Guest guest Posted May 16, 2000 Report Share Posted May 16, 2000 hariH OM! The following appears on an excellent website. However, this particular statement's attempt at defining advaita--being incidentally also the popular conception of what advaitam is--is actually premature and misleading. __________________________ WHAT IS ADVAITA Advaita means 'non-duality'. Non-duality means.... We see lightness and darkness, We hear sound and silence, We feel pleasure and pain, We taste sweetness and sourness, We smell odour and freshness, We know good and bad, We experience in differences. All are subjective. All we see, hear, feel, taste, smell, know, experience, ... we interpret as objects, where we ourselves are subject. But what if this ultimate duality - of subject and object - is false? What if there is no experiencer? Or thing experienced? No subject; no object. Then all that remains is subjectivity or put another way, consciousness. We are concerned too much perhaps with what we are conscious *of*, and forget the miracle of consciousness itself. A small change - to look toward the source of the Light, rather than at a movie on the screen that is illuminated by that Light. [end] my observation regarding it: what is it that nonduality is referring to? what? what is it that is nondual? the answer is *everything conceivable*. that which is both manifest and unmanifest, is nondual. the spirit and its projection into life. these aren't mutually exclusive; rather intrinsically interrelated. only under the very special condition if/when believing something is isolated and apart from its source in spirit, do we have the phenomenon of the unreal. such is the advent of duality. therefore advaita vedanta is the unification of *ALL THAT IS*. this was emphasized very clearly in the treatise ELLAM ONDRE (all is one). this is the true meaning and implication of the vedic axiom: "All This is brahman." many mistake the meaning of advaita for what is technically one of its strategies for breaking the [common] habit of regarding the world as real unto itself...which instruction is to divert one's attention from Without to Within (from the 'objective' to the 'subjective'). however, once the subjective is successfully contemplated, beheld and realized [which is the revelation of the state in turiya (the Fourth State beyond the three phases of the mind: waking, dreaming, sleeping)], one can and will not dwell there indefinitely. eventually [what naturally follows] is the awareness that one's nature also inheres within the projection of the life of the world. this is the true meaning of advaita and the state of the jivanmuktha. HOWEVER--and it's important to realize this also--the jivanmuktha *doesn't necessarily have to possess this understanding*. the only criteria is whether the ego has been sublated. and if it is, the ensuing philosophical conception--necessarily based on the relative paradigm of the phenomenal-bound mind (the vyavaharika)--can often vary, and is usually a byproduct of the path responsible for delivering the sadhaka. thus if one treked the path of karmayoga or bhaktiyoga, one will have the inclination to see the world in the form of the path taken. yet the state of atmasakshat (Self-realization), centered on the absolute plane [of the paramarthika] is the same for all. this is how and why it isn't uncommon for philosophical conceptions/attitudes to vary amongst jnanis. the important thing to realize is that all paths, per se, are in the end discardable. upon reaching the other shore, the raft isn't carried on the back; if anything it's used for firewood! ___________ all that we see is the product of brahman's nature. *ALL that we see in life* is therefore beauty beyond reproach, beyond judgments, beyond the capacity to categorize. it is wonder itself unfolded. therefore life is to be celebrated. look at a scene in nature and realize the absolute beauty that is God's wonder made visible! the world is not anything to be denied or repulsed. rather it is the mystery of mysteries [that is our own Self nature] unfurled before our very eyes. Self-realization is not some final abstraction into the annihilated Void. It is the Play of the Plenum dancing on the foundation of Void. It is nataraja! the Dance of siva. the leela of saguna brahman based on nirguna brahman. it is THIS our Universal Sphere of ellam ondre. OM shaanthi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2000 Report Share Posted May 16, 2000 - f. maiello <egodust <advaitin > Tuesday, May 16, 2000 9:52 AM What is Advaita? > hariH OM! > > The following appears on an excellent website. > However, this particular statement's attempt > at defining advaita--being incidentally also > the popular conception of what advaitam is--is > actually premature and misleading. > > __________________________ > > WHAT IS ADVAITA > > Advaita means 'non-duality'. Non-duality means.... > > We see lightness and darkness, > We hear sound and silence, > We feel pleasure and pain, > We taste sweetness and sourness, > We smell odour and freshness, > We know good and bad, > We experience in differences. > > All are subjective. All we see, hear, feel, > taste, smell, know, experience, ... we interpret > as objects, where we ourselves are subject. > > But what if this ultimate duality - of subject > and object - is false? What if there is no > experiencer? Or thing experienced? No subject; no > object. Then all that remains is subjectivity or > put another way, consciousness. > > We are concerned too much perhaps with what we > are conscious *of*, and forget the miracle of > consciousness itself. > > A small change - to look toward the source of > the Light, rather than at a movie on the screen > that is illuminated by that Light. > > [end] > > Very sound arguments, Frankji, and if I may summarize: We react to the transient or changing events by constructing all sorts of fantastic strategy to create our imagined self-preservation, security or immunity by believing and clinging to the idea that there is an everlasting entity within us called ego, soul or god which really are castles in the air. Withdrawing into the formless silence, is just another symptomatic strategy to cope with the painful events of life, just as escaping into the astral or dream worlds is for the typical yogi! In fact Buddha and Shankara were very skillful at debating and exposing these weak arguments, supports and crutches. Could we exist by being completely open, accepting and allowing whatever changing phenemonen or events to occur without personal intereference, projection, preference, likes-dislikes, rather than wanting things to happen according to our own sweet will ? Then do we have to ask where is the wonder and mystery gone from our life ? ~dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2000 Report Share Posted May 16, 2000 Hi everyone. f. maiello wrote: > hariH OM! > > The following appears on an excellent website. > However, this particular statement's attempt > at defining advaita--being incidentally also > the popular conception of what advaitam is--is > actually premature and misleading. > Frank Hello. Wonderful to see you posting. Now I enjoy sharing about this topic as you know. I am also supportive of your view. I am sharing here one of the Ramesh Balsekar's quotes which Manuel shared here, as I feel it relates. *** The identified man takes part in things and suffers. The unidentified man merely watches the spectacle. The identified man tries to understand truth while the unidentified man experiences it. ~Ramesh Balsekar~ _________________ I guess my response to that is what you are talking about is the reabsorption after witnessing has allowed one to awaken As That. I don't support impersonal watching. I'd much rather Be One with the play (after awakening has been achieved). Is this kind of what you are talking about? > WHAT IS ADVAITA > > Advaita means 'non-duality'. Non-duality means.... > > We see lightness and darkness, > We hear sound and silence, > We feel pleasure and pain, > We taste sweetness and sourness, > We smell odour and freshness, > We know good and bad, > We experience in differences. > > All are subjective. All we see, hear, feel, > taste, smell, know, experience, ... we interpret > as objects, where we ourselves are subject. > > But what if this ultimate duality - of subject > and object - is false? What if there is no > experiencer? Or thing experienced? No subject; no > object. Then all that remains is subjectivity or > put another way, consciousness. > > We are concerned too much perhaps with what we > are conscious *of*, and forget the miracle of > consciousness itself. > > A small change - to look toward the source of > the Light, rather than at a movie on the screen > that is illuminated by that Light. > > [end] > > > > my observation regarding it: > > what is it that nonduality is referring to? what? what is it > that is nondual? the answer is *everything conceivable*. that > which is both manifest and unmanifest, is nondual. This puts an end to separation through judgement (& even through witnessing). Become One with what Is. Live It. > the spirit > and its projection into life. these aren't mutually exclusive; > rather intrinsically interrelated. One might say that the Seer is projecting himself TO experience. Once we Know ourselves As This One ~ then what is left but to enjoy Your Self. We learnt all about suffering through being unaware we are One. We have learnt all about resisting & judging ourselves. > only under the very special > condition if/when believing something is isolated and apart from > its source in spirit, do we have the phenomenon of the unreal. > such is the advent of duality. therefore advaita vedanta is the > unification of *ALL THAT IS*. this was emphasized very clearly in > the treatise ELLAM ONDRE (all is one). this is the true meaning > and implication of the vedic axiom: "All This is brahman." > > many mistake the meaning of advaita for what is technically one > of its strategies for breaking the [common] habit of regarding > the world as real unto itself...which instruction is to divert > one's attention from Without to Within (from the 'objective' to > the 'subjective'). however, once the subjective is successfully > contemplated, beheld and realized [which is the revelation of the > state in turiya (the Fourth State beyond the three phases of the > mind: waking, dreaming, sleeping)], one can and will not dwell > there indefinitely. Nice clarification. Thankyou. Now I presume you are saying we Are not 'just' this Impersonal Being. We are also our own personal expression of That One. > eventually [what naturally follows] is the > awareness that one's nature also inheres within the projection > of the life of the world. Sounds great. > this is the true meaning of advaita > and the state of the jivanmuktha. HOWEVER--and it's important to > realize this also--the jivanmuktha *doesn't necessarily have to > possess this understanding*. the only criteria is whether the > ego has been sublated. and if it is, the ensuing philosophical > conception--necessarily based on the relative paradigm of the > phenomenal-bound mind (the vyavaharika)--can often vary, and is > usually a byproduct of the path responsible for delivering the > sadhaka. thus if one treked the path of karmayoga or bhaktiyoga, > one will have the inclination to see the world in the form of > the path taken. yet the state of atmasakshat (Self-realization), > centered on the absolute plane [of the paramarthika] is the same > for all. How beautiful of you to state so. I hope you are writing a book on it, to help others. I can assure you such information would be helpful & is sorely lacking. Now I also wonder if you have collected quotes from advaitin Saints which clarify what you are saying? I would very much appreciate reading them. > this is how and why it isn't uncommon for philosophical > conceptions/attitudes to vary amongst jnanis. the important thing > to realize is that all paths, per se, are in the end discardable. > upon reaching the other shore, the raft isn't carried on the back; > if anything it's used for firewood! :-) How nice. Oh just to be ordinary again! > ___________ > > all that we see is the product of brahman's nature. *ALL that we > see in life* is therefore beauty beyond reproach, beyond judgments, > beyond the capacity to categorize. it is wonder itself unfolded. > therefore life is to be celebrated. look at a scene in nature > and realize the absolute beauty that is God's wonder made visible! > the world is not anything to be denied or repulsed. Would you include the body & the personal human nature in this equation? Speak it out Frank! > rather it > is the mystery of mysteries [that is our own Self nature] unfurled > before our very eyes. Self-realization is not some final abstraction > into the annihilated Void. ThankYou. I agree. > It is the Play of the Plenum dancing on > the foundation of Void. It is nataraja! the Dance of siva. the > leela of saguna brahman based on nirguna brahman. it is THIS our > Universal Sphere of ellam ondre. > > OM shaanthi Good message Frank, thanks. Love, Colette Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2000 Report Share Posted May 16, 2000 Colette wrote: > I also wonder if you have collected quotes from advaitin > Saints which clarify what you are saying? I would very > much appreciate reading them. if you see this and then investigate between the lines, you'll discover it in all the vedic sastras, as well as in the teachings of the founders of all the religions. most prominent among these are the advaitic classics such as ashtavakra gita, ribhu gita, tripura rahasya, advaita bodha deepika, vasistha yoga, ulladu narpadu, and others. and in sages sri ramana, osho and lao tzu. (osho, *before 1979*, not after...since his reasoning was unfortunately mutated by chronic fatigue syndrome coupled wih an inadvertant abuse of valium.) > > all that we see is the product of brahman's nature. *ALL that we > > see in life* is therefore beauty beyond reproach, beyond judgments, > > beyond the capacity to categorize. it is wonder itself unfolded. > > therefore life is to be celebrated. look at a scene in nature > > and realize the absolute beauty that is God's wonder made visible! > > the world is not anything to be denied or repulsed. > > Would you include the body & the personal human nature in this equation? > Speak it out Frank! yes, colette, yes! hahaha! :::the personal is the impersonal made visible::: however, it's important not to become enamored of any manifestation in any life-form/expression *apart* from its source in the ONE. but you knew this anyway.. :-) peacelove in ONE, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 16, 2000 Report Share Posted May 16, 2000 Dave Sirjue wrote: > Could we exist by being completely open, > accepting and allowing whatever changing > phenemonen or events to occur without personal > intereference, projection, preference, likes-dislikes, > rather than wanting things to happen according > to our own sweet will ? > Then do we have to ask where is the wonder > and mystery gone from our life ? hariH OM! dave-ji, neat observation..compelling. we have to be able to balance the wonder [tending toward the terror] of the unknowable with the security [tending toward the boredom] of the known. part of the Play is the challenge of reinventing ourselves in the journey of life. or not! there are no set rules in freedom! namaste Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 17, 2000 Report Share Posted May 17, 2000 The identified man takes part in things and suffers. The unidentified man merely watches the spectacle. The identified man tries to understand truth while the unidentified man experiences it. ~Ramesh Balsekar~ _________________ QUESTIONS: * Identification with what? with the world or with ones own self? * If one doesn't identify himself with the world then how can he be a realized man? * How can anybody with the spectacle when he is not identified? I mean, in order to watch the spectacle there should be a duality. A seer and a seen. If everything is Seer alone then where is the spectacle to watch? * Isn't understanding a result of experience? Love, Madhava 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.