Traditional versus Neo-Advaita (Conclusion)

Posted on by
Reply

*** Read Part 3 *** *** Go to Part 1 ***

The term ‘neo-Vedanta’ is used these days to describe the teaching of Ramakrishna and Vivekananda followers. It is characterized by ideas such as the need to ‘experience’ Brahman through samādhi, since Self-knowledge is only an ‘intellectual’ understanding. Up until the late 20th C, it was also sometimes called neo-Advaita. It diverges from the Advaita as systematized by Śaṅkara because Vivekananda was adversely influenced by Yoga philosophy, incorporating some of their teaching and denigrating the scriptural authority of the Vedas. I am not addressing this further in this article. Read the excellent book by Anantanand Rambachan – ‘The Limits of Scripture: Vivekananda’s Reinterpretation of the Vedas’ – if interested. (Amazon UK; Amazon US)

My own book ‘Confusions in Advaita Vedanta – Knowledge, Experience and Enlightenment’ also has an account of the differences, and sources of confusion. (Exotic India; Amazon US). (N.B. there only seems to be a hardback available at Amazon UK at present, at a ridiculous price. Exotic India is much cheaper. It is in US but has free postage to UK. Alternatively, probably cheapest of all from the publisher, Indica Books, in India.)

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Part-wise) Part 30

Posted on by
Reply

Part 29

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha                                                                                          6-8 Prasna Upanishad
6-8-2 Prasna 4.7 to 4.9
5th question is where do they get merged? The entire cosmos is resting on AtmA. It is the support. It provides 3 fundamental things for the entire AnatmA prapancha: Sat, Chit, and Ananda. IS-ness of the universe doesn’t belong to the universe. I, the experiencing consciousness, lend existence to this world like as in a dream, I, the observer, lend existence to the dream world. The entire world is supported by I, the AtmA, the witnessing consciousness which is in and through the three states of experience. The Upanishad gives the example of birds who go to a tree for lodging. The birds are supported by the tree.

Continue reading →

Quantum Mechanics

Posted on by
3

Q (Quora): How does the theory of quantum mechanics affect our picture of consciousness?

A (Martin): The two notions (QM and consciousness) are incommensurable in all respects, which should be obvious:
a) QM is a theory referable to reality or an aspect of reality (the microcosm); consciousness, on the other hand, is a known reality, not a theory – not only a fact but that which is behind, the substratum of, all facts and movements of the mind.
b) The reality that is consciousness does not need to be proven for it is immediate, direct, unstultifiable or unsublatable. Everything else – objects or phenomena, thought-constructions, etc. – are stultifiable.

That means that there is not even an approximation between the theory of QM and reality per se. It would be a category mistake to relate one to the other unless using such exercise as analogy or suggestion. In this sense, there are two or three things that can be said:
1) Reality/consciousness is limitless, like the referent (or an aspect thereof) of QM, but the former is un-measurable, unlike QM which is amenable to measurement/quantification and statistical verification
2) Reality is non-local (Bell’s theorem), like QM.
3) Consciousness/reality does not depend on anything, while QM is theory-dependent.

Traditional versus Neo-Advaita (Part 3)

Posted on by
Reply

*** Read Part 2 *** *** Go to Part 1 ***

Advaita refers to the unchanging reality by the Sanskrit term paramārtha and to the constantly changing appearance by vyavahāra. Within this phenomenal realm, separate individuals and objects are recognized and a creator-god, Īśvara, uses the power of māyā to obscure the truth and project the apparent world. It thus affirms that our experience does not tally with its non-dual claims. It acknowledges an appearance of duality, which is at odds with the reality. It also states that we can never directly know the reality. Accordingly, its effective teaching strategy is to successively negate the appearance. That which ‘remains’ and cannot be negated must be the reality. Once the reality is thus effectively (but not literally) known, then it is also realized that the appearance, too, is that same reality.

This process inevitably takes time, from the vantage point of the seeker who is still mired at the level of appearance. The ignorance that prevents the immediate apprehension of reality is effectively in the mind and it is at the level of the mind that this ignorance must be removed. Knowledge must be introduced in such a way that the mind can accept it, using reason and experience. Just as a student is unable to appreciate the subtleties of quantum physics without having the preliminary grounding in mathematics and science, so the seeker is unable to assimilate the ‘bottom-line’ truth of Advaita since it is so contrary to his everyday experience.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 29

Posted on by
Reply

Part 28

Part 30

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
 6-7 Mundaka Upanishad

6-7-19 Mundaka 3.2.7 and 3.2.8
The Upanishad describes the process of videha-mukti, that is, when a jivanmukta dies. A human being is a combination of material part – called anAtma and sentient part called AtmA. AnAtmA is made of gross, subtle and causal bodies or alternatively five sheaths of food, vital forces, mind, intellect, and bliss. The enclosed consciousness is AtmA component. When a jivanmukta dies, anAtmA part merges into total anAtmA. Gross body merges into cosmic gross body called virAt. Subtle body into total subtle body called, Hiranyagarbha. Since there is no karmic balance, there is no causal body. In Prasna Upanishad, anAtmA part of an individual is divided into 16 parts. The Upanishad says that of them, each of 15 parts merges into corresponding totality. The Upanishad is silent about the 16th part. According to Swami ParmArthananda, the 16th part is the name of a jnAni that remains in the world for the disciples to worship. The consciousness part merges into total consciousness without any travel like pot space merging in total space when the pot breaks. An ignorant person takes rebirth in a body according to his karmAs.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 28

Posted on by
Reply

Part 27

Part 29

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-7 Mundaka Upanishad

6-7-11 Mundaka 3.1.3 to 3.1.6
When a jiva is disillusioned by the world of duality and is restless, he seeks permanent solution. He turns to spirituality. It is a life-turning moment. He discriminates between permanent and temporary and finally recognizes his true nature, namely, consciousness. As consciousness, he is the source of creation. All worldly experiences are like ripples in the vast mirror of consciousness which he is. He has Self-realization. He transcends all actions. Action does not taint him though he is ever-engaged in action. He knows that his true nature is consciousness which enlivens the vital forces running through body. He is not interested in boasting of his luminosity because being established in Self, he delights in it. He sees same Self everywhere. The enlightened one does not ‘see’ anything else because it is mithyA. PrAna gives life to the body. Self gives life to prAna. Hence It is vital force of vital forces.
The Self is realized by practice of spiritual disciplines, namely, truth, concentration, knowledge, continence and the like. Truth is the path of gods and leads to victory.

Continue reading →

Traditional versus Neo-Advaita (Part 2)

Posted on by
Reply

*** Read Part 1 ***

There are also two significant dangers regarding the Neo-Advaita ‘movement’. Firstly, there is the clear possibility of charlatans who, having read a little or heard the fundamental elements of ‘descriptions’ of reality, can devise a few ‘routines’ of their own and then advertise themselves on the circuit. Providing that they are good speakers/actors, it is certainly possible to make a living from deceiving ‘seekers’ in such a way, without ever giving away their true lack of knowledge or the fact that they are no nearer any ‘realization’ than their disciples.

Secondly, seekers themselves may be deluded into a belief that some specious realization has been obtained when, in fact, all that has happened is that they have come to terms with some psychological problem that had been making life difficult. The ending of such suffering could well be seen as a ‘liberation’. Of course, such a thing would not be at all bad – it simply would have nothing to do with enlightenment. Indeed, such people might well go on to become teachers in their own right, not charlatans in the true sense of the word, since they genuinely believe that ‘realization’ has taken place.

Continue reading →

Brain and Mind

Posted on by
8

Q (Quora): How does the brain understand philosophy?

A (Martin): The brain… understanding philosophy? My reply to this is similar to the one I gave recently to another question, which was based on Socrates’ answer to an observation that someone was making. The man saw a pool of water being stirred by a stick held by a man and said that the stick was stirring the water. To which Socrates replied: ‘Is it the stick, or the man moving the stick?’ (Which one is the real agent – the material, or the instrumental cause, in Aristotelian terms?).

Equally, is it the brain, or the mind that which ‘moves’ the brain which moves the stick, which stirs the water?

Is it the brain, or the mind that which (using the brain as an instrument) understands philosophy?

Rather, it is consciousness (as a substrate) using the mind using the brain… Consciousness itself does not do anything

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 27

Posted on by
Reply

Part 26

Part 28

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-7 Mundaka Upanishad

6-7-4 Mundaka 2.2.1 and 2.2.2 The Upanishad explains how Brahman can be known though it is formless. It is subtler than the subtlest. It shines through all experiences. It is cognized in the hearts of all beings as revealing Itself through such functions as seeing, hearing, thinking, knowing. It is therefore very near for wise. It is the support of all living and non-living things, all the worlds and the dwellers of the worlds like all the spokes fixed on the navel of the chariot wheel. It pervades all that is subtle and gross, yet not polluted by and is beyond them. It is the highest goal and the most desirable. By knowing It one is contented as if all desires are fulfilled.

Continue reading →

Traditional versus Neo-Advaita

Posted on by
Reply

This will be a multi-part post, triggered in part by Ramesam’s recent post ‘Liberation is Disembodiment’, following which I promised a separate post. First of all, I will repost an article on the subject from advaita.org.uk, with which readers may not be familiar. Secondly, I will post an article on the subject that I apparently wrote in 2006 but do not seem ever to have published. Finally, I will add a new section and make a radical suggestion (as promised in my comment).

The word ‘neo’ means ‘new’ so that ‘Neo-Advaita’ is an impossibility. Advaita means ‘not two’, referring to the non-dual reality that always was, is and will be – unchanging because change would necessarily be from one thing into another, which would be contradictory. There cannot, therefore, be an ‘old’ and a ‘new’ Advaita, only the one truth.

Continue reading →