Which substratum? (was: Gaudapada's Karika)

[Allan Curry]

Namaste

Vidyasankar writes:

>The problem is one of epistemology. The world is almost always taken to be
>real, without question, simply because the world feeds the sense organs
>with input data, and one depends on the sense organs to 'know'.
>

OK, we seem to agree maybe *something* IS actually there to feed the senses
with input. Whether that something is non-conscious energy/matter or Brahman
is another question.


>The world is often described in advaita, not as simply unreal (asat), but
>as false (mithyA). The world is held to be real only insofar as it is
>based on a real substratum, i.e. brahman. Some take it to be an admixture
>of real and unreal, while others take it to be of a third truth value,
>that which is neither real nor unreal.
>
>In fact, the chAndogya upanishad's sad-vidyA khANDa argues, "how can the
>existent (sat, i.e. the world) have arisen from the non-existent (asat)?"
>

I agree that human perceptions of the physical world may be "false" in that
they are composed by the brain/mind and projected in a space/time that is
equally created by the brain/mind. I also agree that something cannot arise
out of nothing, but why can't it be the case that perceptions AND
consciousness (both dual and non-dual consciousness) are ALL arising out of
energy/matter which is NOT conscious?  This contention seems to be
*somewhat* supported by modern science (in my uneducated opinion), but
where, I wonder is the *proof* that consciousness is ontologically prior to
matter/energy instead of vice versa?

>The main argument of the GK is not that dreams are unreal because they
>change, and so is the waking world. Rather, the argument is against a
>realist who holds the waking state to be real, and the dream unreal. The
>intention is to demolish all naive notions about the relative unreality of
>the dream state as compared to the waking state, and to show that both
>partake of the same kind of (un)reality.
>

Yes, I agree that the perceptions occuring in waking state and dream state
are both equally created through the agency of the brain/mind. It seems
likely to me that dream perceptions are entirely created by the mind while
waking state perceptions also have input from outside the mind. Regardless,
I still want to know how we can *prove* the most basic substratum of the
mental and extra-mental worlds is consciousness instead of non-conscious
energy/matter? It seems that any recourse to scripture amounts to faith and
belief, while pointing to the experience of oneself or others (however
hoary) just begs the question.

Sincerely,

Allan Curry

P.S.

Please remember that I'm not trying to disprove Advaita Vedanta here,
rather I want it to emerge from the fire of my doubt like tempered steel.

In any event -- Truth at any cost!!!