adviata vs neoadvaita

[Niemamniee]

Is there any difference between neoadvaita and advaita? Do you know for example Tony Parson or Naho Owada and Rupert Spira and Francis Lucille view? Its seems that they disagree with each other. Below my opinion.

[Unseeking Seeker]

Interesting topic.

In my view, whatever labels we may assign or whatever tradition we resonate with, essentially the direct recognition of truth is in singularity whilst mind is in duality. The ego, if we look at it as an interface, is needed to navigate earth life, so I’d say, don’t negate it but rather instrumentalise it, use it as and when needed.

In my case, I think non-dual teachings, Advaita Vedanta or even the shortcut Neo-Advaita, they are concepts that point out to the truth, like a map. The actual terrain is life, as it unfolds moment to moment and so perhaps what matters is our response and choice to refine our consciousness in the immersion offered.

[Niemamniee]

Originally Posted by Unseeking Seeker

In my view, whatever labels we may assign or whatever tradition we resonate with, essentially the direct recognition of truth is in singularity whilst mind is in duality. The ego, if we look at it as an interface, is needed to navigate earth life, so I’d say, don’t negate it but rather instrumentalise it, use it as and when needed.

Well said. Do you belive in god?

[Unseeking Seeker]

Originally Posted by Niemamniee

Well said. Do you belive in god?

Belief is a function of mind

[Niemamniee]

right, so what your mind says about god? ;)

[Unseeking Seeker]

Originally Posted by Niemamniee

right, so what your mind says about god? ;)

I do not rely on lower mind and dwell mostly in silence. Thought is only an instrument to be used when needed. That said, we live in body so conditioning is inevitable, however if we continue looking at form from a centreless fulcrum, in time, blissful nonchalance sets in.

About God, let us rest that for a while and look at ourselves instead. Clearly, there are two of us in here, one is narrow identity or ego and the other, for lack of an apt expression, is formless awareness, unchanging ~ it dies not get affected by aging and circumstances.

What is this awareness? We cannot use mind to ascertain it, since mind is both limited as well as dualistic. So we rest in silence, in effortless, thought rested meditation. Where is identity in silence? Nowhere. It disappears.

Silence connects awareness to singularity. Of course there are in between stages, manifestations, sounds, experiences, wisdom downloads, even void experiences and so forth. Then, samadhi. What is samadhi? Samadhi is simply a transmutation of consciousness wherein we become the current, the omnipresent life force. We do not experience the flame, we become the flame. What flame? Bliss.

Then we return to form through an unknown mechanism. Mind analyses but analysis is paralysis. Still, since we have directly seen, been and become, there remains no doubt in our dualistic mind even. However, what is imbibed is not assimilated yet. We can call this flickering awareness. Oscillating.

Deeper yet, we see we are the Self, all is Self. What is Self? God. A singular consciousness which we are, albeit without identity. Limitless, boundaryless.

What is there to be said about this? Nothing.

[Niemamniee]

I dont how answer with words so a made a picture :)

[Niemamniee]

Originally Posted by Unseeking Seeker

Clearly, there are two of us in here, one is narrow identity or ego and the other, for lack of an apt expression, is formless awareness, unchanging ~ it dies not get affected by aging and circumstances.

And who are you to see those two? You must be third ;p

[Unseeking Seeker]

Originally Posted by Niemamniee

And who are you to see those two? You must be third ;p

I’m not into debates

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by Niemamniee

Is there any difference between neoadvaita and advaita?

First let me summarize what you are trying to say .
1. Neo advaita say emptyness - zeroness is everything
2. Advaita says oneness -fullness is everything .
3. And sage-like says 0=1 does not exists .
4. As a corollary neither neoadvaita or advaita does not exist .

Now here are my comments .
1. Statement 1 is contextual . Every material thing is incomplete and not one . And hence empty or so to say 0 . This is perfect and nothing wrong with it .
2. Statement 2 is fundamental eternal truth - Everything - material and spiritual combined is complete , full and hence One full . The Universe and world within consists of spiritual as well as material things .All combined makes it one full and recognizing all these we experience the fullness . This statement too is true .

3. Statement 3 too is correct .Any one with lope-sided view (materiality or spirituality alone) is incorrect and unscientific and not in the flow of reality or God . Only the one with holistic view is in tune with God and world under the influence of God .

4. If anyone believe conclusion 4 , its wrong . Life is the oscillation from 0 to 1 and 1 to 0 and we need to be in tune with it. And one need to devise one's life according to it with more orientation towards fundamental truth (as embedded in statement 2 ) for better life experiences for one and all for all the time everywhere.