[Advaita-l] cloning and inevitable mrutyu

[V Subrahmanian]

In the Pancharatra adhikaranam Shankara's  objection is on their proposing
a jivotpatti.  This objection is made by Bhaskara too.

A reply on the topic from an old comment of mine elsewhere:

on
dvaita vs advaita: vadiraja attacks advaita part 2


a comment on the above:



illustration 1. in a dream i find myself in a busy mall. there are a number
of people doing business. i meet a friend there and we chat for a brief
while. i notice a flower vase made of ebony and ask the price. (end of the
dream).



in the dream, all the dream persons, objects, talks, etc. are made of one
material: the dream material which is consciousness. certainly no artisan
of the waking world put an ebony vase there in the dream. the people are
not of the flesh and blood of the waking. the entire mall is of no weight,
for it was in my mind alone. if it was really made of brick, mortar and
steel of the waking, i, the dreamer lying on my bed, would have been
crushed by its weight.



the illustration brings to the foreground the fact that despite the entire
variety of dream objects/people being made up of the same material:
consciousness, yet it is perfectly possible to have the ‘i’- feeling with
respect to one body, ‘he/she’- feeling with respect to the other bodies and
‘it’- feeling with regard to the inert objects.



illustration 2. supposing there is an expert in making wax models. he has
in his stock a variety of models of vegetables, fruits, etc. it is evening
time and suddenly there is a power failure. he finds his candle and lights
it and there is light sufficient for his activity.



now, even though the models and the candle are of the same material: wax,
yet in order to give light it is the candle that is needed and not any of
the fruit/vegetable models. why is this so? it is because it is only the
candle that has a specific cylindrical/conical shape and a wick running
thru it. this unique feature is absent in the other wax objects he has.


similarly, despite the fact that the body and the pot are of the same
material in a superimposition, yet, it is the body alone that qualifies to
be the object of the feeling: ‘i am fair-skinned’. the ‘i’ can arise only
in the body/mind as even though these are made of the five elements, they
alone have the unique capacity of reflecting the consciousness of the
atman/self. this feature is absent in the pot even though it is also made
of the elements. this is the reason for the jiva getting the feeling of ‘i’
in the body/mind complex alone and not in the pot. the body/mind
identification is expressed as: ‘i am the perceiver of the pot’. there is
no feeling ‘i am the pot’ because the pot cannot capture the reflection of
the consciousness just as the body/mind does.



the reason for this dichotomy is the presence of ignorance in the jiva. it
is because of ignorance the jiva identifies with just the body/mind and
sees every other person/object as different from himself. this is the cause
of bondage, samsara. the ‘i’ becomes the experiencer of joy/sorrow and the
‘this’, the objective world, becomes the experienced. the objective world,
when interacted with by the jiva, generates joy or sorrow. this is what
samsara is.



the upanishads teach that this distinction should go and the means for this
is obtaining the knowledge that ‘i am all, everything, there is none other
than me.’ ‘aham brahma asmi’ (i am brahman, the all
quite unwittingly sri vadiraja has pointed out, as a defect, what is
actually the ideal situation that the upanishad/advaita teach as the mark
of freedom from bondage. the taittiriya upanishad iii chapter contains the
expression of joy by the truth-knowing person: ‘aham annam, aham
annam……aham annaado….etc. (iam the food and the eater of the food.) the
universal vision that the aspirant gains affords no room for any difference
whatsoever and that is the realization that destroys all distinction. this
makes the earlier mistaken notion of difference between ‘i’ and the ‘pot’
an erroneous one, now replaced by ‘i am the all’ . the ‘inert’ food (pot)
is also experienced to be consciousness in truth.

thus it can be seen that there is no illogicality in (1) not getting the
feeling of ‘i’ in the pot and getting it only with respect to the body/mind
(in a superimposition) and (2) ultimately, when the superimposition is
gone, getting the feeling of ‘i’ in everything, sentient and insentient.

On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, 14:05 Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l, <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Namaste Jayakumar ji
> Thank you for the inputs. My additional question is - on what basis can we
> categorically rule out self-judgement in the case of a putative android
> which lets say looks and outwardly mimics a human to the point of even
> cribbing about life or his lot and saying/vocalising through a speech
> generator - "I am small and insignificant" etc.
>
> I said additional question becoz even  without complexes and self-judgement
> a mammal like a cow (which we assume does not have complexes) is accorded
> jiiva status but not a sophisticated speaking  robot claiming "I am
> small." What could be the reasons for this?
>
> The same panchabhUtas are the constituents of the gross bodies of both the
> regular jiiva and a robot mouthing "I am small and insignificant". Yet
> there is some significant difference between the way matter is organized in
> living beings as compared to an android. We can use different words like
> Jada and cetana. Or in a different way chidAbhAsa and its absence etc, but
> there is a definite material difference which is currently not clearly
> understood, between the way matter is put together in living and nonliving
> systems.
>
> BhAShya too mentions this in katha  upaniShad someplace. And I remember in
> upadesha sAhasrI too,  the arising of antahkaraNa and ahamkAra is said to
> be mediated by an almost magical arrangement of the same constituents of
> matter that go to make up a stone or a chair etc, just as any metal surface
> is not a mirror but some specially polished surfaces catch the reflection
> of all-pervading consciousness and these are the individual jiiva-s.
>
> Om
> Raghav
>
> On Tue 24 Apr, 2018, 12:00 PM Jay Kumar via Advaita-l, <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>
> > Namaste Shri Raghavji and to all,
> >
> > Questioning Vedanta may appear  proper  only when the scientist claim to
> > have produced and demonstrate an entity with self-judgement,
> un-programmed
> > feelings, un-inhibited aspirations, self-complex etc. etc…. (on a
> > futuristic day even when we will  have our purposeful answer).
> >
> > Coming to the next statement :
> > “the question is, can we extend the privilege to still lower entities
> like
> > insects (yes), viruses (doubtful), plants(yes), stones (no). But where do
> > we draw the line?”
> >
> > Answer – ‘Drawing the line’ : The precise answer is the theory of
> > causation involving 3 types of karmas, re-birth, the ‘as though’ bondage,
> > wisdom, liberation etc.  is applicable to the ‘beings’ that have
> > ‘Individuality’ whereas the individuality itself is ‘unreal’!
> >
> > Contradictions or clarification (if needed) can be shared over phone
> >
> > S K Jayakumar
> > Mobile : 9916494729
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Advaita-l [mailto:advaita-l-bounces at lists.advaita-vedanta.org] On
> > Behalf Of Raghav Kumar Dwivedula via Advaita-l
> > Sent: 24 April 2018 10:51
> > To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> > Cc: Raghav Kumar Dwivedula
> > Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] cloning and inevitable mrutyu
> >
> > Namaste
> >
> > A more difficult to answer question would be of the kind - How do we
> > decide a given entity is a jiva with sanchita karma or is it just an
> > Android or machine which merely mimics speech, facial features etc.
> > I.e., a sophisticated robot ?
> >
> > Any clone is generally initially cultured in vitro (i.e., in a "test
> > tube") and later transplanted in vivo (into a uterus) and later the baby
> is
> > delivered in a regular way. And given its biological/organic physiology
> and
> > neuronal architecture it's quite credibly a jiva in its own right with
> its
> > own sanchita karma etc. This is my understanding.
> >
> > Now if we consider a futuristic android (a real android not its namesake
> > smartphone OS !) which has a brain consisting of just electronic devices
> > with no neuronal structures, it's does not sound believable if some
> people
> > like the proponents of strong-AI claim it's a human being who has the
> > faculties and capacities and consequently the rights of a human being.
> > (Others like Roger Penrose contradict this). But can we give a precise
> > reason why an electronic entity cannot be considered a jiva with the
> usual
> > faculties of iccha, GYAna, and kriya and having sanchita karma etc.
> >
> > Another related question - we can talk of higher mammals like deer, cows
> > etc., as having sanchita karma etc. Now the question is, can we extend
> the
> > privilege to still lower entities like insects (yes), viruses (doubtful),
> > plants(yes), stones (no). But where do we draw the line?
> >
> > The concept of chidAbhAsa is to some extent helpful in figuring this out
> > since it (chidAbhAsa) does indeed depend on the underlying neuronal
> biology
> > and not merely on the superficial faculties of speech and motion which a
> > robot or android can mimic.
> > Om
> > Raghav
> >
> >
> > On Tue 24 Apr, 2018, 9:17 AM Bhaskar YR via Advaita-l, <
> > advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> >
> > > praNAms Sri Sada prabhuji and Sri Venkateshwaran prabhuji Hare Krishna
> > >
> > > Thanks for the clarification.  Just wondering what would be karma /
> > > dharma for these cloning creatures :-) Perhaps it is their karma phala
> > > to get created through cloning technology :-)
> > >
> > > Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
> > > bhaskar
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> > >
> > > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> > >
> > > For assistance, contact:
> > > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> > >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> > http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> >
> > To unsubscribe or change your options:
> > https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> >
> > For assistance, contact:
> > listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>