Reality as Wonder

Discussion in 'Eastern Philosophy' started by Spellbound, Jul 29, 2014.

  1. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    • Members are reminded that sciforums is not the place to blog.
    June 15 2013

    Re: Question to Richard

    RESPONDENT: If the essence of who I am is formless as you say on your website, then how can you see it and describe it as a beautiful rosy pearl nestled coyly amidst the delicate fleshy tissue of its host in its shimmering nacreous shell?

    RICHARD: G’day No. 11, You are obviously referring to an email exchange of ours, on this forum, over 2 & 1/2 years ago. Purely for the sake of clarity in communication I will re-present it in full.

    Vis.:

    #7620
    From: richard.actualfreedom
    Date: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:47 pm
    Subject: Re: Richard I have a question

    • [Respondent]: G’day Richard, How do I learn and discover the essence of who ‘I’ am? Thank you, No.11.

    • [Richard]: G’day No. 11, In a word: intuitively (aka feeling yourself out subjectively).

    Also, much use can be made of what is known as hypnagogic (pre-dormient) and hypnopompic (post-dormient) states which occur, respectively, in the drowsiness stage of intermediate consciousness preceding sleep or in the semiconscious state of transitional consciousness preceding waking ... of the two the identity inhabiting this flesh and blood body all those years ago found the pre-dormient state the easier to manifest.

    However, as it was the hypnopompic state which revealed the essence of who ‘I’ am – the precise nature of ‘me’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself) – an anecdote from that period may throw some light on the matter.

    I was on a coastal sea voyage, making a northerly passage under sail in a trimaran I then owned, off the north-eastern seaboard of Australia when a storm came up from the south late in the day.

    Rather than make a run for the port I was heading for under a storm jib alone (with all that entails) I chose to anchor overnight in the lee of a nearby island until the storm blew itself out. A perusal of the appropriate chart showed a narrow bay, between two jagged coral reefs, with a tiny beach at its head and the notation ‘fair-weather anchorage’. I figured, were the worst to come about, I could beach my yacht (an advantage multihull yachts have over monohull yachts) and weather the storm out thataway.

    I negotiated the two jagged coral reefs, dropped anchor several boat-lengths short of what was actually a miniscule beach, and retired below for the evening. I slept soundly, despite the storm howling all about and the yacht pitching and tossing at anchor, only to emerge from deep sleep into a crystal-clear fully-lucid hypnopompic state just after midnight.

    (Please note that it was, of course, the ‘I’ who was hypnopompic).

    In that crystal-clear fully-lucid hypnopompic state ‘I’ was able to penetrate deeply into ‘myself’ at the core of ‘my’ being (which is ‘being’ itself) – or, rather, the penetration took place via ‘my’ full acquiescence – and there, in the centre of all the feelings swirling around, the essence of who ‘I’ am lay gorgeously exposed ... not all that unlike a beautiful rosy pearl, nestled coyly amidst the delicate fleshy tissue of its host, in its shimmering nacreous shell.

    Except that the essence of who ‘I’ am was a void (and not a ‘thing’ like a pearl is) so the analogy of the void at the centre of whirlpool of water – which is the whirling water in motion – is more apt (albeit not conveying the ethereal radiant beauty of the rosy pearl analogy).

    Or, in other words, the essence of who ‘I’ am is akin to the calm, still centre of a swirling cyclone/ hurricane/ typhoon.

    The swirling air/whirling water is, of course, all the feelings – all of the emotions/ passions – which ‘I’ am comprised of (as in ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’).

    *

    At that point, as the storm howled even louder and the yacht lurched sluggishly at anchor, I was fully awake in an instant; sitting up and swinging my legs to the edge of the bunk I stood up ... knee-deep in seawater!

    Now, when something like that happens in a house one can quickly discern that one’s home is being flooded; on a ship at sea, however, it can mean only one thing ... to wit: one’s home is sinking.

    But, all the while I was starting the auxiliary engine (mostly underwater) and hauling in the anchor (getting thoroughly soaked) and somehow driving the waterlogged trimaran up onto the miniscule beach (unseeable in the pitch black night) without dashing to pieces on the enclosing jagged reefs, that penetration into the essence of who ‘I’ am became indelibly etched into the memory banks.

    And, as ‘I’ knew exactly who ‘I’ was, that very knowledge was in itself empowering (to use the jargon) and thus contributed enormously to ‘my’ eventual demise.

    Ain’t life grand!

    Regards, Richard.

    And, again for reasons of clarity in communication, in a follow-up email I expanded somewhat upon that which lay so gorgeously exposed, completely unprotected, a little after the witching-hour on that revelatory and empowering (to again utilise the jargon) night in mid-1987.

    Vis.:

    #7641
    From: richard.actualfreedom
    Date: Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:13 pm
    Subject: Re: Richard I have a question

    • [Richard]: [...]. So as to put it into perspective: it [#7620] was a response to being asked how to learn and discover the essence of who ‘I’ am, and not who ‘I’ am in general (social-self + ego-self + soul/spirit-self), and my anecdotal reply refers to what took place the sixth year (1987) of spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment.

    [...] what lay exposed (as in completely unprotected) was the essence of ‘me’ in all ‘my’ glory ... beautiful, radiant, resplendent and unquestionably worthy of the utmost adoration, worship and veneration. (Hence my lustrous pearl analogy; the eddy analogy is for void, in contrast to thing, as the essence of who ‘I’ am is formless).

    Kings and Emperors and Sages and Seers alike tremble at the rare honour bestowed only on a graced few, to prostrate before that sacred effulgence, upon choice revelation of its almighty presence.

    For instance:

    • [Ms. Pupul Jayakar]: ‘... the feeling of presence was overpowering, and soon my voice stopped. Krishnaji turned to me, ‘Do you feel It? I could prostrate to It?’ His body was trembling as he spoke of the presence that listened. ‘Yes, I can prostrate to this, that is here’.

    Suddenly he turned and left us, walking alone to his room’. (page 364; Jayakar, Pupul: ‘Krishnamurti – A Biography’; Harper & Row; San Francisco; 1986).

    Regards, Richard.

    Now, back to your question (about how can that which is essentially formless be seen and described as a beautiful rosy pearl and etcetera): first and foremost, the seeing is neither a retinal percipience – as in, the seer –> the retinae –> the seen – nor a dichotomous ‘inner’ perception (as in, the seer –> the seen) as the seer *is* the seen ... or, rather, there is only the seen (‘There is only That’).

    (In short, ‘seeing’, in my above words ‘the seeing is ...’, is being used in its figurative sense).

    Second, as that which is formless (as in, timeless and spaceless, ethereal and supernal, immaterial and incorporeal and so on) is not only neither existent nor non-existent, but is not neither existent nor non-existent either, then my lustrous pearl analogy serves to convey the ethereal radiant beauty of that which is devoid of any personality whatsoever – utterly non-egoic in any way, means or manner (aka, void) – and, thus, totally ‘other’, resplendently supreme, sacred and absolute.

    (In short, ‘seen’, in my further above words ‘... there is only the seen’, is also being used in its figurative sense).

    Lastly, as all my words and writings are informed by the post-parinirvana/ mahasamadhi condition known as an actual freedom from the human condition, it must be stressed that the ongoing experiencing, night and day, for the eleven years 1981-to-1992 was *not* of being a (capitalised) ‘Self’ or ‘Being’ – ‘God’ or ‘The Creator’ by whatever name – but of having gone behind that, in the first few weeks or so, into that which all such gods and goddesses arise out of or are grounded in.

    (In short, that whence all avatars and buddhas emanate).

    Vis.:

    • [Co-Respondent]: These are just two quotes of many possible quotes which show that the masters’ teaching is very well beyond ‘Love Agape’ and ‘Compassion’.

    • [Richard]: You may find the following informative in this regard:

    • [Co-Respondent]: ‘What do You understand by being enlightenment?’
    • [Richard]: ‘There is nothing other than The Absolute’.

    And this:

    • [Co-Respondent]: ‘I invite all of you who have had a Self experience to try describing it’.
    • [Richard]: ‘Sure ... there was only The Absolute (the Self by whatever name) and nothing else existed’.

    And this:

    • [Co-Respondent]: ‘As an example [of a description of ‘Self’], is the description ‘a very old child’ valid in your case?’
    • [Richard]: ‘No, the description ‘there is nothing other than The Absolute’ is what is valid in my case (...)’.
    • [Co-Respondent]: ‘If you can provide a brief description for your particular Self image, so as to compare notes, I would be pleased to read it’.
    • [Richard]: ‘Sure ... there was only The Absolute (the Self by whatever name) and nothing else existed’.
    • [Co-Respondent]: ‘Or is it indescribable?’
    • [Richard]: ‘No, it is easily described: there was nothing other than The Absolute’.

    In other words, in full-blown spiritual enlightenment/ mystical awakenment, there is only ‘That’ (the unmanifest by whatever name) and the manifest – all time and all space and all form – is but a dream/an illusion/an appearance ... meaning that in reality there is neither creation nor destruction, and thus, neither bondage nor liberation/ neither a seeker after liberation nor the liberated. (Actual Freedom Mailing List, No. 89b, 13 May 2005).

    *

    I am also stressing this so as to address the mis-information/ dis-information bruited abroad by a pretermitting whippersnapper whose main function in life is, it would seem, to be a mouthpiece for a once-failed Singapore businessman he publicly identifies as Mr. John Tan (he may as well have said ‘John Smith’ or ‘Joe Citizen’).

    Ha ... this is all such fun!

    Regards, Richard.

    June 18 2013

    Re: Richard you should add my account of a four hour PCE to your website

    RESPONDENT: 1. I cannot imagine what Spirit is, so is it nothing? Sorry I just realized I been deluded for years. And I am awakening from a dream.

    According to Einstein, ‘every human being experiences themself in a limited space and time.’ He was onto the truth but he was not in the actual mind, for there is no time in the actual reality, it is an eternal moment in which we live and in which we die. A single moment in time is what can only be perceived. According to Walter Russel, ‘All matter is moving accross ‘space’ to register the electrical potential at the place of its birth where it belongs.’ I don’t think he’s talking about a physical place here. Since I cannot imagine why matter would be searching for a physical place, I will therefore reject it, for it has no application to the living world itself. ?**&( I am no longer living the ‘truth’, I am actually experiencing the actual moment.

    My words and thinking are clearer, and this is an account of what is called a PCE or pure consciousness experience. There is no ‘me’, ‘myself’, or ‘I’. This is the only way to effect the peace and harmony with others. It was all a big diversion ‘me’, ‘Myself’, or ‘I’ was living for years. Apparently the belief in immortality is a hope or a belief, it is therefore not actual fact. The moment is what is actual and eternal. This is a glimpse of the battle with myself ended. The ‘I’ was an illusion or entity that inhabitted this body.

    2. Awakening from a dream Life is experienced and it is like a dream. I am currently experiencing the actual moment for the first time. You might notice my words or tone is changed. This is an effect of what I am experiencing – the actual. It is a moment where I am not harmful to myself in any way. I.e. I am not suffering for any sake at all. The feeling being is not messing up the moment.

    Edit: I am now studying how I can keep this moment of being alive.

    3. Love Agape ‘08 Love agape is heightened awareness. I do not have to suffer or feel remorse for ‘myself’ any- more. Because on this very day, I became self-less and now I can make others happy. It was on this very day – 02/06/08 – that I first experienced a PCE or pure consciousness experience without the use of a drug. I shoveled the driveway with joy and thus speed. Then I went over to my neighbor’s house and did their driveway. The wheather over here is snowing heavy, but it did not affect my decision to go out and meet others. Sharing myself with others is not a painful experience anymore. Because I am not suffering for no kind of invisible being anymore.


    RICHARD: G’day No. 11, Could you provide an introductory paragraph to the above?

    Such as the events leading up to – and immediately prior to – your experience; for instance, did the recent email exchange of ours play a part, invoke something, set off a train of thought, bring up something deep, profound, and so on?

    Also, could you provide an afterwards paragraph ... as in how your life is experienced now as compared with before?

    Last, but not at all the least, how about some descriptive words of what actually took place during your experience ... such as your ‘shovelled the driveway’ reference to 2008?

    In other words, what were you doing, physically, for all of those four hours?

    Regards, Richard.

    June 18 2013

    Re: Question to Richard ( please answer)

    RESPONDENT: If the essence of who I am is formless as you say on your website, then how can you see it and describe it as a beautiful rosy pearl nestled coyly amidst the delicate fleshy tissue of its host in its shimmering nacreous shell?

    RICHARD: You are obviously referring to an email exchange of ours, on this forum, over 2 & 1/2 years ago.

    Purely for the sake of clarity in communication I will re-present it in full. Vis.: [...snip...].

    Second, as that which is formless (as in, timeless and spaceless, ethereal and supernal, immaterial and incorporeal and so on) is not only neither existent nor non-existent, but is not neither existent nor non-existent either, then my lustrous pearl analogy serves to convey the ethereal radiant beauty of that which is devoid of any personality whatsoever – utterly non-egoic in any way, means or manner (aka, void) – and, thus, totally ‘other’, resplendently supreme, sacred and absolute. [...snip...].

    RESPONDENT: Existent and non-existent are one?

    RICHARD: G’day No. 11, If by ‘one’ you mean the two faces of the same coin then, yes, existent/ non-existent are one; mystical literature often mentions how the polar opposites continue to subsist (as complimentary poles) in awakenment/ enlightenment. Indeed, one of the appellations used to describe that integration of the divine/ diabolical divide upon transcendence, wherein the opposites unite without ceasing to be themselves, is the phrase ‘coincidentia oppositorum’ (coincidence of opposites).

    Another term is ‘complexio oppositorum’ (union of opposites). The (mystical) experience of being both existent and non-existent, simultaneously, is a god-experience (goddess, if feminine).

    But behind the god/goddess-experience (‘behind’, not beyond) is That which is not only neither existent nor non-existent, but is not neither existent nor non-existent either.

    This double-negation is not just a fancy play of words but a precise depiction of that which is, essentially, ineffable (as in, no attributes to speak of).

    RESPONDENT: Also, can you describe how one initiates the act of penetration into one’s being?

    RICHARD: Yes, and I can do no better, for now, than to confirm the selection made by a discerning reader in an earlier post (#14009) as it is the very quote I had in mind to re-present for your appraisal.

    RESPONDENT: Richard, God is real?

    RICHARD: If you are using ‘real’ as it is used in actualism terminology – unlike the dictionaries I draw a sharp distinction between the word real and the word actual – then, yes, ‘God’ is real (just as all gods and goddesses are real) but is in no way, means or manner actual.

    With no God (or gods and goddesses) to meddle in human affairs any longer one walks freely, as this flesh-and-blood body only, in the already always existing peace-on-earth.

    Regards, Richard.

    October 29 2013

    Re: affective vibes are real

    RESPONDENT: Richard, you asked:

    [Richard]: I really do not see any way to be more clear ... how can ‘science’ – no matter what way you define it – detect and/or measure illusions (i.e., that which ‘has no existence in actuality’)? [endquote].

    Who are you to say which is illusion and which is not?


    RICHARD: G’day No. 11, It is not a case of
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    Often people who do not read what I have to say with both eyes gain the impression that I am suggesting that people are to stop feeling ... which I am not. My whole point is to cease ‘being’ – psychologically and psychically self-immolate – which means that the entire psyche itself is extirpated. That is, the biological instinctual package handed out by blind nature is deleted like a computer software programme (but with no ‘Recycle Bin’ to retrieve it from) so that the affective faculty is no more. Then – and only then – are there no feelings ... as in a pure consciousness experience (PCE) where, with the self in abeyance, the feelings play no part at all. However, in a PCE the feelings – passion and calenture – can come rushing in, if one is not alert, resulting in the PCE devolving into an altered state of consciousness (ASC) ... complete with a super-self. Indeed, this demonstrates that it is impossible for there to be no feelings whilst there is a self – in this case a Self – thus it is the ‘being’ that has to go first ... not the feelings.

    It is impossible to be a ‘stripped-down’ self – divested of feelings – for ‘I’ am ‘my’ feelings and ‘my’ feelings are ‘me’. Anyone who attempts this absurdity would wind up being somewhat like what is known in psychiatric terminology as a ‘sociopathic personality’ (popularly know as ‘psychopath’). Such a person still has feelings – ‘cold’, ‘callous’, ‘indifferent’ – and has repressed the others. What the wide and wondrous path to an actual freedom is on about is a virtual freedom wherein the ‘good’ feelings – the affectionate and desirable emotions and passions (those that are loving and trusting) are minimised along with the ‘bad’ feelings – the hostile and invidious emotions and passions (those that are hateful and fearful) – so that one is free to be feeling good, feeling happy and harmless and feeling excellent/perfect for 99% of the time. If one deactivates the ‘good’ and ‘bad’ feelings and activates the felicitous/ innocuous feelings (happiness, delight, joie de vivre/ bonhomie, friendliness, amiability and so on) with this freed-up affective energy, in conjunction with sensuousness (delectation, enjoyment, appreciation, relish, zest, gusto and so on), then the ensuing sense of amazement, marvel and wonder can result in apperceptiveness (unmediated perception).

    Delight is what is humanly possible, given sufficient pure intent obtained from the felicity/ innocuity born of the pure consciousness experience, and from the position of delight, one can vitalise one’s joie de vivre by the amazement at the fun of it all ... and then one can – with sufficient abandon – become over-joyed and move into marvelling at being here and doing this business called being alive now. Then one is no longer intuitively making sense of life ... the delicious wonder of it all drives any such instinctive meaning away. Such luscious wonder fosters the innate condition of naiveté – the nourishing of which is essential if fascination in it all is to occur – and the charm of life itself easily engages dedication to peace-on-earth. Then, as one gazes intently at the world about by glancing lightly with sensuously caressing eyes, out of the corner of one’s eye comes – sweetly – the magical fairy-tale-like paradise that this verdant earth actually is ... and one is the experiencing of what is happening.

    But refrain from possessing it and making it your own ... or else ‘twill vanish as softly as it appeared.

    http://actualfreedom.com.au/richard/articles/aprecisofactualfreedom.htm
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    The website above may have an agenda or not. I hope to find out soon. Last night I had a nightmare with demons in the dark. It may have been caused by this website.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,744
    I did not read the long a** IP. I wanted to present this truth...if we can talk on that...that would be fine. There are energy beings (little ones, big ones, one year old to eight billion year old stuff) on this Universe that manage the Universe. We physical beings are just a part just like everything you see as matter. We are neither good nor bad...this is the way it is. So, unless we bring the whole issue up front...anything we talk will be one sided. So, go to it...thanks.

    "4. I am mortal in that I was born, I live for a period of years, then I die and death is the end, finish. The material universe is infinite and eternal and was here before I was born and will be here after I die."

    Then what, death is not the end, where is your self went to and let us talk about that too....otherwise the story is not complete....
     
  8. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
  9. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    I am attempting to eliminate the 'I'/ the 'who'/ the believer/ the exist-er/ the identity by thrusting my thoughts into the actual world of the senses and not the 'real' world of the thinker. I have found success in eliminating the invisible 'I' in certain proportions or percentages. I was in enlightenment for some time by following this method and recalling my PCE experience in which I lived for 4 hours in the actual world in early 2008 and a few seconds in early 2009 the day Obama was inaugurated. I said "SHIT!... SHIT!" both times in unbelief and amazement. I have no doubt that at the very least I will become enlightened sometime this month. All you need to do is deduce the conclusion that there is an actual world and the amount you "know it" is proportional to how much your 'I' will disappear and you will become free of illusion and pain.

    Read the above material in the link to get started.
     
  10. Kittamaru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,854
    I think my reaction is best summed up as follows:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    It's impossible to believe that there is an actual world unless one has had a pure consciousness experience (however, it can be described). Pure happiness is one's condition 24/7. Here is how the website describes "Actual" to mean:


    Actual

    Actual: Existing in act or fact. Oxford Dictionary

    Peter: Actual is that which is palpable, tangible, tactile, corporeal, physical and material. It is that which can be experienced by the physical senses of sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch. That which is actual, being in action or in existence at this moment in time, is not merely passive.
    In comparison, that which is deemed to be real is merely the cerebral and affective interpretation of the actual and physical by the psychological and psychic (social and instinctual) entity that dwells within the human body.
    In comparison, spiritual Reality while feeling super-real and ‘other-worldly’ is merely an affective, imaginary, hoped and longed for, fairy tale – a further illusion built upon the initial illusion of reality. The myth of a spiritual Reality was created in ancient times as an escape from the very real horror, and the imagined evil spirits, evident in everyday earthly reality.
    This physical universe of people, events and things are seen to be perfect and it is obvious that it is only what goes on in our heads – the disease called the Human Condition that is manifest in each of us as a separate, personal ‘self’ – that is the cause of the appalling malice and sorrow that humans exude. What has always been avoided up until now is the fact that what goes on in the heart is the real problem – the loves, loyalties, passions, ideals and beliefs that humans are willing to kill or die for. The problem lies in feelings and emotions and the PCE confirms this experientially.
    That is why it is so good to write of these experiences – the ordinary everyday experiences when experienced by our senses free of emotions and feelings do indeed become extraordinary, clear, bright, gay, delightful, friendly, benign and, to use that wonderful word, ambrosial. Enlightenment lies in the opposite direction – in the world of spirits, gods, feelings and emotions.
    What a delight to come to my senses – what an achievement. It still seems unbelievable. I still keep pinching myself and checking out this new way of living but it is perfect, flawless, actual, and continually amazing. Actuality is far, far bigger than mere feelings or impassioned imagination for it is actual, patently palpable, infinitely varied, observably tangible, manifestly obvious, always apparent, clearly evident, eternally existing and it is happening right here and right now, under our very noses as it were.
    Every moment, there is a door available marked ‘actual world’, and it is often most accessible at exactly those moments when there seems to be nothing going on in terms of emotions or worry. The ever-present, physical-only, actual world is ever-peaceful, ever-pure and ever-perfect. There is no fear, no aggression, no good, no bad, no right and no wrong in the actual world.

    http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/library/topics/actual.htm

    Notice the absence of dualism in the ending as well as in the above writing.
     
  12. Kittamaru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,854
    So... you are claiming that in order to be... whatever you are describing... one has to be happy 24/7...?

    That sounds strangely dystopian...
     
  13. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
    No, not exactly. One has to eliminate the 'I' or inner being to be happy 24/7. Or else you could end up in some form of enlightenment such as in the following....


    Advaita Vedanta

    Advaita Vedanta: (Sanskrit: ‘Non-dualism,’ or ‘Monism’), most influential of the schools of Vedanta, an orthodox philosophy of India. While its followers find its main tenets already fully expressed in the Upanisads and systematized by the Vedanta-sutras, it has its historical beginning with the 7th-century thinker Gaudapada, author of the Mandukya-karika, a commentary in verse form on the late Mandukya Upanishad.
    Gaudapada builds further on the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy of Shunyava-da (‘Emptiness’). He argues that there is no duality; the mind, awake or dreaming, moves through maya (‘illusion’); and only non-duality (advaita) is the final truth. This truth is concealed by the ignorance of illusion. There is no becoming, either of a thing by itself or of a thing out of some other thing. There is ultimately no individual self or soul (jiva), only the atman (all-soul), in which individuals may be temporarily delineated just as the space in a jar delineates a part of main space: when the jar is broken, the individual space becomes once more part of the main space.
    The medieval Indian philosopher Shankara, or Shankaracharya (Master Shankara, c. 700-750), builds further on Gaudapada’s foundation, principally in his commentary on the Vedanta-sutras, the Shari-raka-mimamsa-bhasya (‘Commentary on the Study of the Self’). Shankara in his philosophy does not start from the empirical world with logical analysis but, rather, directly from the absolute (Brahman). If interpreted correctly, he argues, the Upanishads teach the nature of Brahman. In making this argument, he develops a complete epistemology to account for the human error in taking the phenomenal world for real. Fundamental for Shankara is the tenet that the Brahman is real and the world is unreal. Any change, duality, or plurality is an illusion. The self is nothing but Brahman. Insight into this identity results in spiritual release. Brahman is outside time, space, and causality, which are simply forms of empirical experience. No distinction in Brahman or from Brahman is possible.
    Shankara points to scriptural texts, either stating identity (‘Thou art that’) or denying difference (‘There is no duality here’), as declaring the true meaning of a Brahman without qualities (nirguna). Other texts that ascribe qualities (saguna) to Brahman refer not to the true nature of Brahman but to its personality as God (Ishvara).
    Human perception of the unitary and infinite Brahman as the plural and infinite is due to human beings’ innate habit of superimposition (adhyasa), by which a thou is ascribed to the I (I am tired; I am happy; I am perceiving). The habit stems from human ignorance (ajana, avidya), which can be avoided only by the realization of the identity of Brahman. Nevertheless, the empirical world is not totally unreal, for it is a misapprehension of the real Brahman. A rope is mistaken for a snake; there is only a rope and no snake, but, as long as it is thought of as a snake, it is one. (see also Index: adhyasa).
    Shankara had many followers who continued and elaborated his work, notably the 9th-century philosopher Vacaspati Mishra. The Advaita literature is extremely extensive, and its influence is still felt in modern Hindu thought. Encyclopaedia Britannica

    http://www.actualfreedom.com.au/library/topics/advaita.htm
     
  14. Spellbound Banned Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,623
  15. Kittamaru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,854
    I think you are confused in something VERY important:

    You are confusing "happiness", which is an emotion, with "contentment", which is a state of being.

    One CANNOT be "happy" all the time (at least not without some SERIOUS mind altering drugs) - finding contentment is something many people never learn to do though
     
  16. kmguru Staff Member

    Messages:
    11,744
    It is really the ignorance of illusion (based on what you know). The world out there is so much different that until you know exactly what it is, you can not get it. We do not have the Knowledge this time to understand it.

    GOD - It is what drives our Universe. It is a very large structure that developed this Universe....It is impossible to understand the basics.

    atman - That is what we all are but we are two in one....like a smartphone and the connection. It is very complicated until we have physical items that we can talk about.

    Everything you talk is basically useless. Otherwise even Indians would have had Industry and Vimanas...by now. So...Time will Tell where things go...
     

Share This Page