- **********************************JACKSubject: [NDS] supportive of non-dualism ?
hi Bobby G
you asked Am `I' supportive of non-dualism
`Advaita asserts that the real, essential identity of the jIva, the
individual self, is nothing other than brahman Itself'.
Bobby G it is very easy for the mind /ego to turn this statement
into a belief system.
"Now there is no need for any vigilance or mindfulness I just
give over to what wants to happen, because all is God"
all that is really handed over is the most basic unconscious
patterns of justifiable neurosis acting out
The 1940's German Chancellor was a very committed and
strong believer in the term `providence'
1. the foreseeing care and guardianship of God over his
But he also said "I suffer from tormenting self-deception"
Depressed and exuberant states coupled with grandiose
fantasies and paranoid tendencies are not uncommon to many
claiming to be `lived by' the advaitain / providence belief
To be supportive of non-dualism one might also be clear what it
is `they' are believing re: non dualism.
belief's adopted by any individual, have very precise
consequences of how they experiences any given creation.
BELIEF n 1. the state of believing, conviction or acceptance that
certain things are true or real. Anything believed or accepted as
Von Goethe said
"He who knows not how to rule his inner self would gladly rule
his fellow men according to his own arrogant conceit"
Some thoughts by some of the greatest known non-dualist
Enlightenment means there is `no me' with a sense of personal
doership "I" can do nothing. Everything that happens is Gods
will" R. S. Balsekar
"When you think you re doing all these things -then you live in
ignorance. If you become aware that the whole is doing
everything, you are possessed by the whole, breathed by it, you
are just a hollow bamboo a flute, the sound comes from the
whole, the whole life comes from it- then you live a life of
enlightenment. C. Rajneesh
Let us not pose as the doers, but resign ourselves to the guiding
Power Shri Ramana
As long as you have the idea of influencing events, liberation is
not for you. Nisargatta
Physicist Neils Bohr said "a great truth is a truth whose opposite
is also a great truth"
jackBOBBY G.Dear Jack
Your thoughtful reply is much appreciated.
Doership, influencing events, belief systems, and ruling the inner
self are all ideas worthy of consideration.
About being supportive of Advaita, I originally meant simply are you
against the ideas or not.
I thought you might be saying these ideas are wrong.
The question of being supportive of advaita is interesting.
It is much like saying I believe the essential identity of the
individual jiva is nothing other than Brahman but the experience of
Brahman is held back by idea.
Bobby G.JACKBobby G,
I sincerely thank you for what you have offered
.I slowly recognise the right/wrong game becomes increasingly
more difficult to believe in, the more intelligence and awareness
is used to recognise the belief system that has been adopted to
view any creation.
Ramana Maharshi has been quoted
"all scriptures are only for the purpose of investigating if there
are two consciousness".
He went on to say "if there is any division felt, it is because we
imagine that we as the seer are separate from the experience".
It's very easy for anyone to claim enlightenment and speak in
terms of non-duality.
Ben-Ami Scharfstein, a philosopher once remarked
"I think that if the writings of admitted mystics and admitted
psychotics is compared line by line, image by image, conviction
by conviction, they will often not be distinguishable both, as we
have seen, can share the feeling of immensity and
incommunicabilty of their experience. Both can be happy. Both
can feel that they contain the universe or adjoined with it in
unsurpassing union. Both can be overwhelmed by the sudden
conviction that they see the truth now bare. Both can believe that
they have godly wisdom and benevolence. Both can use
Jehovah's self definition and say of themselves `I AM'.
Just on a last note, here's a few statements
Are these statements made by non -dualist mystics or by
1. "It's not fair to demand more of a man than he can give"
2, "Now, he who destroys life is himself risking death"
3. "The soul and mind migrate, just as the body returns to
4 "This life is eternally reborn from life ..... the soul is
5. "It's a mistake to think that man should be guided by his
6. "Man alone amongst the living creatures, tries to deny the laws
7. "Prepare for war with peace in thy soul"
8. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"
9. "Conflict exists as long as there is effort, as long as there is
contradiction so, is there not a contradiction between the
`observer' and the `observed' in that division?
10 "Man is absurdly concentrated upon the symptoms of his own
distress, and, thus, human beings collectively and individually
pursue knowledge of, and the power over, the conditions which
confront them in body and mind".
11. "Only people condemen who have some part in what they are
who said what..........
1 to 6 A. Hitler
7. Lord Krishna
8. Lord Buddha
9. J Krishnamurti
10. Adi Da Samraj
11. RajneeshRASHMIThe seeker is the sought.
I still don't get it.
Could someone explain the subtle aspect of this matter!
RashmiGREGA spiritual seeker is looking for something. Perhaps something grand,
blissful, peaceful, that might end suffering or illuminate the secrets of
the Universe or allow them to gaze on the countenance of God. When the
seeking is over, it is realized that there is no other in existence. Just
You, the Self, the I-principle, nothing/no-one else. That Self, it is
realized, was always there, never not there. It was masquerading as the
seeker, and as the answer.
When the seeker finds what she is looking for, she comes back to herself,
realizing that she never left.
...........haha now you"re really screwed cause greg explained it so
clearly and concisely, that now you're probably gonna start believing
that you actually understand it. Most questions are just better off
...............matthewJAN B.Of course - the mind always tries to grasp, which is activity whereas
the absence of mental activity 'escapes' all grasping. Most questions
could be classified under "doctor, i want a pill to cure ..." whereas
the lifestyle where even the thought of asking that wouldn't arise,
is likely to be rejected