Gauḍīya Vedāntic Critique of Vimal’s Dual-Aspect Interpretation of Brahma Sūtra

52 views
Skip to first unread message

Bhakti Niskama Shanta

unread,
Jul 12, 2025, 6:13:53 AMJul 12
to Online Sadhu Sanga
Gauḍīya Vedāntic Critique of Vimal’s Interpretation of Brahma Sūtra 2.3.14
Bhakti Niskama Shanta, Ph.D.
President-Sevāite-Āchārya, Sri Chaitanya Saraswat Math, Nrisimha Palli
Sri Nabadwaip Dham, West Bengal, India: www.scsmathworldwide.com


Creation and Dissolution as Divine Līlā, Not Thermodynamic Reversal
Dr. Rām Lakhan Pandey Vimal’s reinterpretation of Brahma Sūtra 2.3.14 (Śrīmad Bhāgavatam is widely regarded as the natural commentary on the Brahma Sūtras, also known as the Vedānta Sūtras) through his DPV~ICRDAM-HCC framework attempts to synthesize Vedic cosmology with concepts from thermodynamics, quantum mechanics, and information theory. Despite its interdisciplinary appeal, this framework suffers from both scientific misapplications and philosophical deviations, especially when evaluated against the coherent personalist ontology of Vedānta.

I. Incompatibility with Vedāntic Ontology
Vimal proposes that consciousness (s-aspect) and non-subjective physical states (ns-aspect) co-arise from a neutral substrate he terms “Neutral Brahman” (NB). This emergentist view contradicts Vedānta, where consciousness is not emergent or dissolvable but eternally existent. As stated in Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā (2.12):

na tv evāhaṁ jātu nāsaṁ na tvaṁ neme janādhipāḥ
na chaiva na bhaviṣyāmaḥ sarve vayam ataḥ param
Translation: Never was there a time when you, I, or all these kings did not exist. Just as we exist in the present, so have we existed in the past, and shall continue to exist in the future.

The source of consciousness, the ātmā, is imperishable (Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā 2.17).

avināśi tu tad viddhi yena sarvam idaṁ tatam
vināśam avyayasyāsya na kaśchit kartum arhati
Translation: Know that the soul, by which the entire body is pervaded, is indestructible. No one can destroy the imperishable soul.

It does not revert to a neutral state but remains eternally active, guided by Paramātmā even during pralaya in the mundane reality.

II. Misapplication of Scientific Concepts

1. Entropy and Thermodynamics
Dr. Vimal’s assertion that entropy reverses during cosmic dissolution contradicts a foundational principle of physics: the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In its statistical form, the Second Law states: In a closed system, entropy tends to increase or remain constant; it never spontaneously decreases.

Entropy (S) quantifies the number of microscopic configurations corresponding to a macroscopic state. As systems evolve toward equilibrium, they traverse from low-probability, high-organization states to high-probability, disorganized states. This transition is inherently irreversible, governed by probabilistic mechanics rather than deterministic forces.

In a thermodynamically isolated system, such as the universe under classical cosmology, time’s arrow is marked by this entropic ascent—toward disorder, uniformity, and energy unavailability. This principle does not accommodate reversal under contraction. Even Roger Penrose’s Conformal Cyclic Cosmology (CCC), one of the more speculative models proposing eternal cycles of expansion and contraction, does not claim that entropy decreases. Instead, CCC postulates conformal rescaling, resetting entropy’s reference point without violating its inherent directionality.

Entropy is a statistical quantity, not a cosmic agent. Vimal's language implicitly reifies entropy—as if it chooses or acts. But entropy is not an ontic force or intelligent principle. It is a statistical descriptor, a mathematical function that encodes disorder or multiplicity of microstates. It cannot cause, initiate, or reverse anything by itself. Suggesting that entropy “reverses to initiate dissolution” smuggles teleology into thermodynamics, violating the strict non-intentionality of physical laws.

From a Gauḍīya Vedāntic perspective, the universe is not governed by blind material causality, but by conscious intelligence. Matter is not self-organizing, nor self-dissolving; it is activated by life (jīva) and orchestrated by Paramātmā. This view is affirmed in the Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.3.2:

seyaṃ devataikṣata hantāhamimāstisro devatā anena jīvenātmanānupraviśya nāmarūpe vyākaravāṇīti
Translation: Having entered these elements as the living self, I shall differentiate them into name and form.

Thus, the dissolution of the universe (pralaya) is not a consequence of entropic pressure but of the withdrawal of divine will—the cessation of Paramātmā’s sustaining glance. The Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā (9.7) affirms:

sarva-bhūtāni kaunteya prakṛtiṁ yānti māmikām
kalpa-kṣaye punas tāni kalpādau visṛjāmy aham
Translation: O son of Kuntī, at the end of the millennium, all beings are merged in the material nature of three modes, which is My external potency; and at the beginning of a new millennium, I make them manifest again.

By attributing cosmic dissolution to a reversal of entropy, Dr. Vimal inverts cause and effect. Conscious will, not thermodynamic processes, governs the universe’s genesis and dissolution. Entropy only describes material dispersion within a system—it does not explain why the system itself arises or ceases.

Biohylogenesis, the Gauḍīya conception, asserts that matter comes from life, not the other way around. The universe arises not from chaos tending toward order (a statistical improbability), nor from mechanical design, but from the whole, living absolute (pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idam), who breathes out and draws back innumerable universes:

yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya
jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ
viṣṇur mahān sa iha yasya kalā-viśeṣo
govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
Translation: The masters of innumerable universes (Brahmā and other lords of the mundane worlds) live only as long as the time of one exhalation of Mahā-Viṣṇu. He (Mahā-Viṣṇu) is a plenary portion of that Govinda, the original Supreme Person. I worship that original Lord, Govinda. (Brahma-saṁhitā 5.48)

2. Quantum Consciousness Misinterpretation
There is a widespread misapplication of quantum mechanics in the study of consciousness, and Dr. Vimal’s Dual-Aspect interpretation exemplifies this confusion. Dr. Vimal’s proposal to equate dual-aspect quantum states with consciousness—a claim that the subjective (s-aspect) of experience arises from quantum superpositions—lacks both mathematical rigor and empirical grounding. His invocation of quantum theory to support a metaphysical emergence of subjectivity is neither supported by quantum formalism nor justified by any validated model in physics.

Quantum states are formal objects and not phenomenal agents. In standard quantum mechanics (QM), a system is described by a wavefunction, a complex-valued amplitude encoding the probabilities of measurement outcomes. This function evolves linearly under the Schrödinger equation until a measurement collapses it into an eigenstate of the observable operator. However, (1) the wavefunction has no experiential content. It is a mathematical abstraction used to predict experimental results—not to account for what it is like to be a conscious subject, (2) in all mainstream interpretations—Copenhagen, Many-Worlds, QBism, Relational QM—consciousness is not intrinsic to the quantum formalism and (3) the wavefunction does not explain self-awareness, intentionality, or qualia. There exists no accepted formulation in Hilbert space theory that connects the ontic status of a wavefunction with phenomenal consciousness.

The observer effect in quantum mechanics strictly concerns physical measurement interactions, not metaphysical inquiry. Dr. Vimal appears to conflate this effect with the epistemic subject of conscious experience—a clear category error. Observers in quantum theory are measurement devices or systems, not self-aware minds. Mixing these distinct concepts misrepresents both quantum physics and the philosophy of mind. The observer effect in quantum theory refers to physical interactions between a quantum system and measuring apparatus, leading to decoherence or collapse (depending on interpretation). The “observer” in this context is any physical system capable of information registration (a Geiger counter, photodetector, etc.), not a conscious being. No formulation of QM requires a conscious observer for wavefunction collapse. Even in Wigner’s original proposal, Wigner later abandoned the idea of consciousness causing collapse, favoring environmental decoherence. Thus, invoking QM to justify phenomenological consciousness is unsupported.

Dr. Vimal's ideas lack empirical validation. There is no experimental evidence supporting: (1) the existence of consciousness as a quantum field, (2) a “subjective pole” or “s-aspect” inherent in quantum states, or (3) dual-aspect wavefunction configurations that correspond to introspective awareness. These claims remain speculative and untestable within the current framework of quantum theory, and thus fall outside the bounds of empirical science. Proposals such as Orch-OR (Penrose-Hameroff) remain highly speculative and lack testable predictions or independent verification. Vimal’s Dual-Aspect State theory fares no better; it offers no mathematical framework, no falsifiable criteria, and no peer-reviewed evidence. Hence, it fails both the Popperian standard of falsifiability and the Lakatosian criteria for progressive research programs.

Gauḍīya Vedānta advocates an ontological reversal: consciousness is the origin, not the byproduct of matter. From this standpoint, Dr. Vimal’s model mistakenly inverts causality by positing consciousness as an emergent feature of physical systems. In contrast, Vedānta asserts that cit—pure consciousness—is primordial and self-luminous. As described in foundational texts like the Bhagavad-gītā and Brahma-saṁhitā, consciousness is the ontological basis of both the observer and the observed, sustaining and illuminating the phenomenal world, not arising from it.

viṣṇur mahān sa iha yasya kalā-viśeṣo
govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
(Brahma-saṁhitā 5.48)
Translation: This material world is but a partial manifestation of one of His portion of portion. The original source is the conscious Absolute—Govinda.”

Thus, consciousness is not an emergent aspect of quantum states, but the source of quantum phenomena itself, mediated by the Lord’s agency (māyādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ, Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā  9.10).

Dr. Vimal proposes a misleading symmetry between quantum mechanics (QM) and subjectivity. While QM is a formalism for predicting physical phenomena via probabilistic outcomes, it is entirely silent on inner, qualitative experience. In contrast, Gauḍīya Vedānta offers a coherent ontology: the jīva is an irreducible unit of consciousness, and Paramātmā is the transcendental witness and guide. Attempts to derive consciousness from QM fail because (1) QM models probabilities, not intentional awareness; (2) wavefunction collapse does not involve introspection; and (3) the Schrödinger equation contains no reference to subjective experience.

Therefore, Vimal’s model reveals a fundamental incompatibility with both modern science and Gauḍīya Vedānta. Scientifically, it misrepresents the formalism of quantum mechanics—where no term or mechanism accounts for self-aware subjectivity—and lacks any empirical support. Metaphysically, it inverts the ontological foundation of Vedānta by placing consciousness as a product of material processes, rather than their origin. In Gauḍīya Vedānta, the conscious self (ātmā) is categorically distinct from matter, including quantum fields. Consciousness is not emergent—it is eternal, foundational, and the very basis of all perception and cognition.

To advance a scientific understanding of consciousness, we must move toward a consciousness-centered ontology, where matter is a derivative of life, not the origin of it—a view grounded in both scripture and experiential reason.

3. Lack of Testable Predictions
Scientific models require operational definitions, mathematical formalism, and empirical verifiability. Vimal’s framework lacks all three. Terms like NB, DAS, EII, and HCC stages remain undefined and unmeasurable.

This renders the model speculative and unscientific, misrepresenting both Vedānta and physics.

III. Biohylogenesis: The Consciousness-First Alternative
Gauḍīya Vedānta advocates Biohylogenesis — the principle that matter comes from life, not vice versa. Life is not an emergent property of complex matter but the organizing principle behind material arrangements.

1. Empirical Support for Consciousness-First
Modern science has failed to generate life from non-life (abiogenesis). Living systems consistently organize matter intelligently, as seen in embryogenesis and cellular activity. These functions display purpose and teleology absent in inert matter.

Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā 2.13 affirms the soul's distinct continuity across bodily changes, establishing it as the animating principle:

dehino ’smin yathā dehe kaumāraṁ yauvanaṁ jarā
tathā dehāntara-prāptir dhīras tatra na muhyati
Translation: As the living being passes through the bodily changes of childhood, youth, and old age, it similarly attains another body at death. The wise are not deluded by this.

2. Irreducibility of Consciousness
Material science cannot explain qualia, moral judgment, or volition. The “hard problem” of consciousness remains unsolved. Gauḍīya Vedānta identifies consciousness with the eternal jīva, not neural or quantum patterns.

3. Karma and Memory Are Not Physical Templates
Vimal posits that karmic imprints are stored in NB as informational templates. There is no mechanism in physics to preserve such metaphysical data. Gauḍīya Vedānta teaches that memory and karma are preserved in the jīva, regulated by the omniscient Paramātmā.

Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā 15.15:

sarvasya chāhaṁ hṛdi sanniviṣṭho
mattaḥ smṛtir jñānam apohanañ cha
vedaiś cha sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedānta-kṛd veda-vid eva chāham
Translation: I am situated (as the Supersoul) within the heart of all souls, and from Me arises the soul’s remembrance, knowledge, and forgetfulness (according to his actions). I alone am the Sweet Absolute to be known through all the Vedas. I am the revealer of the Vedānta—Vedavyās, and I am the knower of the Vedas.

IV. Personal Agency and Līlā in Creation and Dissolution
In Gauḍīya Vedānta, the universe is not a mechanical system but the dynamic manifestation of Bhagavān’s līlā. Creation and dissolution occur by His will:

mayādhyakṣeṇa prakṛtiḥ sūyate sa-charācharam
hetunānena kaunteya jagad viparivartate
Translation: O Kaunteya, ordained by Me, My illusory potency produces this universe of moving and stationary beings. Thus it is manifest over and over again. (Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā 9.10)

sūta uvāca
jagṛhe pauruṣaṁ rūpaṁ
bhagavān mahad-ādibhiḥ
sambhūtaṁ ṣoḍaśa-kalam
ādau loka-sisṛkṣayā
(Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.3.1)
Translation: Sūta said: In the beginning of the creation, the Lord first expanded Himself in the universal form of the puruṣa incarnation and manifested all the ingredients for the material creation. And thus at first there was the creation of the sixteen principles of material action. This was for the purpose of creating the material universes.

The process described in Brahma Sūtra 2.3.14 refers to a conscious reversal of creation, not thermodynamic regression. The Śrī Brahma-saṁhitā (5.48) explains how all universes emerge and dissolve with the breathing of Mahā-Viṣṇu:

yasyaika-niśvasita-kālam athāvalambya
jīvanti loma-vilajā jagad-aṇḍa-nāthāḥ
viṣṇur mahān sa iha yasya kalā-viśeṣo
govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi
Translation: The masters of innumerable universes (Brahmā and other lords of the mundane worlds) live only as long as the time of one exhalation of Mahā-Viṣṇu. He (Mahā-Viṣṇu) is a plenary portion of that Govinda, the original Supreme Person. I worship that original Lord, Govinda.

This is not symbolic entropy, but personal volition.

V. Rejection of Depersonalized Metaphysics
Vimal’s model replaces Bhagavān with a neutral, impersonal force, yet paradoxically attributes it with memory and teleology. Teleology without agency is incoherent. Only a conscious being can direct cosmic order meaningfully.

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.87.2: 

śrī-śuka uvāca
buddhīndriya-manaḥ-prāṇān
janānām asṛjat prabhuḥ
mātrārthaṁ ca bhavārthaṁ ca
ātmane ’kalpanāya ca
Translation: Śukadeva Gosvamī said: The Supreme Lord manifested the material intelligence, senses, mind and vital air of the living entities so that they could indulge their desires for sense gratification, take repeated births to engage in fruitive activities, become elevated in future lives and ultimately attain liberation.


VI. Conclusion: Reclaiming the Bhāgavata Paradigm
Gauḍīya Vedānta presents a theistic and scientifically compatible ontology. It posits consciousness as the basis of all reality, life as the source of organization, and the universe as a manifestation of divine play. The attempt to recast these truths in the language of entropy and quantum metaphors, as seen in DPV~ICRDAM, only leads to confusion and philosophical dilution.

Let us reject models that attempt to replace the Supreme Person with impersonal constructs. The origin, maintenance, and dissolution of the cosmos are eternally and joyfully conducted by Bhagavān, not by entropy or quantum fluctuations.


On Saturday, July 12, 2025 at 9:01:31 AM UTC+5:30 rlpv...@gmail.com wrote:

Dear All,

 

In this post, we present an Overarching Conclusion of the important Brahma Sūtra 2.3.14 (BS230): The process of dissolution of the elements is in the reverse order from that of manifestation/creation. For a deeper understanding and comprehensive insights, please refer to pages 110-203 (attached).

 

We appreciate your feedback and constructive comments.


8. Overarching Conclusion: DPV~ICRDAM–HCC Reconstructs the Dissolution Principle of BS230

The interpretation of Brahma Sūtra 2.3.14 (BS230)—"Dissolution proceeds in the reverse order of creation"—finds revolutionary reinterpretation through the DPV~ICRDAM + HCC framework, reconciling classical Vedantic cosmology with modern entropy dynamics, quantum field theory, and dual-aspect consciousness studies. This synthesis reveals twelve foundational tenets:

1. Principle of Reverse Dissolution is Ontologically Sound

BS230 affirms a causal logic: the last created (grossest) dissolves first, and the first created (subtlest) dissolves last. This pattern reflects natural phenomena, from clay returning from pots to stars collapsing into energy fields (Śivānanda, 2002).

2. Śaṅkarācārya’s Nondual Return:

Advaita teaches that dissolution involves complete absorption into Nirguṇa Brahman, the attributeless, nondual reality. Reverse order is a hierarchical undoing of manifestation, restoring pure unity (Śaṅkarācārya, 1904).

3. Rāmānujācārya’s Qualified Retention:

Viśiṣṭādvaita preserves individual identity in subtle form during dissolution. The return is not annihilation but a shift to latent potential within Brahman. SB(realized) is co-reflected in NB(potential) as dual-aspect states of the same reality (Rāmānujācārya, 1904).

4. Śivānanda’s Bridging View:

Śivānanda links spiritual insights with analogies and observations—stairs, pots, evaporation—showing the deep symmetry of universal cycles (Śivānanda, 2002). His interpretation connects practical life with spiritual law.

5. Scientific Resolution via DPV~ICRDAM:

The dual-aspect framework posits that all manifest entities are dual-aspect states (DASs)—with inseparable subjective (s) and non-subjective (ns) aspects. Dissolution is the reversal of DASic configurations into neutral potential within NB (Vimal, 2023, 2024a, 2025a).

6. HCC Maps BS230 to Entropy Cycles:

Heptagonal Cyclic Cosmology (HCC) encodes seven thermodynamic stages from pre-Big Bang neutrality (S1) to Big Bang, cosmic expansion, heat death (S5), and return to neutral NB (S7) (Vimal, 2025b, §4.2.8). BS230 aligns with this cosmic reversal sequence, where dissolution mirrors evolution in perfect inverse.

7. Entropy Reversal Supports Recursion:

Entropy is maximal at dissolution (S5) and systematically decreases during S6–S7, allowing return to a minimum-entropy, potential-rich NB. This refutes the assumption that entropy can only increase, replacing linear thermodynamics with cyclic entropy logic (Penrose, 2013; Vimal, 2025b).

8. Information Templates Survive Pralaya:

During dissolution, individual consciousness patterns (ADSs), CSEs, and Mahābhūtas revert to informational-energy templates (tanmātras or EII) within DA_UF—preserved, not erased (Vimal, 2024a, 2025a).

9. Cosmic Memory Enables Rebirth:

These stored patterns in NB (S1) become seed templates for future manifestation cycles, ensuring continuity across universes. Mokṣa is possible if karmic patterns are resolved before pralaya; otherwise, rebirth resumes per unresolved karmas (Vimal, 2025a).

10. Consciousness is Never Lost:

Even in dissolution, consciousness (as s-aspect) does not vanish but becomes deactivated and reflective in neutral NB—never ontologically destroyed (Vimal, 2023; 2024b).

11. Ethics and Cosmology are Coherent:

BS230 is not just cosmological—it’s ethical. Mokṣa aligns with the natural tendency to dissolve, ethically encouraged by yogic and dharmic living. Right action accelerates return to NB (Vimal, 2025a).

12. From Metaphor to Mechanism:

BS230’s metaphysical model is no longer just allegory. Through DPV~ICRDAM + HCC, it becomes a mechanistic law of quantum reversal, entropy dynamics, and cosmic memory—bridging Vedānta, physics, and consciousness research.

13. Final Insight:

BS230 reveals a recursive truth: creation and dissolution are mirrored arcs in the spiral of existence. The cosmic stair ascended in manifestation is descended in reverse through dissolution, back to the neutral silence of NB. The DPV~ICRDAM synthesis unlocks this insight for both science and spirituality—offering ontological precision, metaphysical elegance, and ethical clarity.



Cheers!

Best regards,

Ram + ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com) + Claude.AI  ( Claude ) +  Perplexity.AI  ( https://www.perplexity.ai/ ) + Gemini ( https://gemini.google.com/ ) + Bing ( https://www.bing.com / )

-------------------------------------------------- --------

RāmLakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.

Amarāvati-Hīrāma ṇ i Professor (Research)  and President
Vision Research Institute Inc, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
7 Captain Parker Arms, Unit 12, Lexington, MA 02421-7016.
Researched at the University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools




On Monday 7 July, 2025 at 01:14:20 am GMT-4, Ram Lakhan Pandey Vimal <rlpv...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:


Dear All,

 

In this post, we present an overview of the important Brahma Sūtra 2.3.13 (BS229): Brahman abiding within the element is the creative principle. For a deeper understanding and comprehensive insights, please refer to Section 3.(229) on pages 40-110 (attached).

 

We appreciate your feedback and constructive comments.

 

2. Overarching Synthesized Abstract: A Synthesis of interpretations of BS229, Challenges, and Resolution through DPV~ICRDAM

A Unified Scientific-Spiritual Interpretation of BS229

This comprehensive analysis of Brahma Sūtra 2.3.13 (BS229)—"Tadabhidhyānādeva tu talliṅgāt saḥ"—examines the assertion that Brahman abiding within the elements is the true creative principle. The interpretations of Śaṅkarācārya (Advaita), Rāmānujācārya (Viśiṣṭādvaita), and Swāmi Śivānanda (integrative Advaita) are synthesized with modern scientific insights through the DPV~ICRDAM framework (Dvi-Pakṣādvaita Vedānta ~ Inseparable-Complementary-Reflective Dual-Aspect Monism).

This study challenges the classical dualistic view that treats Brahman as a separate cosmic consciousness operating within inert elements. Instead, it redefines each element (ākāśa, vāyu, agni, āpaḥ, pṛthvī) as a dual-aspect mahābhūta—with inseparable, complementary, and reflective subjective (s) and non-subjective (ns) aspects. The creative power attributed to Brahman is understood as the s-aspect (protoConsciousness) of each elemental dual-aspect state (DAS), interacting through its ns-aspect in a unified cosmological process grounded in Heptagonal Cyclic Cosmology (HCC).

The Inner Ruler (Antaryāmin) is reconceived as the s-aspect of each element itself, not a separate entity. The conscious will of the divine is reframed as equivalent to all natural physical and psychophysical laws—a principle that unites Vedantic metaphysics with quantum cosmology. This synthesis resolves longstanding dualistic tensions while providing a philosophically and scientifically coherent model for understanding cosmic creation, consciousness, and the ontological status of the elements.

1. Addressing the Dualism Challenge in Traditional Interpretations

The phrase “The sūtra establishes that Brahman abiding within the elements is the creative principle” seems to imply that Brahmin is cosmic consciousness (CC) and elements are non-conscious entities, which appears to be dualism that has 14 challenges elaborated in (Vimal, 2021a).

DPV~ICRDAM framework can address these challenges as follows: A state of an element (such as akāśa, vāyu, agni, āpaḥ, pṛthvī) is a dual-aspect (DA) state (DAS) with subjective (s)-aspect from 1pp (1st person perspective) and inseparable-complementary-reflective non-subjective (ns) aspect from 3pp (3rd pp). The dual-aspect SB manifests from and returns to the neutral NB. A DAS of DA_cosmic_SB~DA_PPU interdependently co-arises through the interactions among the DASs of countless manifested DA entities of our psychophysical universe (PPU). The elements are five DA mahābhūtas: DA_akāśa_SB, DA_vāyu_SB, DA_agni_SB, DA_āpaḥ_SB, and DA_pṛthvī_SB. The Brahma Sūtra 2.3.13 (BS229) establishes a creative principle that the s-aspect of a DAS of an element (such as DA_pṛthvī_SB) is inseparable, complementary, and reflective with the ns-aspect of the same DAS of the same element (such as DA_pṛthvī_SB).

“Saguṇa Brahman (SB) manifests as the Inner Ruler within all elements” appears dualistic view and can be unpacked as follows: The s-aspect (such as protoConsciousness: protoC) and the ns-aspect of a DAS of elemental SB (DA_element_SB) are inseparable, complementary, and reflective; the s-aspect (such as protoC) of DA_element_SB acts as the Inner Ruler within the DA_element_SB.

 

13. Relationship and transformation between mahābhūtas

1. BhūtĀkāśa (physical spacetime/ether/aether) → BhūtaVāyu (gross atmospheric air) → BhūtĀgni (physical combustion agni) → BhūtĀpaḥ (physical water or H2O anywhere) → BhūtaPṛthvī (physical earth)

2. ChittĀkāśa (mental space) → ChittaVāyu (pranic Life-Force) → ChittĀgni (Digestive Agni, Jāṭharāgni) → ChittĀpaḥ (Bodily Fluids) → ChittaPṛthvī (Solid Tissues)

3. ChidĀkāśa (consciousness-space) → ChidaVāyu (cosmic information carrier) → ChidĀgni (Cognitive Agni) → ChidĀpaḥ (Emotional Waters) → ChidaPṛthvī (Psychological Stability)

4. Daharākāśa (heart-space) → DaharaVāyu (Consciousness-Matter Interface → Daharāgni (Illuminating fire/Agni, Discriminating Fire, Active Regulation, Illumination) → DaharĀpaḥ (Flowing Wisdom and Intelligence; Adaptive Circulation and Fluid Adaptation; Emotional Resonance and Integration; Circulation of Patterns, Fluid Distribution, and Cooling Stabilization) → DaharaPṛthvī (Stable Foundation; Stable Structure; Embodied Stability; and Crystallized Patterns)



Cheers!

Best regards,

Ram + ChatGPT (https://chatgpt.com) + Claude.AI  ( Claude ) +  Perplexity.AI  ( https://www.perplexity.ai/ ) + Gemini ( https://gemini.google.com/ ) + Bing ( https://www.bing.com / )

-------------------------------------------------- --------

RāmLakhan Pāndey Vimal, Ph.D.

Amarāvati-Hīrāma ṇ i Professor (Research)  and President
Vision Research Institute Inc, Physics, Neuroscience, & Consciousness Research Dept.
7 Captain Parker Arms, Unit 12, Lexington, MA 02421-7016.



Researched at the University of Chicago and Harvard Medical Schools




Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages