Tag Archives: Suffering

Q.360 – Suffering

Posted on by

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAQ: I have tried several spiritual paths and I was always stopped in my search by this question: How do we explain suffering?. Why does all pervading, partless, actionless Consciousness create, allow, dream of Auschwitz? Surely Consciousness could do better than this?

Answers are provided by: Ted, Martin, and Sitara. For answers by Dennis, see Q.24 and Q.33 and Q.62 and Q.120 and Q.294.

A (Ted): Your question is certainly understandable. It is the same question just about everybody has at an early stage in their spiritual understanding. It is based on a fundamental erroneous assumption we make about the nature of reality due to the conditioning we receive either directly from religion or indirectly from the religious beliefs that undergird the generally accepted perception of reality that informs the society.

 Our mistaken assumption is that awareness is an anthropomorphic (i.e. human-like) entity who has some overarching personal agenda and is orchestrating—or at least overseeing—the activities and events transpiring in the world with a vested interest in their nature and results. But this is not the nature of awareness. Continue reading →

Action – Without Ego, Oh, “I” am the ‘Pain’ on my Neck!

Posted on by

Uff, It’s a terrible pounding head-ache. Felt like a herd of hundred elephants at once trampling on my head. Cups of freshly brewed coffee, and green, white, oval, or round caplets and tablets proved themselves totally inefficacious.

It’s been bright and sunny outside; my write up went off smooth and fast; I got even that rare pat from Dennis. Enjoyed a delightful gastronomic luncheon.  Overall, it had been a very pleasant day. I couldn’t find a reason for the exploding headache.  I was helpless by late evening and had to visit my Doctor. He let me in, though far out off his Consultation hours.

The Doctor lifted his head out of the piles of Advaita books around him, the light from the table lamp throwing an eerie arc of illumination on his face. The soft light from the computer screen added a strange greenish glow-effect to his broad smiling face welcoming me into his otherwise dimly lit drawing room. I felt that I was seeing the grin of a live Cheshire Cat rather than a welcome from my Doctor friend.

The Doc heard my story of agony and suitably tutt-tutted.

And suddenly his Advaitic genius sprang out. He declared, Oracle-like,  that there should be a ‘head’ to have a headache. And he convincingly argued that I had no head. Yes, Did I ever see it? No, never. Even if my hands touched it, could the hands know what they touched? No, never.  It was I who imagined what it was that was touched by the hands and gave a name to the resulting sensation as ‘head.’  Meekly succumbing to his invincible logic, I lifted my head a little when I saw myself in the window glass on the opposite side. I shouted in joy to prove to him that I had, after all, a head that was begging for a cure. But no, he didn’t relent.

“Mirrors can lie,” he said, “Don’t believe the reflection. A glass can show things even if the things are not there.” To prove his point, he quickly linked on his computer to the 1 min Video clip of his fellow Psychologist here. Yes, the mirror showed a banana, even when there was none!

In utter bewilderment, I asked submissively, “Who is this that thinks I am and what is this pain?”  The Doctor declared triumphantly, “It’s only ‘Pain’ that is there. No separate ‘you’ anywhere.”

“Do you mean there is nothing of my personality, my prestige, my ego, my….. …..”

“You see, you are appearing as the ‘Pain’ at this moment.”

“So, you mean to say that I am present in the now as the ‘Pain’ on my neck?!”

What is Death – Mythology ll (Tristan and Isolde) – part 5

Posted on by

 

tristan2013

 

The power of the feminine principle (Shakti, Prakrit-Nature): Creation, Life, Nurturing – and its cycles. Also representing desire, as well as beauty. Woman, however, (embodiment of the Goddess) can also be redemptress (e.g. Mary in Christianity).

In Wagner’s opera ‘Tristan und Isolde’, desire is linked with Life, and Love with death –  sacrificial death (Liebestod), which admits of multiple implications and interpretations. The Romantic hero – and Wagner was one, at least ideally – could only be redeemed by and through woman; in that opera love could not be fulfilled in earthly terms (for it was unlawful). The Romantic ideal was a combination of love, sacrifice, transcendence, union – union through the transcending of the human personality, of individuality itself. Is this not a universal theme, as well as being very German?. In Wagner’s own words, “What Destiny separated in life emerges as life transfigured by death”.  Continue reading →

What is the point of enlightenment? – Q.339

Posted on by

Q: I have seen from articles and questions on your website that Brahman cannot ‘know’ or ‘do’ anything; that it (as if) acts and knows only through the body-mind of the jIva. What I would like to know is: why would anyone want to become enlightened if this means the end of rebirth, and ‘becoming’ one with Brahman? OK, this may mean the end of suffering but does it not also mean the end of enjoyment? If ‘I’ (even though this is only a reflection in the mind) cease to exist (when the body-mind finally ceases to exist) on the death of the enlightened person, then there is no more experiencing of any kind for me as that person, and none for the Brahman that I (as it were) become.

 You will perhaps say that, as Brahman, I will still experience through all the other body-minds but this does not sound like enlightenment to me! And don’t I do that already anyway since there is only Brahman? In which case what is the meaning (and point) of enlightenment? Continue reading →

Not the Doer – Q.338

Posted on by

Q: It seems like a contradiction to me to say that we are the observer and not the doer and, at the same time, suggest that we can do something such as paying attention. I encounter this “apparent contradiction” often when I read about Advaita. If there is no doer, why are there suggestions as to how to remove ignorance, for example? Who would remove the ignorance if there is no doer?

 – Is it that in the dualistic world it appears as if there is a doer and therefore we act “as if”, even though we might know that there is no doer?

– If we realize that there is no doer but we act “as if”, is it like playing our part in a “game”?

– If the ignorance is removed, “who” apperceives the truth? Continue reading →

The Hole in The Whole

Posted on by

There is no Whole without a ‘h-o-l-e’ in it.
There is no hole without the whole around it.

The whole never contracted to become the hole.
The hole cannot expand to become the whole.

Pain is our struggle to keep up the identity
And the separateness of a “me”
That struggle for the survival by a “me”
Has been going on for millennia.
That story is the Theory of Evolution.

Suffering is our effort to become
Back again One Whole
Seeking for integration
Propels us for Self-inquiry.
That story is the Theory of Liberation.

The whole and the hole together simply “are.”
That is Oneness. So just Be.

That “Beingness” itself is Meditation.

Why do I Feel Unhappy? Why do I Feel Depressed?

Posted on by

Questioner: “I am Brahman” is the simple and straightforward message of Advaita. Brahman is synonymous with Beingness, Consciousness and Happiness. If I = Happiness, I should be always happy, should never be depressed. But I am overcome by the feelings of unhappiness, I get depressed. How come?

***

Well, the answer is “You” (I) can never not be Happy.

Out of Beingness – Consciousness – Happiness, the first two are self-evident. We do not require an external proof to tell me that I exist or that I am conscious. Can you ever say “I am not here” or “I am not conscious”? You have to be there and be present to say, “I am not here.” Similarly, I have to be conscious to say, “I am not conscious.”

In the same way, “I” can never ever be other than Happiness.

What is then the “feel” of unhappiness or depression that arises?

The “feel” cannot be “I” nor can it belong to “I”. That “feel” must obviously be something other than “I”. That is to say that such a feeling cannot be real because Brahman is the only “thing” that is Real. If the feeling is not real, it has to be an imaginary thing for, “I” would never say: “I am unhappy.”

But a Ramesam or a Tom or Dick do “feel” unhappy and say: “I am unhappy; I feel depressed. I am suffering.”

Continue reading →

A Question On Causality, Purpose And Suffering In Non-Duality

Posted on by

[As students of Non-duality, we often come aross situations that apparently seem to be at variance with the  Non-dual teachings. Here is such a Question raised by a friend of mine and felt that it would be interesting to share our exchange with a wider audience for possibe further discussion — ramesam.]

Questioner:  How could there be no cause and effect? How can things happen randomly with no purpose?  I just can’t accept that meeting you was random, or that I found nonduality, and fell in love with it. It seems to appear everywhere. Jesus said ‘Seek and ye shall find.’ There is no randomness in that. We set goals, work hard, then accomplish them. Some people live for fun, engage in risky behavior, then get into trouble; how could it be completely random that some people are in the wrong place at the wrong time, then others are in the right place at the right time. Then there are the people who seem to do everything “right”, then some horrible fate befalls them. Have you ever read anything by Malcolm Gladwell? He wrote The Tipping Point, Outliers, and some other books. His research into why some people are successful and others are not is fascinating.

Continue reading →