Phil. 312: Chat on Hinduism
Session Start: Tue Mar 27 20:00:09 2007
Session Ident: #philosophy
[20:00] *** Now talking in #philosophy
[20:01] <larchie> Phil 312 Oriental
Philosophy Chat is open
[20:01] <larchie> ...
[20:02] *** guest has joined #philosophy
[20:02] *** DBaldwin has joined #philosophy
[20:03] <larchie> Hi David
[20:03] <DBaldwin> Hello Dr. Archie
[20:03] <DBaldwin> And hello, Guest =)
[20:03] <larchie> guest is me checking on
another computer
[20:04] <larchie> Guest is signing off
[20:04] <DBaldwin> Oh, okay
[20:04] *** guest has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
[20:04] <DBaldwin> I was curious about
something I read on your sample test
[20:04] <larchie> right ...
[20:05] <DBaldwin> It asked about the
differences/similarities of Atman and Brahmin
[20:05] <DBaldwin> What are they?
[20:05] <larchie> Atman is the
subjective....soul
[20:05] <larchie> Brahman is the
objective ... nature
[20:05] <larchie> they are two aspects of the
same thing
[20:06] <larchie> viewed from two different
viewpoints.
[20:06] <larchie> Atman = Brahman
[20:06] <DBaldwin> On the test, it said that
Atman becomes Brahman.
[20:06] <DBaldwin> Does our individual soul
become part of nature?
[20:07] <larchie> sort of ...
[20:07] <larchie> Since it is Atman it can be
viewed that way.
[20:07] <larchie> I.e., we are part of the
whole of what is.
[20:07] <larchie> Hence, union with
"God"
[20:08] <DBaldwin> So, in essence, Atman (my
soul) is just a part of Brahman (nature/universe)?
[20:08] <larchie> Neither has higher status.
[20:09] <larchie> What is real is
transcendental to both--a kind of thing-in-itself
[20:09] <DBaldwin> Right. Atman is just a part of Brahman, right?
[20:09] <larchie> Not quite--they are both
modes of the ultimate reality
[20:10] <larchie> both two different ways of
describing reality
[20:10] <DBaldwin> But aren't those modes
individual vs collective?
[20:10] <larchie> one subjective one
objective--the really real is ultimateln neither one
[20:11] <larchie> They are more like looking
at a human being as a mind and a body
[20:11] <DBaldwin> How is the Atman
considered to be subjective? To what
standards and by whom?
[20:11] <larchie> what we are is neither but
something more than both
[20:12] <larchie> Atman is soul or big self
known through meditation and the mind
[20:12] <larchie> Mind is mental phenomena or
subjective.
[20:12] <larchie> Brahman is nature or the
principles of nature and is material
[20:12] <larchie> the universe as phenomena
[20:12] <larchie> so is "objective"
[20:13] <DBaldwin> Based on the way we interact
then?
[20:13] <larchie> Yes, based on how we come
to know reality.
[20:14] <DBaldwin> We interact with the
Brahman via our senses and our Atman via meditation
[20:14] <larchie> right--although
[20:14] <larchie> Brahman is known as well by
perception mediated by thinking
[20:15] <larchie> whereas Atman is not so
much thought as intuited
[20:15] <larchie> Thought, language, and
science get in the way of direct intuition
[20:16] <larchie> whereas Brahman can be
known through study and awareness of nature
[20:16] <DBaldwin> So, Atman is sensed or
felt
[20:17] *** guest has joined #philosophy
[20:17] <larchie> No, it's intuition although
sometimes intuition
[20:17] <larchie> is defined as
"perception via the unconscious" --
[20:17] <larchie> it not really perception
even if its subliminal
[20:17] <larchie> Hi guest.
[20:19] <DBaldwin> Is this where Yoga comes
in? To get in touch with one's Atman?
[20:19] <larchie> Absolutely, through
meditation with no thought
[20:19] <larchie> one can merge with the
object of meditation so the distinction
[20:20] <larchie> between perception and the
thing perceived vanishes
[20:20] *** guest has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
[20:20] <larchie> and one becomes one with
the object.
[20:20] <DBaldwin> Like what happens when one
practices japam?
[20:20] <larchie> When the soul (jiva)
"merges" with Atman we become Atman
[20:21] <larchie> yes, japam is another
way--good point
[20:21] <larchie> Here, however, with japam
it's more like self-hypnosis
[20:21] <DBaldwin> It allows our
subconscience to intuit our Atman, right?
[20:21] <larchie> right
[20:22] <DBaldwin> Into another topic: How do the Yogas work with the 4 Ends of
Life?
[20:23] <larchie> That's somewhat arguable.
[20:23] <DBaldwin> Are they two separate
things I can do during my life to obtain enlightment?
[20:23] <larchie> But one way to view the two
together is to correlate the goal of each
[20:24] <larchie> yoga with the goal of the
ends of life.
[20:24] <larchie> Karma yoga correlates with
dharma or duty or householder
[20:25] <larchie> Raja or meditative yoga
correlates with the forest stage like the samanas
[20:25] <larchie> the reflective yoga Jnana
would correlate with the student stage of life
[20:25] <larchie> so in similar manner correlations
can be set up with the path of desire
[20:26] <larchie> and the path of
renunciation.
[20:26] <larchie> This is more or less a
question that is arguable from different points of view.
[20:26] <DBaldwin> It was just something that
struck a chord in my mind
[20:27] <larchie> One obtains enlightenment
usually by several different ways working together
[20:27] <DBaldwin> Hatha yoga is something
that is learned before pursuing any of the other yogas, correct?
[20:27] <larchie> at different points in
life-span psychology
[20:27] <larchie> Usually--right
[20:28] <DBaldwin> It's not learned just for
it's own sake though, right? It's
always followed by one of the other yogas?
[20:28] <larchie> Sometimes, a person gets
"stuck" in hatha yoga because of the
[20:29] <larchie> siddhis that result--the
so-called magic powers
[20:29] <larchie> With hatha yoga, incredible
abilities are sometimes claimed and one gets sidetracked
[20:29] <larchie> from the spiritual goals
[20:30] <larchie> But ideally you are
entirely correct.
[20:31] <DBaldwin> I also have a question
about the test itself: will spelling
count if it's somewhere in the ballpark?
[20:32] <larchie> Sure--these words are
spelled differently by different translators anyway.
[20:32] <larchie> Spelling and grammar aren't
a factor on tests.
[20:33] <DBaldwin> Okay. Thanks, I was just curious...
[20:33] <larchie> I think I scared away the
"guest" a while ago by saying "HI"
[20:34] <larchie> If you have answers to half
of the essay questions on the sample test
[20:34] <larchie> you will be in excellent
shape for the essay on the test tomorrow.
[20:35] <DBaldwin> Well, what I know and
whether it's correct might be two different things. =)
[20:35] <larchie> So far your questions and
comments in class have been right on target.
[20:36] <DBaldwin> Yeah, I noticed they left
rather quickly. I tried to see who they
were, but there doesn't seem to be a way to do that on my end.
[20:36] <larchie> I can do a whois as
Guardian in mIRC, but I don't usually do so unless someone gets a bit wild
[20:37] <DBaldwin> So far, the only thing
that I've really been unsure of has been the concept of Atman and how it
relates to everything else.
[20:37] <DBaldwin> But you've answered quite
a few of my questions on that and I think I've gotten a much better handle on
it now.
[20:38] <larchie> By analogy with
Christianity, Atman is the holy spirit and Brahman is God
[20:38] <larchie> Logic does not apply to the
relation between Atman and Brahman in Hindu logic.
[20:38] <DBaldwin> I guess a lot of my
confusion comes from what we read in Siddartha
[20:39] <larchie> In answer to a question on
the Message Board, there's a short explanation
[20:39] <larchie> why this is so. You might take a look if you get a chance.
[20:39] <larchie> Atman and Brahman aren't
individual things--they are like mass terms.
[20:40] <DBaldwin> But Hinduism just adds the
concept of Brahman to it (along with a few other things), right?
[20:40] <larchie> I'm not sure what you mean
"to it"--can you elaborate?
[20:41] <larchie> Atman and Brahman are two
aspects of the same thing--the really real
[20:41] <DBaldwin> It's my understanding
(during Siddartha) that there's only Atman.
We all share a part of it.
[20:42] <DBaldwin> Now, under Hinduism, we
still have Atman but now have Brahman as the collective whole of Atmans.
[20:42] <larchie> From the point of view of
the soul, yes.
[20:42] <larchie> Think of Atman as World
Soul
[20:42] <larchie> Think of Brahman as Nature
or the Universe
[20:43] <larchie> Reality is the combination
of both--neither one nor the other.
[20:43] <larchie> Just as a human being is
neither mind nor body but both, but can be known
[20:43] <larchie> in either manner.
[20:43] <DBaldwin> So, Atman
"exists" in Brahman just as we exist in the universe
[20:44] <larchie> Well, the analogy isn't
quite perfect--Atman is spiritual substance and Brahman is material substance.
[20:44] <DBaldwin> Atman cannot exist w/o
Brahman and vice-versa
[20:45] <larchie> Spirit doesn't really exist
in matter. They are two kinds of
reality.
[20:45] <DBaldwin> I think I understand now
[20:45] <DBaldwin> (or at least a whole lot
better)
[20:45] <larchie> Yes, Atman and Brahman are
different characteristics of the same reality
[20:46] <DBaldwin> You're talking about the
physical (Brahman) and the meta-physical (Atman)
[20:46] <larchie> I guess I would put it the
physical Brahman and the spiritual Atman
[20:47] <larchie> The metaphysical usually
would be whatever they are both aspects of.
[20:47] <DBaldwin> Yeah, I suppose
meta-physical *does* have a bad connoctation...
[20:47] <larchie> The so-called ultimate
reality with no definite predicates or descriptions
[20:48] <larchie> which cannot be known
through perception or thought.
[20:49] <larchie> Sure, I guess because all
of these concepts are metaphysical from the point of Western knowledge
[20:49] <DBaldwin> Onto reincarnation: I just want to make sure that I understand
it correctly
[20:49] <larchie> Hopefully, the questions on
the test will not be as difficult as the questions you are asking here! :)
[20:49] <larchie> OK--
[20:50] <DBaldwin> Sorry about that!!! =)
[20:50] <DBaldwin> Okay, this is our current
life
[20:50] <larchie> right ....
[20:50] <DBaldwin> Our past lives influenced
how we came into this world and affects our current decisions
[20:50] <larchie> right ...
[20:51] <DBaldwin> We may or may not have
been human in our past lives, but they affected us regardless
[20:51] <larchie> right ...
[20:51] <DBaldwin> Our next life will be
affected by the life that we lead in this one
[20:51] <larchie> right ...
[20:51] <larchie> The key to linking karma,
caste, and reincarnation is in Swami Vivekananda's statement, "... why
does a just and merciful God create one happy and another unhappy, why is He so
partial ...?"
[20:52] <larchie> Just as you have described
[20:52] <DBaldwin> This cycle will continue
until we reach enlightenment?
[20:52] <larchie> yes.
[20:52] <DBaldwin> Okay
[20:53] <larchie> And, of course,
enlightenment is union with Atman-Brahman
[20:53] <larchie> Right
[20:53] <DBaldwin> Isn't the caste system a
man-made social invention?
[20:53] <larchie> Yes, and it's based on
human differences or aptitudes or varna
[20:53] <larchie> well ..... supposedly
[20:55] <DBaldwin> Okay, I suppose I have it
correct afterall
[20:56] <larchie> Absolutely.
[20:56] <DBaldwin> Well, I suppose we're not
going to have anyone else join us tonight
[20:56] <larchie> Probably not--I hope that's
a good sign.
[20:57] <DBaldwin> I'm going to go look over
my notes again tomorrow morning just to make sure that I have it all fresh in
my mind
[20:57] <larchie> Good--just post to the
board if you have any last minute questions
[20:57] <DBaldwin> I hope everybody does well
on the test tomorrow
[20:57] <larchie> Me also.
[20:57] <DBaldwin> I doubt I will have any
extra questions, but I will if I have any
[20:58] <larchie> O.K.
[20:58] <DBaldwin> Goodnight and I'll see you
tomorrow
[20:58] <larchie> Bye ...
[20:58] *** DBaldwin has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
[20:58] <larchie> The Chat is closing .....
[20:58] *** DBaldwin has joined #philosophy
[20:58] <DBaldwin> Oh, and I forgot, thanks
for your time!!!
[20:59] <larchie> No problem--thanks for the
questions!
[20:59] <DBaldwin> You really have helped me
understand a lot tonight
[20:59] <DBaldwin> Goodnight!!
[20:59] *** DBaldwin has quit IRC (Quit: Leaving)
[20:59] <larchie> I appreciate your questions
Bye.
Session Close: Tue Mar 27 20:59:45 2007