Nature of Consciousness

[Parisi & Watson]

-----Original Message-----
From: Vidyasankar Sundaresan <vsundaresan at HOTMAIL.COM>
To: ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG
<ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG>
Date: Monday, July 19, 1999 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: Nature of Consciousness


<snip>

>>This is the crux of the issue. Is it not obvious that consciousness is the
>>medium of all human experience, regardless of whether consciousness is
>>produced by the nervous system or vice versa? So how can a valid argument
>be
>>made on this basis that "all there is is consciousness"?
>
>It would be useful to make a distinction between awareness or consciousness
>in relation to sense objects and pure consciousness, which is
>non-relational. There is no means of proof that establishes the latter,
>simply because all human intellectual activity presumes it. Traditional
>Advaita takes the view that pure consciousness is identical with pure
being,
>and is self-established. It is perhaps easier to see within advaita
vedAnta,
>that pure being has to be admitted as the substratum of the_all. It is the
>equation of pure being with pure consciousness that remains a big issue.
>There is a scriptural basis for this equation, which cannot be established
>using other means of knowing.


Just for the record, I never mentioned the word proof. I am only seeking an
understanding of consciousness, experience, and knowledge that best explains
what we 'know' (unavoidably circular), and that entails no unnecessary
assumptions. But you seem to be conceding the main point as a matter of
faith only - as a sort of axiom from which everything else flows, but which
cannot be established except through supposed revelation. I would think that
many people, both Eastern and Western, would find such a position to be
lacking.

Robert.