[Advaita-l] Waking and Dream States - II

Pranipata pranipata at hotmail.com
Mon Mar 30 22:17:24 CDT 2009

Hari Om Sri Sadanandaji,  Pranaams!

Since the word vyatirikta(to the exclusion of) is used, if we say BMI is the 
Sva-Atma, we will be pushed to a position where the BMI becomes 
imperceptible in the waking state(that is one can perceive every outer 
object to the exclusion of one's BMI in jAgrat), which is not the case and 
is very much an object of perception.

In Shri Guru Smriti,
Br. Pranipata Chaitanya

From: "kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada at yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 7:19 AM
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" 
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Waking and Dream States - II

>> From: Pranipata <pranipata at hotmail.com>
>> bahiShprajnaH:  svAtmavyatirikte viShaye prajnA yasya
>> saH bahiShprajnaH. Viewing with other upaniShadic statements
>> like parAk pashyati na antarAtman, Atma should refer to Self
>> and not BMI, I feel.
> Pranipata Caitanyaji – PraNAms
> First, thanks for the comment.  I think, What is implied by ‘sva aatma', 
> or one’s own self is the self identified with BMI and with reference to 
> that conditioned self, the external,  bahiH – implying sva aatma 
> vyatirikta viShaye prajnaa – awareness of the objects that are different 
> from oneself  – Since the self that is being pointed is not the absolute 
> self as there is nothing that is external to the absolute, the implied 
> meaning, as I understand, is the conditioned self – conditioned by the 
> BMI.  Hence my simplified statement follows. Shankara goes into the 
> analysis of avidya as cause for perceiving the objects separate from 
> myself - which is the same avidya that is resposible for my taking the BMI 
> as myself. Hence the statement is consistent and compatible with the 
> individual experience.
> With reference to that conditioning only the anthaH prajnaa also follows.
> --- On Mon, 3/30/09, ombhurbhuva <ombhurbhuva at eircom.net> wrote:
> Namaste Sada-ji,
> To call the dream experience ‘perception’ is an imprecision that leads to
> mistakes. Perception applies to the waking state only. If I have a
> perception of the great hall of the temple at Tiruvanamalai I can proceed
> to count the pillars there. If I imagine or dream that I am there I can
> do no such thing.
> ---------
> Michael – PraNams  and thanks again.
> As I see, you are applying the perceptual process in the waking state 
> directly to the mental states applicable in the waking. I, as a subject in 
> my own dream have 19 mouths according to upanishad  – which include five 
> jnaana indiriyaas, eyes, ears etc and also five karma indriyaas, the 
> speech, hands etc. So the dreamer also sees  his dream created 
> Tiruvannamalai temple and it pillars and he can count them with his 
> karmendriyas –In fact he may even create more pillars to count than the 
> original temple.  He will not have any problem. Each system is fully 
> equipped – that is what the 19 mouths imply in both waking and dream 
> states. Hence I will not have any conflict in counting the pillars in 
> Tiruvannamalai temple may be even count better than in the waking state.
> Hence perception can apply equally to the dream state. There also I will 
> have impressions from the perception in my tiny mind in dream and those 
> are internal perceptions where just as in waking state the memory rules 
> apply.  The parallelism of the dream in this respect is exact. It gets 
> nullified if you try to analyze the dream perceptions with the yard stick 
> of the waker’s indriyaas.
> Hope I am clear.
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list