Guest guest Posted July 23, 2000 Report Share Posted July 23, 2000 At 07:58 PM 7/21/00 -0500, you wrote: >Dan Berkow <berkowd >[...] > >>Advaita, "non-twoness" >>the non-split, >>non-separated, >>non-dichotomous nature >>of actual reality >>is not a point of view. >> >>Any point of view is opposed >>by a differing point of view. >> >>So advaita isn't a point of view. > >Advaita is opposed by a differing point of view: Dvaita. Surely you've heard >of it. This opposition is also inherent in your term, non-twoness. Robert, If you oppose advaita with dvaita, then your advaita is dualistic. As the Real is beyond two or not-two, what will be said about it? >Rather than dwelling on monism versus multiplicity, how about this for a >basic dichotomy: either consciousness is derived from physical existence, or >vice versa. Then, what is the Awareness which isn't dual or nondual? If we say 'consciousness' is different and other than 'physical existence', then what is the Awareness that allowed us to define each of these in contradistinction to the other? Being aware of the relation of "this" as defined in constrast with "that," awareness itself is neither "this" nor "that". Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 23, 2000 Report Share Posted July 23, 2000 Dan Berkow <berkowd >Robert, >If you oppose advaita with dvaita, then your advaita > is dualistic. It wasn't my idea to do so. :-) Can't we say that, while reality itself may be one, philosophy definitely is not? Life as we experience it is full of duality - light and dark, good and bad, true and false, happiness and sadness, and so on. The oppositions of philosophy are other aspects of this apparent multiplicity. And again, while all multiplicity or duality may be transcended in the ultimate nature of reality, it is still something with which we must contend in life, just as we have to work, eat, etc. Don't you agree? Robert. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 24, 2000 Report Share Posted July 24, 2000 >>D: >>If you oppose advaita with dvaita, then your advaita >> is dualistic. > >R: It wasn't my idea to do so. :-) Can't we say that, while reality itself may >be one, philosophy definitely is not? Life as we experience it is full of >duality - light and dark, good and bad, true and false, happiness and >sadness, and so on. The oppositions of philosophy are other aspects of this >apparent multiplicity. And again, while all multiplicity or duality may be >transcended in the ultimate nature of reality, it is still something with >which we must contend in life, just as we have to work, eat, etc. Don't you >agree? > >Robert. Robert, The perspective here on This: The Nondual One includes and transcends the two-ness of so-called duality, transcends without opposing. If we were to try to avoid or deny the apparent multiplicity of life, our very attempt to avoid or deny would be based on a dualistic understanding. Who is the "me" who seemingly must contend with the apparent oppositions of life, the apparent multiplicity? Is this "me" a "something" among other "somethings"? Or is the "me" that seems to exist as a bounded "something" a fictional construct, a conceptual image and association of images? As the Self that "isn't a something" shines, the "me" that takes itself to be a limited "something" disappears. The latter has no basis to "exist" in the "shining" of the former. As "I" and the Reality which gives rise to all this apparent multiplicity are not-two, all the apparently multiple "things" aren't (ultimately) divided, nor divisible from That. Namaste, Dan 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.