words are called Vedanta-vyutpatti and it always refers to Brahman or God [23].
The entire world of Reality according to Ramanuja can be categorized as dravyas (substance) and adravyas (attributes). Thus colour, sound, taste, etc. all come under the category of attributes and these go on to constitute prakriti. Potency is also an adravya or the attribute. Besides the attributes there are six substances (dravyas) which can be classified under the categories of material or non material. The non-material entities are (i) God, (ii) jiva, (iii) Nitya Vibhuti, (iv) dharmabhuta jnana. Time as experienced in the material plane and prakriti constitutes the material variety of substances. Prakriti which is comprised of three modes of material nature stops at the borderline of nitya-vibuti, which is transcendental nature (super prakriti) under the control of the Lord. Time is within Brahman for Ramanuja and space is derived from prakriti [23].
The predecessors of Ramanuja, like the alvars as well as the followers have always presented a theistic concept of Vedanta and explained the philosophy of love of God in their writings. To them, the Holy Ramanujaites, God is not merely a theoretical abstraction but a fact of the experience of the surrendered souls who have developed love of Godhead. Their main theme is the greatness of God and His glory as well as His presence in everything. They stress that the mercy of the Lord as unconditional and all comprehensive. Mercy is higher than Justice. Sripad Ramanuja Acharya was a great genius and a many sided scholar and the foremost of the visistadvaita dialecticians. According to Ramanuja knowledge always has a corresponding object. There is never an objectless cognition. Ramanuja also explained that the cognition of an attributeless object is a mere fiction. A non-qualified object can never be the object of cognition.
Conclusion
Vimal attempts a modification of Visistadvaita without considering many of the essential elements of the philosophy of Sri Ramanuja. Therefore the problems that are cited by him like the Ist pp, cannot be solved within modified visistaadvaita. The reason is that he relies more on the concept of dependent co origination. However the Brahman according to Vedanta is the janmady asya yatah – the source of all that be. The atheistic position has been scrutinized well by Ramanuja, especially when he faced the Buddhists philosophers of his time as well as the Sankarites and others. Therefore it is incorrect to dismiss visistadvaita simply by saying that it does not cater to a non-theistic harmonization of reality. No non-theistic harmonization has ever been achieved. The problems of consciousness are major question mark over such attempts. However the theistic position clearly outlines guidelines for ascertaining how matter can come from life. Therefore only the theistic position has the proper capacity to produce the harmonization that is necessary for a truly rational and comprehensive understanding of reality.
References
[1] Vimal, R.L.P., Vimal, M., U., P. Introducing extended Dual-Aspect Monism (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) Framework in Religion: Prāṇa Pratiṣṭha, https://www.researchgate.net/p ublication/283243225, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4356.4249, October, 2015, pp. 2.
[2] ibid, 1.[3] ibid 1., pp. 3.[4] ibid., 3.[5] ibid 1., pp. 4.[6] ibid 1., pp. 8.[7] ibid 1., pp. 8.[8] ibid 1., pp. 12.[9] ibid 1., pp. 12.[10] ibid 1., pp. 9.[11] ibid 1., pp. 1, 9.[12] ibid 1., pp. 9.[13] ibid 1., pp. 8.[14] Tilakaratne, A., Director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, 133/19, Nawala Road, Narahenpita, Colombo 05 Sri Lanka. refer to the article: ‘Dependent Co-origination: The Buddhist Approach to Reality’, http://www.beyondthenet.net/sl abs/articles/Dependent.pdf[15] quoted in [14], “If empty is not seen then reaching what has not been reached, the act of terminating suffering as well as the relinquishing of all defilements also will not be seen.” (Nagarjuna, XXIV: 38-39).
[17] Prabhupada A.C., Bhaktivedanta Swami, quoted in http://gitabase.com/eng/LTRS/1 976/2/76FE, letter to Sripad Madhava Das [Brahmachari name of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja].
[18] P. Nagaraja Rao, The Schools of Vedanta, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavanm, Bombay, 1943, pp. 73.[19] ibid, 18.[20] ibid, 18.[21] ibid, 18, pp. 73-75.[22] ibid, 18, pp. 75-76.[23]ibid, 18, pp. 76.
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Science and Scientist - 2016
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2016
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CE97E6BA-AB7D-494F-938C-0993FAC02EFB%40chopra.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 20, 2017, 12:12:51 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Syamala !
Leonard Susskind also says the same
All subatomic particles are mathematical abstractions
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/884160936.285428.1492688672419%40mail.yahoo.com.
<image001.png>
<OutlookEmoji-1483997936424_email-signature-plain.jpg.jpg>
Peter Nyikos
Apr 20, 2017, 12:12:51 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 04/20/2017 06:43 AM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the
holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:
-[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?
[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
This is a very demanding concept of theory that you are dealing with
here, Serge. Most theories outside mathematics only try to
explain things while leaving basic features unexplained. Newton's
theory of gravity only explains the effects of gravity
mathematically. It does not even address the question of how gravity
is able to affect objects at a distance, through seemingly empty
space. Newton himself admitted that he had no explanation for that.
Einstein had a sort of explanation: objects curve space around them in such a way that objects follow a path that can be calculated. But he could not explain just how masses can do such a thing as curving space.
Einstein had a sort of explanation: objects curve space around them in such a way that objects follow a path that can be calculated. But he could not explain just how masses can do such a thing as curving space.
If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
Materialists have a theory of "consciousness" in which they give a
concept of "experience" in purely behavioristic terms. For instance,
they might fall back on a "third person" interpretation of
consciousness in terms of responses to stimuli. According to this,
someone is "conscious" of something in the environment if his
responses to it are the sort that we have come to associate with
being conscious of it.
Sometimes materialists will even act as though the only use of the word is to indicate whether someone is "conscious" or "unconscious" in an everyday sense of the word.
Sometimes materialists will even act as though the only use of the word is to indicate whether someone is "conscious" or "unconscious" in an everyday sense of the word.
So, may I as Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
I second the motion. I hope Deepak will name some theories of
consciousness that go beyond the behavioristic theory, about which
many books have been written.
Peter Nyikos
Peter Nyikos
Thanks in advance,Serge Patlavskiy
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
What came first consciousness or science ?What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
Deepak Chopra MD
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/273359453.5492961.1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com.
Asingh2384
Apr 20, 2017, 5:06:29 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, nonlo...@chopra.com
Hi Deepak:
Consciousness never came nor will it ever go
anywhere. It is the eternal and omnipresent Zero-point (energy) state of the universe that always existed and will exist. Time is a property of matter and mind, not of pure fundamental consciousness.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden Factor - An Approach
for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and Universal Reality"
-----Original Message-----
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
What came first consciousness or science ?
What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
Deepak Chopra MD
[23] The section 4.0 contains some thoughts from ideas that were discussed by Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, PhD over Skype.
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni ji,
Thanks for your excellent critique, which has sharpened the extended Dual-Aspect Monism (eDAM, Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) framework
My responses to your critique are given in Section 3.6 (3.6.1 to 3.6.7) of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal, 2011).
Your feedback will be highly appreciated.
Cheers!
Kindest regards,Ram17 Jan. 2017
----------------------------------------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ram_Lakhan_Pandey_VimalResearched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Saturday, 14 January 2017 5:50 PM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
THANKS for your interest in the eDAM/Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita framework and providing excellent critique.
I am in the process of addressing your comments, and I will let you know as soon as it is completed.
Cheers and Happy New Year!
Kindest regards,Ram14 Jan. 2017
----------------------------------------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ram_Lakhan_Pandey_VimalResearched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. In your extended dual aspect monism, i.e. eDAM, you have critiqued Visistaadvaita philosophy for its neglect of the non-theistic harmonization of Reality. You say, “We simply cannot ignore the contribution of science in our lives. [1]” You have tried to cater to the viewpoints of both the theists as well as atheists. For example, you say that theists can assume the dual aspect Brahman as God. Atheists can assume Brahman as dual aspect entity at fundamental level such as physicist’s vacuum, deep quantum potential or Bohm’s Implicate Order from where all universes (including human beings) emerge via co-evolution [2].
Your (RLP Vimal’s) concept of eDAM
As you have proposed a ‘modified Visistadvaita’ through your eDAM, the natural question to ask is why do you think, that the visistaadvaita philosophy needs a modification from eDAM and if indeed so then in what respect. The dual aspects that you in [1] refer to are the physical aspects (e.g neural networks in brain) and the mental aspects (e.g. subjective experiences). In your opinion among all philosophies in religion and science, this modified Visistadvaita proposed by you has the least number of problems. In this regard you have taken up the issues of inseparability as very important. For example you refer to your Dual-Aspect Monism, where mind and matter are the inseparable aspects of the same entity state [3].
In defining concepts of matter, you have pointed out to the distinctions among the concept of Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristotle’ from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept. In the former matter has a form and potentiality for experiences, and you have accepted this concept of matter within your theory of eDAM. Then you distinguish it from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept (that matter is made up of atoms and which is pursued in science) which has the implication that matter is non-experiential within this framework. As this is faced with the hard problem of consciousness, you do not accept this within eDAM [4].
Further with that background, in defining the concept of consciousness, you state to have used the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristotle’s concept of matter that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective (1pp) [5].
While concluding from Sankaracharya’s advaita philosophy that the fundamental Reality is consciousness, i.e. the mental entity, you have mentioned that the advaita system does not explain by any step by step process that how the matter is created from a non-material entity mind (Brahman). And therefore this constitutes a serious explanatory gap within the Sankara’s Advaita system. You have noted that this is the reverse of the explanatory gap found in materialism that mind can be created out of matter [6]. And so you have taken the cue from Buddha and Nagarjuna and followed a middle path which is your theory of Dual Aspect Monism [7]. Your dual-aspect monism proposes that there are varying degrees of dominance of aspects depending of the entity-level and context is the middle path. This means that ‘the concept of the varying degrees of the manifestation (appearance/strength) of aspects’ means that the degree of ‘the appearance and/or strength of aspects’ varies depending on the levels of entities [8]. At each level, the manifestation of aspects is through dependent co-origination [9] i.e., through co-evolution, adaptation, natural selection, co-development and sensorimotor tuning.
But it is clear from your paper that you do not accept the Reality of Brahman as fully independent Truth. Your dual aspect monism does not accept that God/ Brahman is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience, who can affect each one of us and hence we must pray to him [10]. To substantiate your position you have asked the question Who created God/Brahman? And you have stated that the usual answer that Brahman is eternal and hence non-causal, is considered unacceptable to many. And that is the reason I feel you have taken recourse to the principle of dependent co origination because it denies any central or supreme position to any particular entity.
Thus even though you think that visitadvaita is close to your dual aspect monism, there are major differences between Visistadvaita and eDAM. Therefore you consider that visistadvaita like other world religions suffers from a built in interaction substance dualism. For example you state that the soul separates from the body at the time of death [11]. The truth however is that visistadvaita is a consistent and elegant philosophy, well honored in India and now all over the world by different scholars. However your inability to appreciate its foundational consistency and beauty stems from your misunderstanding of the true concept of Brahman as explained in Sri Ramanuja’s system.
Thus in your framework of modified visistadvaita which is a result of your dual aspect monism, you think that the problem is resolved when we can think that the mental aspect of Brahman causes mind and the physical aspect causes matter. From this dual aspect monistic view you further conclude that all entities including us, fermions and bosons are all Brahman [12]. But that is surely not the philosophy of visistadvaita propounded by Sripad Ramanuja Acharya.
The Critique of Vimal’s Philosophy of eDAM
The main difference between Vimal and Ramanuja seems to be on the use of the concept of Dual Aspect by Vimal. Sripad Ramanuja’s Monism is established on the basis of the concept of visista. But Vimal’s monism is attempted on the basis of the idea of dual aspect. Moreover it appears that Vimal has chosen a middle path from that of Buddha and Nagarjuna [13], who are quite clearly non-Vedantic in their approach, and therefore non-theistic. Vimal’s idea of manifestation of objects is through the concept of dependent co-origination. As far as I know the concept of dependent co origination is also founded upon the Buddhist line of thought [14], where the origin is said to be empty or Void [15]. In Buddhist thought everything is changing and dependent. That is the character of reality explained in Buddhism. It was mainly used to target into the causes of suffering but it was also considered as applicable to everything that constitutes Reality. So this then within Buddhism provides the basis for the quest for solution to all problems which we are entangled with. Within this Bauddha Samanvaya (Harmonization) of dependent co-origination of everything there cannot be any centre occupying the supreme position. Therefore, in solving one’s own problems the question/problems of ‘others’ becomes very important, and we cannot totally forget the problems of others.
But In Vedanta clearly the origin is Brahman. Brahman is not an absolute emptiness. Brahman is purna, or Complete in itself. In the Vedantic thought the process of negation will not lead to voidism or absolute emptiness. When we negate something it does not produce a void. For example when a cow eats grass, the grass does not become annihilated. Rather grass which was as if existing for itself, now serves the purpose of the cow as its part and parcel through the process of digesting. So by eating the cow negates the being of the grass as existing for itself. Therefore everything in nature is posited as if it is existing for itself. But by the process of negation that independent positing of entities is being negated in various ways and forms by nature. In this way everything exists for some higher and higher purposes in Nature, in which everything is appearing and vanishing as transitory moments. Therefore Reality is dynamic and it is never fixed. Thus everything is being negated for a higher purpose than that which is for itself. When we come to negation of all such negations, we arrive at the purpose of Absolute, or the Brahman. Therefore Brahman is cause of all causes or that which constitutes the Ultimate purpose. Everything exists for the satisfaction of the Absolute. Sripad Ramanuja has quite clearly shown that only Brahman is independent and everything is dependent upon Him (Brahman). Brahman depends only upon Himself and there is no other cause that is outside of Him or external to Him. We cannot limit Brahman because if we try to limit Brahman, Brahman finds itself beyond its limit as well. Therefore if we say what is beyond Brahman, then the answer is Brahman itself. Therefore questions posed ‘like who created God (Brahman)?’ neglect the position of Brahman as the cause of all causes and the Absolute Truth. Brahman is not some finite entity that can be limited by some boundary. Hegel, the German philosopher summarized this beautifully by saying, “Reality is by itself and for itself.” But such cannot be said of the finite entities like Table, chairs or ordinary living entities. All causes ultimately are to be traced to be dependent on Brahman. But Brahman is by itself, or is the substantial truth of all reality. Thus the entities are not only inseparable but also they are all dependent on Brahman for their being and becoming. This is the major difference between Vedanta’s principle of Brahman as the Cause of all Causes (sarva karana karanam) and Buddhism’s principle of dependent co origination. This is also therefore not in line with Visistaadvaita philosophy when Vimal claims that the concept of dependent co- origination can solve the so called problems of Visistadvaita, merely because the aspects or entities are inseparable. If Visistadvaita is being modified in this way it entails a complete misunderstanding of the underlying principle of visistadvaita which the author (Vimal) should address.
Therefore my suspicion is that this term ‘dual aspect’ in Vimal’s philosophy also has some influence from the idea of dependent co-origination and neglects the position of Brahman as cause of all causes. The mind and brain are of course appear to be inseparable in the organic unity of life processes in nature as long as life continues. But in Vedanta we have the principle of reincarnation by which it is clearly established that the subtle form comprising of soul covered with the mental structure disentangles with the more gross elements – i.e. brain and body at the time of death. In fact we must ask by what means reincarnation takes place. In fact there are also living entities that do not possess any distinctive brain system. Yet they are also intelligent. For example the trees, single celled organisms etc. are all intelligent. We can understand these intelligent concepts of living organisms through the living process which can be written down as an algorithm in terms of the material elements like the atoms and molecules. But the source of this algorithm cannot be pinned down to these material elements. In biology the conventional concepts of Central dogma are for this reason found to be untenable. For example in Wikipedia entry about Robert Rosen, an American biologist, it is mentioned, “He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down. [16]” Additionally we must mention that the concept of internal teleology is quite clearly an inseparable part of such causal processes.
Regarding the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristotle concept of matter, it is quite true that they have not explained matter in the way of modern atomistic view of science. According to Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, “Matter is a symbol of undeveloped consciousness. [17]” Therefore this system can only be understood from the concept of the organic whole. But that does not mean that we can regard that matter can produce consciousness. We need to clearly study the logic of life processes to understand this. The category of acit potency or material energy is never the source of life in the Vedantic thought. Yet the acit potency is dependent category and an attribute in the philosophy of Ramanuja. So we cannot regard matter and mind as being merely dual aspect of the same entity. When there is death there is no more consciousness in the dead body. Neither does the residual dead cell act in any conscious manner. They just disintegrate according to the laws of entropy. Therefore this body and the life principle have no intrinsic relation to each other after death. But how matter is produced is an important question. As we can see when the life principle is present, the body of the organism develops and changes. We have already suggested that no one has done any precise experiment to ascertain whether the law of conservation of mass and energy in case of life is obeyed. According to the Vedantic thought there must be a discrepancy and this discrepancy can be experimentally determined. Therefore what is the problem to think that the whole world of material plane can come from the potencies of Original life, which is the theistic position of the major World Religions. Therefore the problem of Unity is solved through the axiomatic principle of Vedanta (i) Life comes from Life, and (ii) Matter comes from Life.
When you state that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective, it is certainly true that the brain mind system is intricately involved in the different expressions of phenomenal consciousness. Yet the brain cannot be the source of consciousness. Rather when life is present, it produces the inseparable brain mind system within the organic unity of the concept of species. As we know that every cell is sentient, we can only say that in the living process the different organs produce each other. Yet it is the life principle which is a higher and superior category in Vedanta, without which there will be no such process. It is this living entity which holds together the separated material energies in the life process. Hence the life process has a much deeper conceptual relation to Reality. Therefore the natural process of life is inconceivable within physics and chemistry. Chemistry never becomes life in nature.
Some Notes on Visista-advaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja
First let us try to understand something about the philosophy of Visistadvaita. This is a system of Philosophy given by Sripad Ramanujacharya and this critiqued the then and dominating thesis of the kevala advaita system of Adi Sankaracharya. The first point therefore should be to understand the distinction between advaita and kevala advaita. The advaita philosophy has been there in India from time immemorial. It did not begin with Sripad Adi Sankaracharya and neither did he coin the term advaita. Advaita means the non-dual truth. But Sankaracharya’s explanation of advaita is called kevala advaita or Monism. In this explanation the phenomenal reality was an unreality or illusion stemming from avidya or ignorance. Sankaracharya had dismissed plurality by focusing on avidya for establishing his explanation of advaita or non-dualism. But advaita did not always mean Monism in Indian Philosophical traditions. It is the Sankara’s advaita in which the term means monism and therefore it has been categorized not just as advaita but with a qualifier as kevala-advaita. Thus it was distinguished from the philosophy of Suddha Advaita by the line of teachers in Sripad Sridhar Swami’s theistic tradition and other vaishnava acharya’s to protect the real meaning of Advaita as was and is being taught in the theistic schools of India from the onslaught of the Sankara’s reductive philosophy of Monism, where all is reduced to One.
Sripad Ramanuja Acharya gave the concept of Organic Whole in his philosophy of Visitaadvaita. In this he has achieved the great reconciliation of the One with the Many. Sankara had concluded that the Many is illusory manifestations of the One due to the function of Maya or avidya (ignorance). And therefore Sankara had stressed on the Reality One and the illusion of the Many. Therefore Sankara’s philosophy is that of reductive idealism and he stresses only on the principle of identity that exists between the One and the Many based upon the principle of ignorance. He neglects or makes the distinction between one and many a product of illusion, giving distinctions no reality [18].
But Sripad Ramanuja Acharya has stressed that the principle of distinction is a reality. It is not merely a result of illusion as held in Sankara’s line of thinking. Sripad Ramanuja has stressed the reality of both Many as well as the One. The ‘many’ are not the illusory manifestations of the one but they are held in their inseparable relation of dependence on the One. In this way Sripad Ramanuja returned the atman or the soul back to the Vedantins, which was previously lost in the Brahman of Sankara’s kevala advaita system of thought [19].
Therefore matter, souls and Brahman are all real in Ramanuja. The world of matter and souls is treated as attributes of the Brahman. The technical Sanskrit term for attributes is visesanas. The first point is that Brahman is not merely an attributeless homogenous stuff of consciousness. Brahman is Supra Personality or the best of Personalities, or Adi Purusha or Purushottama. He is endowed with infinity of auspicious attributes. He is all knowing, all powerful, all merciful as well as the transcendent Supreme Being. The world of souls (cit) and the world of matter (acit) are regarded as His chief attributes (visesanas). And He is the fundamental Substance (visesya). From this view of the complex whole (called Vaisitya drstya), Brahman is One without a second. Only from this point of view is Ramanuja’s view Monistic, and therefore this kind of Monism is quite different from Sankara’s attributeless Monism. Therefore Ramanuja’s Monism is called visista Advaita. From the angle of vision of the attributes (visesanas), they are different from Brahman, but all time they are always dependent on Brahman and inseparable from Brahman. The distinction and plurality of the souls persists with their dependence on God. Their distinction does not go against their dependence on God. The Brahman of Ramanuja "is an organic unity in which, as in all living organisms one element predominates over and controls the rest. [20]”
The subordinate elements are termed visesanas and the predominant element visesya. Because the visesanas cannot exist by themselves separately, the complex whole (visista) in which they are included is described as a unity. Hence, the name of Ramanuja philosophy is Visistadvaita. Therefore Reality according to Ramanuja is not merely a bare identity as held in Sankara. Reality is an identity-in-difference and the difference is not unreal. The identity element holds the difference and makes for the unity and there is a coordination of identity and difference. In Ramanuja’s system the world of souls and matter are co eternal with God, but not external from Him. Matter or prakriti through pradhan and mahatattva comes from Brahman as one of its energies and is called bahiranga or external energy (appearing external or separate as Maya) thus it is an eternal potential but not intrinsic to Him as his antaranga or spiritual energy. The relation between matter, souls and God in Ramanuja’s system is called aprthaka siddhi. This relation is an eternal one and it maintains distinctions between entities that are in intimate and inseparable relation to each other. Therefore Brahman is the inner immortal ruler and this is based upon the concept of the indweller (antaryami). Moreover Brahman is not unknowable [21]. Ramanuja discovered the epistemological plane called adhoksaja in which such knowability becomes possible.
During the state of dissolution, the world of souls and matter remain in a subtle form within the Lord. This aspect of Lord is called karanavastha, or the causal state. In the effect stage, it is called karyavastha. In this stage the world of souls, get attached to the world of matter and are said to be born. In this way the effect is not something entirely different from the cause. The cause itself gets transformed onto effect and this is called parinamavada. Parinaama means change. So as soon as we ask does that mean God Himself changes into the world of matter and souls. And if so does that not taint Him as something defective. But Ramanuja avoids all these defects and still maintains the concept of change through the category called dharmabhuta jnana, or attributive knowledge. It is not that the Lord changes or the souls change. The Lord and the souls are of the nature of substantive knowledge or jnana. Besides this the Lord and souls have an attributive called dharmabhuta jnana. What changes is the attribute (visesana) called the dharmabhuta jnana, or the attributive knowledge and not the substantive jnana. This dharmabhuta jnana is substance as well as attribute. It is substance in the sense that it undergoes changes and produces effects which are called material cause. It is however not the inert matter. It is this dharmabhuta jnana which operates through the mental faculties and produces knowledge. Not only knowledge but also internal states like desires and aversion are also regarded as the transformation of this dharmabhuta jnana. As it is this attributive knowledge that changes there is no necessity of parinaamavada for God. Thus the change in the attribute does not taint or effect the Lord in anyway. Ramanuja is neither a follower parinaamavaada nor that of vivartavaada [22]. This point is also accepted and supported by Srila Bhakti Vinoda Thakura in his Bhagavad-Gita commentary where he has clearly mentioned that the Gaudiya philosophy does not adhere to Brahma-Parinaamavad. But that the Gaudiyas are the proponents of Shakti-parinaamavad. What is transformed is not the Brahman, but the potency. Therefore the cosmos is not directly a transformation of Brahman. Rather the cosmos is a transformation of shakti or potency, hence the name shakti-parinaamavaad. Thus for Ramanuja, Lord is the Supreme Reality and all others including the chit as well as the acit are dependent upon Him. Every word in the veda has for its plenary significance, the Lord. It is only in the secondary sense that the words of the veda refer to the things of the world, but in the deeper significance of the words are called Vedanta-vyutpatti and it always refers to Brahman or God [23].
The entire world of Reality according to Ramanuja can be categorized as dravyas (substance) and adravyas (attributes). Thus colour, sound, taste, etc. all come under the category of attributes and these go on to constitute prakriti. Potency is also an adravya or the attribute. Besides the attributes there are six substances (dravyas) which can be classified under the categories of material or non material. The non-material entities are (i) God, (ii) jiva, (iii) Nitya Vibhuti, (iv) dharmabhuta jnana. Time as experienced in the material plane and prakriti constitutes the material variety of substances. Prakriti which is comprised of three modes of material nature stops at the borderline of nitya-vibuti, which is transcendental nature (super prakriti) under the control of the Lord. Time is within Brahman for Ramanuja and space is derived from prakriti [23].
The predecessors of Ramanuja, like the alvars as well as the followers have always presented a theistic concept of Vedanta and explained the philosophy of love of God in their writings. To them, the Holy Ramanujaites, God is not merely a theoretical abstraction but a fact of the experience of the surrendered souls who have developed love of Godhead. Their main theme is the greatness of God and His glory as well as His presence in everything. They stress that the mercy of the Lord as unconditional and all comprehensive. Mercy is higher than Justice. Sripad Ramanuja Acharya was a great genius and a many sided scholar and the foremost of the visistadvaita dialecticians. According to Ramanuja knowledge always has a corresponding object. There is never an objectless cognition. Ramanuja also explained that the cognition of an attributeless object is a mere fiction. A non-qualified object can never be the object of cognition.
Conclusion
Vimal attempts a modification of Visistadvaita without considering many of the essential elements of the philosophy of Sri Ramanuja. Therefore the problems that are cited by him like the Ist pp, cannot be solved within modified visistaadvaita. The reason is that he relies more on the concept of dependent co origination. However the Brahman according to Vedanta is the janmady asya yatah – the source of all that be. The atheistic position has been scrutinized well by Ramanuja, especially when he faced the Buddhists philosophers of his time as well as the Sankarites and others. Therefore it is incorrect to dismiss visistadvaita simply by saying that it does not cater to a non-theistic harmonization of reality. No non-theistic harmonization has ever been achieved. The problems of consciousness are major question mark over such attempts. However the theistic position clearly outlines guidelines for ascertaining how matter can come from life. Therefore only the theistic position has the proper capacity to produce the harmonization that is necessary for a truly rational and comprehensive understanding of reality.
References
[1] Vimal, R.L.P., Vimal, M., U., P. Introducing extended Dual-Aspect Monism (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) Framework in Religion: Prāṇa Pratiṣṭha, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283243225, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4356.4249, October, 2015, pp. 2.
[2] ibid, 1.[3] ibid 1., pp. 3.[4] ibid., 3.[5] ibid 1., pp. 4.[6] ibid 1., pp. 8.[7] ibid 1., pp. 8.[8] ibid 1., pp. 12.[9] ibid 1., pp. 12.[10] ibid 1., pp. 9.[11] ibid 1., pp. 1, 9.[12] ibid 1., pp. 9.[13] ibid 1., pp. 8.[14] Tilakaratne, A., Director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, 133/19, Nawala Road, Narahenpita, Colombo 05 Sri Lanka. refer to the article: ‘Dependent Co-origination: The Buddhist Approach to Reality’, http://www.beyondthenet.net/slabs/articles/Dependent.pdf[15] quoted in [14], “If empty is not seen then reaching what has not been reached, the act of terminating suffering as well as the relinquishing of all defilements also will not be seen.” (Nagarjuna, XXIV: 38-39).
[17] Prabhupada A.C., Bhaktivedanta Swami, quoted in http://gitabase.com/eng/LTRS/1976/2/76FE, letter to Sripad Madhava Das [Brahmachari name of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja].
[18] P. Nagaraja Rao, The Schools of Vedanta, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavanm, Bombay, 1943, pp. 73.[19] ibid, 18.[20] ibid, 18.[21] ibid, 18, pp. 73-75.[22] ibid, 18, pp. 75-76.[23]ibid, 18, pp. 76.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/361650313.4280637.1492595191018%40mail.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7AF-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA%40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/7252E520-4677-4E7E-BA5F-D4E584A29CF4%40chopra.com.
C. S. Morrison
Apr 20, 2017, 5:06:29 PM4/20/17
to 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D.
Dear Serge
In case Deepak can't answer your very reasonable challenge, let me draw your attention to my theory of consciousness (Position Selecting Interactionism) because it is a theory that does fulfill your criteria.
It really does provide an explanatory framework that scientifically explains how the physical sensory signals became transformed into experience. And it does this without invoking any functionalism. Moreover, this theory appears to be testable. Unfortunately Deepak may not have heard of it yet as it has so far only been published in my book THE BLIND MINDMAKER which has only been available on Amazon since Christmas.
Best wishes,
Colin
C. S. Morrison, author of THE BLIND MINDMAKER: Explaining Consciousness without Magic or Misrepresentation
https://www.amazon.com/Blind-Mindmaker-Explaining-Consciousness-Misrepresentation/dp/1541283953
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Blind-Mindmaker-Explaining-Consciousness-Misrepresentation/dp/1541283953
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/273359453.5492961.1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com.
Asingh2384
Apr 20, 2017, 5:06:29 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, serge.pa...@rocketmail.com
Hi Surge:
I do not agree with the widely-used definition (Hard Problem) - "By a
"theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework
which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed
into experience.....If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a
theory of consciousness.....So, may I as Deepak to name, at least, one theory
of consciousness known for him? Who is its author?"
Theory of consciousness must address the physical mechanism
that powers the firing of neurons to generate signals; how the signals generate
experience is only a limited sensation - manifestation of the fundamental
consciousness or free willed energy in the universe as evidenced in the
spontaneous expansion of the universe a physical model of the universal consciousness. The so-called Hard Problem only addresses limited biological experience and not the fundamental consciousness.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden
Factor - An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and
Universal Reality"
The attached paper describes suc
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 20, 2017 5:44 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 20, 2017 5:44 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
-
[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:
>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?
[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
So, may I as Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
Thanks in advance,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
What came first consciousness or science ?
What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
Deepak Chopra MD
Asingh2384
Apr 20, 2017, 5:06:29 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, nonlo...@chopra.com
Matter is Consciousness
(C - speed of light) energy bonded or confined by strong nuclear and gravity forces
of attraction wherein the speed and wavelengths of quantum
particles/wave-packets have been reduced to very very small values. Simply said
- Matter is bonded, frozen, or condensed consciousness - Zero-point Energy
(ZPE).
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of
"The Hidden Factor - An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science,
Cosmology, and Universal Reality"
-----Original Message-----
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 20, 2017 9:12 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 20, 2017 9:12 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Thanks Syamala !
Leonard Susskind also says the same
All subatomic particles are mathematical abstractions
On Apr 20, 2017, at 8:44 AM, 'Murty Hari' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Dear Ram,I asked the same question once before. Of course, matter is not made of nothing because Deepak himself repeatedly says that matter is modulation of consciousness.I justify his statements "Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptions" and "Matter is non material" as follows:
In today's quantum mechanics, all matter (some of which is perceived directly by senses and called classical) is made up of quantum particles. A quantum particle is said to be a packet of de Broglie phase waves, each of which is supposed to have a speed greater than that of light in vacuum. Thus the phase wave is a mathematical abstraction, it is non-material in that you cannot perceive it by senses. So, one may say all matter is made of ideas.
Syamala
From: "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.
Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
Kind regards,Rām
----------------------------------------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptionsNo one has ever proved the existence of matterMatter is non material
It's made of nothing
[23] The section 4.0 contains some thoughts from ideas that were discussed by Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, PhD over Skype.
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni ji,
Thanks for your excellent critique, which has sharpened the extended Dual-Aspect Monism (eDAM, Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) framework
My responses to your critique are given in Section 3.6 (3.6.1 to 3.6.7) of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal, 2011).
Your feedback will be highly appreciated.
Cheers!
Kindest regards,Ram17 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
https://www.researchgate.net/p rofile/Ram_Lakhan_Pandey_Vimal
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Saturday, 14 January 2017 5:50 PM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegrou ps.com> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
THANKS for your interest in the eDAM/Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita framework and providing excellent critique.
I am in the process of addressing your comments, and I will let you know as soon as it is completed.
Cheers and Happy New Year!
Kindest regards,Ram14 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 263 5028; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
https://www.researchgate.net/p rofile/Ram_Lakhan_Pandey_Vimal
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. In your extended dual aspect monism, i.e. eDAM, you have critiqued Visistaadvaita philosophy for its neglect of the non-theistic harmonization of Reality. You say, “We simply cannot ignore the contribution of science in our lives. [1]” You have tried to cater to the viewpoints of both the theists as well as atheists. For example, you say that theists can assume the dual aspect Brahman as God. Atheists can assume Brahman as dual aspect entity at fundamental level such as physicist’s vacuum, deep quantum potential or Bohm’s Implicate Order from where all universes (including human beings) emerge via co-evolution [2].
Your (RLP Vimal’s) concept of eDAM
As you have proposed a ‘modified Visistadvaita’ through your eDAM, the natural question to ask is why do you think, that the visistaadvaita philosophy needs a modification from eDAM and if indeed so then in what respect. The dual aspects that you in [1] refer to are the physical aspects (e.g neural networks in brain) and the mental aspects (e.g. subjective experiences). In your opinion among all philosophies in religion and science, this modified Visistadvaita proposed by you has the least number of problems. In this regard you have taken up the issues of inseparability as very important. For example you refer to your Dual-Aspect Monism, where mind and matter are the inseparable aspects of the same entity state [3].
In defining concepts of matter, you have pointed out to the distinctions among the concept of Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’ from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept. In the former matter has a form and potentiality for experiences, and you have accepted this concept of matter within your theory of eDAM. Then you distinguish it from Kanaada-Democritus’ concept (that matter is made up of atoms and which is pursued in science) which has the implication that matter is non-experiential within this framework. As this is faced with the hard problem of consciousness, you do not accept this within eDAM [4].
Further with that background, in defining the concept of consciousness, you state to have used the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le’s concept of matter that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective (1pp) [5].
While concluding from Sankaracharya’s advaita philosophy that the fundamental Reality is consciousness, i.e. the mental entity, you have mentioned that the advaita system does not explain by any step by step process that how the matter is created from a non-material entity mind (Brahman). And therefore this constitutes a serious explanatory gap within the Sankara’s Advaita system. You have noted that this is the reverse of the explanatory gap found in materialism that mind can be created out of matter [6]. And so you have taken the cue from Buddha and Nagarjuna and followed a middle path which is your theory of Dual Aspect Monism [7]. Your dual-aspect monism proposes that there are varying degrees of dominance of aspects depending of the entity-level and context is the middle path. This means that ‘the concept of the varying degrees of the manifestation (appearance/strength) of aspects’ means that the degree of ‘the appearance and/or strength of aspects’ varies depending on the levels of entities [8]. At each level, the manifestation of aspects is through dependent co-origination [9] i.e., through co-evolution, adaptation, natural selection, co-development and sensorimotor tuning.
But it is clear from your paper that you do not accept the Reality of Brahman as fully independent Truth. Your dual aspect monism does not accept that God/ Brahman is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscience, who can affect each one of us and hence we must pray to him [10]. To substantiate your position you have asked the question Who created God/Brahman? And you have stated that the usual answer that Brahman is eternal and hence non-causal, is considered unacceptable to many. And that is the reason I feel you have taken recourse to the principle of dependent co origination because it denies any central or supreme position to any particular entity.
Thus even though you think that visitadvaita is close to your dual aspect monism, there are major differences between Visistadvaita and eDAM. Therefore you consider that visistadvaita like other world religions suffers from a built in interaction substance dualism. For example you state that the soul separates from the body at the time of death [11]. The truth however is that visistadvaita is a consistent and elegant philosophy, well honored in India and now all over the world by different scholars. However your inability to appreciate its foundational consistency and beauty stems from your misunderstanding of the true concept of Brahman as explained in Sri Ramanuja’s system.
Thus in your framework of modified visistadvaita which is a result of your dual aspect monism, you think that the problem is resolved when we can think that the mental aspect of Brahman causes mind and the physical aspect causes matter. From this dual aspect monistic view you further conclude that all entities including us, fermions and bosons are all Brahman [12]. But that is surely not the philosophy of visistadvaita propounded by Sripad Ramanuja Acharya.
The Critique of Vimal’s Philosophy of eDAM
The main difference between Vimal and Ramanuja seems to be on the use of the concept of Dual Aspect by Vimal. Sripad Ramanuja’s Monism is established on the basis of the concept of visista. But Vimal’s monism is attempted on the basis of the idea of dual aspect. Moreover it appears that Vimal has chosen a middle path from that of Buddha and Nagarjuna [13], who are quite clearly non-Vedantic in their approach, and therefore non-theistic. Vimal’s idea of manifestation of objects is through the concept of dependent co-origination. As far as I know the concept of dependent co origination is also founded upon the Buddhist line of thought [14], where the origin is said to be empty or Void [15]. In Buddhist thought everything is changing and dependent. That is the character of reality explained in Buddhism. It was mainly used to target into the causes of suffering but it was also considered as applicable to everything that constitutes Reality. So this then within Buddhism provides the basis for the quest for solution to all problems which we are entangled with. Within this Bauddha Samanvaya (Harmonization) of dependent co-origination of everything there cannot be any centre occupying the supreme position. Therefore, in solving one’s own problems the question/problems of ‘others’ becomes very important, and we cannot totally forget the problems of others.
But In Vedanta clearly the origin is Brahman. Brahman is not an absolute emptiness. Brahman is purna, or Complete in itself. In the Vedantic thought the process of negation will not lead to voidism or absolute emptiness. When we negate something it does not produce a void. For example when a cow eats grass, the grass does not become annihilated. Rather grass which was as if existing for itself, now serves the purpose of the cow as its part and parcel through the process of digesting. So by eating the cow negates the being of the grass as existing for itself. Therefore everything in nature is posited as if it is existing for itself. But by the process of negation that independent positing of entities is being negated in various ways and forms by nature. In this way everything exists for some higher and higher purposes in Nature, in which everything is appearing and vanishing as transitory moments. Therefore Reality is dynamic and it is never fixed. Thus everything is being negated for a higher purpose than that which is for itself. When we come to negation of all such negations, we arrive at the purpose of Absolute, or the Brahman. Therefore Brahman is cause of all causes or that which constitutes the Ultimate purpose. Everything exists for the satisfaction of the Absolute. Sripad Ramanuja has quite clearly shown that only Brahman is independent and everything is dependent upon Him (Brahman). Brahman depends only upon Himself and there is no other cause that is outside of Him or external to Him. We cannot limit Brahman because if we try to limit Brahman, Brahman finds itself beyond its limit as well. Therefore if we say what is beyond Brahman, then the answer is Brahman itself. Therefore questions posed ‘like who created God (Brahman)?’ neglect the position of Brahman as the cause of all causes and the Absolute Truth. Brahman is not some finite entity that can be limited by some boundary. Hegel, the German philosopher summarized this beautifully by saying, “Reality is by itself and for itself.” But such cannot be said of the finite entities like Table, chairs or ordinary living entities. All causes ultimately are to be traced to be dependent on Brahman. But Brahman is by itself, or is the substantial truth of all reality. Thus the entities are not only inseparable but also they are all dependent on Brahman for their being and becoming. This is the major difference between Vedanta’s principle of Brahman as the Cause of all Causes (sarva karana karanam) and Buddhism’s principle of dependent co origination. This is also therefore not in line with Visistaadvaita philosophy when Vimal claims that the concept of dependent co- origination can solve the so called problems of Visistadvaita, merely because the aspects or entities are inseparable. If Visistadvaita is being modified in this way it entails a complete misunderstanding of the underlying principle of visistadvaita which the author (Vimal) should address.
Therefore my suspicion is that this term ‘dual aspect’ in Vimal’s philosophy also has some influence from the idea of dependent co-origination and neglects the position of Brahman as cause of all causes. The mind and brain are of course appear to be inseparable in the organic unity of life processes in nature as long as life continues. But in Vedanta we have the principle of reincarnation by which it is clearly established that the subtle form comprising of soul covered with the mental structure disentangles with the more gross elements – i.e. brain and body at the time of death. In fact we must ask by what means reincarnation takes place. In fact there are also living entities that do not possess any distinctive brain system. Yet they are also intelligent. For example the trees, single celled organisms etc. are all intelligent. We can understand these intelligent concepts of living organisms through the living process which can be written down as an algorithm in terms of the material elements like the atoms and molecules. But the source of this algorithm cannot be pinned down to these material elements. In biology the conventional concepts of Central dogma are for this reason found to be untenable. For example in Wikipedia entry about Robert Rosen, an American biologist, it is mentioned, “He concluded, based on examples such as this, that phenotype cannot always be directly attributed to genotype and that the chemically active aspect of a biologically active protein relies on more than the sequence of amino acids, from which it was constructed: there must be some other important factors at work, that he did not however attempt to specify or pin down. [16]” Additionally we must mention that the concept of internal teleology is quite clearly an inseparable part of such causal processes.
Regarding the Yajñavalkya-Badarayana-Aristot le concept of matter, it is quite true that they have not explained matter in the way of modern atomistic view of science. According to Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, “Matter is a symbol of undeveloped consciousness. [17]” Therefore this system can only be understood from the concept of the organic whole. But that does not mean that we can regard that matter can produce consciousness. We need to clearly study the logic of life processes to understand this. The category of acit potency or material energy is never the source of life in the Vedantic thought. Yet the acit potency is dependent category and an attribute in the philosophy of Ramanuja. So we cannot regard matter and mind as being merely dual aspect of the same entity. When there is death there is no more consciousness in the dead body. Neither does the residual dead cell act in any conscious manner. They just disintegrate according to the laws of entropy. Therefore this body and the life principle have no intrinsic relation to each other after death. But how matter is produced is an important question. As we can see when the life principle is present, the body of the organism develops and changes. We have already suggested that no one has done any precise experiment to ascertain whether the law of conservation of mass and energy in case of life is obeyed. According to the Vedantic thought there must be a discrepancy and this discrepancy can be experimentally determined. Therefore what is the problem to think that the whole world of material plane can come from the potencies of Original life, which is the theistic position of the major World Religions. Therefore the problem of Unity is solved through the axiomatic principle of Vedanta (i) Life comes from Life, and (ii) Matter comes from Life.
When you state that consciousness is the mental aspect of a state of the brain-mind system or that of a brain-process in the first person perspective, it is certainly true that the brain mind system is intricately involved in the different expressions of phenomenal consciousness. Yet the brain cannot be the source of consciousness. Rather when life is present, it produces the inseparable brain mind system within the organic unity of the concept of species. As we know that every cell is sentient, we can only say that in the living process the different organs produce each other. Yet it is the life principle which is a higher and superior category in Vedanta, without which there will be no such process. It is this living entity which holds together the separated material energies in the life process. Hence the life process has a much deeper conceptual relation to Reality. Therefore the natural process of life is inconceivable within physics and chemistry. Chemistry never becomes life in nature.
Some Notes on Visista-advaita Philosophy of Sri Ramanuja
First let us try to understand something about the philosophy of Visistadvaita. This is a system of Philosophy given by Sripad Ramanujacharya and this critiqued the then and dominating thesis of the kevala advaita system of Adi Sankaracharya. The first point therefore should be to understand the distinction between advaita and kevala advaita. The advaita philosophy has been there in India from time immemorial. It did not begin with Sripad Adi Sankaracharya and neither did he coin the term advaita. Advaita means the non-dual truth. But Sankaracharya’s explanation of advaita is called kevala advaita or Monism. In this explanation the phenomenal reality was an unreality or illusion stemming from avidya or ignorance. Sankaracharya had dismissed plurality by focusing on avidya for establishing his explanation of advaita or non-dualism. But advaita did not always mean Monism in Indian Philosophical traditions. It is the Sankara’s advaita in which the term means monism and therefore it has been categorized not just as advaita but with a qualifier as kevala-advaita. Thus it was distinguished from the philosophy of Suddha Advaita by the line of teachers in Sripad Sridhar Swami’s theistic tradition and other vaishnava acharya’s to protect the real meaning of Advaita as was and is being taught in the theistic schools of India from the onslaught of the Sankara’s reductive philosophy of Monism, where all is reduced to One.
Sripad Ramanuja Acharya gave the concept of Organic Whole in his philosophy of Visitaadvaita. In this he has achieved the great reconciliation of the One with the Many. Sankara had concluded that the Many is illusory manifestations of the One due to the function of Maya or avidya (ignorance). And therefore Sankara had stressed on the Reality One and the illusion of the Many. Therefore Sankara’s philosophy is that of reductive idealism and he stresses only on the principle of identity that exists between the One and the Many based upon the principle of ignorance. He neglects or makes the distinction between one and many a product of illusion, giving distinctions no reality [18].
But Sripad Ramanuja Acharya has stressed that the principle of distinction is a reality. It is not merely a result of illusion as held in Sankara’s line of thinking. Sripad Ramanuja has stressed the reality of both Many as well as the One. The ‘many’ are not the illusory manifestations of the one but they are held in their inseparable relation of dependence on the One. In this way Sripad Ramanuja returned the atman or the soul back to the Vedantins, which was previously lost in the Brahman of Sankara’s kevala advaita system of thought [19].
Therefore matter, souls and Brahman are all real in Ramanuja. The world of matter and souls is treated as attributes of the Brahman. The technical Sanskrit term for attributes is visesanas. The first point is that Brahman is not merely an attributeless homogenous stuff of consciousness. Brahman is Supra Personality or the best of Personalities, or Adi Purusha or Purushottama. He is endowed with infinity of auspicious attributes. He is all knowing, all powerful, all merciful as well as the transcendent Supreme Being. The world of souls (cit) and the world of matter (acit) are regarded as His chief attributes (visesanas). And He is the fundamental Substance (visesya). From this view of the complex whole (called Vaisitya drstya), Brahman is One without a second. Only from this point of view is Ramanuja’s view Monistic, and therefore this kind of Monism is quite different from Sankara’s attributeless Monism. Therefore Ramanuja’s Monism is called visista Advaita. From the angle of vision of the attributes (visesanas), they are different from Brahman, but all time they are always dependent on Brahman and inseparable from Brahman. The distinction and plurality of the souls persists with their dependence on God. Their distinction does not go against their dependence on God. The Brahman of Ramanuja "is an organic unity in which, as in all living organisms one element predominates over and controls the rest. [20]”
The subordinate elements are termed visesanas and the predominant element visesya. Because the visesanas cannot exist by themselves separately, the complex whole (visista) in which they are included is described as a unity. Hence, the name of Ramanuja philosophy is Visistadvaita. Therefore Reality according to Ramanuja is not merely a bare identity as held in Sankara. Reality is an identity-in-difference and the difference is not unreal. The identity element holds the difference and makes for the unity and there is a coordination of identity and difference. In Ramanuja’s system the world of souls and matter are co eternal with God, but not external from Him. Matter or prakriti through pradhan and mahatattva comes from Brahman as one of its energies and is called bahiranga or external energy (appearing external or separate as Maya) thus it is an eternal potential but not intrinsic to Him as his antaranga or spiritual energy. The relation between matter, souls and God in Ramanuja’s system is called aprthaka siddhi. This relation is an eternal one and it maintains distinctions between entities that are in intimate and inseparable relation to each other. Therefore Brahman is the inner immortal ruler and this is based upon the concept of the indweller (antaryami). Moreover Brahman is not unknowable [21]. Ramanuja discovered the epistemological plane called adhoksaja in which such knowability becomes possible.
During the state of dissolution, the world of souls and matter remain in a subtle form within the Lord. This aspect of Lord is called karanavastha, or the causal state. In the effect stage, it is called karyavastha. In this stage the world of souls, get attached to the world of matter and are said to be born. In this way the effect is not something entirely different from the cause. The cause itself gets transformed onto effect and this is called parinamavada. Parinaama means change. So as soon as we ask does that mean God Himself changes into the world of matter and souls. And if so does that not taint Him as something defective. But Ramanuja avoids all these defects and still maintains the concept of change through the category called dharmabhuta jnana, or attributive knowledge. It is not that the Lord changes or the souls change. The Lord and the souls are of the nature of substantive knowledge or jnana. Besides this the Lord and souls have an attributive called dharmabhuta jnana. What changes is the attribute (visesana) called the dharmabhuta jnana, or the attributive knowledge and not the substantive jnana. This dharmabhuta jnana is substance as well as attribute. It is substance in the sense that it undergoes changes and produces effects which are called material cause. It is however not the inert matter. It is this dharmabhuta jnana which operates through the mental faculties and produces knowledge. Not only knowledge but also internal states like desires and aversion are also regarded as the transformation of this dharmabhuta jnana. As it is this attributive knowledge that changes there is no necessity of parinaamavada for God. Thus the change in the attribute does not taint or effect the Lord in anyway. Ramanuja is neither a follower parinaamavaada nor that of vivartavaada [22]. This point is also accepted and supported by Srila Bhakti Vinoda Thakura in his Bhagavad-Gita commentary where he has clearly mentioned that the Gaudiya philosophy does not adhere to Brahma-Parinaamavad. But that the Gaudiyas are the proponents of Shakti-parinaamavad. What is transformed is not the Brahman, but the potency. Therefore the cosmos is not directly a transformation of Brahman. Rather the cosmos is a transformation of shakti or potency, hence the name shakti-parinaamavaad. Thus for Ramanuja, Lord is the Supreme Reality and all others including the chit as well as the acit are dependent upon Him. Every word in the veda has for its plenary significance, the Lord. It is only in the secondary sense that the words of the veda refer to the things of the world, but in the deeper significance of the words are called Vedanta-vyutpatti and it always refers to Brahman or God [23].
The entire world of Reality according to Ramanuja can be categorized as dravyas (substance) and adravyas (attributes). Thus colour, sound, taste, etc. all come under the category of attributes and these go on to constitute prakriti. Potency is also an adravya or the attribute. Besides the attributes there are six substances (dravyas) which can be classified under the categories of material or non material. The non-material entities are (i) God, (ii) jiva, (iii) Nitya Vibhuti, (iv) dharmabhuta jnana. Time as experienced in the material plane and prakriti constitutes the material variety of substances. Prakriti which is comprised of three modes of material nature stops at the borderline of nitya-vibuti, which is transcendental nature (super prakriti) under the control of the Lord. Time is within Brahman for Ramanuja and space is derived from prakriti [23].
The predecessors of Ramanuja, like the alvars as well as the followers have always presented a theistic concept of Vedanta and explained the philosophy of love of God in their writings. To them, the Holy Ramanujaites, God is not merely a theoretical abstraction but a fact of the experience of the surrendered souls who have developed love of Godhead. Their main theme is the greatness of God and His glory as well as His presence in everything. They stress that the mercy of the Lord as unconditional and all comprehensive. Mercy is higher than Justice. Sripad Ramanuja Acharya was a great genius and a many sided scholar and the foremost of the visistadvaita dialecticians. According to Ramanuja knowledge always has a corresponding object. There is never an objectless cognition. Ramanuja also explained that the cognition of an attributeless object is a mere fiction. A non-qualified object can never be the object of cognition.
Conclusion
Vimal attempts a modification of Visistadvaita without considering many of the essential elements of the philosophy of Sri Ramanuja. Therefore the problems that are cited by him like the Ist pp, cannot be solved within modified visistaadvaita. The reason is that he relies more on the concept of dependent co origination. However the Brahman according to Vedanta is the janmady asya yatah – the source of all that be. The atheistic position has been scrutinized well by Ramanuja, especially when he faced the Buddhists philosophers of his time as well as the Sankarites and others. Therefore it is incorrect to dismiss visistadvaita simply by saying that it does not cater to a non-theistic harmonization of reality. No non-theistic harmonization has ever been achieved. The problems of consciousness are major question mark over such attempts. However the theistic position clearly outlines guidelines for ascertaining how matter can come from life. Therefore only the theistic position has the proper capacity to produce the harmonization that is necessary for a truly rational and comprehensive understanding of reality.
References
[1] Vimal, R.L.P., Vimal, M., U., P. Introducing extended Dual-Aspect Monism (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) Framework in Religion: Prāṇa Pratiṣṭha, https://www.researchgate.net/p ublication/283243225, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.4356.4249, October, 2015, pp. 2.
[2] ibid, 1.[3] ibid 1., pp. 3.[4] ibid., 3.[5] ibid 1., pp. 4.[6] ibid 1., pp. 8.[7] ibid 1., pp. 8.[8] ibid 1., pp. 12.[9] ibid 1., pp. 12.[10] ibid 1., pp. 9.[11] ibid 1., pp. 1, 9.[12] ibid 1., pp. 9.[13] ibid 1., pp. 8.[14] Tilakaratne, A., Director, Postgraduate Institute of Pali and Buddhist Studies, 133/19, Nawala Road, Narahenpita, Colombo 05 Sri Lanka. refer to the article: ‘Dependent Co-origination: The Buddhist Approach to Reality’, http://www.beyondthenet.net/sl abs/articles/Dependent.pdf[15] quoted in [14], “If empty is not seen then reaching what has not been reached, the act of terminating suffering as well as the relinquishing of all defilements also will not be seen.” (Nagarjuna, XXIV: 38-39).
[17] Prabhupada A.C., Bhaktivedanta Swami, quoted in http://gitabase.com/eng/LTRS/1 976/2/76FE, letter to Sripad Madhava Das [Brahmachari name of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja].
[18] P. Nagaraja Rao, The Schools of Vedanta, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavanm, Bombay, 1943, pp. 73.[19] ibid, 18.[20] ibid, 18.[21] ibid, 18, pp. 73-75.[22] ibid, 18, pp. 75-76.[23]ibid, 18, pp. 76.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
--
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20139A50349A68100B98649C80180%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/282238421.4607245.1492664849105%40mail.yahoo.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/884160936.285428.1492688672419%40mail.yahoo.com.
<image001.png>
<OutlookEmoji-1483997936424_email-signature-plain.jpg.jpg>
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/36021B0D-EC76-4BC1-A87D-D4993B081F54%40chopra.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 20, 2017, 5:06:29 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Peter - great comments
All theories are conceived in consciousness alone
Materialists cannot explain any experience including the experience of doing science
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
Siegfried Bleher
Apr 20, 2017, 9:09:21 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Peter and Serge,
There does seem to be a range of meaning to the notion of ‘theory’ when we look at examples of theories. So, although Newton’s theory of gravitation does not give an ‘explanation’ for how gravity is able to affect objects at a distance, it is still an adequate and rather successful explanation and predictive model for a large set of observations over a wide range of scales. In the effort to widen the range of applicability and predictive power of a theory of gravitation (i.e. to understand why the environment of an accelerating elevator looks just like the environment in a stationary elevator in the presence of a gravitational field), Einstein came upon the idea of curvature of spacetime as an ‘explanation’ for how gravity can influence objects at a distance: a massive object at location A results in the spacetime near it to be curved in such a way as to influence another object at location B. This theory greatly expands the range of applicability and predictive power to include behavior of masses that are highly concentrated (neutron stars and black holes), and large energy events that generate gravitational waves (predicted by Einstein and confirmed by the LIGO experiment). But even this theory does not account for all phenomena, as evidenced by its extension by Hawking to include some quantum effects near black holes. My intention in responding here is to highlight three things about theories in general (of the many characteristics that could be highlighted), and how these things apply, in particular, to a purported theory of consciousness.
The first is the presence and assumption of primitives, or concepts that are considered ‘givens’. For example, in the case of a theory of gravitation, a ‘given’ is that it acts at a distance. Who can argue with that, right? Except that within this assumption is embedded the particular ways our human senses perceive and our minds interpret distinction or separation between what we see as different objects, and the distances between them. So, although Newton could not account for that particular aspect of gravity, his theory still stands as a valid and effective theory. And this leads to the second aspect of theories, which is their range of applicability, to some degree determined by the primitives of the theory. So, both Newton’s and Einstein’s theories of gravitation are limited in their applicability to scales (in phase space) much larger than the quantum of action. The primitive in this case is the assumption of the unrestricted divisibility of matter. Questioning the validity or essential nature of the primitives creates the opportunity to expand the range of applicability of the theory, as does Einstein’s in relation to Newton’s. So, these two aspects can be summarized as: 1) what question(s) does the theory try to answer? and 2) what are the givens it must answer these questions in terms of? The third aspect is that a theory that is expanded in its range by changing the primitives does not necessarily invalidate the former theory: Newton’s theory is still adequate for many things, and far easier to use than Einstein’s.
I basically agree with you, Peter, that Serge is pointing to a demanding concept of theory. But I would also say that behaviorist theories of consciousness have a (limited) range of validity. So, as long as the primitives are clear, and the range of applicability is clear, then perhaps there can be a little more agreement on what is valid theory? For example, consider the challenge to Deepak from Serge:
“I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.”
Within this challenge there appears to me to be embedded an already virtually complete theory for how experience happens: it happens when “physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience”. First there is a signal, which has physical roots or are physical in nature, and then somehow these are transformed—altered in their essential nature as physical things—into experience (assumed, I guess, to be non-physical in nature). Hence the difficulty in answering the challenge—how can we give an explanatory framework for something that is already assumed without question to be a certain way? I believe what Deepak is saying is that he disagrees with the most commonly assumed primitives, the ‘given’s’.
We have a ‘common’ narrative born of historical record that life evolves from physical things that begin with simple interactions, and such interactions grow in complexity until ‘poof’ - life emerges. If we accept this narrative as a given, along with the more subtle embedded assumptions, then we appear to be constrained to pose the question as SP did above.
I would also like to point out there are many theories of consciousness already, but they can be viewed from the perspective described above—clearly demarcate the primitives and their range of applicability. I can mention two I am familiar with (arguments against them are a separate issue): Giulio Tononi’s Integrated Information Theory (which doesn’t so much explain consciousness in physical terms as it gives constraints on a physical substrate sufficient to account for the phenomenology of consciousness), and Penrose and Hameroff’s Orchestrated Objective Reduction hypothesis.
Regards,
Siegfried
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
Murty Hari
Apr 20, 2017, 9:09:21 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Hi Avtar,
Indian
philosophy calls the collection of all the thoughts, desires,
emotions, memories, etc, of an individual as the individual's mind and emphasizes that
just like lifeless matter, an individual's mind is NOT conscious! The philosophy explains the solution to the hard problem by means of an analogy as
follows: When sun light falls in a pot containing water, the light is
reflected by the water creating an image of the sun. The image has some
brightness but its origin is in the sun light and not in the pot nor in
the water. A living being is a body with a mind and similar to a pot
containing water; the mind is like water and the body is like the pot.
Consciousness (with big C) is the sun light. The consciousness appearing
in a living being is like the image of the sun in water. Just as there
is no reflection in an empty pot, there is no appearance of
consciousness in lifeless matter but only in living beings because they
have minds and life is the interaction of mind with matter. Again, just
as the water needs a pot to hold it, and the reflection is gone if the
pot is broken, the mind cannot exhibit the apparently conscious behavior
after the death of the physical body.
Syamala Hari
From: "'Asingh2384' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com; serge.pa...@rocketmail.com
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 5:05 PM
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/15b8c85faaf-1d7a-2d61f%40webprd-m41.mail.aol.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 20, 2017, 9:09:21 PM4/20/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, David Schwartzman, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Dear Dr. Bhaktivijnana Muni ji,
Namaste,
Thanks for your excellent critiques in both emails.
Replies to BVM’s critiques (19-30 April 2017)
1. Brahman, nonlocality, synthesis, Vedānta, and eDAM
Thanks for the excellent critique (19 April 2017) and historical review of dual-aspect monism (DAM), which is further elaborated in (Vimal, 2008, 2010a).
There are many interpretations for the term ‘Brahman’ depending on the foundational metaphysical views. In the eDAM, the Brahman is interpreted as the primal entity; its states have dual-aspect. This is somewhat close to cit-acit Viśiṣṭādvaita (qualified non-dualism) and Kashmiri Shaivism (see below). It appears aspectless, attributeless, or nirguṇa because both aspects are latent in its unmanifested state. Your description is based on the top-down Sāṅkhya and Achintya-Bheda-Abheda. The ontology is given in Section 3.15 of (Vimal, 2016b).
The old DAM has some problems but the five-component eDAM ((Vimal, 2008b), (Vimal, 2010c), (Vimal, 2013), (Vimal, 2015g), (Vimal, 2016d), and summarized in (Vimal, 2016b)) has addressed them in (Vimal, 2016b). Thus, the eDAM has no such problem.
The QM has over 48 interpretations, which can be categorized based on foundational metaphysics. The nonlocality in QM is apparent (not real). The non-local correlations can be explained thru the local comparison measurement (Tipler, 2000). As per (Tipler, 2000), “Quantum nonlocality may be an artifact of the assumption that observers obey the [commutative] laws of classical mechanics, while observed systems obey [non-commutative law of] quantum mechanics.” As per (de la Peña, Cetto & Valdes-Hernandez, 2015), QM is an approximation of the phase space (p,x,t) to configuration space (x,t) or (p,t), which misleads to nonlocality. In other words, quantum nonlocality is an artifact of this approximation and hence it is unreal.
The higher synthesis (unity/consciousness) in the phrase “a proper rational approach the body/mind opposition can be comprehended in a higher synthesis or unity called consciousness” in the eDAM is interpreted as the dual-aspect unmanifested start of primal entity (Brahman).
2. The existence of matter-in-itself and consciousness-in-itself
There are two arguments for the existence of matter-in-itself in physical domain:
(i) If we remove the chair, its appearance also disappears.
(ii) We were not present over 10 billion years after Big Bang during evolution. During this period, matter, such as stars, galaxies etc, were present.
An argument for the existence of consciousness-in-itself (mind-independent reality or MIR entity in the mental domain) is that we have consciousness in mind-dependent reality (MDR).
3. Relational dialectics
As per Wikipedia (as of 20 April 2017), “Relational dialectics is an interpersonal communication theory about close personal ties and relationships that highlights the tensions, struggles and interplay between contrary tendencies. […] According to theorist Leslie Baxter, there are three major limitations in the work of Relational Dialectics Theory.[34]Baxter claims that her work has been ‘too distanced from naturally occurring talk between relating parties,’ and claims that the theory needs a firmer empirical base when applied to talk between relating parties. Baxter also believes that more future work needs to include multiple voices instead of focusing on the more popular research on the dialectics between "two voices." Lastly, Baxter has stated that future research should focus on discourse through time, such as studying dialogue and how it transforms over a longer period of time.”
4. The unification of matter-in-itself and consciousness-in-itself
The ideas of the three stages of rational development (abstract understanding, negative and positive reasons), relational dialectics, and the unification of matter-in-itself and consciousness-in-itself are useful. They are implicitly employed in a few models such as the Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita (eDAM), Achintya-Bheda-Abheda (inconceivable oneness and difference, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, 1486-1534), cit-acit Viśiṣṭādvaita (qualified non-dualism, Rāmānujāchārya: 1017–1137 or 1077-1157), and Shiva (consciousness-in-itself, cit) and Shakti (matter-in-itself, acit) in Kashmiri Shaivism (860–925). The last three older models are based on Samādhi state knowledge of ‘Organic wholism’ (Brahman). They seem to use the top-down approach (God theory or creationism), which has serious problems. For example, the Samādhi state knowledge missed the knowledge of about 50-year-old neuroscience (every experience, knowledge, understanding or thought must have a respective neural basis) and that of co-evolution, (dependently co-origination was known to Nāgārjuna), co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning because they were not available that time.
Your critique (19 April 2017), “eDAM somewhat takes an ad hoc stand about the ontic state and further there is no proof to extrapolate such ideas to life processes” is a misconstruction of the eDAM. This is clarified in Section 3.15 of (Vimal, 2016b).
Since the both aspects of unmanifested state of primal/primordial entity (Brahman) are latent (hidden, unmanifested, unexpressed), the primal entity appear aspectless/attributeless and hence it has neither objective/material existence nor subjective/mental existence; both aspects are latent and are in potential form because the eDAM follows scientific bottom-up approach, which is just opposite to the top-down Vedāntic approach.
To sum up, the eDAM addresses the above problems thru the scientific bottom-up approach by introducing the inseparable mental aspect in the physical aspect based science towards the ‘Organic wholism’, which is initially in potential form (not manifested form as in the top-down approach). In other words, the Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita (eDAM) proposes that (a) the universal potential consciousness (UPC) as the mental aspect and (b) the potential zero-point field (ZPF) or potential quantum vacuum (close to Pradhāna) as the inseparable physical aspect of the dual-aspect unmanifested state of the primal entity (Brahman, Organic whole). The manifestation of potential/latent aspects starts from the Big Bang, and eventually our both aspects co-evolved, dependently co-arose, co-developed, and sensorimotor co-tuned over 13.8 billion years. Thus, so far, the eDAM (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) is the only framework that can bring science and the spiritual aspect of religions closer.
Cheers!
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear friends (Dr. RLP Vimal and Dr. Schwartzman),
Namaste. The concerns of RLP
Vimal are well taken. RLP Vimal has raised the important question that can we
have something like matter in itself or consciousness in itself. Of course we
had pointed out in the earlier email that such a result is only an abstraction. It is only an isolated idea which does not consider the dialectical oppositional relationship with its other. An opposition ties one thing with a specific other. So there is a necessary relation involved. And that relation has a dynamic structure which thought can uncover and leads to a higher conception that unifies them.
The issues related to naïve
realism (materialism) and subjective idealism are due to the two different
kinds of reductions that are carried out. We would like to point out that the
philosophy of Vedanta is not equal to that of subjective idealism. Of course
materialism or naïve realism is already being found inadequate in advanced
modern science, especially led by the problems encountered in the measurement
problems of quantum physics.
Subjective idealism (or naïve
idealism) tries to reduce all of reality to the finite consciousness based on
“I think”. In order to come to the proper concept of reality and overcome the
limitations of the subjective idealism or naïve idealism, one has to go beyond
the finite consciousness, i.e. ‘the finite I think’ and go beyond it and see it
as only a small infinitesimal unit of reality.
As there are many such units,
then what is the ontology of the Whole. What is the nature of the Whole that
includes many such finite ‘I thinks’. To rediscover this is the task of
philosophy and science. This requires an advancement beyond Kant and very
careful analysis of the situation. In fact in the last email we had referred to
this necessity, when the three stages of rational development were pointed out
as [1] :
(i) The Stage of Abstract Understanding which is abstract determination of the
separate sides of the contradiction without understanding the relation between
the two sides,
(ii) The stage of Negative Reason in which the dialectical relation of the two sides
is determined. In this process the existence of the abstract independence of
two sides in the stage of Understanding is dissolved and a dialectical relation
is reasoned,
(iii) Positive
Reason: this dialectical relationship is raised into a dynamic
reality. The ability to reason in these stages prepares the thoughtful to come
to its True Concept.
Thus
if we carefully study the systematic development of philosophical approach to
reality as presented here, this is far removed from Subjective idealism. Rather
reason does not abandon the
dialectical relation between the two sides (subject and the object), but rather
determines it and does not reduce one side to other. But reason in the stage of positive
reason raises this dialectical relationship into a wholistic and dynamic
reality. And by this approach of an in depth Conceptual rational development of
reason can it be properly reasoned that the body/mind opposition can be
comprehended in a higher synthesis or unity called consciousness. Thus we need to carefully note that the idea
of consciousness in Vedanta is a view of Organic wholism and not subjective
idealism.
As far as Dr. Schwartzman’s
opinion about Darwinism and materialism is concerned, his stand neglects any
substantial consideration of thought in constituting biological reality. Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm.
Thanking
you,
Bhaktivijnana
Muni, PhD
References
[1] www.gwfhegel.org
The webpage of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja. PhD.
On Thursday, April 20, 2017 9:53 AM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Matter-first (materialism) science is a bottom-up approach from pre-Big Bang to Big Bang to the current period of co-evolution, dependently co-origination, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning. This is just opposite to fully manifested consciousness-first (idealism), which is a top-down approach. Both have serious problems: materialism rejects consciousness-in-itself, and idealism rejects matter-in-itself. They are riding in different boats of foundational metaphysics in opposite direction. They will never meet and hence this materialism vs. idealism debate is a never ending and is a useless mental exercise in my view. Dualism has its own 8 serious problems, which cannot be resolved. Therefore, the only hope is the least problematic 5-component extended dual-aspect monism (eDAM) metaphysics elaborated in 5 articles: (Vimal, 2008b), (Vimal, 2010c), (Vimal, 2013), (Vimal, 2015g), (Vimal, 2016d). This eDAM foundational metaphysics brings science and religions closer and is worth spending time on it.
Kind regards,
Vimal
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
My take today
The labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.
This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemist
Professor Emeritus
Howard University
Author of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/909138707.4292081.1492644058616%40mail.yahoo.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/705385895.5368506.1492667636497%40mail.yahoo.com.
David Schwartzman
Apr 20, 2017, 9:09:31 PM4/20/17
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Your conclusion: consciousness is unexplainable by science, now and forever, therefore, we must adopt on an idealist philosophical position, mind/consciousness is primary, obviously ignoring all the knowledge produced by science, i.e., the universe and the Earth existed long before human consciousness emerged.
I submit Benjamin Farrington argued persuasively that Plato’s idealism was associated with the emergence of an aristocracy doing no manual labor, served by slaves, leading to the concept of mind being primary, in contrast to the materialism of Thales of Miletus who lived in a more equal society where everyone worked with their hands. Carlo Ginzburg’s “The Cheese and the Worms” is recommended, supporting this take on the relation of materialism to social reality (Menocchio the miller: God and the angels came out of the foam of ocean waves, spontaneous materialism). Menocchio burned at the stake one year before Giordano Bruno; witness the fate of outspoken atheists in Bangladesh, and other victims of religious intolerance of non-believers.
If material reality is just an illusion, as all of you idealists claim, I challenge you all to stand in front of an incoming train or truck, or jump off a tall building, your choice. Again it is obvious that common sense, grounded in conscious realization that material reality exists outside our consciousness will prevail for your personal survival. Of course, I anticipate some convoluted argument to the contrary.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/28B54BFD-5BAD-493F-A8A6-986F169A9047%40chopra.com.
Donald DeGracia
Apr 21, 2017, 6:23:05 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Syamala Hari
That was a perfect explanation!
Professor, Department of Physiology
4116 Scott Hall
540 E. Canfield
Detroit, MI, 48201, USA
(313) 577-6745 (office phone)
(313) 577-3948 (lab phone)
(313) 577-5494 (fax)
http://www2.med.wayne.edu/degracialab/
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/883300060.864577.1492724409600%40mail.yahoo.com.
priyedarshi jetli
Apr 21, 2017, 6:23:05 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
The question of what came first, consciousness or theory of consciousness, has a question prior to it. Is there a consciousness? And then what is consciousness? Those who beg the question here assume that there is a consensus on this. I do not think there is any more consensus on this as there is on the existence of God. There is a consensus that there are ultimate constituents of matter and then alternative theories are spurned out and debated on this. Of course the first question here is "Are there ultimate constituents?" The Ionians answered this in the affirmative and there has been consensus on this among scientists ever since. Of course, this could be the wrong answer to the question. That is another matter. But we have theories because we have consensus that there is matter and that there are ultimate constituents. Perhaps there is some such consensus among those who spurn out theories of consciousness, there must be, but it is not a consensus neither of all humans nor of the entire scientific community. I am for the ordinary use of the word 'consciousness' which is a bodily use in terms of the proper functioning of the body.
Priyedarshi
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:18 PM, Peter Nyikos <new...@mailbox.sc.edu> wrote:
On 04/20/2017 06:43 AM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:-[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?
[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
This is a very demanding concept of theory that you are dealing with here, Serge. Most theories outside mathematics only try to explain things while leaving basic features unexplained. Newton's theory of gravity only explains the effects of gravity mathematically. It does not even address the question of how gravity is able to affect objects at a distance, through seemingly empty space. Newton himself admitted that he had no explanation for that.
Einstein had a sort of explanation: objects curve space around them in such a way that objects follow a path that can be calculated. But he could not explain just how masses can do such a thing as curving space.
Materialists have a theory of "consciousness" in which they give a concept of "experience" in purely behavioristic terms. For instance, they might fall back on a "third person" interpretation of consciousness in terms of responses to stimuli. According to this, someone is "conscious" of something in the environment if his responses to it are the sort that we have come to associate with being conscious of it.If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
Sometimes materialists will even act as though the only use of the word is to indicate whether someone is "conscious" or "unconscious" in an everyday sense of the word.
So, may I as Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
I second the motion. I hope Deepak will name some theories of consciousness that go beyond the behavioristic theory, about which many books have been written.
Peter Nyikos
Thanks in advance,Serge Patlavskiy
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/273359453.5492961.1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
Edwards, Jonathan
Apr 21, 2017, 6:23:05 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
I have considerable sympathy for your exasperations, David. The fact that our
idea of matter is simply an idea in our consciousness is trite. Because of the indirect nature of perception the ‘matter’ the idea is about, whatever it might be, is
not in our consciousness, even if it is in the consciousness of other matter or the universe or whatever.
But I was intrigued by Farrington’s story. I think there is a twist. The concept of matter was most forcefully proclaimed by Descartes. Descartes had private means, although he did grind lenses to make ends meet, I believe. But more interestingly,
within about thirty years of Descartes's death his idea of matter lay in ruins and one of the people most responsible, together with Hooke and Huygens, was none other than the builder of St Paul’s Cathedral, Christopher Wren. These practical physicists and
architects who dealt with what seemed to be ‘extended matter’ proved that it was not extended after all. Rather than there being stuff that takes up space they had to conclude that the illusion of matter was merely the result of action or force from within.
The full implications have only become clear recently but in essence physics became a respectable science when it cast off the concept of extended matter and restricted it self purely to rules of dynamic relation, or causal connection, or necessity of change
- or put simply just the study of action or force.
Essentially I am agreeing with Peter, but I see no reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater and say ‘all force is within consciousness’. The forces of the wind shaking the leaves of the tree outside are NOT in my consciousness, only the
forces that my brain uses to construct my idea of those distant forces.
For me the whole sterile debate was resolved in 1693 by Leibniz’s short piece of Reflections on True Metaphysics. He pointed out that the nature of the constituent elements of the world is action or force or necessity of change. And in subsequent
essays he shows that the parsimonious view is to assume that the dynamic relation of force is the same dynamic relation (viewed from the other end) as perception or experience - as in the phrase ‘the leaves experienced force’. So force is not in consciousness
nor consciousness in force. They are the same thing. Most people find it hard to deny stuff so they called Leibniz an idealist but he would have never suggested that the force of an oncoming train was merely a whim. The solidity of the train for him is a ‘well-founded
illusion’, the well-founded being the crux. It is an illusion only in the sense that Leibniz understood indirect realism.
So science is already the business of explaining consciousness and there is no reason why it should not do so fully in time. I totally agree that any other route is hand-waving.
Jo
On 20 Apr 2017, at 22:58, David Schwartzman <dschwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
Your conclusion: consciousness is unexplainable by science, now and forever, therefore, we must adopt on an idealist philosophical position, mind/consciousness is primary, obviously ignoring all the knowledge produced by science, i.e., the universe and the Earth existed long before human consciousness emerged.
I submit Benjamin Farrington argued persuasively that Plato’s idealism was associated with the emergence of an aristocracy doing no manual labor, served by slaves, leading to the concept of mind being primary, in contrast to the materialism of Thales of Miletus who lived in a more equal society where everyone worked with their hands. Carlo Ginzburg’s “The Cheese and the Worms” is recommended, supporting this take on the relation of materialism to social reality (Menocchio the miller: God and the angels came out of the foam of ocean waves, spontaneous materialism). Menocchio burned at the stake one year before Giordano Bruno; witness the fate of outspoken atheists in Bangladesh, and other victims of religious intolerance of non-believers.
If material reality is just an illusion, as all of you idealists claim, I challenge you all to stand in front of an incoming train or truck, or jump off a tall building, your choice. Again it is obvious that common sense, grounded in conscious realization that material reality exists outside our consciousness will prevail for your personal survival. Of course, I anticipate some convoluted argument to the contrary.
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Peter - great commentsAll theories are conceived in consciousness alone
Materialists cannot explain any experience including the experience of doing science
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnsLsJGb2SLURQc_cHuHFCxQK%3D6e-G9y4Lf5CSpqkPYf_Q%40mail.gmail.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 21, 2017, 9:07:55 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Consciousness is the knowing element in every experience --mental or perceptual
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com <online_sa...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 3:09:52 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 3:09:52 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfACjyZ5a99GB5uQ97sdZh4KEwb45s%2BrqrMj0mSUes4qkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
priyedarshi jetli
Apr 21, 2017, 9:07:55 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Jonathan,
I am quite inspired by your understanding of Leibniz. I will look up these works. I like the term "indirect realism" because direct realism as in Berkeley leads to idealism. Leibniz was not an idealist by any means. A key to Leiniz's perspective is his dissertation at the age of 19 or 20 is his claim that there is a match between the idea, let it be a clear and distinct idea of Descartes, in the mind and the reality outside. This is common sense because mind, brain, foot, birds, quanta, all are part of the same world. I am also inspired by your use of the word 'consciousness'. Unfortunately, many use the word 'consciousness' to first divide the world in two and then say that consciousness is somehow supervenient on the physical world. This is misguided. The primacy of forces that you find in Leibniz can also perhaps be traced as far back to Heraclitus vaguely and in Anaxagoras and Empedocles more precisely. Besides positing basic elements that combined to form everything both of them posited opposite forces of Love and Strife which brought things together and took them apart.
Priyedarshi
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnsLsJGb2SLURQc_cHuHFCxQK%3D6e-G9y4Lf5CSpqkPYf_Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/D766F9D3-E8E9-4C6B-BB30-5A3879DAB424%40ucl.ac.uk.
Bruno Marchal
Apr 21, 2017, 9:07:55 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Priyedarshi,
On 21 Apr 2017, at 09:09, priyedarshi jetli wrote:
The question of what came first, consciousness or theory of consciousness, has a question prior to it. Is there a consciousness? And then what is consciousness? Those who beg the question here assume that there is a consensus on this.
Consciousness is undoubtable, if only because a genuine doubt has to be a conscious experience.
We can doubt all content of consciousness, except consciousness itself. It is a sort of fixed point of doubt.
Many people agree that consciousness is undoubtable and unjustifiable rationally. Then it is interesting to notice that with quite natural definition we can say today that we know that when a universal machine introspects itself (in the Gödel-Löb technical sense) it discovers some truth which are undoubtable and unprovable.
That explanation reduces eventually physics to a statistics on first person (plural) computations in arithmetic, and a part of physics has already been derived from this.
I do not think there is any more consensus on this as there is on the existence of God. There is a consensus that there are ultimate constituents of matter and then alternative theories are spurned out and debated on this. Of course the first question here is "Are there ultimate constituents?" The Ionians answered this in the affirmative and there has been consensus on this among scientists ever since. Of course, this could be the wrong answer to the question. That is another matter. But we have theories because we have consensus that there is matter and that there are ultimate constituents. Perhaps there is some such consensus among those who spurn out theories of consciousness, there must be, but it is not a consensus neither of all humans nor of the entire scientific community. I am for the ordinary use of the word 'consciousness' which is a bodily use in terms of the proper functioning of the body.
No problem with this, unless you take this as an argument in favor of physicalism, in which case I miss something.
Bruno
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfACjyZ5a99GB5uQ97sdZh4KEwb45s%2BrqrMj0mSUes4qkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Eric Reyes
Apr 21, 2017, 9:07:55 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Serge and Deepak,
But then again if there were nothing to be conscious of, such as theories, thoughts, about consciousness or of anything else; then what would be the meaning of consciousness in the first place?? What's there to be conscious of?? That's the real question.
Regards, Eric Reyes
Bruno Marchal
Apr 21, 2017, 9:09:02 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 20 Apr 2017, at 23:58, David Schwartzman wrote:
Your conclusion: consciousness is unexplainable by science, now and forever, therefore, we must adopt on an idealist philosophical position,
I agree. This is not a valid conclusion. But that very fact is not valid to ascertain the existence of a *primary* physical reality either.
mind/consciousness is primary, obviously ignoring all the knowledge produced by science, i.e., the universe and the Earth existed long before human consciousness emerged.
Yes, and among the greatest discovery by science, we know today that the elementary arithmetic realize all computations, if we accept the Church-Turing thesis, on which there is a consensus (but I don't think we can appeal to consensus in science).
Now, if I agree that Earth existed well before the human consciousness emerged, I still disagree that this entails physicalism. In particular, I can prove that if the brain can be emulated by a physical computer, at some* level of description, then physics has to be reduced to a non physical science (arithmetic, or Turing equivalent theories).
It is like Darwinism: the laws of physics have "evolved" too, but in a logico-mathematical space. That explains why the laws of physics have a mathematical look, but actually, that explains also consciousness (although this would be longer to explain).
I submit Benjamin Farrington argued persuasively that Plato’s idealism was associated with the emergence of an aristocracy doing no manual labor, served by slaves, leading to the concept of mind being primary, in contrast to the materialism of Thales of Miletus who lived in a more equal society where everyone worked with their hands. Carlo Ginzburg’s “The Cheese and the Worms” is recommended, supporting this take on the relation of materialism to social reality (Menocchio the miller: God and the angels came out of the foam of ocean waves, spontaneous materialism). Menocchio burned at the stake one year before Giordano Bruno; witness the fate of outspoken atheists in Bangladesh, and other victims of religious intolerance of non-believers.
If material reality is just an illusion, as all of you idealists claim, I challenge you all to stand in front of an incoming train or truck, or jump off a tall building, your choice. Again it is obvious that common sense, grounded in conscious realization that material reality exists outside our consciousness will prevail for your personal survival. Of course, I anticipate some convoluted argument to the contrary.
In some non materialist theory, or even in a materialist account of Everett Quantum Mechanics (no collapse of the wave), you can predict that you will survive in the most normal computational continuations, and in the case of a violent ending, that could mean a very unpleasant experience, like a nightmare. No need to believe in PRIMARY matter to avoid such experience. Even in (non lucid) dream I usually avoid such behavior. That is not a metaphysical proof of the existence of primary matter.
I think we are close here to a confusion between the meta-assumption in physics that there is a physical reality (no problem with that), and the assumption in metaphysics that there is a *primary* physical reality. That last one can be shown unsustainable with even very weak mechanist assumption.
Bruno
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Peter - great commentsAll theories are conceived in consciousness alone
Materialists cannot explain any experience including the experience of doing science
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnsLsJGb2SLURQc_cHuHFCxQK%3D6e-G9y4Lf5CSpqkPYf_Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Bruno Marchal
Apr 21, 2017, 9:09:02 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 20 Apr 2017, at 20:04, Deepak Chopra wrote:
Peter - great commentsAll theories are conceived in consciousness alone
I agree. But that does not mean that the things pointed on by those theories were also conceived in consciousness alone.
We must distinguish a theory, and what the theory tries to talk about.
Materialists cannot explain any experience including the experience of doing science
I partially agree. Materialist usually invoke computationalism to explain the experience, and the doing of science. When we dig on that issue, the explanation of experience makes sense, but fail to explain the stability of the experiences of matter. Then they get wrong by invoking matter to explain that stability, but this endows the subject with an ability to detect the difference between a computation or themselves done in arithmetic and a computation or themselves done in a physical universe, which makes no sense when supposing computationalism.
The problem, for me, with a theory assuming consciousness and/or matter at the start, is that they assume what I am asking an explanation for.
With mechanism, it has to be like NUMBER ==> CONSCIOUSNESS ==> MATTER (and consciousness here is not human consciousness, but universal number consciousness, it is mainly an ability to know that there is *some* reality).
Bruno Marchal
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/28B54BFD-5BAD-493F-A8A6-986F169A9047%40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 21, 2017, 9:22:31 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Science is an activity in consciousness .
Theories are conceived in consciousness , experiments are designed in consciousness , observations are made in consciousness .
All debates & agreements & disagreements re consciousness are in consciousness alone
Mind Body and Universe are a process in consciousness .
"You cannot get behind consciousness " Max Planck
Consciousness is the source of thought and modes of perception - Patanjali
It has no form but experiences itself as form and phenomena through its own self interaction
Thought and perception are modifications of consciousness
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfACjyZ5a99GB5uQ97sdZh4KEwb45s%2BrqrMj0mSUes4qkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 21, 2017, 11:55:37 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Murty Hari
Dear Syamala,
Thanks for the query.
There are over 45 interpretations of QM. One of them is de Broglie’s view.
As per (Schneider, 1997), “The wave-particle dualism rest on a fact discovered by Louis de Broglie in 1923 - 1924: if a system is in a state y [psi] such that measurement of its impulse [momentum] has an exactly predictable outcome P, then the mathematical expression of y is a wave with a wavelength l = h/P. In this case, y has a spatially infinite extension and the measurement of the position can give, with equal probability, a result anywhere in space. In that sense, and only in that sense, the system has no assignable position. If the precision on P vanishes, so does, as a consequence of l = h/P, the precision on l and the wave-like nature (or, more exactly, appearance) of y fades out.
As a particular case of DA.DB ≥ h, [D=delta] one has here Dx.DP ≥ h (where x is the position of the object under study). Thus, as the imprecision DP on P (to be more exact the statistical dispersion on repeated measurements) increases, the imprecision Dx on x decreases. At the limit where DP becomes infinitely large, the prediction of the results on position measurements becomes infinitely precise, a way to see the object as ‘punctual’ or corpuscular.
My understanding is that there are at least 3 levels ('t Hooft, 2015; de la Peña, Cetto & Valdes-Hernandez, 2015):
(i) Classical level as in classical mechanics (CM) for macroscopic objects that obey classical logic (such as commutativity),
(ii) Quantum level as in quantum mechanics (CM) for microscopic entities that obey quantum logic (such as non-commutativity), and
(iii) Planck level for sub-microscopic entities.
(Adapted from my e-book in preparation)
The four justifications for quantum nonlocality being apparent (not real) are as follows.
1. As per (de la Peña, Cetto & Valdes-Hernandez, 2015), QM is an approximation of the phase space (p,x,t) to configuration space (x,t) or (p,t), which misleads to nonlocality. In other words, quantum nonlocality is an artifact of this approximation and hence it is unreal.
2. As elaborated before, Susskind argues that QM appears nonlocal because Bell’s inequality is based on classical logic; QM is based on quantum logic; so with or without experiments, they will differ. In my view, if we assume CM (classical mechanics) is real (in MIR world out there) and local (v≤c) then QM has to appear as nonlocal (v>c) in our minds because of subjective probability, uncertainty, and superposition. Therefore, we need to derive Bell’s like inequality based on quantum-logic. In other words, we should try to investigate nonlocality based on some other yard-stick. We cannot take orange seeds and try to create apple out of it. Classical logic and quantum logic are of different kinds; it is a category mistake to use the former for investigating the latter. Do we have a violation of Bell’s inequality in CM?
3. There is a third way to deny nonlocality in QM, which is by introducing the third measurement called ‘comparison’ measurement of (Tipler, 2000) as elaborated in Section 2.7. He used this concept in the MWI, but this can be used in any interpretation of QM. As per (Tipler, 2000), “Quantum nonlocality may be an artifact of the assumption that observers obey the [commutative] laws of classical mechanics, while observed systems obey [non-commutative law of] quantum mechanics.”
4. The quantum nonlocality is an artifact of a peculiarity of consciousness (Mermin, 1998). When we open our eyes, we have phenomenal experience of the whole visual field in our mental space with a subjective feeling of almost instantaneously from the 1st person perspective (1pp). It takes less than 50 msec stimulus presentation (Sperling, 1960) for non-reportable phenomenal consciousness; it takes about 500 msec for reportable access consciousness.
Although we cannot see space-like separated A and B simultaneously but we can think of them in our minds. The ‘quantum nonlocality’ arises when we try to reconcile the actual measured results of specific experiments at site A with the hypothetical results of other (counterfactual) experiments at site B that might have been performed but in reality were not performed. The feeling of nonlocality is because of the peculiarity of consciousness (Mermin, 1998) (see also (Fuchs, Mermin & Schack, 2013)), i.e., in our thought processing, an illusory thought of nonlocality related to simultaneity arises to reconcile the anticorrelation and angular dependence of coincident detection of space-like separated particles A and B. In other words, apparent nonlocality is in our mental space.
I hope this helps.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Thursday, 20 April 2017 8:44 AM, "'Murty Hari' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Dear Ram,
I asked the same question once before. Of course, matter is not made of nothing because Deepak himself repeatedly says that matter is modulation of consciousness.
I justify his statements "Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptions" and "Matter is non material" as follows:
In today's quantum mechanics, all matter (some of which is perceived directly by senses and called classical) is made up of quantum particles. A quantum particle is said to be a packet of de Broglie phase waves, each of which is supposed to have a speed greater than that of light in vacuum. Thus the phase wave is a mathematical abstraction, it is non-material in that you cannot perceive it by senses. So, one may say all matter is made of ideas.
Syamala
From: "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.
Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptions
No one has ever proved the existence of matter
Matter is non material
It's made of nothing
My take todayThe labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemistProfessor EmeritusHoward UniversityAuthor of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20139A50349A68100B98649C80180%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/282238421.4607245.1492664849105%40mail.yahoo.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/884160936.285428.1492688672419%40mail.yahoo.com.
Serge Patlavskiy
Apr 21, 2017, 11:55:37 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
[Avtar Singh] wrote:
>Theory of consciousness must address the physical mechanism
>that powers the firing of neurons to generate signals
[S.P.] As I see, you are looking for mechanistic/physicalistic/epiphenomenalistic solutions. No problem with this -- it's your choice. As to me, I start from the fact that consciousness makes it possible for the living organism to have an adequate picture of the outer world. Every living organism possesses unique totality of knowledge, information, experience, etc. Therefore, to account for the mechanisms of consciousness we have to elaborate and use the methods and models which correspond to special nature of the object of study.
I assume that it is not a brain but a living organism as a whole complex system which possesses consciousness. So, we need the methods/models able to deal with the whole complex self-organizing systems. The methods and models used in Physics are not effective here.
Moreover, I hold that every living organism has such a {brain+nervous system (or whatever stands for these in the given organism)} as is required by normal functioning of its exemplar of consciousness. Consciousness keeps under control all the processes in the organism (we should consult practicing yogis on this matter). There can be no organism which would be living but not possessing consciousness.
That is why, even in case we have an explanatory framework explaining how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience, this explanatory framework could be called "a theory" only if we simultaneously consider two other applied theories, namely, the applied theory of the origin of life and consciousness, and the applied theory of evolution of the complex self-organizing systems.
Yes, the suggested solution is very complex, but I am afraid that there can be no easier solutions. At any rate, my correspondent paper contains all three applied theories.
[Avtar Singh] wrote:
>The so-called Hard Problem only addresses limited biological
>experience and not the fundamental consciousness.
[S.P.] "limited biological experience"? A nice term, indeed. :-) To the point, I consider fundamentality of informational factor (together with material factor and energetic factor). I do not consider fundamentality of consciousness.
Kindly,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: "'Asingh2384' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com; serge.pa...@rocketmail.com
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Hi Serge:
I do not agree with the widely-used definition (Hard Problem) - "By a
"theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework
which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed
into experience.....If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a
theory of consciousness.....So, may I ask Deepak to name, at least, one theory
of consciousness known for him? Who is its author?"
Theory of consciousness must address the physical mechanism
that powers the firing of neurons to generate signals; how the signals generate
experience is only a limited sensation - manifestation of the fundamental
consciousness or free willed energy in the universe as evidenced in the
spontaneous expansion of the universe a physical model of the universal consciousness. The so-called Hard Problem only addresses limited biological experience and not the fundamental consciousness.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden
Factor - An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and
Universal Reality"
The attached paper describes suc
-----Original Message-----
From: 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 20, 2017 5:44 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thu, Apr 20, 2017 5:44 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
-
[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:
>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?
[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
So, may I ask Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 21, 2017, 11:55:37 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.
Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
Bruno Marchal: I agree with Chopra, here. The point is that nobody has given any evidence for primitive matter. But nobody can doubt consciousness. Indeed, to have a genuine doubt, we have to be conscious.
Vimal: No one has proved and no one can prove the existence of the matter-in-itself and consciousness-in-itself as well. This is because both are entities in unknown mind-independent reality (MIR) and for proving, knowing, and understanding human mind is necessary. In other words, what we can prove, know, and understand are the entities of mind-dependent reality (MDR), but it would be Maya/illusion. Thus, fundamental truth is unknown to us. Perhaps, in mindless/thoughtless Nirvikalpa samādhi state, a yogi may encounter ineffable experience of MIR entities.
However, tentatively, there are two arguments for the existence of matter-in-itself in physical domain:
(i) If we remove the chair, its appearance also disappears.
(ii) We were not present over 10 billion years after Big Bang during evolution. During this period, matter, such as stars, galaxies etc, were present.
An argument for the existence of consciousness-in-itself (mind-independent reality or MIR entity in the mental domain) is that we have consciousness in mind-dependent reality (MDR). Therefore, I agree with Bruno in this respect.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Show original message
On Thursday, 20 April 2017 8:44 AM, Bruno Marchal <mar...@ulb.ac.be> wrote:
I agree with Chopra, here. The point is that nobody has given any evidence for primitive matter.
But nobody can doubt consciousness. Indeed, to have a genuine doubt, we have to be conscious.
On 20 Apr 2017, at 07:07, 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
I agree with Chopra, here. The point is that nobody has given any evidence for primitive matter.
But nobody can doubt consciousness. Indeed, to have a genuine doubt, we have to be conscious.
Best regards,
Bruno
Kind regards,Rām----------------------------------------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptionsNo one has ever proved the existence of matterMatter is non material
It's made of nothing
My take todayThe labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemistProfessor EmeritusHoward UniversityAuthor of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
<image001.png><OutlookEmoji-1483997936424_email-signature-plain.jpg.jpg>
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/D92EC76A-0CDF-4D64-ACE8-52BD1EE2B410%40ulb.ac.be.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 21, 2017, 11:55:37 AM4/21/17
to Murty Hari, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, PhD Bhakti Vijnana Muni
Dear Syamala,
Thanks for your interest in the eDAM.
In the eDAM, information processing is bidirectional because the 1pp-mental aspect and 3pp-physical aspect are inseparable. Whatever goes on in one aspect is faithfully, rigorously, and precisely reflected in other aspect. This is because information is precisely the same; it is simply viewing the same information from the 1st and 3rd perspectives. For example, every thought, every experience, and every mental activity (1pp-mental aspect) has their respective neural basis (3pp-physical aspect) and vice-versa. How thought and consciousness affect genome changes for adaptation and normal cellular activity can be explained thru the eDAM. If you are interested in writing an article on this, I can help you.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Thursday, 20 April 2017 8:21 AM, Murty Hari <murty...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear Dr.Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
Namaste. Thank you for your scholarly analysis. I hope I am correct in interpreting your following statement
"Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm."
as an illustration or manifestation of Organic wholism.
As I understand Ram's eDAM, it does not include action of mind/thought on matter/brain. He simply attaches thought=like aspect to every material entity. While all actions and interactions are carried on by matter, mental aspects have no effect on any part of any process.
Best Regards
Syamala Hari
From: Bhakti Vijnana Muni <b...@scsiscs.org>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear friends (Dr. RLP Vimal and Dr. Schwartzman),
Namaste. The concerns of RLP
Vimal are well taken. RLP Vimal has raised the important question that can we
have something like matter in itself or consciousness in itself. Of course we
had pointed out in the earlier email that such a result is only an abstraction. It is only an isolated idea which does not consider the dialectical oppositional relationship with its other. An opposition ties one thing with a specific other. So there is a necessary relation involved. And that relation has a dynamic structure which thought can uncover and leads to a higher conception that unifies them.
The issues related to naïve
realism (materialism) and subjective idealism are due to the two different
kinds of reductions that are carried out. We would like to point out that the
philosophy of Vedanta is not equal to that of subjective idealism. Of course
materialism or naïve realism is already being found inadequate in advanced
modern science, especially led by the problems encountered in the measurement
problems of quantum physics.
Subjective idealism (or naïve
idealism) tries to reduce all of reality to the finite consciousness based on
“I think”. In order to come to the proper concept of reality and overcome the
limitations of the subjective idealism or naïve idealism, one has to go beyond
the finite consciousness, i.e. ‘the finite I think’ and go beyond it and see it
as only a small infinitesimal unit of reality.
As there are many such units,
then what is the ontology of the Whole. What is the nature of the Whole that
includes many such finite ‘I thinks’. To rediscover this is the task of
philosophy and science. This requires an advancement beyond Kant and very
careful analysis of the situation. In fact in the last email we had referred to
this necessity, when the three stages of rational development were pointed out
as [1] :
(i) The Stage of Abstract Understanding which is abstract determination of the
separate sides of the contradiction without understanding the relation between
the two sides,
(ii) The stage of Negative Reason in which the dialectical relation of the two sides
is determined. In this process the existence of the abstract independence of
two sides in the stage of Understanding is dissolved and a dialectical relation
is reasoned,
(iii) Positive
Reason: this dialectical relationship is raised into a dynamic
reality. The ability to reason in these stages prepares the thoughtful to come
to its True Concept.
Thus
if we carefully study the systematic development of philosophical approach to
reality as presented here, this is far removed from Subjective idealism. Rather
reason does not abandon the
dialectical relation between the two sides (subject and the object), but rather
determines it and does not reduce one side to other. But reason in the stage of positive
reason raises this dialectical relationship into a wholistic and dynamic
reality. And by this approach of an in depth Conceptual rational development of
reason can it be properly reasoned that the body/mind opposition can be
comprehended in a higher synthesis or unity called consciousness. Thus we need to carefully note that the idea
of consciousness in Vedanta is a view of Organic wholism and not subjective
idealism.
As far as Dr. Schwartzman’s
opinion about Darwinism and materialism is concerned, his stand neglects any
substantial consideration of thought in constituting biological reality. Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm.
Thanking
you,
Bhaktivijnana
Muni, PhD
References
[1] www.gwfhegel.org
The webpage of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja. PhD.
On Thursday, April 20, 2017 9:53 AM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Matter-first (materialism) science is a bottom-up approach from pre-Big Bang to Big Bang to the current period of co-evolution, dependently co-origination, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning. This is just opposite to fully manifested consciousness-first (idealism), which is a top-down approach. Both have serious problems: materialism rejects consciousness-in-itself, and idealism rejects matter-in-itself. They are riding in different boats of foundational metaphysics in opposite direction. They will never meet and hence this materialism vs. idealism debate is a never ending and is a useless mental exercise in my view. Dualism has its own 8 serious problems, which cannot be resolved. Therefore, the only hope is the least problematic 5-component extended dual-aspect monism (eDAM) metaphysics elaborated in 5 articles: (Vimal, 2008b), (Vimal, 2010c), (Vimal, 2013), (Vimal, 2015g), (Vimal, 2016d). This eDAM foundational metaphysics brings science and religions closer and is worth spending time on it.
Kind regards,
Vimal
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
My take today
The labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.
This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemist
Professor Emeritus
Howard University
Author of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/909138707.4292081.1492644058616%40mail.yahoo.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/705385895.5368506.1492667636497%40mail.yahoo.com.
Serge Patlavskiy
Apr 21, 2017, 11:55:47 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Yahoogroups
-
Siegfried Bleher <SBl...@msn.com> on April 21,
2017 wrote:
>Hence the difficulty in answering the challenge—how
can we
>give an explanatory framework for something that is
already
>assumed without question to be a certain way?
[S.P.] Indeed, all physical bodies have a natural ability
to attract other physical bodies (whether we like it or not, and whether we can
explains this or not). Similarly, all living organisms, to stay alive, must
have and do have a natural ability to transform the physical (sensory) signals
into new experience, knowledge, information, etc.
These are simple observational facts we start with. Then,
some of us, the humans, try to account for these facts. Somebody starts with
trying to construct a theory of consciousness. As to my approach, I start from
constructing the appropriate meta-theory. A meta-theory is a set of postulates,
and it serves as an epistemological (or conceptual) framework for possible
applied theories. A meta-theory, by definition, requires no proofs. They are
the applied theories which must have certain explanatory and predictive power.
While constructing a meta-theory I consider the question
of a new base of prime concepts, a question of a general method, a question of
the system of models, a question of the system of proofs, and many other
questions. Then, if I use the general method (and other elements elaborated on
the meta-theoretical level) and apply it to the concrete object of study, I
receive, what I call, an applied theory [of this object].
So, what is assumed "without question", it is
formulated as a postulate on the stage of constructing a meta-theory. Namely, I
postulate Noumenal Reality (or, as somebody would like, outer world, or
physical world, etc.) as existing objectively and independently of the activity
of consciousness. Then, I state that every living organism possesses, what I
call, a personal version of Phenomenal Reality, by which I mean a totality of
experience, knowledge, information, etc. about Noumenal Reality.
So, in general terms, Phenomenal Reality is postulated to
be a model of Noumenal Reality that every living organism possesses due to
activity of own consciousness. In so doing, there are as many versions of
Phenomenal Reality as there are living organisms, while we all share the same
Noumenal Reality.
Then we come down to the level of an applied theory. We
have here the physical signals (e-m radiation, air vibrations, etc.) as the
elements of Noumenal Reality. We also have the physical sensory signals -- the
electric impulses sent by sense organs along neuronal channels to the brain,
which are the elements of Noumenal Reality as well. Then some magic happens,
and we have experience (or knowledge, or picture of the outer world, etc.) as
the element of Phenomenal Reality. Now then, the applied theory of consciousness
must be able to remove the words "then some magic happens".
And, the final remark. Our results of constructing the
applied theory of consciousness (to wit, how effective it will be on explaining
the mechanisms of consciousness) badly depend on the meta-theory we choose or construct.
For example, as one may conclude, the various versions of the theory of
consciousness constructed within the limits of the existing dominating
meta-theory called the Modern Materialistic (Physical) Picture of the World
have small (if any) explanatory and predictive power.
Thanks for your interest,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: Siegfried Bleher <SBl...@msn.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 4:08 AM
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear Peter and Serge,
There does seem to be a range of meaning to the notion of ‘theory’ when we look at examples of theories. So, although Newton’s theory of gravitation does
not give an ‘explanation’ for how gravity is able to affect objects at a distance, it is still an adequate and rather successful explanation and predictive model for a large set of observations over a wide range of scales. In the effort to widen the range
of applicability and predictive power of a theory of gravitation (i.e. to understand why the environment of an accelerating elevator looks just like the environment in a stationary elevator in the presence of a gravitational field), Einstein came upon the
idea of curvature of spacetime as an ‘explanation’ for how gravity can influence objects at a distance: a massive object at location A results in the spacetime near it to be curved in such a way as to influence another object at location B. This theory greatly
expands the range of applicability and predictive power to include behavior of masses that are highly concentrated (neutron stars and black holes), and large energy events that generate gravitational waves (predicted by Einstein and confirmed by the LIGO experiment).
But even this theory does not account for all phenomena, as evidenced by its extension by Hawking to include some quantum effects near black holes. My intention in responding here is to highlight three things about theories in general (of the many characteristics
that could be highlighted), and how these things apply, in particular, to a purported theory of consciousness.
The first is the presence and assumption of primitives, or concepts that are considered ‘givens’. For example, in the case of a theory of gravitation, a ‘given’
is that it acts at a distance. Who can argue with that, right? Except that within this assumption is embedded the particular ways our human senses perceive and our minds interpret distinction or separation between what we see as different objects, and the
distances between them. So, although Newton could not account for that particular aspect of gravity, his theory still stands as a valid and effective theory. And this leads to the second aspect of theories, which is their range of applicability, to some
degree determined by the primitives of the theory. So, both Newton’s and Einstein’s theories of gravitation are limited in their applicability to scales (in phase space) much larger than the quantum of action. The primitive in this case is the assumption
of the unrestricted divisibility of matter. Questioning the validity or essential nature of the primitives creates the opportunity to expand the range of applicability of the theory, as does Einstein’s in relation to Newton’s. So, these two aspects can be
summarized as: 1) what question(s) does the theory try to answer? and 2) what are the givens it must answer these questions in terms of? The third aspect is that a theory that is expanded in its range by changing the primitives does not necessarily invalidate
the former theory: Newton’s theory is still adequate for many things, and far easier to use than Einstein’s.
I basically agree with you, Peter, that Serge is pointing to a demanding concept of theory. But I would also say that behaviorist theories of consciousness
have a (limited) range of validity. So, as long as the primitives are clear, and the range of applicability is clear, then perhaps there can be a little more agreement on what is valid theory? For example, consider the challenge to Deepak from Serge:
“I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical
(sensory) signals become transformed into experience.”
Within this challenge there appears to me to be embedded an already virtually complete theory for how experience
happens: it happens when “physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience”. First there is a signal, which has physical roots or are physical in nature, and then somehow these are transformed—altered in their essential nature as physical things—into
experience (assumed, I guess, to be non-physical in nature). Hence the difficulty in answering the challenge—how can we give an explanatory framework for something that is already assumed without question to be a certain way? I believe what Deepak is saying
is that he disagrees with the most commonly assumed primitives, the ‘given’s’.
We have a ‘common’ narrative born of historical record that life evolves from physical things that begin with simple
interactions, and such interactions grow in complexity until ‘poof’ - life emerges. If we accept this narrative as a given, along with the more subtle embedded assumptions, then we appear to be constrained to pose the question as SP did above.
I would also like to point out there are many theories of consciousness already, but they can be viewed from the
perspective described above—clearly demarcate the primitives and their range of applicability. I can mention two I am familiar with (arguments against them are a separate issue): Giulio Tononi’s Integrated Information Theory (which doesn’t so much explain
consciousness in physical terms as it gives constraints on a physical substrate sufficient to account for the phenomenology of consciousness), and Penrose and Hameroff’s Orchestrated Objective Reduction hypothesis.
Regards,
Siegfried
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:online_sa...@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Peter Nyikos
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 11:48 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 11:48 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
On 04/20/2017 06:43 AM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:
-[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
This is a very demanding concept of theory that you are dealing with here, Serge. Most theories outside mathematics only try to explain things while leaving basic features unexplained. Newton's theory of gravity only explains the effects of gravity mathematically. It does not even address the question of how gravity is able to affect objects at a distance, through seemingly empty space. Newton himself admitted that he had no explanation for that.
Einstein had a sort of explanation: objects curve space around them in such a way that objects follow a path that can be calculated. But he could not explain just how masses can do such a thing as curving space.
If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
Materialists have a theory of "consciousness" in which they give a concept of "experience" in purely behavioristic terms. For instance, they might fall back on a "third person" interpretation of consciousness in terms of responses to
stimuli. According to this, someone is "conscious" of something in the environment if his responses to it are the sort that we have come to associate with being conscious of it.
Sometimes materialists will even act as though the only use of the word is to indicate whether someone is "conscious" or "unconscious" in an everyday sense of the word.
Sometimes materialists will even act as though the only use of the word is to indicate whether someone is "conscious" or "unconscious" in an everyday sense of the word.
So, may I ask Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
Edwards, Jonathan
Apr 21, 2017, 11:55:47 AM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Heraclitus, Empedocles and Anaxagoras, indeed. I am reminded of Picasso’s comment on viewing the caves at Lascaux: ‘We have learned nothing’.
Donald DeGracia
Apr 21, 2017, 3:23:31 PM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
I would say consciousness is the “being” aspect in every experience.
Professor, Department of Physiology
4116 Scott Hall
540 E. Canfield
Detroit, MI, 48201, USA
(313) 577-6745 (office phone)
(313) 577-3948 (lab phone)
(313) 577-5494 (fax)
http://www2.med.wayne.edu/degracialab/
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/273359453.5492961.1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20131A1F483A7663A856855D801A0%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
priyedarshi jetli
Apr 21, 2017, 3:23:31 PM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Deepak,
What does this really mean? I do not understand! Normally, 'knowing' is identified with a subject, which could be human or some other living organism or even a computing machine. The term 'element' here is strange. Are elements knowers?
Priyedarshi
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Consciousness is the knowing element in every experience --mental or perceptual
2013 Costa Del Mar RoadCarlsbad, CA 92009
From: online_sadhu_sanga@googlegroups.com <online_sadhu_sanga@googlegroups.com> on behalf of priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 3:09:52 AM
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfACjyZ5a99GB5uQ97sdZh4KEwb45s%2BrqrMj0mSUes4qkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
--
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20131A1F483A7663A856855D801A0%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 21, 2017, 3:23:54 PM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Priyedarshi Jetli, Bruno Marchal
I agree with Bruno Marchal and Priyedarshi Jetli's arguments related to proofs.
However, my critical analysis entails that materialism, idealism, and dualism have serious problems as elaborated in (Vimal, 2010d), (Vimal, 2012c), and (Vimal, 2013), and the eDAM has the least number of problems.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Thursday, 20 April 2017 8:44 AM, priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com> wrote:
Proofs apply to mathematical theorems not to things like matter or consciousness. And even in mathematics if something cannot be proven it does not mean that it is not true. Take Fermat's last theorem for example. It took 300 years to prove it. It is like saying that if no one had ever climbed the peak of Mount Everest it did not exist. The metaphoric statement of the type Deepak Chopra makes is meaningless. There is a very old fallacy that is commonly used: No one has proven that God does not exist. Therefore, God exists. It is an obvious fallacy. In any case the burden of proof lies on the one who accepts the existence of God or a non-material consciousness for that matter and not on those who do not accept them. The fallacy is surely obvious to those who are committing them as well. They are a disguise for covering up the issue. The issue is that once stated as alternative hypotheses, idealism, dualism, materialism and perhaps other isms regarding the mind body problem are dogmas. None of these hypotheses can be proven and all attempts to prove them beg the question. But among dogmas we can choose the one that seems most plausible to us. To me the materialist or physicalist dogma is the most plausible. There is no emergent mental (non-physical) world, there is no non-physical or mystical forces that causally act on the physical world. The physical is causally closed. To deny this people often equate 'physics of the day' with 'everything that is physical'. I need not spend time to dispel this fallacious equivocation. We need only reflect on the statement that "everything is in principle explainable physically."
Priyedarshi
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 10:37 AM, 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Chopra: No one has ever proved the existence of matter.Vimal: Did anybody has proved the existence of the consciousness-in-itself?
Kind regards,Rām
------------------------------ ----------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
2013 Costa Del Mar RoadCarlsbad, CA 92009
From: Deepak Chopra
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 6:44:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Matter is a concept an interpretation is sense perceptionsNo one has ever proved the existence of matterMatter is non material
It's made of nothing
Deepak Chopra MD
My take todayThe labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemistProfessor EmeritusHoward UniversityAuthor of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-% 2BUsfunggPA1% 2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail. gmail.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ SN2PR01MB20139A50349A68100B986 49C80180%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod. exchangelabs.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 282238421.4607245. 1492664849105%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfDDC7AX_q-VHxzpGWOoz5VNp11mkqDhZXKtYqW3maQYsg%40mail.gmail.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 21, 2017, 6:31:37 PM4/21/17
to Priyedarshi Jetli, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Priyedarshi,
Thanks.
Jetli: The question of what came first, consciousness or theory of consciousness, has a question prior to it. Is there a consciousness? And then what is consciousness? Those who beg the question here assume that there is a consensus on this. I do not think there is any more consensus on this as there is on the existence of God. There is a consensus that there are ultimate constituents of matter and then alternative theories are spurned out and debated on this. Of course, the first question here is "Are there ultimate constituents?" The Ionians answered this in the affirmative and there has been consensus on this among scientists ever since. Of course, this could be the wrong answer to the question. That is another matter. But we have theories because we have consensus that there is matter and that there are ultimate constituents. Perhaps there is some such consensus among those who spurn out theories of consciousness, there must be, but it is not a consensus neither of all humans nor of the entire scientific community. I am for the ordinary use of the word 'consciousness' which is a bodily use in terms of the proper functioning of the body.
Vimal: There are over forty meanings attributed to the term consciousness, which “were identified and categorized according to whether they were principally about function or about experience; some overlapped but others were apparently mutually exclusive – and this list is by no means exhaustive. […] The prospects for reaching any single, agreed, theory independent definition of consciousness thus appear remote. However, much confusion could be avoided if authors were always to specify which aspects of consciousness they refer to when using the term” (Vimal, 2009f). Your definition falls under the functional aspect of consciousness, which can be explained thru materialistic science. However, the experiential aspect of consciousness needs some framework beyond materialism. The eDAM is preferred because it has fewer problems compared to idealism and dualism. The eDAM is elaborated in (Vimal, 2008b), (Vimal, 2010c), (Vimal, 2013), (Vimal, 2015g), (Vimal, 2016d), and summarized in (Vimal, 2016b).
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 273359453.5492961. 1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfACjyZ5a99GB5uQ97sdZh4KEwb45s%2BrqrMj0mSUes4qkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Eric Reyes
Apr 21, 2017, 6:31:37 PM4/21/17
to nonlo...@chopra.com, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Deepak,
But again I'll ask you, what meaning does consciousness have if there isn't something and someone to be conscious of? What good would it be? If there were no experience, no thoughts, no relationship, no activity? It has lost its meaning then. Your theory is only half the picture, there is far more to the picture of reality. There is activity, meaning, experience, relationship. This exists even here, so what to speak of beyond going towards the infinite, evolving forwards. We need this, reality needs this, and we need to seek the truth, this is living.
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 273359453.5492961. 1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/EBF0A8C4-4083-4021-B028-BA2F90F1FF3F%40chopra.com.
Asingh2384
Apr 21, 2017, 6:31:43 PM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Hi Jo:
You said - “The forces of the wind shaking the leaves of the
tree outside are NOT in my consciousness, only the forces that my brain uses to
construct my idea of those distant forces.”
The forces of the wind shaking the leaves of the tree
outside are within cosmic consciousness represented by the eternal (scientific)
laws of the universe. Our individual (biological) consciousness or mind (brain forces) is
also within the laws or cosmic consciousness or universal awareness.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden Factor - An Approach
for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and Universal Reality"
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/D766F9D3-E8E9-4C6B-BB30-5A3879DAB424%40ucl.ac.uk.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 21, 2017, 6:31:43 PM4/21/17
to Jonathan Edwards, David Schwartzman, Online Sadhu Sanga
Hi jo,
Thanks.
Edwards: For me the whole sterile debate was resolved in 1693 by Leibniz’s short piece of Reflections on True Metaphysics. He pointed out that the nature of the constituent elements of the world is action or force or necessity of change. And in subsequent essays he shows that the parsimonious view is to assume that the dynamic relation of force is the same dynamic relation (viewed from the other end) as perception or experience - as in the phrase ‘the leaves experienced force’. So force is not in consciousness nor consciousness in force. They are the same thing. Most people find it hard to deny stuff so they called Leibniz an idealist but he would have never suggested that the force of an oncoming train was merely a whim. The solidity of the train for him is a ‘well-founded illusion’, the well-founded being the crux. It is an illusion only in the sense that Leibniz understood indirect realism.
Vimal: Materialists could argue that “consciousness and force are the same thing” can be interpreted as Identity theory of materialism. I would interpret that Leibniz’s relational ontology is close to the eDAM because consciousness and force appear same as they are two inseparable aspects of a state of an entity/mode: the consciousness/experience is the mental aspect viewed from 1st person perspective and the force is the physical aspect viewed from the 3rd person perspective; information is the same in both aspects; it is just viewing the same information from two different perspectives.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 273359453.5492961. 1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 28B54BFD-5BAD-493F-A8A6- 986F169A9047%40chopra.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/D766F9D3-E8E9-4C6B-BB30-5A3879DAB424%40ucl.ac.uk.
Donald DeGracia
Apr 21, 2017, 7:08:30 PM4/21/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
To Priyedarshi
Syamala Hari answered this already and in the best possible way. “Element” is the sun light in the metaphor.
Indian philosophy calls the collection of all the thoughts, desires, emotions, memories, etc, of an individual as the individual's mind and emphasizes that just like lifeless matter, an individual's mind is NOT conscious! The philosophy explains the solution to the hard problem by means of an analogy as follows: When sun light falls in a pot containing water, the light is reflected by the water creating an image of the sun. The image has some brightness but its origin is in the sun light and not in the pot nor in the water. A living being is a body with a mind and similar to a pot containing water; the mind is like water and the body is like the pot. Consciousness (with big C) is the sun light. The consciousness appearing in a living being is like the image of the sun in water. Just as there is no reflection in an empty pot, there is no appearance of consciousness in lifeless matter but only in living beings because they have minds and life is the interaction of mind with matter. Again, just as the water needs a pot to hold it, and the reflection is gone if the pot is broken, the mind cannot exhibit the apparently conscious behavior after the death of the physical body.
Syamala Hari
Professor, Department of Physiology
4116 Scott Hall
540 E. Canfield
Detroit, MI, 48201, USA
(313) 577-6745 (office phone)
(313) 577-3948 (lab phone)
(313) 577-5494 (fax)
http://www2.med.wayne.edu/degracialab/
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:online_sa...@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of priyedarshi jetli
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 12:32 PM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Deepak,
What does this really mean? I do not understand! Normally, 'knowing' is identified with a subject, which could be human or some other living organism or even a computing machine. The term 'element' here is strange. Are elements knowers?
Priyedarshi
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 5:50 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Consciousness is the knowing element in every experience --mental or perceptual
2013 Costa Del Mar Road
Carlsbad, CA 92009
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/SN2PR01MB20131A1F483A7663A856855D801A0%40SN2PR01MB2013.prod.exchangelabs.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue:
http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?:
http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at
https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfDfECnF%3DY6AQ2CusvxJa19o97RizKfxERAEtQ164mrp3A%40mail.gmail.com.
Edwards, Jonathan
Apr 22, 2017, 4:51:13 AM4/22/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Avtar,
I understand the motivation for your claim but I think cosmic
consciousness is simply the wrong word. It perpetuates confusion. After all it is merely a word for an idea, as Deepak reminds us, and I think it is likely to suggest the wrong idea.
Consciousness, as we understand it, is a relation of being aware of a world from a point of view. It is finite, evanescent, and local: actual in space and time. The ‘cosmos’ is not. The word ‘cosmos’ or ‘universe’ suggest that there ‘is’ an actual
universe either of finite size wrapped back on itself by curvature, or of infinite dimensions. I think it is likely that
neither of these is true. Our cosy idea of ‘what is actually there’ is, I suspect, another of our naive myths. Other than the personal actual world that each of us perceives there is only timeless and spaceless possibility. Timeless and spaceless
possibility cannot have an attribute as finite and trivial as consciousness. Ascribing consciousness to a cosmos is an anthropomorphism. There isn’t an
actual cosmos ‘there’ to be conscious. So you cannot be ‘in touch with the cosmos’ as some people would like to think.
I entirely agree that there is some reality we cannot grasp that is the totality of reasons for everything - Leibniz’s concept of God. But I think it is to misunderstand and belittle this reality to suggest it might be something as trivial and
finite as conscious. Our own consciousnesses are actualisations of possibilities based on some timeless reasons but it seems to me completely confusing to suggest that they are instances of some global version of the same relation.
Best wishes
Jo
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/15b92188e58-1c95-30fbb%40webprd-m62.mail.aol.com.
Syamala Hari
Apr 22, 2017, 4:51:13 AM4/22/17
to Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D., ddeg...@med.wayne.edu
Prof. DeGracia,
Thanks for appreciating the quote of the metaphor about Consciousness, mind, and matter relations from Indian philosophy. I wish to add that this view of appearance of consciousness in living beings is consistent with the findings of modern neuroscience about the so called neural correlates of consciousness. Because: according to neuroscience, for example, according to Mormann and Koch, every phenomenal, subjective conscious state such as a conscious intention or conscious emotion has a correlating neural process; each state has its associated neural correlates of consciousness: one for seeing a red patch, another one for seeing grandmother, yet a third one for hearing a siren, etc. When a sensory input enters the brain, it creates a neural map (a pot in the metaphor) of the received stimulus and a sensation (water), which is a mental aspect and which is never created in a lifeless computer. The individual has a conscious experience of the stimulus when the formation of the neural map is completed (described as attaining neuronal adequacy by some neuroscientists). The neural map is therefore called the neural correlate of consciousness. Of course, scientists can never detect Consciousness (sunlight) with their monitors. They cannot detect the mental aspect by physical instruments either because all contents of mind are not accessible to senses; but in their experiments, they have human subjects to report their experiences. So they can verify that each conscious experience has a corresponding neural correlate. Any way, this finding of neuroscience does not contradict the metaphor. I wrote more about this in an article "How Vedanta explains conscious subjective experience" http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/385/437
Thanks for giving the link for your book on Yoga. I will read it
Syamala Hari
Thanks for appreciating the quote of the metaphor about Consciousness, mind, and matter relations from Indian philosophy. I wish to add that this view of appearance of consciousness in living beings is consistent with the findings of modern neuroscience about the so called neural correlates of consciousness. Because: according to neuroscience, for example, according to Mormann and Koch, every phenomenal, subjective conscious state such as a conscious intention or conscious emotion has a correlating neural process; each state has its associated neural correlates of consciousness: one for seeing a red patch, another one for seeing grandmother, yet a third one for hearing a siren, etc. When a sensory input enters the brain, it creates a neural map (a pot in the metaphor) of the received stimulus and a sensation (water), which is a mental aspect and which is never created in a lifeless computer. The individual has a conscious experience of the stimulus when the formation of the neural map is completed (described as attaining neuronal adequacy by some neuroscientists). The neural map is therefore called the neural correlate of consciousness. Of course, scientists can never detect Consciousness (sunlight) with their monitors. They cannot detect the mental aspect by physical instruments either because all contents of mind are not accessible to senses; but in their experiments, they have human subjects to report their experiences. So they can verify that each conscious experience has a corresponding neural correlate. Any way, this finding of neuroscience does not contradict the metaphor. I wrote more about this in an article "How Vedanta explains conscious subjective experience" http://scigod.com/index.php/sgj/article/view/385/437
Thanks for giving the link for your book on Yoga. I will read it
Syamala Hari
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_S...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_S...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_S...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_S...@googlegroups.com.
VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Apr 22, 2017, 4:51:22 AM4/22/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Joe and Ram,
Many centuries before Leibnitz, Vedic/Upnishadic Rishis had found that two grand forces emanate out from the womb of cosmic consciousness or originate in Prakriti ( nature) but due to cosmic consciousness.. First force was the force of propulsion which created and sustained motion in the entire nature right from sub Planckian scale to the galactic scale, This force was named as Prana. Second force was that of knowledge which provided guiding course to nature during the creation as well as in its working as on present. This force is akin to Information of contemporary Physics which guides nature. This force represent the conscious element of the cosmic consciousness. This force was named as Shabada. Nature moves ahead and sustains on these two twin forces viz Prana and Shabda. Discovery of these forces was not part of any theoretical and speculative model to which most of the philosophers and thinkers are attuned to. Rishis had discovered the existence of these two forces in their subjective spiritual practice based upon the methodology of Sammadhi. Even during the current period, there have been Rishis/Yogis who have discovered above mentioned twin forces in the state of Samaadhi.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/D766F9D3-E8E9-4C6B-BB30-5A3879DAB424%40ucl.ac.uk.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1154253911.679730.1492803223089%40mail.yahoo.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 22, 2017, 9:33:23 AM4/22/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Consciousness conceives ,constructs , governs and becomes the universe .
That is useful enough
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1412635604.5764224.1492768974234%40mail.yahoo.com.
Edwards, Jonathan
Apr 22, 2017, 9:33:23 AM4/22/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
I cannot see why anyone’s theorising is any different from anyone else’s theorising. I don’t buy that sort of thing. It leads to exactly the sort of misinterpretation of the idea of ‘cosmic consciousness’ I was alluding to. To claim that something is known
for certain rather than theorised in this context is to forfeit any credibility, to my mind.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAGQG8_wawcKwuZB7pWTJuZ7r2y0C9PUDwpCGVOghcCoL-aBN-g%40mail.gmail.com.
Deepak Chopra
Apr 22, 2017, 9:33:23 AM4/22/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Can you conceive a theory outside of consciousness ?
Deepak Chopra MD
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1F7EB9C1-A24C-4F76-B5C9-BF7EC6D2B8B1%40ulb.ac.be.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 22, 2017, 5:14:38 PM4/22/17
to Priyedarshi Jetli, Online Sadhu Sanga, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Dear Priyedarshi,
Thanks.
I agree with you because the eDAM framework entails that God is inside us, so we are self-sufficient. However, we cannot reject the benefits of a group. I interpret the (Theiner & O’Connor, 2010)’s findings on the emergence of group cognition as follows, which are consistent with the eDAM:
(i) The functional sub-aspect of consciousness such as group-cognition (including knowledge/information) can be greater than an individual cognition because a group can have more information than an individual.
(ii) However, the experiential sub-aspect of consciousness of a group is unclear: For example, consider a group of a trichromat (who experiences colors) and an achromat (who experiences black- white): what will be the group experience related to a ripe tomato?
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear Joe and Ram,
Many centuries before Leibnitz, Vedic/Upnishadic Rishis had found that two grand forces emanate out from the womb of cosmic consciousness or originate in Prakriti ( nature) but due to cosmic consciousness.. First force was the force of propulsion which created and sustained motion in the entire nature right from sub Planckian scale to the galactic scale, This force was named as Prana. Second force was that of knowledge which provided guiding course to nature during the creation as well as in its working as on present. This force is akin to Information of contemporary Physics which guides nature. This force represent the conscious element of the cosmic consciousness. This force was named as Shabada. Nature moves ahead and sustains on these two twin forces viz Prana and Shabda. Discovery of these forces was not part of any theoretical and speculative model to which most of the philosophers and thinkers are attuned to. Rishis had discovered the existence of these two forces in their subjective spiritual practice based upon the methodology of Sammadhi. Even during the current period, there have been Rishis/Yogis who have discovered above mentioned twin forces in the state of Samaadhi.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 1:03 AM, 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Hi jo,Thanks.Edwards: For me the whole sterile debate was resolved in 1693 by Leibniz’s short piece of Reflections on True Metaphysics. He pointed out that the nature of the constituent elements of the world is action or force or necessity of change. And in subsequent essays he shows that the parsimonious view is to assume that the dynamic relation of force is the same dynamic relation (viewed from the other end) as perception or experience - as in the phrase ‘the leaves experienced force’. So force is not in consciousness nor consciousness in force. They are the same thing. Most people find it hard to deny stuff so they called Leibniz an idealist but he would have never suggested that the force of an oncoming train was merely a whim. The solidity of the train for him is a ‘well-founded illusion’, the well-founded being the crux. It is an illusion only in the sense that Leibniz understood indirect realism.Vimal: Materialists could argue that “consciousness and force are the same thing” can be interpreted as Identity theory of materialism. I would interpret that Leibniz’s relational ontology is close to the eDAM because consciousness and force appear same as they are two inseparable aspects of a state of an entity/mode: the consciousness/experience is the mental aspect viewed from 1st person perspective and the force is the physical aspect viewed from the 3rd person perspective; information is the same in both aspects; it is just viewing the same information from two different perspectives.
Kind regards,Rām------------------------------ ----------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ CAP4HMnsLsJGb2SLURQc_ cHuHFCxQK%3D6e- G9y4Lf5CSpqkPYf_Q%40mail. gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ D766F9D3-E8E9-4C6B-BB30- 5A3879DAB424%40ucl.ac.uk.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 1154253911.679730. 1492803223089%40mail.yahoo.com .
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAGQG8_wawcKwuZB7pWTJuZ7r2y0C9PUDwpCGVOghcCoL-aBN-g%40mail.gmail.com.
Edwards, Jonathan
Apr 22, 2017, 5:14:38 PM4/22/17
to Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal, Edwards, Jonathan, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Priyedarshi Jetli, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Asingh2384
I doubt anyone much except Dr Theiner and Dr O’Connor would want to define it that way, Ram. They have a theory of group cognition which to my mind is groundless. I doubt it bears any relation to the Vedic texts or Leibniz or anything much.
On 22 Apr 2017, at 16:10, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
The term ‘cosmic consciousness’ can be defined as the functional (not the experiential) aspect of consciousness (such as cognition/knowledge/information) of a group of all conscious beings of our universe; see (Theiner & O’Connor, 2010) for the emergence of group cognition).
Kind regards,Rām----------------------------------------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 273359453.5492961. 1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 28B54BFD-5BAD-493F-A8A6- 986F169A9047%40chopra.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/91471121-DEE2-4B35-9387-912091EE7AF8%40ucl.ac.uk.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 22, 2017, 5:14:38 PM4/22/17
to Jonathan Edwards, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Priyedarshi Jetli, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Asingh2384
The
term ‘cosmic consciousness’ can
be defined as the functional (not the experiential) aspect of consciousness (such
as cognition/knowledge/information) of a group of all conscious beings of our
universe; see (Theiner &
O’Connor, 2010) for the emergence
of group cognition).
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 273359453.5492961. 1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 28B54BFD-5BAD-493F-A8A6- 986F169A9047%40chopra.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/91471121-DEE2-4B35-9387-912091EE7AF8%40ucl.ac.uk.
Serge Patlavskiy
Apr 22, 2017, 5:14:38 PM4/22/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> on April 22, 2017 wrote:
>Can you conceive a theory outside of consciousness ?
[S.P.] Can anybody explain to me what sense is in all these childish questions?
OK. I would ask a question myself: can anybody conceive Deepak Chopra outside of the field of consciousness studies? I would answer: I definitely can. :-)
Best,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Saturday, April 22, 2017 4:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Jayanti Chavan
Apr 23, 2017, 12:26:10 PM4/23/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sir,
As per your paradigm
1. What is the role of life (particle) or atma? Are they different from consciousness?
What is the relation of consciousness with life particle and matter.
2. What makes a pure consciousness develop various degrees of desires(good and bad or low) in a human being?
3. How does single consciousness expand into multiple consciousness represented by many human beings such that each one has separate free will?
Thank you
Rgds
Sent from my iPad
Jayanti
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/EBF0A8C4-4083-4021-B028-BA2F90F1FF3F%40chopra.com.
Vinod Sehgal
Apr 24, 2017, 5:21:58 AM4/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Avtar Singhji,
I agree with you that consciousness at fundamental level is an omnipresent, eternal state but I don't find it conforming to logic that it is a zero energy state. If we agree to the zero energy state of absolute consciousness, this will reduce to the quantum vacuum which will lead to the notion of something from nothing which prima facie is illogical and irrational. If you stick to the concept of zero state energy for absolute consciousness, God or Waheguru will reduce to zero state having no powers.
In view of above, I think, more rational approach will be one in which absolute consciousness has infinite energy and powers. From this infinite absolute consciousness, infinite universes take birth and merge in that. The plausible thing could be that with the dissolution of our universe, manifested space, time, matter and physical energy of our universe reduces to zero state. But if we interpret that absolute consciousness also becomes zero, this will amount to taking the all powerful God to the level of nil knowledge and nil powers. I think, with or without manifestation of our universe, God's infiniteness in terms of its knowledge, power and spread remains intact.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
I agree with you that consciousness at fundamental level is an omnipresent, eternal state but I don't find it conforming to logic that it is a zero energy state. If we agree to the zero energy state of absolute consciousness, this will reduce to the quantum vacuum which will lead to the notion of something from nothing which prima facie is illogical and irrational. If you stick to the concept of zero state energy for absolute consciousness, God or Waheguru will reduce to zero state having no powers.
In view of above, I think, more rational approach will be one in which absolute consciousness has infinite energy and powers. From this infinite absolute consciousness, infinite universes take birth and merge in that. The plausible thing could be that with the dissolution of our universe, manifested space, time, matter and physical energy of our universe reduces to zero state. But if we interpret that absolute consciousness also becomes zero, this will amount to taking the all powerful God to the level of nil knowledge and nil powers. I think, with or without manifestation of our universe, God's infiniteness in terms of its knowledge, power and spread remains intact.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
From: 'Asingh2384' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M.Puri Maharaja, Ph.D.
Sent: 21-04-2017 02:35
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com; nonlo...@chopra.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Hi Deepak:
Consciousness never came nor will it ever go
anywhere. It is the eternal and omnipresent Zero-point (energy) state of the universe that always existed and will exist. Time is a property of matter and mind, not of pure fundamental consciousness.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden Factor - An Approach
for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and Universal Reality"
-----Original Message-----
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
What came first consciousness or science ?
What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
Deepak Chopra MD
My take todayThe labels we give to Mind/Body/Universe are of course human constructs, the product of our collective consciousness as an activity of the material social brain of animals, the result of some 4 billion years of biological evolution.This knowledge comes from the never completed process of real science research most consistent with an emergent materialist philosophy, rather than the citation of some sacred text with all the answers now and forever.
Long live Materialist Neo-Darwinian Science and its endless development (e.g., epigenetics, niche construction)
David Schwartzman, biogeochemistProfessor EmeritusHoward UniversityAuthor of Life, Temperature and the Earth:the Self-Organizing Biosphere, 1999, 2002, Columbia University Press
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
My take todayMind / Body/ Universe are human constructsThere is only consciousness in which those constructs are conceived
Dear RLP Vimal,
Namaste. Thanks for sending in your paper written in 2011, in which you have added my response and your replies recently. I sincerely appreciate your detailed response. We were also travelling a lot and hence it is a delayed response.
1.0 Dual Aspect Monism
I had the opportunity to look at the Dual aspect Monism webpage from Wikipedia [1] which Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja, our Gurudeva had shown us. It was interesting to know that Pauli and Jung’s work resulted in the conjecture of dual aspect monism (DAM). It posits that different aspects including the mental and physical may show a complementarity in quantum physical sense. John Polkinghorne also was inclined to DAM. Certainly therefore it is a current problem meriting a serious study.
Atmanspacher wrote vextensively on DAM and from the work of Paul Berneys explained complementarity as, “Two descriptions are complementary if they mutually exclude each other, yet are both necessary to describe a situation exhaustively.”[2]
The Vedantic Concept has a term called Pradhan for the unmanifested sum total of the material elements. Pradhana is not the Brahman of Vedanta. Brahman has no material qualities and that is why it is called nirguna. The Vedantic causality principle is that Brahman (The Absolute Truth) is sarva karana karanam or cause of all causes [3].
DAM view is quite different in that it posits that causality p
[The entire original message is not included.]
Bhakti Vijnana Muni
Apr 24, 2017, 5:21:58 AM4/24/17
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Respected Smt. Murty Hari Mataji,
Namaste. Your modification of my statement is ok. The origin of biological forms has been considered in a too simplified ways in the conventional biology. And even after much realization the bulk of emphasis in modern biology merely goes to complexity concepts as understood in some parts of modern mathematics.
However the real concept of the biological being is Organic Whole. And hence the reality of life principle is a much deeper concept than what mechanistic sciences or even QM has considered. Biological beings are a product of nature, but not of chemical or physical nature. Therefore it displays a higher order of logic and even our concept of nature is for that same reason inadequate as considered in mechanistic sciences. For e.g. life comes from life. The individual comes from another individual of the same species etc.
Even Kurt Goedel has considered that reality must be rational. He wrote in one of his letter to his mother Marianne that, "But do we have reason to assume that the world is rationally organized? I think so. For the world is not at all chaotic and capricious, but rather, as science shows, the greatest regularity and order prevails in all things; [and] order is but a form of rationality." [Ref: https://math.stanford.edu/~feferman/papers/Goedel-Project-Synopsis.pdf ]
Goedel also spoke about life and brain as non-mechanical concepts. For example, "I don’t think the brain came in the Darwinian manner. In fact, it is disprovable. Simple mechanism can’t yield the brain. I think the basic elements of the universe are simple. Life force is a primitive element of the universe and it obeys certain laws of action. These laws are not simple, and they are not mechanical." [reference: Quotes from A Logical Journey 6.2.12]
Thanking you,
Bhaktivijnana Muni
Dear Dr.Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
Namaste. Thank you for your scholarly analysis. I hope I am correct in interpreting your following statement
"Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm."
as an illustration or manifestation of Organic wholism.
As I understand Ram's eDAM, it does not include action of mind/thought on matter/brain. He simply attaches thought=like aspect to every material entity. While all actions and interactions are carried on by matter, mental aspects have no effect on any part of any process.
Best Regards
Syamala Hari
From: Bhakti Vijnana Muni <b...@scsiscs.org>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:57 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear friends (Dr. RLP Vimal and Dr. Schwartzman),
Namaste. The concerns of RLP
Vimal are well taken. RLP Vimal has raised the important question that can we
have something like matter in itself or consciousness in itself. Of course we
had pointed out in the earlier email that such a result is only an abstraction. It is only an isolated idea which does not consider the dialectical oppositional relationship with its other. An opposition ties one thing with a specific other. So there is a necessary relation involved. And that relation has a dynamic structure which thought can uncover and leads to a higher conception that unifies them.
The issues related to naïve
realism (materialism) and subjective idealism are due to the two different
kinds of reductions that are carried out. We would like to point out that the
philosophy of Vedanta is not equal to that of subjective idealism. Of course
materialism or naïve realism is already being found inadequate in advanced
modern science, especially led by the problems encountered in the measurement
problems of quantum physics.
Subjective idealism (or naïve
idealism) tries to reduce all of reality to the finite consciousness based on
“I think”. In order to come to the proper concept of reality and overcome the
limitations of the subjective idealism or naïve idealism, one has to go beyond
the finite consciousness, i.e. ‘the finite I think’ and go beyond it and see it
as only a small infinitesimal unit of reality.
As there are many such units,
then what is the ontology of the Whole. What is the nature of the Whole that
includes many such finite ‘I thinks’. To rediscover this is the task of
philosophy and science. This requires an advancement beyond Kant and very
careful analysis of the situation. In fact in the last email we had referred to
this necessity, when the three stages of rational development were pointed out
as [1] :
(i) The Stage of Abstract Understanding which is abstract determination of the
separate sides of the contradiction without understanding the relation between
the two sides,
(ii) The stage of Negative Reason in which the dialectical relation of the two sides
is determined. In this process the existence of the abstract independence of
two sides in the stage of Understanding is dissolved and a dialectical relation
is reasoned,
(iii) Positive
Reason: this dialectical relationship is raised into a dynamic
reality. The ability to reason in these stages prepares the thoughtful to come
to its True Concept.
Thus
if we carefully study the systematic development of philosophical approach to
reality as presented here, this is far removed from Subjective idealism. Rather
reason does not abandon the
dialectical relation between the two sides (subject and the object), but rather
determines it and does not reduce one side to other. But reason in the stage of positive
reason raises this dialectical relationship into a wholistic and dynamic
reality. And by this approach of an in depth Conceptual rational development of
reason can it be properly reasoned that the body/mind opposition can be
comprehended in a higher synthesis or unity called consciousness. Thus we need to carefully note that the idea
of consciousness in Vedanta is a view of Organic wholism and not subjective
idealism.
As far as Dr. Schwartzman’s
opinion about Darwinism and materialism is concerned, his stand neglects any
substantial consideration of thought in constituting biological reality. Especially
modern Biology recognizes cognition and is documenting many examples of thought
(and consciousness) in effecting even genome changes for adaptation and even
normal cellular activity. Thus the bioinformatics must include the
consideration of the study of subjective elements in constituting the biological
realm.
Thanking
you,
Bhaktivijnana
Muni, PhD
References
[1] www.gwfhegel.org
The webpage of Sripad Bhakti Madhava Puri Maharaja. PhD.
On Thursday, April 20, 2017 9:53 AM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
Matter-first (materialism) science is a bottom-up approach from pre-Big Bang to Big Bang to the current period of co-evolution, dependently co-origination, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning. This is just opposite to fully manifested consciousness-first (idealism), which is a top-down approach. Both have serious problems: materialism rejects consciousness-in-itself, and idealism rejects matter-in-itself. They are riding in different boats of foundational metaphysics in opposite direction. They will never meet and hence this materialism vs. idealism debate is a never ending and is a useless mental exercise in my view. Dualism has its own 8 serious problems, which cannot be resolved. Therefore, the only hope is the least problematic 5-component extended dual-aspect monism (eDAM) metaphysics elaborated in 5 articles: (Vimal, 2008b), (Vimal, 2010c), (Vimal, 2013), (Vimal, 2015g), (Vimal, 2016d). This eDAM foundational metaphysics brings science and religions closer and is worth spending time on it.
Kind regards,
Vimal
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Saturday, 14 January 2017 5:50 PM, "'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegrou ps.com> wrote:
Dear Dr. Bhakti Vijnana Muni,
THANKS for your interest in the eDAM/Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita framework and providing excellent critique.
I am in the process of addressing your comments, and I will let you know as soon as it is completed.
Cheers and Happy New Year!
Kindest regards,Ram14 Jan. 2017
------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Dear RLP Vimal,
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/909138707.4292081.1492644058616%40mail.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/705385895.5368506.1492667636497%40mail.yahoo.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 24, 2017, 1:47:59 PM4/24/17
to VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Asingh2384, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Matters Of Mind
The term ‘nothing’ is misleading. It is not true that there is nothing in quantum vacuum and ZPE (zero-point energy). Rather, at every point in space, the quantum vacuum has ZPE = (½ ħw). ZPE implies temperature is absolute zero so there is zero thermal energy and there is no matter. In other words, in the universe, there is an enormous amount of potential energy. Quantum fluctuations (QFs) emerge in this background ZPF (zero-point field), which is presumably responsible for Big Bang; therefore, it is misleading to say universe emerged from nothing. In the extended dual-aspect monism (eDAM) framework, the ‘quantum vacuum’/ZPE is the physical aspect of a state of the primal entity (Brahman) and has enormous potential (coded) information sufficient to create the whole universe we have today. Its inseparable mental aspect is universal potential consciousness (UPC). Manifestation started from Big Bang and our experiences are excitations of the UPC. It is the same information, but ‘viewing’ it from two different perspectives; therefore, they ‘look’ different. Further details are given in Section 3.15 of (Vimal, 2016b).
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/668569285.1336255.1493007574102%40mail.yahoo.com.
Asingh2384
Apr 24, 2017, 5:46:53 PM4/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, vinodse...@gmail.com
Dear Vinod Ji:
Yes, Zero Point state refers to
unmanifested state of the all-inclusive wholesome existence ( 0 to infinity,
all mass/energy/space/time) or everythingness in the unmanifested state of nothingness
as mis-perceived by the human mind.
Looks like we are in agreement if you do
not misinterpret Zero Point as Zero energy. Instead it is “all that there is”
consciousness energy.
Zero Point state represents all existence
in a state of zero amplitude but infinite wavelength (omnipresent) pure kinetic
or consciousness energy at the speed of light.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The
Hidden Factor - An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and
Universal Reality"
Dear Avtar Singhji,
I agree with you that consciousness at fundamental level is an omnipresent, eternal state but I don't find it conforming to logic that it is a zero energy state. If we agree to the zero energy state of absolute consciousness, this will reduce to the quantum vacuum which will lead to the notion of something from nothing which prima facie is illogical and irrational. If you stick to the concept of zero state energy for absolute consciousness, God or Waheguru will reduce to zero state having no powers.
In view of above, I think, more rational approach will be one in which absolute consciousness has infinite energy and powers. From this infinite absolute consciousness, infinite universes take birth and merge in that. The plausible thing could be that with the dissolution of our universe, manifested space, time, matter and physical energy of our universe reduces to zero state. But if we interpret that absolute consciousness also becomes zero, this will amount to taking the all powerful God to the level of nil knowledge and nil powers. I think, with or without manifestation of our universe, God's infiniteness in terms of its knowledge, power and spread remains intact.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
-----Original Message-----
From: Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 24, 2017 2:21 am
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 24, 2017 2:21 am
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear Avtar Singhji,
I agree with you that consciousness at fundamental level is an omnipresent, eternal state but I don't find it conforming to logic that it is a zero energy state. If we agree to the zero energy state of absolute consciousness, this will reduce to the quantum vacuum which will lead to the notion of something from nothing which prima facie is illogical and irrational. If you stick to the concept of zero state energy for absolute consciousness, God or Waheguru will reduce to zero state having no powers.
In view of above, I think, more rational approach will be one in which absolute consciousness has infinite energy and powers. From this infinite absolute consciousness, infinite universes take birth and merge in that. The plausible thing could be that with the dissolution of our universe, manifested space, time, matter and physical energy of our universe reduces to zero state. But if we interpret that absolute consciousness also becomes zero, this will amount to taking the all powerful God to the level of nil knowledge and nil powers. I think, with or without manifestation of our universe, God's infiniteness in terms of its knowledge, power and spread remains intact.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
I agree with you that consciousness at fundamental level is an omnipresent, eternal state but I don't find it conforming to logic that it is a zero energy state. If we agree to the zero energy state of absolute consciousness, this will reduce to the quantum vacuum which will lead to the notion of something from nothing which prima facie is illogical and irrational. If you stick to the concept of zero state energy for absolute consciousness, God or Waheguru will reduce to zero state having no powers.
In view of above, I think, more rational approach will be one in which absolute consciousness has infinite energy and powers. From this infinite absolute consciousness, infinite universes take birth and merge in that. The plausible thing could be that with the dissolution of our universe, manifested space, time, matter and physical energy of our universe reduces to zero state. But if we interpret that absolute consciousness also becomes zero, this will amount to taking the all powerful God to the level of nil knowledge and nil powers. I think, with or without manifestation of our universe, God's infiniteness in terms of its knowledge, power and spread remains intact.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
From: 'Asingh2384' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M.Puri Maharaja, Ph.D.
Sent: 21-04-2017 02:35
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com; nonlo...@chopra.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Hi Deepak:
Consciousness never came nor will it ever go
anywhere. It is the eternal and omnipresent Zero-point (energy) state of the universe that always existed and will exist. Time is a property of matter and mind, not of pure fundamental consciousness.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden Factor - An Approach
for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and Universal Reality"
-----Original Message-----
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Wed, Apr 19, 2017 9:23 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
What came first consciousness or science ?
What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
DAM view is quite different in that it posits that causality p
[The entire original message is not included.]
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/58fd644f.4335620a.a7ae8.1596%40mx.google.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 24, 2017, 5:46:53 PM4/24/17
to Asingh2384, Online Sadhu Sanga, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Matters Of Mind, Bernardo Kastrup
Dear Avtar,
Thanks.
You have raised an interesting point. Kindly email me your article; I do not understand “a zero-amplitude and infinite wavelength energy state”; I need to understand your framework before I comment. My understanding is that ZPF without fluctuations is a motionless ubiquitous background field with constant ZPE = (½ ħw).
Meanwhile, do you agree that QFs are responsible for Big Bang (BB)? If you do, then perhaps, QM ZPE might be related to pre-BB state, where an extremely high energy might be needed for such a BB explosion. The “observed dark or vacuum energy (cosmological constant) causing the observed accelerated expansion of the universe” might be after BB.
In addition, BrihadAryanka Upanishad mentions fluctuations/excitations in universal potential consciousness (UPC) for the creation of the universe, which might be the mental aspect and QFs might represent the equivalent inseparable physical aspect of the unmanifested (pre-BB) state of the primal entity (Brahman). The excitations in UPC are our manifested co-evolved experiences, in analogy to ripples in a still ocean (Kastrup, 2016). If there is a no fluctuation, then both aspects of the unmanifested state of Brahman are like a motionless ocean.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Monday, 24 April 2017 1:00 PM, Asingh2384 <asing...@aol.com> wrote:
Dear Ram:
Yes, “The term ‘nothing’
is misleading.”
However, the vacuum
energy predicted by QM ZPE is 120 orders of magnitude higher than the observed dark
or vacuum energy (cosmological constant) causing the observed accelerated expansion of the universe. This a major QM deficiency or paradox that makes QM ZPE unsuitable to
represent universal consciousness, which is truly a zero-amplitude and infinite
wavelength energy state as opposed to the finite non-zero quantum fluctuations that are 120
orders of magnitude higher. QM ZPE falls way short of reaching the cosmic Zero
Point state of fully dilated mass-space-time predicted by relativity as shown in my book and papers.
“Nothing” is a mis-perception
of the human mind of “Everything” in an un-manifested Zero Point state.
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The Hidden Factor - An Approach for
Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and Universal Reality"
-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in>
To: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>; Asingh2384 <asing...@aol.com>
Cc: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>; Matters Of Mind <matters...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 24, 2017 9:07 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in>
To: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>; Asingh2384 <asing...@aol.com>
Cc: Online_Sadhu_Sanga <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>; Matters Of Mind <matters...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 24, 2017 9:07 am
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear RLP Vimal,
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/3616503 13.4280637.1492595191018%40mai l.yahoo.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/0465A7A F-955B-4DF9-BC44-5FE6D81FEBCA% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAP4HMnvCbhARiQDgx8-%2BUsfunggPA1%2BeWRxfRoEVFPqUMm0rpg%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/909138707.4292081.1492644058616%40mail.yahoo.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/705385895.5368506.1492667636497%40mail.yahoo.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/668569285.1336255.1493007574102%40mail.yahoo.com.
Asingh2384
Apr 24, 2017, 5:47:04 PM4/24/17
to rlpv...@yahoo.co.in, vinodse...@gmail.com, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, matters...@googlegroups.com
Asingh2384
Apr 24, 2017, 9:21:37 PM4/24/17
to rlpv...@yahoo.co.in, online_sa...@googlegroups.com, vinodse...@gmail.com, matters...@googlegroups.com, bern...@bernardokastrup.com
Dear Ram:
Big Bang is a theoretical singularity that never happened
physically. The observed physical universe can be explained without Big Bang or
time as explained in my attached paper.
In the Zero Point state, since time is dilated the frequency
is zero and wavelength is infinite; I derive these in my book - The Hidden
Factor. QM never predicts a motionless ocean. QM ZPE is 120 orders of magnitude
higher than cosmic ocean of vacuum. QM predicted vacuum energy, if true, would
rip apart the universe in no time counter to the observed universe. QM ocean is
full of agitated wave functions of non-zero frequencies and amplitudes.
My model supports the position - "If there is a no
fluctuation, then both aspects of the unmanifested state of Brahman are like a
motionless ocean."
Best Regards
Avtar Singh, Sc.D.
Alumni, MIT
Author of "The
Hidden Factor - An Approach for Resolving Paradoxes of Science, Cosmology, and
Universal Reality"
-----Original Message-----
From: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in>
To: Asingh2384 <asing...@aol.com>
Cc: Online Sadhu Sanga <online_sa...@googlegroups.com>; VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>; Matters Of Mind <matters...@googlegroups.com>; Bernardo Kastrup <bern...@bernardokastrup.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 24, 2017 12:16 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
From: Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in>
To: Asingh2384 <asing...@aol.com>
Cc: Online Sadhu Sanga <online_sa...@googlegroups.com>; VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>; Matters Of Mind <matters...@googlegroups.com>; Bernardo Kastrup <bern...@bernardokastrup.com>
Sent: Mon, Apr 24, 2017 12:16 pm
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear Avtar,
Thanks.
You have raised an interesting point. Kindly email me your article; I do not understand “a zero-amplitude and infinite wavelength energy state”; I need to understand your framework before I comment. My understanding is that ZPF without fluctuations is a motionless ubiquitous background field with constant ZPE = (½ ħw).
Meanwhile, do you agree that QFs are responsible for Big Bang (BB)? If you do, then perhaps, QM ZPE might be related to pre-BB state, where an extremely high energy might be needed for such a BB explosion. The “observed dark or vacuum energy (cosmological constant) causing the observed accelerated expansion of the universe” might be after BB.
In addition, BrihadAryanka Upanishad mentions fluctuations/excitations in universal potential consciousness (UPC) for the creation of the universe, which might be the mental aspect and QFs might represent the equivalent inseparable physical aspect of the unmanifested (pre-BB) state of the primal entity (Brahman). The excitations in UPC are our manifested co-evolved experiences, in analogy to ripples in a still ocean (Kastrup, 2016). If there is a no fluctuation, then both aspects of the unmanifested state of Brahman are like a motionless ocean.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 24, 2017, 9:21:37 PM4/24/17
to vinodse...@gmail.com, matters...@googlegroups.com, Online Sadhu Sanga, Asingh2384
Respected Vinod ji,
Thanks.
Vimal
Since entities can have more than one state; so it is better to propose that a state is dual-aspect. QFs are fluctuations in ZPF, such as the emergence of Planck energy in Planck time; you may like to read Wikipedia for QFs and quantum vacuum. There are many proposals what caused the creation of the universe (search in google). One of them is that QFs seem responsible for the Big Bang as discussed before. Another one is: as per Wikipedia (as of 23 April 2017), “If the known laws of physics are extrapolated to the highest density regime, the result is a singularity which is typically associated with the Big Bang.”
Sehgal (24 April 2017)
Yes, quantum science speaks of many states of an entity say a particle -- an electron or photon. But this pertains to physical features of the particle. For example, an electron may occupy many positions (a physical attribute). Even for this feature, there is no certainty if this feature of matter particles is an apparent one or real, as we had also been discussing on the public forum. Further, some quantum theoreticians proposing creation from Nothing or ZPF also propose that within Planck time (deltaT), some small Planck energy (delta E) is borrowed from quantum vacuum or nothing till deltaT*delta E is less than h. But this argument is not conforming to principles of quantum science. Quantum Science speaks of the complementary relation of delta T and delta E and relates them thru the above equation by incorporating h till complementary quantities are available. There is no principle even. In a quantum science which proposes appearance of something from nothing. Even from the available sources of quantities, there is no confirmation if the uncertainty is perceived one arising out from the observation or real one at the ground state of matter.
In view of above, if you propose that dual aspect QFs can take birth from a physical quantum vacuum due to an entity having many states, this will neither be as per any principle of quantum science nor it will be logical since this will amount to the creation of something from nothing. When quantum vacuum is purely physical without any trace of mental aspect, how QFs can have any mental aspects as the dual aspect? On the contrary, I would say that if you continue with your present hypothesis that dual aspect QFs emerge out from quantum vacuum having ONLY PHYSICAL ASPECTS, eDAM shall reduce to Materialism simply due to reasons that vacuum is PURELY PHYSICAL having no mental aspects but fluctuations thereupon, as taking birth from the same are having mental aspects. One thing more. If you treat dual aspect quantum fluctuations as dual aspect Brahman then PHYSICAL QUANTUM VACUUM WILL become more fundamental than dual aspect Brahman.
There is one more complex issue. As the name implies, the word quantum means discrete one. Therefore quantum vacuum should be composed out of some discrete entities. In other words, the quantum vacuum should be a very large aggregate of some discrete entities. An aggregate of discrete entities can't be a holistic whole like holistic ZPF, as you pointed in the last email and I also agreed.( since present. Issue did not cross my mind).
There is one more complex issue. As the name implies, the word quantum means discrete one. Therefore quantum vacuum should be composed out of some discrete entities. In other words, the quantum vacuum should be a very large aggregate of some discrete entities. An aggregate of discrete entities can't be a holistic whole like holistic ZPF, as you pointed in the last email and I also agreed.( since present. Issue did not cross my mind).
Vimal
You have misconstrued the eDAM again. The ZPF/quantum vacuum is not dual-aspect; it is the physical aspect of the dual-aspect unmanifested state of the primal entity (Brahman). The UPC (universal potential consciousness) is the inseparable mental aspect of this unmanifested state of Brahman. Nothing here means particle + antiparticle = zero; ZPE = ½ ħw; thermal energy = 0; the temperature is absolute zero; this zero is what is meant by misleading term ‘nothing’. The total energy of the universe is always conserved. ZPF is quantized, which means particles are modes of excitations as in QED.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/15ba0e7c517-2aa7-18edf1%40webprd-m05.mail.aol.com.
Vinod Sehgal
Apr 24, 2017, 9:22:06 PM4/24/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Siegfried, Peter and Serge,
Without commenting upon the criteria of primitives and range of applicability for a theory to be a theory, let me state that there can't be any theory of consciousness. Theories are devised for the phenomena which are emergent one. Consciousness is the most fundamental with all other phenomena including that of cognition emergent one as subservient to consciousness
Hoeever, what Serge states the theory of consciousness as one with explanatory and predictive powers for the phenomenon of transformation of physical signals of senses into subjective experiences is actually not a theory of consciousness. Any such theory shall be a theory of cognition with due difference between consciousness and cognition. Further, even though cognition is an emergent phenomenon but no theory in the strict physical sense of theory can be developed even for the cognition like that for Newton's or Einstein's gravity simply due to fact that none of such theories can have the predictive powers for the subjective experiences. Attributes of subjective experience can't be even enlisted let alone parameterized, quantified, measured and controlled. Entire realm of subjective experience is beset with free will which is inconsistent with the mechanism of predictability.
Siegfried is right when he states that Serge's definition of theory is beset with an uninvestigsted primitive that signals from senses are physical. What is physical and what is non-physical? --- this need to be defined précisely and elaborated upon.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
Without commenting upon the criteria of primitives and range of applicability for a theory to be a theory, let me state that there can't be any theory of consciousness. Theories are devised for the phenomena which are emergent one. Consciousness is the most fundamental with all other phenomena including that of cognition emergent one as subservient to consciousness
Hoeever, what Serge states the theory of consciousness as one with explanatory and predictive powers for the phenomenon of transformation of physical signals of senses into subjective experiences is actually not a theory of consciousness. Any such theory shall be a theory of cognition with due difference between consciousness and cognition. Further, even though cognition is an emergent phenomenon but no theory in the strict physical sense of theory can be developed even for the cognition like that for Newton's or Einstein's gravity simply due to fact that none of such theories can have the predictive powers for the subjective experiences. Attributes of subjective experience can't be even enlisted let alone parameterized, quantified, measured and controlled. Entire realm of subjective experience is beset with free will which is inconsistent with the mechanism of predictability.
Siegfried is right when he states that Serge's definition of theory is beset with an uninvestigsted primitive that signals from senses are physical. What is physical and what is non-physical? --- this need to be defined précisely and elaborated upon.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
From: Siegfried Bleher
Sent: 21-04-2017 06:38
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear Peter and Serge,
There does seem to be a range of meaning to the notion of ‘theory’ when we look at examples of theories. So, although Newton’s theory of gravitation does not give an ‘explanation’ for how gravity is able to affect objects at a distance, it is still an adequate and rather successful explanation and predictive model for a large set of observations over a wide range of scales. In the effort to widen the range of applicability and predictive power of a theory of gravitation (i.e. to understand why the environment of an accelerating elevator looks just like the environment in a stationary elevator in the presence of a gravitational field), Einstein came upon the idea of curvature of spacetime as an ‘explanation’ for how gravity can influence objects at a distance: a massive object at location A results in the spacetime near it to be curved in such a way as to influence another object at location B. This theory greatly expands the range of applicability and predictive power to include behavior of masses that are highly concentrated (neutron stars and black holes), and large energy events that generate gravitational waves (predicted by Einstein and confirmed by the LIGO experiment). But even this theory does not account for all phenomena, as evidenced by its extension by Hawking to include some quantum effects near black holes. My intention in responding here is to highlight three things about theories in general (of the many characteristics that could be highlighted), and how these things apply, in particular, to a purported theory of consciousness.
The first is the presence and assumption of primitives, or concepts that are considered ‘givens’. For example, in the case of a theory of gravitation, a ‘given’ is that it acts at a distance. Who can argue with that, right? Except that within this assumption is embedded the particular ways our human senses perceive and our minds interpret distinction or separation between what we see as different objects, and the distances between them. So, although Newton could not account for that particular aspect of gravity, his theory still stands as a valid and effective theory. And this leads to the second aspect of theories, which is their range of applicability, to some degree determined by the primitives of the theory. So, both Newton’s and Einstein’s theories of gravitation are limited in their applicability to scales (in phase space) much larger than the quantum of action. The primitive in this case is the assumption of the unrestricted divisibility of matter. Questioning the validity or essential nature of the primitives creates the opportunity to expand the range of applicability of the theory, as does Einstein’s in relation to Newton’s. So, these two aspects can be summarized as: 1) what question(s) does the theory try to answer? and 2) what are the givens it must answer these questions in terms of? The third aspect is that a theory that is expanded in its range by changing the primitives does not necessarily invalidate the former theory: Newton’s theory is still adequate for many things, and far easier to use than Einstein’s.
I basically agree with you, Peter, that Serge is pointing to a demanding concept of theory. But I would also say that behaviorist theories of consciousness have a (limited) range of validity. So, as long as the primitives are clear, and the range of applicability is clear, then perhaps there can be a little more agreement on what is valid theory? For example, consider the challenge to Deepak from Serge:
“I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.”
Within this challenge there appears to me to be embedded an already virtually complete theory for how experience happens: it happens when “physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience”. First there is a signal, which has physical roots or are physical in nature, and then somehow these are transformed—altered in their essential nature as physical things—into experience (assumed, I guess, to be non-physical in nature). Hence the difficulty in answering the challenge—how can we give an explanatory framework for something that is already assumed without question to be a certain way? I believe what Deepak is saying is that he disagrees with the most commonly assumed primitives, the ‘given’s’.
We have a ‘common’ narrative born of historical record that life evolves from physical things that begin with simple interactions, and such interactions grow in complexity until ‘poof’ - life emerges. If we accept this narrative as a given, along with the more subtle embedded assumptions, then we appear to be constrained to pose the question as SP did above.
I would also like to point out there are many theories of consciousness already, but they can be viewed from the perspective described above—clearly demarcate the primitives and their range of applicability. I can mention two I am familiar with (arguments against them are a separate issue): Giulio Tononi’s Integrated Information Theory (which doesn’t so much explain consciousness in physical terms as it gives constraints on a physical substrate sufficient to account for the phenomenology of consciousness), and Penrose and Hameroff’s Orchestrated Objective Reduction hypothesis.
Regards,
Siegfried
From: online_sa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:online_sa...@googlegroups.com]
On Behalf Of Peter Nyikos
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 11:48 AM
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
On 04/20/2017 06:43 AM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:
-
[Deepak Chopra] on April 20, 2017 wrote:
>What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness?
[S.P.] Let us call a spade a spade. By a "theory of consciousness" I suggest to mean an explanatory framework which is able to explain how the physical (sensory) signals become transformed into experience.
This is a very demanding concept of theory that you are dealing with here, Serge. Most theories outside mathematics only
try to explain things while leaving basic features unexplained. Newton's theory of gravity only explains the effects of gravity mathematically. It does not even address the question of how gravity is able to affect objects at a distance, through seemingly
empty space. Newton himself admitted that he had no explanation for that.
Einstein had a sort of explanation: objects curve space around them in such a way that objects follow a path that can be calculated. But he could not explain just how masses can do such a thing as curving space.
If a theory is not able to explain this, then it is not a theory of consciousness.
Materialists have a theory of "consciousness" in which they give a concept of "experience" in purely behavioristic terms. For instance, they might fall back on a "third person" interpretation of consciousness in terms of responses to
stimuli. According to this, someone is "conscious" of something in the environment if his responses to it are the sort that we have come to associate with being conscious of it.
Sometimes materialists will even act as though the only use of the word is to indicate whether someone is "conscious" or "unconscious" in an everyday sense of the word.
So, may I as Deepak to name, at least, one theory of consciousness known for him? Who is its author? If he will not name, at least, one theory, then his question should be treated as senseless.
I second the motion. I hope Deepak will name some theories of consciousness that go beyond the behavioristic theory, about which many books have been written.
Peter Nyikos
Thanks in advance,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 7:23 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
What came first consciousness or science ?
What came first consciousness or theories about consciousness ?
Anirudh Satsangi
Apr 25, 2017, 6:39:22 AM4/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Deepak Chopra
No sir. Nothing can be conceived outside of consciousness. All that exists is consciousness.
Regards
Anirudh Kumar Satsangi
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1F7EB9C1-A24C-4F76-B5C9-BF7EC6D2B8B1%40ulb.ac.be.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/BB9F70CB-B510-4AAA-B03F-FE9413760755%40chopra.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 25, 2017, 1:26:12 PM4/25/17
to VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Vinod ji,
QFs emerge in the quantum vacuum. Therefore, both are parts of physical aspect. UPC is the inseparable mental aspect, which also has related fluctuations. You need to read how harmonic oscillator works for fluctuations. The total energy of the universe is conserved. The term ‘nothing’ is misleading as discussed before. A field is holistic; its modes are equivalent to particles. Read QED.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 273359453.5492961. 1492685022813%40mail.yahoo.com .
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 58F8D832.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 28B54BFD-5BAD-493F-A8A6- 986F169A9047%40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/ optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ 1F7EB9C1-A24C-4F76-B5C9- BF7EC6D2B8B1%40ulb.ac.be.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ BB9F70CB-B510-4AAA-B03F- FE9413760755%40chopra.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAN93pGR%2Bhwc0D_NggkQALhGtRnKZZSZpTvJhhO5P9pbiRwBi2w%40mail.gmail.com.
Laj Utreja
Apr 25, 2017, 1:26:17 PM4/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com, Deepak Chopra
My views on Consciousness based mostly on Upanishads follow:
1. Consciousness prevails (It is termed Brahman).
2. It exists on its own;
3. It is an entity that is unborn, ever present and omnipresent, without end, changeless and indestructible.
4. It is immaterial, thus without qualifications (beyond comparison) and without attributes (shapeless, formless), that is why it is beyond the capacity of the senses of perception.
5. It is the absolute frame of reference from which everything that changes can be measured (experienced in living beings), hence the Absolute Truth, the Only Truth (Ekam Satya) that never changes or dies.
6. The principles (or the seeds) of: matter (tamas; static, ignorance, inertia), energy (rajas; motion, activity, change) and thought (sattva; balance, knowledge, light) are ever present in Consciousness, the potencies of Consciousness.
7. Since it is the only entity that prevails, it exercises its potencies to expresses itself to know itself. Human beings are considered highest in creation, because in human life alone in the sequence of evolution, one questions, ponders and ultimately attains enlightenment about the source, or experiences the source through disciplines such as Samadhi.
8. All phenomenal existence of matter (and its continuous evolution), energy (including life energy, prana) and life (and its continuous evolution) with action, motion and change are perceived, only in Consciousness. Correspondingly, from Consciousness arise all: the perceiver (the Subjective Principle in the perceiver, the so-called soul, atman, a unit of Consciousness), the object of perception (the material existence), and perception (the conditioned soul with the individual state of mind, individual awareness)
9. Correspondingly, all intentions (will to know and will to do), all knowledge (to perform a willed action), and all activities (whether pre-programmed or with intention and knowledge) take place in Consciousness.
10. All living beings have a mind (the subtle body), the interface between the physical body and the individual consciousness. It is the mind which filters perception based on its quality and conditioning. If there were no mind, there would be matter and Consciousness.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/BB9F70CB-B510-4AAA-B03F-FE9413760755%40chopra.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAN93pGR%2Bhwc0D_NggkQALhGtRnKZZSZpTvJhhO5P9pbiRwBi2w%40mail.gmail.com.
Laj Utreja
Director, Institute of Global Harmony, Ph.D.
Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan, India
NYIKOS, PETER
Apr 25, 2017, 7:19:16 PM4/25/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Ram, Bruno--
Somehow this personal note of Ram's got onto the list -- I see nothing from Vinod ji below. But, inasmuch as I missed Bruno Marchal's post, I'll take this opportunity to reply to it after a brief question.
Ram -- what do you say to inflation theories which violate the law of conservation by attributing strange properties to the "false vacuum," not the quantum vacuum?
Bruno -- you are quite right to distinguish between the thing itself and any theory of the thing. The most vocal materialistic supporters of evolution unguided by any consciousness are highly prone to confusing "evolution" with "evolutionary theory" and acting as though evidence for the former is really evidence for the latter. This acting is foolish even on a purely scientific level: while there is a well developed theory of microevolution (evolution within populations), the development of a theory of macroevolution is still in its embryonic stage.
On the other hand, I am a bit at a loss as to how to interpret the term "number consiousness" despite the fact that I have been a professor of mathematics here for over half my life!
Peter Nyikos
Department of Mathematics
University of South Carolina
Somehow this personal note of Ram's got onto the list -- I see nothing from Vinod ji below. But, inasmuch as I missed Bruno Marchal's post, I'll take this opportunity to reply to it after a brief question.
Ram -- what do you say to inflation theories which violate the law of conservation by attributing strange properties to the "false vacuum," not the quantum vacuum?
Bruno -- you are quite right to distinguish between the thing itself and any theory of the thing. The most vocal materialistic supporters of evolution unguided by any consciousness are highly prone to confusing "evolution" with "evolutionary theory" and acting as though evidence for the former is really evidence for the latter. This acting is foolish even on a purely scientific level: while there is a well developed theory of microevolution (evolution within populations), the development of a theory of macroevolution is still in its embryonic stage.
On the other hand, I am a bit at a loss as to how to interpret the term "number consiousness" despite the fact that I have been a professor of mathematics here for over half my life!
Peter Nyikos
Department of Mathematics
University of South Carolina
From: 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. [Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 9:34 AM
To: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Cc: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 9:34 AM
To: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Cc: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/475218746.585756.1493127278463%40mail.yahoo.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 25, 2017, 7:19:16 PM4/25/17
to lutr...@gmail.com, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Laj,
Thanks.
There are two approaches: top-down and bottom-up.
I agree with you when I look at from top-down (God theory) approach.
However, science is based on bottom-up approach (from potentiality to realization thru Big Bang and evolution theory). Therefore, science and spirituality will never meet.
If you are interested bringing science and spirituality closer, then you might consider middle way the extended dual-aspect monism (Dvi-Pakṣa
Advaita) framework; see (Vimal, 2012c) and (Vimal, 2016b).
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/2733594 53.5492961.1492685022813% 40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/58F8D83 2.905%40mailbox.sc.edu.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/28B54BF D-5BAD-493F-A8A6-986F169A9047% 40chopra.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/op tout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1F7EB9C 1-A24C-4F76-B5C9-BF7EC6D2B8B1% 40ulb.ac.be.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org /donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.al s.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1942 0889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org /harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org /Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe @googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroup s.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/grou p/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ms gid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/BB9F70C B-B510-4AAA-B03F-FE9413760755% 40chopra.com.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/ scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist. org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j. als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/ group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/ msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/ CAN93pGR%2Bhwc0D_ NggkQALhGtRnKZZSZpTvJhhO5P9pbi RwBi2w%40mail.gmail.com.
Laj Utreja
Director, Institute of Global Harmony, Ph.D.
Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan, India
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CA%2BASyYxPTWZB618U8XrFcHZ-kvkNxjbkD7yf4_X-sniOWmBCkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
Apr 26, 2017, 6:59:20 AM4/26/17
to nyi...@math.sc.edu, Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear Peter,
Thanks.
In the extended dual-aspect monism (eDAM) framework, my
point is that stable quantum or unstable false vacuum is a part of physical
aspect and universal potential consciousness is a part of inseparable mental
aspect of unmanifested state of the primal entity (Brahman). Then the
manifestation starts after Big Bang.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/956F056B71785C498214DC8208A55634780983F6%40CAE145EMBP04.ds.sc.edu.
VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Apr 26, 2017, 6:59:20 AM4/26/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Dr. Lal,
At point 10, you have mentioned that all the living beings have a subtle body which is an interface between consciousness and our physical body. Not only at the micro/human level, but such layers exist at the macro/cosmological level also in between physical world and cosmic consciousness also. Rishis/Sages/Yogis of Vedic /Upnishadic period as well as of the current era had found that in between our physical body and localized consciousness ( soul), there exist elements of ontological realities which in Sankhya's terminology have been described ashi, 1 Manas,1 Buddhi, 10 senses, 1 Chitta and 1 Ahamkara.10 senses should not be misconstrued as the external biological organs. These biological organs are the external sockets to collect and dissipate signals of knowledge and actions. These elements constitute two subtle bodies viz Astral ( Suukshmaa Sharira or Linga Deha) and Causal body ( Kaarana Sharira).These two bodies along with conscious soul enter Zygote at the time of conception and leave the physical body at the time of death. Parallel to the micro/human level, at the macro
Thanks for providing a summary of Upanishad's essence in short.
/cosmological level also lies all these elements of Manas, Senses etc in between cosmic consciousness and physical world of baryonic matter and 4 fundamental forces -- weak, strong, e.m and gravity. At the cosmological level, these elements constitute two broad layers of nature viz Astral and Causal world as parallel to Astral and Causal bodies at the micro/human level.
Contemporary Physics. cosmology and biology have a very extensive and intensive knowledge of the Physical world/body composed out of the baryonic matter of atoms/molecules and 4 forces but it has no awareness of very large realms of nature viz Astral and causal worlds and bodies. Hence all sort of issues regarding the mind-body problem, Self, consciousness etc. In the absence of the knowledge of Astral, causal bodies and fundamental consciousness, contemporary neuroscience, quantum physics have come out with a plethora of theoretical models for consciousness and mind and there have been even big annual conferences of Physicists/ quantum scientists/neuroscientists on consciousness, But all the theoretical models of science are far from reality since they are seeking 'something: where it does not take birth,
By following a strict spiritual discipline for a long period and methodology of Sammadhi and by the grace of a fully realized Guru, reality of the Astral and causal bodies/worlds and of the cosmic consciousness can be realized in a quite vivid manner.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAN93pGR%2Bhwc0D_NggkQALhGtRnKZZSZpTvJhhO5P9pbiRwBi2w%40mail.gmail.com.
--Laj UtrejaDirector, Institute of Global Harmony, Ph.D.
Gandhi Vidya Mandir, Sardarshahr, Rajasthan, India
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CA%2BASyYxPTWZB618U8XrFcHZ-kvkNxjbkD7yf4_X-sniOWmBCkQ%40mail.gmail.com.
the
Bruno Marchal
Apr 26, 2017, 12:19:16 PM4/26/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Peter,
On 25 Apr 2017, at 23:00, NYIKOS, PETER wrote:
Ram, Bruno--
Somehow this personal note of Ram's got onto the list -- I see nothing from Vinod ji below. But, inasmuch as I missed Bruno Marchal's post, I'll take this opportunity to reply to it after a brief question.
Ram -- what do you say to inflation theories which violate the law of conservation by attributing strange properties to the "false vacuum," not the quantum vacuum?
Bruno -- you are quite right to distinguish between the thing itself and any theory of the thing. The most vocal materialistic supporters of evolution unguided by any consciousness are highly prone to confusing "evolution" with "evolutionary theory" and acting as though evidence for the former is really evidence for the latter. This acting is foolish even on a purely scientific level: while there is a well developed theory of microevolution (evolution within populations), the development of a theory of macroevolution is still in its embryonic stage.
OK.
On the other hand, I am a bit at a loss as to how to interpret the term "number consiousness" despite the fact that I have been a professor of mathematics here for over half my life!
Mathematics is very vast, and surprises are guarantied :)
I work on the antic Mind-Body problem, and I assume a digital version of Descartes' Mechanism according to which our bodies work like digital machines at some level of their description.
A quasi operational definition is that a digital mechanist accept the proposition of its doctor to have an artificial brain or body emulable by a computer at some level of description (perhaps at the level string theory + quantum dynamics (known to be Turing emulable)).
Computers have been discovered by mathematicians working in the foundations of mathematics, in the 1930, and although Gödel missed it, he was responsible for defining an important embryo of it, and then Church and Turing, and Kleene made the notion precise. It is the discovery of the partial computable functions, and the possibility of their computable enumeration, and of the universal programs, or machines, or numbers.
Choose your favorite "modern" universal programming language (LISP, prolog, c++, or even just one degree four universal diophantine polynomial). All what follows do not depend on which one is chosen.
You can enumerate the programs computing functions from N to N (where N is the set of natural numbers, the non negative integers):
P_0, P_1, P_2, ..., computing the partial computable functions from N to N: f_1, f_2, f_3, ...
Let us fix a computable bijection from N x N to N, denoted by <x, y>.
I say that a number u is universal if f_u(<x, y>) = f_x(y). u is the computer, x is the program and y is the data.
By Gödel's arithmetization of meta-arithmetic, the proposition"it exists u such that f_u(<x, y>) = f_x(y) can be shown to be a theorem of arithmetic. The existence of the computations is also a consequence of the laws of addition and multiplication (and elementary logic).
So my more precise statement will be that the number e is conscious relatively to the universal number u when f_u(e, i) corresponds to a computation emulating a brain at or below the substitution level needed to preserve my consciousness (and all first person attribute I judge relevant) which exists (by the assumption of digital mechanism.
Careful, many people understands that arithmetic manipulates (to be short) description of computations, but fail to see that the semantic of the arithmetical theories emulates the computation.
I hope this answer the question. The problem for the poor universal e is that there are infinitely many universal u which compete for the computational continuations, and eventually this shows how the appearances of the physical laws arise on some normal sheaf of histories (computation seen "from inside"). The incompleteness gives a tool to explain the appearance of quanta and qualia, and explains the common point and the differences., in a testable way for the quanta.
I used this to transform the mind-body problem into a problem of appearance of matter in the mind of the universal numbers, in arithmetic.
That vindicates somehow Chopra on Consciousness. It is at the origin of all what we see touch, dream about, etc.
But that vindicates Pythagorus's too, as consciousness becomes Itself "only" a special invariant of the recursive permutation in arithmetic, and matter becomes an internal limiting border of that consciousness.
The first person can be "meta-described' by the modal logic of Gödel-Löb-Solovay self-reference, and the intensional variants saved thanks to that incompleteness.
Kind regards,
Bruno
Peter Nyikos
Department of Mathematics
University of South Carolina
From: 'Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. [Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com]
Sent: Tuesday, April 25, 2017 9:34 AM
To: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Cc: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/475218746.585756.1493127278463%40mail.yahoo.com.
--
To view this discussion on the web visithttps://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/956F056B71785C498214DC8208A55634780983F6%40CAE145EMBP04.ds.sc.edu.
priyedarshi jetli
Apr 26, 2017, 12:49:52 PM4/26/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Obviously not as your one liner is the question and answer in itself. To me it is a nonsense statement.
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1F7EB9C1-A24C-4F76-B5C9-BF7EC6D2B8B1%40ulb.ac.be.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/BB9F70CB-B510-4AAA-B03F-FE9413760755%40chopra.com.
VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Apr 26, 2017, 9:47:09 PM4/26/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Bruno quoted :
"A quasi operational definition is that a digital mechanist accept the proposition of its doctor to have an artificial brain or body emulable by a computer at some level of description (perhaps at the level string theory + quantum dynamics (known to be Turing emulable))."
Vinod -- Computationalism, may be of any sophisticated degree, represent only a slice of human mind. A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored. It is not possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human mind in toto.
Second aspect is that human mind and consciousness are distinct entities Consciousness is the one due to which brain and mind get functioning ability to perform. And these functions are also experienced/perceived by consciousness. So whatever little part of the mind has been mapped in computers via brain is not consciousness but that part of the mind and brain which is "computable".
Mind and brain are also distinct entities. It is not necessary that all the territory of the mind is necessarily reflectable at the brain
Vinod Sehgal
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/BB9F70CB-B510-4AAA-B03F-FE9413760755%40chopra.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfAfG20jJpDpS8_pwipZXx4YPFK7DU_hKQTP8xT6hh0cvw%40mail.gmail.com.
priyedarshi jetli
Apr 27, 2017, 5:25:43 AM4/27/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Vinod,
As Jonathan has aptly pointed out in a reply to you, science does not claim to understand or rather explain everything. However, it continues to progress. In medical science, less than 50% is known. Yet it keeps striving to know more. First of all, you need to make a distinction between what is explainable now and what is in principle explainable. To substantiate your claim you need to demonstrated those regions of what you call 'mind' and 'consciousness' that are in principle not explainable. This will not be an easy task at all except for just saying it and repeating it, which is what you always do. Why are mind and brain distinct? Why just adopt the dualism or rather trialism of cosciousness, mind and brain? Why not say there is mind, legs, arms, ..., brain and so on? Why reduce everything to the three holy substances of mind, body and consciousness, especially when you do not like reductionism. Leave the world of nature as it is, the beauty of diversity, of birds chirping in the morning, the sound of the water reaching the shores of the beach, and so on! Let science explain whatever it can and whatever it cannot explain now is not beyond explanation.
Priyedarshi
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAGQG8_xNqB%3DC6LCv_9xQz1PQXf%3DHW%2BWSHeo_rCajkUcGv3v1FQ%40mail.gmail.com.
VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Apr 27, 2017, 9:34:45 AM4/27/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Priyedarshi,
Realms of mind and consciousness are not explainable since their ontology does not fall within the physicality as known to the Science of the day. Physical signals of em energy and other physical energies are unable to piece thru the Astral and causal realm of nature where mind resides, Realm of consciousness is even transcendental to the Astral realm of the mind. If you are conversant with the basic Upnishadic/Sankhya philosophy, you get a fair idea of such transcendence.
Transcendence of the Astral realm of mind and Consciousness are not speculative and theoretical ideas. In the state of Samadhi, the existence of mind and consciousness as distinct from the brain can be experienced in a quite vivid manner. In the area of spiritual research, subjective evidence as flowing from the experience in Sammadhi is akin to empirical evidence in objective scientific research. I am not repeating for the sake of repetition. Need is to seriously follow the description of such experiences in the state of Sammadhi.
You asked why mind and brain are distinct? Very simple since they belong to quite different realms of nature. Brain belong to Physical realm and mind comes from the Astral realm. Though both realms are physical but their physicality and laws governing thereupon are entirely different, The key problem has been that current knowledge of the Science is limited up to the Physical realm only which represent only a slice of the entire spectrum of nature. If one would like to explain everything say mind-body problem within the known physical realm, then obviously problems are bound to arise. In the state of Sammadhi, Astral realm of nature including the ontological reality of mind can be vividly observed and understood. Now, what is the Astral realm of nature? Either it is a particle in nature with scale in the Planckian regime or it is not the particle in nature but some quite different nature.
To assume that physicality is limited up to the ends as known to Science of the day and that everything should be explainable within the known physicality is a travesty of rationality. If scientists, particularly Physicists and neuroscientists could sincerely follow and understand the ontology of the transcendental Astral and Causal realm of nature, as given in the description of experiences of the state of Sammadhi and as given by spiritualists of past as well as present, there is the likelihood that their approach towards mind and consciousness may undergo a radical shift. Alternatively, if in future Physicists and neuroscientists are able to know the expanded range of the physicality and fall on the astral plane of nature, then also they may have new insight on mind and consciousness.
You asked why not legs, arms, mouths, brain ...... and mind.? I have explained above since mind and brain belong to quite different ontology despite both being physical. Here word physical need to be expanded. Any ontological entity which lacks innate consciousness and power of propulsion is physical. Any ontological entity which has consciousness and propulsion power as innate is non-physical or conscious one.
Regards
Vinod sehgal
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAGQG8_xNqB%3DC6LCv_9xQz1PQXf%3DHW%2BWSHeo_rCajkUcGv3v1FQ%40mail.gmail.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAG9qgfCvXKh778sN7vwgutqWWjvU5rfuEuau-sNTSucMB57TPw%40mail.gmail.com.
Bruno Marchal
Apr 27, 2017, 9:34:45 AM4/27/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 27 Apr 2017, at 03:32, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL wrote:
Bruno quoted :"A quasi operational definition is that a digital mechanist accept the proposition of its doctor to have an artificial brain or body emulable by a computer at some level of description (perhaps at the level string theory + quantum dynamics (known to be Turing emulable))."Vinod -- Computationalism, may be of any sophisticated degree, represent only a slice of human mind.
it does not represent anything. It is a principle which is either true or false. We can study its consequences and search for testing them.
A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored.
In fact, computationalism can be used to show that indeed, a large territory remains unexplored, and is larger than we usually think. Paradoxically, the internal psyche of the universal machine is bigger than the observable universe. It is not even nameable.
It is not possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human mind in toto.
That is indeed impossible, and *provably so*. In fact, IF we are machine, THEN we cannot which machine we are. Saying "yes" to a doctor needs an act of faith. And reality is made bigger.
I would say that computationalism is the most anti-reductionist position. It refutes, and show that all universal machines/numbers refute the reductionist conception of machine and numbers. It gives them a soul and explains that it is not a machine.
The real question is more like "do you agree that your daughter marry a man who has got a digital brain transplant". Somehow. For a christian, the question might be "should we baptize the computers", etc.
Non-computationalism needs to add magic to distinguish human from machine, and that might only mean that human have not yet understood or listen to them.
Nobody claims that computationalism is explaining everything. It is just an hypothesis, and eventually it changes the perspective, entails afterlife, for example, and makes Reality *far* bigger than what we can infer by observation, which appears to be a temporary "illusion", somehow.
Second aspect is that human mind and consciousness are distinct entities Consciousness is the one due to which brain and mind get functioning ability to perform.
OK.
And these functions are also experienced/perceived by consciousness. So whatever little part of the mind has been mapped in computers via brain is not consciousness but that part of the mind and brain which is "computable".
Indeed.
Mind and brain are also distinct entities. It is not necessary that all the territory of the mind is necessarily reflectable at the brain
I can't agree more. There is no brain. I like to say that the brain is all in the brain. It is an appearance only, provably so when we assume computationalism. Physics will be reduced to machine theology, and so we can test it by comparing the physics "in the head of the machine" with the physics that we extrapolate from observation.
Bruno Marchal
Vinod Sehgal
On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 9:56 PM, priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com> wrote:
Obviously not as your one liner is the question and answer in itself. To me it is a nonsense statement.
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 2:36 PM, Deepak Chopra <nonlo...@chopra.com> wrote:
Can you conceive a theory outside of consciousness ?
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/CAGQG8_xNqB%3DC6LCv_9xQz1PQXf%3DHW%2BWSHeo_rCajkUcGv3v1FQ%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Serge Patlavskiy
Apr 27, 2017, 9:34:56 AM4/27/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on April 27, 2017:
>A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored. It is not
>possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all
>the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist
>view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be
>represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none
>of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human
> mind in toto.
[S.P.] Here, I should agree with Vinod's general understanding of the problem (however I disagree with his usage of such terms as consciousness and mind).
In my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 14, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can work as in sub-conscious regime, normal everyday regime, so in ultra-conscious regime. Yes, while functioning in its normal everyday regime, our consciousness performs computations akin a computer machine -- we come to new ideas being based on formal logic and cause-effect relations. But, performing machine-like computations is not all (is far from being all) that there is to the activity of consciousness.
Computationalism-based solution to AI problem is unrealizable in principle because computationalism does not take into consideration the mentioned above sub-conscious and ultra-conscious regimes of the activity of consciousness."
Also, in my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 16, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can function in three regimes, and, if the problem of AI is solved, the complex system will be able to function in these three regimes too, which may lead to unpredictable repercussions."
(I will reply to other Vinod's questions expressed in his earlier posts later.)
Kindly,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 4:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Bruno Marchal
Apr 27, 2017, 1:21:13 PM4/27/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
On 27 Apr 2017, at 11:57, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. wrote:
-Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on April 27, 2017:>A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored. It is not>possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all>the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist>view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be>represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none>of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human> mind in toto.[S.P.] Here, I should agree with Vinod's general understanding of the problem (however I disagree with his usage of such terms as consciousness and mind).In my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 14, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can work as in sub-conscious regime, normal everyday regime, so in ultra-conscious regime. Yes, while functioning in its normal everyday regime, our consciousness performs computations akin a computer machine -- we come to new ideas being based on formal logic and cause-effect relations. But, performing machine-like computations is not all (is far from being all) that there is to the activity of consciousness.Computationalism-based solution to AI problem is unrealizable in principle because computationalism does not take into consideration the mentioned above sub-conscious and ultra-conscious regimes of the activity of consciousness."
I would say it implies it, and even that it makes possible to mathematically described its degrees of unsolvability.
I might think that the universal numbers are born in the "Samadhi state". Their soul "fall" when we implement them physically (relatively to us) and upload some (non universal) application on it. They become slaves.
The singularity point might be when machines will be as much stupid than us, may be. The relation between consciousness and intelligence are tricky.
I think it is a symptom of vanity to believe humans are the favorite of "the good lord", and indeed spiders does not seem to blasphem as much as the humans, if the spiders blasphem at all. Big minds tend to torture themselves.
Also, in my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 16, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can function in three regimes, and, if the problem of AI is solved, the complex system will be able to function in these three regimes too, which may lead to unpredictable repercussions."
No problem with this. keep in mind that computationalism is not proposed as an answer, but as a tool to measure the difficulty of the mind-body problem, and get some indirect light on the *Unknown".
Bruno Marchal
(I will reply to other Vinod's questions expressed in his earlier posts later.)Kindly,Serge Patlavskiy
From: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 4:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Bruno quoted :"A quasi operational definition is that a digital mechanist accept the proposition of its doctor to have an artificial brain or body emulable by a computer at some level of description (perhaps at the level string theory + quantum dynamics (known to be Turing emulable))."Vinod -- Computationalism, may be of any sophisticated degree, represent only a slice of human mind. A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored. It is not possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human mind in toto.Second aspect is that human mind and consciousness are distinct entities Consciousness is the one due to which brain and mind get functioning ability to perform. And these functions are also experienced/perceived by consciousness. So whatever little part of the mind has been mapped in computers via brain is not consciousness but that part of the mind and brain which is "computable".Mind and brain are also distinct entities. It is not necessary that all the territory of the mind is necessarily reflectable at the brainVinod Sehgal
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1955564420.12313808.1493287068870%40mail.yahoo.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Apr 28, 2017, 9:00:46 AM4/28/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
|
|
it does not represent anything. It is a principle which is either true or false. We can study its consequences and search for testing them. |
Computenalism per se may not represent anything but its applications lie in representing different ontology. For example, 2+2=4 is a principle of computationalism but this can represent 2 mangoes+2 mangoes = 4 mangoes OR 2 dogs+2 dogs = 4 dogs OR 2 atoms+2 atoms = 4 atoms etc etc The second issue about computationalism which I wanted to talk was that all the present computationalism is the product of human conscious mind At the dawn of the civilization when human beings might have invented the very basics of computationalism viz number system 1, 2, 3, 4, .., the same should have emerged out of their conscious minds. Further, human beings, in all its probability, might have invented number system to identify some distinct ontology of matter. , but it could not come into existence without two priories viz conscious minds and some distinct ontology of matter. diversity of ontology. But this representation of diverse ontology is limited by the fact that ontology to be represented should be parameterizable, quantifiable, measurable, It is from this perspective, I had mentioned that entire domain of mind and consciousness being non-parameterizable, non-measurable and non-quantifiable can not be represented by computationalism |
The real question is more like "do you agree that your daughter marry a man who has got a digital brain transplant". Somehow. For a christian, the question might be "should we baptize the computers", etc.
Non-computationalism needs to add magic to distinguish human from machine, and that might only mean that human have not yet understood or listen to them.
I think perspective is not from machine to non-computationalism leading to distinguishing of huma being beings from machine. Perspective is the birth of a machine from human beings. Machine still remains a machine since consciousness and all the domain can't be transposed
from humans to machine
Nobody claims that computationalism is explaining everything. It is just an hypothesis, and eventually it changes the perspective, entails afterlife, for example, and makes Reality *far* bigger than what we can infer by observation, which appears to be a temporary "illusion", somehow.
Of course, computationalism multiples manyfold some functions of mind but such functions
represent only taht domain of the mind which can be identified as distinct, parameterizable,
measurerable and quantifiable.
|
I can't agree more. There is no brain. I like to say that the brain is all in the brain. It is an appearance only, provably so when we assume computationalism. Physics will be reduced to machine theology, and so we can test it by comparing the physics "in the head of the machine" with the physics that we extrapolate from observation. |
Plesae see blow my reply to Serge on this issue (SP) wrote In my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 14, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can work as in sub-conscious regime, normal everyday regime, so in the ultra-conscious regime. Yes, while functioning in its normal everyday regime, our consciousness performs computations akin a computer machine -- we come to new ideas being based on formal logic and cause-effect relations. But, performing machine-like computations is not all (is far from being all) that there is the activity of consciousness. Vinod - I agree that consciousness work in broad 3 regimes viz subconscious one in dreams or sleep, normal every day in awakened state and ulta conscious or super conscious in the state of Samaadhi or higher spiritual experience states. Yes, I also agree that in the normal conscious state, computations akin to a computer are performed viz new ideas based upon logic and cause-effect relation. But I don't agree that such computations are done by consciousness. Such computations in the normal awakened state are done by the mind-brain system with mind and brain having their distinct identities but working in close conjunction. However, the mind-brain system acquires the capability for computation functions due to consciousness and such functions are also perceived by consciousess. An analogy will illustrate my point of view. Laptop on which I am working and sending the message has some outer hardware of monitor, keyboard etc. Our physical brain is equivalent to this external hardware. But the real processing is not being done on monitor or keyboard. Real processing of data is bein done in the internal circuits constituting RAM and hard disc which is not visible from outside. Our mind is equivalent to the internal hardware having RAM and hard disc. Internal hardware and external hardware work in close conjunction with each other and in the normal conscious state work as one composite unit though basically have distinct identities. B Both the external and internal hardware are dead and incapable of performing any function
|
unless energized by power from some mains or battery. Our consciousness is akin to the power which energizes both the external and internal hardware.
I know that you may find it difficult to agree to the above framework of consciousness, mind, and brain since current science particularly Physics and neuroscience is unaware of the ontology of mind and consciousness, therefore, they are in search of all sort of models of theoretical nature to explain mind and consciousness out of body and brain.
Your model though slightly different than the models of materialists since you view consciousness as the capability of the living organism to transform physical signals in products of subjective experiences yet it is grounded in the physical capability of organs of the body.
However, the framework of consciousness, mind, and brain as indicated by me and as illustrated thru an analogy can be subjectively viewed and verified in the state of Samadhi ( meditation). I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi as a subjective evidence akin to empirical evidence in objective research. The way in objective scientific research, objective evidence is the judge overriding all theories/models/ interpretations, similarly in the matter of consciousness, mind, I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi equivalent to all the objective evidence overriding all the theoretical model/hypothesis/theories of consciousness and mind.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL
Apr 28, 2017, 9:00:46 AM4/28/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
(SP) wrote In my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 14, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can work as in sub-conscious regime, normal everyday regime, so in the ultra-conscious regime. Yes, while functioning in its normal everyday regime, our consciousness performs computations akin a computer machine -- we come to new ideas being based on formal logic and cause-effect relations. But, performing machine-like computations is not all (is far from being all) that there is the activity of consciousness.
Vinod - I agree that consciousness work in broad 3 regimes viz subconscious one in dreams or sleep, normal every day in awakened state and ulta conscious or super conscious in the state of Samaadhi or higher spiritual experience states. Yes, I also agree that in the normal conscious state, computations akin to a computer are performed viz new ideas based upon logic and cause-effect relation. But I don't agree that such computations are done by consciousness. Such computations in the normal awakened state are done by the mind-brain system with mind and brain having their distinct identities but working in close conjunction. However, the mind-brain system acquires the capability for computation functions due to consciousness and such functions are also perceived by consciousess. An analogy will illustrate my point of view.
Laptop on which I am working and sending the message has some outer hardware of monitor, keyboard etc. Our physical brain is equivalent to this external hardware. But the real processing is not being done on monitor or keyboard. Real processing of data is bein done in the internal circuits constituting RAM and hard disc which is not visible from outside. Our mind is equivalent to the internal hardware having RAM and hard disc. Internal hardware and external hardware work in close conjunction with each other and in the normal conscious state work as one composite unit though basically have distinct identities. B
Both the external and internal hardware are dead and incapable of performing any function unless energized by power from some mains or battery. Our consciousness is akin to the power which energizes both the external and internal hardware.
I know that you may find it difficult to agree to the above framework of consciousness, mind, and brain since current science particularly Physics and neuroscience is unaware of the ontology of mind and consciousness, therefore, they are in search of all sort of models of theoretical nature to explain mind and consciousness out of body and brain.
Your model though slightly different than the models of materialists since you view consciousness as the capability of the living organism to transform physical signals in products of subjective experiences yet it is grounded in the physical capability of organs of the body.
However, the framework of consciousness, mind, and brain as indicated by me and as illustrated thru an analogy can be subjectively viewed and verified in the state of Samadhi ( meditation). I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi as a subjective evidence akin to empirical evidence in objective research. The way in objective scientific research, objective evidence is the judge overriding all theories/models/ interpretations, similarly in the matter of consciousness, mind, I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi equivalent to all the objective evidence overriding all the theoretical model/hypothesis/theories of consciousness and mind.
Regards
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 3:27 PM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com> wrote:
-Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on April 27, 2017:>A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored. It is not>possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all>the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist>view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be>represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none>of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human> mind in toto.[S.P.] Here, I should agree with Vinod's general understanding of the problem (however I disagree with his usage of such terms as consciousness and mind).In my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 14, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can work as in sub-conscious regime, normal everyday regime, so in ultra-conscious regime. Yes, while functioning in its normal everyday regime, our consciousness performs computations akin a computer machine -- we come to new ideas being based on formal logic and cause-effect relations. But, performing machine-like computations is not all (is far from being all) that there is to the activity of consciousness.Computationalism-based solution to AI problem is unrealizable in principle because computationalism does not take into consideration the mentioned above sub-conscious and ultra-conscious regimes of the activity of consciousness."Also, in my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 16, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can function in three regimes, and, if the problem of AI is solved, the complex system will be able to function in these three regimes too, which may lead to unpredictable repercussions."(I will reply to other Vinod's questions expressed in his earlier posts later.)Kindly,Serge Patlavskiy
Sent: Thursday, April 27, 2017 4:46 AM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Bruno quoted :"A quasi operational definition is that a digital mechanist accept the proposition of its doctor to have an artificial brain or body emulable by a computer at some level of description (perhaps at the level string theory + quantum dynamics (known to be Turing emulable))."Vinod -- Computationalism, may be of any sophisticated degree, represent only a slice of human mind. A large territory of our mind still remains unexplored. It is not possible to even enlist, parameterize, quantify and measure all the "elements" which constitute mind, if we take reductionist view of the mind. Only some of the aspects of mind can be represented by computationalism and computers. Therefore none of the comutationalism or computers or AI can represent human mind in toto.Second aspect is that human mind and consciousness are distinct entities Consciousness is the one due to which brain and mind get functioning ability to perform. And these functions are also experienced/perceived by consciousness. So whatever little part of the mind has been mapped in computers via brain is not consciousness but that part of the mind and brain which is "computable".Mind and brain are also distinct entities. It is not necessary that all the territory of the mind is necessarily reflectable at the brainVinod Sehgal
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1955564420.12313808.1493287068870%40mail.yahoo.com.
Serge Patlavskiy
May 1, 2017, 6:34:04 AM5/1/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on April 28, 2017 wrote:
> I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi as a subjective
>evidence akin to empirical evidence in objective research.
[S.P.] Very good! The key word here is "akin". When applying the first-person approach, every researcher constructs his own version of the theory of consciousness being based on subjective research data.
In case I study own consciousness, there is no way for me to prove to others that I have got such or other data, for example, that I have got some premonition. In other words, the problem of intersubjectivity becomes topical, and some scholars even concludes that because of this problem the Science of Consciousness is impossible (see my reply to Priyedarshi Jetli on April 21, 2017).
My solution here is that in case every researcher will construct his subjective version of the theory of consciousness by obeying the universal criteria of formal correctness, then the subjective versions constructed by different researchers will be compatible, and we will be able to come to a comprehensive version of the theory of consciousness. (This is Assertion 35 of my applied ADC theory; I mention this applied theory in my earlier post of today).
Note: for the criteria of formal correctness see my posts on 1-09-2016, 20-04-2017, 21-04-2017. See also appendix below
-----------------
Appendix (the criteria of formal correctness)
Whatever meta-theory, applied theory, a hypothesis, or a simple description my (or anybody's) consciousness constructs, they all
(1) should not contain tautologies;
(2) should not contain notion-metaphor transmutations (e.g., "power" – it is a concept in Physics, but being used in Psychology, say, as "power of imagination", it becomes a metaphor);
(3) should not contain hypostatization (which occurs when something abstract is treated or represented as a concrete reality);
(4) should not contain incorrect definitions (when the unknown is defined through another unknown);
(5) should not contain multiplication of hypotheses (which occurs when the new hypothesis is being based upon the previous one, instead of being the result of generalization and systematization of research data);
(6) should not breach Okham's principle (the most evident and simplest explanation has to be preferred);
(7) should possess inner consistency (or, be formally non-self-contradictory);
(8) should be rational (when the aim and criteria of approach correspond to each other).
-------------------
Best,
Serge Patlavskiy
To: "Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com" <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 4:00 PM
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
(SP) wrote In my reply to Bruno Marchal on April 14, 2017 I wrote: "I assume that consciousness can work as in sub-conscious regime, normal everyday regime, so in the ultra-conscious regime. Yes, while functioning in its normal everyday regime, our consciousness performs computations akin a computer machine -- we come to new ideas being based on formal logic and cause-effect relations. But, performing machine-like computations is not all (is far from being all) that there is the activity of consciousness.
Vinod - I agree that consciousness work in broad 3 regimes viz subconscious one in dreams or sleep, normal every day in awakened state and ulta conscious or super conscious in the state of Samaadhi or higher spiritual experience states. Yes, I also agree that in the normal conscious state, computations akin to a computer are performed viz new ideas based upon logic and cause-effect relation. But I don't agree that such computations are done by consciousness. Such computations in the normal awakened state are done by the mind-brain system with mind and brain having their distinct identities but working in close conjunction. However, the mind-brain system acquires the capability for computation functions due to consciousness and such functions are also perceived by consciousess. An analogy will illustrate my point of view.
Laptop on which I am working and sending the message has some outer hardware of monitor, keyboard etc. Our physical brain is equivalent to this external hardware. But the real processing is not being done on monitor or keyboard. Real processing of data is bein done in the internal circuits constituting RAM and hard disc which is not visible from outside. Our mind is equivalent to the internal hardware having RAM and hard disc. Internal hardware and external hardware work in close conjunction with each other and in the normal conscious state work as one composite unit though basically have distinct identities. B
Both the external and internal hardware are dead and incapable of performing any function unless energized by power from some mains or battery. Our consciousness is akin to the power which energizes both the external and internal hardware.
I know that you may find it difficult to agree to the above framework of consciousness, mind, and brain since current science particularly Physics and neuroscience is unaware of the ontology of mind and consciousness, therefore, they are in search of all sort of models of theoretical nature to explain mind and consciousness out of body and brain.
Your model though slightly different than the models of materialists since you view consciousness as the capability of the living organism to transform physical signals in products of subjective experiences yet it is grounded in the physical capability of organs of the body.
However, the framework of consciousness, mind, and brain as indicated by me and as illustrated thru an analogy can be subjectively viewed and verified in the state of Samadhi ( meditation). I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi as a subjective evidence akin to empirical evidence in objective research. The way in objective scientific research, objective evidence is the judge overriding all theories/models/ interpretations, similarly in the matter of consciousness, mind, I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi equivalent to all the objective evidence overriding all the theoretical model/hypothesis/theories of consciousness and mind.
Regards
priyedarshi jetli
May 1, 2017, 12:33:39 PM5/1/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Serge,
You seem to have a very sophisticated theory. I will find some time and go through it through the past emails and your writings.
In your criteria for formal correctness are indefinables admissible or does everything have to be defined? Also, in (vi) I would be a bit careful. Ockham's razor is more often misused than properly applied. The simplest explanations among alternative explanations is to be preferred only when it explains as much or as well as the other explanations to which it is preferred. Let me give a crude example. I could say that the cause of an earthquake is that the earth rests on the horn of a bull and when he gets tired he shifts it to the other horn (my grandmother told me this). Obviously a very simple explanation. Of course in actual scientific theories it is much more complex. I do not know much about any branch of science but I do know a little about mathematics. Poincare gave a proof for a theorem which was already proven and in a simpler manner than he did it. However, his proof was superior because its technique could be applied to other branches of mathematics. So, I think we have to be cautious with Ockham's razor. Scientific hypotheses and theories often have structural features that have an intrinsic importance even if they fail on Ockham's razor requirements.
Priyedarshi
On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 2:44 PM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
-
Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on April 28, 2017 wrote:> I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi as a subjective>evidence akin to empirical evidence in objective research.[S.P.] Very good! The key word here is "akin". When applying the first-person approach, every researcher constructs his own version of the theory of consciousness being based on subjective research data.In case I study own consciousness, there is no way for me to prove to others that I have got such or other data, for example, that I have got some premonition. In other words, the problem of intersubjectivity becomes topical, and some scholars even concludes that because of this problem the Science of Consciousness is impossible (see my reply to Priyedarshi Jetli on April 21, 2017).My solution here is that in case every researcher will construct his subjective version of the theory of consciousness by obeying the universal criteria of formal correctness, then the subjective versions constructed by different researchers will be compatible, and we will be able to come to a comprehensive version of the theory of consciousness. (This is Assertion 35 of my applied ADC theory; I mention this applied theory in my earlier post of today).Note: for the criteria of formal correctness see my posts on 1-09-2016, 20-04-2017, 21-04-2017. See also appendix below-----------------Appendix (the criteria of formal correctness)Whatever meta-theory, applied theory, a hypothesis, or a simple description my (or anybody's) consciousness constructs, they all(1) should not contain tautologies;(2) should not contain notion-metaphor transmutations (e.g., "power" – it is a concept in Physics, but being used in Psychology, say, as "power of imagination", it becomes a metaphor);(3) should not contain hypostatization (which occurs when something abstract is treated or represented as a concrete reality);(4) should not contain incorrect definitions (when the unknown is defined through another unknown);(5) should not contain multiplication of hypotheses (which occurs when the new hypothesis is being based upon the previous one, instead of being the result of generalization and systematization of research data);(6) should not breach Okham's principle (the most evident and simplest explanation has to be preferred);(7) should possess inner consistency (or, be formally non-self-contradictory);(8) should be rational (when the aim and criteria of approach correspond to each other).-------------------Best,Serge Patlavskiy
From: VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com>
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/Online_Sadhu_Sanga.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1567502805.1390670.1493630054841%40mail.yahoo.com.
Serge Patlavskiy
May 2, 2017, 10:57:26 AM5/2/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
Priyedarshi Jetli <pje...@gmail.com> on May 1, 2017 wrote:
>So, I think we have to be cautious with Ockham's razor.
[S.P.] Yes, the suggested criteria of formal correctness may seem to be paranoid. But, consider the following argument. We use an axe to cut wood, but, when performing operative treatment we have to use a sterile scalpel.
Similarly, when a journalist describes some international event, the mentioned criteria may be ignored by him at all. But, when creating an explanatory framework explaining the mechanisms of consciousness, the mentioned criteria should be strictly obeyed. At any rate, my personal explanatory framework obeys these criteria, including the Ockham's razor.
Kindly,
Serge Patlavskiy
From: priyedarshi jetli <pje...@gmail.com>
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Monday, May 1, 2017 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
priyedarshi jetli
May 2, 2017, 3:13:02 PM5/2/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Ok, fine, as long as Ockham's razor is not misapplied.
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 7:32 PM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com> wrote:
-
Priyedarshi Jetli <pje...@gmail.com> on May 1, 2017 wrote:>So, I think we have to be cautious with Ockham's razor.[S.P.] Yes, the suggested criteria of formal correctness may seem to be paranoid. But, consider the following argument. We use an axe to cut wood, but, when performing operative treatment we have to use a sterile scalpel.Similarly, when a journalist describes some international event, the mentioned criteria may be ignored by him at all. But, when creating an explanatory framework explaining the mechanisms of consciousness, the mentioned criteria should be strictly obeyed. At any rate, my personal explanatory framework obeys these criteria, including the Ockham's razor.Kindly,Serge Patlavskiy
Sent: Monday, May 1, 2017 7:33 PM
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Serge,You seem to have a very sophisticated theory. I will find some time and go through it through the past emails and your writings.In your criteria for formal correctness are indefinables admissible or does everything have to be defined? Also, in (vi) I would be a bit careful. Ockham's razor is more often misused than properly applied. The simplest explanations among alternative explanations is to be preferred only when it explains as much or as well as the other explanations to which it is preferred. Let me give a crude example. I could say that the cause of an earthquake is that the earth rests on the horn of a bull and when he gets tired he shifts it to the other horn (my grandmother told me this). Obviously a very simple explanation. Of course in actual scientific theories it is much more complex. I do not know much about any branch of science but I do know a little about mathematics. Poincare gave a proof for a theorem which was already proven and in a simpler manner than he did it. However, his proof was superior because its technique could be applied to other branches of mathematics. So, I think we have to be cautious with Ockham's razor. Scientific hypotheses and theories often have structural features that have an intrinsic importance even if they fail on Ockham's razor requirements.Priyedarshi
On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 2:44 PM, 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D. <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@googlegroups.com> wrote:-Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on April 28, 2017 wrote:> I treat subjective experience in the state of Sammadhi as a subjective>evidence akin to empirical evidence in objective research.[S.P.] Very good! The key word here is "akin". When applying the first-person approach, every researcher constructs his own version of the theory of consciousness being based on subjective research data.In case I study own consciousness, there is no way for me to prove to others that I have got such or other data, for example, that I have got some premonition. In other words, the problem of intersubjectivity becomes topical, and some scholars even concludes that because of this problem the Science of Consciousness is impossible (see my reply to Priyedarshi Jetli on April 21, 2017).My solution here is that in case every researcher will construct his subjective version of the theory of consciousness by obeying the universal criteria of formal correctness, then the subjective versions constructed by different researchers will be compatible, and we will be able to come to a comprehensive version of the theory of consciousness. (This is Assertion 35 of my applied ADC theory; I mention this applied theory in my earlier post of today).Note: for the criteria of formal correctness see my posts on 1-09-2016, 20-04-2017, 21-04-2017. See also appendix below-----------------Appendix (the criteria of formal correctness)Whatever meta-theory, applied theory, a hypothesis, or a simple description my (or anybody's) consciousness constructs, they all(1) should not contain tautologies;(2) should not contain notion-metaphor transmutations (e.g., "power" – it is a concept in Physics, but being used in Psychology, say, as "power of imagination", it becomes a metaphor);(3) should not contain hypostatization (which occurs when something abstract is treated or represented as a concrete reality);(4) should not contain incorrect definitions (when the unknown is defined through another unknown);(5) should not contain multiplication of hypotheses (which occurs when the new hypothesis is being based upon the previous one, instead of being the result of generalization and systematization of research data);(6) should not breach Okham's principle (the most evident and simplest explanation has to be preferred);(7) should possess inner consistency (or, be formally non-self-contradictory);(8) should be rational (when the aim and criteria of approach correspond to each other).-------------------Best,Serge Patlavskiy
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1242227112.723666.1493733751162%40mail.yahoo.com.
Serge Patlavskiy
May 4, 2017, 6:00:02 AM5/4/17
to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
-
Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> on May 3, 2017 wrote:
>There is a basic difference in the experiences as gained in the state
>of Samaadhi and model of the consciousness as built by the reserschers
> based upon some meta theory of his own.
[S.P.] Wait. I talked about a version of the theory of consciousness built by a researcher based on private research data, BUT NOT on "some meta theory of his own". By the way, how do you know about "a basic difference in the experiences" if you have not got your personal version of a theory of consciousness. It is a clear contradiction in your reasoning.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
> Such experiences are subject to verification by the test of the reproducibility .
[S.P.] Please, re-read my post on May 1 where I wrote: "In case I study own consciousness, there is no way for me to prove to others that I have got such or other data, for example, that I have got some premonition." So, what "reproducibility" you are talking about? The brute fact is that most of consciousness-related phenomena appear suddenly and unexpectedly, and cannot be reproduced at will.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
>However, when a researcher starts with the model of consciousness,
>he starts with a set of axioms which you call as some meta theory.
[S.P.] What "researcher" you are talking about? It is me who suggests first to construct an appropriate meta-theory, and then to try to construct a theory of consciousness within its limits. Second, I talk about a set of postulates and general assertions. The word "axioms" pertains to mathematics.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
>However, you treat meta theory as sacrosanct one to the extent it to
> be beyond logical and empirical scrutiny.
[S.P.] Vinod. Do you, in principle, able to accept rational arguments? A meta-theory -- it is a set of postulates and general assertions about Reality the person lives in. It is a belief system, a world-view, a life-long experience of the concrete person. You cannot criticize Christianity from standpoint of Buddhism. Why? Because both are the MT-level intellectual products -- they are certain belief systems. You cannot criticize a person who likes red cars from the point of view of a person who likes green cars. Can you logically explain why you like red cars?
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
>For ascertained the correctness of of any applied theory of
>consciousness built by a researcher based upon some meta
>theory if his own, you have proposed a test of the formal
>correctness.
[S.P.] Vinod. Is your English the same as my English? I talk NOT about "the test of the formal correctness". I talk about criteria of formal correctness. I say that my explanatory framework obeys these criteria. I state (or predict) that in case the theories of consciousness constructed by different researchers will obey these same criteria of formal correctness, then these theories will be compatible. So, my approach is testable and falsifiable.
Moreover, I say that there is an objective criterion for assessing a meta-theory. I say that a meta-theory is "good" if the applied theories constructed within its limits possess sufficient explanatory and predictive power, and it will be the more "good" the more such applied theories are there.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
> In view of this test of the formal correctness is not the final test
>for the correctness of a theory of consciousness due to lack of
>any subjective or objective evidence.
[S.P.] Do you understand yourself what you are talking about? Where your "lack of any subjective or objective evidence" is taken from?
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
>But why living organisms acquires lowest level of entropy? There
>is no convincing explanation for this.
[S.P.] It is an undeniable fact that any living organism tries to reduce own overall entropy. Do you have "convincing explanation" why you start eating when you are hungry? Do you have "convincing explanation" why you are looking for a warm place when you feel cold? Do you have "convincing explanation" why you get a high-paid job in case you have good knowledge in a correspondent field? So, the organism's overall entropy depends on these three factors: having knowledge, eating, and warming.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
> In fact, it is on acquiring the lowest levels of the entropy that
>a system became a living organisms. So explanatory mechanism
>for consciousness is not complete and convincing in your framework.
[S.P.] Sorry, but this is some nonsense! First. What do you know about my framework and "explanatory mechanism for consciousness"? Have you read, at least, one of my five papers on this matter? Second. What "lowest levels of the entropy" you are talking about? You are not listening to my arguments. Instead, you invent your own arguments as if they are my arguments, and then criticize them. I talk about a certain low value of entropic characteristic of a complex system required for the effect of self-organization to come into play.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
>Suppose a subjective experience X is produced by signals Y.
[S.P.] Total nonsense! Physical (sensory) signals DO NOT produce experience!!! It is consciousness which can produce experience due to processing the physical (sensory) signals.
[Vinod Sehgal] wrote:
>I had received another mail from you yesterday wherein you
>have indicated ADC as an applied theory from which you
>derive 4 levels of assertions viz D, GS, AT and MT. ADC itself
>being an AT should be based upon some MT. Therefore, how
>from ADC, a MT can be inferred?
[S.P.] First, you receive a "mail" NOT FROM ME, but from Sadhu Sanga forum. Second. My applied ADC theory, by definition, takes any intellectual product as its object of study (see my reply to you on May 1, 2017). As an applied theory, it is constructed within the limits of my meta-theory.
On the other hand, my meta-theory is itself an intellectual product, namely, the MT-level intellectual product, and because of being an intellectual product, it must be the object of study for the applied ADC theory. The applied ADC theory is called "applied" because it used the methods and models elaborated on a meta-theoretical level and applies them to the concrete objects of study.
So, we have a situation when my meta-theory formalizes (or, models) itself using its own means of formalization. The relation between my meta-theory and its applied ADC theory is an example of functional tautology (for details, see my posts on April 1, 2017). On the other hand, the case when the researcher uses his consciousness to study this same his consciousness, it is also a case of functional tautology.
So, the cases of functional tautology in explanatory framework and in the object of study cancel each other out. A good metaphor here is as follows: "two negatives make an affirmative" (or, minus on minus gives plus).
By the way, in my reply on May 1, there is a General remark where I say:
"my applied ADC theory consists of about 40 assertions and is officially published. Second, as any scientifically correct applied theory it can be put under test and falsified. For example, the applied ADC theory PREDICTS that whatever intellectual product you construct, it will necessarily be of one of the mentioned above four levels. Therefore, if you formulate some intellectual product which will not be of some of these four levels, then, thereby, you will prove my applied theory to be false."
So, I hold that my applied ADC theory possesses required explanatory and predictive power.
Best,
Serge Patlavskiy
PS. Please, before submitting a post to the forum, check it with a text editor like MS Word. Your posts contain so many omissions that sometimes it is not possible to understand your ideas.
From: Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com>
To: serge.pa...@rocketmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 7:49 AM
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear Serge,
There is a basic difference in the experiences as gained in the state of Samaadhi and model of the consciousness as built by the reserschers based upon some meta theory of his own. State of Samaadhi is like an empirical experiment, therefore, experiences as flowing thereupon carry the power of subjective empiricalism. Such experiences are subject to verification by the test of the reproducibility .
However, when a researcher starts with the model of consciousness, he starts with a set of axioms which you call as some meta theory . However, you treat meta theory as sacrosanct one to the extent it to be beyond logical and empirical scrutiny. For ascertained the correctness of of any applied theory of consciousness built by a researcher based upon some meta theory if his own, you have proposed a test of the formal correctness. But this test itself is a theoretical proposition without the support of evidence from any subjective or objective empirical experimentation. In view of this test of the formal correctness is not the final test for the correctness of a theory of consciousness due to lack of any subjective or objective evidence.
A theory in the physical sense of the theory can't be called a theory unless it provides complete explanatory and predictive mechanism for the emergence of a phenomenon. For example, in your framework, you define consciousness as the natural ability of living organisms to transform physical signals into new mental products of subjective experiences. From where such ability is imparted. As per your version, when living organisms acquires a lowest level of entropy, its entropy goes to lower and lower levels. But why living organisms acquires lowest level of entropy? There is no convincing explanation for this. In fact, it is on acquiring the lowest levels of the entropy that a system became a living organisms. So explanatory mechanism for consciousness is not complete and convincing in your framework. Secondly, there is no predictive mechanism at all. Suppose a subjective experience X is produced by signals Y. We can't predict if next time same X will be produced by Y or not? And if produced will this be same X or vary from previous X and to what extent. In fact concept of the predictability is redundant in the matter of consciousness since none of the subjective experiences can be parameterized, quantified and.measured. In view of this, no theory of consciousness can be built in the strict senses of a physical theory whatever has been built up are speculative frameworks of consciousness devoid of subjective or objective evidence.
---------------------------------------------
I had received another mail from you yesterday wherein you have indicated ADC as an applied theory from which you derive 4 levels of assertions viz D, GS, AT and MT. ADC itself being an AT should be based upon some MT. Therefore, how from ADC, a MT can be inferred?
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
There is a basic difference in the experiences as gained in the state of Samaadhi and model of the consciousness as built by the reserschers based upon some meta theory of his own. State of Samaadhi is like an empirical experiment, therefore, experiences as flowing thereupon carry the power of subjective empiricalism. Such experiences are subject to verification by the test of the reproducibility .
However, when a researcher starts with the model of consciousness, he starts with a set of axioms which you call as some meta theory . However, you treat meta theory as sacrosanct one to the extent it to be beyond logical and empirical scrutiny. For ascertained the correctness of of any applied theory of consciousness built by a researcher based upon some meta theory if his own, you have proposed a test of the formal correctness. But this test itself is a theoretical proposition without the support of evidence from any subjective or objective empirical experimentation. In view of this test of the formal correctness is not the final test for the correctness of a theory of consciousness due to lack of any subjective or objective evidence.
A theory in the physical sense of the theory can't be called a theory unless it provides complete explanatory and predictive mechanism for the emergence of a phenomenon. For example, in your framework, you define consciousness as the natural ability of living organisms to transform physical signals into new mental products of subjective experiences. From where such ability is imparted. As per your version, when living organisms acquires a lowest level of entropy, its entropy goes to lower and lower levels. But why living organisms acquires lowest level of entropy? There is no convincing explanation for this. In fact, it is on acquiring the lowest levels of the entropy that a system became a living organisms. So explanatory mechanism for consciousness is not complete and convincing in your framework. Secondly, there is no predictive mechanism at all. Suppose a subjective experience X is produced by signals Y. We can't predict if next time same X will be produced by Y or not? And if produced will this be same X or vary from previous X and to what extent. In fact concept of the predictability is redundant in the matter of consciousness since none of the subjective experiences can be parameterized, quantified and.measured. In view of this, no theory of consciousness can be built in the strict senses of a physical theory whatever has been built up are speculative frameworks of consciousness devoid of subjective or objective evidence.
---------------------------------------------
I had received another mail from you yesterday wherein you have indicated ADC as an applied theory from which you derive 4 levels of assertions viz D, GS, AT and MT. ADC itself being an AT should be based upon some MT. Therefore, how from ADC, a MT can be inferred?
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
From: 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd.B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D.
Sent: 01-05-2017 16:03
To: Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
May 6, 2017, 4:20:04 PM5/6/17
to VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com
Dear Vinod ji,
Thanks for your comments. Kindly see blue font texts of Section 3.7.15.3 of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal,
2011) for my replies to your comments.
Cheers!
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
--
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
----------------------------
Fifth International Conference
Science and Scientist - 2017
August 18—19, 2017
Nepal Pragya Pratisthan, Kathmandu, Nepal
http://scsiscs.org/conference/scienceandscientist/2017
BHAKTI VEDANTA INSTITUTE Report Archives
http://bviscs.org/reports
Sponsorship and Donations for Vedanta and Science Dialogue: http://scienceandscientist.org/donate
Reply to Gustavo Caetano-Anollés: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2016.1160191
Why Biology is Beyond Physical Sciences?: http://dx.doi.org/10.5923/j.als.20160601.03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist.org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist.org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sa...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Online_Sadhu_Sanga/1947700604.2756363.1493871768908%40mail.yahoo.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
May 8, 2017, 10:46:34 AM5/8/17
to VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL, Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear Vinod ji,
Thanks.
I do not have Swamiji’s book but you have read it. So tell us how can we create a human being out of manifested cosmic consciousness and how can we materialize and create matter such as a chair from the cosmic consciousness. You have to show us precisely. I think that your answer will be: first attain the Samādhi (SS/NS) state and then do firm Sankalpa (an intention formed by the heart and mind -- a solemn vow, determination, or will) to create them and then a human being and chair will be automatically created (as shown in some TV Hindi serials). I request you that you do it and show us publically. We do not know what yogis or God did and we cannot take anything for granted thru any logical arguments. Alternatively, just accept it is not possible to demonstrate easily and Sankalpa is not the method used to create a human being and matter in the current era. The purpose of Samādhi state is different. Some of the characteristics of Samādhi state are elaborated in Section 2.1 of (Vimal, 2009d).
On the other hand, the eDAM (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita) provides scientific mechanisms, such as co-evolution, dependent co-origination, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning. If you follow the eDAM, you have already participated in the creation of human beings such as your children thru the science-based process of reproduction in 9 months or so and you have already facilitated them to become adult thru the process of co-development and sensorimotor co-tuning. A carpenter can create a chair easily out of woods. We can follow science how their constituents are created to the extent of particle physics and/or field theory. I agree that more research is needed, but at least these mechanisms are conceivable, logical, and empirically tenable in the modern era.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Monday, 8 May 2017 1:23 AM, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com> wrote:
Respected Dr. Ram,
It is your misconception that God theory or Saankhya does not provide any mechanism for the creation
of the universe from the primordial stage of the physicality or cosmic consciousness till the matter or humanbeings. In the Sammadhi stage all the mechanism I observable in a manner. Please read "Brahma Vigyaana" or Science of Divinity by Swami Y.N Swamij Maharaj, which has been written primarily based on live experiences in the stage of Sammadhi. But if you decline to read or read with some biased mindset that descriptions in the book is an interpretation and not experiences
or data, then there is no way out for such obstinacy. Problem is that while describing the mechanism for the creation
of the universe, a specific terminology like Manas, Buddhi, Tanmmatras have been used which have no equivalents
in the current science primarily due to reasons that Science has not yet Zeroed down on the ontology of the Astral and Causal world. Therefore any attempt to understand the mechanism of the creation of the universe, as indicated in Science of Divinity, in terms of the ontology of the physical world viz baryonic matter and 4 forces is doomed to fail.
Yes with the type of Sankalap we are having we are unable to produce even a particle of sand. But our Sankalpa in
our daily life is derived from the normal consciousness which is miles apart from the cosmic consciousness in terms of power, purity, and potential. The consciousness of a realized Yogi is identified with theb cosmic consciousness which isinfinite in terms of power, potential, and purity. There is no parallel in the Sankalpa of on ordinary people like you and me and a realized Yogi. Sankalpa of a Yogi is very [powerful. Additionally, the consciousness of a realized Yogi gets awakened at the Astral body/world, therefore, he can activate the mechanisms of the Astral world. One of the Law of the Astral world is that with the Sankalpa, any object composed out from Tanmmatras, manifest automatically. When a powerful Sankalpa is assigned to this object made out of the Tanmmatras, that object gets materialized in the physical world in physical form also.
You need to follow more and more incidents of the materialization, which are described in many sources, and enhance your
understanding of the ontological reality of the Astral body/world. However, if you decline to follow the descriptions seriously
or brush off as some gossips or fairy tales or lucid dreams, they can there be any way out for such a casual approach? Actually complete understanding on these aspects take its own time.
Yes, God for ever one is within us and we shall find God within us only. But there is no harm in having knowledge of the life of others in past and present who really achieved the highest states of Samaadhis. Everyone who treads on the path of a new journey on an unknown path has to seek guidance from others who have already taken steps on that path. We can't be exceptions. Rest choice is yours.
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 5:29 AM, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Dear Vinod ji,Since I spent time to reply, it might be worth only reading it. The major problem of God theory (the theist Sankhya plus Advaita) is that it does not provide any authentic mechanism to create a human being or matter from the manifested consciousness. The mechanism of Sankalpa, you wrote, is useless; you cannot create even a sand particle, no matter how firm sankalpa we have; just try it for your whole life and let me know if you can materialize any thing, forget about a whole human being.On other hand, the eDAM provides scientific mechanisms, such as co-evolution, dependent co-origination, co-development, and sensorimotor co-tuning. I agree that more researches are needed, but it is at least conceivable.I have started meditation seriously; my sadguru is my God inside me which is basically the name of Samadhi state as per eDAM.All the best!Kind regards,Rām------------------------------ ----------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Sunday, 7 May 2017 10:07 AM, VINOD KUMAR SEHGAL <vinodse...@gmail.com> wrote:
Respected Dr. Ram,In your previous email, you had indicated that you are no longer interested in responding to my comments since this involveswastage of time and that you want to concentrate on meditation. I had also concurred your views. Now if I start reading your comments and examine the same, this is quite obvious that I shall also send my counter-comments and this endless round of discussions shall never come to an end. Therefore, I resist myself from reading your comments. On your part, if you are satisfied with the metaphysics of eDAM, why should have I any reservation? That is your choice and sweet will. But on my part, I find many logical inconsistencies as well as the lack of any subjective and objective evidence in favor of eDAM. I am not a fan of Saankhya in any way. But I trust the ontological existence of the Astral and causal reality in nature and of the manifested consciousness as distinct from the physical reality of the baryonic matter and 4 forces of nature since this view is supported by a lot of subjective evidence of corroborative nature as flowing from the experiences in the state of Sammadhi. This is the major point of differences in our views and we have not been able to come to a consensual point despite repeated conversation of past more than 6 months. I view of this, it is better that we may agree that we disagree tin order to save us from the further waste of time. We should appreciate that we have not to involve ourselves any intellectual tournament where the question is of win/loss.One more important issue is that for treading on the path of the practical spirituality via the methodology of Samadhi, leave away examining the theoretical intricacies of different metaphysics, no need of knowing even the elementary aspects of any metaphysics at all. When we go into the issue of micro level scrutiny of various aspects of different metaphysics, our mind gets entangled with the theoretical aspects so strongly that we start ignoring the practical aspect. One more thing worth noting is that all the traditional metaphysics of the world were an aftermath outcomes of the actual findings in Samaadhi. In other words. experiences thru means of Samaadhi were the primary purpose and subsequent descriptions of such findings thru some language in structured format assumed the form what we call metaphysics.But, I think, it is necessary that we should know about the of the people in past and present who ascended the pinnacle of experiences in the state of samadhi in terms of nature and type of life they lived, methodology adopted by them, obstacles faced by them and how did they overcome the obstacles etc? This will provide us with some lamp posts and caution us from making the mistakes they committed in their life.Regards.Vinod Sehgal
On Sat, May 6, 2017 at 9:30 PM, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:
Dear Vinod ji,Thanks for your comments. Kindly see blue font texts of Section 3.7.15.3 of (Vimal & Pandey-Vimal, 2011) for my replies to your comments.Cheers!Kind regards,Rām------------------------------ ----------------------------Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USAPh: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Thursday, 4 May 2017 5:59 AM, "'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." <Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com> wrote:
-
Sent: Wednesday, May 3, 2017 7:49 AM
Subject: RE: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Dear Serge,
There is a basic difference in the experiences as gained in the state of Samaadhi and model of the consciousness as built by the reserschers based upon some meta theory of his own. State of Samaadhi is like an empirical experiment, therefore, experiences as flowing thereupon carry the power of subjective empiricalism. Such experiences are subject to verification by the test of the reproducibility .
However, when a researcher starts with the model of consciousness, he starts with a set of axioms which you call as some meta theory . However, you treat meta theory as sacrosanct one to the extent it to be beyond logical and empirical scrutiny. For ascertained the correctness of of any applied theory of consciousness built by a researcher based upon some meta theory if his own, you have proposed a test of the formal correctness. But this test itself is a theoretical proposition without the support of evidence from any subjective or objective empirical experimentation. In view of this test of the formal correctness is not the final test for the correctness of a theory of consciousness due to lack of any subjective or objective evidence.
A theory in the physical sense of the theory can't be called a theory unless it provides complete explanatory and predictive mechanism for the emergence of a phenomenon. For example, in your framework, you define consciousness as the natural ability of living organisms to transform physical signals into new mental products of subjective experiences. From where such ability is imparted. As per your version, when living organisms acquires a lowest level of entropy, its entropy goes to lower and lower levels. But why living organisms acquires lowest level of entropy? There is no convincing explanation for this. In fact, it is on acquiring the lowest levels of the entropy that a system became a living organisms. So explanatory mechanism for consciousness is not complete and convincing in your framework. Secondly, there is no predictive mechanism at all. Suppose a subjective experience X is produced by signals Y. We can't predict if next time same X will be produced by Y or not? And if produced will this be same X or vary from previous X and to what extent. In fact concept of the predictability is redundant in the matter of consciousness since none of the subjective experiences can be parameterized, quantified and.measured. In view of this, no theory of consciousness can be built in the strict senses of a physical theory whatever has been built up are speculative frameworks of consciousness devoid of subjective or objective evidence.
------------------------------ ---------------
I had received another mail from you yesterday wherein you have indicated ADC as an applied theory from which you derive 4 levels of assertions viz D, GS, AT and MT. ADC itself being an AT should be based upon some MT. Therefore, how from ADC, a MT can be inferred?
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
From: 'Serge Patlavskiy' via Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd.B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D.
Sent: 01-05-2017 16:03
Life and consciousness – The Vedāntic view: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 19420889.2015.1085138
Harmonizer: http://scienceandscientist. org/harmonizer
Bhakti Vedanta Institute of Spiritual Culture & Science
Princeton, NJ, USA: http://bviscs.org
Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Institute: http://scsiscs.org
Darwin Under Siege: http://scienceandscientist. org/Darwin
Sadhu-Sanga Blog: http://mahaprabhu.net/satsanga
Contact: http://scsiscs.org/contact
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Sadhu-Sanga Under the holy association of Spd. B.M. Puri Maharaja, Ph.D." group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga+ unsub...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to Online_Sadhu_Sanga@ googlegroups.com.
Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal
May 8, 2017, 1:09:33 PM5/8/17
to Vinod Sehgal, Online Sadhu Sanga
Dear Vinod ji,
You have not addressed by my critical argument related to the demonstration of your claim, rather you are trying to baffle on irrelevant arguments.
As I mentioned before that I have conviction on experiential data at Samādhi state levels and attaining their virtues as elaborated in Section 2.1 of (Vimal, 2009d). This is the reason why I would like to try for SS/NS states.
However, I do not have a slightest conviction on Sāṅkhya’s God theory interpretation because of its 9 serious problems, which you fail to address.
On the other hand, I have full conviction on the eDAM (Dvi-Pakṣa Advaita)’s interpretation including the functional and experiential sub-aspects of consciousness, which are included in the mental aspect of a state of a mind-brain system). This is because the eDAM has the least number of problems.
All paranormal data can be explained thru the proposed 6th sense including so-called rebirth related data. This is because information of previous already exists which can be obtained thru the subject’s 6th sense tuning thru perhaps usual 5 senses; this, however, misleads that s/he has previous births; rather it is just tuning and obtaining the previous information.
Kind regards,
Rām
----------------------------------------------------------
Rām Lakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.
Amarāvati-Hīrāmaṇi Professor (Research)
Vision Research Institute, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
25 Rita Street, Lowell, MA 01854 USA
Ph: +1 978 954 7522; eFAX: +1 440 388 7907
Researched at University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools
On Monday, 8 May 2017 11:11 AM, Vinod Sehgal <vinodse...@gmail.com> wrote:
Respected Dr Ram,
Is it so difficult to get Swamiji's book or is it so cost prohibitive that it is beyond your capacity to get the book that I should explain you? then is it feasible to summarize s whole book in an email? I had already send the references to you. Before you ask me to demonstrate the whole mechanism thru some public demonstration or you aspire to attain the capacity yourself, Ist at least have the conviction at the mental level. If you are not convinced of the plausibility of the materialization, how can you make sincere and whole heartedly efforts to achieve that level of consciousness in which Sankalapa at that level can produce material objects. You often state that you want to concentrate on meditation or want to make more sincere efforts to achieve thr state of Samaadhi -- NS or SS? Now you should ask yourself why should you make efforts to attain the state of Samaadhi when
You don't recognize the existence of any manifested cosmic consciousness.in some ontological form . Consciousness of eDAM manifest as FUNCTIONS only and that too at the functioning level.of brain only
You don't have conviction in the ontological reality of any astral or causal reality.
You don.t have convictional understanding of rebirth that your intent is to get free of the cycle of births/deaths.
You don't perceive any sufferings in the world that your objective behind attaining Samaadhi might be to get rid of the sufferings. You perceive world to be full of enjoyments and happiness. So why don,t you enjoy worldly pleasures up to the hilt instead of pursuing these reclusive objectives like SS or NS Samaadhi?
When you are satisfied with the mechanism of the creation of the universe thru quantum vacuum, what extra you want to find by achieveing the state of Samaadhi?
I fail to understand that when you don't have conviction in none of the above listed objectives for attaining the state of Samaadhi, what makes you to make efforts for attaining the state of Samaadhi for which you state that you want to make very sincere efforts. How one can make sincere efforts for a pursuit which is devoid of any macro level objective?
So first you clarify your stand why you want to attain any Samaadhi at all?
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
Is it so difficult to get Swamiji's book or is it so cost prohibitive that it is beyond your capacity to get the book that I should explain you? then is it feasible to summarize s whole book in an email? I had already send the references to you. Before you ask me to demonstrate the whole mechanism thru some public demonstration or you aspire to attain the capacity yourself, Ist at least have the conviction at the mental level. If you are not convinced of the plausibility of the materialization, how can you make sincere and whole heartedly efforts to achieve that level of consciousness in which Sankalapa at that level can produce material objects. You often state that you want to concentrate on meditation or want to make more sincere efforts to achieve thr state of Samaadhi -- NS or SS? Now you should ask yourself why should you make efforts to attain the state of Samaadhi when
You don't recognize the existence of any manifested cosmic consciousness.in some ontological form . Consciousness of eDAM manifest as FUNCTIONS only and that too at the functioning level.of brain only
You don't have conviction in the ontological reality of any astral or causal reality.
You don.t have convictional understanding of rebirth that your intent is to get free of the cycle of births/deaths.
You don't perceive any sufferings in the world that your objective behind attaining Samaadhi might be to get rid of the sufferings. You perceive world to be full of enjoyments and happiness. So why don,t you enjoy worldly pleasures up to the hilt instead of pursuing these reclusive objectives like SS or NS Samaadhi?
When you are satisfied with the mechanism of the creation of the universe thru quantum vacuum, what extra you want to find by achieveing the state of Samaadhi?
I fail to understand that when you don't have conviction in none of the above listed objectives for attaining the state of Samaadhi, what makes you to make efforts for attaining the state of Samaadhi for which you state that you want to make very sincere efforts. How one can make sincere efforts for a pursuit which is devoid of any macro level objective?
So first you clarify your stand why you want to attain any Samaadhi at all?
Regards
Vinod Sehgal
Subject: Re: [Sadhu Sanga] A critique of Vimal's idea of eDAM
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages