Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

if there are not two things

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

If there are not two things then it cannot be possible for one man to

reach God before any other. When we do awaken, we must awaken all at

once, because there is only one of us.

 

This is something I've been thinking about.

 

R Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

This is not the case. It is like saying that, when one person

dies, everyone will die. Or suggesting that sages such as Shankara and Ramana

Maharshi were not enlightened. It is a confusion of the absolute reality with

the empirical. As enlightenment is an event in time in the mind of a jIva, it

does not affect any other jIva. For some excellent observations on all of this,

read about the pot-space versus total-space metaphor used by Gaudapada in his

Mandukya kArikA II.3-9.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of R

Henry

Tuesday, July 29, 2008 6:40 PM

advaitin

if there are not two things

 

 

 

 

 

 

If there are not two things then it cannot be possible for one man to reach

God before any other. When we do awaken, we must awaken all at once, because

there is only one of us.

 

This is something I've been thinking about.

 

R Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

If there is only one true reality, then all of these people you mention were not ever real. They knew that, too. Their enlightenment was based on that knowledge. But can it be true that we should be able to awaken in parts? For doesn't the existence of such parts indicate that there are two things? If these people could reach God before the rest of us then they are separate than us?

I would say that, once a person has reached this enlightenment, they also see that we are all there already. Some of us just don't know it. There is no journey for there is no place to go. Isn't this the knowledge that exists within each of us?

What you are saying about time is my point, exactly. Once we have stepped out of time then we see that all time has passed because it was not real anyway. It may only appear from our Earthly domain that we are awakening in parts, and this is because of this illusion of time, but once we have woken then the truth is otherwise. Once time is no more, which is, in truth, always.

I think, in a manner of speaking, that when a person dies for the last time (that is to even say there could be a last time if all time occurs at once) then yes, once the transition from time is achieved, it could be said that all have died. We are all born at once and we all die at once. How can this not be so if all time is one moment? Are we all not one another; past, present and future?

Forgive me for I do not know all of the terminology as of yet. I could very well be saying the same things that you are saying and not even realize it. I am very pleased that you responded to me. It's been a long time since I've discussed these things and I feel almost as if I am a cat stretching after a nap.

Ray HenryOn Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:51 AM, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is not the case. It is like saying that, when one person

dies, everyone will die. Or suggesting that sages such as Shankara and Ramana

Maharshi were not enlightened. It is a confusion of the absolute reality with

the empirical. As enlightenment is an event in time in the mind of a jIva, it

does not affect any other jIva. For some excellent observations on all of this,

read about the pot-space versus total-space metaphor used by Gaudapada in his

Mandukya kArikA II.3-9.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Ray,

 

As I said, you should read some presentations on this topic,

such as the one I mentioned. In that metaphor, the ‘awakening’

relates to the pot (i.e. the mind), not the pot-space (i.e. the Atman), which

is always only total-space. The pot (i.e. body of the person) only seemingly

separates out a ‘part’ of the total space. The pot is born and dies

but the space is unaffected. The pot is subject to time, the space is not.

There is one total-space but lots of pots. ‘Enlightenment’ of one

pot does not affect the others.

 

So, yes, some of what you say is correct: there is no real

journey to be made; we are already the non-dual reality (the pot space is

already the total space). People are never ‘absolutely real’ and

enlightenment is realizing all of this. But the realization is in a single mind

(a single pot) so that this understanding unfortunately does not impact

directly on the understanding of another mind. This knowledge belongs to the

pot and, while some have it, most do not. There is only seeming duality but the

appearance of duality continues after enlightenment (the sun still appears to

rise even though we know this is an appearance caused by the rotation of the

earth). Time continues at the relative level for all jIva-s, enlightened or

not. It is only true to say that there is no time, space and causation in respect

of absolute reality. ‘We’ as separate persons never ‘step out

of time’.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of R

Henry

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 1:43 PM

advaitin

Re: if there are not two things

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I would say that, once a person

has reached this enlightenment, they also see that we are all there already.

Some of us just don't know it. There is no journey for there is no place to go.

Isn't this the knowledge that exists within each of us?

 

What you are saying about time is my point, exactly. Once we have stepped out

of time then we see that all time has passed because it was not real anyway. It

may only appear from our Earthly domain that we are awakening in parts,

and this is because of this illusion of time, but once we have woken then the

truth is otherwise. Once time is no more, which is, in truth, always.

 

I think, in a manner of speaking, that when a person dies for the last time

(that is to even say there could be a last time if all time occurs at once)

then yes, once the transition from time is achieved, it could be said that all

have died. We are all born at once and we all die at once. How can this not be

so if all time is one moment? Are we all not one another; past, present and

future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Thank you Dennis,

 

This is what I meant when I was saying that I am sure I am not using

the proper terminology. When I am speaking of " reaching God " I am

speaking of the next step after enlightenment, I suppose; the only REAL

state to achieve; the goal; The step that occurs at the end of all

lives.

 

I do appreciate your helping me to differentiate. We, as separate

person, do not step out of time but once time has been trancended then

there will be no separate persons. Once it does happen it will have

always been.

 

Thank you!

 

Ray HenryOn 7/30/08, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Ray,

 

As I said, you should read some presentations on this topic,

such as the one I mentioned. In that metaphor, the 'awakening'

relates to the pot (i.e. the mind), not the pot-space (i.e. the Atman), which

is always only total-space. The pot (i.e. body of the person) only seemingly

separates out a 'part' of the total space. The pot is born and dies

but the space is unaffected. The pot is subject to time, the space is not.

There is one total-space but lots of pots. 'Enlightenment' of one

pot does not affect the others.

 

So, yes, some of what you say is correct: there is no real

journey to be made; we are already the non-dual reality (the pot space is

already the total space). People are never 'absolutely real' and

enlightenment is realizing all of this. But the realization is in a single mind

(a single pot) so that this understanding unfortunately does not impact

directly on the understanding of another mind. This knowledge belongs to the

pot and, while some have it, most do not. There is only seeming duality but the

appearance of duality continues after enlightenment (the sun still appears to

rise even though we know this is an appearance caused by the rotation of the

earth). Time continues at the relative level for all jIva-s, enlightened or

not. It is only true to say that there is no time, space and causation in respect

of absolute reality. 'We' as separate persons never 'step out

of time'.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Ray,

 

This is where you start to diverge from what we have been

saying. There is no ‘next step’ in respect of the apparent person

in the world. (There isn’t even a first step in respect of

who-we-really-are in reality.) Realizing that there is no person, that we are

already perfect and complete, *is* the goal for the one who still

believes himself to be a person. The idea of ‘reaching God’ is for

the person still seemingly trapped in duality. At the end of ‘our life’,

nothing at all happens to Consciousness. When the pot breaks, the pot-space is

unaffected because the pot-space never existed. The space is not in the pot; it

is the pot that is in the space. Consciousness is not in the body; it is the

body that is in Consciousness.

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

advaitin

[advaitin ] On Behalf Of R Henry

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 4:54 PM

advaitin

Re: if there are not two things

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you Dennis,

 

This is what I meant when I was saying that I am sure I am not using the proper

terminology. When I am speaking of " reaching God " I am speaking of

the next step after enlightenment, I suppose; the only REAL state to achieve;

the goal; The step that occurs at the end of all lives.

 

I do appreciate your helping me to differentiate. We, as separate person, do

not step out of time but once time has been trancended then there will be no

separate persons. Once it does happen it will have always been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

advaitin , " R Henry " <rhenry1210 wrote:

>

> I would say that, once a person has reached this enlightenment, they

also

> see that we are all there already. Some of us just don't know it.

There is

> no journey for there is no place to go. Isn't this the knowledge

that exists

> *within* each of us?

>

> What you are saying about time is my point, exactly. Once we have

stepped

> out of time then we see that all time has passed because it was not real

> anyway. It may only *appear* from our Earthly domain that we are

awakening

> in parts, and this is because of this illusion of time, but once we have

> woken then the truth is otherwise. Once time is no more, which is,

in truth,

> always.

>

> I think, in a manner of speaking, that when a person dies for the

last time

> (that is to even say there could be a last time if all time occurs

at once)

> then yes, once the transition from time is achieved, it could be

said that

> all have died. We are all born at once and we all die at once. How

can this

> not be so if all time is one moment? Are we all not one another; past,

> present and future?

>

 

>

> Ray Henry

>

>

> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 2:51 AM, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

>

> > This is not the case. It is like saying that, when one person dies,

> > everyone will die. Or suggesting that sages such as Shankara and

Ramana

> > Maharshi were not enlightened. It is a confusion of the absolute

reality

> > with the empirical. As enlightenment is an event in time in the

mind of a

> > jIva, it does not affect any other jIva.

> > Best wishes,

> >

> > Dennis

 

Namaste Henry,

 

You and Dennis are not saying the same thing.

In the tradition of Vedanta we say that the teacher

is the most compassionate person, because knowing

that there is no problem at all, he or she teaches

others who do not know this as yet.

 

Above you stated: " We are all born at once and we

all die at once. How can this not be so if all time

is one moment? Are we all not one another; past,

present and future? "

 

IMO this would not be an understanding which Vedanta would

endorse. I think that such an understanding may have its

roots in Buddhism, but I'm not sure that all Buddhists would

agree with your interpretation of the way time unfolds,

and not being a Buddhist, I cannot comment any further.

 

The teachings of Vedanta first very carefully separate out

the absolute and the relative orders of reality. This is

done in order to help the mind of the individual recognize

that indeed I am the unchanging absolute reality from

my own perspective.

 

Then the creation is analyzed. Is it really here at all in the

way that we perceive it, or does it come and go in the stability

of being?

 

It comes and goes in the stability of being. If I am stable

being without change, and the reality of the creation is also

that, then are there two stable beings, or one? Only one.

 

Seer, seen, seeing, one stable reality despite seemingly

separate objects which can be observed to change.

 

So, the final understanding is that the reality I am never

dies, and everything, all that exists in time and space, is

that same reality also. So absolute existence never changes

or dies. But then we see and perceive all of this duality.

 

So within that order (duality), change takes place, and within

that order there are individual minds with self-ignorance,

self-ignorance which causes each mind to think 'I' exist

separately as a body/mind/sense organs individual, and all

that is seen and perceived also has its own separate existence,

(Not a pretty picture when the implications of this type

of thinking are analyzed) :-)

 

Vedanta breaks this down from within and without, as

it were. When the truth is cognized by the mind,

in the direct recognition of what is true, that there

is only existence alone, that separate objects do not

have their own separate existence, then that mind

is said to have gained self-knowledge.

 

That mind now knows, there is no problem and there never

has in reality been a problem. Time and space, and all

which they contain are in fact a product of my own being.

And being a product of my own being, what are they?

My own being. So, in reality there is only my own

being, nondually one.

 

But there are many minds which have not recognized

this, which you acknowledge above when you say,

" …we are all there already. Some of us just don't know it. "

 

And it is for the benefit of those minds which 'don't know it,'

which due to self-ignorance are suffering, that the teacher teaches.

He or she most compassionately teaches order to relieve that

suffering, which from one level of understanding isn't 'real,'

and from another level of understanding is so real as

to make living hell.

 

Pranams,

Durga

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Namaste Henry,

 

You and Dennis are not saying the same thing.

In the tradition of Vedanta we say that the teacher

is the most compassionate person, because knowing

that there is no problem at all, he or she teaches

others who do not know this as yet.

 

Above you stated: " We are all born at once and we

all die at once. How can this not be so if all time

is one moment? Are we all not one another; past,

present and future? "

 

IMO this would not be an understanding which Vedanta would

endorse. I think that such an understanding may have its

roots in Buddhism, but I'm not sure that all Buddhists would

agree with your interpretation of the way time unfolds,

and not being a Buddhist, I cannot comment any further.

 

The teachings of Vedanta first very carefully separate out

the absolute and the relative orders of reality. This is

done in order to help the mind of the individual recognize

that indeed I am the unchanging absolute reality from

my own perspective.

 

Then the creation is analyzed. Is it really here at all in the

way that we perceive it, or does it come and go in the stability

of being?

 

It comes and goes in the stability of being. If I am stable

being without change, and the reality of the creation is also

that, then are there two stable beings, or one? Only one.

 

Seer, seen, seeing, one stable reality despite seemingly

separate objects which can be observed to change.

 

So, the final understanding is that the reality I am never

dies, and everything, all that exists in time and space, is

that same reality also. So absolute existence never changes

or dies. But then we see and perceive all of this duality.

 

So within that order (duality), change takes place, and within

that order there are individual minds with self-ignorance,

self-ignorance which causes each mind to think 'I' exist

separately as a body/mind/sense organs individual, and all

that is seen and perceived also has its own separate existence,

(Not a pretty picture when the implications of this type

of thinking are analyzed) :-)

 

Vedanta breaks this down from within and without, as

it were. When the truth is cognized by the mind,

in the direct recognition of what is true, that there

is only existence alone, that separate objects do not

have their own separate existence, then that mind

is said to have gained self-knowledge.

 

That mind now knows, there is no problem and there never

has in reality been a problem. Time and space, and all

which they contain are in fact a product of my own being.

And being a product of my own being, what are they?

My own being. So, in reality there is only my own

being, nondually one.

 

But there are many minds which have not recognized

this, which you acknowledge above when you say,

" …we are all there already. Some of us just don't know it. "

 

And it is for the benefit of those minds which 'don't know it,'

which due to self-ignorance are suffering, that the teacher teaches.

He or she most compassionately teaches order to relieve that

suffering, which from one level of understanding isn't 'real,'

and from another level of understanding is so real as

to make living hell.

 

Pranams,

Durga

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps I am mixing levels of understanding, then. When I speak I am referring to what is real and not what seems

to be real. In that sense I suppose that none of what I have said would

be true because none of it is real. There is only one answer to any

question that is true and that answer is that there are not two things.

We are not all born at one time and we do not all die at one time

because we are neither born nor do we die. None of what appears to be

is real. There is no " next " level because there are not two things.

 

Time is not real. What appears to be the passing of time is a

misinterpretation as is everything else that appears to be. If time is

not real then there is no past, present or future and, in that sense, then all of time is one moment but only because it isn't at all.

 

The reality of what we are is the only truth. The separation is not real. The ones who do not know it yet only think they

do not yet know. They are not, in reality, separate from you or I, who

are not separate from one another. In reality we are not two things and

so the seeming differences in our location, our ethnicity, our gender

or even our date of birth are not real. You and I are the same space,

not the 'pots' that we believe we appear to be.

 

Who do we appear to be separate to? No one because there is no one else there. Not really.

 

I have the idea that in reality is a kind of silence which cannot be

imagined, let alone described with words. The hell in which we think we dwell is such because

of the seeming separateness of ourselves from those we desire, so very

much, to be truly seen by. We know somewhere within ourselves, even if

we don't know we know, that we are NOT the 'pot' that others supposedly see. Deep inside we fear we are unseen and this is torture. We think we are alone within our 'pot' but we are not. There is no one to be separate from.

 

As I have read more about Advaita I have seen that this is a truth that lies within all of us if it lies within any

of us. I have always said that if any one of us will see Heaven then we

must all see it because we are not separate. If any one of us is to

know true peace and truly experience Heaven then we must all experience

it because the truth of Heaven is without the chaos of human emotion

and it cannot be had as long as any part of God believes itself to be

in Hell.

 

It cannot be possible for any one person to experience the true reality

and be one with God and also still believe he is a person. In reality

we are ALL one with God and this is the only reality and it is now.

It could not be possible for some of us to be one while others are not.

Those who are not " enlightened " may not yet see this but those are also

the same who do not see any truth, or very little.

 

The truth is absolutely the truth no matter where it is written, or if

it is even written at all. It is what we are; truth. There is no amount

of reading or understanding or even debating on my part or any one

else's part that will change it or make it more or less true. My

apparent inability to properly express it within the confines of the

English language does not render it any less so.

 

There is only one answer that is true. That answer is that there is not two things. This is really the only thing one need comprehend to experience realization. All the rest is illusion. All the rest is false.

 

There are not different levels. Not really. There are not different

lives; not different times. There are no beginnings and there are no

endings. All of this is duality.

 

Thank you for putting up with me!

Ray Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I did want to quickly add that it would be almost as if one eye is

closed and one is open (as an anolgy for one who is enlightened

compared to one who is not.) Perhaps it could be true that one eye sees

while one eye doesn't but the mind to which both eyes connect to does see.

 

We are not the mind and we are not the witness to the mind but what we

truly are is " connected " to all supposed eyes, whether they be open or

closed and what is true is true whether one eye sees it or not. Any eye

seeing it at all makes no difference for the true seer is not the eye

and we are not even the seer. We are beyond that.On 7/30/08, R Henry <rhenry1210 wrote:

 

 

 

 

Namaste Henry,

 

You and Dennis are not saying the same thing.

In the tradition of Vedanta we say that the teacher

is the most compassionate person, because knowing

that there is no problem at all, he or she teaches

others who do not know this as yet.

 

Above you stated: " We are all born at once and we

all die at once. How can this not be so if all time

is one moment? Are we all not one another; past,

present and future? "

 

IMO this would not be an understanding which Vedanta would

endorse. I think that such an understanding may have its

roots in Buddhism, but I'm not sure that all Buddhists would

agree with your interpretation of the way time unfolds,

and not being a Buddhist, I cannot comment any further.

 

The teachings of Vedanta first very carefully separate out

the absolute and the relative orders of reality. This is

done in order to help the mind of the individual recognize

that indeed I am the unchanging absolute reality from

my own perspective.

 

Then the creation is analyzed. Is it really here at all in the

way that we perceive it, or does it come and go in the stability

of being?

 

It comes and goes in the stability of being. If I am stable

being without change, and the reality of the creation is also

that, then are there two stable beings, or one? Only one.

 

Seer, seen, seeing, one stable reality despite seemingly

separate objects which can be observed to change.

 

So, the final understanding is that the reality I am never

dies, and everything, all that exists in time and space, is

that same reality also. So absolute existence never changes

or dies. But then we see and perceive all of this duality.

 

So within that order (duality), change takes place, and within

that order there are individual minds with self-ignorance,

self-ignorance which causes each mind to think 'I' exist

separately as a body/mind/sense organs individual, and all

that is seen and perceived also has its own separate existence,

(Not a pretty picture when the implications of this type

of thinking are analyzed) :-)

 

Vedanta breaks this down from within and without, as

it were. When the truth is cognized by the mind,

in the direct recognition of what is true, that there

is only existence alone, that separate objects do not

have their own separate existence, then that mind

is said to have gained self-knowledge.

 

That mind now knows, there is no problem and there never

has in reality been a problem. Time and space, and all

which they contain are in fact a product of my own being.

And being a product of my own being, what are they?

My own being. So, in reality there is only my own

being, nondually one.

 

But there are many minds which have not recognized

this, which you acknowledge above when you say,

" …we are all there already. Some of us just don't know it. "

 

And it is for the benefit of those minds which 'don't know it,'

which due to self-ignorance are suffering, that the teacher teaches.

He or she most compassionately teaches order to relieve that

suffering, which from one level of understanding isn't 'real,'

and from another level of understanding is so real as

to make living hell.

 

Pranams,

Durga

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps I am mixing levels of understanding, then. When I speak I am referring to what is real and not what seems

to be real. In that sense I suppose that none of what I have said would

be true because none of it is real. There is only one answer to any

question that is true and that answer is that there are not two things.

We are not all born at one time and we do not all die at one time

because we are neither born nor do we die. None of what appears to be

is real. There is no " next " level because there are not two things.

 

Time is not real. What appears to be the passing of time is a

misinterpretation as is everything else that appears to be. If time is

not real then there is no past, present or future and, in that sense, then all of time is one moment but only because it isn't at all.

 

The reality of what we are is the only truth. The separation is not real. The ones who do not know it yet only think they

do not yet know. They are not, in reality, separate from you or I, who

are not separate from one another. In reality we are not two things and

so the seeming differences in our location, our ethnicity, our gender

or even our date of birth are not real. You and I are the same space,

not the 'pots' that we believe we appear to be.

 

Who do we appear to be separate to? No one because there is no one else there. Not really.

 

I have the idea that in reality is a kind of silence which cannot be

imagined, let alone described with words. The hell in which we think we dwell is such because

of the seeming separateness of ourselves from those we desire, so very

much, to be truly seen by. We know somewhere within ourselves, even if

we don't know we know, that we are NOT the 'pot' that others supposedly see. Deep inside we fear we are unseen and this is torture. We think we are alone within our 'pot' but we are not. There is no one to be separate from.

 

As I have read more about Advaita I have seen that this is a truth that lies within all of us if it lies within any

of us. I have always said that if any one of us will see Heaven then we

must all see it because we are not separate. If any one of us is to

know true peace and truly experience Heaven then we must all experience

it because the truth of Heaven is without the chaos of human emotion

and it cannot be had as long as any part of God believes itself to be

in Hell.

 

It cannot be possible for any one person to experience the true reality

and be one with God and also still believe he is a person. In reality

we are ALL one with God and this is the only reality and it is now.

It could not be possible for some of us to be one while others are not.

Those who are not " enlightened " may not yet see this but those are also

the same who do not see any truth, or very little.

 

The truth is absolutely the truth no matter where it is written, or if

it is even written at all. It is what we are; truth. There is no amount

of reading or understanding or even debating on my part or any one

else's part that will change it or make it more or less true. My

apparent inability to properly express it within the confines of the

English language does not render it any less so.

 

There is only one answer that is true. That answer is that there is not two things. This is really the only thing one need comprehend to experience realization. All the rest is illusion. All the rest is false.

 

There are not different levels. Not really. There are not different

lives; not different times. There are no beginnings and there are no

endings. All of this is duality.

 

Thank you for putting up with me!

Ray Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Hi Henry,

 

All the you said up to about half way through sounded fine but

then you again said: “I have always said that if any one of us will see

Heaven then we must all see it because we are not separate. If any one of us is

to know true peace and truly experience Heaven then we must all experience it

because the truth of Heaven is without the chaos of human emotion and it cannot

be had as long as any part of God believes itself to be in Hell.”

 

If I can return to the pot-space and total-space metaphor. The

individual pots (the actual material) correspond to individual persons

(body-minds).

 

Now pot A is not realized. He thinks that ‘who-I-really-am’

is the space inside me (equivalent to my ‘soul’ or whatever you

want to call it). He thinks that, when he dies, his space will merge with God

or go to some heavenly space or be reborn inside another pot. Or perhaps he

thinks that, when he breaks (the body dies), his space will disintegrate and

exist no more.

 

Pot B is enlightened. He knows that, in reality, there is only

total-space and that who-he-really-is IS that total-space. Each pot actually

exists in total-space. Each pot does not really have pot-space inside of it. He

knows that when he breaks, all that will happen is that the clay of the pot

will return to the ground but he, the total-space, will be totally unaffected.

 

But B’s knowing of the truth is an aspect of B’s pot

(his mind). This does not affect A’s pot and A still does not know it

(unless B becomes a teacher-pot and explains the discovered truth to others).

 

So, the bottom line is that the pot-spaces of ALL pots are

really total-space, whether or not they know this. Total-space is all there is.

But most pots do not realize this. When one pot is enlightened, other pots are

not automatically enlightened.

 

Hope this is now clear,

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of R

Henry

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 9:31 PM

advaitin

Re: Re: if there are not two things

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I have read more about Advaita I have seen that this is a truth that lies

within all of us if it lies within any of us. I have always said that if

any one of us will see Heaven then we must all see it because we are not

separate. If any one of us is to know true peace and truly experience Heaven

then we must all experience it because the truth of Heaven is without the chaos

of human emotion and it cannot be had as long as any part of God believes

itself to be in Hell.

 

It cannot be possible for any one person to experience the true reality and be

one with God and also still believe he is a person. In reality we are ALL one

with God and this is the only reality and it is now. It could not

be possible for some of us to be one while others are not. Those who are not

" enlightened " may not yet see this but those are also the same who do

not see any truth, or very little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

I understand that the other pots are not enlightened. I am speaking from the mind of the pot who is enlightened and who knows that what we actually are is not separate; neither itself or the other pots. Pot B knows that what we truly are is unchanging and eternal. That what we truly are is the one true thing. I use the word " Heaven " in place of God, or Brahman.

When I say that one of us cannot know Heaven without all others knowing it I mean that in the sense of what is absolutely true; that we are all already there. There are not some who are and some who are not. The Pot B knows that the space within itself and all other pots is the same and that it will be whether the other pots are enlightened to this fact or not. Teaching the truth to the minds of the other pots is a different story all together.

Thank you again! I will keep it up until I have it right!Ray HenryOn Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 2:54 AM, Dennis Waite <dwaite wrote:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hi Henry,

 

All the you said up to about half way through sounded fine but

then you again said: "I have always said that if any one of us will see

Heaven then we must all see it because we are not separate. If any one of us is

to know true peace and truly experience Heaven then we must all experience it

because the truth of Heaven is without the chaos of human emotion and it cannot

be had as long as any part of God believes itself to be in Hell."

 

If I can return to the pot-space and total-space metaphor. The

individual pots (the actual material) correspond to individual persons

(body-minds).

 

Now pot A is not realized. He thinks that 'who-I-really-am'

is the space inside me (equivalent to my 'soul' or whatever you

want to call it). He thinks that, when he dies, his space will merge with God

or go to some heavenly space or be reborn inside another pot. Or perhaps he

thinks that, when he breaks (the body dies), his space will disintegrate and

exist no more.

 

Pot B is enlightened. He knows that, in reality, there is only

total-space and that who-he-really-is IS that total-space. Each pot actually

exists in total-space. Each pot does not really have pot-space inside of it. He

knows that when he breaks, all that will happen is that the clay of the pot

will return to the ground but he, the total-space, will be totally unaffected.

 

But B's knowing of the truth is an aspect of B's pot

(his mind). This does not affect A's pot and A still does not know it

(unless B becomes a teacher-pot and explains the discovered truth to others).

 

So, the bottom line is that the pot-spaces of ALL pots are

really total-space, whether or not they know this. Total-space is all there is.

But most pots do not realize this. When one pot is enlightened, other pots are

not automatically enlightened.

 

Hope this is now clear,

 

Best wishes,

Dennis

 

 

 

 

advaitin [advaitin ] On Behalf Of R

Henry

Wednesday, July 30, 2008 9:31 PM

advaitin

Re: Re: if there are not two things

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I have read more about Advaita I have seen that this is a truth that lies

within all of us if it lies within any of us. I have always said that if

any one of us will see Heaven then we must all see it because we are not

separate. If any one of us is to know true peace and truly experience Heaven

then we must all experience it because the truth of Heaven is without the chaos

of human emotion and it cannot be had as long as any part of God believes

itself to be in Hell.

 

It cannot be possible for any one person to experience the true reality and be

one with God and also still believe he is a person. In reality we are ALL one

with God and this is the only reality and it is now. It could not

be possible for some of us to be one while others are not. Those who are not

" enlightened " may not yet see this but those are also the same who do

not see any truth, or very little.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

One thing I wanted to say here is advaitam (non-dualism) is not the

same as ekam (singularity).

 

If some of us take the inference that non-dual means singular, it is

not proper understanding.

 

It is the same confusion that people have with the universe - is it

single, or are there more universes? Some people say that universe by

definition includes all of space and time, so it should be singular,

while others argue to the contrary.

 

Arithmetic is 'not applicable' in these cases. The universe is

unquantifiable.

 

Similarly nonduality is neither singularity, nor multiplicity.

 

In respect of Vedanta therefore we have this principle of negating all

positive descriptions of the realized state with the maxim 'Neti Neti'.

 

You are right that language is definitely an impediment in expressing

one's understanding or ideas about this topic.

 

Regards,

Ramakrishnan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

On 7/31/08, s_r_kris <srkris wrote:

 

 

 

 

One thing I wanted to say here is advaitam (non-dualism) is not the

same as ekam (singularity).

 

If some of us take the inference that non-dual means singular, it is

not proper understanding.

 

It is the same confusion that people have with the universe - is it

single, or are there more universes? Some people say that universe by

definition includes all of space and time, so it should be singular,

while others argue to the contrary.

 

Arithmetic is 'not applicable' in these cases. The universe is

unquantifiable.

 

Similarly nonduality is neither singularity, nor multiplicity.

 

In respect of Vedanta therefore we have this principle of negating all

positive descriptions of the realized state with the maxim 'Neti Neti'.

 

You are right that language is definitely an impediment in expressing

one's understanding or ideas about this topic.

 

Regards,

Ramakrishnan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, my understanding along this line is that to say something is

singular is to automatically imply duality because it suggests that

there is an object to be observed and, therefore, there must also be an

observer. This is why it is said that there are " not two things. "

 

I would like to also say that I, personally, have really enjoyed this

discussion. Thank you to all who have participated. It's been good for

me to have to try so hard to say things correctly. It's a lesson in

life!

 

Ray Henry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...