Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Spirituality & Beliefs > Non Duality

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 16-11-2017, 10:41 PM
Gem Gem is online now
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,073
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moondance
Can you get the felt-sense that in this that’s happening…

Thanks for asking - having a 'felt sense' is much more to the point.

Quote:
there is ONLY this that’s happening. The phenomenal ‘you’ is a modulation of this. It has no separate, inherent existence.

Quote:
It’s borne out of and sustained by a vast web of complex conditions. When these conditions subside so does the self.

In dreams it becomes looser and unbound. In deep sleep it dissolves. There is no actual, intrinsic self - what we experience is the phenomenal/conventional self.

I think no self means there is no identity which has awareness. Obviously there is awareness, but no individual who is aware.

Quote:
What is this essential ______ which moment by moment gives rise to it all? No one knows. We can call it Oneness or Source or Reality (or God if you prefer) but these are merely placeholder for something truly ineffable.
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 16-11-2017, 10:53 PM
Gem Gem is online now
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 22,073
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by django
One of the main differences is that neo-advaita is a perfect product for Mc Spirituality appetites in the West. Not 'truer' just a hell of a lot quicker and unhealthier.

Teehee .
__________________
Radiate boundless love towards the entire world ~ Buddha
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 17-11-2017, 01:45 AM
blossomingtree blossomingtree is offline
Suspended
Ascender
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 937
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by django
Neither of these very fine quotes suggest non-dualism to me though.

The teachings of both are numerous, and ultimately point to the same realizations as the Advaita Vedanta Gurus.

Where they all concur is in the path of inquiry and realization of the fruits.

For example, you have people who took the long road and reached the peak of a mountain. No-one can reach that peak without having traveled, whichever path that is. At the top of the peak, things are different - the altitude is higher, the air thinner, the lungs feel different, the vision is clear, the Adept is well trained and at peace.

Down in the village, a few people hear the talk of what it is like. Sunsets, sunrise, peace, bliss and the like. And then they tell people - all you need to do is nothing. Just imagine: peace, bliss, sunsets, sunrise. Do you see? You are already here.

There is a subtle difference but it is devious and highly misleading.

What is clear is that the fruits (as sky123 once posted) are not going to be there for the Village people - as enticing as it is to anyone else coming from behind, to imagine that they are there.

Same goes for all the self taught folk - mindfulness that can't even be honest or take a challenge is a self-defeating path.

Ultimately it all leads to self deception, because the person who has not seen that peak cannot imagine it {it is beyond mind, it is a shift in actual consciousness, it is not just dodging "unpleasant" feelings or thoughts. In addition, such a practice will never stand on its own - in the face of adversity, challenge or hostility, the false practitioners will always without fail fold. That is the difference between a seeker and an Adept. Gurus are beyond that even - they are safe and well rewarded in that bliss/state because they are One with the Divine}

BT
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 17-11-2017, 02:44 AM
Iamit Iamit is offline
Master
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: West Wales. u.k
Posts: 1,002
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonesboy
So you can't know the truth, so give up on knowing the truth and once you do you are free?

Really?

Jesus said it a little differently.

61. Jesus said, "Two will recline on a couch; one will die, one will live." Salome said, "Who are you mister? You have climbed onto my couch and eaten from my table as if you are from someone." Jesus said to her, "I am the one who comes from what is whole. I was granted from the things of my Father." "I am your disciple." "For this reason I say, if one is whole, one will be filled with light, but if one is divided, one will be filled with darkness."

That would be the realization of one being filled with the light and if you haven't realized the light you are in darkness

24. His disciples said, "Show us the place where you are, for we must seek it." He said to them, "Anyone here with two ears had better listen! There is light within a person of light, and it shines on the whole world. If it does not shine, it is dark."

I would also say that your understanding of AV seems to be limited. AV is not a do nothing practice. It is a tradition with many practices. AV is non dual which is much different than Oneness

Many traditions disagree with AV because it states the end state is a silent nothingness. Traditions like KS would say that is only half, that is the void aspect and one has yet to realize the form/light Shakti aspect of things.

All the best :)


Yes indeed you are then free from the requirement that what resonates with you has to be the truth. It does not mean that it isn't the truth, just that you will never know whether it is or not.

There is not just one version of Advaita. I have referred to 2. There are no doubt others.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 17-11-2017, 02:56 AM
Iamit Iamit is offline
Master
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: West Wales. u.k
Posts: 1,002
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by django
When something comes to light that contradicts what I now believe, then that will be what I come to believe instead. My beliefs are not set in stone, and will hopefully accommodate themselves to reality, however that shows itself.

In the meantime, I don't wish to tie myself up in philosophical knots and cul de sacs.

Pleased to hear you are happy to keep changing your view of the truth depending on what may come to lght. "This is the truth" then "Oh no sorry this is now the truth". And on and on it goes.

That may work for some, and so be it. But it does not work for all.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 17-11-2017, 03:31 AM
Iamit Iamit is offline
Master
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: West Wales. u.k
Posts: 1,002
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
I understood this though and can agree 100%. The 'truth' which can be 'known' is not the truth. Can the mind know itself? can a thought think itself into existence? People can chase their own philosophical tails for years and get no-where, reminding me of that age-old story:

Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor’s cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. “It is overfull. No more will go in!”
“Like this cup,” Nan-in said, “you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?”

Yes.

Even science does not regard its conclusions as truth, but rather what seems to be the case at the moment.

There is a hell that can arise when something comes to light that contradicts what is believed to be true, that was hidden when it was thought that the truth had been discovered. Those events have a way of quickly and painfully emtying ones cup of truths. It is understandable that those who believe they have discovered truth, resist such changes.

History is littered with such events, and in some cases, the resistance resulted in the death of the messengers and their followere. The main stream religions seem to go in for this a lot.

Watch out Neo Advaitins:)
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 17-11-2017, 04:18 AM
Iamit Iamit is offline
Master
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: West Wales. u.k
Posts: 1,002
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
Is it a good thing that I did not understand a word you just typed?

Ha ha, Sorry Shivani. It would be easier if we were talking face to face which I am sure we would enjoy. However lets try again with the limitations of this method.

We would agree I'm sure that Oneness/Brahman is the only reality so disconnection from Oneness/Brahman is impossible as Oneness/Brahman arises as all states.There is simply nothing else available that is real to arise as ourselves and all we see around us.

So whatever state one may be in, whether it is the state you describe as me/you or the state you describe as you/me. makes no difference in terms of connection to Oneness/Brahman, because Oneness/Brahman is both states.

However connection may not be your (only) concern, so please say more about what difference you think being in one of those states means. as opposed to being in the other?

Last edited by Iamit : 17-11-2017 at 06:13 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 17-11-2017, 04:28 AM
django django is offline
Master
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 1,485
  django's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by blossomingtree
The teachings of both are numerous, and ultimately point to the same realizations as the Advaita Vedanta Gurus.

Where they all concur is in the path of inquiry and realization of the fruits.

For example, you have people who took the long road and reached the peak of a mountain. No-one can reach that peak without having traveled, whichever path that is. At the top of the peak, things are different - the altitude is higher, the air thinner, the lungs feel different, the vision is clear, the Adept is well trained and at peace.

Down in the village, a few people hear the talk of what it is like. Sunsets, sunrise, peace, bliss and the like. And then they tell people - all you need to do is nothing. Just imagine: peace, bliss, sunsets, sunrise. Do you see? You are already here.

There is a subtle difference but it is devious and highly misleading.

What is clear is that the fruits (as sky123 once posted) are not going to be there for the Village people - as enticing as it is to anyone else coming from behind, to imagine that they are there.

Same goes for all the self taught folk - mindfulness that can't even be honest or take a challenge is a self-defeating path.

Ultimately it all leads to self deception, because the person who has not seen that peak cannot imagine it {it is beyond mind, it is a shift in actual consciousness, it is not just dodging "unpleasant" feelings or thoughts. In addition, such a practice will never stand on its own - in the face of adversity, challenge or hostility, the false practitioners will always without fail fold. That is the difference between a seeker and an Adept. Gurus are beyond that even - they are safe and well rewarded in that bliss/state because they are One with the Divine}

BT

I don't think all roads lead to Rome, though I do agree with your village story.

re Buddhism and advaita vedanta:

Quote:
In my opinion, there was in later times, especially since the Christian era, much mutual influence of Vedanta and Buddhism, but originally the systems are diametrically opposed to each other. The Atman doctrine of the Vedanta and the Dharma theory of Buddhism exclude each other. The Vedanta tries to establish an Atman as the basis of everything, whilst Buddhism maintains that everything in the empirical world is only a stream of passing Dharmas (impersonal and evanescent processes) which therefore has to be characterized as Anatta, i.e., being without a persisting self, without independent existence.

Again and again scholars have tried to prove a closer connection between the early Buddhism of the Pali texts, and the Vedanta of the Upanishads; they have even tried to interpret Buddhism as a further development of the Atman doctrine. There are, e.g., two books which show that tendency: The Vedantic Buddhism of the Buddha, by J.G. Jennings (Oxford University Press, 1947), and in German language, The Soul Problem of Early Buddhism, by Herbert Guenther (Konstanz 1949).

The essential difference between the conception of deliverance in Vedanta and in Pali Buddhism lies in the following ideas: Vedanta sees deliverance as the manifestation of a state which, though obscured, has been existing from time immemorial; for the Buddhist, however, Nirvana is a reality which differs entirely from all dharmas as manifested in Samsara, and which only becomes effective, if they are abolished. To sum up: the Vedantin wishes to penetrate to the last reality which dwells within him as an immortal essence, or seed, out of which everything has arisen. The follower of Pali Buddhism, however, hopes by complete abandoning of all corporeality, all sensations, all perceptions, all volitions, and acts of consciousness, to realize a state of bliss which is entirely different from all that exists in the Samsara.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/.../wheel002.html

Jesus’ teachings on the kingdom of God vary in different situations. Clearly dualistically, in the Lord's prayer he prays, ~Thy kingdom come, thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven". He said to a group of Pharisees, "The kingdom of God is in the midst of you", to Nicodemus, "unless one is born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God", to his disciples at the last supper, " ... my Father appointed a kingdom for me"... all dualist statements.

Some people claim that John has a more non-dualist flavour

John 5:19 Jesus gave them this answer: “Very truly I tell you, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.”

John 12:49 For I did not speak on my own, but the Father who sent me commanded me to say all that I have spoken.

John 14:24 Anyone who does not love me will not obey my teaching. These words you hear are not my own; they belong to the Father who sent me.

John 7:16 Jesus answered, “My teaching is not my own. It comes from the one who sent me.”

John 12:44 And Jesus cried out and said, “Whoever believes in me, believes not in me but in him who sent me.”


Perhaps these are non-dualist statements if read with a certain mindset, but can these statements also be read as making a distinction between Jesus and the Father still, ie dualistically? It matters in one way, and it doesn't matter in another.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 17-11-2017, 08:51 AM
Shivani Devi Shivani Devi is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 10,861
  Shivani Devi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iamit
Ha ha, Sorry Shivani. It would be easier if we were talking face to face which I am sure we would enjoy. However lets try again with the limitations of this method.

We would agree I'm sure that Oneness/Brahman is the only reality so disconnection from Oneness/Brahman is impossible as Oneness/Brahman arises as all states.There is simply nothing else available that is real to arise as ourselves and all we see around us.

So whatever state one may be in, whether it is the state you describe as me/you or the state you describe as you/me. makes no difference in terms of connection to Oneness/Brahman, because Oneness/Brahman is both states.

However connection may not be your (only) concern, so please say more about what difference you think being in one of those states means. as opposed to being in the other?
Thank you, I see what has happened now, I didn't mean to transpose personal pronouns in my second paragraph and you picked up on that. Yes, it would be nice to talk about this personally because such nuances cannot be inferred over the internet.

This is all according to my teachings - and I know nothing about Neo Advaita, because I understood the whole essence of Vedanta (the end of knowledge) after reading the Mandukya and Chhandogya Upanishads...nothing more was needed...nothing more was required in regards to anything that was 'non-dual' forever and ever amen.

We could say that nothing is Brahman or everything is Brahman and both would be correct and we can also understand the Saguna (attributed) non-duality which is also Vishishtadvaita or qualified monism or the Nirguna (non-attributed) non-duality aspect which is Achintya...which exists as satchitananda...existence (truth), consciousness and bliss...and both would be correct.

To understand this, the light of conscious awareness of Brahman (prakasha) would only be known due to its corresponding reflective awareness (vimarsha)...like how heat is a manifestation of the sun, but to say the sun is 'hot' doesn't describe the sun...even though the sun is hot.

I shall continue this a bit later, because my whole train of thought just derailed.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 17-11-2017, 09:57 AM
God-Like God-Like is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 6,874
  God-Like's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shivani Devi
Thank you, I see what has happened now, I didn't mean to transpose personal pronouns in my second paragraph and you picked up on that. Yes, it would be nice to talk about this personally because such nuances cannot be inferred over the internet.

This is all according to my teachings - and I know nothing about Neo Advaita, because I understood the whole essence of Vedanta (the end of knowledge) after reading the Mandukya and Chhandogya Upanishads...nothing more was needed...nothing more was required in regards to anything that was 'non-dual' forever and ever amen.

We could say that nothing is Brahman or everything is Brahman and both would be correct and we can also understand the Saguna (attributed) non-duality which is also Vishishtadvaita or qualified monism or the Nirguna (non-attributed) non-duality aspect which is Achintya...which exists as satchitananda...existence (truth), consciousness and bliss...and both would be correct.

To understand this, the light of conscious awareness of Brahman (prakasha) would only be known due to its corresponding reflective awareness (vimarsha)...like how heat is a manifestation of the sun, but to say the sun is 'hot' doesn't describe the sun...even though the sun is hot.

I shall continue this a bit later, because my whole train of thought just derailed.


I had a conversation a while back where some individuals were adamant that consciousness is this or that . Awareness therefore is this or that equally based upon their self reference for consciousness .

Sooo many terms for what this and that is, whether it refers to this type of Samadhi or that type of Samadhi it's mind boggling to say the least .

My thoughts at the time was where or who coined the term consciousness as being this or that .

Who coined the term nirvikalpa samadhi ...

I mean all these terms and references are non existent beyond the mind ..

Do you think such terms and references came from beyond the mind to all sages / gurus that have realized what they are?

Or do you think that one individual perhaps came up with the idea and then others just followed suit ..

It's funny in my eyes because sooo many people are adamant of what this and that is and yet there are no answers or questions pertaining to what you are beyond .


x daz x
__________________
Everything under the sun is in tune,but the sun is eclipsed by the moon.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums