Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Advaita Vedanta at its finest
taiyaki
Veteran
I'd love to hear your opinions on this video. Interesting? or not useful?
Thank you.
0
Comments
The method of enquiry into "Who am I?" is somewhat different from Buddhist meditation but the end point is similar ie. realisation of the empty nature of the ego ("I" don't know)
when we don't know then we can embody the infinite potentiality. out of seeing clearly we realize wisdom or rather wisdom manifests through concepts or compassionate action.
if we are holding onto concepts then we live in ignorance. ignorance is not, not knowing. ignorance is assumption, interpretation, dualistic thinking, and beliefs. it is because we cling to what we "think" we know, which prevents us from seeing what is. from not knowing we reach the neutral and from the neutral we can see clearly without thinking (our conditioned filters). thus a realization can occur when even we drop the not knowing, for the not knowing becomes an object. if we drop one thing, we must drop the dropping of the one thing as well.
as seung sahn always says go straight.
I think the only issue I have with the approach is the tendency to reify the experience of ego transcendence as a supreme source of all beings, as if it had a will of it's own separate from the phenomenal world.
He's really just talking about the neti-neti process as exposed in the Upanishads.
But, Advaitin's have the tendency to make the formless experience beyond all forms an ultimate Self of all.
It's true that everything has the nature of emptiness and inter-dependency, but so does the experience of seeing this directly, so this too is not a Self. Though, it can be called a self in the sense that this insight is the source of a Buddhas expressions, and this insight is permanent as well as flexible. Though Ramana had the experience of heart/mind essence, he in my opinion reifies it too much. Though, one never knows how a person really internalizes a concept? Especially someone that high on the totem pole
It's not quite Buddhahood. It's what Nagarjuna said is the summit of Samsara, but not the path to Buddhahood. Nagarjuna also said that if there is something not empty, that too should be emptied. Talking about the experience of freedom from phenomena but attachment to this experience as proof of an ultimate Self existence behind all things. That too should be emptied.
accurate. I do see a lot of Advaitins asserting that consciousness is Self, but only as a method towards having a pure consciousness experience. Consciousness just is, as no one can "own" it or "claim" it to be you as it is prior to the mental objects.
I think from here one can if they are honest and open go into dependent origination.
i suppose my question is: is dependent origination an understanding of the non dual experience or is it a realization that occurs after the non dual awakening.
is it only conditioning myself to see in such a way or should i naturally see such truth as i interpret the non dual.
i suppose both can help lol.
the subject exists in relation to the object. the consciousness only exist in relation to body and mind. take one out and you don't have the process. everything is interdependent.
emptiness = interdependent.
it is not that things don't exist, they do but as constantly changing, existing phenomena.
something like that
Because buddhist's realise the empty nature of mind, our experience is different in that there is no mind, and "we" are essentially the sum total of experience in the present moment.
The speaker is trying to hard to convince others they should pursue 'freedom'. This is supermarket/department store religion, selling "glittering" things. The path arises from perceiving suffering & aspiring to be free from it (rather than chasing glittering things in the department store). The mind must have something that desparately drives it to drop the ego. Plus, there is no such thing as "Self" realisation, with a capital "S". Our obsessions with these kinds of teachings shows how distant we are from Buddha-Dhamma :-/