View Single Post
  #52  
Old 06-09-2017, 03:49 PM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is online now
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 10,366
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
Please allow me to also tackle that post in question.

Try thinking backwards, Necro and it will make more sense then:

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
I have always been confused that if something is 'non-dual' then it also must have that which is 'dual' to make it 'non-dual' and thus 'non-dual' is still 'dual'.
If something is 'dual', it must also have that which is 'non-dual' to make it 'dual' and therefore 'dual' is still 'non-dual'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
I have also been confused with the "I am That" assuming "That" does not exist apart from the "I" and even the relationship between an "I" and a "That" is a dual one.
It's just word-play semantics. If something exists as being what it truly is, then it cannot be any other way. If it confuses you less, you can just drop "That" and stick with "I AM".

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
I have been totally confused by the saguna aspect of a divine consciousness, represented in manifest form, when if people are praying to it, or even what it represents, are not they merely praying to themselves?
We have been through this many times before! The imminent and transcendent are one, yet there is still an imminent and transcendent. To make it easier, the differentiated self is no different to God, but God also exists apart from it. So you are praying to the indwelling spirit within and the external spirit without.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
Who is to say the saguna representation of Brahman has all of the attributes ascribed to it anyway? I mean how can form represent the formless in any aspect whatsoever?
So, please tell me why you worship Lord Shiva as the manifest form of Brahman again? :p

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
I adopted the path of qualified monism in the attempt to stop my mind thinking about all this too much, but it still doesn't fill in all the holes in the theory.
Maybe you should just embrace the path of dvaita totally then. It's like you are putting each of your feet into two boats here. If you can realise Brahman through dvaita that's good isn't it? You're just complicating things.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
I'm still trying to work out why all the non-dual schools of Tantric Kashmir Shaivite philosophy still have pictures of a Puranic Shiva adorning their walls and saying "Shivoham" when I am thinking "I can't see chandra in their hair...mother Ganga either..you don't have Neelkantha...etc etc.
That would only be known to those of that school...which you are not, but you have already answered that question yourself anyway. I have also told you about the mountain that was there...then it was not there...then it was and that whole thing about 'before nirvana, chop wood, carry water...after nirvana, chop wood, carry water'. Things still exist how they are and have always been, despite the realisation of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Necromancer
Thus, I am like "what's the story, morning glory?"
The story is that you are trying to rationalise personal experiences which cannot be rationalised by comparing them to conflicting ideals and philosophies that do nothing to explain it and it only ends up confusing you.

Yes, you can read Jyotir's offerings, or re-read this one again and practice it! It's been 35 years since you did:

https://www.thoughtco.com/lord-siva-...orship-1769550

How am I doing, Jyotir?
Reply With Quote