Explaining the inexplicable.

[Guest guest]

Namaste All,

 

Some asked me why I asked this question, did I know

the answer. If I knew the answer I wouldn't be writing

anything.

 

So if 'I Am', is non-dual, is that, it is a feeling of

nonduality or oneness?

 

OK let me fall back on to my learning system of

Vedanta. We have the concept of Saguna and Nirguna,

attributes and attributeless 'God'/Brahman.

 

So if we accept that a 'realised whilst alive

person'/Jivanmukta, has achieved the feeling of 'I

AM', and has lost the little 'i'/ego. Then when the

body drops so does the 'feeling', of 'I Am', and there

is only Nirguna/attributeless 'God'/Brahman.

 

So the body 'attracts' the attribute. What is the

final attribute? It is the Sakti, or power of

creation/mind. Even if it is undifferentiated,or in a

state of nonduality. However it is Universal Mind.

>From time to time people can become attributeless in

meditation, it's highest level.

 

However the tendency would be to stay there, and drop

the body.

 

So one of my questions is; Are we all on the same page

here? When talking about nonduality and realisation

etc, are we talking about 'I Am'. Is there an

understanding of a non-attribute non-state beyond

oneness and bliss etc.

 

Otherwise we have crossed wires, some talking of one

state and others another state.

 

For even the nondual 'I Am' state is duality for there

is yet another state, or rather non-state!

 

My thought again, is that if the little ego has gone

then effort is impossible. Therefore it is only

possible to drop the I Am and Bliss feeling, with the

Grace of the indwelling 'God with attributes'.

 

Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

 

=====

http://members.xoom.com/aoclery/sanskritglos.htm

 

ASATHO MA SATH GAMAYA, From the unreal lead me to the real,

THAMASO MA JYOTHIR GAMAYA, From darkness, lead me to light,

MRITHYOR MA AMRITAM GAMAYA.From death, lead me to immortality.

OM, SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI. Om, Peace Peace Peace.

 

 

Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

http://im.

[Guest guest]

Dear Tony,

 

Please allow me this:

 

You seem to be caught up in so many concepts of what others have realised or

written. Why spend so much time on this, unless your interest is for

intellectual clarity alone.

 

If your questions were the result of your involvement with your own sense of

duality, they might have been more simple, direct and clear.

 

You ask if we are talking the same language.

 

Yes, indeed - if you come from your own reality, however profound or

shallow, and present that to some of us. I am sure there are many here who

will be only too eager to embrace your questions as our own and who will

feel priviledged to make useful comments if possible.

 

Love,

 

Moller

 

Tony O'Clery <aoclery

< >

Cc: nondualitysalon <nondualitysalon >

20 February 2000 06:02

Explaining the inexplicable.

 

>Tony O'Clery <aoclery

>

>Namaste All,

>

>Some asked me why I asked this question, did I know

>the answer. If I knew the answer I wouldn't be writing

>anything.

>

>So if 'I Am', is non-dual, is that, it is a feeling of

>nonduality or oneness?

>

>OK let me fall back on to my learning system of

>Vedanta. We have the concept of Saguna and Nirguna,

>attributes and attributeless 'God'/Brahman.

>

>So if we accept that a 'realised whilst alive

>person'/Jivanmukta, has achieved the feeling of 'I

>AM', and has lost the little 'i'/ego. Then when the

>body drops so does the 'feeling', of 'I Am', and there

>is only Nirguna/attributeless 'God'/Brahman.

>

>So the body 'attracts' the attribute. What is the

>final attribute? It is the Sakti, or power of

>creation/mind. Even if it is undifferentiated,or in a

>state of nonduality. However it is Universal Mind.

>

>From time to time people can become attributeless in

>meditation, it's highest level.

>

>However the tendency would be to stay there, and drop

>the body.

>

>So one of my questions is; Are we all on the same page

>here? When talking about nonduality and realisation

>etc, are we talking about 'I Am'. Is there an

>understanding of a non-attribute non-state beyond

>oneness and bliss etc.

>

>Otherwise we have crossed wires, some talking of one

>state and others another state.

>

>For even the nondual 'I Am' state is duality for there

>is yet another state, or rather non-state!

>

>My thought again, is that if the little ego has gone

>then effort is impossible. Therefore it is only

>possible to drop the I Am and Bliss feeling, with the

>Grace of the indwelling 'God with attributes'.

>

>Om Namah Sivaya, Tony.

>

>=====

>http://members.xoom.com/aoclery/sanskritglos.htm

>

>ASATHO MA SATH GAMAYA, From the unreal lead me to the real,

>THAMASO MA JYOTHIR GAMAYA, From darkness, lead me to light,

>MRITHYOR MA AMRITAM GAMAYA.From death, lead me to immortality.

>OM, SHANTI SHANTI SHANTI. Om, Peace Peace Peace.

>

>

>Talk to your friends online with Messenger.

>http://im.

>

>------

>Want to help promote education? Help kids learn to read? AND earn

>extra income? Join our affiliate program for the successful Hooked

>on Phonics product and you will do all three!

>http://click./1/1633/2/_/_/_/951019275/

>------

>

>//

>

>All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights,

perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and subside

back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not different than

the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the nature of Awareness.

Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. It is Home. Home is

where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the Finality of Eternal

Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of Self-Knowledge, spontaneously

arising from within into It Self. Welcome all to a.

>

>To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at

> www., and select the User Center link from

the menu bar

> on the left. This menu will also let you change your

subscription

> between digest and normal mode.

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Tony,

>>So if 'I Am', is non-dual, is that, it is a feeling of

>>nonduality or oneness?

 

It isn't a feeling. If you are feeling something or perceiving something,

that isn't it.

>>OK let me fall back on to my learning system of

>>Vedanta. We have the concept of Saguna and Nirguna,

>>attributes and attributeless 'God'/Brahman.

 

Notice that you are now discussing the "concept" of Brahman... not THAT.

This is mind examining its contents.

>>So if we accept that a 'realised whilst alive

>>person'/Jivanmukta, has achieved the feeling of 'I

>>AM',

 

Going into the All... uniting with Brahman... is not achieving a feeling

of "I AM"... or of anything. But afterward, in trying to grasp in some way

what has happened... what THAT was and is... one may use the words "I

AM." And in trying to express to others the inexpressible, one may use the

words "I AM." There are so many ways to try to say it, and none are

adequate... it cannot be said.

>and has lost the little 'i'/ego. Then when the

>>body drops so does the 'feeling', of 'I Am', and there

>>is only Nirguna/attributeless 'God'/Brahman.

 

This is closer to it... In the All is no "little i/ego"... no "feeling"

of "I AM"... no physical body... no mental body... no "soul"... But it

is not loss... it is ALL. In the All there is nothing... nothing in

particular. And everything is there... in potential. We can speak of

emptiness... we can also speak of the fullness of THAT.

 

If one comes back into the manifested bodies of this life, then there is

again the "I-making" faculty... a mind to think with... an ego structure

to use in everyday life, relating to other people.

>>So the body 'attracts' the attribute. What is the

>>final attribute? It is the Sakti, or power of

>>creation/mind. Even if it is undifferentiated,or in a

>>state of nonduality.

 

Someone (the name escapes me) said that Shakti is the first emanation from

the All. I like that image... the _first_ attribute, you might say.

>However it is Universal Mind.

 

If you define "mind" broadly enough. But it is not mind in any sense that

we know it in our human lives.

>>From time to time people can become attributeless in

>>meditation, it's highest level.

 

Meditation is a tool, a technique. Achieving union with Brahman... going

into the All... could be defined as its highest level. But the All is not

a level at all. Pushing to go a little higher or a little deeper will not

get you to the level of Brahman... it is no level... it is All.

>>However the tendency would be to stay there, and drop

>>the body.

 

Your purpose will bring you back. In the case of one who has decided to

drop the body... I think they call it taking mahasamadhi... he does not

have the purpose to return into manifestation... he just goes home to stay.

>>So one of my questions is; Are we all on the same page

>>here? When talking about nonduality and realisation

>>etc, are we talking about 'I Am'. Is there an

>>understanding of a non-attribute non-state beyond

>>oneness and bliss etc.

 

We are all talking the same language. The trouble is, language itself is

not capable of expressing THAT. In every other experience in life, there

are words... or symbols... or feelings... _something_ that we can relate

to something else, so we can categorize... and explain... and discuss.

In Brahman are no words, no symbols, no sights, no sounds... how can we

categorize? Explain? Discuss?

 

After the All, it becomes apparent that any way we try to express it, to

explain it, is symbolic... of the nature of simile and metaphor. "Like

this"... "like that"... ALL of our statements about it are symbolic...

they are ALL simile and metaphor. There is no best way to talk about it...

there is no way to talk about it at all. All we can do is say something

that may catch at a handle in someone else's mind... may feel like a

hint... Talking about the All is like standing in the road and pointing a

finger... "thataway!" That's the best we can do... just point. And all

of our pointers are symbolic... like road signs. (We may also try to

point away from some exits from the highway... "Not this"... "not that.")

 

In fact, after the All, this manifest creation looks like all symbol... To

paraphrase the ancient teaching: "In the beginning God symbolized."

>>Otherwise we have crossed wires, some talking of one

>>state and others another state.

 

This is often true. Harsha said:

>All barriers to Self-Knowledge may be viewed as stepping stones. There are

>many ways and forms of expression of the Nondual Truth. Any form of

>genuine expression takes place knowing that the expressions are not

>themselves the Truth.

 

One may experience nothingness, the void... and assume that that must be

IT... and so he describes the All as nothingness, as a void. Another may

experience profound silence... and think that is IT... and describe

Brahman as silence. Another may experience great bliss... and describe

the All as bliss. The man who comes back from the All may use any of these

words... but he knows that none are adequate... that all language is

symbolic... and cannot express THAT.

 

One more metaphor: the manifested universe is a giant movie... we are

appearing on that big screen... We try to discuss the nature of Reality...

the ultimate... the All... but all of our words, all of our reference

points, are part of the movie on the screen. What can they convey of the

projection room, the audio/visual equipment there? But suppose a man in

this movie manages to lay aside his body, his image, and travel in pure

consciousness back up the rays of light coming from the projection booth...

until he reaches the projection machine... and finds at the core of it

what seems to be a great jewel, flickering in and out of existence... and

he goes into the jewel and he IS the jewel... And there is no movie... no

theater... only the heart of the jewel.

 

Then this pure consciousness goes out again in the light rays and again

animates the character on the screen. And now this character, no matter

what happens to him in the movie... no matter what he says or does...

knows that it's a movie... and always he has the awareness... as much as

will stay in his on-screen memory and mind... of the jewel that he is,

behind all the images, behind the rays of light... And he would like to

tell other characters in the movie.... he knows they are all himself, of

course (what else is there?)... but in the movie they seem to be parts of

himself that he would like to share more with... what can he say to them?

 

Not a bad metaphor... except that this movie seems to be a hologram. And

each little bit of a hologram contains ALL of it. So the jewel is just as

accessible from anywhere at all... The way to the source is anywhere...

everywhere.

>>My thought again, is that if the little ego has gone

>>then effort is impossible. Therefore it is only

>>possible to drop the I Am and Bliss feeling, with the

>>Grace of the indwelling 'God with attributes'.

 

For most people, the best way is to do those practices or techniques that

bring one as near as possible... and do them again and again... let the

"being near" be habitual, a way of life... and wait in patience... with

no expectations... pray for grace... and wait... wait for grace.

 

Love,

Dharma