It doesn’t matter. Unreality is a objective quality.
You saying this is like you looking at my invisible apple argument and saying “Ah, no, because there are many different colours the apples could be!” It doesn’t matter, because “invisible” applies across the entirety of that spectrum. Likewise, if something is “unreal”, it doesn’t matter how many realities there are. You’ve negated the ability to judge whatever you apply that word to by that measure, because you’ve already said it’s devoid of that quality.
It doesnt work that way always, Please refer to Snake & Rope analogy I used. For example, In Darkness you mistake rope as snake and afraid of it, Now snake is reality for you in the present state. When there is light and you see rope in the form of snake, then you realize snake is unreal. Now snake becomes unreal only when there is light, In the state of darkness snake will always be real for you. Snake is relative reality, Rope is absolute reality.
In either case you have the experience of playing and eating to relate to, right? You can feel elated only relating to the event of how well you played. Same can be applied to the act of sleeping. I dont mind dropping this here.
[QUOTE=Why? It seems manifestly true to me. My “I” is what I call my consciousness. I don’t have that when I’m asleep. Logically, it is not there. In this case because, I would argue, it’s an emergent property from processes which continue but which are not by themselves my consciousness.[/QUOTE]
Consciousness is not something you “created” it is not like other faculties you develop. Rational things to do would be exploring this further instead of “feeling certain”.
Incorrect. That I perceive the object to be a snake is equally real even after I stop perceiving it that way. If it wasn’t, then I wouldn’t be able to remember what I thought it was, would I? Reality remains fixed.
[QUOTE=MusicalDream]
In either case you have the experience of playing and eating to relate to, right? You can feel elated only relating to the event of how well you played. Same can be applied to the act of sleeping. I dont mind dropping this here.
[/QUOTE]
Again, as I have already stated at least twice now, no, I do not refer to sleeping in that way. The same cannot be applied to the act of sleeping - you have my direct testimony that I can feel elated (or otherwise) relating to the aftereffects of the act, and not simply the act itself.
I’d be happy to drop the subject, if you didn’t respond to each of my pointing out that “Here’s something that has happened to me.” with “That’s never happened to anyone, and cannot occur.”
Same for playing and eating, which I explicitly pointed out to you that I could feel elated about **based purely on how I felt at that moment.
**
I didn’t claim that “I” created it. That makes very little sense, given that I’m claiming that “I” is a result of these processes; something cannot create itself, so really, I’m negating the argument you’re telling me that I hold. I also explicitly said that my “I” and those processes were not the same thing. The rational thing to do might be to address my argument and not a different argument that I have already disagreed with at least twice myself.
Here’s my argument. Again. Consciousness, as I understand it, is the result of processes in the physical brain. That’s what my “I” comes from. Those processes are not my “I”, in the same way that the physical structure of a computer is not the same as a program currently running on that computer. It’s entirely reasonable to say that, while I am asleep or otherwise unconscious, my consciousness is absent, vanished, non-existent, because one of the vital points of my consciousness (and, I’d argue, yours) is that we’re aware of it. When we’re asleep, we’re not. So my consciousness is not present there and then.
When you come back try to remember that your own holy books may not be considered good cites when you are asked to back up statements of fact. Also, declaring that something is true because it is ancient probably won’t fly, either.
Edited to add: Atheism isn’t a religion-that is yet another word, along with “religion”, that already has an established definition.
In my world, even while in darkness, it’s almost impossible to mistake Rope for Snake. But it’s good to know that Rope is afraid of me. Or is it that Rope doesn’t think I’m reality? Bah…I forget already.
Remembering something doesnt mean it was/is reality. You remember many things from your dream last night, In waking state it has no reality for you. Dream is real only as long as you are in the dream state. Snake ceases to exist when there is light, It never existed except for your misconception. When your misconception is cleared, you realize that was an illusion. Reality and Illusion both cannot exist parallely, Just as Darkness and Light cannot co-exist.
]Why should sleeping be different from any other activity? May be because of real “I” consciousness overtakes the misconceived identification of “Ego” created by mind as ‘real’?I dont find it logical or rational to be honest.
It is not about anyone’s personal experience. It is not about taking your word over mine or vice versa. There is no rational explanation forthcoming for the simple experience as such as Deep sleep where “suddenly you dont exist and you re-appear after deep sleep experience” We are attempting rational explanation for this scenario.
These are wild assumptions with no scientific or logical basis. Remember we are not talking about Programmed Robots unless you think Human beings are similar to Robots.
You skipped to answer pointed questions in debate and you came up with this camouflage after i logged of? Nice debating skill!
You keep on repeating “Religion” “Holy Book” is quite boring. You are just demonstrating the fact Atheists are quite touchy when it comes to their “religion” . Atheists feel very insecure about their “Beliefs” are questioned, quite similar reaction to Fundamentalists folks of religion.
Treating “Advaita Vedanta” as “Religious Stuff” is similar to Nazis calling Einstein’s Theory of relativity as “Jewish Conspiracy”. Keep it going!
Atheism isn’t a religion no matter how many times you repeat it without defining what you mean by “atheism” and “religion”-we are not bound by your personal definitions.
Equating atheists with Nazis is Godwinizing at it’s ugliest.
Remembering something means that that memory was/is reality. And that memory is all we have, thanks to perception. Unless, of course, you’re making a statement about the objective reality of the rope, which of course never changes unless we redefine it.
I’m not claiming that sleeping is different from any other activity. As I’ve said; I use those same terms in the same way for many activities.
Of course there’s a rational explanation, which I’ve stated several times. If my “I”, my “self”, innately includes or consists entirely of my self-consciousness, and when I am asleep that is no longer present, logically it is gone. It is not present.
It’s like light, to borrow your metaphor. In my room a lightbulb gives off light. Turn off the switch, and the light vanishes, it is no longer present. Flip it on again, and light reappears. During the time it’s off it can rationally, reasonable, be said not to exist. And the means for light to appear is present at all times, just as the brain itself is.
I do think human beings are similar to robots (not quite sure why you’re capitalizing them there), although the more accurate term would probably be artificial intelligence. Impressive, incredibly complex, but “programmed” all the same.
And of course it has a scientific and logical basis. A very simple one, in fact; I can go out and look at a brain. I could have mine scanned. It is something that exists. If someone damages theirs, changes can occur - predictable changes, sometimes - in personality, reasoning ability, and function. The brain, by all scientific and logical accounts, is the centre of the mind.
Your turn. Explain “transcendental state”, with reference to logic and scientific enquiry, please.
I’ve been reading through MusicalDream’s thread and trying to make sense of it as much as my materialistic western mindset can process.
What I think (don’t know for sure) MD is saying is that there’s three levels of reality, all relative to each other.
Dream state
Waking state
Absolute reality
In the dream state, we are not conscious of any other states of reality. Our dreaming selves manufacture our own state of reality, which is not based on any physical quality. To one who dreams, every object and person is real, but there is no physical attribute to the dream universe. Dreamers have no reason to believe there should be.
In the waking world, we add physical attributes to our concept of reality. We define reality by what we can perceive, not manufacture ourselves. We separate ourselves from the rest of the universe, and do not interact with it like we do in dreams. MD’s philosophy/religion/what-have-you considers this a bad thing.
In absolute reality, we integrate ourselves with the rest of the universe. We become aware of everything occurring outside our individual selves. This is Enlightenment. It takes a long, long time to adjust to this state of thinking because we have to reject the laws of reality we previously learned. Intense meditation is a means to adjust to this state.
Maybe that’s why Siddhas isolate themselves on mountaintops. It’s the farthest they can physically remove themselves from the distractions of the waking state (the reality around them).
But whether you’ve reached this supposed “absolute reality” can only be a matter of personal opinion…making it completely indistinguishable from the “waking state”.
