advaitin More on objects

[Guest guest]

Hi Benjamin,

 

Have you done any of the Gedankenexperimente or exercises by Douglas Harding on

the headless.org site? They are good to get people to see that there is just no

one home, no owner, no separation, etc. Nondualism demonstrated perceptually!

 

As per your model, would you say that Ramana Maharshi has melted his mindtream

into yours? If his is yours, then yours is his too. So why have you no

evidence of it? To nondualists, it's not a case of one river coming to merge

with or overflood another, it's the cessation altogether of perceiving rivers.

 

--Greg

 

 

On 10/04/03 04:35 pm Benjamin Root (orion777ben) wrote:

 

Greg:

 

Here's where as discussion leader for this topic, I apologize for the

prolonged entry into this corner of Western-like philosophy. If many

members would rather read different aspects of the overall topic, I

could take it offline with Benjamin. I'll be sensitive and

responsive to people's wishes.

 

 

Benjamin:

 

As I said, I don't intend to pursue this topic if it just goes around

in circles. However, the notion that there is a 'Western' vs. an

'Indian' or 'Hindu' version of the truth seems rather silly to me,

especially on a topic as general as objects. It's not like we're

doing textual analysis of some particular Sanskrit scripture.

 

Also, I don't really like discussing things offline, because I end up

discussing them online somewhere anyway, so that my work is

multiplied unnecessarily. Besides, the thrill of online

philosophical discussions is wearing off, since nobody ever furnishes

me with any fresh revelations.

 

 

 

Greg:

 

Two nondual awarenesses! Doesn't that sound strange, er, dual??

Awareness isn't limited, nor can you find anything in awareness that

establishes limits. I definitely don't agree on the above, and I

notice you didn't support your belief in something not given in your

experience...

 

We can discuss our "own" experiences, but for me, the subject/object

dichotomy was the last to go. Way before that, the notion of

separate loci of awareness or activity had already dissolved.

 

This stuff isn't personal. The awareness "happens" at a place just

doesn't make sense. That awareness is limited to a place is simply

not given in awareness.

 

 

Benjamin:

 

Two nondual awarenesses does not sound strange, because I carefully

defined how they are nondual *within* themselves, by the vanishing of

the subject/object relationship *within* the respective streams of

consciousness. A philosophy consisting of a plurality of

consciousnesses, each containing the illusion of an objective

material world, is an intelligible and reasonable view.

 

The further merging of the streams into a single consciousness is a

*separate* issue than requires further discussion and further reasons

and is not simply an extension of the first restricted type of

nondualism, as I said yesterday.

 

As for experience, I repeat that I have no trouble imagining other

experiences or streams of consciousness similar to mine. I can see

no reason why this present consciousness called 'Benjamin' should be

the only one, and indeed I find it highly implausible. However, just

as the so-called 'external' world that appears in this present

consciousness is but an illusory projection, likewise the apparent

external worlds in other consciousnesses are also projections.

 

This projection includes space and time, so that space and time are

but aspects of the respective consciousnesses, and the

consciousnesses are not in some 'enveloping' space and time, as I

said. However, this does not mean that the consciousnesses cannot be

*different*, as far as I can see.

 

In fact, the difference of your consciousness from mine IS supported

by experience, namely, the experience that your experience is not

part of mine. Yet I do believe that your experience exists. I

dismiss the possibility of solipsism as utterly improbable. I

consider it a waste of time, and I will not consider it. Instead, I

want to start from the assumption that our respective streams of

consciousness do indeed exist, and then see how they might be

considered the 'same'.

 

You say that for you the 'subject/object' dichotomy has gone. But I

have pointed out that that occurs within our respective

consciousnesses. It is an unsubstantiated stretch to simply wave

your hand and say that, 'Oh, the difference between our

consciousnesses is just another version of that.' It is something

fundamentally different.

 

Yes, I agree that there are not separate 'loci' of awareness. I

fully agree that our consciousnesses are not objects in some kind of

space, like stars in the sky, as I said before. We each have our own

version of space and time, which is but an aspect of the illusion of

an external world that manifests within our respective

consicousnesses. However, this does not prevent our consciousnesses

from being *different*, as far as I can tell. They can be different

despite not having any loci. They are different simply because they

are different. Your experiences are not mine and vice versa, period.

I guess this is repetitive, but I see no reason to change my mind.

 

 

 

Greg:

 

If there's a G and B, then the subject/object dichotomy is still

functional. Either (a) they are both objects to you, or (b) G and B

are each other's objects, or both.

 

 

Benjamin:

 

Why? I have explained how within a particular consciousness, the

subject/object distinction is one of a perceiving conscious self and

an external world that is other than the self. This we both deny.

The external world is a hallucination within our respective

consciousnesses. But this does not mean that your consciousness is a

hallucination in mine; the whole point is that it is not. Therefore,

the difference between your consciousness and mine has nothing to do

with the subject/object dichotomy, which always takes place within a

particular consciousness.

 

 

 

Greg:

 

Nonduality isn't just the situation where a person doesn't believe in

a subject/object distinction. It's where no dualisms or pluralities

at all are operative. The claim of B and G is quite dual.

 

 

Benjamin:

 

Very well! But please provide some REASONS for this extension of the

notion of nonduality. You see, there WERE reasons for 'eliminating'

the external world within a particular consciousness, namely, the

example of the dream. This example clearly explains how apparently

external objects can be projected as illusions or hallucinations

within a particular consciousness. But it is of no use to the

completely different issue of 'uniting' your consciousness and mine.

Nothing of your consciousness manifests in mine, and so all such

analogies as the dream are irrelevant.

 

 

 

Greg:

 

You postulate a separate awareness, Ben's. On top of that, you state

that you are Ben. This is very close to solipsism. ... Yet, against

this, you state that there are other awarenesses. Where's your

evidence???

 

Benjamin:

 

As I said above, I have no problem with solipsism. My evidence is

the utter improbability that I should be the only one. That would be

arbitrary and bizarre in the extreme. That suffices for me.

 

 

 

Greg:

 

Have you read ATMA DARSHAN by Krishna Menon?

 

 

Benjamin:

 

Being Ananda Wood's teacher, I must read it some time. Ananda wrote

me an excellent email on Advaita, which I published recently on my

list at

 

<a href="clearvoid/message/1055"

target="NewWin">clearvoid/message/1055</a>

 

I do recommend reading it.

 

Don't worry Advaitins, I don't intend to pursue this much further.

I'm just trying to get poor Gregji to cough up some new reasons that

are convincing to me. If this bothers anyone, I'll drop the issue.

But I do believe it's quite mistaken to think that such 'Western'

discussions are foreign to the topic of Advaita. This is a very

misguided notion.

 

 

Regards

Benjamin

 

 

Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman

and Brahman.

Advaitin List Archives available at: <a

href="http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/"

target="NewWin">http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/</a>

To Post a message send an email to : advaitin

Messages Archived at: <a href="advaitin/messages"

target="NewWin">advaitin/messages</a>

 

 

 

Your use of is subject to <a

href=""

target="NewWin"></a>