Guest guest Posted August 27, 2000 Report Share Posted August 27, 2000 Patrick Kenny wrote: > > Dear Frank, > > I can't quarrel with the point of view that you express here but I > would remark that, even under the most favorable conditions, our most > intimate personal experiences are largely incommunicable to others. In > the case of a list such as this we have no choice but to try and > communicate as best we can through logical discourse and reasoned > argument. Despite this limitation, the fact that we continue to plug > away at it suggests that this is a profitable activity for most of us. > My gripe is simply that appealing to a higher authority than reasoned > argument --- even the authority of personal experience --- undermines > the only type of exchange which is possible on a list like this. hi patrick- i quite see your point. however, advaita vedanta, by *definition* is not a philosophy at all, which is the product of any dialectic. the fact is, advaita vedanta's central thrust is a *methodology* *specifically* geared to transcend the human mind's proclivity to depend on logic/reason (viz. philosophical systems) as the *means* to enlightenment or moksha. now, the method itself is of course logical *en route* to the point where the aspirant becomes ready to shed its chrysalis so-to-speak, and fly unbridled, unfettered by what is--*within the purview* of advaita-- recognized to be the shackles of relative logic...whereupon [such logic] is boldly released. the thing is, who could [or would even want to!], for example, reason out the experience of love? it is what it is, in the Heart. who *knows* what it is? it makes us soar. why? we don't care why. same with moksha. this is why the esoteric teachings found in *all* religions universally emphasize the critical and *indispensable* importance of transcending the Mind. there can be no reasoned argument about the method itself, which is designed to transcend the *exclusivity* of the relative world--or relative Mind. reasoned argument only applies to the relative world problems such as free will vs determinism, as vidyasankarji pointed out. contrary to what many seem to believe, advaita isn't concerned with these kinds of issues. advaita is solely concerned with the wisdom of the Heart, which defies relative world/Mind categorization. regards, frank Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 28, 2000 Report Share Posted August 28, 2000 Dear Frank, I can't quarrel with the point of view that you express here but I would remark that, even under the most favorable conditions, our most intimate personal experiences are largely incommunicable to others. In the case of a list such as this we have no choice but to try and communicate as best we can through logical discourse and reasoned argument. Despite this limitation, the fact that we continue to plug away at it suggests that this is a profitable activity for most of us. My gripe is simply that appealing to a higher authority than reasoned argument --- even the authority of personal experience --- undermines the only type of exchange which is possible on a list like this. Regards, Patrick --- Dans advaitin@e..., "f. maiello" <egodust@d...> a écrit > Patrick Kenny wrote: > > > [...] My own view is that > > Advaita is a serious philosophical > > tradition but not one that has any > > special monopoly on truth and it > > deserves to be discussed on the same > > footing as other philosophies. The > > problem with this of course is that > > those who are most knowledgeable about > > Advaita feel otherwise... > > > > > namaste patrick- > > the following might sound elitist. > it really isn't. the fact is, i am > *certain* that we are all in reality > having the experience of the Self ALWAYS. > (we ARE the Self and nothing more.) > it's only the mind distracting us; > diverting our awareness. however, it > cannot affect our innate consciousness. > which will be proven in time. > > having said that... > > experience is the real barometer concerning > these issues. and this is what the vedic > sruti is the product of. and for one to > have any corresponding recognition of it, > one needs to be at least approaching the > commensurate level of its experience within > oneself as well. if not it will remain > mentally/emotionally irrelevant. > > if one is in fact nearing such proximity, > i would strongly advise seeing the videotape > of the sage of arunachala, sri ramana. > > there is a point in the video where bhagavan > is looking into the eyes of one of the visitors > to the ashram. if one is open and sensitive > enough, one will immediately be transported. > all doubts will be dispelled. > > one has to be at least near the point of > what could be called 'egoic breakthrough.' > if one could be expected to have a resonance > within themselves and see/experience the > ineffable reality of Self-realization in > the eyes and auric vibration of a jnani. > > then it goes to a place where it isn't merely > even that 'seeing is believeing,' but rather > more: 'Being is believing.' no! even this > latter is nonsense!! nothing can be said. > nothing whatsoever. > > peace in OM, > frank 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.