Traditional versus Neo-Advaita (Part 2)

Posted on by

*** 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

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

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

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 →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 26

Posted on by

Part 25

Part 27

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-7 Mundaka Upanishad

6-7-1 Mundaka 1.1.1 and 1.1.2 The Upanishad reminds the seekers about the divine origin of the Upanishads and their transmission through the lineage of teachers thereby ensuring purity. Brahmaji is the creator and protector of the world. He has imparted the knowledge of Brahman to his eldest son Atharv who in turn has passed it on to Angir. Satyavaha (of the line of Bhardvaja) and Angiras are the subsequent receivers of knowledge and so on from higher ones to lower ones.

Continue reading →

Liberation is Disembodiment

Posted on by

Shankara, at over a three dozen places in his bhAShya-s (commentaries) on the three canonical texts (10 Upanishads, brahma sUtra-s and Bhagavad-Gita — collectively known as prasthAna trayI), says that “Liberation” (mokSha) is equivalent to “Disembodiment” (asharIrata). In fact, the opposite thought that “I am embodied” is for him nothing but “ignorance” (ajnAna) from which the whole enchilada of the downstream effects of bondage, appearance of the illusory world, misery and sorrow etc. arise. I present below a few quotes from his writings to illustrate the point. Continue reading →

Waking Up (Conclusion)

Posted on by

Part 4 (conclusion) of the review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris

Read Part 3 / Go to Part 1

Drugs

Many pages are devoted to a discussion of Near Death Experiences, although the reason for this is unclear – it is quite disproportionate, given the supposed topic of the book. He rightly condemns them as having nothing to do with spirituality, since they are merely the result of a cocktail of naturally produced chemicals in the brain. But then, inexplicably, he lauds hallucinogens as a mechanism for artificially inducing spiritual experiences, when all that they do is introduce a cocktail of man-made chemicals into the brain! You know full well (afterwards) that any experience you might have had was chemically created and therefore unreal. How can it possibly teach you anything useful? This is the height of irresponsibility and should have been rejected by the publisher.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 25

Posted on by

Part 24

Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha

6-6 Kena Upanishad

6-6-1 Kena 1.1 The student is an informed student. He experiences the phenomenal world by his senses and knows that they are made of matter and are inert. They have five features: material (inert), objects of experience, changing, with attributes, and temporary (available in the waking state). There should be an outside source imparting sentiency to the sense organs. The student is curious to know the source and asks a pointed question to that effect. He wants to know the divine source which impels eyes to see, ears to hear, speech to happen, mind to go to objects and vital forces to function. The teacher replies.

Continue reading →

Eight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 24

Posted on by

Part 23

Chapter 6 JnAna and MokshA

6-5   Katha Upanishad

6-5-33 Katha 2.3.7 to 2.3.11                                                                                              A refined mind is needed for Self-knowledge. Refining is gradual. The mountaineers gradually go from base to base as they climb higher so that they get used to the rarified atmosphere. From the grossest state, the mind cannot comprehend the subtle AtmA. Therefore, the withdrawal takes place one step at a time. It is Arundati Darsana method. The principle is that the controller is subtler and more powerful than the controlled. The steps in sequence are: – Withdraw from the world and identify with the body. Then withdraw from the body and identify with the sense organs. Withdraw from the sense organs and identify with the mind; the latter is subtler and more powerful and therefore controls the former. The intellect is subtler than the mind. The mind represents the doubting faculty. The intellect rationally analyses and removes the doubt. Therefore, the intellect is stronger than the mind. Now expand the mind by identifying with Hiranyagarbha, the total intellect by understanding that the individual does not exist separate from the total. Beyond Hiranyagarbha is the cosmic causal body which is unmanifest.

Continue reading →

Waking Up (Part 3)

Posted on by

Part 3 of the review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris

Read Part 2

Other Religions and Non-duality

It is not at all obvious why ‘religion’ should be so disparaged. He recognizes “the needless confusion and harm that inevitably arise from the doctrines of faith-based religions”. The literal meaning of ‘religion’ is ‘joining back’, from the Latin ‘re ligare’. Its essential aim (and, I suggest, one rather more worthy) has nothing to do with psychology or personal happiness but with the nature of reality itself. It is difficult to understand how someone could place more value on a drug-induced experience than upon use of reason applied to scriptural revelation.

Continue reading →