TO THE EDITOR: Re: atma --- 'self-referential | recursive' thought ;;; my-copy;;;DRAFTxpanded;;;

Dear Editor:::

as i indicated to my friends as follows ---​​

...

humbly, i mention my > thoughts and meditations < over-all are very gratifying to me and in my judgement important and useful for others as well : this transcription is for your view and concerned comment --- it is about the famous religious concept of India all the way going back to the time of the Vedas --- "atma" as it is written in Telugu or "Atman" as it is usually written i think in Sanskrit as well as English;;; i humbly review below the view on the "atma" by Sakyamuni Gauthama the Buddha and Jiddu Krishnamurti;;;

...

i am copying out here the transcription of the passage on the atma in >.thoughts and meditations.< of my own authorship;;;

begin

Rem: addressing Jiddu Krishnamurti ...

>.you say there is no ‘atma’ … Q: is there no ’atma’ ? Q:what is thought itself then?.< ;;; Rem.begin: empirically, thought may be conceived as response to memory ;but, what is it inherently by itself? Enh!?;;; my hunch is that thought is verily Brahman, Itself ::: ego obscures this fact;;; if you don't know what is Brahman, ask what is Brahman ::: don't say It is just thought with the attendant notion "I am the thinker";;; thought is Brahman Itself wo the attendant notion "I am the thinker" ::: thought is not goblin {.dic_ goblin n elf, evil spirit.};;; Rem.end;;;

LENOVO.dic.BEGIN

goblin
Also found in: Thesaurus, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.
gob·lin (gŏb′lĭn)
n.
A grotesque elfin creature of folklore, thought to work mischief or evil.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
dic_ elfin adj (.of a face etc.,.) small and delicate;;;

[Middle English gobelin, from Norman French *gobelin, name of a ghost that supposedly haunted the town of Évreux in the 12th century.]

LENEVO.dic.END;;; Rem: i hope it is enough!!!

‘recursive thought’ is atma, Sir, if I may inform you <.addressing Krishnamurti.>;;;

Rem: thought is of two kinds: one, ‘referential thought’ ;and, two, ‘self-referential thought’; ‘self-referential thought’ is recursive thought; ‘recursive thought’ is thought which employs thought itself as part of itself;;;

revealing.ASIDE.begin

i respectfully quote MANDUKYA UPANISHAD Juan Mascaro (Penguin Books) ...

The fourth condition is Atman in his own pure state: the awakened life of supreme consciousness. It is neither outer nor inner consciousness, neither semi-consciousness, nor sleeping-consciousness, neither consciousness nor unconsciousness. He is Atman, the Spirit himself, that cannot be seen or touched, that is above all distinction, beyond thought and ineffable {.dic_ ineffable a. too great for words.}. In the union with him is the supreme proof of his reality. He is the end of evolution and non-duality. He is peace and love.

PDS {.Rem: fm a letter to Jacob.}

revealing.ASIDE.end;;;

EX: well known recursive definition for factorial n is …

n! = n*(n-1)!

for n = 1 ,
1! = 1*(1-1)! = 1*0! [ - ] = 1*1 [ by definition ] = 1 ; Reference: Ryser “Combinatorial Mathematics”; The Carus Mathematical Monographs, The Mathematical Association of America;;;

Rem: Krishnamurti says | opines { dic_ opine v state as one’s opinion } there is no atma; he says the notion of atma is only a superstition, i remember ;;; i beg to differ ;;; please permit me to quote the Buddha from "The Buddha and Buddhism", Encyclopedia Britannica copy right 1985, 15th Edition ( or, perhaps later ), The University of Chicago;;;

quote

There is an unborn, an unoriginated, an unmade, and an uncompounded; were there not, there would be no escape from the world of the born, the originated, the made, and the compounded.

unquote; Rem: where there is no deliberate action, there there is 'atma';;; ... amma ...;;;

Q: can thought be entirely referential, Sakyamuni Gauthama the Buddha, please ... please? Q: what is ‘sunyata’ ? the Buddha said pointing to the moon, “that is the moon” and added “do not mistake this, the index finger, to be the moon”;;; Q:does the Buddhist concept of ‘sunyata’ have something to do with the attempt to make thought entirely referential? >. perhaps .< ;;; Krishnamurti’s observation “you are the world” is primarily an instance of referential thought i feel; Krishnamurti’s thought is exclusively referential --- Q: is that why he says there is no atma? perhaps so! The Buddha said to say there is the atma leads to attachment which is counterproductive; so please remember ‘atma’ appears in the context of self-referential thought: and, do not use it in the context of, and with the implication of, referential thought --- a very strenuous discipline;;; to put it simply 'atma' is not an object;;; Rem: Krishnamurti is a Bodhisattva, one who keeps his own Nirvana in abeyance out of his concern for others;;; he remarks there is no liberation --- so sorry!!!---;;; his ego is his identification with all others + theosophical society people were impressed with his total lack of ego --- "you are the world" is what he says ::: to him consciousness is mixed with the me ;and, that is why to him there is no 'atma' and no Brahman;;; Rem: Krishnamurti has an aura of a total lack of ego according to theosophical society people;;;

i respectfully quote MANDUKYA UPANISHAD Juan Mascaro (Penguin Books) ...

The fourth condition is Atman in his own pure state: the awakened life of supreme consciousness. It is neither outer nor inner consciousness, neither semi-consciousness, nor sleeping-consciousness, neither consciousness nor unconsciousness. He is Atman, the Spirit himself, that cannot be seen or touched, that is above all distinction, beyond thought and ineffable {.dic_ ineffable a. too great for words.}. In the union with him is the supreme proof of his reality. He is the end of evolution and non-duality. He is peace and love.

PDS {.Rem: fm a letter to Jacob.}

+>> ... ​... +>> Q: what is ‘self-referential | recursive’ thought? is it meditation on the atma? i feel it is so, Sirs ... please ... ;;; the Question ".Qn: who am I?." is of the nature of self-referential thought, which is recursive thought ... ;;;

aside begin thought is template {{​.​Rem: i use the word figuratively::: dic_ template n pattern used to cut out shapes accurately.​}} of action end aside;;; >.meditation is the resolution of the problem of thought.< ;;; and Krishnamurti famously advises {.​dic_ advise v 1 give advice about a course of action. 2 inform;.​} "action without idea”; the notion of idea is used in the referential sense;;; "action without idea" is >.action without
the me.<;;;

​Adi Sankara is famously said to have said, "Atma-satyam::: Jagan-midhya";;; this is to be understood as implying referential thought is prone {.dic_ prone adj 2 (.usu. followed by to or to+infin..) disposed or liable.} to error (.naturally.) ::: i.e., statements about the world could be either true or false ;and, self-referential | recursive thought, that is atma, does not suffer from this draw back;;; 'atma' is said to be beyond doubt;;; Rem: interesting and revealing!!! ​

end;

​aside remark.begin::: ​paramatma and jeevatma are both notions which appear when one, perhaps somewhat reluctantly, admits at once both referential and self referential modes of thought together ;and, Hindu religion declares their essential identity implying truth perceived in either referential or self-referential modes of thought is ultimately essentially the same!!! it is interesting to note that the Buddha, while remaining strictly referential in thought, steadfastly refuses to permit himself to draw upon God | paramatma ;and, so feels impelled {.dic_ impel v drive or urge to do something.} to reach sunyata;;; Hinduism reaches.1 and Buddhism reaches.0;;;
aside​ remark​.end

thank you all - for this opportunity to express my fond thoughts ; please unhesitatingly reply ...

Sincerely

( Krishna Rao PUTCHA )

​PS:
--- --- ---
Q: why is there no atma for Jiddu Krishnamurti? to him, thought is exclusively referential & atma appears only in self-referential.|.recursive. thought;;; atma exists beyond.|.is deeper than space-time, perception of which is a product of referential thought;;;
>>> Rem: beautiful early morning-dream .. two parallel mirrors ​... reflecting (.light.) ... atma Q:? ... please ... ;;; Rem: having woken-up, got ...confused... !!! ...i believe it is said the wakeful state itself is akin to dream-state ... please ... ;;; <<<

​aside begin

Q<.addressing JK.> what is the right attitude to thought, whereby it is everywhere relevant? ​+ what is the right attitude to money (.Economics.), Vivekananda?;;;Q: would 'prayer' and >.repeated relevance.< (.to elaborate.) >.reappearance of, the relevance of, a thought in time again.< come to the rescue? please ? +++ Q: what is the content of the 'image' of Mother Kali? >.rejection of the dominance of thought.< {.!.} ;and, >.the 'according to' -malady of the modern civilization.<;;; Q: what is the importance of meditation in life? --- please;;;

aside end

[] EPR => electron [ e - ] exists not in Space-Time ;but, in the Brahman | Atman ; []Q; why do more gross particles seem to exist in Space-Time? >.i don't know::: but i guess appearances are any way not real.<;;;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0x9AgZASQ4k

The Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation

+

(.also linked through this to.)
Bell Inequality as-well;;;

--- --- ---

Attachments area
Preview YouTube video The Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation
The Einstein Podolsky Rosen (EPR) Paradox - A simple explanation

A humble request (.to sriramakrishnaprabha.)::: kindly arrange for the translation of my submission to Telugu while considering it for publication in sriramakrishnaprabha [[.e-mail sriramakrishnaprabha@gmail.com.]];;; thank you ... ::: Q: or, is there an English Language publication you recommend i send it to, Sir?

krp

PS: ---

Rem: the closest Krishnamurti comes to 'atma' is the question he raises Qn: what is thought? but, does he perceive it as a phenomenon in time? ;or, does it prompt him to inquire into it recursively? Krishnamurti is certainly vast::: i hate to pass judgments ;but, i think he fails to see it recursively;;; Q; what is the gist of Krishnamurti's discussion on transformation? Q: {.h.}what is transformation? is it irreversible?

krp

PS: ---

Rem: Krishnamurti had an aura of a total lack of ego in the theosophical society perceptive insight when they "found him" --- interesting;;;