The critique to be found with the link below
gave me something worthwhile.
It also expressed more coherently than I have
some of the hesitations felt.
Anyway ... check it for yourself at:-
http://luthar.com/sri-ramanas-teaching- ... an-jacobs/
Worth a read!
-
dilaram
Re: Worth a read!
Spiritual Humanism versus Neo-Advaita - Möller de la Rouvière, Tony Parsons and Alan Stoltz.
(http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/tr ... moller.htm)
(http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/tr ... moller.htm)
-
dilaram
That's very beautiful Aquariusthe heart
however it seems that us fellas
do not have as clear an access to
that organ as you ladies do.
_______________
Hence the importance of some critique.
There are some very strong claims made
here ... and for those like me who are not
yet 'baptised' so to speak, it can be over-
whelming. Critique keeps things more honest
and true. Sometimes it does indeed seem
that here the blind are leading the blind.
-
dilaram
makara wrote:
Hence the importance of some critique.
There are some very strong claims made
here ... and for those like me who are not
yet 'baptised' so to speak, it can be over-
whelming. Critique keeps things more honest
and true. Sometimes it does indeed seem
that here the blind are leading the blind.
Nonduality has nothing to do with right or wrong, with critique...
but right and wrong, and critique may arise within 'It'...
.
Re: Worth a read!
Hello, been looking in now and again and enjoying the thoughts and perspectives shared here, this article prompted me to respond, maybe because it relates to Ramana Maharshi and his ideas on self inquiry which I particularly like. But also it relates to something I've puzzled over regarding self realization or enlightenment and what it means. From what i can understand, the article is arguing that in the East enlightenment equates to experiencing a kind of full on, ever present mystical experience of bliss, and union, of actually perceiving the Self in all things all of the time, of knowing that all is One not just as an understanding but as an on going ever present experience? (I've had this kind of experience a few times but only briefly, I think it's also called 'kensho'). Whereas in the West with so called - neoadvaita, the article is saying enlightenment equates to realising and understanding or exposing the 'false sense of me' realising that I am not what I previously thought and understanding that all is interconnected, that there is no I seperate from the All, but not actually experiencing this expanded sense of Self in a particularly profound way, in fact things carry on pretty much as before after the so called enlightenment has happened, other than maybe the seeking dropping off, but in fact this is maybe just like a first step? So it's like the article is saying that neo advaita and eastern advaita have different standards as to what enlightenment is? Maybe this doesn't really matter, if someone feels inclined to really earnestly pursue self enquiry and somehow open their channels and purify their mental habits etc etc and experience more blissful states thats great, if they don't feel so inclined thats fine too. I suppose i'm curious about whether there are different definitions or grades or depths of enlightenment is bliss and profound mystical union a perpetual reality for some such as Ramana Maharshi?makara wrote:The critique to be found with the link below
gave me something worthwhile.
It also expressed more coherently than I have
some of the hesitations felt.
Anyway ... check it for yourself at:-
http://luthar.com/sri-ramanas-teaching- ... an-jacobs/
I sometimes wish I was a little bit more enthusiastic about practicing self enquiry..
Re: Worth a read!
angela wrote:Hello, been looking in now and again and enjoying the thoughts and perspectives shared here, this article prompted me to respond, maybe because it relates to Ramana Maharshi and his ideas on self inquiry which I particularly like. But also it relates to something I've puzzled over regarding self realization or enlightenment and what it means. From what i can understand, the article is arguing that in the East enlightenment equates to experiencing a kind of full on, ever present mystical experience of bliss, and union, of actually perceiving the Self in all things all of the time, of knowing that all is One not just as an understanding but as an on going ever present experience? (I've had this kind of experience a few times but only briefly, I think it's also called 'kensho'). Whereas in the West with so called - neoadvaita, the article is saying enlightenment equates to realising and understanding or exposing the 'false sense of me' realising that I am not what I previously thought and understanding that all is interconnected, that there is no I seperate from the All, but not actually experiencing this expanded sense of Self in a particularly profound way, in fact things carry on pretty much as before after the so called enlightenment has happened, other than maybe the seeking dropping off, but in fact this is maybe just like a first step? So it's like the article is saying that neo advaita and eastern advaita have different standards as to what enlightenment is? Maybe this doesn't really matter, if someone feels inclined to really earnestly pursue self enquiry and somehow open their channels and purify their mental habits etc etc and experience more blissful states thats great, if they don't feel so inclined thats fine too. I suppose i'm curious about whether there are different definitions or grades or depths of enlightenment is bliss and profound mystical union a perpetual reality for some such as Ramana Maharshi?makara wrote:The critique to be found with the link below
gave me something worthwhile.
It also expressed more coherently than I have
some of the hesitations felt.
Anyway ... check it for yourself at:-
http://luthar.com/sri-ramanas-teaching- ... an-jacobs/
I sometimes wish I was a little bit more enthusiastic about practicing self enquiry..
Self inquiry is a misunderstanding.
The sense of separation has (is) the belief that it can access its own sphere of influence........and that is an erroneous assumption.
It cannot see nothing on the inside......simply because there is nothing there.
One can study the origin and modality of the self and in so doing loosen its underpinnings.
The idea that enlightenment is constant bliss is another misinterpretation.
When the ego loses its opacity the sense of being the doer dissipates and a most familiar lightness of being occurs.
Life is depersonalized and sentient-awareness flows easily through its natural course.
The sense of self remains but is seen for what it is and no longer sits in the center of the drama.
There are no methods that it can use to reach the understanding of its own essential emptiness.
There is nothing it can do to transcend the world that exists only in its own conceptual dream of separation.
Along with the apperception of the vacuity of self comes the understanding that nothing can be known about the self and its imaginary world.
Find out how real the self is and its dream will implode.
-
dilaram
angela wrote: I suppose i'm curious about whether there are different definitions or grades or depths of enlightenment is bliss and profound mystical union a perpetual reality for some such as Ramana Maharshi?
When it is seen BY NO ONE
that there is NO ONE
and NOTHING to find
then all materialism,
included 'spiritual materialism'
also called 'enlightenment'
fall away
and what remains is THIS,
the wonder of BEING.
Hi Homer ... good to see yr
Hello Angela, glad you came back/in ...
may you remain as another aspect of the
one contributer playing Q & A with Itself.
- what you say is a good contribution.
I've also has those special experiences ...
but what was notable was that they didn't last.
When say one reads Papaji then it's reasonable
to expect Bliss in capital letters.
But as T points out ... that's not what happens
to us westerners anyway. maybe it's something
in the water in India.
would be good
Hello Angela, glad you came back/in ...
may you remain as another aspect of the
one contributer playing Q & A with Itself.
- what you say is a good contribution.
I've also has those special experiences ...
but what was notable was that they didn't last.
When say one reads Papaji then it's reasonable
to expect Bliss in capital letters.
But as T points out ... that's not what happens
to us westerners anyway. maybe it's something
in the water in India.
If I cna'thave the Bliss Toombaru then some of thata most familiar lightness of being occurs
would be good