Guest guest Posted October 2, 2000 Report Share Posted October 2, 2000 Hi Moller-ji, I agree with you in general, and salute your wake-up call to not hide out in the intellectual advaita shuffle! The traditions that teach advaita or nondualism (Advaita Vedanta, Kabbala, Madhyamika, Sufism, etc.) as part of an overall spiritual approach to life, they have this kind of attitude towards the non-dual teaching: the people for whom the non-dual teachings are usually helpful are ironically, the ones who have practised long and sincerely. That is, they aren't the best teaching for every stage of life. E.g., coming off the street fresh from college and one's first corporate job, then into this teaching, would cause the person to bypass lots of helpful stuff that would eventually help this non-practicing teaching take root. Helpful stuff which might include therapy, devotional, ethical and meditative practices. So, is what you are saying that the advaita view is more of a trap when adopted too soon?? Sounds good to me! Namaste, --Greg At 02:46 AM 10/2/00 -0400, 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Advaita-Ashram- > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 2, 2000 Report Share Posted October 2, 2000 Gregory Goode [goode] Hi Moller-ji, I agree with you in general, and salute your wake-up call to not hide out in the intellectual advaita shuffle! The traditions that teach advaita or nondualism (Advaita Vedanta, Kabbala, Madhyamika, Sufism, etc.) as part of an overall spiritual approach to life, they have this kind of attitude towards the non-dual teaching: the people for whom the non-dual teachings are usually helpful are ironically, the ones who have practised long and sincerely. That is, they aren't the best teaching for every stage of life. E.g., coming off the street fresh from college and one's first corporate job, then into this teaching, would cause the person to bypass lots of helpful stuff that would eventually help this non-practicing teaching take root. Helpful stuff which might include therapy, devotional, ethical and meditative practices. So, is what you are saying that the advaita view is more of a trap when adopted too soon?? Sounds good to me! Namaste, --Greg Thanks Greg-Ji. It should be pointed out that in many traditions, Yoga and Advaita Vedanta are taught simultaneously. Advaita awareness can be conceptualized as a potent practice adopted along with and in the context of other practices such as meditation, pranayama, etc. For most people, an integrative approach focusing on the needs of the body and mind is helpful. As I have said before, there is no conflict between the nondual and the dual approach. One can only engage in those spiritual practices towards which one is already inclined. So in a sense the issue is not as important as it might seem at first. Love to all Harsha 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.