A Discussion Of Non Dual "adviata" Philosophy.

Discussion in 'Philosophy and Religion' started by Meagain, May 29, 2017.

  1. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    So, on we go.....
    When we are unconscious, there is nothing we can know and nothing to be remembered.
    The remembrance of being unconscious is merely the remembrance of the state previous. Unconsciousness is a temporal, there is no time, subjectiveness, or objectiveness, to be experienced.
    There is no thought or thought process.

    Now, if we remember the interval between thoughts we can see a correlation.
    As one thought follows another and no two thoughts can exist at the same time, there must be an interval between them.
    As thought is required for experience, the interval can't be experienced and the interval between thoughts is seen to be the same as the unconscious "state".
    The unconscious state is the non-dual reality that underlines all of our existence.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  2. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    And now we move on to the self.


    The self, or our self, is made up of the body and it's sensations, our mental activity, and our personality.
    For us to be an individual we must be conscious of ourselves as individuals separate from all else. To do this we must transcend the body, it's sensations, and our mental activity, just as the game we play on a computer transcends the hardware and the software it rides upon.
    At the same time we identify the self with the body, just as we realize the computer game can't exist without the computer.

    But the body continually changes from moment to moment, day to day, and year to year.
    What allows us to identify with the continually changing body is the immutable self. The same immutable self that exists in all beings. Yet we fail to see that this immutable self does not reside only in our own body. We ignore the fact that the body changes, the conscious mind does not.
    This becomes more apparent as we age and we feel the same on the inside, but the body begins to break down.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  3. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    As we recognize ourselves even as the body changes we must conclude that the self is a habit we have acquired when we identify the immutable universal self as an individual self attached to a body.
    We do this by thinking of the immutable self as possessing characteristics inherent in the body, such as height, weight, eye color, physical aches and pains , etc. Lumping them all together we compile an image of an individual human being.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  4. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Just a few thoughts, probably a bit rambling as usual..............

    There's a distinction to be made between the immutable self and mind I think. Mind in this context is really a part of our embodiment. I'd say it definitely does change over time, along with the body, as we go through life.
    Even our sense of self seems to me to change. But of course, that sense of self is not the direct experience of the Self , but only a mental concept or feeing of an individual.

    The concept of the immutable and impersonal Self, what Sri Aurobindo called 'the One Self of All' is a difficult one I've always thought for the western mindset (or maybe just my mindset).
    We tend to think of self and personality as integral parts of the same thing. The idea of the Self as impersonal, or as an absolute, is really quite alien to most western thought, even of a mystical nature. I suppose the influence of Christianity has been quite deep, and there, the absolute is usually seen as something separate from the individual - God or Christ are not seen as a higher and universal self in the sense of 'myself' or my highest and deepest self. And the same is true more or less of devotional or dualist schools of Hindu philosophy, in fact it's one of the main bones of contention between them and the Advaitins.

    It's pretty much impossible to even begin to formulate any kind of mental image of what an impersonal self would be like. Probably would have to begin by looking closely at the concepts of 'personality' and 'self'. This Indian philosophy in general only makes sense if the way these terms are used is understood. If they are taken as they usually are in the west, it can be a little confusing perhaps. Sometimes the meaning of 'self' in a western and an Indian text can be the complete opposite.

    Maybe adds to the complexity, but worth noting that according to the Gita there is a higher form of the divine or absolute, Purushottama, the supreme purusha, that transcends both the personal and the impersonal.
     
  5. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    Yes mind, or the processes of the brain change.
    And our view of our self changes, but what witnesses these changes?

    I think we need to make sure we distinguish between the self and the immutable self.
    The West has no problem with the self, it's the immutable self that the West doesn't usually recognize. The closest thing in the West is the soul, but the soul is an individual concept.
     
  6. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    Levy comments on what the self is....
    First the body changes.
    Second thoughts and emotions change.
    Third thoughts come and go.

    The immutable self is that which witnesses these changes.
     
    Last edited: Nov 7, 2017
  7. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    One problem I see is that if the individual self is an illusion - or let's say not really real - then the immutable 'transpersonal' self should know the thoughts going on in all minds.

    It's hard to see how it could be otherwise, if the One Self is the only witness.
     
  8. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    Maybe "it" does.

    But I think the real answer is that that is a realm we are incapable of knowing the workings of.
    Maybe like a dog ain't gonna understand calculus no matter how hard he tries.
     
  9. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Trouble is though that if it isn't realizable, we can't know, and it all becomes entirely speculative.
     
  10. Moonglow181

    Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    16,175
    Likes Received:
    4,916
    I don't think I would want existence to be poured into any knowable formula, anyway.
     
  11. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    I think all philosphy tries to do just that.

    This advaita philosophy though is a branch of Hindu religion. So if it's not verifiable through experience, a person would just be accepting one formulation against others mainly on faith or because it has intellectual appeal. But the whole basis of advaita is that intellect can't know reality.
     
    1 person likes this.
  12. themnax

    themnax Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,694
    Likes Received:
    4,465
    there is a reasonable 'black box' analogy of reality.
    you may not KNOW what's in the box, but you can observe what comes out when what goes in.

    the useful function of belief, is not to replace knowledge or logic,
    but to encourage the avoidance of causing suffering and harm,
    which still requires the use of logic to achieve.

    i believe too much western religions cause people to loose sight of this.
    to become mere excuses for irresponsible behavior,
    replaced by trust that a cookbook that enobles the causing of fear, will somehow always work out.

    I believe the unseen requires no hierarchy,
    and the wish to be feared is no more nobil there then here

    and it is certainly not nobil, or even sane, here at all.

    I suppose how people perceive the unseen, is part of how,
    they perceive their own world as well

    but I perceive the world not as people, but as landscapes,
    rocks, trees, structures and infrastructure,
    and only optionally,
    as occupied by animate beings.

    And I perceive no species more integrally nobil then another.

    well of course belief has one other valid function,
    one all beliefs share to some degree,
    which is to acknowledge the universal wonder of strangeness,
    whatever the form or nature of the unseen might happen to be.
     
    1 person likes this.
  13. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    I don't think anyone said it can't be realized, or experienced, it can't be intellectually rationalized except in a roundabout way.
     
    1 person likes this.
  14. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    OK - but you did say that this is a realm we are incapable of knowing the workings of.

    But who are 'we'? Not what we think according to this philosophy. If the one immutable self is our real self, then we should be able to come to know all that it knows. If not, then all we have is a set of intellectual propositions.
     
  15. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    19,782
    Likes Received:
    13,799
    And we should be able to bend "reality" and work magic.

    I think of it as momentum, as we are limited in scope we can't alter the ongoing tide.
    Sorta like the each tip of a wave is individual, it can be defined as unique, arises from the depth, lives a brief life of its own, and returns to the ocean.
    Even though it's an extension of the ocean, and its underlining being is controlled by the ocean, even though it gets to briefly express its individuality, it can't do much to effect, or know, the entire ocean.
     
    1 person likes this.
  16. Moonglow181

    Moonglow181 Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    16,175
    Likes Received:
    4,916
    Just a speck of sand am I. :D

    Reminds me of a cartoon someone once made for me....and they made themself a dot character saying...."why am I just a dot?".
     
  17. Ajay0

    Ajay0 Guest

    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    529
    Advaita means nonduality. And this nonduality is really a state of consciousness without any transient mind content that is the basis of dualistic concepts.

    This is a real state of being that attains a state of permanent nature upon enlightenment. The ancient Hindu, Taoist and Sufi sages have proclaimed this and so have modern enlightened masters like Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Jiddu Krishnamurti, H.W.Poonja, Dada Gavand, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, Robert Adams, Adyashanti, Sailor Bob Adamson, Gilbert Schultz, Madhukar, Mooji, Eckhart Tolle, Barry Long, Adam Oakley, Metta Zetty, Jed Mckenna, John Wheeler, Dave Oshana, Jean Klein, Jeff Foster, Bernadette Roberts, Jac O' Keeffe , Greg Goode, Douglas Harding, Jan Frazier, Ilie Cioara, Charlie Hayes, Franklin Merrell-Wolff, Pamela Wilson and so on.

    The point I am trying to make is that Advaita is not a mere intellectual abstraction but a real state of being, and the proper way to comprehend this philosophy is through experiential understanding and not mere conceptual or intellectual understanding, which is always a dualistic exercise.

    I would say a proper study of the works of the enlightened masters listed above can help one to gain a better understanding of Advaita than through mere intellectual exercise.
    Most of them have free works of theirs in pdf form in the internet or websites,and this can help one to comprehend Advaita better.
     
  18. Ajay0

    Ajay0 Guest

    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    529
    Understanding of Advaita can also help one rationally comprehend certain teachings of the old and new testament.


    Ramana Maharshi often cited the Bible, and in particular the statement ‘I am that I am’, to support his contention that God’s real nature was ‘I am’. He stated thus....

    ‘I am’ is the name of God. Of all the definitions of God, none is so well put as the biblical statement ‘I am that I am’ in Exodus chapter three. There are other statements such as brahmavaiham [Brahman am I], aham brahmasmi [I am Brahman] and soham [I am He]. But none is so direct as Jehovah [which means] ‘I am’.



    Jesus's statement, 'I and my Father are one' can also be stated to be an expression of Advaita, that is, a nondualistic state of being.
     
  19. BlackBillBlake

    BlackBillBlake resigned HipForums Supporter

    Messages:
    11,504
    Likes Received:
    1,543
    Which is pretty much the point I was making. Except I didn't say it's a real state of being - the whole point is that it's meaningless to say it's a real state of being on someone else's say so. To know it as a real state, one woud have to experience it.
     
  20. Ajay0

    Ajay0 Guest

    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    529
    You are right. I stand corrected. Poor attention span created the error in perception. [​IMG]

    You have articulated it very well. :scholar:
     
    1 person likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice