Fwd: Ego, Reincarnation and all that Jazz./no duality no ism

[Guest guest]

GuruRatings , " Tony OClery " <aoclery wrote:

 

GuruRatings , " Era Molnar " <mi_nok@> wrote:

>

> > > > > > Tony: Namaste,

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I really can't see how non dualism is hard to understand,

> > > > > > even by the

> > > > > > most unaware humans.

> > > > >

> > > > > ..........Right it's not hard to

> > > > > understand at all. We are

> > > > > plagued with, infested with, teachers of nonduality

> > > > > simply because it is so easy to understand,

> > > > > so easy for mind to wrap itself around

> > > > > the concepts, the metaphors, the dharma

> > > > > of nonduality.

> > > > >

> > > > > Matthew

> >

>

> Advaita word means - non-duality and as doctrine - it

> is non-dualism.

>

> Why non-duality - it is negation of duality. Since

> duality is the state we are in - in the vyvahaara

> state - but take this state as the real state.

>

> Hence the philosophy negates the reality to the

> duality that we experience and says that experiential

> duality is only mithyaa or only apparent and not real.

>

> Shree T.P. Mahadevan says 'advaita as translated as

> non-dualism - that non- not only refers to duality but

> to -ism as well'- essentially implying that it is the

> absolute truth and not an ism or philosophy or matam

> in Sanskrit.

>

> Advaita doctrine has three fundamental aspects

> involved.

>

> 1. Brahma satyam - Brahman alone is real - real being

> that which cannot be negated at anytime or place.

>

> 2. Jagat mithyaa - the world is apparent - neither

> real since it is negated in dream and deep sleep

> states, nor unreal since it is experienced - hence it

> is apparently real like mirage waters.

>

> and most importantly,

>

> 3. jiivo brahma eva na aparaH - the individual soul is

> nothing but Brahman - that is 'I am' is truly all

> pervading infinite consciousness-existence, the one

> without a second.

>

> Understanding of the third one requires appreciation

> of the first and second. That clear understanding as

> a fact is the samaadhi or nidhidhaasanam- which

> automatically requires appreciation of the first two

> as facts as well. It is not an understanding as a

> thought but understanding as a fact. That

> understanding is the recognition that you are that

> turiiyam - consciousness that pervades all the three

> states - waking, dream and deep sleep states. That

> provides samatvam in the dhii - samaadhi (equanimity

> in the intellect or buddhi)- since all that experience

> is only apparent and not real and what is real is only

> I, the conscious-existence that I am.

>

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

> Ana:

> Hmmmmm.

>

> You wanna let the cat out of the bag?

 

Namaste,

 

I find the response quoting sadananda from the advaitin group an

interesting foil. He was one of the moderators that essentially got me

thrown off the group for my ideas might be taken seriously as I had

been on there a long time.

Remembering we are discussing illusion within illusion, my ideas were

that there is only NirGuna Concept.

The final straw was when I quoted the creation hymn from the Rig Veda

which questions whether a 'God' knows or doesn't know about creation.

This was in the context of talking about sat-cit-ananda which to

advaitins is the ultimate condition of Brahman-nirguna. My argument

was that as these were qualities, as Ramana said, they were

describable attributes and therefore Saguna Concept.

I expanded the argument to suggest that as Brahman in the

dissolutions or pralayas was in potentiality that this was also Saguna

not NirGuna. This was the final straw of my heresy and I was given a

red card, as I was upsetting some devout people and not sticking

strictly to Sankara.

To me either Sankara was a fraud, he kept his real teaching for only a

few like Jesus, or his whole teaching have been heavily edited to suit

the Bhakti aspects of religions.

The way the followers of Sankara perceive him is almost superstitious.

They believe he is an incarnation of siva, and they more or less

worship him.

So the word A-Dvaita when applied to the devotees of Sankara is a

misnomer, for the teachings do not proceed beyond

Saguna/sat-cit-ananda, concept of the Self and do not entertain true

Advaita or NirGuna in any serious way..............Tony.

 

--- End forwarded message ---