A conceptualisation of Brahman, Atman, Maya and experience
Posted: Mon Nov 22, 2021 12:46 pm
I've recently become interested in traditionalist metaphysics, and Advaita Vedanta in particular. In my country, there is a pretty strong community of traditionalist writers and thinkers, and for some reason they made the concept of solipsism their central idea (nevermind that there's no hint of solipsism in almost any traditional work). One of these writers wrote a strong critique of this concept, which I fully agreed with, but made me think about a few things. I'll present my thoughts below, and I'd really be interested in your perspective - and I'm looking at you now, Cleric.
In Advaita, Brahman is God, the all-encompassing infinity that contains the totality of existence. Atman is the Universal I, the Witness that experiences, but all experience is Maya: dream, illusion. It can be conceptualised like this: Brahman is the Sun, containing all potential, and the Atman is a prism through which this potential is shattered into the many colours of existence. Maya is the manifold pattern drawn from these many colours: an infinite tapestry, on which everything that ever happened or will happen in any universe appears. The patterns of Maya bloom in a fractal-like manner, which, from within Maya, appears as causality. A living being is simply a pattern that is so complex that it gives rise to thoughts (which are also merely a part of the pattern, just more complex than "matter") a self-referential sense of identity.
Since everything - your body, your mind, all your actions - are just part of the pattern, subject to the causality of the fractal mathematics of the tapestry, then nothing is really happening or changing. You are simply watching a story unfold. You think you are a person with free will and actionality because the Witness is currently experiencing a pattern that thinks these things. But only the Witness is ultimately real, and the Witness does nothing, it just experiences.
This is nothing new. So, what does this have to do with solipsism?
Well, why should we suppose that the Witness is experiencing anything at all other than what is experienced in this very moment? (BK hints at this same thing in More than Allegory btw). This doesn't mean that other living beings do not have their mental processes and sensations, it just means that the Witness is currently not looking at that part of the tapestry that contains those sensations. From my perspective, as I write this, and as you answer, I don't have to experience your mental processes needed to answer this, since it is not the Witness that is doing those things (as it is also not the thing that is writing these lines - it's - or rather, "I AM" - just experiencing the act of writing these lines). Those mental processes are just part of the tapestry.
Of course when this ego that the Witness is currently experiencing dies, the Witness will choose another part of the tapestry to experience - hence, reincarnation. Maybe "next time" the Witness will experience one of those patterns reading and responding to this thread.
In the Eastern traditions it is also said that awakening clears all karma. What I described can clearly answer why. Karma is the accumulation of causal effects on the tapestry. The Witness is bound to experience the things that follow from the things that are "earlier" in the tapestry. Unless it ceases to look at it. Then there's no more cause and effect.
There's also a teaching that says "If you awaken, the world awakens with you." Now, there have been many alleged awakenings, yet the world hasn't awakened yet. This can also answer why. There is no time. There is just the tapestry. Awakenings, wherever they are located temporally, are just parts in the pattern where a pattern reaches the conclusion of realising the nature of its existence, or rather, non existence. The fact that I'm not awake simply means that the Witness haven't looked at one of these patterns "yet".
What do you think about all this, fellow patterns?
In Advaita, Brahman is God, the all-encompassing infinity that contains the totality of existence. Atman is the Universal I, the Witness that experiences, but all experience is Maya: dream, illusion. It can be conceptualised like this: Brahman is the Sun, containing all potential, and the Atman is a prism through which this potential is shattered into the many colours of existence. Maya is the manifold pattern drawn from these many colours: an infinite tapestry, on which everything that ever happened or will happen in any universe appears. The patterns of Maya bloom in a fractal-like manner, which, from within Maya, appears as causality. A living being is simply a pattern that is so complex that it gives rise to thoughts (which are also merely a part of the pattern, just more complex than "matter") a self-referential sense of identity.
Since everything - your body, your mind, all your actions - are just part of the pattern, subject to the causality of the fractal mathematics of the tapestry, then nothing is really happening or changing. You are simply watching a story unfold. You think you are a person with free will and actionality because the Witness is currently experiencing a pattern that thinks these things. But only the Witness is ultimately real, and the Witness does nothing, it just experiences.
This is nothing new. So, what does this have to do with solipsism?
Well, why should we suppose that the Witness is experiencing anything at all other than what is experienced in this very moment? (BK hints at this same thing in More than Allegory btw). This doesn't mean that other living beings do not have their mental processes and sensations, it just means that the Witness is currently not looking at that part of the tapestry that contains those sensations. From my perspective, as I write this, and as you answer, I don't have to experience your mental processes needed to answer this, since it is not the Witness that is doing those things (as it is also not the thing that is writing these lines - it's - or rather, "I AM" - just experiencing the act of writing these lines). Those mental processes are just part of the tapestry.
Of course when this ego that the Witness is currently experiencing dies, the Witness will choose another part of the tapestry to experience - hence, reincarnation. Maybe "next time" the Witness will experience one of those patterns reading and responding to this thread.
In the Eastern traditions it is also said that awakening clears all karma. What I described can clearly answer why. Karma is the accumulation of causal effects on the tapestry. The Witness is bound to experience the things that follow from the things that are "earlier" in the tapestry. Unless it ceases to look at it. Then there's no more cause and effect.
There's also a teaching that says "If you awaken, the world awakens with you." Now, there have been many alleged awakenings, yet the world hasn't awakened yet. This can also answer why. There is no time. There is just the tapestry. Awakenings, wherever they are located temporally, are just parts in the pattern where a pattern reaches the conclusion of realising the nature of its existence, or rather, non existence. The fact that I'm not awake simply means that the Witness haven't looked at one of these patterns "yet".
What do you think about all this, fellow patterns?