Guest guest Posted June 25, 2000 Report Share Posted June 25, 2000 KKT - We get lost in the categories we construct. They are merely constructions, and when we start treating them as real in and of themselves, we're lost in fictions, forgetting that they're dependent on our belief and use for their existence. Examples: Is there free will or destiny? Is there an ego or not an ego? Is the world real or not real? These questions are unending. Ego/not ego Doer/no doer Destined/free Unreal/real False/true No authority will answer this because having authority/lacking authority is itself another dichotomous categorization. Love, Dan At 10:59 AM 6/25/00 -0400, you wrote: >Dear everyone, > >I want to share with you an >excerpt from an interview with >Bannanje Govindacharya by >Andrew Cohen in the new issue >of "What is Enlightenment" with >the interesting theme "What is Ego?" > > >AC: In the West at this time, there's literally an explosion of >interest in Advaita philosophy, mainly due to the influence of >Ramana Maharshi, Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, H.W.L. Poonja >and Ramesh Balsekar. And there are also now a number of >Western teachers propagating the advaita or nondual teachings. >In Advaita, what is emphasized is the unreality of the world-- >the unreality of manifest existence . And in that, what's being >stressed by many teachers is also the unreality of the ego . >Therefore, it is said that the sadhaka need not make any effort >to struggle against the negative ego in their pursuit of inner >freedom because the very object that they're trying to free >themselves from--the ego--is merely an illusion. The teaching >goes: Simply realize that the ego never existed and then live >happily in the knowledge of one's own inherent freedom. > >Now my view on this is that it's only the rarest of rare realized >persons who could get away with saying such a thing--that the >ego is an illusion--and that therefore one need not make any >effort to liberate onself from its corrupting influence . Indeed, only >the rarest of rare individuals, someone like Ramana Maharshi or >Ajja, could say something that absolute, that outrageous, and >it actually be true . Why ? Because those rarest of rare beings >are already finished--their ego has been utterly destroyed, burnt >in the fire of spiritual experience until there was nothing left. But >to encourage a seeker who is very, very far away from that kind of >extraordinary attainment to presume that their ego is an illusion >appears to be a dubious form of instruction. In fact, it could be >dangerous in some cases because it opens the door for self-deception >and/or self-indulgence . The seeker could easily, under the guise >of enlightened understanding, abandon all effort to censor or control >impure motivations or tendencies that actually do exist within them. >In other words, "Well, the ego doesn't exist; everything is unreal, >so nothing really matters anyway ." > >BG: Just to deny ego is of no consequence at all. If somebody >merely says that they have no ego, THAT is ego--that is the >greatest ego . "I don't have ego so I need not reject it" is a foolish >statement. Somebody who says, "I don't have ego," is at the >same time EXPRESSING his ego . This is against our experience . >It's just escapism through philosophy . These people say the ego >is false and not existent and that therefore they don't have to reject >it. But what is existent then? Does that mean everything is >nonexistent? Then why practice? Practice is nonexistent! If the >whole thing is false, if it doesn't exist, and if only the real essence >exists, then why practice? A REALIZED person can say that >they don't have ego because it is a self-ASSESSMENT; it is not >self-assertion. THEY can say it. But not ALL people can say >it. It is not a common, general statement. > >You see, the problem is that in Advaita there is no acknowledgment >of individuality . Advaita says that all is only one ATMAN [self]. >But Advaita is just a certain sect in India; it's not the whole of Indian >philosophy . In fact, Shankara, who lived in the seventh century, was >the only major Indian philosopher who preached Advaita . Later >philosophers--Ramanuja, Bhaskara, Nimbarka, Madhva--everybody >condemns Shankara . Nobody accepts him. But nowadays, Advaita >has become a fashion. > > >Any comment? > >Peace, > >KKT > >------ >**BELIEFNET SHOPPING** Save $20 at the Beliefnet store! Thousands of >religious and spiritual gifts and products. Now- get $20 off purchases >of $50 or more through July 10. >http://click./1/5591/9/_/520931/_/961945155/ >------ > >// > >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. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.