[Advaita-l] Cotard Syndrome and Brahman Realisation

[sriram]

Dear Sri Rajaram Venkatramani
I tend to agree that mind is a product of the brain only as intellect is.I 
had undergone administration of anaesthsia for a surgical operation and 
during this period there were no activity of the brain as discernible by 
me-mind-and I was not aware of any external activity.During deep sleep also 
this can be seen.Dreams come only when your brain is not fully asleep 
leading to mind`s supplying bizarre of jumbled thoughts.So mind also comes 
under brain`s function.Brain`s damage results in loss of memory etc and what 
we call mind becomes incoherent.
I am not a neuroscientist but I am researching on mano nasam and as per my 
thinking mind is brain`s activity only and sans brain no 
mind.R.Krishnamoorthy.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rajaram Venkataramani" <rajaramvenk at gmail.com>
To: "A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta" 
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Saturday, June 09, 2012 11:16 AM
Subject: [Advaita-l] Cotard Syndrome and Brahman Realisation


>I am only thinking aloud taking the question posed by Sri Rajaram as the
>> 'prashna bIjam'.  Members are welcome to point out errors in my
>> thinking/expression.
>>
>
> It is perhaps easier to find a needle in a hay stack.
>
> I think the mind is clearly distinct from the body (according to the
> sastras) as you said. I don't quite understand Sri Vidyasankar's position
> on mind - body connection. If his position is that mind is distinct from
> the body but when in it remains in the body it is totally connected as 
> long
> as there is attachment, I can't agree more. The actions of the mind create
> measurable effect all over the body - the brain, heart and practically
> every part of he body. The body also produces effects on the mind.
>
> The modern scientific opinion that the mind is a product of the brain
> function cannot be right in my opinion. Even Roger Penrose, who agrees 
> with
> the current scientific paradigm that the mind is a product of the neural
> activity argues that there need to be advances in mathematical physics to
> explain the mind. The current physics falls short is his opinion based on
> good logic.
>
> Ian Stevenson spent a life time documenting, critically and with high
> integrity, thousands of cases of reincarnation based on memory of past
> lives. If we accept reincarnation based on such verbal testimony or
> sastras, then we need to accept that mind is distinct from the body.
>
> Knowledge is characterised by renunciation. Renounciation is not possible
> without the right mindset and body. So it seems tattva jnana  alters
> neurological constitution. But I think this alteration is easily
> reversible. The jnani can assume the conditioning of a king or a 
> mendicant,
> which won't be possible if jnana shapes the brain in a particular way
> irreversibly.
>
> But I think repetition of mantras, deep meditation etc. semi-permanently
> shapes the brain. It seems similar to building the body in a gym but if 
> you
> stop the practice  you lose the muscles over time.
>
> If the jnani is able to witness his own insanity, if it occurs, then
> witnessing part (seer) has to be disconnected from acting part (seen). 
> Who
> is the witness? I think the mind sees the dysfunction of the brain. I am
> happy to be created.
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org