Advaitist's illusion

October 1, 2000

Dear Friends,

Much has been said about the non-dual nature of Being in many of the

lists which concern themselves with the question of non-duality. It

seems to me that this new 'spiritual' buzzword (non-duality) has the

potential of creating a great deal of confusion in those who are eager

to penetrate deeply into the question of freedom from that which

prevents them from being who and what they, and everything else,

really are.

I say this because the non-practicing 'talking school' (Da Free John

expression) of Advaitists has developed such a watertight argument

around the question of the totality and all-inclusiveness of

'consciousness', that if one were to follow the logic of their

arguments, absolutely nothing can be done, and should be done, to

one's present condition of suffering and dualistic awareness because

everything is so obviously already non-dual.

Their argument goes something like this: All manifest existence

already rests in, and is a manifestation of the non-dual condition of

Being. Duality, however profoundly experienced, is therefore already

included in this non-dual Beingness/Consciousness and so any attempt

to get rid of the dualistic world-view must of necessity strengthen

the very entity (self/ego) which the practitioner is trying to get rid

of. Any attempt to break out of the spell of separate existence

(I-consciousness) is seen to be an act of bad faith because not only

is no breaking out necessary (as all is already whole and

non-separate) but impossible for the very same reason. In short,

dualism gets rejected by logical argument and any attempt to rid

oneself from dualism suffers the same fate. All is whole, all is

consciousness, all is awareness, so no practice is possible or

necessary.

Yet, despite all these clever arguments, life remains as difficult as

ever. However convinced by the arguments of the intellect that life

is O.K. because it is non-dual, these certainties flounder in the

face of the reality of human suffering. No logical argument can

counter and neutralise the argument of suffering. Suffering is real.

Suffering IS SAMSARA. Suffering IS the very notion that any argument

can destroy it. It is unfortunately an inherent part of the very

instrument which creates suffering (thought) that also projects a

pseudo freedom from itself through argumentation and then naively

believes that because it has presented itself with such an irrefutable

argument of its inherent identification with the whole, that this

argument will lead to the ACTUAL freedom FROM itself. This,

tragically, is not possible.

The first so-called 'Noble Truth' in Buddhism states the fact of

suffering to be an underlying theme in human experience. Immediately

following that is the investigation into the reasons of how suffering

is possible. So for the Buddha suffering (Samsara) was real, even

while teaching the fact of Nirvana (freedom from suffering). This

makes him a realist and not an idealist. Duality, and the suffering

inherent in this world-view is REAL for those caught in the web of

duality. From the point of view of Samsara, Samsara is REAL, and no

amount of non-dualistic projections from thought can and will bring

relief from this profoundly disturbing sense of life and oneself. So

the first TRUTH about life is the fact of suffering or Samsara. Let

those who stand in freedom from this contracted state offer help to

those not 'there', and let those who are still deluded, and caught in

a slightly modified version of Samsara (the intellectual non-dualists)

accept their delusion as delusion, and start working on themselves in

order to rid themselves of the false sense self-created 'non-dualism'

which they so readily offer to others as the final truth about life.

This is the work we can all share, if we learn how to distinguish

between that which is created by thought, mistaken for reality, and

that which thought cannot touch, but only point to.

Love

Moller

October 1, 2000

Advaita wrote:

> Dear Friends,

>

> Much has been said about the non-dual nature of Being in many of the

> lists which concern themselves with the question of non-duality. It

> seems to me that this new 'spiritual' buzzword (non-duality) has the

> potential of creating a great deal of confusion in those who are eager

> to penetrate deeply into the question of freedom from that which

> prevents them from being who and what they, and everything else,

> really are.

>

> I say this because the non-practicing 'talking school' (Da Free John

> expression) of Advaitists has developed such a watertight argument

> around the question of the totality and all-inclusiveness of

> 'consciousness', that if one were to follow the logic of their

> arguments, absolutely nothing can be done, and should be done, to

> one's present condition of suffering and dualistic awareness because

> everything is so obviously already non-dual.

>

> Their argument goes something like this: All manifest existence

> already rests in, and is a manifestation of the non-dual condition of

> Being. Duality, however profoundly experienced, is therefore already

> included in this non-dual Beingness/Consciousness and so any attempt

> to get rid of the dualistic world-view must of necessity strengthen

> the very entity (self/ego) which the practitioner is trying to get rid

> of. Any attempt to break out of the spell of separate existence

> (I-consciousness) is seen to be an act of bad faith because not only

> is no breaking out necessary (as all is already whole and

> non-separate) but impossible for the very same reason. In short,

> dualism gets rejected by logical argument and any attempt to rid

> oneself from dualism suffers the same fate. All is whole, all is

> consciousness, all is awareness, so no practice is possible or

> necessary.

>

> Yet, despite all these clever arguments, life remains as difficult as

> ever. However convinced by the arguments of the intellect that life

> is O.K. because it is non-dual, these certainties flounder in the

> face of the reality of human suffering. No logical argument can

> counter and neutralise the argument of suffering. Suffering is real.

> Suffering IS SAMSARA. Suffering IS the very notion that any argument

> can destroy it. It is unfortunately an inherent part of the very

> instrument which creates suffering (thought) that also projects a

> pseudo freedom from itself through argumentation and then naively

> believes that because it has presented itself with such an irrefutable

> argument of its inherent identification with the whole, that this

> argument will lead to the ACTUAL freedom FROM itself. This,

> tragically, is not possible.

>

> The first so-called 'Noble Truth' in Buddhism states the fact of

> suffering to be an underlying theme in human experience. Immediately

> following that is the investigation into the reasons of how suffering

> is possible. So for the Buddha suffering (Samsara) was real, even

> while teaching the fact of Nirvana (freedom from suffering). This

> makes him a realist and not an idealist. Duality, and the suffering

> inherent in this world-view is REAL for those caught in the web of

> duality. From the point of view of Samsara, Samsara is REAL, and no

> amount of non-dualistic projections from thought can and will bring

> relief from this profoundly disturbing sense of life and oneself. So

> the first TRUTH about life is the fact of suffering or Samsara. Let

> those who stand in freedom from this contracted state offer help to

> those not 'there', and let those who are still deluded, and caught in

> a slightly modified version of Samsara (the intellectual non-dualists)

> accept their delusion as delusion, and start working on themselves in

> order to rid themselves of the false sense self-created 'non-dualism'

> which they so readily offer to others as the final truth about life.

>

> This is the work we can all share, if we learn how to distinguish

> between that which is created by thought, mistaken for reality, and

> that which thought cannot touch, but only point to.

>

> Love

>

> Moller

>

Created by thought

Mistaken for reality

Easily touched by thought

seems to apply

to many things,

E'nit

Mace

October 2, 2000

Dear Brother Moller,

What a beautiful writing. May be it is what Buddha mean by Right

Understanding; The first Marga of Sapta Arya Marga ( Noble Eightfold Path ).

Could you please write about another Marga?

Noble Eightfold Path;

1.Right Understanding

2.Right Thoughts

3.Right Speech

4.Right Action

5.Right Livelihood

6.Right Effort

7.Right Mindfulness

8.Right Concentration

GATE GATE PARAGATE PARASAMGATE BODHISVAHA...

With Love,

Nasir

> ----------

> Advaita[sMTP:Advaita]

> Sunday, October 01, 2000 4:17 PM

> Advaita

> Cc: harsha

> Advaitist's illusion