Jan/Brahman

[Guest guest]

>Patrick:

[...] My problem rather is

¤with

¤Brahman as defined by the Upanishad as

¤'Verily, all this is Brahman' which is

¤so

¤all-encompassing as to be meaningless.

[...]

>Jan: I haven't yet met a statement regarding Brahman that cannot be

"experienced", whether a rare or frequent "experience. When properly

instructed, the statement is useful; in this case it indicates that not a

trace of individuality remains to discriminate between Brahman and Maya;

that distinction has been lost entirely.

 

Dan: Thank you, Jan, for a very useful to-the-point statement.

When the mind finds no meaning in a statement, the statement

may be challenging the mind to dissolve its need to retain and "make"

meaning. The retention of a meaning-system (that itself is the retention of

images, interpretations, languaging, etc.) seems to divide absolute and

relative, ultimate and individual, source and apparent manifestation.

"Experiential" is the key, as seen from here. Not a new stance for

meaning-making, but the ending of the meaning-making reference point - the

"all-encompassing" is the dissolution of the "division-making machine" of

reactive intellect/emotion/memory.