Neo Advaita vs. Classical Advaita

[7luminaries]

Jim, your insights into human nature and trauma are good, and solid. And I appreciate the affirmation and understanding. It has helped me make better sense of those outside my family, who had no reason to be so harsh or angry or cruel with me for just for being born (like dear old dad). Slowly, I am gaining better understanding from a variety of sources...but ultimately the true explanations are spiritual, else we would have to classify them as irrational and misplaced. The spiritual perspective provides insight but not justification...as of course, everyone still has to own what they do (even if they're fighting that too in their daily reality). The main thing is, it's never really about you when they could never really see you or know you as you are. But there's the rub, that they may never have bothered nor really cared...rather, they may have just skipped over at some point to the blame, resentment, and hostility or loathing. Or to a place where they felt comfortable in relation to you.

It's like so many things in society...how about I don't bother extending a hand, or giving an word, or doing anything at all, and we just skip to the part where you beat on me, or abuse me verbally, or shun me with loathing and hostility? Right? And that's the part that hurts and that you patch over -- that they'd rather skip over your humanity past simple recognition, kindness and dignity, so that they can vent on you for weeks, days, or years for whatever you've been designated or blamed for.

Borne of experience and investigation. I agree on all points. It's tragic that society offers so many seemingly normative, approved, or even "spiritual" ways to undercut one's own humanity as well as the humanity of others. Simple kindness, compassion, respect, honour, and dignity...these things acknowledge the humanity of others. They really do matter. And so do others.

Now...when it comes to neo-advaita and any extreme or fundamentalist interpretation of advaita...they lend themselves to grave misdirection by many, as you say.

We are all One in interbeing and we are all the infinite extension of Source, true, but since we come into being as individuated consciousness (or "souls", loosely) for a reason, we are not "the same as" the unindividuated One which is beyond all existence and emanation. We are of Source, we are self-aware (true, we have far to go there and in our development of a self-aware collective consciousness)...and yes the fractal nature of existence applies, but still we and all that is are emanations. And we exist as individuated consciousness for a reason, that being simply to explore the infinite multiplicity of what is. Everything is equally important or of value...which means everything matters equally, just as much as nothing matters more than any other.

Advaita has much to offer regarding the understanding of interbeing and collective consciousness and conceptual Unity...BUT whenever taken to the extreme of non-being, or when the individuated consciousness and its periodic incarnation into temporal material reality (all of which are also real, also true, and also worthy and by design, no less)...when these are seen as false or unworthy, then I find its utility ceases and its misdirection increases.

I do realise this is not the fault of advaita itself (per se), but rather of anyone who pushes non-being as spiritual escapism, or to underwrite an avoidant, impersonal, utilitarian mode of living -- or who asserts that unity is the only reality, when in fact interbeing and unity are both integral aspects of reality. And these extreme positions are the logical conclusion of the unawakened mind...that is the danger. In that, I completely agree with you.

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

There is a cold, impersonal, utilitarian aspect to this philosophy, as Jeff has mentioned, and so it would be nearly impossible to hold to non-being and still view others as fully human.

Originally Posted by jimrich

IMO, the philosophy is not wrong but an emotionally damaged person can and will use the philosophy in destructive ways. A sick ego is compelled to misuse EVERYTHING!

Peace & blessings
7L

[jimrich]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Jim, your insights into human nature and trauma are good, and solid. And I appreciate the affirmation and understanding. It has helped me make better sense of those outside my family, who had no reason to be so harsh or angry or cruel with me for just for being born (like dear old dad).

If you study the elements and dynamics of Toxic Shame, you will see exactly why some folks are so abusive, cruel, ignorant, hostile, stupid, wrong and just plain BAD, while often looking good and right. Shame MAKES us be and do horrible things while believing that we are RIGHT. Another thing that might help you to understand why things are as they are in the world would be to study some spiritual philosophies that attempt to explain EVERYTHING that goes on in terms of what the Divine, empty phenomenon, god, creator, Source wants and why. I won't comment on what Source wants and why becaues Source's intentions are way beyond my limited abiltiy to grasp so I just have to trust that Source knows what she is doing and live with it.

Slowly, I am gaining better understanding from a variety of sources...but ultimately the true explanations are spiritual, else we would have to classify them as irrational and misplaced. The spiritual perspective provides insight but not justification...as of course, everyone still has to own what they do (even if they're fighting that too in their daily reality).

For me, the spiritual answer, such as - "What will be, will be" and "Thy will be done" and "Things just happen" - is the only one that actually works even if I don't know why Spirit does what it does and is what it is. As for everyone owning what they do, you cannot expect an INSANE person or animal to own what they do (i.e.: "...For they know not what they do." ~ Jesus) As much as I want to PUNISH them, I guess insane people (like my brilliant dad) have to be excused from blame and responsibility - for now at least.

The main thing is, it's never really about you when they could never really see you or know you as you are. But there's the rub, that they may never have bothered nor really cared...rather, they may have just skipped over at some point to the blame, resentment, and hostility or loathing. Or to a place where they felt comfortable in relation to you.

When a person is infected with Toxic Shame, they simply cannot behave right or sanely. Shame forces them to defend their egos to the max and treat everyone as either the enemy or something to FULFILL their desperate NEEDS. Google: Toxic Shame or search for it at Youtube.

It's like so many things in society...how about I don't bother extending a hand, or giving an word, or doing anything at all, and we just skip to the part where you beat on me, or abuse me verbally, or shun me with loathing and hostility? Right? And that's the part that hurts and that you patch over -- that they'd rather skip over your humanity past simple recognition, kindness and dignity, so that they can vent on you for weeks, days, or years for whatever you've been designated or blamed for.

That's all about Shame.

Borne of experience and investigation. I agree on all points. It's tragic that society offers so many seemingly normative, approved, or even "spiritual" ways to undercut one's own humanity as well as the humanity of others. Simple kindness, compassion, respect, honour, and dignity...these things acknowledge the humanity of others. They really do matter. And so do others.

They matter to me.

Now...when it comes to neo-advaita and any extreme or fundamentalist interpretation of advaita...they lend themselves to grave misdirection by many, as you say.
We are all One in interbeing and we are all the infinite extension of Source,

This is where folks get stuck. Source is all that there is and Source manifests or appears AS all of "us" or as everything there is. What you are calling "we" is Source appearing as a we. You are Source but you have forgotten that fact. "We" is an illusion! You, Source, seem to be a someone doing your own thing and living your own individual life, along with or against others BUT it's an illusion that you Source, create or manifest for whatever reason you have to be manifesting this incredible cosmic drama. The separate self or ego is NOT capable of grasping this which is why the sages often spoke of "mystical intuitions" or "visions", which can take someone into expanded mental states but I believe that our ordinary, everyday, common, simple awareness is good enough to KNOW that Source just is and that it's OK. I'd like to be up there with Jesus, Moses, Buddha, Rupert Spira, etc. but I'm must little old, plain and simple jim - which is Source appearing in and AS this ordinary guy RIGHT NOW.

Source IS ME and it doesn't scare my little ego at all now that I know my little ego doesn't even exist! Source alone is. But that obvious and knowable fact scares the hell out of most egocentric human so they either fight it or run away.

true, but since we come into being as individuated consciousness (or "souls", loosely) for a reason, we are not "the same as" the unindividuated One which is beyond all existence and emanation.

This "unindividuated One" or Source is all that there is! And it appears AS all the other stuff you mentioned. We are not "the same" because the One needs to have some fun so it appears in unique and different forms and conditions for its own pleasures or reasons (I believe). I imagine that science can say why there are so many different and unique creations in the cosmos from the current perspective of physics.

We are of Source, we are self-aware (true, we have far to go there and in our development of a self-aware collective consciousness)...and yes the fractal nature of existence applies, but still we and all that is are emanations.

We are NOT emanations of Source, we ARE Source itself appearing to be "emanations" or manifested objects and conditions. So long as the cosmos is seen as an emanation, the underlying Source will be veiled from the persons view. If seen as it really is .... Source PRETENDING TO BE a lot of separate stuff, then Advaita will make sense and it will be obvious that YOU ARE SOURCE ITSELF. Not two, just One reality.

And we exist as individuated consciousness for a reason, that being simply to explore the infinite multiplicity of what is. Everything is equally important or of value...which means everything matters equally, just as much as nothing matters more than any other.

It probably "matters" to Source but I can't say what would be.

Advaita has much to offer regarding the understanding of interbeing and collective consciousness and conceptual Unity...BUT whenever taken to the extreme of non-being, or when the individuated consciousness and its periodic incarnation into temporal material reality (all of which are also real, also true, and also worthy and by design, no less)...when these are seen as false or unworthy, then I find its utility ceases and its misdirection increases.

I do realise this is not the fault of advaita itself (per se), but rather of anyone who pushes non-being as spiritual escapism, or to underwrite an avoidant, impersonal, utilitarian mode of living -- or who asserts that unity is the only reality, when in fact interbeing and unity are both integral aspects of reality. And these extreme positions are the logical conclusion of the unawakened mind...that is the danger. In that, I completely agree with you.

It has been shown over and over throughout history that Shame-based, sick and insane individuals can and do completely distort and twist ALL teachings, philosophies and knowledge to meet the personal needs and desires of these SICK individuals such as the Egyptian Kings, Roman emperors, the early Catholics, Caesars, the Nazis, the Wall Street super rich, the Ku Klux Klan, Adolf Hitler, Charlie Manson, the CIA, the FBI, the UFO cover up and on and on and the most viciously maligned entity of all will be EVERY religion, faith and spiritual institution that exists or ever existed. And even those institutions will quite often be at the forefront of HATE wars upon each other. Source has a strange sense of humor, IMO.
So all I have to say about Advaita is - most folks have no clue what Advaita teaches or points to and are terribly AFRAID of it.

Peace & blessings
jim

[7luminaries]

Jim, I don't disagree in the main with any of what you say. Only that, since we are directed by Buddha et al to strive to know the emptiness but not to strive to dwell there...I think that's exactly what I'm trying to say. The concept illuminates and growth in spirit will expand our individuated consciousness. But in our incarnate existence -- which I do believe is just as real and valid as it is illusory from the perspective of Source -- we do not and cannot fully live directly as Oneness at all times, because we are of that and thus yes we are that...but we are also of that and are that as individuated beings with individuated consciousness which exist in interbeing with all else.

We can say all is subsumed in the oneness and so therefore all is just oneness...and we can also say that individuated consciousness and interbeing equally exist as the infinite individual expressions of oneness. And both are "right" or true. One perspective focuses more on the emptiness, with a nod to interbeing...and the other focuses more on interbeing, with a nod to emptiness. The latter is where we live, no matter how much we expand our consciousness and so forth...because we are tethered to the body, until we move on. Even then, at least until we reach a certain point in spirit (and who knows for certain?), it seems individuated consciousness, like all other consciousness, simply remains...overlapping and connected with all other individuated consciousness, within the One.

Thank source for our (limited) awareness of both interbeing and Oneness -- the truth can only both enrich us and set us free. But as far as we can tell (and no one knows all), if we inter-are in Oneness...and consciousness is eternal, all that is (including us as individuated consciousness) is sticky and isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

So I suppose my focus is a bit more on the interbeing in Oneness. Otherwise, I feel that so many try to skip from the illusory isolated self (illusory because we are NEVER isolated and ALWAYS interconnected) to the emptiness of One, skipping over the interbeing in oneness which is where we actually live With all its infinite variation in expression and all its infinite opportunities for life, growth, and authentic being

Peace & blessings,
7L

[jimrich]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Jim, I don't disagree in the main with any of what you say.

I don't see us "disagreeing" - just holding our own, individual veiws of things. We can disagree without being DISAGREEABLE ~ G.W. Bush

Only that, since we are directed by Buddha et al to strive to know the emptiness but not to strive to dwell there...I think that's exactly what I'm trying to say.

I've learned that we are always this "emptiness" or the Ocean and cannot ever be otherwise or dwell anywhere else since all that there is, is emptiness or Ocean. What happened is that we (whatever that is) have been programmed from day one to BELIEVE that we are NOT emptiness but that we are ONLY limited, egoic, personal, little creatures who are struggling to exist in a place where other deluded individual egos are also struggling to exist. We can be separate, individuals and also KNOW, as most sages do, that we are emptiness or Ocean while temporarily occupying a temporary form amongst other temporary forms living on a temporary form. Once seen that we ARE Ocean and not just waves (temporary forms) ONLY, a great peace and relaxation might occur for the apparent individual so, ultimately it comes down to the issue of are you happy being a temporary, vulnerable form (person) or would you rather be Ocean - or both? If both, would you rather live with the wisdom, love and power of Ocean or with the limited and sometimes troubled problems of a little, separate form/(person? Just before my late wife crossed over, I am pretty sure she was fed up with the pain, misery, disappointment and
hopelessness of a life about to end and wanted very much to get out of her temporary sick and dying form and I don't blamed her for wanting to leave here and go back to Ocean. She LOVES IT over there!

The concept illuminates and growth in spirit will expand our individuated consciousness.

...and perhaps help us remember that we are (infinite) emptiness appearing to be limited individuals.

But in our incarnate existence -- which I do believe is just as real and valid as it is illusory from the perspective of Source -- we do not and cannot fully live directly as Oneness at all times, because we are of that and thus yes we are that...but we are also of that and are that as individuated beings with individuated consciousness which exist in interbeing with all else.

Most folks believe and live as if they are limited, unhappy or needy individuals ONLY and that emptiness is just a pipe dream. Even some, who claim to be religious and "trust" in god (emptiness), still sometimes act like they are ONLY limited, isolated individuals.

We can say all is subsumed in the oneness and so therefore all is just oneness...and we can also say that individuated consciousness and interbeing equally exist as the infinite individual expressions of oneness. And both are "right" or true.

Yes, all of that is true, IMO. Now, can we live that truth or do we crumble when challenged by life because we still believe that we are NOT emptiness but are ONLY isolated, vulnerable individuals?

One perspective focuses more on the emptiness, with a nod to interbeing...and the other focuses more on interbeing, with a nod to emptiness. The latter is where we live, no matter how much we expand our consciousness and so forth...because we are tethered to the body, until we move on. Even then, at least until we reach a certain point in spirit (and who knows for certain?), it seems individuated consciousness, like all other consciousness, simply remains...overlapping and connected with all other individuated consciousness, within the One.

I agree that we will remain stuck in and as the ego UNTIL we wake up which is why there are Buddhas, Christs, Dali Lamas, preachers, saints, sages, teachers and witnesses manifested by emptiness to help itself remember that it is infinite Being just pretending to be a herd of egos.

Thank source for our (limited) awareness of both interbeing and Oneness -- the truth can only both enrich us and set us free. But as far as we can tell (and no one knows all), if we inter-are in Oneness...and consciousness is eternal, all that is (including us as individuated consciousness) is sticky and isn't going anywhere anytime soon.

LOL, well I don't know about you but I am not going to wait around for something to go somewhere any time soon. I'm going to be FREE right now, thanks to the wise messages from a few other Liberated folks who are "there" right now and tell me that I am also "there" right now - and there's no need to WAIT any longer.

So I suppose my focus is a bit more on the interbeing in Oneness.

My focus is on and as Oneness with an apparent "interbeing" appearing in me and not the other way around. I, Oneness or emptiness, manifest interbeing and everything else but I am NOT limited to that or them.

Otherwise, I feel that so many try to skip from the illusory isolated self (illusory because we are NEVER isolated and ALWAYS interconnected) to the emptiness of One, skipping over the interbeing in oneness which is where we actually live With all its infinite variation in expression and all its infinite opportunities for life, growth, and authentic being

IMO, a wise person can and will incorporate Oneness along with individuality but with Oneness at the forefront or in charge so their ego becomes a friendly companion instead of the master of their life as is the case for most humans. The few sages and wizards I know or have known are governed by Oneness or emptiness MORE THAN their limited egos. They all have/had egos BUT not overbearing, dominating and controlling egos like most humans struggle with. But, what is, is! and what will be will be! Emptiness manifests everything!
So, for me, the point to enlightenment or awakening is to somehow get comfortable within my own skin and remembering that I am emptiness or Ocean feels a lot more comfortable to me than ONLY being a limited, frightened, troubled, ego - and nothing else.

Peace & blessings,
jim

[7luminaries]

Jim, that's a big mouthful of a response...
I'll just say I largely agree. But I agree that if we do disagree, it should ideally always be civil and respectful.

Once again, I think the danger stems from the commonly-held idea (in the West) of an isolated self...which is illusory not because individuated consciousness doesn't exist. As it does. Hence our conversation. But it is illusory because separation is an illusion, whilst interbeing and unity are the reality. Not just unity and not even primarily unity....hahaha But equally interbeing and unity are the reality, not the illusory "isolated self" who acts on behalf of his or her "own" so-called self interests. Which is not exactly the engaged and grounded middle way (of equanimity and lovingkindness) of the heart-led consciousness, as the masters have advised, LOL.

I think we are in agreement that this fallacy of the isolated self is a fundamental source of most of the problems we see in human society. But to skip from this fallacy directly to one of "only unity is real" without the ying/yang of unity/interbeing will -- for all but perhaps the highest masters -- equally tend to lead to escapism, narcissism, and/or a generally dehumanised detachment...as is seen in the neo-advaita perspective AND the extreme advaita perspective held by a quite a fair number who put forth that all is illusory except that which is beyond all that is. It's not that it's not true...rather, it's more that it's not the ONLY truth. Hence the spectrum and the yin/yang concepts. Interbeing is equally true...equally and simultaneously. IMO, it is only the isolate self concept which is inherently false, rather than simultaneously true.

Nice to agree to disagree...or more, to agree with a difference in emphasis ...as always with respect and civility!
Peace & blessings
7L

[jimrich]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

But I agree that if we do disagree, it should ideally always be civil and respectful.

LOL,something rarely seen at forums!

Once again, I think the danger stems from the commonly-held idea (in the West) of an isolated self.

I see this as an ego or separate self defense.

..which is illusory not because individuated consciousness doesn't exist.

It "exists" as a feature of the ego or separate self (to use Rupert Spira's terminology) or the 'me" (as Tony Parsons says).

As it does. Hence our conversation.

IMO, our conversation is occuring between two 'me's or egos but I don't see it as a problem to innocently discuss things AS TWO FRIENDS. The 'me' or ego can quite often become upset, frightened or angry and then the conversation becomes nasty. Two conscious beings would most likely NOT have this talk because they are completely fulfilled and have better things to do. For the time being, I, the ego or 'me', am happy to sit here and talk with you, another 'me'. When we "awaken", we most likely will not come to forums again but, for now, this is OK and I, the ego, am enjoying it and learning quite a lot here.

But it is illusory because separation is an illusion, whilst interbeing and unity are the reality.

In a way, everything is both real and unreal or an illusion. The question might be: Is it bearable? Is this illusion OK? Am I happy in this illusion" Would I rather be somewhere else or doing something else? Most folks are HAPPY with the illusion of self in another illusion called life and so do not bother to seek answers or solutions while others are NOT very happy with this illusion and go looking for answers and solutions - to India or at forums, etc. The separate self may or may not be happy while the Real me is ALWAYS happy.

Not just unity and not even primarily unity....hahaha

There's just ONE unity or Isness. Unity is all that there is, but the 'me' cannot see that nor does it even need to. What is, is!

But equally interbeing and unity are the reality, not the illusory "isolated self" who acts on behalf of his or her "own" so-called self interests.

The isolated self or 'me' HAS TO act on it's own interests since it only knows itself and it's interests in having what it wants and SURVIVING.

Which is not exactly the engaged and grounded middle way (of equanimity and lovingkindness) of the heart-led consciousness, as the masters have advised, LOL.

The ego or isolated self (nice term) simply cannot go the "middle way" nor express "loving kindness" whilst engaging in ego defenses or offenses to get what it wants and needs.

I think we are in agreement that this fallacy of the isolated self is a fundamental source of most of the problems we see in human society. But to skip from this fallacy directly to one of "only unity is real" without the ying/yang of unity/interbeing will -- for all but perhaps the highest masters -- equally tend to lead to escapism, narcissism, and/or a generally dehumanised detachment.

I see: escapism, narcissism, dehumanization, detachment and societal problems as basically ego defenses or offenses that are all designed to enhance or protect the non-existent ego or isolated 'me' which is why masters have long warned about the dangers and problems surrounding the ego or false self.

..as is seen in the neo-advaita perspective AND the extreme advaita perspective held by a quite a fair number who put forth that all is illusory except that which is beyond all that is.

Which demonstrates more ego defenses held by ego-bound neo-advaitans and others who NEED to defend their separate selves with such foolishness. An aware being would never recommend such stuff.

It's not that it's not true...rather, it's more that it's not the ONLY truth. Hence the spectrum and the yin/yang concepts.

The defensive ego doesn't care if its true or not and a master doesn't NEED it to be true or not.

Interbeing is equally true...equally and simultaneously. IMO, it is only the isolate self concept which is inherently false, rather than simultaneously true.

Nice to agree to disagree...or more, to agree with a difference in emphasis ...as always with respect and civility!
Peace & blessings
7L

At the risk of violating the rules, I am including a link to two videos which I believe demonstrate both the nature of the separate self or "disturbed ego" and it's non-existence as experienced by two "bothered" Seekers. .......enjoy.....
www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVdsVwiRTvI
www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq248KMOh8I&t=104s

P.S.Please notice how relieved and happy the Seekers become once they discover that the bothered 'me' does not even exist and they are then left simply as HAPPINESS.

[jimrich]

I replied to this post before but I feel an urge to come back to it for another go.......

Originally Posted by awareness

In pure Advaita terms, indeed all of this play of phenomenal existence is essentially a dream within Universal Consciousness.

Yes this is true so no need to go into the insignificant details in the rest of your post here since Universal Consciousness is all that there is in this "dream play". I would have started with this fact rather than leave it to the end.

Oh what the heck, why not.........

Dear brother, we were not really programmed by "others," but rather we (as souls) agreed to the particular programming, the particular paradigm that we have been affected by. The soul is ultimately responsible for its own programming. Not our parents, teachers, society, etc. The soul.

Dear brother, since all of this is Universal Consciousness and this is just a dream play, it must be obvious that the "soul" and all the rest of the phenomenal existence is not very significant and need not be taken very seriously''.... including the apparent programming of defenseless children by ignorant parents or genetic influences and other unwelcome stuff. Everything is within Universal Consciousness appearing as all of the forms in your dream. So, yes, we, Universal Consciousness, are responsible for our own programming and all that appears to happen in the dream play since we are Universal Consciousness itself and nothing else.

The soul, prior to taking incarnation, fully agrees to experience the illusions of duality, limitation and separation. This has nothing to do with what "others" believe. (That is victim thinking, blaming others for our programming.)

All of that can simply be summed up as Universal Consciousness appearing as this dream play of phenomenal existence.

The soul, prior to physical incarnation, already has an agreement with the two souls that are "to be" its Earth parents. They are already selected. The soul agrees to play the game of separation for awhile. This includes a basic agreement that yes, it will be affected by the programming of society, but in actuality the soul is really affected by its own programming, since the personal reality that it experiences is literally a projection of its own consciousness.

And all of that is a projection or manifestation of you, Universal Consciousness, pretending to be all these forms and conditions in your amazing dream for whatever reasons or needs that you have. You are eternal and infinite so there is absolutely nothing that is beyond your boundless, being to apparently manifest or apparently have.
It all makes sense if we start with the fact of Universal Consciousness and then go from there. Nathan Gil would say that all there is is Awareness plus the apparent objects of Awareness, such as "souls", which are also Awareness.
You, Tony Parsons, Rupert Spira and Nathan Gil (to mention only a few) all KNOW the same universal truths but use different terminology to describe the TRUTH.
It's easy to to see the truth by starting from the fact of Universal Consciousness first rather than trying to understand things from the Relative perspective alone.

[jimrich]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

Good afternoon, Jim (well, it is in Sydney anyway).

Like I said in the other post, 'classical advaita" or advaita vedanta has stronger ties to Dharma and Hinduism than its modern counterpart.

You will find that the majority of those who follow the 'old ways' and 'old teachings' are pretty much Hindu by default - even if Shankaracharya said that labels mean nothing.

The human habit of making everything old 'new again' to fit in with the beliefs of current society is totally symptomatic of the age we live in...it is called Kali Yuga, where people will make up anything to suit themselves.

Here is the history behind this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advait...Parampar%C4%81

I am part of this lineage.

As awareness had pointed out, it's all just the dream play of Universal Consciousness pretending to be everything. Awareness knows the very same truths that Shankaracharya discovered so long ago.

[jimrich]

Originally Posted by The Necromancer

It's easy!

Have learned how to do this very well. Can apply it in any situation and all it takes is mindful awareness, like consciously choosing to omit any word from common usage, even a whole basket full of personal pronouns if/whenever the mood strikes. Just need to remember it for when replying to something which calls itself 'Jim' next time. See? not hard at all.

LOL, you, universal consciousness, can do and be anything, including something which you call 'Jim' or Necromancer = a person who practices necromancy; a wizard or magician.
synonyms: sorcerer, sorceress, (black) magician, wizard, warlock, witch, enchantress, occultist, diviner. [from an online dictionary]

[jimrich]

[quote=redstone]

Originally Posted by jimrich

Hi gang:
I just spent little time researching what others with more skill and knowledge than I have to say about Advaita and Neo-Advaita. My best sources are Rupert Spira and Jeff Foster, who has some very comical things to say about Neo-Advaita - google him. Actually, there are a lot of others who might be considered Neo-Advaitins such as Lisa Cairns and Jim Newman (obviously students of Tony Parsons) and the list goes on and on so take a look for your self.
The one item I find common with all of them is Identity - who/what are you/we/I? It seems to me that, unless someone KNOWS that they are the Absolute, Self, Reality, Brahman, God, Totality, Source, etc., they are just floundering around in the muck and mire of personal, egoic dramas that are neatly placed between birth and death. So Traditional or Neo, it seems to me that locating or recognizing that THOU ART THAT is the bottom line for both forms of non-duality (Advaita) so I do not see any significant difference in Traditional vs. Neo accept in maybe some of the SILLY details and concepts as presented in this hysterical cartoon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4KXidr0z1RY

Hi Jim
That is exactly the problem I (if you allow me to say that) have with Advaita,
there is no direct path to it! Except through the death of the self.

Redstone, there is no self and there is no death. There is only Universal Consciousness which is infinite, eternal life or being.

I heard Tony Parsons refer to his identity or the structure of his self collapsing..and that there is only what is left!

Yes, in Tony's terms, all there is is boundlessness. He and awareness know and speak of the same ultimate truth.

So all I can suggest about that is the energetic structure which was his own personal story before this happened has been de-energised previously through some insights gained from some discipline he was doing, the only way (I) know to do that is through analysis and insight in to what the limitations of the self are!

That seems like a lot of work to arrive at what you, Universal Consciousness, already are.

It’s limited for sure….but it’s the insight that breaks the structure or the energetics of the self down, and he must have been a practioner of sorts, or of some kind of discipline before the story of who he once was collapsed!

I'd guess that his 'story", like yours, is unique within the dream play of Universal Consciousness.

I know Jim Newman (he still answers to that name) was an avid seeker before the story of who he once was collapsed…so he was obviously doing some sort of analysis of the self previously…wasn’t he a psychologist in his own story once? (he also used to go to Tony Parsons talks)

I have only seen a few Jim Newman videos, such as: [www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaHRGC18Bb8] and he definitely knows about Universal Consciousness and how things happen.

I can only liken the experience they went through of the self collapsing was as if it was a large building that was being planned for demolition, you would have to analise where to place the explosive charges to bring it down…some buildings don’t collapse in the way expected but do come down non the less!

So all I can say about Tony Parsons and Jim Newman as it’s the only two advaita guys I have come across, is they must have been chipping away at there own block for so long…(or de-energising the self gained through insights) that at some point there limited self was bound to come crashing in to the ground eventually.

Yes the dream play of Universal Consciousness is quite interesting and amazing - for no one.