• Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Consciousness and non physical reality

sravna

Well-known member
We go by physical boundaries and think reality is discrete. Would you trust your eyes or your brain? Sense organs cannot perceive all. What about consciousness? It needs a brain to perceive. So isnt the reality perceived by brain something beyond what sense organs or any physical measuring instruments can perceive or measure? Consciousness also points out to the fact that perception is unified at higher level . So the reality is also unified.

The perception of the sense organs is contained in the perception of brain and not vice versa. In principle we can measure and perceive anything that is physical. If something is not measurable or perceivable by sense organs or instruments it is not physical. Is there any physical instrument that can grasp the totality of consciousness? We are no where even when it comes to making even a supercomputer understand the totality of a simple sentence. So why talk about making a machine understand consciousness in its totality? btw, even among people, there are the truly analytical ones whose minds work only like that of a computer.

So my conjecture in a logical way is, consciousness points to a non physical reality which is a unification of all the discrete physical entities. Our ancestors have said much farther saying that there is a spiritual reality too and in some great mind boggling detail but I will just stop here and let readers give their views on a drop of what would be a gigantic ocean of spiritual knowledge that emerged from our land.
 
We go by physical boundaries and think reality is discrete. Would you trust your eyes or your brain? Sense organs cannot perceive all. What about consciousness? It needs a brain to perceive. So isnt the reality perceived by brain something beyond what sense organs or any physical measuring instruments can perceive or measure? Consciousness also points out to the fact that perception is unified at higher level . So the reality is also unified.

The perception of the sense organs is contained in the perception of brain and not vice versa. In principle we can measure and perceive anything that is physical. If something is not measurable or perceivable by sense organs or instruments it is not physical. Is there any physical instrument that can grasp the totality of consciousness? We are no where even when it comes to making even a supercomputer understand the totality of a simple sentence. So why talk about making a machine understand consciousness in its totality? btw, even among people, there are the truly analytical ones whose minds work only like that of a computer.

So my conjecture in a logical way is, consciousness points to a non physical reality which is a unification of all the discrete physical entities. Our ancestors have said much farther saying that there is a spiritual reality too and in some great mind boggling detail but I will just stop here and let readers give their views on a drop of what would be a gigantic ocean of spiritual knowledge that emerged from our land.


1. That the perception of the sense organs is contained in the perception of brain is also a perception of brain. Every organ of perception is indispensable for "existence".

2. Super computing skills are growing fast. It is an evolving area where growth is phenomenal. We are even scared of the prospects. The totality of a simple sentence/command is indeed understood well by an ordinary computer if the interface between the higher level and lower level languages are well delineated.. And if there is no such understanding, execution of reams and reams of code will be impossible. Everything is finally reduced to binaries of on/off before it is "read" and acted upon by the computer. So it is only a catchy phrase to say that super computers do not understand a sentence fully. They understand well what is the command to be executed conveyed in a sentence/script. May be they do not bother about grammar. But that is extraneous to the task.

3. Raw consciousness devoid of inputs from sense organs points to just the "existence" and nothing else. To add wider dimensions to it and call it part of a larger universal consciousness etc., are all just wishful imaginations and can not be proved.

4. spiritual reality is what we would like to have to feel comfortable with the otherwise intimidating vacuum. But if you think a little more you will realise that the reality as it exists is just indeterminate. There is no way to contain it or define it with our woefully inadequate scales, coordinates, languages, and other equipments.

Yet to make an endeavour to do that is there in our nature and so we keep doing it in many ways.

I may be intelligent, may be strong, rich, might have lived my life usefully and fully but when I die I will still have the regret that I could not decypher the "existence" fully. LOL.
 
Last edited:
Dear Sri Sravana,
I am very happy that you have started a subject of such serious nature. I am aware of the fact that many of us may not even touch the fringes of the enquiry done by the sages who had done in depth search on "self" and its mystery. Their results are the outcome of "Upanishads".
Recently I came across one such Upanishad "The Kaushitaki Upanishad" (कौषीतकि उपनिषद्, Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad) an ancient Sanskrit text contained inside the Rigveda. Also known as Kaushitaki Brahmana Upanishads.
This Upanishad deals with the subject of " Prana and pragnya" (life force and awareness). Honestly I admit that I have not understood the subject due to lack of proper Guru or teacher.
As a knowledge seeker I tried reading a few translations both by western and our own scholars. But due to my limited (mental) capacity I am yet to get the results.

Regards,
Brahmanyan
Bangalore.
 
Dear Sravna..

The mind needs the brain for input via senses.
According to religious philosophy..consciousness animates the mind and the physical body.

Now coming to the human mind and brain..at times some who had undergone a cerebrovascular event and lapse into a coma wake up speaking a language they never even knew.

So how is this possible?
Its as if the brain was exposed to some data from an intrinsic source which has to be from the mind..but how?

Then we have to explore the possibility of subconscious inputs which we receive from the cosmos but silently downloaded in our brain hence one meets an accident and wakes up speaking Mandarin!

Now..how do we know what our brain is storing subsconsciously?
We dont know much actually...the parasympathetic system runs in the background without us being aware..endocrine system is almost autopilot running even as we sleep.

So if the physical body can run silently in the background without us being aware surely the subconcious mind too is running in the background sans our knowledge or awareness.

Now..next question..what and where is the role of consciousness in this?

Is consciousness just a medium of animation..some subtle undetected particles ?
Is it inert or suffused with Constant Integrated Awareness also known as Prajnana Brahma?

Is this Constant Integrated Awareness pulsating with all data..all that there is to know in a timeless state that did not have a begining or an end?

Is that what is sage Udalakka asked his son Swetaketu...do you know That by knowing which everything is known?


So to be honest Sravna...I can only play a guessing game.
There is so much no one knows about the physical body itself..or the mind and God knows what consciousness is all about.
 
Last edited:
Dear Sravna..

The mind needs the brain for input via senses.
According to religious philosophy..consciousness animates the mind and the physical body.

Now coming to the human mind and brain..at times some who had undergone a cerebrovascular event and lapse into a coma wake up speaking a language they never even knew.

So how is this possible?
Its as if the brain was exposed to some data from an intrinsic source which has to be from the mind..but how?

Then we have to explore the possibility of subconscious inputs which we receive from the cosmos but silently downloaded in our brain hence one meets an accident and wakes up speaking Mandarin!

Now..how do we know what our brain is storing subsconsciously?
We dont know much actually...the parasympathetic system runs in the background without us being aware..endocrine system is almost autopilot running even as we sleep.

So if the physical body can run silently in the background without us being aware surely the subconcious mind too is running in the background sans our knowledge or awareness.

Now..next question..what and where is the role of consciousness in this?

Is consciousness just a medium of animation..some subtle undetected particles ?
Is it inert or suffused with Constant Integrated Awareness also known as Prajnana Brahma?

Is this Constant Integrated Awareness pulsating with all data..all that there is to know in a timeless state that did not have a begining or an end?

Is that what is sage Udalakka asked his son Swetaketu...do you know That by knowing which everything is known?


So to be honest Sravna...I can only play a guessing game.
There is so much no one knows about the physical body itself..or the mind and God knows what consciousness is all about.

Doctor,

That's a wonderful exposition of a difficult subject.

Some times we travel to places that looks so real in experience in our dream. Where from this memories come in our dreams !
I would suggest you to kindly go through the "The Kaushitaki Upanishad" (कौषीतकि उपनिषद्) if you have not done already. This Upanishad deals with "Prana and Pragnya" and its relationship with senses. This Upanishad has been translated in English by a few western philosophers including Max Mueller, The most cited English translations are those by Eduard Cowell, Paul Deussen, Robert Hume and Max Muller.Also by R D Ranade, S.Sharma. An audio version by "Librivox" is available in the internet.

This is an interesting subject I wish more members should participate in this thread.
Regards,
Brahmanyan
Bangalore.
 
Dear Shri Vaagmi, Shri Brahmanyan ,. Renuka

thanks for the input. the following is my take:

Typically brain transfers the input it receives from the senses to the mind which exists at a sub conscious level. It is subconscious because it cannot be perceived in a physical way by us. It is beyond that perception. The mind does the interpretation of what is sent by the brain and pushes back its output to the brain. the interpretation is done again by the brain and thus emerges a physical mental interpretation and the consciousness. So consciousness goes beyond what is physical because a mental interpretation is added by the mind.

when in evolved souls the brain is evolved enough to be one with mind , no thinking happens because everything is spontaneous . there is no back and forth between the brain and mind and so all of space and time with a totally integrated physical mental perception happens and one sees all at any time.
 
Dear Shri Vaagmi, Shri Brahmanyan ,. Renuka

thanks for the input. the following is my take:

Typically brain transfers the input it receives from the senses to the mind which exists at a sub conscious level. It is subconscious because it cannot be perceived in a physical way by us. It is beyond that perception. The mind does the interpretation of what is sent by the brain and pushes back its output to the brain. the interpretation is done again by the brain and thus emerges a physical mental interpretation and the consciousness. So consciousness goes beyond what is physical because a mental interpretation is added by the mind.

when in evolved souls the brain is evolved enough to be one with mind , no thinking happens because everything is spontaneous . there is no back and forth between the brain and mind and so all of space and time with a totally integrated physical mental perception happens and one sees all at any time.

Sravna...the brain is an organ that allows thought processing of the mind to take place to relay it to the body for execution of the thought.

The mind and brain relationship is a delicate one.

My personal opinion after years of working in my job i have come to believe that the brain is merely like a smart phone..it has all the apps to function and the mind is like the sim card that activates the smartphone with its data package.

So lets take a new sim card and new smart phone.
The new smart phone has all the physical apps wired to function if activated.

Now..a new sim card is blank but has the capacity to receive input and allows it to be accessed when needed.

Ok ..lets take a human body.
A baby..new born.
Brain brand new..no info yet..if a baby is never exposed to sounds and people he might grow up not being able to even speak.
If brought up by a wolf he would be like a wolf.

This shows that input relayed via senses to the brain and then to the mind shapes an individual.

Ok..next question..we assume a new born babys mind is blank.

But is a mind actually blank?
There is something called instinct most probably genetically coded..for eg a chick just knows how to use its beak to come out of the egg shell.

A baby has a rooting reflex on birth..it instincly knows how to suckle milk.

Ok..how does this happen?
Where is this info stored?
A reflex doesnt need to go tru brain..most life saving reflexes go tru spinal cord so it doesnt go tru the mind.

For eg..when we hold a hot pot and we didnt know its hot..we leave it right away to prevent burn..this does not go tru brain at all.
Its a spinal reflex.
Cos if it goes tru brain it takes time and the mind could start to "think" and delay the reaction.

So that goes to show the minds influence is not always beneficial and the spinal reflex keeps the mind out in certain life saving reactions.

So goes without saying..the mind can be your best friend and your worst enemy.

Next is..how are we to know what is stored in the mind upon birth..a new mind.
How do we know what it came equipped with.
How to access stored data that denotes the basic behavior of each species?

Coming to your perception of an evolved mind equals to" not thinking" and spontaneous..i get what you mean but technically that wont be conducive for life becos its almost being "programmed" to.function in a certain manner.

This only holds safe if the environment and inputs and outputs is the same.

The human is designed to survive and for continuation of species and to be able to handle even new unexpected situations.

That the protective mechanism confered upon entire existence.
A so called " non thinking status quo " state would seem like sattva but its just inertia and that would spell self destruct.

Conclusion:
We should just embrace the fact that as a human we came with a MBA ( Mind..Body and Atma) ..we are designed to function as a holistic unit and not dissect ourselves into sections and feel one function can be ignored becos its less evolved than the other.

Today I would beg to differ from Advaita philosophy..I wont want to think Neti Neti anymore.
I wont want to say i am not the mind or not the body ..etc.

Nothing is out of Brahman is we go by religious logic..so I cant divorce my body and mind from my atma as long as i am alive.

So i would prefer to say.." i have a mind..intellect..chitta and ahamkara..i have all my senses..i experience the all the 5 elements..the core of me is Consciousness ..Existence and Bliss"


I have given a slight twist to the Atma Shatakam of Adi Shankara not out of arrogance but just to not deny the holistic function of the MIND..BODY and ATMA.
 
Your interactions with the external world , should take care of your mind and body but your introspections should elevate your soul
 
Doctor,

That's a wonderful exposition of a difficult subject.

Some times we travel to places that looks so real in experience in our dream. Where from this memories come in our dreams !


[h=3]Domhoff: Dreams as a Reflection of Waking Life[/h]G. William Domhoff is a prominent dream researcher who studied with Calvin Hall at the University of Miami. In large-scale studies on the content of dreams, Domhoff has found that dreams reflect the thoughts and concerns of a dreamer’s waking life. Domhoff suggests a neurocognitive model of dreams in which the process of dreaming results from neurological processes and a system of schemas. Dream content, he suggests results from these cognitive processes.



In other words, people are motivated to interpret their dreams in ways that support their already existing beliefs about themselves, the world, and the people around them. The researchers found that such things as the confirmation bias and the self-serving bias even impact how people respond to their own dreams.


Because people tend to take their dreams seriously, the researchers suggest, these dreams can also become something of a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you dream that you are going to fail an exam, you might be less motivated to study or even become so stressed out that you perform poorly.


https://www.verywellmind.com/dream-interpretation-what-do-dreams-mean-2795930

 
In 1973, two researchers named Allan Hobson and Robert McCarley threw out Freud and Jung when they came up with a theory called the activation-synthesis hypothesis, which proposed that dreams simply originated from random electrical impulses in the brain. Those impulses, they said, drew imagery from traces of experiences we stored in our memories—and later, they theorized, our waking minds, always organizing, tried to make sense of that imagery by creating its own narratives from them.

http://bahaiteachings.org/are-dreams-random
 
Last edited:
Doctor,

That's a wonderful exposition of a difficult subject.

Some times we travel to places that looks so real in experience in our dream. Where from this memories come in our dreams !
I would suggest you to kindly go through the "The Kaushitaki Upanishad" (कौषीतकि उपनिषद्) if you have not done already. This Upanishad deals with "Prana and Pragnya" and its relationship with senses. This Upanishad has been translated in English by a few western philosophers including Max Mueller, The most cited English translations are those by Eduard Cowell, Paul Deussen, Robert Hume and Max Muller.Also by R D Ranade, S.Sharma. An audio version by "Librivox" is available in the internet.

This is an interesting subject I wish more members should participate in this thread.
Regards,
Brahmanyan
Bangalore.

Dear Sir...
I will start looking for the Upanishad.
I have not read it before and would certainly do so as the subject of human mind and consciousness is my favorite topic.

Coming to dreams...yes surely is the stored data playing in our brain but as you rightly said from where these memories come ?

I feel dreams too are based on input..emotional mainly.
The emotions then gets projected into an image in our brain and we see it tru over visual cortex.

But from personal experience sometimes I can dream so detail in a futuristic manner about specific individuals which turns out 100% true.

Initially I thought its fututistic but later i realized that these individuals have been thinking of some plans in their life and did harbour a thought to share it with me but before they do so I would have dreamt of it.

This goes to show that thought waves can be transmited and if one is receptive enough the thought waves of another is converted to images in our brain..very much like television..we see images from the waves transmited.

As I mentioned earlier...the subconscious mind could be downloading data in the background sans our awareness and these can.show up in our brain as dreams.

Personally I dont feel dreams are just a neuronal glitch...i feel its the play of the subconcious mind.

That goes without saying that our minds cos be subject to influence of thought waves of others too.

So instead of weapons of mass destruction...a very potent weapon would be weapons of mind destruction tru generating a frequency that can penetrate the subconscious mind for a total take over of anothers mind.

We do see subtle forms of mind attack but its still mainly at a physical level and not yet at a level of thought waves.


Come to think of it God could be the greatest IT expert of all...Wonder why none of the Sahasranamams mention this.

Om Shree Bhagavan IT Vishaye Nipunaaya Namah!

(Salutions upon the Auspicious Lord who is an expert in the matters of IT)
 
Last edited:
That goes without saying that our minds cos be subject to influence of thought waves of others too.

So instead of weapons of mass destruction...a very potent weapon would be weapons of mind destruction tru generating a frequency that can penetrate the subconscious mind for a total take over of anothers mind.

We do see subtle forms of mind attack but its still mainly at a physical level and not yet at a level of thought waves.


Come to think of it God could be the greatest IT expert of all...Wonder why none of the Sahasranamams mention this.

Om Shree Bhagavan IT Vishaye Nipunaaya Namah!

(Salutions upon the Auspicious Lord who is an expert in the matters of IT)

Yes you are right. Taking over one's mind is the next level of offence. But for that it has to be accepted there is a reality beyond the physical and also a good theory of that reality needs to be developed. Then real mind games will start.
 
Post 1: You say consciousness needs a brain to perceive. How is the existence of brain perceived - I assume consciousness (by definition). This kind of circular logic is illogical and hence rest of assertions are flawed.

One cannot believe your conjecture...
 
Post 1: You say consciousness needs a brain to perceive. How is the existence of brain perceived - I assume consciousness (by definition). This kind of circular logic is illogical and hence rest of assertions are flawed.

One cannot believe your conjecture...

That is the problem with understanding certain concepts when you see entities as discrete. You need a reality shift in understanding them. The perceiver and the perceived can come together in a holistic way. The more they are holistic the better the perception of reality.
 
That is the problem with understanding certain concepts when you see entities as discrete. You need a reality shift in understanding them. The perceiver and the perceived can come together in a holistic way. The more they are holistic the better the perception of reality.
Dear Sravana,

You have pulled a 'Srvana' again which is making it about your skills and powers.

Let us parse what you just said

In Post 1 you wrapped yourself in a circular logic which is illogical. Once pointed out you could have manned up and owned to it if you are interested in logical ideas.
Instead you are telling me that you are endowed with this 'holistic' thinking while I dont so I cannot see past the circular logic... wow

You need holistic thinking to see such circular logic issues when you write whatever comes to your mind here.

Mr Brahmanyan and Madam Renuka have dignified the thread with their useful interpretations but Post 1 has logic issues.
 
Dear Sri Sravana,
I am very happy that you have started a subject of such serious nature. I am aware of the fact that many of us may not even touch the fringes of the enquiry done by the sages who had done in depth search on "self" and its mystery. Their results are the outcome of "Upanishads".
Recently I came across one such Upanishad "The Kaushitaki Upanishad" (कौषीतकि उपनिषद्, Kauṣītaki Upaniṣad) an ancient Sanskrit text contained inside the Rigveda. Also known as Kaushitaki Brahmana Upanishads.
This Upanishad deals with the subject of " Prana and pragnya" (life force and awareness). Honestly I admit that I have not understood the subject due to lack of proper Guru or teacher.
As a knowledge seeker I tried reading a few translations both by western and our own scholars. But due to my limited (mental) capacity I am yet to get the results.

Regards,
Brahmanyan
Bangalore.

Many Upanishads deal with this matter. The Aitareya upanishad, for one, leads to the declaration Prajnaanam Brahma.
 
Dear Sravana,

You have pulled a 'Srvana' again which is making it about your skills and powers.

Let us parse what you just said

In Post 1 you wrapped yourself in a circular logic which is illogical. Once pointed out you could have manned up and owned to it if you are interested in logical ideas.
Instead you are telling me that you are endowed with this 'holistic' thinking while I dont so I cannot see past the circular logic... wow

You need holistic thinking to see such circular logic issues when you write whatever comes to your mind here.

Mr Brahmanyan and Madam Renuka have dignified the thread with their useful interpretations but Post 1 has logic issues.

Dear Shri a-TB,

I have not pulled anything. All I said was circular logic happens because we see things in isolation. We think events need to happen in a sequence in a process and that the output of one event becomes the input of another, which need not be true. Two events can happen in an interconnected way at the same time with neither depending on the other to complete, for its task to be done and yet the process be done. Think about it.
 
Dear Shri a-TB,

I have not pulled anything. All I said was circular logic happens because we see things in isolation. We think events need to happen in a sequence in a process and that the output of one event becomes the input of another, which need not be true. Two events can happen in an interconnected way at the same time with neither depending on the other to complete, for its task to be done and yet the process be done. Think about it.

Dear Mr Sravana:

You talked about you being endowed ('holistic thinking) that I dont. That kind of implication is what I called 'pulling a Savana' since you have endlessly posted about your spiritual powers bringing yourself instead of answering an issue with your post.

Circular logic is not to be glorified. It is a flaw in logic period. In fact one needs holistic thinking to see the flaw when the flaw is spread over multiple statements.
In your post 1, there as no input or output or events or interconnection. Re-read the flaw as pointed out and think about it. Dont just respond without understanding what you yourself wrote and what the flaw is. Do not defend circular logic as holy. That will put more credibility to what you write here
 
We go by physical boundaries and think reality is discrete. Would you trust your eyes or your brain? Sense organs cannot perceive all. What about consciousness? It needs a brain to perceive. So isnt the reality perceived by brain something beyond what sense organs or any physical measuring instruments can perceive or measure? Consciousness also points out to the fact that perception is unified at higher level . So the reality is also unified.

The perception of the sense organs is contained in the perception of brain and not vice versa. In principle we can measure and perceive anything that is physical. If something is not measurable or perceivable by sense organs or instruments it is not physical. Is there any physical instrument that can grasp the totality of consciousness? We are no where even when it comes to making even a supercomputer understand the totality of a simple sentence. So why talk about making a machine understand consciousness in its totality? btw, even among people, there are the truly analytical ones whose minds work only like that of a computer.

So my conjecture in a logical way is, consciousness points to a non physical reality which is a unification of all the discrete physical entities. Our ancestors have said much farther saying that there is a spiritual reality too and in some great mind boggling detail but I will just stop here and let readers give their views on a drop of what would be a gigantic ocean of spiritual knowledge that emerged from our land.

Dear Shri a-TB,

The above is post 1. You say that according to me experiencing consciousness requires brain but the perception of brain requires consciousness. I think this is what you call circular logic.

It can be simply understood as brain producing consciousness and that consciousness perceiving the brain. This is called as self awareness . This requires that brain produces a holistic energy. What is the flaw in this logic? Kindly elucidate.

I am simplifying a lot to make my point.
 
Dear Shri a-TB,

The above is post 1. You say that according to me experiencing consciousness requires brain but the perception of brain requires consciousness. I think this is what you call circular logic.

It can be simply understood as brain producing consciousness and that consciousness perceiving the brain. This is called as self awareness . This requires that brain produces a holistic energy. What is the flaw in this logic? Kindly elucidate.

I am simplifying a lot to make my point.

Dear Mr Sravana :

If the basics are right only then we can talk about simplifying or complicating a view. Let us stick to what you just said.

How do I know there is something called consciousness ? Because I have a brain to know the existence of consciousness.
OK , then how do I know there is something called brain? Because it is the existence of consciousness that makes me know I have a brain that exists.

In other words existence of two things are tied to each other's existence. That is not holistic but flaw in thinking. I called it circular logic.

Let me give an example.



Say I want to go to Mr Sravana's house and I ask where does Mr Sravana live?
The answer is he lives next door to Mr Vaagmi's place.
Then I ask - where does Mr Vaagmi live? Answer is he lives next to Mr Sravana's place

The above is useless to reach Mr Sravana's place

Makes sense?
 
Dear Shri a-TB,

Let us assume that because of the activities in the brain, a higher energy emerges. That energy is little more than all the energy that went into making it and that is the making of self awareness because it is a whole and not just the parts alone. So brain creates consciousness and consciousness is aware of itself and represents the big picture activities of the brain.
 
Let me make a clarification. I said that consciousness needs a brain to perceive to contrast that with the perceptions of the sensory organs which are limited in scope and reality.
 
Dear Mr Sravana:

It is time consuming to parse each of your sentence for all kinds of logical issues. I admit defeat in communicating the issues because you keep imagining all kinds of things. You have woven a web of logical flaws out of which you cannot get out of and keep weaving more webs of imagination as a response.

So let us leave this as is
 

Latest ads

Back
Top