Guest guest Posted November 30, 1998 Report Share Posted November 30, 1998 Greetings Frank. >the fundamental principle of advaita--or non-duality-- >is that there is only brahman in existence, and what >therefore can only ever be conceivably perceived is >simply brahman. the apparent problem arises with >the special exception if/when the perceiver regards >his/her object of perception as *apart* from brahman >which, by definition, must be an illusion. therefore, >in reality, there *cannot* be a duality/plurality in >existence--but only ONE Being: ONE satchidananda. >this knowledge confers the infinite awareness, infinite >peace, infinite love, and infinite freedom of moksha. What's knowledge? It's to know. Not merely knowing as one would by watching Star Trek, the powers of the Vulcan. No, it's knowing with full conviction, with as much certainty as knowing that one exists. To know in the fullest depths of one's being, in the bottom of your soul with absolute certainty. The Buddha is supposed to have said that he knew with final certainty within the depths of his being that that was his last birth. It's that kind of knowledge which is required. More important than all that you've outlined as being professed by Advaitam, is that it insists on actual experience - the experience that the snake is indeed a rope. Not just mental knowing which is a product of intellectual appreciation, but experiencing and "being" it. This is again my problem with Advaitam. A few months back, when I was on an "intellectual" binge, the Dhammapada was a mere book of morals. It was not for me. Oooh, give me Vasubandhu and Nagarjuna or Dignaga and Dharmakirti. They amazed me with their abstract logic. In truth, all this intellectual hairsplitting, is nothing compared to the Dhammapada which are truly words of a Jeevan muktha. Just that I didn't have the "eyes" or "knowledge" to realize it. Be True to yourself, the truth is yours. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 30, 1998 Report Share Posted November 30, 1998 Greetings Nanda, At 09:14 AM 11/30/98 PST, nanda chandran wrote: (quoting frank here..) >>the fundamental principle of advaita--or non-duality-- >>is that there is only brahman in existence, and what >>therefore can only ever be conceivably perceived is >>simply brahman. the apparent problem arises with >>the special exception if/when the perceiver regards >>his/her object of perception as *apart* from brahman >>which, by definition, must be an illusion. therefore, >>in reality, there *cannot* be a duality/plurality in >>existence--but only ONE Being: ONE satchidananda. > >>this knowledge confers the infinite awareness, infinite >>peace, infinite love, and infinite freedom of moksha. >What's knowledge? It's to know. Not merely knowing as one would by >watching Star Trek, the powers of the Vulcan. No, it's knowing with full >conviction, with as much certainty as knowing that one exists. .... >Not just mental knowing which is a product >of intellectual appreciation, but experiencing and "being" it. > >This is again my problem with Advaitam. Good points, Nanda, and I like your refreshing candor!! Is your problem with Advaita more an issue with the Advaita metaphysics or Advaita sadhana? You don't disagree with Advaita's metaphysics, do you? That all is Brahman? Frank's capsule about Advaita says that there is only Brahman in existence. This is a metaphysical proposition, about the nature of ultimate Reality. It can be believed and known intellectually, with the help of a teacher in whom you have faith, via the scriptures, and as a result of direct experience of being the truth. And such a metaphysical proposition is something whose truth or falsity doesn't depend on whether one follows the Advaita philosophy. This leaves lots of room for discussion, however. The mere intellectual conviction is not enough, I agree 100% with you. That leaves the question, Just what DOES it take to confer the infinite peace and love and freedom of moksha? This sounds like a question of the kind of sadhana and guidance required. Is THAT perhaps your problem with Advaita? --Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 30, 1998 Report Share Posted November 30, 1998 nanda chandran wrote: > > "nanda chandran" <vpcnk > > Greetings Frank. > > >the fundamental principle of advaita--or non-duality-- > >is that there is only brahman in existence, and what > >therefore can only ever be conceivably perceived is > >simply brahman. the apparent problem arises with > >the special exception if/when the perceiver regards > >his/her object of perception as *apart* from brahman > >which, by definition, must be an illusion. therefore, > >in reality, there *cannot* be a duality/plurality in > >existence--but only ONE Being: ONE satchidananda. > > >this knowledge confers the infinite awareness, infinite > >peace, infinite love, and infinite freedom of moksha. > > What's knowledge? It's to know. Not merely knowing as one would by > watching Star Trek, the powers of the Vulcan. No, it's knowing with full > conviction, with as much certainty as knowing that one exists. To know > in the fullest depths of one's being, in the bottom of your soul with > absolute certainty. The Buddha is supposed to have said that he knew > with final certainty within the depths of his being that that was his > last birth. It's that kind of knowledge which is required. > > More important than all that you've outlined as being professed by > Advaitam, is that it insists on actual experience - the experience that > the snake is indeed a rope. Not just mental knowing which is a product > of intellectual appreciation, but experiencing and "being" it. > > This is again my problem with Advaitam. > > A few months back, when I was on an "intellectual" binge, the Dhammapada > was a mere book of morals. It was not for me. Oooh, give me Vasubandhu > and Nagarjuna or Dignaga and Dharmakirti. They amazed me with their > abstract logic. In truth, all this intellectual hairsplitting, is > nothing compared to the Dhammapada which are truly words of a Jeevan > muktha. Just that I didn't have the "eyes" or "knowledge" to realize it. > > Be True to yourself, the truth is yours. > hariH OM! the knowledge i'm speaking of is the knowledge that can stop the relentless judgment machine of the mind, which can thus allow one to become aware of being in their otherwise natural state [in the Heart]. if/when the mind arises with questions and speculations, the wisdom of *esoteric* advaita, which confirms that "all of this is brahman," effectively dissolves all such questions and paradoxic quandaries. one is then able to live and move and have one's being in the Heart, where one's reality has ever resided. gotama buddha's silence in the face of philosophical inquiry brings us to the same end: atmanishtha cidakasa. (regardless that he implied the nonexistence of the self [anatta], yet nirvana itself is not shunya, therefore there must be an existence it is founded on...and such a reality implicates the necessity of Being, which in turn cannot exist devoid of primal awareness or selfhood. [viz. 'selfless being' is ontologically impossible]) actually, btw, i'm a simultaneous practitioner of zen as well as so-called mahayoga associated with atmavichara. as you probably know, zen claims to capture the pure spirit of buddha's teaching, insofar as refusing to involve with philosophical or even metaphysical speculations. if/when attempting to neutralize intellectual anxieties expressed by sincere individuals on the path to Self-realization, i prefer the strategy of advaita vedanta. but, as i've implied, they're both fingers pointing to the selfsame sun of pure Being. namaste Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.