To Michael

[Guest guest]

Namaste Michael,

>Your diligence in the defense of immaterialism and

>your capacity to wring agreement with your position

>from what seems self evidently a contrary view evokes awe.

 

 

Regarding 'immaterialism', all I can say is, these Vedic types have

believed that reality is fundamentally, nay entirely spiritual, for a

LONG time. I call THAT 'immaterialism'.

 

Brahman = Consciousness = Reality.

 

Regarding what you said, I would say that both the sensation before

conceptual reflection and the conceptual reflection upon that

sensation are in consciousness. It's a process in awareness.

Likewise for the seeing of the pot and the remembrance thereof. As

for the unification of disparate concepts following successively in

time, this must indeed be done at a given moment. It is no more

mysterious than realizing that the parts of an apple cohere in their

spatial contiguity within consciousness, despite any lack of

underlying 'substance' for these parts to 'stick' in.

 

Consciousness is a unity (advaita) by nature, and the supreme

manifestation of unity is to realize that all is Brahman and that

there is no distinction between ego and world. There is just the

consciousness. Any semblance of multiplicity or distinction is an

illusory deviation from the intrinsic nature of consciousness. The

distinction between consciousness and matter is only the grossest

form of a whole sequence of false discriminations that begin with the

I-thought (which is NOT the Self).

 

I also appreciate your diligence and backbone.

 

But I am addressing this message to you for another reason: to

'apologize' for something else having nothing to do with

immaterialism. Well, apologize is not quite the right word, but you

will understand as you read on.

 

Some months ago, we somehow got into a discussion of Sai Baba, and I

got alarmed about all the bad reports on the web. You, as a devotee,

got indignant, and I, as a rationalist, felt that the probability of

something bad going on was uncomfortably high. A 'where there's too

much smoke, there is probably fire' situation.

 

Since then, I have discovered that several extremely nice people at

the satsanghs I attend are Sai Baba devotees. It has occurred to me

how much they might be hurt by all this.

 

Furthermore, I have discovered through my reading how some

emotionally troubled people can really believe events that never

occurred. For instance, they may have been abused by their parents

when young, then suppressed it from their awareness, and much later

they project it on to someone else, perhaps another father figure.

 

I don't want to indulge in too much psychobabble, and I am not

exonerating Sai Baba. I simply don't know, and until one knows with

certainty, one should think of the innocent who are hurt by rumour.

It helps to know some actual people like this to fully understand the

implications.

 

Hari Omn!

Benjamin