Abstract:  This paper explicates the essence of Gaudapada’s ajativada (nothing is ever born) school of Non-duality and gives a neuroscientific rationale to develop identifiable “Markers” in the brain of a Jivanmukta, i.e. one who has realized that “nothing is ever born.”  The sense of an individuating ‘self’ has collapsed right in the present life for a Jivanmukta. Samadhi or equivalent meditation states and epiphany etc. (on which published research information is available) is considered in Advaita to be still a ‘state’ (i.e. time dependent) unlike Jivanmukti where the sense of separation ends for good (i.e. irreversibly).  Though a Jivanmukta is dissolved into an inexpressible Oneness, this change happens within and to an individual.  Certain broad traits and characteristics of a Jivanmukta can be gleaned from scriptural literature and taking advantage of the latest research on brain, these traits can be expected to show their distinct signatures in the brain chemistry and neuronal activity of a Jivanmukta.  Ten such “Markers” are identified in the present study.  A road map of future research can be thought about only after these “Markers” are firmed up and their parameter ranges are established quantitatively.  These studies may also be able to help to throw light in the future on the ‘explanatory gap problem’ (how matter can arise from Consciousness in general or how a world is seen by a Jivanmukta in specific), though this issue is not the focus of the current paper.

Introduction:

Brahmavidya (Knowledge of the Self) is considered Paravidya (beyond the world) in contrast to the worldly knowledge (aparavidya) basically because Brahman is eternal, ineffable and inexpressible in terms of the worldly languages and symbols.  Worldly knowledge is limited to the sensory and mental realms and transient.  But Brahman is inaccessible to either the senses or the mind.

But mind is the only tool we have through which we can understand Brahman and experientially ‘be’ Brahman.  A human mind that gives up its habitual worldly proclivities of likes and dislikes (and other such pairs of opposites) and is immersed in an unbroken continuous stream of “Brahman thought” is itself Brahman.  This transformation of the mind takes place through re-orientating its reactive judgmental attitude.  The re-orientated mind moves from assessing the external stimuli in terms of opportunities and threats for the protection and perpetuation of the ‘self within’ to a realization that the ‘self within’ is an imaginary non-existent entity and what truly exists is ‘whatever’ that IS (indescribable unitary experience of thoughts, sensations and perceptions). 

The thoughts, sensations and perceptions are called “objects” – sensory and mental percepts which have no inherent meaning within themselves but attain a significance only when and if a meaning is attributed to them.  (Even the word Consciousness or Brahman are just words in this sense and no salient sanctity exists in those words).  This realization within the mind changes it to ‘let’ all things happen as they arise effortlessly just like various picture elements appearing on a screen.  Such a mind also realizes eventually that the arisings (thoughts, sensations and perceptions) are no different from itself just like no picture element is any different from the screen on which it appears. Each picture element happens to be only a transient ‘superimposition’ on the screen at that moment.  That is to say that the screen temporarily appears in the form of that specific picture element at that moment.  In other words, the screen, the document on the screen or any pixel is non-different from one another. This is a good modern analogy for the Oneness of the Brahman, world and the individual (Jiva).

A room thermometer cannot have any memory of the temperature measured even a nanosecond before nor can it see in the present ‘now’ the temperature that is going to be after a nanosecond.   It functions (senses the temperature) always in the “Now.”  Thus ‘time’ is a non-existent dimension to a thermometer.  The ‘realized’ mind too functions ever in an eternal “Now” transcending time.  Because all there is, is only itself and no other entities separated from it ever exist, there is no scope for space (the in-between dimension separating two objects) to arise.  Consequently such a mind transcends space too. An absence of experiencing of time and space may also be obtained in a Samadhi state.  But as Gaudapada in his Karika and Sankarar’s commentary thereon urges, one has to surpass such Samadhi states in order to attain Jivanmukti (Turiya).

A human being in whom this transformation of mind has happened is called a “Jivanmukta”– liberated right in this life.  Now the question is whether the present day scientific developments can help us to describe “objectively” the transformed ‘mind’ of a Jivanmukta.

Often there is an entrenched ‘belief’ in many of the traditional philosophers that science deals exclusively with physical “objects” and Brahmavidya which is beyond objects is inaccessible to science.  They believe that science deals with materials and philosophy of mind with mind.  This is the unfortunate legacy of Cartesian dichotomy.  Cracks began to appear in this imaginary wall of separation about a century ago with the arrival of Quantum Mechanics.  Modern day neuroscientific developments and technologies speeded up the crumbling of this separation wall.  Today scientists do courageously foray into those domains of mind and consciousness, which used to be solely the preserves of philosophy of mind. 

Further, “objective” assessment in science does NOT mean dealing with ‘objects’ or their measurable properties.  “Objectivity” in science refers to an unbiased open-minded inquiry without prejudgments and establishing the truth with the operative principles being falsifiability and verifiability, ever mindful of experimental and observational errors as well as interpretational hazards (biases) and limitations.  The true spirit of science is to ‘inquire in wonder’.  This is no different from Vedantic Self-inquiry into “who am I” or “what is this world around” by apavada (sublation) technique – negating each stage of an understanding reached by the seeker as neti neti until no further negation is possible.

 Whereas in the good old ancient days not much was perhaps known about the brain beyond trepanning (though the ancients might have had their own jargon to explain things of the mind), we are now in a better position to have a look at the ‘goings on’ in the brain of a Jivanmukta.  Undoubtedly, neuroscience has to travel a long way to understand the brain and is only scratching the surface at the present.  We may not be able to establish right away quantitative parameters to define the characteristics of a Jivanmukta’s brain.  But we can try to identify specific qualitative “Markers” that distinguish the brain of a Jivanmukta objectively.

An attempt is made here to present the rationale of the approach and to identify a few “Markers” that are amenable for investigation in a lab.

Who is a Jivanmukta:

 A Jivanmukta’s state* is described in laudatory and eulogizing terms in all our scriptures. 

[* : Special Note on the word “State”: We normally use this word to describe a phase or a transitory condition. It implicitly indicates that there are other states in which an entity could exist. But this is not the sense we use the word here. What we try to convey is the ‘disposition’, natural isness of Jivanmukta after one achieves ‘realization’.

So the ‘state’ of Jivanmukta is not something that comes and goes. As per Advaita Vedanta, this state is always there; other states, conditions may superimpose on that veiling it, making it invisible. For lack of a better word, we shall continue to use ‘state’ to denote the position of a Jivanmukta in order to differentiate from the condition or disposition of an ordinary seeker who has not yet reached that ‘state.’]

A Jivanmukta is a Knower of Brahman. He is ever immersed in Brahman. The apparent world is unreal to him and lacks true existence.  He is Existence-Consciousness-Bliss. He is Truth-Knowledge-Infinity. He is forever happy unmindful of and unaffected by the goings on in the world. He is Brahman.

A Jivanmukta’s ‘self’ stays merged with the Supreme Self or the Cosmic Consciousness. His mind is totally tranquil, equanimous and always focused on Brahman. He is the world and the world is him.  He is in close intimacy with every thing around much like an atom, which loses its individuality in a Bose-Einstein Condensate.  In this intimacy, he loses his individual ID and consequently it is the end or ‘death’ of his separate individuating ‘personality’.    This intimacy is called Universal love (‘maitri’).

A Jivanmukta’s behaviour and actions, his day to day life and working are, however, described to be indistinguishable from any ordinary man. Hence we do not have any externally visible and readily identifiable traits of a Jivanmukta.  So we have to understand first without any ambiguity who is a Jivanmukta.

The best and simplest working definition for Jivanmukta adopted for the current study is taken from that given by direct path Advaitins.

“A Jivanmukta is one in whom a separate sense of ‘self’ has collapsed.”

We shall use this definition for all of our future reference in this paper.

Does a Jivanmukta have a Mind?:

Note: The term ‘mind’ is used here in a generic sense to encompass all activities related to mentation.  Mind in Neuroscience and in the Western languages may have slightly a different connotation.  In order to avoid awkward expressions or new terminology, we shall continue to use the word mind and the context itself makes it clear the sense in which it is used.]

Self-Knowledge leads one to a state of null mind (amanaska). Sankara says that it happens by itself (i.e. it is not causated).  Modifications in the mind and their root-cause, intentions, too cease in a Jivanmukta. He transcends the mind.  All his impressions (vasanas) collapse and he loses all thoughts of and about the world. The state of Jivanmukta will be as if he is in deep sleep but with Awareness (Yoganidra) unlike our deep sleep when we are ignorant of who we are.

In other words Self-Realization is synonymous to ending the mind.  J. Krishnamurti calls it ‘emptying the mind’.  A zero-thought position describes the state of a Jivanmukta. How does then a Jivanmukta continue to live and function in the world with an annihilated mind because mind is required to sense the world and transact within it?

We get many such doubts about Advaita philosophy. Much of the Advaita argot appears awfully ambiguous and confusing to us. Yogavaasishta, an Advaita text attributed to Sage Valmiki (of Ramayana fame), but considered to be of a later period by some, explicates and clearly explains many of these intricacies of Advaita philosophy.

Yogavasishta clearly states that the world does not end as long as mind exists (See Ref: 1).  Regarding the mind of a Jivanmukta, the story of Sage Vitahavya was narrated to show how Vitahavya annihilated his mind through Knowledge. Sage Vasishta, observed that as a result, Vitahavya obtained noble qualities like universal affection (maitri). The dialog between Sage Vasishta (the Teacher) and Rama (the Pupil) went on the following lines at this point:

Rama: “Just a second Sir! On one hand you say that the mind was annihilated. On the other hand you say that noble qualities like universal affection have arisen. When mind itself was gone, where could these noble qualities reside?”

Vasishta: “Annihilation of mind is of two types. One is ‘Annulment of mind With Retention of Form [in memory]’. The other is Annulment of mind Without Retention of Form’. The annihilation of mind of the Jivanmuktas is of the first type. Videhamuktas achieve the other type of annihilation. [Jivanmukta is one who is liberated and is still living in his body and Videhamukta is one who is liberated without the body [dead!] ]. Vitahavya obtained annihilation of mind with retention of form at that time. Hence universal affection and other good qualities generated in it.”

Rama: “Sorry Sir! I am unable to follow. What is meant by annulment of mind? How could there be a form for a mind that is destroyed? How can a mind that is destroyed function again? Please do explain a bit more.”

Vasishta: “Rama! An annulled or annihilated or ‘Calmed Down’ Mind is the mind of a steadfast individual whose equipoise is not disturbed by external conditions of sorrow or happiness just like a mountain does not get affected by the inhalations and exhalations of a passerby man. 

“His is a Calmed Down Mind whose expansiveness is not reduced by delimiting concepts of ‘we – they’. 

“His mind is a ‘Calmed Down Mind’, if his face does not alter in expression under conditions of pleasure or peril, treasure or threat, incentives or impediments.……. In this state he gets rid of the idea that the world is true. His mind shines forth in its Pure, Pristine and True form.

“As far as ‘Annulment of Mind Without Form’ is concerned, it is a state obtained only in liberation without the body.  There is no question of any impressions being residual in this state. Hence neither virtuous qualities like universal affection nor performance of actions related to them exist in a Videhamukta.”

Later on, Sage Vasishta also clarified that it was wrong to assume that the world would not be visible to Jivanmuktas. He said that the entire world would appear to them as pure Brahman (Pure Consciousness). He added, “Jivanmuktas experience sorrows and happiness in a similar way as they did in the past. The difference is that these experiences will be like burnt out seeds. Their actions and experiences do not create new impressions.”

The Case for Neuronal Correlates of a Jivanmukta’s Mind:

Jivanmukti is a ‘state’ when the sense of one’s existence as a separate entity distinct from what is around ceases. Yet this loss of individuation occurs within and to an individual.  The man does not evaporate into thin air on Realization, on becoming a Jivanmukta, like the snake disappearing on seeing the rope. His body very well continues to exist in the world with all its needs for food and oxygen, experiences, joys and sufferings etc. The man (or rather his body) continues to be physically present and so does a mind that goes with the body.  The ancient Indians conceived of an intangible mental body and mental world made up of very subtle ‘mindstuff’ to explain mind.  Bhagavad-Gita (III – 42) gives a pecking order with increasing superiority of status and a concomitant fineness to mind and intellect with respect to the gross visible body as follows:

Physical Body --> Indriyas (Sense Organs)--> Manas (Mind) -->Buddhi (Intellect)--> Tat (Nameless ‘That’ or Brahman).

Ancient Indian tradition envisaged four distinct functional aspects of the mind, each different from the other.  The four aspects are:  (i) Thoughts and counter thoughts; (ii) Intellect; (iii) Memory; and (iv) I-consciousness or ego.  In general as per modern usage, however, the word ‘mind’ subsumes all the four functions.   

Neuroscience tells us that these are the functions of the brain or in other words, mind is nothing but what the brain does.  

[Note 1: Some people like to assign a sort of other worldliness to mind (some schools in the east hold mind to be made up of subtler mindstuff, say that it constitutes the mental sheath (kosha), and they conceive of a mental world (manoloka)).  But we know from neuroscience that thoughts, memory, decision making and autobiographical information (the sense of ‘me’) are all discernible within the brain using modern imaging techniques.  So for all practical purposes we may regard the word ‘mind’ as an omnibus term for all the four activities identified in the east.

Note 2: One can, of course, argue whether brain causes these four functions or that the brain is only an organ influenced by some ‘forces’ beyond itself in functioning in a certain way. This is a controversial issue that demands a separate essay by itself.  Let us disregard for the present what forces cause these functions in the brain and go with what neuroscientists are able to identify within the brain.]

Brain scans using the latest imaging techniques record the activity of the cells (neurons, interneurons, glia).  The activity pattern is relatable to the thoughts or other functions that happen in the brain.  So brain is clearly the seat of mind. Whatever was attributed to physically invisible ‘mindstuff’ [mind] by the ancients can be seen in the brain using techniques like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), Diffusion-weighted MRI, single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT), positron emission tomography (PET), diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), arterial spin labelling magnetic resonance imaging (ASL MRI), magnetoencephalography, etc. in addition to the more simple electroencephalography (EEG). These are sensing systems beyond the immediate capability of our physical sensory organs.

The “Form” of mind is still said to be retained in a Jivanmukta, though vasanas (except in trace residual quantities) and mind are annihilated. Therefore, if we can identify such traits which can be observed in the brain of a Jivanmukta, we will have certain “characteristic markers” to differentiate a Jivanmukta from an ordinary man, though the physical body may not show any external difference detectable by the human senses.

Stripping out the hyperbole, mysticism, esoteric and ‘other worldly’ attributes and complex descriptors, let us see what Non-Dualism says.

On the attainment of Liberation “I” and “World” become One. 

“I” loses its (individuating) status as a subject perceiving a separate object “World” out there. 

When a distinct perceiver “I” is no more present, it logically follows that a distant perceived “World” also cannot be present (because there is no one to see it). 

[Note: In other words, an object cannot and does not ‘exist’ by itself without a subject ‘seeing’ it.  Putting it differently, as Advaita Vedanta holds, true “Existence” (transcending time periods of past, present and future) is intrinsic to “Subject” only.  An object may exist for a period of time (however long may be the period), but it is considered as lacking ‘True Existence’ if it is ‘born’ at a time and ‘ends’ at another time.]

What will then remain is only “Am-ness” or “Being-ness” or simply “Existence” of whatever That Is. If this sounds as too much mumbo-jumbo, let us translate this into simple English.

Sentence 1:

“I See the World.” – (i.e. ‘I’ am here and the ‘world’ is out there).

Sentence 2:

“I Am the World” or “The World Is Me” -- (i.e. No distinctions through ‘names and forms’ are seen).

Sentence 3:

“Whatever that All Is, simply IS” -- (i.e. Just Seeingness or Is-ness is the remnant once the triad of observer-observing-observed differentiation ends, thus establishing Unity).”

The transformation of Sentence 1 to 3 in an individual is Liberation.

Sentence 1 is a phenomenon of normal perception. It involves the sense organs and sensory cortex in the brain. As it transforms to Sentence 3., via Sentence 2., there is no apparent reason to say there are no attendant cognitive changes (invoking Occam’s Razor). Further, the change is happening within and to a specific individual. So this change in cognition has to show up in that specific liberated Individual’s brain areas and their activities. (We cannot, though, rule out related changes in other body parts e.g. endocrine system).
 

Possible Objections and Answers to the proposed Neuronal Correlates:

Objection 1:

A major objection of the traditional advaitin trained in the Guru-disciple system in looking for possible neuronal correlates that can work as ‘markers’ for a Jivanmukta runs as follows:

1. A Jivanmukta is a “Knower of Brahman (Brahmavit)”. A Brahmavit is Brahman Himself (Brahmaiva Brahmavit). Brahman being the Absolute (Paramarthika), the entire empirical (transactional) world disappears (like the snake in a rope disappearing) on the Realization of Truth by Jivanmukta.

2. Therefore, there is no extant empirical world for a Jivanmukta. It is we only who are in the empirical world that see the body of a Jivanmukta; but he is not aware of his own body.

3. The human body including the neurons exists in the empirical (vyavaharika) world. Hence no possible indicators of the Paramarthika of Jivanmukta can exist in his brain which is seen only by the people existing in the transactional world.

Reply to the Objection 1:

1. We distinguish three types of truths – Paramarthika, vyvaharika and pratibhasika. They correspond to the Absolute, empirical and dream worlds.

2. The transactional (wakeful) world is illusory and non-existent from the Absolute (Paramarthika) angle. This is because the world (jagat) is transitory and Brahman is eternal.

3. The Dream world (pratibhasika) is non-existent and illusory from the viewpoint of the wakeful (transactional) world.

4. Though we may not be able to show the dream world of a man when he is later in his ‘awake’ state, we who are in the wakeful world, (the candidate being in his dream world), can make a record of the brain waves of his dreaming brain (and dream world).

5. Therefore, the pratibhasika truth (dream) of that man is recordable in our transactional (vyavaharika) world.

6. Hence it amounts to say that the relatively non-existent dream world of the dreamer is demonstrably leaving its foot-print in the dreamer’s brain and that specific signature is recordable in the wakeful ‘real’ (relatively) world.
7. In the same way, we may expect to see a signature of the Absolute in the ‘awake’ worldly brain of a Jivanmukta.

Objection 2:

The Universal Consciousness into which a Jivanmukta has dissolved would not be confined to brain only. It is all permeating and hence his entire (visible) body should be considered and not the neurons in the brain to find It.

Reply to the Objection 2:

This is a good question and can also be true.

But ever since bilateralism evolved about 600 millions years ago in biological creatures, the body structure of the organism has developed a distinct head and tail ends. The head provided an opportunity to locate a centralized control system for the entire body of the organism. That central control structure is the brain. While Consciousness may be distributed all over the body, we may perhaps find more easily identifiable ‘markers’ in the brain which is the centralized control system.

Secondly, many of such states of the bodily functions which are relegated to invisible and intangible ‘subtler world’ in the ancient Indian tradition (e.g. Brahma viharas) have clear markers in the neurons of the brain.  In a recent neuroscientific study, researchers have been able to successfully correlate even the political orientations in young adults with their brain structures (See Ref: 2), embarrassment to pregenual anterior cingulate cortex and so on.  Hence it is reasonable to expect a signature of the Universal Self (into which an individual is dissolved on Realization) in the brain of the Jivanmukta.

Objection 3:

By definition The Paramarthika (The Absolute) exists all the time and everywhere. The transactional or phenomenal world is limited in space and time having finite existence between appearance and disappearance. The Absolute forms the permanent background against which the transitional can be seen. Say, like a passing train on the unmoving rail track. Or a turbulence in a river, an example Vince (Just Rest) gives. 

The turbulence may appear in the river. But a ‘marker’ of the river cannot be seen in the turbulence. How can we notice ‘markers’ of the Absolute Brahman within the impermanent phenomenal brain of a Jivanmukta?

Reply to the Objection 3:

In our day to day world we see shifting things against the background of a fixed thing – like a movie projected on a screen. So we are conditioned to see only contrast. We readily notice the spike or anomaly but miss the background – like reading the letters of this write up but not be aware of the constant presence of the paper on which they appear. We are accustomed to classifying things, fragmenting them into distinct entities. We continually assess the environment in terms of threats and opportunities for our individual survival. We acquired this characteristic as a result of biological evolution. The survival tactic and tools developed during millions of years of evolution are stored and transmitted to the offspring through ‘information replicators’. 

Genes are the replicators for an organism. As each organism learns newer and newer survival tactics, the robust and sturdy tactics get passed on to the offspring through the genes. Thus the survival information (genes) is inhered from a succession of ancestral creatures which were born and later dead in the past. These perhaps constitute what are called as vasana-s (impressions from past births). If we consider the ‘birth and death’ of each of our ancestors (human and pre-human animal ancestors going right up to the beginnings of life (prokaryotes - single living cells)) from whom the accumulated genetic information gets transmitted, we can think of all those creatures to be our ‘past lives’!

One of the significant survival tools is the sense of ‘I am an individual’, giving a distinct identity to each organism. This sense of “an individual entity” separate from the rest is more developed in man compared to other animals. It got solidly concretized as the concept of ‘self’ in us. Culture helped in reinforcing the concept of ‘self’. The replicators for cultural information are ‘memes’, a term coined by Prof. R. Dawkins in 1976. Dr. Sue Blackmore recently introduced the word ‘temes’ to refer to a replicator of technological information. Memes and temes facilitated faster communication and spread of the acquired characteristics in self-protection and self-perpetuation.

In other words, it is our sheer habit conditioned by survival information transmitted by genes, memes and temes that makes us view the world in fragments, divide the world into parts that can be handled and then assign distinct names and forms to the parts for identification and referral. The fragmentation of one whole experience that truly IS into pieces and subsequent identification of an individual through the claim “as mine” some of those pieces engenders the sense of a separate individual organism.  This process of individuation results in ‘conflict of interest’ and ‘competition for resources’ ending up mostly in misery and sorrow.

In order to redeem this sorrow, Advaita points us back to the basic ‘Oneness’ of everything, the unfragmented wholeness.

Now that we understand the biological reason for our conditioned view of fragmentation, it is only a short step to say that the distinction we make between the ‘permanent screen’ over which a ‘movie’ occurs and the movie character is also artificial, non-existing. Or taking the example of turbulence and the river, the turbulence and river are not two separate things.  The distinction is artificial and non-existing.  So turbulence is the river and the river is the turbulence.

The oft quoted metaphor in Advaita is the non-difference between the ocean water, the wave, the foam, the spume and the water droplet. A boy at the beach sees them all to be distinct, each with its own name and form, but an adult looks at them all as water. Hence there is no separate object sitting there as “Absolute” – a distinct entity separate from the world. This differentiation of the background and the foreground is imaginary, merely conceptual, because of the force of habit. This is supported by Shruti statements: neha nAnAsti  kincana (= there is no multiplicity, 4-iv-19, Brihadaranyaka Upanishad); sarvam khalu idam Brahma (= every thing here is verily Brahman, III-xiv, Chandodyoga Upanishad).  Aparokshanubhuti (verse 116) says: if you see with the eye of Knowledge, you will see the world is full of Brahman.

The world thus is non-different from Brahman.  But we consider the world to be a percept of the brain in our day to day experience.  Therefore, we must be able to discern Oneness in the brain of a Jivanmukta unlike the popping up of the sense of individuation and separate entities in an ordinary individual.  Put in a different way, one may not find a definitive ‘positive presence’ of a Marker for Universal Self or Brahman or Awareness. It is perhaps the “absence” of certain traits within the brain of a Jivanmukta (compared to the brain of an ajnani, an ordinary person) that may stand out as Markers in the brain of a Jivanmukta. 

Objection 4:

Brahman or Consciousness (with capital C and not consciousness as used in psychology) is the Subject, the self-effulgent illuminator of all.  What is observed or what gets illuminated is an object only.  The Subject can therefore be never observable, because by definition the subject will then become an object.  Brahman (Consciousness) is ever the Subject.  Brahman cannot be an object.  Hence any scientific second person study or third person observation of the Subject is not possible.

Reply to the Objection 4:

It is true that Consciousness (Brahman) is always the Seer.  One of the scriptural definitions for a Jivanmukta is that he/she is a Seer when there is nothing to see.  The term Drik is used for Jivanmukta as per this understanding.  Brahman being one and there being no second, there does not exist any other “thing” to be seen nor an action of “seeing” can exist  apart from what IS.

What we are arguing for in this paper is NOT direct observation of Brahman (the Subject).  We are only trying to evolve ‘correlates’ –indicators or markers.  The following analogy may clarify the issue.

Let us say that the Self-effulgent Brahman is like Sun, a source of light.  The Sun need not be directly detected to establish his presence.  The Sunlight falling on an object makes the object visible (or an object arises out of darkness on illumination).  Actually when I see an object, I do not really visualize any object.  I am only sensing the sunlight reflected off from the object.  I interpret the reflected light with a ‘name and form’ for identification purposes.  I may collate this visual information with other sensory data for confirmation and firming up my belief of the presence of the object.  Actually what is involved is the cumulative sensory information and we do not strictly know what exactly is “out there.”  Cognitive scientists have clearly established the Perception-Reality disconnect (See Ref: 3).

Thus once we know the neuroscience behind the identification of an object, we can reorientate our understanding of what is sensed from an immediate investment in a belief structure of the existence of an object to the source of what illuminates the object.  In simple terms, instead of saying that there is an ‘object’, I can say that an object is illuminated and hence there is an illuminator of the object.  In the case of vision, when an object is visible in daylight, I can say there is Sunlight and therefore, there is the Sun.  Here the object is an indicator or marker for the sunlight and hence the Sun.  By observing the ‘object’, I can establish the presence of Sun.  Thus the attempt in this paper is not direct detection of Brahman but to evolve definitive Markers of Brahman in a Jivanmukta’s mind.

My argument, in short, in looking for Neuronal Correlates for Jivanmukta’s mind is as follows:

i)  We perceive a world. 

But neuroscience clearly shows through studies on illusions/magic etc. that we hardly perceive what really exists 'out there.' 

In other words, there is a disconnect between the ‘reality out there’ and our perception. This means that the sensory apparatus (senses and the respective cortical neurons) are inadequate to show what "exactly" is 'out there.'

ii)   Our brain makes a “map” of the perceptions received from the senses after an interpretation is made by the sensory cortex to give a meaning to the sensory signals. We are actually aware of only the “map” formed in our head. But we don't have a clue about what "exactly" is ‘out there’. 

This “map” in our head is obviously made up of ‘thoughts’ (generated by neuronal electrical pulses as waves), or thought-stuff - whether it is beautiful girl or an ugly duck or a river or a table - all are represented as thoughts in brain. So the constituent of all the so called perceived ‘objects’ is thought-stuff.

iii)  The thought itself is cognized by us because we have "consciousness." Or as philosophers put it, consciousness illuminates (shows up) the thoughts. 

iv)  A ‘me’-thought acts as the ‘seer’ of the map in our head. This is the ego providing continuity in time, coherence to experience and ownership to knowledge. It gets generated based on memory-based autobiographical information.

v)  Neuroscience is as yet unable to understand how "Consciousness" is engendered in us.

vi) Jivanmuktas find a shift in their perception. Instead of seeing the 'map' of the world in their brain with the ego at the center, they identify themselves with the illuminating Consciousness. And this shift happens within and to an individual.

vii) Can we evolve Neuronal Correlates as “Markers” to detect this shift? 
 

Unique characteristics of a Jivanmukta’s mind:

We shall next list what could possibly be the unique characteristics of a Jivanmukta’s mind which still retains its ‘Form’ in the brain of his physical body and each trait's corresponding neuronal correlates  which can be expected in his brain in a qualitative way to begin with.  Much research and data are needed before we can inch towards the development of quantitative value ranges for each of these markers and set standards as it is done for health parameters.

We should also note that some of the traits may arise in a Jivanmukta in the last stages only of the Seven Step Knowledge Path.  The Knowledge Path begins with the first step of an intense desire for liberation, study and analysis of ‘self’ and the world, arriving at an understanding that the “I” and the world are the same, internalizing this understanding unbrokenly and unswervingly, then non-perception of a world and finally a realization that all is Brahman (See Ref: 4).  As what we are discussing presently is a preliminary coarse level attempt, it may not be wise to try to demarcate the characteristic markers specifically identifiable at each stage of the Sevenfold Path.

The neuronal correlates of some of the characteristics can be in the brain chemistry reflected through hormonal changes detectable in blood. Some other traits can be seen only from the relative activity level of a specific lobe of the cortex (outer most layer) or a deeper part of the brain detectable through a suitable imaging technology. Leaving out the details for the present, I shall tabulate below (Table 1) the characteristics that can serve as possible “Markers” for a Jivanmukta’s mind.   A few additional ‘markers’ like the absence of a sense of ‘embodiment’, an “active body-inactive mind” may also be identified later on.

I suggest the “objective” approach of “Markers” proposed here is better than a standardized psychological questionnaire approach because any question framed automatically implies the existence of a “separate entity” on the part of the administrator of the questions.  In fact Peter Dziuban pointed out this limitation in the study of Jeffery Martin (See Ref. 5).  The study done by Zoran Josipovic on the neural networks appears not to be strictly related to Advaita because meditational practices do not involve permanent collapse of individuating ‘self’ as would happen in the case of a Jivanmukta (See Comments section in Ref:  5).

Table 1: Possible “Markers” of a Jivanmukta’s Mind: 

Purpose of the Study:

Tying up a study with “Purpose” or “Utility” is a mundane technological perspective. Blue sky type of R&D is for knowledge enhancement without predetermined objective. Science (done with an open mind) has brought out unimaginable transformation during the past couple of centuries on our understanding of the Universe, its Laws, Man’s position in the Universe and so on. Amazing examples can be cited from Genetics, Molecular Biology, Quantum Physics, Astrophysics, Medicine and many other fields. We do not know what the future scientific discoveries will unfold.  So it is unwise to get tied up at the very start with a demonstrable utilitarian purpose or goal in this nascent field of understanding the neurobiology of a Jivanmukta’s brain.

It may also be pointed out here that Non-Dualism is inarguably a unique achievement of our ancient seers and sages within the means of inquiry and investigation available to them millennia of years ago.  Non-Dualism and its derivatives helped in the redemption of sorrow. But the important point is that Advaita ends the “sufferer” and not “suffering” per se. Existence of ‘suffering’, inviolability and inexorability of Natural Laws (Niyati) are accepted as Anaadi (without a beginning) and hence taken as unquestionable in Vedanta.

Causal Relations:

A question may come up whether the “Markers” would be mandatory or necessary conditions in a Jivanmukta and whether externally inducing the electrical/chemical/structural changes will result in Jivanmukti (Liberation).

Questions like these can become relevant far into the future. Right now, one has to establish first that certain indicators as ‘signatures’ of the Jivanmukti can be detected in the brain. Further, even if we do find the “Markers”, we should remember that one-to-one causal relationships cannot immediately be postulated in biological systems unlike in deterministic physical systems. That is to say, if we find that [A] indicates [B], we cannot say in natural systems that given [B], [B] automatically implies [A].  In other words, correlation may not imply causation.

Required Future Plan of Action:

The suggested markers are indicative only. Quantitative base level information for each of the markers has to be established for a normal person from a review of the available published research documents or actual studies. When once the bench mark levels are agreed to, we may measure the same parameters in any of the volunteering individuals who are known to be those in whom the separate sense of ‘self’ has already collapsed (i.e. Jivanmuktas).  [Jeffery Martin claims to have a database of over 300 Non-dual awakenings (See Ref. 5)].

A road map for a possible extension of the research can then be drawn if we are successful in unequivocally identifying “Markers” in a Jivanmukta.

Acknowledgements:

I am grateful to Dr. T. S. Ramakrishna, Founder President of ESWARA, at whose behest the preliminary thoughts on the topic were laid in early 2009 through an opportunity he provided for a talk at the Forum ESWARA.  I am greatly obliged to John (Editor, NDM), Paula (Author of “The Teachers of One”) for their encouraging comments on the draft version.  Charles (Author of “Circuits in the Brain“) was kind to suggest one correction.  I am indebted to Ram (Vision Research Institute, Acton, MA, USA) who suggested incorporation of explanatory notes/amplifications in order to improve the understandability of the terminology of the paper for readers unfamiliar with the Advaita argot. 

Neuroscientist Zoran (Adjunct Professor, New York University) says that the neural correlates of Jivanmukta or nonduality, is perhaps the most important topic but stresses the need for rigorous definitions of Vedantic terms and points to the difficulties because of the complexity and variability in neuronal phenomena.  He also points out that gamma synchrony may have some technical problems.  

Some of the scientists brought to my notice their own research work.  Much of this scientific effort, in general,  seems to have gone on the basis of analyzing “concepts”  - Advaita and Brahman too  were ‘concepts’ for them to be assessed or compared with other concepts.  Such an approach betrays a lack of clear understanding of Advaita.  Advaita is not a ‘concept’.  It is beyond the realm of mind and senses.  So the question whether a non-conceptual nameless That (Brahman) which is inaccessible to the mind can be examined remained unaddressed within the scientific endeavor.  Nevertheless, I would like to express my thanks to many of the scientists whose work is referred to in the paper but no specific citations are given in order to avoid too pedantic a look.

References:

1.  Yogavaasishta, Part IV, The Calm Down, by K.V. Krishna Murthy, (English Translation by Dr. Vemuri Ramesam), Avadhoota Datta Peetham, Mysore, India, pp: 194, 2008.

2.  Political Orientations Correlated with Brain Structure (R. Kanai et al, 2011):

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6VRT-52JV2HC-2&_user=10&_coverDate=04%2F07%2F2011&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_acct=C000050221&_

version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=4666f1d3391f98ba0082699bd8753735&searchtype=a

3.  Perception – Reality Disconnect: Blog Posts at:

                (i)   http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/2009/10/seeing-is-believing-is-it-really-so.html

                (ii)  http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/search?q=reality+perception+disconnect

4.  Knowledge-based Spiritual Path: Blog Post at: http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/2010/12/yoga-based-and-knowledge-based.html

5.  Research on Non-Dualism: Blog Post at:

 http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/2010/09/research-on-non-dualism-self-and.html

6.  Awareness of decision making: Chun Siong Soon et al., “Unconscious Determinants of Free Decisions in the Human Brain,” Nature Neuroscience 11, no. 5 (May 2008): 543 at: http://www.rifters.com/real/articles/NatureNeuroScience_Soon_et_al.pdf

“One interpretation of this finding is that frontopolar cortex was the first cortical stage at which the actual decision was made, whereas precuneus was involved in storage of the decision until it reached awareness.”

7.  Loss of fear: Blog Post at: http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/2009/09/on-fear-hypnosis-consciousness-and.html

8.  Consciousness of subjective time in the brain, Nyberg L, et al, Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Dec 21;107(51):22356-9. Epub 2010 Dec 6. Also  http://neuroskeptic.blogspot.com/2010/12/time-travelling-brain.html