Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Is there a Changeless Self?

In my previous essay, ‘The Mistake of Intelligent Design’ I had said that the Hindu thinker claims the self to be the only unchanging entity. Let us look at this more closely. He says that man lives in a universe where everything keeps changing and the only entity that can be relied upon is the cosmic consciousness. According to this claim, consciousness is omnipresent. There is only existence and the objects that you see in the world are projections of illusion. The question of whose illusion it is can seldom be answered. It is inferred as a consequence that the illusions are those of ‘Brahman’. This Brahman is what the Hindu thinker refers to as ‘the changeless Self’. But if it has been identified as a ‘self’ that is ‘the other’ to the ego of the individual, there can neither be an individual nor the other. This means that both the individual self and the objects around are part of the illusion. If this were to be the case then any ethics that arrives out of it cannot be treated seriously. Any logic born out of illusion must ultimately be a fallacy. But even Brahman is part of this illusion and you end up with circular arguments. Brahman or the cosmic consciousness cannot be identified as the self in the first place because it is not an individual self. It is an idea created by a human being and this idea must therefore also be an illusion.

Self is not an entity as a body is because the concept of self is a converging point of sensations which is not a material phenomenon. All sensations together constitute consciousness and the meeting point is what language calls self because it is the origin of duality. Without self-reference there can be no language and no transaction with the outside world. The solipsistic syndrome is akin to it because there is a disconnection experienced as a result of the detachment with the world. The point is that the meeting point or self is a convergence consciousness of all the sensations of the mind and the body. If there is no concept of self then the individual floats in objective reality and cannot be grounded in the firmament. If this syndrome were not to be the case then the individual forcibly denies the body and deceives himself that it is to be discarded when he needs the body to identify himself for the convergence happens in the body alone. Therefore the result of this is neurosis where this individual wants two contradictory things. He wants the body to the extent of wanting to deny it and he wants the dissociation because he wants permanence which the body or the objects in the world cannot give him.

The individual concerned is trying to lift the chair on which he is sitting. This is impossible but he thinks it is possible in the mind when in fact it is only possible in language. The mind also depends on the body for its chemicals. Neither the body nor the mind can be denied forcibly. What is achieved is only self-deception. The solipsistic syndrome is no intellectual phenomena but an outcome of experiencing dissociation with the world either from trauma or from being separated. The convergence-consciousness in such an individual identifies its limits correctly which the one without this syndrome cannot do. The self as the convergence of sensations cannot be treated as changeless or cosmic in the context of universal illusion/reality when it is its very consequence.

11 comments:

Pkayen said...

If you infer that the world is projected by Brahman, then it is not possible to hold at the same time that Brahman is part of the illusion too.

The definition of Consciousness as the convergence of sensations seems untenable. Can there be sensations without consciousness? Consciousness is what is aware of the sensations. It precedes every thought, sensation, perception, word and action. Hence it is not possible to describe It or define It. It cannot be taken to be a mere idea or concept because It precedes ideas and concepts. But It can certainly be experienced. Everyone undenaibly experiences It as 'I' (but the notion of an individual ego-based self itself is ultimately sublated since it too arises in Consciousness).

The Advaitin (I will particularize the Hindu thinker here) does not forcibly deny any conscious experience. It is not necessary to give up the body or mind, only the notion that I am the body or the mind. Ultimately, everything is seen as non-different from the Self which is the same as Brahman. There is no other.

Unknown said...

Brahman can be an illusion if it is born out of an illusory association with the objective reality. If this world is unreal then where is the guarantee that Brahman is real? If the mind is an illusion and so is thought then whatever thought conceives of must be an illusion as well.

You say that consciousness is what is aware of the sensations but tell me is n't consciousness a product of complete sensory perception? There are cases when in brain disorders people have lower levels of consciousness and in that state they are not as aware as they would have been without the disorders in the first place. Consciousness as a phenomena cannot exist without the idea of it. You have probably missed out on the fact that time lapse between consciousness and thought does not always exist in which case it is possible to confuse consciousness as separate from sensation. There are different aspects of thought. You can relate to some as merely ideas and you can relate to some as experiences. "I" is an identity that is an outcome of separation which is again sensory based.

It is not possible to give up the notion of I am the body or the mind when this notion of "I" as an identity is an outcome of the body and mind. There is no other only in death. This can never be experienced in its totality as nothingness. There is no consciousness here which is why there is no other but to conscious entities this can never be. As long as the intellect, memory and senses are intact there is to some extent always the other. It is only with the dissipation of consciousness there is the end of the self and the other.

Pkayen said...

Since Brahman is all there is, there is no denying Brahman. The world is nothing but Brahman, entirely dependednt on It and has no existence apart from It. It appears and dissolves in Brahman. This is the sense in which it is unreal (In this context, I would like to point out that the existence of an objective, external reality cannot be verified directly because all our experiences are necessarily subjective). Just as the dream world is real to the dreamer, this world is real to the waker. But seen from a higher perspective (i.e. Brahman), it gets sublated just like the dream world does upon waking up.

Consciousness as a product of sensory perception, imho, is not logical. The experience of consciousness is self-evident and cannot be denied. It is neither perceptual nor conceptual. As for brain disorders and consciousness, the case is similar to that of electricity being independent of equipment that function using it. A 40-watt bulb will necessarily be duller than a 100-watt bulb, but we don't say electricty is different in the two. It is also similar to light striking all surfaces equally, but a clear reflection occuring only on a polished surface.

Your position on Consciousness is that it is an emergent phenomenon (in fact, you seem to be denying it altogether) while it is primary in Advaita. I am afraid it will be impossible to bridge this gap.

Unknown said...

The analogy that you gave of the bulb points out that voltage varies and that accounts for difference in effects. Similarly with lower levels of consciousness the sense of awareness varies. If this is the case then the conclusion is that the world is imperfect and life in general depends on the condition of the brain.

Unknown said...

Likewise experience is impossible with the death of the senses and the brain.

Pkayen said...

The voltage does not vary. It is the bulb that is different. Anyway, the functioning of the body/mind does depend on the condition of the body/mind, no questions about that.

We are not talking about experience after death here. That can at best be speculation or accepted on faith. There is no way to verify it. What I am referring to is transcending the limitation of the body/mind here and now. While a proof for this may not be possible in the conventional sense, Advaita asserts that subjective verification is possible. It is up to the individual whether or not to accept the premise and proceed with verification using the methods prescribed.

Unknown said...

Thanks for your comments. I did not refer to the bulb but the voltage as in voltage fluctuation. I welcome you to put comments on the other posts as well.

Sublimation said...

Ajay that was an interesting diaologue. However I have only one thing to add here as I do not have much to say. Electricity as an energy is always present, otherwise it cannot be tapped either as hydroelctric, thermal. wind, nuclear, solar or through other means. The problems arise only on account of imperfect generation and transmission due to faulty equipment. The voltage fluctuations are on account of this. So electricity as a reality cannot be denied. This is how I understand life, being an electrical engineer myself.

gssubbu

Sublimation said...

Ajay that was an interesting diaologue. However I have only one thing to add here as I do not have much to say. Electricity as an energy is always present, otherwise it cannot be tapped either as hydroelctric, thermal. wind, nuclear, solar or through other means. The problems arise only on account of imperfect generation and transmission due to faulty equipment. The voltage fluctuations are on account of this. So electricity as a reality cannot be denied. This is how I understand life, being an electrical engineer myself.

gssubbu

Unknown said...

The point that electricity is tapped is correct but my point is that consciousness is not like electricity. It is a consequence of complex phenomena without which there is no state of mind. When there is no state of mind typically the entity is empty of reflection. The being does not know that it is being. This typically will be viewed in objective reality as the float phenomenon where no transaction is possible. However any entity that collapses in reflection may still be called alive as the vital organs may continue to function. But in this case the idea of consciousness disappears with the collapse.

Anonymous said...

whats up ajayseshadri.blogspot.com admin found your site via yahoo but it was hard to find and I see you could have more visitors because there are not so many comments yet. I have found website which offer to dramatically increase traffic to your blog http://xrumer-services.net they claim they managed to get close to 4000 visitors/day using their services you could also get lot more targeted traffic from search engines as you have now. I used their services and got significantly more visitors to my website. Hope this helps :) They offer most cost effective services to increase website traffic Take care. Roberto