Jnana and 'destroying concepts'

[Guest guest]

I have heard Jnana yoga referred to as the destruction of concepts.

I understand that the mind works thru division, and that it cannot

grasp the 'whole'. Each division implicitly contains its opposite-

such as, in order for 'shortness' to exist, 'tallness' too is

automatically created or implied. Kind of like that ying/yang

symbol (forgot what its called). And there is a 'consilitory'

principle that is superior to both concepts which is inclusive and

renders each of the origional concepts obsolete (or rather, implies

that they are actually relative terms as opposed to absolutes...) -a

little terminology from Benoits 'Supreme Doctrine'.

 

Anyways, Im looking for some direction/instruction on how one goes

about 'destroying concepts' in a systematic fashion.

 

Yes, yes, I know- more useless conceptualizing, avoiding

the 'direct' path. blah, blah, blah.

 

Any replies welcome- links, opinions, flames, experiences,

referances, books to read- all welcome

 

Thany you!

[Guest guest]

Hi Joe,

 

 

 

-

" joeelberti " <joeelberti

<Nisargadatta >

Friday, April 09, 2004 07:58 AM

Jnana and 'destroying concepts'

 

 

> I have heard Jnana yoga referred to as the destruction of concepts.

> I understand that the mind works thru division, and that it cannot grasp the

'whole'. Each division implicitly contains its opposite- > such as, in order

for 'shortness' to exist, 'tallness' too is automatically created or implied.

Kind of like that ying/yang

> symbol (forgot what its called). And there is a 'consilitory' principle that

is superior to both concepts which is inclusive and

> renders each of the origional concepts obsolete (or rather, implies that they

are actually relative terms as opposed to >absolutes...) -a little terminology

from Benoits 'Supreme Doctrine'.

 

 

 

Is there any " absolutes " , without the relative?

 

Is there a saint, without a sinner around to be salvaged?

 

 

>

> Anyways, Im looking for some direction/instruction on how one goes about

'destroying concepts' in a systematic fashion.

 

 

 

How about looking, .........to whom is " destroying concepts " , .........of

relevance, of significance?

 

What is the underlying stake in that?

 

 

 

Concepts are ideations, having as much susbtantivity as your shadow.

 

Wanting to destroy concepts , .........is it not akin to needing to stamp on

your shadow, to eradicate it's infernal presence?:-)

 

See the shadow for what it is.

 

See that shadow does not exist where it does not fall.

 

It also does not exist where it does fall.