Guest guest Posted June 16, 2003 Report Share Posted June 16, 2003 Hello Benjamin, Greg and advaitins all, The ajativada theory is a complex digression but even so so it still doesn't show that consciousness only theories have any merit. They are offered by their proponents as an account of our everyday perception. To move them away from that to the sphere of the apophatic (Divine Darkness of Dionysius the Areopagite) or annihilation (fana/Sufism)is a mighty transport. My allusion to those two strains of thought concerning the all noughting absolute in Christianity and Islam will show that the observations that you utter concerning them are not backed up by the gold standard of knowledge. Anyway given that moderate commentators in India are appalled by the rise of Hindu fundamentalism anything that adds to prejudice should be left out even if it were true. Rememember that the silent ones may really not know that much about those faiths so unless you have something positive to say better leave it out. Other than in his commentary on Mandukya Upanisad where he includes the Karikas of Gaudapada and comments on them where does Sankara allude to ajativada in a major work? The use of the word 'real' as in real butter, real leather and the really real needs to be looked at coolly. Best Wishes, Michael. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Namaste. I am afraid we are missing a very subtle difference here. If there is nothing but Consciousness (one Consciousness), then there is no scope for limits or adjuncts and, therefore, conceptualization, whereas when we say there are consciousnesses, the whole scenario is vitiated and rendered inadvaitic with numbers creeping in. There is, therefore, a world of difference between the two. Let us sit back, close our eyes and erase thought after thought on the mind's screen. A very tall order indeed! Let us suppose all thoughts have been erased including the body thought. There now is the blank screen and, if that is seen as screen, woe betide, that again is a thought limited to the very core. But, instead, if what remains is `identified with' or 'known as' or 'intuited as' the limitless "I", wherefrom the world including all so-called consciousnesses emerges and where to it retracts, then the game is won and that can't be accomplished without detachment and surrender. Till then, it may just occur as occasional flashes of lightning on the distant horizon. Still, there is a lot of beauty in it. Am I poetic enough although I can't scale Mount Everest? PraNAms. Madathil Nair ________________________ advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: Furthermore, a subjective > idealist may believe there are many individual consciousnesses like > yours and mine, or one single all-encompassing consciousness (like > Brahman), or both. The only requirement is that there be nothing > other than consciousness in some form or another. ............................................... But it is still just > intellectual for me, which is why I raised the subject in the first > place a few months ago. I was hoping that some inspired poets on > this list could find just the right words to give me that flash of > intuition that I need to rise above my own personal phenomenology and > gaze from the top of Mount Everest. I am still keeping my fingers > crossed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Namaste Sri Madathil Nair! >Let us sit back, close our eyes and erase thought after >thought on the mind's screen. A very tall order indeed! >Let us suppose all thoughts have been erased including >the body thought. There now is the blank screen and, >if that is seen as screen, woe betide, that again is a >thought limited to the very core. But, instead, if what >remains is 'identified with' or 'known as' or 'intuited >as' the limitless "I", wherefrom the world including all >so-called consciousnesses emerges and where to it retracts, >then the game is won and that can't be accomplished without >detachment and surrender. Till then, it may just occur as >occasional flashes of lightning on the distant horizon. >Still, there is a lot of beauty in it. > >Am I poetic enough although I can't scale Mount Everest? I think you are on the right track! I do agree that it may occur as brief flashes of insight (especially during meditation) long before the dawn of full realization. What makes all this erasing of the mind especially interesting to me is that the Jivan-mukta can still operate in the world, drive a car and even program a computer. I think what matters is not whether we think and perceive but whether we do so self-consciously. I.e. there may be perception but there should be no perceiver. But then, is there perception? We are talking about extreme levels of subtlety here. Yet there is overwhelming credible and sincere testimony that the state of 'thoughtless thought' can indeed occur. This keeps me very interested! As Swamiji says, Advaita is quite fascinating to talk about even before realization (which can of course also be a trap). Om! Benjamin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Namaste Shri Benjamin. I would rather be cautious here and say that 'you and I see a jivan- mukta (whatever that is!) driving a car and programming a computer', for when we 'gain' jeevan mukti (whatever that means!), will there be a 'we' (of plurality) or another jeevan mukta to view. These are matters for us to contemplate and come to grips with. It is difficult to catch them in words although in the meditation hours we often feel sure that we have all of them securely cached up for later reproduction in print! PraNAms. Madathil Nair ____________________________ advaitin, Benjamin Root <orion777ben> wrote: > What makes all this erasing of the mind especially interesting to me > is that the Jivan-mukta can still operate in the world, drive a car > and even program a computer. > > I think what matters is not whether we think and perceive but whether > we do so self-consciously. I.e. there may be perception but there > should be no perceiver. But then, is there perception? We are > talking about extreme levels of subtlety here. Yet there is > overwhelming credible and sincere testimony that the state of > 'thoughtless thought' can indeed occur. This keeps me very > interested! As Swamiji says, Advaita is quite fascinating to talk > about even before realization (which can of course also be a trap). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair> wrote: > Namaste. > Let us sit back, close our eyes and erase thought after thought on > the mind's screen. A very tall order indeed! Let us suppose all > thoughts have been erased including the body thought. There now is > the blank screen and, if that is seen as screen, woe betide, that > again is a thought limited to the very core. But, instead, if what > remains is `identified with' or 'known as' or 'intuited as' the > limitless "I", wherefrom the world including all so-called > consciousnesses emerges and where to it retracts, then the game is > won and that can't be accomplished without detachment and surrender. Namaste M et al, It seems to me that realisation is in two stages,( really one); However one realises the true 'I' 'I', becoming one with the manifestational energy. At this stage one is also aware of one's relationship or non relationship to Nirguna. At the dropping of the body so drops the illusion of energy and realises totally Nirguna Nirguna ..........ONS...Tony. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Namaste Nairji, But, instead, if what remains is `identified with' or 'known as' or 'intuited as' the limitless "I", wherefrom the world including all so-called consciousnesses emerges and where to it retracts, then the game is won and that can't be accomplished without detachment and surrender. SV - To me this also appears to be a thought. Could you please clarify, how this is different from a thought such as 'Here is a blank screen'. Thanks and regards. Venkat Plus - For a better Internet experience Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 17, 2003 Report Share Posted June 17, 2003 Namaste Venkatji. I am just packing off for a week-long holiday with family in Sri Lanka and then to Kerala to watch the monsoon rains for a month, if they don't play truant again. I may spend a couple of days in Amchi Mumbayi too and, if my trip materializes, can I get in touch with you at Mahindra & Mahindra (that is where I believe you are currently stationed)for a chat? Perhaps, the wisdom that I may gain in Buddhist Sri Lanka, if I am sober enough there(hehehe!), might help me to be clearer on your question. You have touched an area where language fails. When I wrote my post, I thought I had selected the right words or the best words possible, at least. However, with your question, I now realize that language has failed me once again. However, in order not to give up so easily, I would rather differentiate that "Here is a blank screen" is seeing a thought but what I meant was being a thought. We are really the thoughts and all that is seen all the time but never do we realize that that is the truth as the sense of separation relentlessly plagues us when we jump from one tree-top to another like monkeys. In fact, that sense of separation, again a thought, is also us in ultimate analysis but we let it plague us through our ignorance. Like I said before in the case of Christ - if the nails are me, and my tormentors are me, how can they hurt me, for am I not the pain too? That I believe is advaitic wisdom. If an anaconda gulps me down its entrails, I shouldn't repeat shouldn't then be bothered because I am the anaconda and its gastric juice as well. Good thought before a holiday - hehehe! Please do let me have your contact details, if it is convenient. Regards and praNAms. Madathil Nair __________________ advaitin, S Venkatraman <svenkat52> wrote: > Namaste Nairji, > > > But, instead, if what > remains is `identified with' or 'known as' or 'intuited as' the > limitless "I", wherefrom the world including all so-called > consciousnesses emerges and where to it retracts, then the game is > won and that can't be accomplished without detachment and surrender. > > > SV - To me this also appears to be a thought. Could you please clarify, how this is different from a thought such as 'Here is a blank screen'. Thanks and regards. > > Venkat 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.