Sravan is sufficient
In Sravan, the student listens to the teacher about the teaching, namely, TTA. On understanding the full import of TTA, the student has Self-knowledge, i.e., I am Brahman and there is liberation. Self-knowledge and liberation are simultaneous. There is no time-gap. In chapter 18 titled ‘Tat Tvam Asi’ of Upedesha Sahasri (Up Sah), ShankarAchArya introduces a Purva Paksha (PP) in 18.09 who holds that mere Sravan is not sufficient for liberation. It should be followed by repetition of ‘I am Brahman’. PP argues as below.
Tag Archives: self
Dialog with Jeff Foster (conc.)
*** Read Part 2 *** *** Go to Part 1 ***
13. You then talk about:“the collapse into not-knowing, the profound mystery…”I don’t know (!) what this means – sounds a bit too mystical for me.
– Well, I suppose those words do sound a bit mystical! I’m talking about the huge relief, the liberation, the sense of freedom when the mind’s endless search for something MORE than the present moment dies down, and there is only what is, and nothing more. It’s the “profound mystery” because nothing can be known about it.
OK, I’m happy with ‘relief’ and ‘liberation’ but I would use ‘fascination’ instead of ‘mystery’ – after all, ‘I amThat’. ‘Not-knowing’ is quite misleading.
14. “If anything, I’m saying the exact opposite, that the Mystery could NEVER be contained in ANY belief (especially simplistic neo-advaita beliefs!) ”Words never ‘contain’ the ‘mystery’, but they can be used to point to it. “Everything is here right now” does not provide any pointers that might overcome the essential ignorance.
– Yes, words as pointers….of course.
Continue readingDialog with Jeff Foster (part 2)
*** Go to Part 1 ***
The Discussion
1. You say: “But the message asks – what reality does this person have in the first place? This isn’t about DENYING that person, or REJECTING that person.”
So are you saying that the person exists or not?
– I see this as a false dichotomy. The mind believes that something has to “exist or not”. But who would know whether a person existed or not? A person?
Without Consciousness, nothing exists. But it seems that this is the usual absolute versus empirical reality problem. Since we are using language and having a dialog, both of us are implicitly assuming the existence of separate persons. You cannot deny this without making nonsense of your position as a teacher and writer. So the answer to your question ‘what reality does the person have’ is that he has an empirical reality. This has to be accepted as a given at the level of the world appearance. The question as to whether this person has an absolute and separate existence is another question entirely.
Continue readingDialog with Jeff Foster (part 1)
Continuing to look for essays and reviews etc. that are no longer available online, I came across the following dialog that I had with Jeff Foster in June 2007, after I had read his book ‘Life Without a Centre: awakening from the dream of separation’. In fact, the dialog is still available at the advaita.org.uk site but, since that site does not seem to be much visited these days, I thought it would be a good idea to republish here, as a follow-up to the recently posted article on neo-Advaita. A link to an extract from the book is included below and you can purchase the book at Amazon.UK or Amazon.com. Jeff’s website is here.
This post will be in several parts. This first part contains our initial exchange; the remainder will contain the ensuing discussion. Readers should always remember that this was nearly 20 years ago and views may change. I understand that Jeff has said that he no longer holds some of the views that he did then.
In all parts, my words are in blue (Dennis Waite) and Jeff’s are in red (Jeff Foster).
The reason I am writing is that Julian Noyce (Non-Duality Press) periodically sends me review copies of new books and, some time ago he sent me yours, which I read with interest. I just sent the following message back to him and he suggested that I contact you directly.
Continue readingWaking Up (Conclusion)
Part 4 (conclusion) of the review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris
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 readingWaking Up (Part 3)
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 readingWaking Up (Part 2)
Part 2 of the review of Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris
Read Part 1
Science
Another problem which adds to the book’s confusion is the attempt to utilize science, supposedly to improve upon or correct the ancient (and therefore bound to be mistaken) views of the original philosophies (be these Advaita or Buddhism). Harris explains that “Throughout this book, I discuss certain classical spiritual phenomena, concepts, and practices in the context of our modern understanding of the human mind.” Why would one want to do this? It is missing the point completely. The truth cannot be found in the mind; rather the mind is a tool with which we may discover the truth.
I explain in my article ‘Science and Consciousness’ that science can never explain the nature of ‘I’ because I am the subject, doing the investigating. The subject can never objectify himself. It is true that I can investigate both the body and the mind because I am neither of these. But this also means that understanding the human mind is not going to help in an ‘investigation’ of spirituality; it is simply not relevant to ‘who I really am’. Furthermore, if Harris is ‘talking about the nature of experience itself’, he is not talking about ‘I’, since I am the experiencer. Finding out about household electric light circuits and how they work tells me nothing at all about the one who operates the light switch.
Continue readingWaking Up
Here is another old book review, this one from just over 10 years ago. It is for the book Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion by Sam Harris.
It is an even longer review than the last, so will require at least 3 parts. Here is Part 1.
The Meaning of the Word ‘Spiritual’
Regardless of how well a book is written, and how interesting its content, if it is non-fiction it seems that its value should be judged upon how successfully it achieves its stated objective. As far as potential readers are concerned, the objective is traditionally determined from a book’s title. And, in this case, it appears that the intended purpose of this book is to teach us about ‘Spirituality’ whilst avoiding any ‘religious’ overtones.
This tells us that the author acknowledges that ‘spirituality’ is usually associated with religion. It suggests that, not only does he believe that it need not be so associated, but also he thinks that he can teach us about spirituality without needing to say anything at all about religion. Before starting to read the book, therefore, it would be useful to know exactly what is meant by the term ‘spirituality’.
Continue readingEight Upanishads (Topic-wise) Part 18
Chapter 6 JnAna and Moksha
6-5 Katha Upanishad
6-5-1 Katha 1.2.12 and 1.2.13 The Self (AtmA) is not perceptible to sense organs. Neither is It available for inference. It is hidden in the intellect like a cave enveloped in darkness of ignorance causing miseries. It is a figurative expression as the elf is infinite, all-pervading and cannot be hidden. It is the witnessing consciousness of both the happy and sad states of the mind. An aspirant first hears about this Truth from an enlightened teacher. If he has any doubts, he gets it resolved by the teacher. He is now intellectually assured about the teachings. Stii, he may not be able to align the life with the teaching because of habitual tendencies. To overcome it, he reflects upon what he has learnt by constant meditation on the teachings. It is Vedantic meditation, nidhidhyAsana. He meditates on the Self withdrawing his mind from external objects. Eventually his life conforms to the teachings. He achieves the fulfilment of the highest human goal. He learns that all sense pleasures are but fragmentary reflections of that one supreme joy found in the true Self alone. Yama says that Nachiketa will realize the Truth as he has shown the highest discrimination and sincerity of purpose. The mansion of Brahman is wide open for him.
“When the cloth goes, the thread also goes”
With reference to “Spiritual Aspiration and Practice,” I came across the following eye-opening and enlightening words from Swami Krishnanada of the Divine Life Society (Swami Sivananda Group):
“This world is very valuable because this body is also valuable. It is a part of this world. As threads are connected to a piece of cloth or fabric, this body, this personality is vitally connected to the whole world of nature. This entire world is a large spread-out fabric, of which you are a thread. So when you speak of renunciation in the light of a religious enthusiasm or on account of a spiritual call from inside, when you think of renouncing, as every religion speaks of renunciation, ask yourself what you are going to renounce.