Published on www.acadun.com
30th October 2013
Discussion Linkedin: “Essence of Non-Duality” group
Tittle: article Dr. Shankar “What does oneness mean?”
L1: Universal wisdom will find its way to humanity. There were times 'we' went the round-about way. Past and future will slowly die....
AAU: Universal wisdom found its way even in ancient times. Universal knowledge still makes man go the round-about way. Nothing dies; everything gets transformed from one form to another, as everything is energy, meaning light, in simple words. Past and future will remain real to Universal knowledge. Universal wisdom will reveal past, future and knowledge as illusory, as it finds its way.
L1: The 'Platonic' habit of talking with metaphors is often triggering my mind. Can we experience universal wisdom or do we have to belief?
AAU: The mind is triggered because platonic means words that do not lead to practical actions. Actions require time to accomplish. The mind will not be triggered and metaphors will not be understood as platonic, when time is understood to be illusory and not an actuality in life. Belief happens when reason and logic function 50% of its potential. When reason and logic function 100%, belief will be understood as illusory. Wisdom is experienced as words, and so is knowledge. Words of wisdom reveal the illusory, whereas words of knowledge create beliefs as real and metaphors as platonic.
L1: Ok, let’s bridge the 'gap' to the universal Light
AAU: The bridge is absolute understanding, which reveals universal light or wisdom. Relative understanding requires bridges to build to fill the gaps, to see universal light. Universal light cannot be seen.
L1: There is absolute understanding (also called 'apologetics') and relative understanding. I can't choose between both of them, I only prefer the first..
AAU: The website Absolute understanding neither points out or regretfully acknowledges or excuses anyone’s failure or offence, neither is it a reasoned argument or justification of either a theory or a religious doctrine, so apologetics is not a synonym for absolute understanding. Apologetics is a synonym for relative understanding, which is the one you prefer and not absolute understanding.
L1: In the classical times of 'hellenistic' Egypt and at the start of Christianity this was called 'apologetics'. But In my opinion AAU is not familiar with ('his') Atman.....
AAU: AAU is familiar that in the classical times of ‘hellenistic’ Egypt and at the start of Christianity absolute understanding existed within few, but not explained to all. Everyone’s opinion is right to him, and this is his belief. Belief is however not the truth.
L1: I also have the strongest doubts by everything I see....If I stop this doubt (illusions), step out of the cave, create the state of mind in which Light is the only experience that runs along with cosmic 'time', then I am in a 'universal' state of consciousness. Jung, Leibnitz, Goethe, 'Jesus', Buddha were all able to remove their ' shadow'.....
AAU: Illusory doubts invite pondering that result in absolute understanding (also illusory) that the real is illusory. The ego cannot stop doubt or create any state of mind. If it could then it could experience light too as the only experience. Light is not an experience that runs along with cosmic time. Light is never an experience. Cosmic time is an auditory illusion of universal light. The enlightened realised the ego to be a shadow, meaning not real. They did not have a need to remove it, as it was never present, meaning illusory.
L1: Thanks for this enlightening conversation about oneness. After sending you my warm regards, I'll disappear with my light
AAU: You are welcome. Happy to share with anyone who understands. Please understand that light is neither mine nor yours.
L1: I borrowed it from 'heaven'.
AAU: When thoughts are understood absolutely to be illusory, the mind is heaven. When thoughts are relatively understood to be real, the mind is hell. Heaven and hell are here and now, which is oneness or universal light.
L2: What oneness IS? Meaning not required. When the self has Dissolved, Oneness IS.
AAU: What is the meaning of ‘self has dissolved?’
L2: The observation of "What Is" "The Present." is not dependent on self. As self arises with desire by referencing "What Is" to the self, and it's desires. In this, the self loses the observation in the Present and the observation is in reflection of desire, as in the momentary Past. This is a trait of Mankind. Humans (Who must act Humanely to remain Human) avoids the self by Compassion, that is the wordless language perceived without judgement toward to the needs of others. Acting Humanely avoids and/or dissolves the self, and the All IS and open to Being Present Oneness. Not to mean that the Oneness is not beyond the Present, it is just that most of Mankind is not Present. Sorry for the lack of clarity, many of the points of reference in the previous posting are still unread. Still catching up.
AAU: Acting humanely suggests behaviour. Acting humanely is authentic if it lasts the entire life for every moment, and not just for certain period of a day, days, weeks, months or years. If it does for a certain period it is just good behaviour, and not BEING. This kind of behaviour happens too for the self.
L3: Oneness is to be understood as the one without the second! This is known as advaitA.
AAU: Oneness is to be understood as everything without the second. As everything is a reflection of the ONE without the second. This is advaita.
L3: It is the manifestation of Brahma.Therefore we say that the creation is GOD and we see GOD in every thing.
AAU: If ‘IT’ is the manifestation of Brahma and the creation is God every cell of the human body too would be in the creation. If we see God in everything it would include every cell of the human body too. Therefore everything including every cell of the human body would be a reflection of light which is GOD or Brahma.
L2: I am familiar with this point of view. (FWIS) All Humans, a wholly Humane Being, will act in the same way. Just as all of animal man can be expected, to act in the same way. Mankind however Exist in a Tertium quid reality. by their will may act as an animal or will act as a Human.
AAU: What are the two known and definite things in reality if man exists in a tertium quid reality?
L2: Man exists in a Tertium quid reality, between Humane Beings and Animal man.
AAU: Thank you for explaining. What is the nature of THE reality IN Human beings and Animal man? By nature I do not imply qualities, but a request to know the nature of WHAT a Humane Being and Animal man IS?
L2: Theoretical physics and Metaphysically Speaking, " Life is not the whole of our existence. " That existence is a different topic and is best left for a separate posting subject.
AAU: What existence is made up of is not enquired. What Human Being and animal man is made up of is enquired. The posting subject is oneness and the posting is in existence and not out of it. You said quote ‘Mankind however exits in tertium quid reality by their will may act as an animal or will act as a Human.’ end quote, and this reality is in existence and not out of it. You wrote about the qualities of a wholly Human Being and animal man in this posting, which is in existence and not out of it. It is therefore appropriate and right posting to enquire the nature of wholly Human being and animal man in existence and not out of it. A different posting would be needed if the wholly man and animal man were out of this existence, and not in it. (BTW) (By the way) existence is neither about theoretical physics or metaphysics, it is just physics.
L2: At this time: theoretical physics and metaphysics, are debating the extent of existence.
Physicist "seem" to have a handle on just what is provable, as related to the Present.
Oneness goes well beyond the Present.
I regret that I must beat about the topic with metaphor,
but hopefully I can make the data clear by reference.
For convenience I shall use the word "All" in place of "Oneness".
To example the extended state of existence,
and to show that Substance and Form are not dependent on one another,
and to show Why it relates to Oneness.
Being out of Present Existence is not outside of Oneness. Oneness is inclusive.
What existence is, and What nonexistence is, may not have been enquired, but as for a discourse on Oneness it is required.
AAU: Thank you for your clarifications. Allow me to clarify further 1.The nature of form and substance of the example you cited i.e., glass ashtray is the same. It is atoms, sub-atomic particles, energy, all of which is basically light. 2. The nature of wholly man, animal man, mankind, animal kingdom, vegetation, matter and five elements is the same. It is atoms, sub-atomic particles, energy, all of which is basically light. 3. The nature of consciousness is light and is the same everywhere. Everything is an illusory form of consciousness, for their nature is atoms, sub-atomic particles, energy, all of which is basically light. 4. Theoretical physics and metaphysics are proof that the capacity of the mind to imagine information is unbelievable. It is an illusory function of intellect or light. Wherever you are on earth the form has both, its own reality and illusory reality. Non-existence (death) is existence too which man is yet to understand. Pure light is real oneness, and visible light, which reflects the world, man, and mind, including time, is illusory oneness.
L4: What is oneness? A question. Not a quest yet.
AAU: Oneness cannot be in a quest for itself. Oneness is the absence of the second.
L4: Oneness is always a quest for itself. Oneness is not absence of the second . Its beyond second. And Advaita does not mean oneness. Non duality does not mean oneness. ocean is not one There is no oneness. There is uniqueness These experiences need a quest. The moment you say oneness can not be a quest for itself then (1)its a theoritical statement (2) Does not means its a false statement. It can be a true statement for you . But its a lower truth. Till there is one there will be a quest. Because still it identifies itself as one. Oneness still has duality of One n Ess (ence). So even theoretically it will have a quest for the higher essence.
AAU: Oneness reflected as an illusory ego through consciousness, is in quest for oneness. Therefore, it is the ego that is in quest of oneness and not oneness that is in quest of itself. Similarly, the illusory ego thinks that oneness is beyond the second. Oneness does not think it is beyond the second and has no need to think that it is either. Advaita means not two. Non duality means not two. Ocean is not one because there is more than one ocean. There is no oneness in ocean as there are islands and marine life in them. That an ocean is oneness is poetic and not realistic. Every speck of what is experienced by the ego is unique and illusory, and NOT just an ocean is unique. Every experience is experienced by the ego, and the ego searches for many including the quest for oneness. (1) It is not a theoretical statement, as science has proved without a doubt that everything that exists in the world including the world is energy which is basically light. This means that everything that exits in the world including the world has to be an illusory reflection of light. This is just what the sages from your land have proclaimed, but not explained so far. A sage from your land, living in the west, has been EXPLAINING NOW why the world and everything in it is an illusion. (2) To anyone who has sound reasoning and logic will understand that the world and everything in it is true. The lower truth would be that the world and everything in it is real, while it is not which is the higher truth. The ego goes in search for everything including the one. It is only the ego that says it, meaning the one, identifies itself as one, and not the one itself. If oneness has duality it cannot be oneness or essence. The ego will always have a quest for the higher essence practically, and it is very evident in your land, including mine too. We in the west have recognised that now a sage from India is EXPLAINING the proclamations of the sages of ancient times, that the world is ‘Maya’ and a play of light and sound. We are preserving these explanations SINCE TWO DECADES and are ever ready to make it available to anyone. We have been patiently waiting for someone from your land to enquire, about the sage’s proclamations of ancient times. We are very proficient in all of the ancient texts, and are aware what is written in them. You have enquired now, and therefore we inform you about these precious EXPLANATIONS that we have preserved in text form. You should be craving for the texts we have, to spread it all over your country. You may ignore it or be interested in it; it is fine by us. You would be interested if you value the sage’s proclamations of ancient times. We recognise the value of the proclamations of ancient times, just as you do. We therefore find the EXPLANATIONS of the proclamations invaluable, that is coming through this sage, who is living with us in the west.
L4: Wow. There are so many words. Let us resolve one by one. Oneness reflected as an illusory ego through consciousness- Did you experience it? Were you oneness , illusory ego or consciouness the at that moment ? If you were oneness then you can not see or experience the illusory ego and consciousness. So its a futile explanation. If you were illusory - how can you comprehend reality. So in this case too its a futile explanation If you were consciouness - Then you are witness . And you should be witnessing both ONENESS and ILLUSION apart from you . In that case there should be no oneness as an ultimate reality . And when there is no oneness how can its illusory image be formed? So even this way its a futile explanation. For 20 years you are exploring oneness. But still you have east and west .Nothing wrong in it I am not of East or West . I m cosmic :).
AAU: You have not resolved whether the previous explanations to your text were understood or not? Since you do not mention that you either understand or do not understand, there is no point in entering into another set of text to resolve it.
AAU: Dear L4, firstly, many words are required to explain, to bring in clarity. Few words are enough to make statements and not offer explanation for it. If explanations are not offered they are blind statements and become beliefs and not the truth. You have presently not resolved whether the previous explanations to your text were understood? Since you do not mention that you either understand or do not understand, there is no point in entering into another set of text to resolve it. Knowledge has numerous texts and it would require entire life time to explain every set to clarity. Your present text will be explained since it has been written. Please understand that there is no point in resolving an another set, if this text too is not replied whether understood or not. Everyone is right where they are, as far as their understanding goes, and the enlightened have said this too. Now your present text: It has not been indicated in the previous text, that oneness reflected as an illusory ego has been experienced by me. That statement has been reported as a realisation of the sages or the enlightened. None has been claimed in the text sent. It is only the ego that claims. That the ego is a claimer is a realisation of the enlightened. You are right that oneness does not see, experience the ego or consciousness. Please indicate where I have claimed that I am oneness in the previous text. The sages have proclaimed that everyone and everything is illusory. The sages i.e., the enlightened have not said anywhere or anytime that reality can be comprehended. The ego claims to comprehend even reality. The witnesser (sakshi) is a reflection of consciousness. The witnesser is an evolved ego, which is a reflection of consciousness too. The witnesser therefore witnesses the real in the world to the ego as illusory, which is everything. The witnesser does not witness oneness. You are right, if the ego can witness oneness and illusion that oneness cannot be the ultimate reality or oneness. But I have never claimed any in the previous, but you suggest I do. Again it has never been claimed in the previous text that for 20yrs oneness is being explored by me. It was only reported in the previous text, that since two decades the EXPLANATIONS of the proclamations of the ancient sages, that is happening NOW in this generation is being preserved. The witnesser realises that east and west are relative and illusory. The witnesser never claims, he only shares statements. Only the ego claim and is a claimer, nothing wrong with it, as this is its job. It is only the ego, which claims I am this and I am that, and not of north or south. The witnesser witnesses and shares statements, which cannot be disproved.
L2: Hello AAU, What does Oneness mean? Thank you for your reply, I do agree with every word that you have written, I am extremely honored that you have used your precious time to advance my understanding. As you say, " Non-existence (death) is existence too which "man" is yet to understand." G.B. Sharing understanding is dependent on words, and the preciseness they have. To expand on that preciseness, these points apply. Humans, "The rare" (Wholly HUMANE Beings) which Man experiences in brief moments, have an awareness that is not hindered by the reflection of self, desires , that predetermine. Humans, (Wholly HUMANE Beings) are not dependent on words, Compassion is their language and is a wordless commutation that is understood by all,and ALL. Compassion is not hindered by "Ego/self. Compassion dissolves self/ego. Oneness consciousness matters in All of Space, Individual Consciousness matters in the Space we occupy, within the ALL/Oneness. Not comparing to other locations in Space. The Space that has once been occupied by the Earth, and the Life that is carried along by it, has significance, a significance that establishes a contentious debris of Forms (not Substance ) that lingers there. Forms that endure in the Oneness, as Dark Matter, a reservoir of Dark Energy. " Man" only awaits the scientific perceptive tools to measure it. "Humans have this perspective ability, without the hindered of the Presence of Ego that Compassion displaces." L2 (This is a form of Metaphysics, and is not Physics worthy.) "3.The nature of consciousness is light and is the same everywhere. Everything is an illusory form of consciousness,---" AAU (This "IS" is totally acceptable, of Oneness.) A cubit of "empty" space has a Quantity of light from our Sun, unseen for lack of reflective substance, even in the shadow of the Earth, the Stars pass Light through that cubit. Hence there is more Light in that Cubic than any "Individual" Star/Sun. "From the perspective of Oneness "There IS Only One Star." L2. " Form has no Atoms. Even the Form of a Shadow, when exposed to a flash of brighter Light, the individual shadows becomes a Darker Hue, and when vision light is not Present, the Shadow compiles into all local Space, and joins All Space. (Having more intense light make the individual shadows darker--- having no visible light, makes the all local space shadows darker. Forms are not dependent on Light, Forms are only dependent on the Space that It occupies. That Space in not dependent on Being in the Present/ Potential Change. Past Forms remain, as Forms can/must Change while in the Present, Change of Form, occurs at a different pace with different Substances. A Diamond's Form, may remain unchanged millions of years, not so for Mercury's Form. Substance must become Energy to become a different Substance. "",,,, consciousness, for their nature is atoms, sub-atomic particles, energy, all of which is basically light. "" AAU #3 AS Substance "Is." Only Substance has Atoms, and Only Substance is confined to the Present, Oneness Is not limited to our Elemental Perceptions, Steam and Ice occupy more Space then Water. All three are of the Oneness. The same with Fire and Life. 4 (FWIS) Physic is the proving ground for both, the (Metaphysical "What IS") and (Theoretical Physics is it's Testing Methodology for it's labeling accuracy.)
L4: AAU, glad to hear from you . Now to the question What does oneness mean ? I answered its a question not a quest. I could have given the answer whatever you want it to be. Or whatever you know and you avoid knowing. But those are answers. An answer to a question leads to another question only . Only when the quest changes into quest the above question can be experienced. If I ask what does sweetness mean we have numerous answers but stillsweetness will not be known that way . In a quest there is no - No, no - not possible. Whatever you get as an a reply you take it and start working on it to realise your reality . Please understand reality is unique. Its a different expression for same and different experiencer. I am in no disagreement but that does not mean agreeing . If you point at my hand and say 'This is you", I will not disagree but will not even agree as the body is more than hand. All I want to say is there is something beyond oneness. And oneness needs to be experienced. Everyone knows sweet but it mean different in different situation. Right now its diwali here and its 2:15 am here . So I will respond on it further later. With Regards, L4
AAU: Dear L2, I am happy that you consider every word in the discussion so far is correct, and has increased your understanding. In ancient days in-depth discussion took place in a place and space that could be visited. Since then life has tremendously sophisticated. These days in-depth discussions take place in a space that cannot be visited. The place and space is internet which is basically light. Since you wish to continue the discussion, allow me to proceed further deeper. Spoken human words and its preciseness are made up of sound waves of human breath. Human breath is made up nitrogen, oxygen, water vapour and many constituents, the nature of all of which is once again atoms, sub-atomic particles, and energy, which are basically light. Just as lightning in the sky transforms into thunder, light in the human breath transform as sound and mysteriously appear as words with meanings in the human mind, which the human intellect which is light again understands. On earth space too contains sunlight, which means space is light too. Space is therefore a thought in the human mind and not an actuality in life, though it appears so. Subtle sound transforms mysteriously as thoughts in the human mind. A rare human being realises that pure light is real oneness, and visible light (not entire sunlight), that reflects the world, man, and mind (inclusive of words and thoughts) is illusory oneness. He also realises time like space is a thought too in the mind and not an actuality in life, though it appears so. That rare human being is whole and is known as an enlightened being. If you are still interested in getting the mysterious of life clarified, which the majority take for granted, they are easily available. They are available in a place and space called www.acadun.com which is basically light. They are in the form of articles that introduce the issues in the mind to discuss. As CD’s, DVD’s and books they explain in-depth the illusory nature of the mind, the power of which makes man believe in a real world. Paradoxically the nature of all articles, CD’s, DVD’s and books are atoms, sub-atomic particles, and energy which is basically light. It was wonderful to have met you in this place and space which no one can visit, and is basically light i.e., the internet. I request your permission to end the discussion, so that I may be able to devout my life to help others begin to understand. Farewell my friend.
L5: Oneness and separateness are dual terms. Trying to apply the word 'oneness' to a non-dual wisdom is like trying to apply the word 'righteousness' to a non-judgemental behaviour.
AAU: Oneness and separateness are dual terms according to knowledge, reason and logic. Oneness indicates absence of the second when reason and logic are applied to its limits. This is wisdom and not knowledge. Righteousness is judgmental behaviour and not non-judgemental behaviour, as right exists only because of wrong.
L6: Just a brief comment to come back to the opening of the exchange. While a sense of Oneness can be experienced within, the oneness of non-duality is not an experience. In fact, it is a merging of the experiencer and experienced. Non-duality is lived and changes the context of all experience. It's also worth noting from comments here that inner awakeness and outer illusion is 2, not non-duality. It is dwaita. Awakening to the Self is an important step towards non-duality but is not yet it. As long as there is something else, illusory or not, it is not non-dual.
AAU: Hello L6, thank you for response! Sense is a thought experienced by the ego within the mind. The ego is false or illusory. A sense of oneness experienced within would only be in the mind and therefore false or illusory and not real, just as all thoughts are illusory and not real. Oneness includes non-duality too and neither can be experienced. Oneness includes experiencer, experience and the experienced. Non-duality is lived when the context of all experience is understood as false or illusory. It is dwaita if inner awakeness is thought to be real and the outer illusory. When both are understood to be illusory it is non-duality, as inner awakeness can neither be known nor experienced. When understanding happens that non-duality is life the step into the self happens.
L6: Hi AAU, interesting response but I disagree on many of your points. This is not how I or others I know have experienced the process. Nor is it how the sages of yor describe it. For example, the senses are a mechanism of experience, not a thought. Their input is transferred to the brain where it is processed & compared with past experiences and becomes conscious. Thought is our response to those sensations, a side effect. "ego" can be understood in several ways, depending on how you define it. There is the concept of Ahamkara from India, the individuating principle that arises from consciousness being globally aware of itself at every point within itself. This is not an illusion. But when we identify with the local experience of that, we are in effect "caught" in the experience of being an individual "me". That is an illusion. You confuse mind and consciousness. Mind is not the experiencer. It may be experienced as such when we are identified with it but that is part of the illusion. Mind responds to and compares notes about experiences but does not in itself experience anything. Mind only exists as a function of awareness. When we experience samadhi or presence consciousness in itself we experience the experiencer, without content. This is beyond mind and is not illusory. In that state, it is possible to recognize the inherent wholeness or unity of pure consciousness. Inner awakeness is experiencing and very much can be experienced. Consciousness is by nature self-aware. That is why it is called Self and Awakening. In fact, in more advanced stages we can experience consciousness becoming. My point was because many confuse the inner unity - outer illusion experience of early Self Realization with non-duality. I would also suggest thoughts in themselves are not illusory. It is the content of thoughts and our identification with them that can be illusory. Non-duality means not-2 = oneness. Oneness can be experienced because it is oneness of experiencer and experienced, as I mentioned prior. It is inherent to who you are and the nature of experience. This is basic Vedanta, the source of non-duality. I'd agree that oneness includes the experiencer, experiencing and the experienced. But it's not that it includes them together. It's that they are recognized directly to be one and the same. Then there is no separate experiencer and experienced. There is only experiencing. This is not a change in understanding. It is a change in being, in who we are. That changes how we recognize ourselves and the world and changes our understanding. But the change of understanding is an effect. This extends right into the senses. For example, in Unity when you touch an object, you feel the object. But as you are also the object, you feel the object being touched, both at the same time. This is not an idea or concept but is fully lived. For most people, Self Realization happens first within. The outer world shifts from being seen as real to being seen as unreal. This is the dwaita stage. Later, the Self is also recognized in the world. That same Self within is recognized without and the division between "inside" and "outside" falls away. When all is recognized to be Atman, the Self, which is experienced as the only reality there is, that is non-duality. There is a further stage past that but i won't muddy the waters now. Your quote from Dr. Shankar is a beautiful description of inner oneness. It also contradicts your statements. But it is not a description of non-duality because he describes the world as a separate illusion. He doesn't claim non-duality either. As more are making the Unity shift in recent years, this common error is beginning to be corrected.
AAU: Hello L6, A sage who is knowledgeable describe, but not a sage who is wise. The knowledgeable describe while the wise point by explaining (not stating) a deep understanding. Wisdom is not excess of knowledge as many believe it is. There are knowledgeable sages and wise sages as well, just as there are professors and the enlightened. Knowledgeable sages are professors and the wise sages are the enlightened. That senses are a mechanism of experience is also a thought in the mind. The process of mechanism too are thoughts including the past and experiences. We become conscious of the response which happen to us and claim that it is ours. The ego is a claimer. Ego is individuality arising from the letter ‘I’ which is sound. The ego or the ‘I’ is an auditory illusion of the sound ‘I’ arising from humans. All concepts are beliefs. They are right where they are as far as their understanding goes. But a belief is not the truth. A belief is an opinion shared by more than one. Mind is a collection of thoughts which forms memory and knowledge. Memory and knowledge has happened to man and man did not make it. The ego is the experiencer of whatever thoughts there are in the mind and happen to it. The ego does not make thoughts come, they happen to the individual, and the ego claims it thinks. The ego is a claimer as the wise sages correctly proclaim. The capacity of the ego to imagine is unimaginable. This is the capacity of the intellect and not intelligence. Intelligence reflects intellect to manifest the illusion. The wise sages have correctly proclaimed it as ‘Maya’ or illusion. Inner and outer is the duality believed by the ego as the truth. The cemented understanding that everything is illusory or ‘Maya’ is self-realization. If such were the case and the truth, then obviously even the thoughts would be illusory as thoughts make up the content of thoughts. Vedanta means end of knowledge ‘ved’ means knowledge and ‘anta’ means end. Understanding that knowledge is illusory is the end of knowledge. The end is a metaphor, as there is no end in life. Life is beginingless and endless. Oneness means everything present together every moment. The ego conveniently separates them to defend its beliefs. There is nothing wrong with it, as this is the function of the ego. If you are really the object too in Unity, you would not be separate from it nor feel the object being touched. You would feel yourself being touched. This you feel when you take a bath. You describe what the ego experiences every day, that an object is being touched. When the outer world is understood as unreal meaning illusory, the outer world would be understood as a reflection from within. The ‘in’ is ‘out’ meaning the ‘out’ is a reflection from the ‘in’. This is the ‘Maya’ meaning illusion. The Self does not experience itself for there is no need for the self to experience. The ego thinks it can experience and so thinks that the Self can experience. The ego’s experience is illusory as is the ego. This would make the Self to be illusory as well as its experience. To say that the Self is experienced as the only reality there is, makes the muddy waters more muddy. Dr. Shankar explains only oneness and not inner or outer oneness. Dr.Shankar does not describe the world as a separate illusion. Please point out where he has described the world as a separate illusion? Dr. Shankar does not claim anything. . One cannot make the shift to unity. A man is not the doer, as the wise sages have correctly proclaimed. One cannot correct any error either for the same reason. If either happens it happens and man cannot make either happen. He would be an illusory claimer who thinks he can. PS: Please send one point at a time and allow that point to be resolved before moving to the next. Because nothing is achieved by moving to the next point if the previous is not resolved. Regards AAU
L7: Intellectual understanding that relativity is illusion is a beginning. Going beyond intellectual understanding is to enter into direct experience of what is. And for this to happen we have to understand what are we? Decades of yoga and mediation have emptied my body so that my body is an instrument like a hollow tube or a hollow flute. Integrating and coming into my "centre", ie. the holy - hole - gateway of the "zero point" - has allowed me to dissolve and disintegrate and disappear into the vast Emptiness: No.thing.ness (the Void / the Womb) out of which Everything arises. I am here and not here simultaneously. Zero and One. The unmanifest and the manifest. And what a cosmic Dance of UNION it is.
L6: Hi AAU, your opening paragraph is a little ironic, given your later stated desire to "resolve" each point, like this is an intellectual exercise. That is not my goal. I do not wish to convince anyone of concepts but rather show a better way of looking. But I will continue to see if this goes anywhere. For a first point, I'll raise the word "Maya". The root of Maya is to build. It does not mean illusion, though I realize this is how it is often translated. As Adi Shankara (the probable namesake of your quoted author) explained, when tamas is dominant, the world (maya) behaves as a covering and is all that seems real. The common experience of many. When rajas is dominant, the world behaves as an illusion or veil. In other worlds, the covering over the deeper reality has begun to be seen through. When Sattva is dominant, the world is seen as Lila, the divine play. In these 3 cases, the world has not changed. What has changed is the perceiver, their point of perception or perspective. This is much deeper than a change of mind. Part of the reason for the illusion emphasis has been a recent dominance of renunciate teachings. Renouncing the world is part of that path. But most of us are householders. The idea of this path is not renouncing the world but integrating the world with spirit. If we try to follow a renunciate path while being a householder, we'll fail at both. The trick is, seeing the world as illusion is not a technique. It is an effect of progress to a certain stage of transpersonal development. This perception will unfold naturally, then fade again with further progress. And it's not so much that "world is illusion" but that by itself, the world is just appearance. Put in the right context, it is real. Not in itself but as an expression of That. To quote the Upanishads - I am That, Thou are That, all this (the world) is That, That alone Is. This is non-duality, beyond the above three, where Maya is also recognized as That. The experience of a person and a world continue after enlightenment. Not as a me and mine but as the divine play. This is perhaps more than one point but that is necessary to explain the perspective.
L6: Hi AAU, Yes, a person does not become Self Realized nor do they reach Unity. Those are a process of Self (Atman) waking up to itself. But it takes place at the apparent juncture of a person, at that point of self-referral awareness. So there is an apparent person going through stages of transpersonal development.
L6: Hi AAU, as a final comment for now. I'll try and answer your one question: "Dr.Shankar does not describe the world as a separate illusion. Please point out where he has described the world as a separate illusion? " He says: "This can only mean that everything in life, including man and time, is illusory and not real. To be real man has to see it, but he has neither seen the mind nor time in life, hence they both are illusory and not real." and "It means that pure light or God is real oneness, and visible light, which reflects the world, man, and mind, including time, is illusory oneness." He does not use the word "separate" but as long as anything is illusory or not-God it is other or separate. This is a much more subtle separation than the ego creates but it is necessary to resolve it prior to a true non-dual stage. He'll find that it is not the light of God (aka Lila or Maya) that is the higher oneness but the container of that. We don't find true Oneness in what is created but in the container of that, the creator or source. This is then inclusive of everything. (as an aside, the mind and time can be seen, literally. This is how the sages described them.) I don't know the broader writings of Dr. Shankar. But by what he is saying here, it sounds like a description of the stage known as Self Realization or Cosmic Consciousness. In that stage, the Self has been realized within but not yet in the world. So in that stage, there is an inner experience of oneness but outer sensory and mind experiences are considered not-Self and illusory. The Rajas stage of the prior comment. Often in that stage, we become aware of the divine if we have not already. The quote describes many things common to the Refined value of that stage, also known as God Consciousness. However, in non-duality or Unity, the world is also recognized to be That as per the Upanishads quote. It is a much deeper oneness than he describes. By the description, he would seem to be experiencing values of the greater Oneness but has not yet become it. I can also comment that it can depend on the audience a teacher is speaking to. It's possible Dr. Shankar is speaking to the stage of Self Realization and the details of that from his own history. But because there are no caveats to a still greater reality, it suggests not. This is not a criticism of the quote. He describes it very well. It was simply an answer to your question of why I put the quote in that context. Much can be learned from quotes like this. But it can support us even more if it is put in context. Part of the issue with following eastern teachings has been the lost context of the stages of the development of enlightenment. Without that, people debate which teacher is actually right without asking why so many enlightened sages would seem to contradict each other. Each primary stage brings with it a distinct reality and perception of self and the world. Having a sense of which stage a teacher is speaking from or to can make a great deal more sense out of the worlds teachings.
AAU: Dear L7, Intellect is a reflection of intelligence. Understanding happens in the intellect as well as directly in intelligence. Intellectual understanding is relative understanding while intelligent understanding is absolute understanding. Intellect understands that relativity is illusory. Intelligence reveals WHY relativity is illusory. The understanding to enter into direct experience of what is, is within intellect. Intelligence reveals that any experience is a thought for the ego and is illusory. The ego experiences everything in the world directly and therefore believes ‘what is’ can be experienced directly and one needs to enter it. Intelligence reveals that man and everything else in the world including the world is light. What we are is light, and who we are is an optical illusion of light. There is intellectual spiritual poetry just as there is intellectual poetry. Intelligent understanding reveals that time is illusory and one would need real time to do real yoga or meditation. Yoga and meditation have happened to you so that you may have an intelligent understanding that man is not the doer and yoga and meditation is possible only as an illusion and not as a reality, though it appears real when it happens. Honesty would reveal whether your body is a hollow flute or not. Centre, Emptiness, Zero point, Nothingness (void/womb) is pure light that reflects the world and everything in it. Intelligence reveals we are alive and dead simultaneously, because light appears and disappears simultaneously. When it appears the illusory ego feels alive but does not realise we are dead too in the same moment. It is intellectual poetry to say I am here and not here simultaneously, Zero and One and a cosmic dance. Intelligence reveals that the play of light and sound is a cosmic dance of union and the dance cannot be experienced or known by the ego of the human mind. Regards AAU
L7: Glad to see you have everything figured out. Poetically and otherwise. Congratulations.
AAU: Dear L6, --- Respond to your comment: "Your opening paragraph is a little ironic, given your later…." --- Intellect is not synonymous with intelligence. Intellectual understanding leads to relative understanding while intelligent understanding reveals absolute understanding. I meant to resolve absolutely and not relatively. Maya means illusion and it has been built up, meaning manifested by life and not man. The belief that the root of maya is ‘to build’ is held by man who believes he is the door. The divine play is a play of light and sound that reflect an optical illusion within visible light and auditory illusion of certain audible sounds. Absolut understanding reveals that the world changes every moment. It reveals to the perceiver, that perception or perspective is illusory and not real. Absolute understanding does not emphasize anything. It merely reveals an understanding that any path is illusory and not real. Absolute understanding reveals that any technique is illusory and everything eventually fades away. The progression from a knowledgeable man to a wise sage also happens and man cannot bring this about. Real means that which never changes. An appearance means it will disappear too. Only a reflection disappears. The Upanishads mean by ‘That’ is pure light which neither can be experienced nor known. The divine play meaning it is a drama or illusory and not real. The points are intellectual as real is suggested but not intelligent which would reveal the illusory appears real. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L6, --- Respond to your comment: "Yes, a person does not become Self Realized nor…." --- The process by atman is spontaneous, unpredictable and uncontrollable, and happens every moment at its own pace. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L6, --- Respond to your comment: "As a final comment for now. I'll try and answer your …." --- Illusory does not mean it is not God. It means the illusory is a reflection of God. The God man believes in too is an illusion of God and not real God. Real God is pure light, which man can neither see nor know it. Can you see the mind and time in life? The knowledgeable sages say so, and so does man. The wise sages would not say so as time and the mind do not exist in life as a reality or actuality. Their existence is illusory. Dr.Shankar says that every speck that exits is God meaning an illusory reflection of visible light. Read the writings from Dr.Shankar if you want to, before you conclude. They are available on www.acadun.com Has man met God to know that God has consciousness and therefore there is God consciousness! If he has then man is more powerful than God for man knows that God has consciousness! Man should be praying to man rather than to God. ‘That’ means light and the world too is a reflection of ‘That’ meaning light. Dr. Shankar speaks to anyone who wishes to listen to him. If his quotes are understood absolutely it sure can support anyone. Sages contradict each other and not the enlightened sages. Just as spiritual teachers contradict each other and not the enlightened. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L7, glad you understand that poetic is relative understanding and otherwise is absolute understanding. Meaning intellectual understanding and intelligent understanding.
L6: While I fully agree there is an absolute reality, our understanding of that is relative to the observer - where we are in the process of development. A 2 year-old does not experience the absolute the same way as an adult. Even the Self Realized don't have a complete perspective. Someone who is not yet awake cannot have "Absolute Understanding" because even who they experience themselves to be is relative. There is no absolute reference point for that understanding to occur. We can all have some understanding of the absolute but we have to be very careful to recognize that our understanding is still relative. If we hold it as absolute, that understanding will become a barrier to direct knowing. Sorry- but that's a really bizarre interpretation of what I said about Maya. You are of course welcome to believe what you want but if you're going to use the terms of another philosophy, you should learn to use them correctly rather than perpetuating misunderstanding. And no, "That" is not translated as the word for light. Light is part of creation, hence Maya - even the celestial. "That" is Brahman, for which there is no English word. Beyond is another word sometimes used. Light is not beyond, as you have described. I'm afraid that you're confusing 2 stages in your understanding of God. Everything is God in a Unity perspective, but if you're going to talk illusion, there is then a distinction between what is God and what is of God. Reflection = illusion = not-God. This is why I raised the issue about someone Self Realized confusing inner unity with actual unity. Not the same thing. Very different perspective and take on reality. Very different understanding of the absolute. The divine play is quite a bit more than a light show. But given your statements are "absolute understanding", it's apparent you are not open to discussion. I've made the above comments for the benefit of other readers.
L3: Oneness is without the second! Advayam. The seen and the seer difference is the block! You can understand oneness only in the Consciousness!
AAU: Dear L6, Neither a child nor an adult can experience the absolute. The absolute cannot be experienced by anyone. The Self Realised have an absolute understanding of the absolute. He who is awake from the dream of the waking state is Self Realised and who he experiences is realised as illusory, meaning not real but still exist as real. Absolute understanding (intelligent understanding) has no reference point, only relative understanding (intellectual understanding) has many reference points, which is the entire duality for example; right and wrong etc. Absolute understanding happens to man and so does relative understanding as well. Man cannot have either of them or recognise them, even if he wants or wishes, but he believes he can recognise and have them as well. Understanding is relative as long as duality appears to be real and not illusory. If the root of Maya is to build who is to build? Man cannot as man is not the doer. He believes he is and this belief is part of the maya or illusion. It is not another philosophy it is daily life as it is. If the root of maya is ‘to build’ it surely is another philosophy. Every philosophy no matter how popular it is, is illusory and not real. Absolute understanding is not a philosophy as it has no usual reference points of philosophy such as duality, time, action and man as the doer, speaker ad thinker. Brahman or ‘That’ is Pure light. Pure light, Brahman or ‘That’ emit reflected light which in turn emits a ‘Maya’ which is the world, man and mind. That God or ‘That’ is Brahman and not light is relative understanding and not absolute. There is nothing wrong about it, as this is the understanding that has happened to them who believe ‘That’ is Brahman and not pure light. God has not made anything real. If God had made anything real that real would never change as it is real. Everything including man changes every moment, meaning everything ages every moment. God has made everything illusory for they change every moment. The illusory is God or reflected light. . To the Self Realised there is only unity, this is absolute understanding. Inner and actual unity is a belief of the intellectual or one with relative understanding. Observe everything that is relative. The relative give clues to the absolute. The absolute has no need to give clues to itself, as it has no needs. For example, light is information and this evident when we observe the TV, DVD, and CD. They all contain electromagnetic signals and not shape, size, figure, color or words. Yet the human mind sees and thinks reality, when the TV is switched on, or the DVD, CD is played. The same is with God, Brahman, ‘That’ or Pure light. Pure light projects the world, man and mind. It is an illusory show of light and sound which appears real to man. When everything is understood to be illusory the absolute reveals itself which cannot be seen or known, but only lived. This is for the benefit of all readers. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L3, the understanding in consciousness by the you that the seen and the seer are real is the block. The ego (you) and the witnesser (sakshi) both understand only in consciousness. The witnesser (sakshi) understands in consciousness that the seen and the seer are illusory and not real. The ego (you) understands in consciousness that the seen and the seer are real and not illusory. Regards AAU
L8: Too much in the head instead of out of it...no body home...:)))
AAU: Dear L8, All that anybody says is only in the head and not out of it. The knowledgeable have much in the head which is knowledge, and the wise have enough which is wisdom and this is enough to bring clarity to the knowledgeable. Please clarify what is meant by no body home...))). Regards AAU
L6: Wow, AAU, you certainly have a unique take on this. If the absolute is all that is real and that is what we are, why would we not be able to experience it? What then is Samadhi? Do you really think Self Realization is just an understanding? I could go on and on, but your premise makes no sense in light of both experience and tradition. It would appear you've tried to explain away anything that didn't fit you model. Some of your arguments are circular. As to who builds Maya, look to your opening quote. Or to your own explanation in the same comment. It's the meaning and origin of the word, even if you don't like it. I'll say it again - absolute understanding cannot arise until one knows the absolute. That can not be done with the mind for reasons you yourself have stated. And that understanding is subject to revision as we develop further. You have no clue about ParamBrahman. Brahman doesn't emit or create anything. It is absolute alone. Brahma creates. Light is not absolute. It only ever arises is space. Subtle space perhaps, but still space. The light of God is not absolute as it too changes. And I'll disagree on your closing point. Understanding the world is illusory is an Effect of experiencing our absolute nature. Nothing the mind does can create Self Realization. I am just using words to describe something that is not words. But if the words are not heard, they accomplish nothing.
L6: BTW, the witness IS consciousness. That's why it's called that. Awareness witnesses. It is also known as the observer or seer. Synonyms. L3 is correct. What the witness comes to recognize is that the SEPARATION of seer and seen is illusion, not that they are illusion. Otherwise the witness, which is experienced as boundless eternity, would see itself as unreal. That's totally false at this stage. This recognition (not understanding yet - that comes later) is the foundation of the shift into Unity, the non-dual stage. After this shift, there is NO LONGER a witness because the observer and observed have become one. Again, I make a distinction between Self Realization when we know (not by understanding) ourselves to be Self (Atman). In this stage we are an independent observer or witness of all life. The world may seem an illusion. But this separation of the witness makes it dwaita or duality. It is only when seer and seen merge in Unity that you reach non-duality. This all takes place in Atman which is consciousness. Only when the progressive uniting of non-duality takes place do you transcend Atman into ParamBrahman, the uncreated absolute. This is not an understanding IN consciousness but OF consciousness. It is an understanding that arises because we subjectively experience becoming it and recognize we always were it.
L8: Hi AAU..."Nobody home" ...excuse me for interjecting...I am no expert here but find the shared insights fascinating...you are right about "losing" the self identifications in order to "be"...100% agree.Truly there is "no body home".
AAU: Dear L8, thank you. I am sure you mean ‘Truly there is “no body home” but only appears to be’ to the guy who is not at home but yet appears to be at home. There and yet not there. Regards AAU
AAU: Hello L6, --- Response to: "Wow, AAU. You certainly have a unique take on this……" --- ‘Unique take on this’ means a different opinion apart from the popular beliefs; spiritual or mundane. Absolute understanding just gifts clarity to beliefs, popular or mundane. The understanding shared is for the many points that were written. Read the discussion and you will find some agree 100% with what is written and you say the premise makes no sense. You had not written about Samadhi. Now you write about samadhi without bringing clarity to what you had written previously. How could the response to Samadhi make sense to you when you are stuck with your previous beliefs and not clarifying them? Samadhi will definitely be addressed once the present points are clarified. Samadhi is present and understood relatively but not not absolutely. Understand that a word or its meaning has happened to man and man did not make them or build them. Read the book ‘Evolution of mind’ by Dr. Vijai S Shankar to be clear about it. You do not understand the responses sent to you deeply as yet. The absolute cannot be known by the mind. Absolute understanding only points to the absolute by understanding what the relative is. In the last response it was mentioned that information is light that projects a real world to man. Similarly the absolute is pure light (‘That’ or Brahman) that reflects reflected light (consciousness) that projects the illusory world, man and mind as real. Read the previous response many times more. Examine everything that exists and you will only find light! This is a scientific fact and science makes sense and not no sense. Who is Brahma? And who saw Brahma create? The one who saw Brahma create must be greater than brahma as he was present before Brahma created him. So who would have created the one who saw brahma create? Param Brahman is the spiritual name for Pure light. Brahma is the spiritual name for consciousness (reflected light). Consciousness does not create. It manifests meaning reflects as the five elements, world, man and mind.. The closing point was “When everything is understood to be illusory the absolute reveals itself which cannot be seen or known, but only lived” Where does the statement say ‘that understanding the world is illusory is an effect of experiencing our absolute nature?’ please understand what is written and then comment. Yes you are correct; nothing the mind does can create Self Realisation. Please use words to describe an understanding about what is written. No point is served by using words to describe an understanding about what is NOT written. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L6, --- Response to: "BTW, the witness IS consciousness. That's why it's called that…….." --- Consciousness is not a person to witness anything. Consciousness is reflected light that appears as everything. It is called that to indicate Pure light. If ‘That meant’ witness it will mean a person. Awareness, Parambrahma or ‘That’ (using your terms) means Pure light and not a person who witnesses. The observer or seer in the ego (you) or the witnesser. The ego observes and sees everything, meaning is conscious of them as real. The witnesser observes and sees everything, meaning is conscious of them as illusory. L3 is right as far as his understanding goes. The understanding that has happened to him is relative and not absolute as yet. If the witness which is experienced as boundless eternity is real and not illusion according to you, the separation of seer and seen would be included in the boundless eternity and would be real and not illusory. If there is no longer a witness then consciousness, That, and awareness would no longer be there as they witness according to you. If awareness, That, consciousness is boundless energy without separation what could they witness? Please clarify in which stage we are an independent observer or witness of all life? Your text suggests that is the stage of Self Realisation when we know ourselves to be Self or atman. The last sentence suggests that non duality takes place in ataman. There seems to be a contradiction here. Please clarify. Also how could anything be known without understanding? The word realisation indicates understanding. When Non-duality is realised you are atman or Self Realised. When the Self Realised body dies meaning is transformed into the five elements it transforms into pure light or Parambrahman ( using your term). Every understanding; relative or absolute is of consciousness and not in consciousness. It is a nice dream to think you can subjectively experience becoming it and recognise we were always it. If anyone were it he would know that the world is illusory, and would tell everyone that the world is illusory and you cannot do anything to realise that it is illusory. For any doing would be illusory too. This is why all spiritual doing happens so that man may understand that the moment he realises the all doings are illusory and they happen to him. That is the moment of Self Realisation. Regards AAU
L6: Hi AAU, I'm glad you're so confident in your opinion. Have never heard opinion described as "absolute understanding". My response was not meant as a discussion point. It's clear you simply wish to tell me rather than actually discuss anything. In fact my comments seem to be adding to your distortion. As I mentioned prior, my comments are based on direct experience and the interpretation thereof. Brahma is the Sanskrit word for creator. There are other names for this, both as a being and as a principle. Who has seen what they call Brahma? Many, including myself. It is not uncommon. As your story doesn't explain my experience and doesn't meet the understanding of great sages, it fails the truth test of experience. It's also clear you're missing my points entirely - you've asked me a question about illusion I've already answered more than once. And you distort what I say before you respond. I didn't say consciousness was a person, for example. For the benefit of other readers, I'll answer a few questions, some of them again. In Self Realization, we recognize ourselves to be Atman, the cosmic Self. In Unity or Non-duality, we recognize everything to Atman. Everything is one. This is real basic. Realization means become, recognize I am That. Understanding comes later. It's not the mind that's doing this. Also, as I've already said, you know by being. When you are That, you know it directly, not through experiences and senses, although they come along for the ride. Atman is consciousness. In the Unity shift, everything is consciousness. A separate witness is meaningless. It is all self-referral. Ego is not an observer and never has been. It simply lays claim to everything as "mine". That is the illusion of the ego. Please do not start using the term ParamBrahman. You have it totally wrong. It is a post-non-duality reality. It has nothing to do with light. I'm sorry I brought it up. I'm finding this less than productive so will let it go there.
AAU: Hello L6, Absolute understanding is not an opinion it is statements that cannot be disproved. Relative understanding is an opinion which can be disproved. For example, disprove that everything is not light, that a word is not sound, and time is not illusory. That everything in the world is light is a scientific fact, that word is sound is a scientific fact, that time is illusory is a scientific fact. The wise sages have proclaimed ages ago that there is no time in the world, and the world is illusory. Science is just confirming it in this century. Responses from absolute understanding brings a discussion to clarity. Relative understanding brings a discussion to prove right or wrong which is duality and distortion. I mention once more for your benefit. Can man experience the movie which is within a DVD by entering the DVD? The DVD contains the movie and yet does not. The DVD contains just electromagnetic signals, which is basically light. Man imagines that movie on a screen which is basically light too. Similarly Light cannot be experienced be entering it. Light contains life and everything and yet does not contain it. If man cannot enter the relative to experience it, do you think man could enter the absolute such as ‘That’, Brahma, Brahman, or other names both as a being and principle (using your terms) and experience it? Absolute understanding is not a story for it neither contains time, events and man as the protagonist. There are knowledgeable and there are wise sages. Both are not the same but are mistaken to be the same. Please clarify what you mean by illusion? I have not distorted what you wrote, for you wrote consciousness is witness. The word witness means a person. For the benefit of all readers. Can man experience the movie which is within a DVD by entering the DVD? The DVD contains the movie and yet does not. The DVD contains just electromagnetic signals, which is basically light. Man imagines that movie on a screen which is basically light too. Similarly Light cannot be experienced be entering it. Light contains life and everything and yet does not contain it. If man cannot enter the relative to experience it, do you think man could enter the absolute such as ‘That’, Brahma, Brahman, or other names both as a being and principle (using your terms) and experience it? For you let me explain Unity: Pure Light is absolute Unity which cannot be known or experienced. Absolute understanding is relative unity which can be understood and realised as illusory but not experienced. Relative Understanding is illusory wherein the world and everything in it can be known, and experienced as a reality. This reality is however a dream. To realise I am That happens when everything is understood to be illusory. And even this understanding happens and man cannot do or become ‘That’ or anything. Understand that the wise sages have proclaimed that man is not the doer. To do anything or become anything man would need time and time is illusory and not real. The wise sages have said that and so do the wise scientists say so now. The wise sages were internal scientists and the wise scientists are external wise sages. I use your terms of external and internal to make it clear for you. Absolute understanding revels that the wise sages and wise scientists both are expressions of life. I have already said man could know only as thoughts and thoughts are sound that mysteriously appears as illusory words with meanings. The wise sages have proclaimed it ages ago and the wise scientists agree that thoughts are subtle sounds now. If they come along for the ride when you are that, as you say they do, it would only mean that thoughts are present in the being, which would make the being a man and anything divine. The separate witness is meaningless in Unity, because it is illusory. The witness was illusory before the shift to atman, consciousness and unity too. When this is absolutely understood the shift to atman, consciousness and Unity happens. The ego cannot claim without observing it. Please clarify who is the observer? I have referred to the ego as (you) within brackets, meaning the individual and individuality. If you say so I shall not use the term ParamBrahman. I used your term to make it easy for you to understand. Relative understanding believes in productivity, not knowing that productivity brings along bondage. Absolute understanding reveals a clarity that productivity brings in bondage. This understanding is freedom. Regards AAU
L6: Hi AAU Thank you for clarifying your position. I'm dubious my comments will have any value. But.. Proof and scientific fact relate to constants of the world. Light and sound are effects of creation and are never absolute. The absolute could be said to have effulgence and produce, for example, the primordial hum. But that is not absolute - it is an effect. The Indian model of time studies the vast cycles of creation and destruction of the universe, and with it all those "absolute"s. The absolute is beyond all these. Science itself would not agree with you. The other word you use a lot is understanding. Understanding is always relative to the observer. It is how the mind has related to it's experiences. We may find a constant in those experiences and believe it to be absolute, but that does not make it so. Even someone who has become Self Realized does not have absolute understanding because they continue to evolve and thus, so does their understanding. It is a basic of human life. We are the absolute and always have been. If the absolute is boundless infinity and eternal, how is it possible we'd ever not be it? The Realizations of higher stages are recognition's of that. You speak of I AM. What are we if we're not absolute and we're not the illusory relative? Even a beginning meditator experiences the absolute. In fact everyone does, each time we change states of consciousness. For example, when we fall asleep, we briefly go into a neutral gear without content. Samadhi. That's much more familiar with experiences of samadhi. As I said, witness or observer is a name for consciousness or awareness. That's why it's called that. When you change what I say to your understanding and then say I said it, that is distortion. The Unity I speak of is a stage of Transpersonal development also known as Non-duality, the theme of this forum. If it cannot be experienced, it cannot be known and this forum would not exist. Pure light of God can be experienced directly and known by being. Have done it myself. And I'll say it again. Understanding doesn't create Self Realization. In fact, many teachers will tell you concepts are a barrier to it. The recognition of Self happens when the ego is seen through. Only then do we really recognize the world is illusion. That is recognized based on I AM, not on concepts. Now - there are paths that use the intellect to achieve Self Realization by analyzing questions about the nature of reality so it is seen through. But such a path requires a person withdraw from the distractions of the world to focus within. It is a high and difficult path most are unsuited to. There are much easier ways. I can also tell you where thoughts come from. Not mysterious. But it doesn't fit your model. What you are saying is quite clear to me. I understand where you're coming from. But you will not convince me if that is your goal because I have not experienced the process like this. And that suggests your model has work to do. I'd also suggest that your habit to use words like "absolute" is encouraging black and white thinking. Always and never are not how things work.
L9: So, what would be the point of this thread? It is of no use to those who know. So my guess is, it is be meant to be a kind of service for those who are seeking truth. Then a problem arises. On the one hands the comments that have an authorative tone - 'speaking from Absolute Understanding' and on the other hand those of challenges that, but whose comments have an undertone of absolute knowing, based on experience and 'insight in hindsight'. A reader who has not yet the experience / insight finds herself in the dilemma: who am I to believe? I would say to anyone experiences this dilemma: which approach invites you to trust on your own ongoing experience and growing insights? Which contributions help you to understand the process you are going through right now? I would certainly vote for that one. As for me: true wisdom is in how the one who knows reaches out to connect to the one who does not yet understand, exactly where she is right now. This is how compassion shows itself. Any comment that lacks the innate intention of the heart to meet the reader where she is right now, will bear no fruit.
AAU: Dear L9, You guessed correctly. It is meant for those who are seeking truth. And there are many seeking truth. But to the seekers what they believe is the truth. So they seek their beliefs and not the truth. Truth can never be known. If anyone claims that he is speaking from absolute understanding it is authorative and egoistic. It cannot be absolute understanding either if anyone says he is speaking, as man is not the doer. Absolute understanding makes man understand that speaking happens to him and he does not make speaking happen to him. If anyone claims absolute knowing based on experience and insight in hindsight it just cannot be absolute knowing. Surely you cannot believe the one who claims that he does, speaks or thinks. Surely if it helps you to be contented every moment of every day, meaning fear, anxiety or doubt do not upset you, you do not argue or be angry. You accept those you know and live with for who they are and who they are not. You love those you know and live with for who they are and who they are not. You are correct. Wisdom sure is to realise that everyone is right where they are, and are as they are. Compassion surely shows with this understanding. Real comment is that by which there is no need for further comments, this is the real fruit to bear. If the other is met where she is right now by comments that have innate intention of the heart and requires further such comments during her lifetime with innate intentions of the heart, it is no fruit to bear. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L6, Response to: “Thank you for clarifying”
Your comments will have value to you and to all if it is 100% reasonable and logical, and not below 100 % which gives rise to beliefs and beliefs systems. Your comments would be dubious to another who discuses with relative understanding with you, but not to the one who discuses with absolute understanding. Absolute understanding realises it is the understanding that has happened to him with relative understanding.
Proof and scientific facts are illusory constants of the illusory world. Light and sound is a reflection of Pure light that manifest an illusory world. You are correct light and sound are never absolute. The absolute could be said to have effulgence and produces a primordial hum if the hum was heard by anyone. It could then be said to be an effect. Is it possible for anyone to hear the primordial hum? This impossibility and the indian model of time studies is the intelligence of life to reflect through the intellect of the mind such a possibility and studies to create the illusion of reality and man as the doer.
Intelligence reflects as intellect. Both reflect through the mind. Intellectual understanding is always relative and real. You are correct no constant is an absolute. Intellectual understanding is superficial and leads to knowledge, whereas intelligent understanding is deep and reveals wisdom.
Firstly, If someone does not have absolute understanding he cannot be Self Realized. A Self Realized too evolves to become cosmic, wherein he is absolutely alive and not relatively alive with absolute understanding as he has during his life in the world.
Please inform where I spoke of I AM? Intelligent understanding reveals that we are a reflection of the absolute and not the absolute. We are the illusory relative with either relative or absolute understanding. Sleeping state, dreaming sate and Samadhi will be discussed later.
If witness or observer is synonyms for consciousness and awareness, it is fine. But please also mention that they neither witness nor observe anything.
If non-duality can be experienced and known, it will not be non-duality, as there would be an experiencer, the experienced, a knower and the known. The forum that exits now is relative non-duality and not absolute non-duality. Absolute understanding is relative unity or absolute non-duality which can be understood and realised as illusory but not experienced.
To claim to have done it means a claimer and you know who a claimer is. It also means man is the doer. It also means man has time to do it. Man is neither the doer nor is there time. It would be non-duality and illusory if you have done it yourself.
I repeat again, understanding has happened to man. A primitive man had neither understanding nor knowledge. Understanding is an inherent characteristic of life. This inherent characteristic manifested in primitive man and made him to know. Later this inherent characteristic gave rise to knowledge which happened to man and man did not make knowledge. Therefore relative understanding has happened to man that makes him a man, and so too absolute understanding will happen to man, which makes him Self Realized man. Teachers may say concepts are barriers but nevertheless give concepts themselves. Self Realization happens when the ego (you) is understood to be illusory and not the doer. This is what ‘the ego is seen through’ means. Firstly man can neither use intellect or intelligence. Intellect and intelligence are inherent and not under the control of man. Intellect has many paths and any analysing done will be real and so would be what is seen through by analysing as real. Intelligence reveals to man that all paths are illusory and every analysing and what is seen through by it as illusory.
Please do tell me where thoughts come from. Also tell me what is my model? A model has three dimensions, or is something to follow or imitate both of which require time.
Relative understanding makes man believe where the other or himself come from. By absolute understanding man realises that it is a mystery that he has come to live in this world as a man.
Man is not the doer so how could I or anyone use? Glad you find the words encouraging. You are correct, always and never are not how things work. It is mysterious how things ever work at all, because it is mysterious that something does work when things never work. Absolute understanding reveals that life is an illusory spontaneous, unpredictable and uncontrollable singular movement that is happening without a beginning or an end without time, cause or effect. This singular movement is interpreted by relative understanding that life is made up of numerous separate events happening in time by cause and effect and man as the doer. This interpretation is manifested mysteriously in the mind as real. This reality is however a drama or illusory. Regards AAU
L6: Hi AAU Yes, it's more than possible to hear the cosmic hum. Some experience it as a high pitched constant tone or whistle, some as a low rumbling Au, and some feel it bodily, like their entire form is being recreated in every moment. Depends on where it's being experienced from. In each case it is a constant, although as the attention shifts it can then flower into the diversity of creation. There is a famous Hindi letter for the primordial sound. Why would it be described as a sound if it cannot be experienced? I don't expect you to answer these questions. I am simply making a point. In several cases I reply to your comments, referring to what you seem to have said and then you tell me I'm incorrect. Perhaps English is not your first language and there are some subtle nuances being missed here. I'll also disagree on your point about the Self Realized. I know people who have awoken who could care less about understanding. They simply live it. All these concepts about what a Self Realized person "should" be like are nonsense. It's one of the myths of enlightenment - that you'll become a guru. Few have the skills to be teachers. Understanding is an inherent characteristic of YOUR life. Mine also. But that is not true of everyone, by any stretch of the imagination. For some, feeling is prominent and understanding is annoying. If we are not the absolute and the relative is illusion, then we're just illusions and there is no point in a non-dual discussion. It's meaningless. In fact, that makes everything meaningless. Not a philosophy I'd subscribe to. Why would it be called "observer" if they don't observe anything? Rather than just keep telling me I'm mistaken, you might want to reconsider a few of your points. Non-duality is known by being, as I've mentioned. It is the collapse of the knower and known into wholeness or totality. It is not done by a person but it occurs from a subjective perspective. It is accompanied by the recognition that I have always been That. The philosophy of India is not there as a bunch of man-made concepts that can give us some superior understanding. They are there to be lived. What is the point of a bunch of ivory tower concepts that have no bearing on a lived life? And where does Absolute Understanding come from if no one has every experienced it? I mention it being the experience simply to demonstrate it is real and not just some competing concept of mine. There is no special claim to have done anything or accomplished some special status. In fact, it is annoying to keep having to say this. Many others have had the same. Have you seen through your ego? Then tell me how you can claim to know what it means or what it's like? Where has your understanding come from? Other people? Does that sound absolute? Does it serve you to be so certain? By model, i mean conceptual framework. All words are symbolic concepts. We use words to communicate ideas. A model is a set of such ideas. A 3D model is one type. Describing where thoughts come from is pointless as you've already rejected my description of the mind. It also requires further background. But I've written on the subject before. My point is it's not a mystery. How is a mystery understanding? What you describe is a perspective of how it is, but it's not a complete perspective. But you're welcome to it.
L6: btw - it's useful to note that many of the things I've talked about are not the exclusive domain of someone who has awoken. Its more common and prevalent in the Refined stage of Self Realization but many experience the nature of thoughts, the primordial sound, various ways of seeing time, the witness and many such things before Self Realization. They may not, but they may. On time- time is an effect of the process of experience. It doesn't exist as it's own reality but does exist as an effect and can be experienced a surprising number of different ways. On that, I can mention that timeless and eternity (all time) are 2 very different modes.
L9: Hello AAU, It looks like you misread or misinterpreted my post - or I was maybe a bit too indirect in my comment. L6 already touched the subject, and I'll stretch it a bit - understanding is of no importance, unless one happens to have an interest in understanding (like I do). For some, understanding may be supportive 'on the path'. I happen to be one of those. This understanding is beyond the mind, although it is expressed through the mind and - here - in words. Understanding is always relative - it is an understanding, here, and now, and an understanding of something. "Real comment is that by which there is no need for further comments" Now this is a strange concept. Communication takes always place between two (or more) entities. One could describe communication as the exchange of information (or in your way of communicating here: a flow of information in one direction). If you as a sender hold the position that it suffices to make a statement and leave it at that, for it is 'absolute truth', this is not communication, this is autisticism. And the very fact that you keep on commenting and elaborating on previous comments shows that, by your very own standard, your comments are not 'real comment'. ;-) On the other hand, I do know exactly what you are referring to, as I very often had and have the 'pleasure' and privilege of communicating with someone, direct or via the written word, who had the 'capacity' to transmit truth 'under the words'. (And I am at times being accused of doing it 'myself'.) Then it is just like you put it: no further comment is needed, for actually it is not communication that is taking place, but communion. This is not what I experience, reading your words, however. So the overall feeling your comments elicit in me, is that they are the product of conceptual thinking. I happened to stumble on this fragment just now, which seem to fit here: "These very same [words] can become stale, worn out, second-hand, and just, well, inhuman. We sometimes forget that the essence of spirituality is a cosmic embrace of the relative, the dual, the very messy, sticky, gooey nature of human life. The light we are seeking is not 'elsewhere', but already shining throught the appearance of a separate self, pouring out of our intimate relatio(nships and illuminating our most disturbing feelings and emotions."
L10: Love this piece, thank you kindly AAU. Honest opinion, What does oneness mean? You said - everything that is meant to happen only happens. Also - oneness as that which is complete or whole. Advaita perhaps is a better label. (labels are the problem) We firstly, have to recalibrate our conceptual spacetime frameworks to respectfully incorporate the real truth of infinite possibility. We are and must be, what is - everything that is meant to happen only happens - This redefining of our personal relationship with what is the now is the gateway to releasing all that Human intellect has captured and confined. To clear away these our ancient obstacles of intellect’s dependence upon opposites and dualities. Oneness can-not be correctly viewed from duality. To know Unity. Our intellect has to be firstly tamed and then empowered and glorified to see beyond logic and reason, develop trust in our skills of intuition and emotion. Oneness must be the psychological freedom of the slaves. (old metaphor) Oneness is understanding this, our complete unity of all that is now happening, understanding there is no reality or illusion, no unique meaning, no doing. But there is a perfect coincidence of energy, balanced and poised, ever hanging to happen in continuum as now. Such is the wonder of Oneness Unity, the true wonder of you and me. Love the Mystery ………………..
AAU: Dear L10, Advaita is a synonym for absolute understanding. Happy that you have good grasp of things. If neither reality or illusory were present, as you say they are not present, then there would not be perfect coincidence of energy, balanced and poised hanging to happen in continuum as now. You are spot on that life is mysterious Regards AAU
AAU: Hello L6, respond to: "Yes, it's more than possible to hear the cosmic hum. Some experience…" The capacity of the mind to identify and interpret senses is limited. But the ability of intellect to dream about the senses is unimaginable. The capacity of life’s intelligence to manifest a dreamer through the intellect cannot be estimated. Life covers itself intelligently by manifesting such dreams in the mind. Not just a letter, there are plenty more. There is no point in discussing why a letter is illusory until the previous points have clarity. Your first sentence is not clear, please elaborate. English is not my mother tongue, but I understand that there are nuances in every word of every language that has happened to man. Two individuals cannot have an identical intensity of a meaning to a word at any moment. What a Self Realised person ‘should’ be has never been mentioned. What he understands has been shared. A Self Realised person neither cares less nor cares more about anything. All teachers have skills and life is to be admired for making them have them. A guru is he who makes others understand who they are not and not who they are, and that they are not the doers. Understanding is an inherent characteristic of life and not just my life, your life or other’s life. Feelings have happened to man when understanding of the meaning of words happened to him. Feelings cannot exist without understanding. Feelings can be understood as illusory or real, and this man cannot bring it about, It has to happen to man and it will when it is meant to happen to him. Please do reply what you understand is the meaning of illusion? Please ask them who called it ‘Observer’. The wise sages have never said it, the knowledgeable sages have. The subjective perspective is that the knower and known is illusory and not real. It is simultaneously accompanied by the understanding that ‘I have always been a reflection of That’. You are right, the philosophy of India is not man made and neither is any concept that man knows. Every philosophy and concept has been manifested by life at precise moments for an understanding to happen that they are illusory, and this understanding too will happen at the precise moment. Absolute understanding happens when experience is understood to be illusory. In the last response it was mentioned that absolute understanding is relative unity or absolute non-duality which can be understood and realised as illusory but not experienced. You must have missed reading the sentence the last time, otherwise you would not ask who has experienced the absolute. Any experience is illusory and not real, and it cannot be real either, as there is no time, and man is not the doer. Absolute understanding makes man calm and patient, and so would a person who experiences the being or ‘That’ be calm and patient. Majority or many is not the criterion for truth. I understand that the ego, and not just mine, is illusory and not real. Please inform me where a claim of what it means or what it’s like has been made by me? Absolute understanding comes from observing the relative understanding. I mentioned earlier that religions have light as the symbol for divinity. The shape of that light which is lit to signify divinity can neither be controlled nor shaped. Man can neither determine when the candle or wick gets smaller. These are clues that life is light (confirmed by science that every speck of life is light) cannot be controlled or shaped and what the real could mean and what it is like. I mention once more that any concept and dimension that make up a model is illusory. Prove that concept and dimension are real. If you do you would have disproven the wise sages. How could describing where thoughts come from be pointless? As the discussion is about thoughts and it is the right place to enquire where they come from. Your description of the mind has not been rejected. It has been clarified to be illusory. For relative understanding nothing is a mystery as it believes cause and effect to be the truth. The wise sages have proclaimed that life is without cause or effect and a mystery. Mystery cannot be understood. If mystery could be understood then it will not be a mystery. It will then be a known. Life will NOT be a mystery if man could answer where did the first seed to bear a plant come from? Where did the first egg or sperm come from to give birth to an animal and similarly to man? How could the first egg or sperm ever come and from where? Where did the five elements come from and which was the first element that came and where did it come from? Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L6, response to: "BTW, the witness IS consciousness. That's why it's called that. Awareness…." The capacity of the mind to imagine is unimaginable. The intelligence of life cannot be comprehended by the intellect of the mind. Just as baby can never know how the mother’s womb is. How could time exist as an effect as its cause (experience) would require time to exist? Eternity means absence of time. Timeless and eternity are synonyms and not different modes. Regards AAU
L10: Thanks AAU, Advaita is a synonym for absolute understanding. You asked – what does oneness mean? Oneness is absolute understanding of now. You and now have no separation. All that is happening now is perfect oneness.
L6: Eternity means all time.
AAU: Dear L10, It was not a question asked to know the answer. Usually a question is asked as the answer is known. A question cannot be asked if the answer is not known. It was an insight to what oneness is and not a question. Yes, you are spot on. The illusory that is happening now is perfect oneness. Regards AAU www.acadun.com
L6: Hi L10, nicely put. My only caveat would be your comment "Our intellect has to be firstly tamed". We have to be a little careful about ideas that we can individually change how our mind and intellect operate and that they must be controlled. Now certainly, there are people who teach this, but I've found that the "control" of the mind and intellect occur as an effect of disengaging from identification with the sense of me. That also leads to Self Realization. After that, at a certain point, there is a recognition or realization and the intellect shifts from looking out and dividing to looking within and joining. This is known as the Resolute Intellect and relates to its foundation in unchanging being. And that is the development of oneness or non-duality.
L6: Hi AAU, Ah, I see. I've made it all up. As have the Vedic seers. Not to mention pretty much every tradition you can name. I'd call that the Muller approach. Make it a myth. Has it not occurred to you that just because you have not yet experienced it, that it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or cannot be experienced? Sorry, but the context of your understanding is skewed if you don't think our foundations can be experienced. They are experience itself. But that is up to you. Clearly, your desire is to convince me of your truth rather than discuss points. Perhaps you prefer a lively debate or argument? You're asking me questions I've already covered and you discounted. I did not miss reading your sentence. I don't agree because that is not my experience. I did not say models were real. I said they were representative or symbolic, just as the words on this page. This is how we are communicating. Or at least attempting to. You say "life is a mystery" and "Mystery cannot be understood." And yet you say "Understanding is an inherent characteristic of life." Those facts don't stand together to me. Life is vast and complex but that does not mean it's foundations cannot be known. Describing where thoughts come from is not pointless. As I said I've done it several times. But the effort to explain in this context is pointless when you have rejected my platform. You have described the factors involved as imagination, illusion, and so on. The first element is space (the texts like Sankhya also tell us that) and it comes originally from Consciousness becoming aware of itself. As I've previously mentioned, Time also arises from that dynamic. And this can be known from direct experience. Hold your 2 hands up facing each other. What is between them? This is how awareness, curving back on itself and seeing itself gives rise to space. Disagree all you like but it is the fundamental dynamic of every appearance that arises. Finally, Timeless means without time. Eternity means infinite or all time. Not the same. You can look it up. Because time is an effect, how does that make it real? A reflection is an effect. All of creation is an effect. Personally, I've found it interesting to explore how the apparent world comes to be. It's fascinating to me. But I have not said it is real unto itself. It is Lila. You are of course welcome to your opinion but I've made it clear why I don't share it.
L10: The pleasure is sharing. It was said - "Mystery cannot be understood." Which I feel, is a beautiful paradox. Great Mystics were described as the keepers of the Mysteries, albeit at different times and with different cultures, different allegories, symbols and metaphors. Truth is an unchanging personnel condition and only truth can stand the test of time. All grand or glorious Mysteries were made safe and perpetuated by numerous individuals or groups throughout the past and the present. Logic and reason, opposites and dualities are respected essentials on a psychological journey of expansion. Psychologically we carry a void which can expand or contract. Our minds sense a known and unknown of its sentient phenomena. This sense of the unknown drives the human passion for memorable dramas to encapsulate allegorical explanations and direction of the sacred laws. The ancients used dramas like Noah’s Ark, Mosses, king Solomon, Shiva, Krishna, Brahma and The Buddha to convey principles. We today have the techno virtual platform of the internet with new stars like Google, LinkedIn and Facebook. Fear not, that today’s stars will soon become the historic dramas of the future. No doubt, Elvis Presley is already referred to as the King. We the present, if to seriously venture into an appreciation of the Mysteries must be prepared to do more than logic and reason. This our human psychological condition in truth is designed for far more than logic and reason. Our capacity to imagine, dream, feel, hope and fear are very real realities of being human. These must have purpose. Our approach to the inner unknown can be gratified by a trusting faithful freedom to embrace, celebrate and then work positively with one’s own imagination, emotions, hopes and fears. To love all of what we are, inner and outer. The Mysteries are not to understood, they are lived. Each and every day by the seers. Dance with Mysteries …….. as they dance with you.
L3: The meaning of oneness without the second(advayam) is the topic of VEDANTA. VEDANTA also reveals the knowledge about JivA JivA beda,JivA Ísvara beda and JivA jagat beda. Deals with the creator and creation.
L6: Hi L3. Yes, the "inconceivable oneness and difference" coexisting. Apparent differences that are united - in some ways, paradoxically. How we can be united with all and yet still be having distinct experiences from anyone else. The way totality can know itself in all it's fine details.
AAU: Dear L6, respond to: "Ah, I see. I've made it all up. As have the Vedic seers. Not to….." Man cannot make anything up. They all happen to him including the myths. Even the myth is illusory and not real. Every experience is experienced. What has been pointed is that any experience is illusory and not real, meaning an experience’s actuality is illusory. What has been pointed is that experience cannot be experienced as an actuality or real. Dear L6, if anyone is convinced that will remain a belief to him. If clarity sets in, it points to the truth. Clarity was being shared. Relative understanding has a desire to know more. Absolute understanding reveals desire is an illusory function of the ego, which it thinks is real. Argument does not change man qualitatively. Argument is merely an exercise in trading beliefs. Man has enough of this every day as it is, and there is no point in adding more. Rendering beliefs that do not stand up to 100% reason and logic is not an answer, it is just another belief. And all that is being shared is that communication and therefore any model is illusory and not real. Whatever man believes he makes, is not a mystery to him though a belief has mysteriously happened to man and he does not make the belief happen. Now, can man make that which is inherent? It is present whether man likes it or not and its presence will be a mystery to any intelligent man. Nothing has been rejected. Nothing will be rejected if it stands up to 100% reason and logic. By 100% reason and logic the factors described by you have been explained to be illusory. Therefore by 100% reason and logic please explain that the factors described by you to be real and not as real. If space comes originally from consciousness becoming aware of itself, it means that consciousness does not need space to exist. It means consciousness was existing in no space or absence of space, and space came originally from consciousness. This cannot be disproved, so point taken. Space has to be taken into consideration too. So, Space that originally came out of consciousness is either filled with darkness or filled with light. Light that man can see is visible light and darkness is light that is not visible to man. So space is light that originally came out from consciousness which makes consciousness light too, and therefore space cannot be the first element that originally came out of consciousness. What is between two hands held up and facing each other is space which is light and the hands facing each other are an illusory reflection of light too. The fundamental dynamic of every appearance is colour. If everything were a single colour, appearance would not be possible. And colour is a function of light. The dynamics of light is outside this discussion. . Time and eternity was responded in your previous reply. An effect does not make anything real as any effect requires time, albeit illusory. A reflection does not require time as reflection is an inherent characteristic of light and is not an effect of time. Light too does not need time to exist and is not an effect. Light’s existence is timeless. If the world is not real unto itself, please clarify what is Lila? An opinion is a view or a judgment that can be disproved. If the statements shared with you could be disproved then it would be an opinion. Please disprove the statements shared with you, by 100% reason and Logic. It is difficult to share if doubt exists. Sharing happens in freedom when doubt does not exist. Regards AAU www.acadun.com
L6: Sorry, AAU, but you ask for "100% reason and logic" but assume too much, thus falling off your own wagon. Your space and light sequence would be a good example. Space is not light but light is in space. That's true even physically. The traditional sequence is Space, Air, Fire (light), Water, Earth. Essentially, increasing density and each builds on the previous ones. Consciousness vibrates within itself, the medium (air) arises and sound and light emerge. What I refer to is not physical air and space but the subtle foundations of them. There are also subjective equivalents. For example, we experience the vibration (the primordial sound) as bliss. And yes, it is all Lila, the divine play. Some call it illusion as it is only an appearance. But the appearance points to what underlies it so should not be rejected completely. If you're looking for "absolute understanding", you're not going to find it through "100% reason and logic". That's all mind, part of the play. But it can be found through direct knowing, by recognizing what is beyond the mind. There is no way to "prove" anything of this to you that you have not experienced yourself. I can tell you all I want to about the taste of a dragon fruit but if you have not tasted one yourself, it will just be an idea without foundation. That is the real illusion.
AAU: Dear l6, response to: "Eternity means all time." A watch or a clock does not measure time it only defines time. Even science does not know what a second in time really is. Time is illusory and if eternity means all time, it does mean eternity is illusory too and you are absolutely correct, eternity is illusory too, as man knows eternity as a word and a word however is a mysterious manifestation of sound. Eternity means absence of time. Eternity means all time to relative understanding and it is correct as far as relative understanding goes. Regards AAU www.acadun.com
AAU: Dear L3, response to: "The meaning of oneness without the second(advayam) is the topic of VEDANTA….." Oneness is not the topic of Vedanta. It is one of the topics of the Upanishads followed by Vedanta. That Vedanta reveals knowledge reveals that duality is also the topic of Vedanta, as knowledge is filed with duality. That Vedanta deals with the creator and creation reveals it deals with duality. Therefore one who follows Vedanta is not free of duality. Regards AAU
L10: Agreed response to: "Eternity means all time." We the sentient being sentient here and now need to cohabit this moment. Cohabitation is enhanced thought cooperation. Communication is instrumental in positive cohesion growth and expansion of the sentient being sentient. The word sound ‘Eternity’ helps counter-claim conceptual beginning and end. Consider the now – when did now begin, when did-could now end ??? We see there is no logical answer to this. Now is not the past or future. Therefore now has no time. No beginning or end. Now is in effect, eternal. Time is a label. We can only ever exist as sentient being sentient in the now.
AAU: Dear L6, Response to: "Sorry, AAU, but you ask for "100% reason and logic" but assume too much, thus….." -- Assumption happens when reason and logic is below 100% meaning not total. When reason and logic is 100% meaning total, it reveals that whatever is in any space on earth is made up of atoms, these atoms are present in the air which is made up of gases that make up air unseen by the human eye, atoms that make up millions of organisms unseen by the human eye are present in any space on earth. Total reason and logic reveals that atoms are energy which is basically light. Therefore space is light whether anybody likes it or not. Traditions happen when reason and logic are not total. When reason and logic is not total, a tradition is assumed that subtle foundations of air, fire, water and earth build on the previous ones. Even if the assumptions were true, total reason and logic would reveal that subtle water would put out subtle fire and it would not be possible for earth to appear. Also where would the subtle air, fire, water and earth exist when space is light? Excess of knowledge increases imagination, which eventually become dreams. The dream is an experience, as is any dream. The experience of a dream passes away. The experience of bliss is not present in every moment of every day. If it were a real, meaning bliss is an actual experience it would be present every moment of every day. As the bliss passes away the experience of the bliss or primordial sound is a dream. If experiences were real they would not pass away. That they do indicates that experiences are thoughts and everyone knows that thoughts pass away. An appearance points to light and nothing else. It was mentioned in the previous response that an appearance happens because of colours, which is basically light. Nothing is rejected by absolute understanding. Life is what it is and it cannot be rejected. Therefore Lila and the divine play, is a play of light, whether anybody likes it or not. Absolute understanding is a synonym for wisdom. The wise sages had abundance of logic and reasoning power. They shared wisdom only because of absolute understanding that happened to them because of the power of total reason and logic. What is in the mind is part of the play of light and so too is absolute understanding and wisdom part of the play of light. ‘That’ is therefore pure light which inherently reflects this Lila, divine play or illusion. Stories become the truth even without experiencing them. Stories are nevertheless NOT the truth. Similarly, stories about the experiences ‘of this’, which cannot be proved become the truth even without experiencing them. The stories ‘of this’ which cannot be proved is the illusion. A dragon fruit can be tasted and its taste could be known and experienced, both as illusory thoughts in the mind. Regards AAU www.acadun.com
AAU: Dear L10. Response to: "Agreed …" -- Totally spot on. We can only ever exist as sentient being sentient, albeit illusory, in the now. The now is eternity. Regards AAU www.acadun.com
L6: Sorry, AAU, but you're spouting uninformed opinions, not logic, not even close to 100%. You seem to assume some sort of bizarre perfection. re: L3: The Upanishads are a branch of Vedanta. They deal with it because duality is part of the process of coming to oneness or non-duality. They are the essence of the Vedas, drawn from many other books. The Brahma Sutras are another aspect of Vedanta. They deal with the process of progressive uniting that happens in the Unity stage. You're making physical assumptions about the elements. The 5 elements are energetic, not physical and interplay and intermix. We can associate them more with the physical element valence groups. And while I'll agree some traditions have come to be run on concepts rather than direct experience, they can be verified by direct experience. Why else would cultures around the world describe similar subtle elements? I would agree that an atom is made partly of light but just because it's in space, that doesn't make it space. Again, you're confusing subtle with manifest. And I don't disagree at all that Lila is light and sound. Very much so. Quite the show in fact. On a far greater scale than our universe. Self Realization is also known as Sat Chit Ananda or Absolute Bliss Consciousness. The Buddhists call it Nirvana. One of the characteristics of the stage when it's established is bliss, 24/7. The dominance of the bliss in awareness comes and goes but it is ever present. That meets your criteria for "real" but I'd disagree with that logic as well as it's still an expression of creation. Reality is what underlies bliss. Bliss comes to be known by coming to reality. It is the vibrating edge of self-aware consciousness. If you're so big on logic, you might find reading Nyaya interesting. It's the Indian system of logic, far more advanced than Spinoza. The dragon fruit reference was for illustration. I'm glad you're so confident in your knowledge.Given that you're disagreeing on points I don't disagree with, we're really not communicating.
AAU: Dear L6, What was shared is deductions by common sense based on scientific facts. Opinion is bizarre if it is neither based on common sense nor science. Duality is realised as oneness when the appearance of duality is understood to be illusory and not real, whether anybody likes it or not. It is the intelligence of life to stay hidden by manifesting Vedas, Vedanta, Brahma sutras and many other books. Life nevertheless gives clues of its nature and reveals it in certain Upanishads and in the present century life reveals itself as absolute understanding and as science. Physical assumptions of elements were never made, please indicate where it was made? Don’t forget to indicate. You are correct five elements are energetic and not physical. Energy is light therefore energetic means light is energy. As everything that exists in the world including, man, mind, vegetation, animal kingdom and matter are made up of five elements how could they be physical if atoms are energetic meaning light? Please explain and do not forget to explain. Absolute understanding does explain this but relative understanding does not, as it is not its function. Every atom, is made up of, electrons, neutrons, protons, bosons, quarks, super quarks, and few more before Higg’s particle all of which is light. An atom is therefore totally light and not partially light. Just as relative understanding is partially right and not totally right. Relative understanding has no clarity of what is subtle and what is manifest. It would be if it understands that five elements are energy which is light, it cannot impart that understanding for it has not happened to it. Does sat chit anand translate as absolute bliss consciousness? Absolute real is neither created nor manifested. Relative real which is illusory but only appears real (an appearance has been clarified as being a function of light) and is not created but is manifested as a reflection (meaning appearance) of light. If as you say the dominance of bliss comes and goes the dominance is relative meaning illusory and not real. It indicates that bliss that is experienced is a dream. If more is needed it will happen if it is meant to happen. Relative understanding builds confidence. Absolute understanding gifts patience and trust in life. Regards AAU www.acadun.com
L6: Sorry AAU, this discussion is neither about "common sense" (aka relative understanding) or science. Science is "the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment." That is Maya or Lila in this context, depending on how you look at it. You ask me questions to clarify something you've already discounted. This is not discussion. Over and over again you make the same stale points. Where does this lead us? I said "partly" light because they are also sound or vibration, which you have also said. The elements model suggests everything is made of a blend of 5, so atoms would thus be made up of all 5, not just light/fire. In the context of that discussion, partly. But again, you have to put this in context. On one level, all is light. On another level, all is vibration or sound. But from a more inclusive container, it is all of it. Sat Chit Ananda translates literally as Absolute Consciousness Bliss. Absolute Bliss Consciousness is the version adjusted to English grammar. The dominance vL12s because we're experiencing with a relative body and because our attention has greater and less focus. That's the relative part. But it, as with the observer, is ever-present in that state. That's not opinion. That's why it's called Sat Chit Ananda. The Absolute, the Observer and the bliss, together as one. (but separate from the world as yet) And yes, because bliss is vibration, it is an element of relative. But because it's on the "edge" prior to actual expression, it is in a field known as "the gap". Kind of a little of both. It is in the lively nature of consciousness itself. Bliss is also an aspect that leads into actual non-duality, the recognition that the world is also That.
L5: Some corrections. :-) One. there is no 'relative body'. The experience of the body is nothing but though form, created from an idea and made real with the attention that is the power of maya (maya = thought). Second. There is no separate observer. 'Counsiousness' and the 'world' is one. Life. The separate one observing and 'experiencing' himself 'not being this / not being that' is nothing else than thougt-formfooling itself, pretending. Thought-form is just a shadow of the life one is.
AAU: Dear L5, Some amendments: One. You are correct. The experience of the body is nothing but thought form, manifested from an idea and made real with the attention that is the power of maya (maya is manifested by thought). Thought is nevertheless illusory (maya) and not real, and that is why thoughts manifest maya. The body is relative to mean that it is illusory (maya) and not real. Second. Correct again. The world is an illusory reflection of consciousness. Correct again. Thought-form is an illusory manifestation of life. AAU, www.acadun.com
AAU: Dear L6, Response to: "Sorry AAU, this discussion is neither about "common sense"….." Common sense means good sense and sound judgement in practical matters. The world is real and practical to relative understanding and it is to science as well. So common sense and science should be the criterion for the discussion. Science is included in the maya. Science does not know either by observation or experiment how a single cell functions in its entirety let alone the entire body. It is maya how the entire body works. Nothing has been discounted only good sense and sound judgement (common sense) has been applied. Sound has been mentioned and not vibrations. Sound is in wave form and therefore vibrations are present. Vibrations are therefore sound and not separate from it. Sound is nothing but light. Points appear stale if clarity is absent. Clarity means the absence of every single doubt. Again it is pointed that sound is light at a lesser speed. The speed of visible light is known by science but not the speed of light as sound and many other forms of light such as radio waves, micro waves, infrared rays, ultraviolet rays, x-rays and gamma rays. sat means existence, chit means wisdom and ananda means bliss. Adjustment not required If ‘it’ is ever present the observer and attention would be total and not have great or less focus. This is common sense if ‘it’ were absolute. As attention would not be present if ‘it’ were not there? Ishavasya upanishad states even a part of the whole is whole. Therefore the ‘gap’ with bit of the both is illusory and not real. The real does not have any need to recognise. Man with an ego only has a need to recognise. The absolute understanding that duality is non-duality but appears dual in the mind as thoughts which are illusory is bliss 24/7 every moment of every day. There is definitely no annoyance for sure. Regards AAU, www.acadun.com
L6: I'd go further and say that the body itself is nothing but a thought form. It's useful to differentiate this as it's not just the experience of the body that is maya but the body itself. It's also worth noting that it's not my personal thoughts that create this thought form. They're just a reaction to it. The body and all forms are created in the whole because an individual having personal thoughts is also part of the Maya. And I'll again note that how Maya is understood vL12s at different stages of development. As noted prior, when tamas is dominant, Maya acts as a covering and the world is seen as real. That is the typical perception. With Rajas, the world is seen as an illusion. And with Sattva, the world is seen as Lila, the divine expression. The last has a very different flavour than "world is illusion". Its not that it is then seen as real in and of itself. But it's nature and origins become known directly so the relationship with it changes again.
L6: Hi AAU, if you have no doubt, then you have complete certainty. This gives a feeling of clarity but that is an illusion. If you have all the answers, it means you are unwilling to see other perspectives and are stuck in a box. And that is a barrier to deeper knowing. Even the greatest sages did not have all the answers. Speed is just a relative way to measure. Sound is not light at a slower speed. Light can move in a vacuum. Sound is a wave that requires a medium. Empty space is silent. It doesn't sound like "sound judgment in practical matters" to me. Just lots of opinions. Common sense is also shared. It's not common if no one else sees it your way. We might derive wisdom from consciousness because understanding is structured in consciousness. But Chit means consciousness or of consciousness. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cit_%28consciousness%29. A person who is Self Realized is always awake within. However, they continue to live a life and focus on eating and acting and sleeping like anyone else. When they are focused on reading, they are not paying attention to attention itself. But if they pause for a moment and look, it is always there. All this activity takes place within the context of the ever present awareness. The focus is not seen as anything but focused awareness. The absolute is expressing itself in a relative way. There is another aspect here too. The fact that the observer can notice the observer. In other words, there is deeper and broader layers to the rishi or observer. The sense of observer deepens over time until it becomes inclusive of everything. You're welcome to cite common sense and disagree, but I'm observing the common experiences of this process. You're taking the gap reference out of context and confusing stages. The Upanishads focus is on the process of Unity. When one is both knower and known, there is no gap. It is seen as a gap only during the earlier stages, in the context in which I was pointing. "The real does not have any need to recognise." OK - but why then is there a Maya? Why did thought forms arise and create this apparent world in the first place? Why are people not enlightened and enlightened?
L9: I'm really grateful to you, AAU, for you really bring out the best in L6. L6, I really love your last comment. Brilliant. "When they are focused on reading, they are not paying attention to attention itself. But if they pause for a moment and look, it is always there." Wow, this is so pinpoint accurate. Beautiful.... "You're taking the gap reference out of context and confusing stages. The Upanishads focus is on the process of Unity. When one is both knower and known, there is no gap." So this is where conceptual thinking really falls short. Funny... I was just reading this passage (Ishavasya Upanishad). It is about love. Take away love, give all 'your' away. And how much remains? All that remains still is love. So there is no gap. At all. :-)
L5: L6, ""It's also worth noting that it's not my personal thoughts that create this thought form. They're just a reaction to it. The body and all forms are created in the whole because an individual having personal thoughts is also part of the Maya."" They are not personal in the sense that every word/thought and even feelings you know comes out of the world around you. You have heard or read it somehow. Thats all. But it is you continuing thought-form/maya. There is no maya outside of you…. you see ...
L6: "There is no maya outside of you" Right, L5. It's inside of me because everything arises within the Self. ;-)
L6:Thanks, L9. I have wondered why the conversation continues. ;-) There is a t erm used in Unity, Leisha Avidya or the remains of ignorance. The gradual resolution of all aspects of personhood. But one of the ways it is also used is the intentional retention of a small separation so that there is still an object of devotion and love can flow. So yes, no gap. But an artificial one created so love can flow and creation express.
L9: ;-) Yes, L6, there has been a lot of processing going on here, and your contributions are of tremendous support. And very inspiring! Namaste
L6: By coincidence, I got a link to a recent talk by Igor Kufayev covering many of the topics we've been discussing recently. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uObE8H_Wi5w It's a 5 parter. The first talks about the Advaita and Tantra traditions as they are currently understood and their differences on the nature of the world. The second talks about sat chit ananda and the dynamics of consciousness. Then he goes into questions. Each starts with an intro page with the topics. One of Igor's biggest things is clarifying many of the points I've raised. He has more expertise in the bodies energy physiology (kundalini, etc) but we agree on points like the stages and the mistaken notion that the world should be discounted as purposeless illusion. As he points out, after Self Realization, it is the illusion that becomes the vehicle for consciousness to express itself and be known. It is interesting to consider. We might call Advaita and Tantra (as currently typically taught) as the monks and the householders paths. Or we might consider them the teachings of 2 different stages in our development. Each has complete validity but they are not really mutually exclusive.
L6: The theme of the talk was Brahman is the world. This comes from the phrase: The world is unreal Only Brahman is real The World is Brahman The third line is really the essence of non-duality, the resolution of that paradox.
L9: Thanks, I'm gonna check it out. This resolution is exacly what seems to be going here for a while right now. My wife asked me a few days about my 'daily experience of me and the world' and as I was trying to find words for it, it dawned on me that a subtle change has taken place. "When they are focused on reading, they are not paying attention to attention itself. But if they pause for a moment and look, it is always there." This is almost a carbon copy of what I said to my wife: when I am working, there is a certain focus. A narrowing down. Yet in this smaller reality, there is awareness of it, and also awareness of how the working unfolds all by it self like a beautiful composition. Then, when I pause for a second or get up, the world hits me in the face, opening me up again, always accompanied by bliss and love. And as I gave it more thoughts, I realized what is actually happening is first of all, that the world has so much and such a sparkling presence, that it is no longer the world that 'distracts' me but it is 'the world' that keeps me 'awake'. (Is this what you mean by "moving from Maya to Lila"?) And the freshness of every experience (as if I see everything the first time) probably results from the fact that it is not so much 'the world' that comes to my attention, but 'the world + attention'. This made the sentence 'The World is Brahman' pop up in my mind - with the proposition: this may be the essence of what this experience is all about.
AAU: Dear L6, respond to: "I'd go further and say that the body itself is nothing but a thought form. " -- During the sleeping state the body does not know itself or the bed on which it is asleep, as thoughts are absent. This makes the body a thought form and so too the experience of it a thought form. If an experience of the body and the body is maya or illusory, so would be every experience a thought from and illusory. That which is just a reaction is in thought form and personal. All thoughts are personal for they come from within you. Ponder how they are manifested within you and come out at precise moments. The thoughts neither come from outside nor is present because you heard or read it. If so, from where did the thoughts come to those outside to say it or write it? Ponder. So, the tamas sees the world as real as a typical perception and not the divine everywhere. The rajas sees the world as an illusion and the divine is not present in the illusion. You have not mentioned this point so point it out in your next reply. So, when sattva is dominant, does satva see the divine in every speck of existence? As the divine is present everywhere. What is the nature and origins of the world seen by sattva? Regards AAU, www.acadun.com
L9: to my last comment: if I would get stuck in 'Only Brahman is real', I probably would change my way of communicating. If I would write: "I now see that only Brahman is real", this would be a contradition in itself. And I would have to change my sentence in, for instance: "What is shared is that only Brahman is real", so as to avoid the use of any personal pronoun. And yes, I have known this fase, in which I even felt a stong physical aversive reaction whenever I was in a situation that a sentence starting with 'I' was expected from me. But that is just a phase, in which the truth of 'Only Brahman is real' is so overwhelming, that every use of the word I feels like a lie. In the end, however, both world come together - the absolute and the relative. And only from that point of view, the word 'Oneness' takes on its deeper meaning. For there would be no need of the word oneness if there was only one. It would be a nonsensical statement to use the word, as it would be obvious. The hidden world in the word 'oneness' is: diversity. It is exactly because there is diversity, that the word Oneness is needed. A beautiful example of how the mind can misunderstand this, is in the last comment by AAU: "During the sleeping state the body does not know itself or the bed on which it is asleep, as thoughts are absent." This is true. This can be known 'in hindsight'. Drawing from this that the body does not exist, is an expression of confusion. If the body did not exist at all, the sentence "During the sleeping state the body" loses it's meaning for there is no body and therefore no sleeping state. So what is forgotten, that there is still a person who is writing this and commenting this, and not using personal pronouns and using indirect speech does not make that person vanish. A quote: Since we live on two levels as human beings, we can never reduce reality to a single dimension. We are not just this relative body/mind organism, we are also an absolute being/awareness/presence, which is much larger than our bodily form or personal history. But we are also not just this larger, formless absolute; we are also incarnate as this particular individual. If we identify totally with form - our body/mind/personality - our life will remain confined to known, familiar structures. But if we try to live only as pure emptiness, or absolute being, we may have a hard time fully engaging with our humanity. At the level of absolute truth, the personal self is not ultimately real; at the relative level, it must be respected. If we use the truth of no-self to avoid ever having to make personal statements such as "I want to know you better" to someone we love, this would be a perversion. John Welwood on page 153 of "Chapter 11 - Realisation and Embodiment: Psychological Work in the Service of Spiritual Development" in "The Psychology of Awakening - Buddhism, science, and our day-to-day lives", edited by Guy Watson, Stephen Batchelor and Guy Claxton, ISBN 0 7126 7043 2
AAU: Dear L6, response to: "If you have no doubt, then you have complete certainty…." --- Clarity reveals that certainty is illusory. All that has been shared is that clarity means absence of doubt. Absence of doubt and presence of answers has not been claimed. Sound is light at a lesser speed as sound is produced by displacement of molecules with a media. Empty space on earth is silent and as the capacity of the mind is limited, it cannot hear the sound. The same is true of space in outer space. Relative understanding shares common sense based not on total reason and logic. This gives rise to beliefs and do not point to the truth. Please elaborate ‘we might derive’. Man can surely know wisdom but not consciousness, so chit would mean consciousness that cannot become the known and wisdom that could become the known. The Self Realised is always awake within and lives every day knowing the eating, the working, the resting etc. every day. happens to them and they do not make them happen. When they are reading their attention is on reading and not on anything else. This too happens to them and realise they do not make it happen or claim that they make it happen. When they pause to look they realise everything is there and yet not there. They realise life is a singular movement and their attention is on life and not on the mind. The only aspect is. The sense of observer deepens as wisdom sets in and the ego (you) evolves as a witnesser (sakshi). The witnesser realises that everything is illusory but appears real to the ego (you).. Common sense has been cited but not disagreement. You are welcome to observe the common experiences of the ego (you) of the process. Ishavasya upanishad was mentioned and not the upanishads. The upanishad states that even a part is whole. So please explain the gap contains both of what? The real has no needs either. It is a divine play of light and sound-Lila. Man too is a divine play of light and sound. So the thoughts forms and the world is not for anyone. That is why it as a play, meaning a drama. When absolute understanding happens to man he realises that it is all a play happening in illusory time, while the nameless ‘here’ and timeless ‘now’ is enlightened and always has been enlightened. A Self Realised man is he who lives in the ‘here’ and ‘now’ contented, and patient every moment of every day.
AAU: Dear L6, Response to: "By coincidence, I got a link to a recent talk by Igor….." --- That the known is illusory has already been mentioned and proved why it is illusory. If consciousness could be known, it would be illusory and not real.
AAU: Dear L6, response to: "The theme of the talk was Brahman is the world……" ---- Yes, Brahman is the world as Brahman is light and the world too is light.
AAU: Dear L9, response to: "And in addition to my last comment: if I would get stuck in 'Only Brahman is real', I ……" --- The relative too is non-dual but appears dual to the mind. The hidden world in the word oneness cannot be diversity as diversity is oneness but appears diverse or dual in the mind. The body does not exist as a reality. The body exists as a thought, which means that the body exists as an illusion in the waking state and not as a reality or actuality. Writing and commenting is happening to illusory AAU who appears real to the mind. No one vanishes as long as life happens to them. Reality is a single dimension as it is pure light, whether we like it or not. That is why it is real. We are neither relative nor absolute, neither this nor that. The absolute reflects the relative that appears as we to be the real. Man neither can live in emptiness nor does he know what emptiness is. Man also cannot do it as man is not the doer.
L9: Dear illusory AAU, there is no L9 here. That is just a word. There is no doer here. Beding a doer is an illusion created by thinking. Everything is seen happening, seen being done. I could write now: I am sitting on a chair, and typing these words. But when I look, I can not find a body, not a chair, no sitting, no typing. These words as expressed just now are not an expressionknowledge, neither an expression of experience, but what is seen. It is an expression of absolute truth. And on this level, many of your statements are fairly okay - that is, I can see what you are trying to say, and as separate lines they often Truth, but as a whole, it is untrue. It is a misconception. And by 'placing yourself outside of the equation' you created a new illusion - a frozen reality in which no learning and further unfolding is allowed. This is a text that happened to be mailed to me today - it is written by Jeff Foster: ALL THE WORLD'S A STAGE In my short life, I have known the passing of myriad states, experiences, belief systems, identities, conceptual fixations. I have identified with many roles, all of which, at one time or another, I mistook for who I really am, losing my sense of humour, humility, and ultimately my humanity, in the process. I have been the suicidal depressive, the lost soul seeking answers to my never-ending questions, the seeker of a future spiritual enlightenment, the chaser of states of bliss, confusing experiences for the ground of experience itself. I have been the excited one, the blissed-out visionary, the ecstatic one, the exhausted one, the homesick one, the one in absolute despair, sometimes all at the same time. I have been the enlightened guru, imagining that it was my job to awaken the un-awakened, remove the pain of others, knock sense into the ignorant world, save humanity from itself. I have imagined that the answers were mine, that the questions were 'theirs', that I was 'finished' in some way, and 'they' were still works-in-progress. I have been the angry anti-guru, criticizing gurus and their spiritual paths and teachings, secretly at war with the dreams of others, not realizing that the anti-guru is the biggest guru of all, and the 'non-role' is the heaviest role, and it was only my dream that others' dreams were somehow wrong for them. I have been a numb, lifeless, detached, transcendent non-entity, an 'ego-free being', subtly putting down others for 'still having a self' or 'still being a person' or simply 'not getting it yet'. I have been 'pure awareness', not a person at all, dryly lecturing others about 'pure awareness' in a lifeless, impersonal, detached way, devoid of any kind of heart connection. I couldn't see that even this was yet another identification - the 'pure non-person'. The subtle works of the ego! I have known the passing of all of these roles, these states, these beautiful fragments of the tapestry of life, none of which can begin to define the vastness or timelessness of the Presence that I am, that you are, that we all are beyond our mind-created roles. Yet I do not reject the fragments, nor cling to them - they are all intimately known, familiar visitors, deserving of love, not rejection. But all these identities have at one time or another separated 'me' from 'you', separated the 'one over here' from the 'one over there', divided teacher from student, guru from disciple, lover from the beloved, expert from novice, and healer from the healed, when in fact, these divisions never happened, ontologically-speaking. I am what you are. And so, in the end, as in the beginning, I can only meet you as a friend, as a profound equal, a fellow wave in the vast ocean of life, and remind you of what you already know in your heart of hearts - that we are oceanic. This is poetry, not a fixed, regurgitated teaching or history lesson. This is music, not a dry lecture about something called consciousness. This is dance, not logic - an alive silence - and even as these words are being typed, I know that none of them are true, but all of them are alive, and that's what really matters. I'm not saying "I used to be identified with all these things, but now I'm totally clear and non-identified". Do you see, that's the old enlightenment myth rearing its beautiful head? The image of "the finished one" - another beautiful cosmic joke! I'm saying, there is no such thing as "finished" at all, here in the vastness of you, for who would provide the reference point, and who would actually care? Only the mind deals in beginnings and endings, finished or unfinished. Life is too fresh for time. Be what you are. Indefinable, undefined, open.
L9: Dear AAU, I only enjoy interacting with real persons, of flesh and blood, so I am going to leave our 'non-dialogue' at that. Thank you for your contributions which were, in trying to clarify 'my posistion', really valuable in deepening my understanding Kind regards and namaste L9
L9: Dear L6, Great link, great video's. "This is the structural basis behind the Lila. [....] Every object is now a manifestation of bliss. [...] From Maya it is now being viewed as that which abides in juise, to be celebrated, savoured and enjoyed." Well, I guess that answers my previous question :-) There is one point where my experience differs from what Igor is stating: "The one who has realized his oneness with Brahman, does not fail to experience pain and suffering, but it does not obstruct one's identity wicht sat-chit-ananda." It would be an adequate description of what is experienced here the last two years, but for the word 'suffering'. For pain still may arise, but suffering no more, and I can not see how it could possibly arise any more. Suffering can only arise when I would not embrace whatever is happening. I know some teachers s who would say the same as Igor does, others (like Byron Katie) who experience it like I do. But maybe I misread what he says - and he is only talking about the suffering he sees around him - for of course, not being able to suffer anymore does not mean that I cannot see the suffering of others, let alone be compassionate. I wonder what you have to say on this, L6. (Of course, the last part of his statement (it does not obstruct) needs no comment. This is how it is.)
AAU: Dear L9, Response to: "This is a text that happened to be mailed to me today"…. ---- That none of the beautiful fragments of the tapestry of life can begin to define the vastness or timelessness of the presence that I am or you are, is another spiritual behaviour just as the rest enumerated. All that one can say is who he is not and not who he is or others are. Life is fresh every moment of life and not too fresh for time, because, a moment in life is not a period of time. A moment in life is eternity. The ‘here’ and ‘now is timeless, thoughtless and eternal. Everything happens in the mind in time which is mistaken for life.
AAU: Dear L9, response to: "I only enjoy interacting with real persons, of flesh and blood, so I am going to leave our 'non-dialogue' at that."…. --- Every person appears real, but fortunately he is not real. If a person were real; for example, the first feeling he had will never go away as the feeling would be real. Life would be impossible on many counts. Life surely is compassionate to manifest an illusory person. Every person is illusory but appears real. A dialogue discusses beliefs and also brings clarity to beliefs. A non-dialogue happens between a deaf and dumb to whom speaking and hearing does not happen, and to a man to whom speaking and hearing happens. Happy that the dialogue deepened your understanding, so it was not non-dialogue after all. Regards and Namaste AAU
L6: Hi L9, yes, it's fascinating how the growth just kind of sneaks up on us and the mind is left wondering what has happened. You describe it very clearly. And yes, it's kind of like that. As you note, Igor talks about it. There are 2 key aspects of that stage of the process- the first is the refinement of perception which takes many forms. But in essence the layers of what is here are gradually revealed. The other aspect is the awakening divine heart. While this isn't really a different heart, it may be experienced subjectively as a more subtle version of the heart chakra. Obviously it relates to a flowering of unconditional love. Love like you wouldn't believe possible. From prior comments, I have the impression that has been developing for you. It's known as Glorified or Refined Self Realization or as God Consciousness when it's fully developed. Much more of course could be said. Don't be surprised if you have occasional "blasts" where the bliss or love kick up a massive notch and are briefly almost overwhelming. For some it is mostly more gentle but this can happen. As a friend jokes, you can hope this doesn't happen in public. (laughs) Rapture is a good word. It's worth mentioning the saying that Brahman cannot be understood even by someone in Unity consciousness. While you have a sense of aspects of it, the reality of it goes beyond the sense of Maya or Lila. Igor didn't talk about stages in that talk. Agreed on AAU quote. The mind and ego concepts sleep every night. The perception of the body stops. But the body does not end, otherwise it would vanish from the bed and your wife would not see it sleeping. This is mistaken attribution. The mind creates the world, but not the individual mind. The individual mind is an illusion created by the ego's desire for control. But mind exists as a function of consciousness. So just as consciousness is not really bound to an apparent individual, neither is the mind. Seeing it otherwise is just subjective, related to identification. Nice Welwood quote. Because of my own history I've never much related to terms like Emptiness and no-self but have come to discus them with people who have so can relate to them better now.
L6: Hi L9, on suffering, there are 2 things. In Igor's case, he is using the term a little differently. The suffering we experience prior to the shift does indeed end. We are no longer caught by emotions in a way that will lose us to it. But this does not end emotions or physical pain. In some ways we may feel them much more fully as there is no longer the resistance to life. And in fact, when the heart is wide open and unconditional, the suffering of the world can be overwhelming. It is one of the reasons the awake feel to help others. But there are adaptations we make so we can live in the world and not be dominated by the new experiences of it. You can see it as part of the integration of that stage. The other aspect of this is that even after an awakening, if there is still a lot of energetic baggage unresolved, it can still create dramas and an appearance of suffering. But with some skill, we can be much better at resolving it. Bringing open attention to it, we can process and release what arises without having to live it in the world. We can also throw up the old habits of resistance and keep the drama going as one friend did. It can take a bit of practice. That stuff tends to bring a blind spot with it. It illustrates you don't have to be perfect to awaken and that awakening itself is key but is not yet sat chit ananda. That develops over time. At a certain point, you discover that the stuff you're processing was never "mine". It's more like your contribution to healing the whole. You may even come to recognize the cosmic body. The compassion will come with the boundless heart. And your relationship with that will depend on many things. Are you on a more devotional path or more intellectual? What are your talents and preferences, etc etc
L6: Hi AAU, in dreams, the body is asleep but the mind awake. In deep sleep, the body and mind are asleep and thus ego concept of a me is also. But the body does not cease to exist just because the mind is asleep. Otherwise it would vanish from the bed and not be seen by your wife (or whatever). The error here is thinking that Maya is created by the individual mind. As mind is the lively edge of consciousness, there is no "individual" mind. Just identification. This is very clear if we witness sleep. Remember that the witness or observer is 24/7 once established. If the ego is an illusion and the me does not exist, how can thoughts come from that? THAT is the real illusion. That you have anything to do with it. Thoughts arise from mind which is the lively edge of non-local consciousness, sometimes identified with a person. Sattva does not see. But when sattva is dominant, the divine is seen. The divine light you talk about is also called sattva, although there is 2 values. As I mentioned prior, sattva is gold. Pure divine is higher and white. The colours of the spectrum are part of Maya and the interplay of sattva with the other gunas. What this also means is that when sattva is dominant, the origins and nature of the world are seen by the perceiver. You can call that Maya or Lila or whatever you like. But it is an aspect of how non-duality dawns. At first in the experience is an absolute and a relative world. (Dwaita) Then the origins of the relative world become known and the gap between them (mentioned). And then the 2 are recognized to be one. This is the formula if someone follows the path through Refined Self Realization I was talking about with L9. Some people recognize Oneness more from the absolute side of it, skipping some of this. But a lot of the richness (sweetness as Igor put it) is in the Refined part of it. Consciousness can be known because it is everything you experience. Sat Chit Ananda means you are consciousness and know consciousness. I am That. In Unity you recognize the world is also That (by my meaning) - consciousness is everything. So you know it in yet another way. And so on. You can know consciousness. It is the foundation of eastern thought, including non-duality. You may not know consciousness but it doesn't mean it can't be know. In fact, anyone whos practices an effortless meditation for any period of time has begun to know consciousness. Samadhi is also known as pure consciousness, meaning we are experiencing consciousness itself. I mentioned this prior. If what can be known is all illusory, your repeated statements about Absolute Understanding make no sense. But I don't expect them to.
AAU: Dear L9, response to: "There is no L9 here. That is just a word."…. ----
L9 is here and so is AAU, words are here too, albeit illusory. There is a doer here who is not really the doer, but only appears to be. Everything is happening and it is thought that they are being done but they are not seen. That it is seen is the illusion. If it is seen it would be a singular movement that appears as actions in the mind in thought form and not as an actuality in life. You do find a body, a chair, a sitting and typing, albeit illusory. Illusory does not mean it does not exist, it does exist but not in the way the mind thinks it exists. What is seen if it is seen would just be a singular movement. As separate lines they are not the truth but opinions. The lines are an illusory expression of absolute truth. Nothing is outside the equation everything is in the equation.
L6: AAU - What you completely miss in your comment on L9 is he is describing how he is now experiencing the world. And what he is discovering in the process. You are unable to see a living example because it does not match what you believe to be true. This is exactly how concepts create an illusion and get in the way of seeing what is in front of us. And this is why you have never met anyone Self Realized.
L9: Hi L6, Yes, all of what you say fits my experience and how I came to understand it (wich is / was an iterative process). Yes this unconditional love is there. Unconditional and all encompassing - which, seen from here actually are synonymous, now that I come to think of it :-) These bliss outbursts I have known. Now it is always there, close under 'the surface' and Igors words 'objects are bliss in manifested form' make a lot of sense to me. In a way this feels to me right now to be the living reality of 'the world is Brahman' (or am I repeating myself right now?). As for the suffering. Yes, this is also how I came to see it, just wanted to check out. If my interpretation of the teacher I was referring to is right, there are still some unresolved issues, which do not make him less the helluva teacher he is, as he is open about what he experiences (including a suffering part), yet I can see how some aspects of these unresolved issues are shimmering through in the teaching.... As for me, a few years ago as I read Adyashanti about 'after enlightenment' and how a lot of 'homework' may still be needed, I decided: well, I seem to have no influence on the process of awakening itself, so let me take care of the things I can take care of and need to be done anyway - get rid of whatever needs to be gotten rid of, work through everything that needs to be worked through. Some unhealty habits still there, but no deeper issues. The hardest part was with my wife, with whom I grew more and more impatient, until it dawned on me we needed a 'spiritual divorce'. So last year I made a vow: "You have the right on your own path, your own tempo, your own pitfalls, your own direction." And gradually the impatience has gone. So it is great to be able the shift in 'emotional household' that takes place, since I have been working for years on a 'theory of emotions' until I saw how my own being stuck at a certain point prevented me from 'completing' it. Now I can see how it all 'fits together. In my definition, emotions are the expression of how I relate to a given situation or persen in the past, the present or the future. It expresses as thoughts, feelings and bodily states. This implicates, that after the shift in perception and the changing way of 'relating to the world', part of the process is a new emotional makeup. So now it looks like I can finish this 'theory'. As for my 'strategic choice' to start working on the energectic baggage, I can see now how this did pave the way to the 'breaktrough' of the heart. Yes, I have had some moments where my love was so overwhelming, that people actually responded to it and then halfway stopped and felt awkward, so I kind of learned to play with it (have it more on the foreground / background). As for 'stuff being not mine': I have a pretty nasty biography, too long a story to tell. But what happened after 'the shift' is that my looking back on these dark years completely changed. I was playing with 'meditative writing' and first wrote spontaneously a lot of sentences that started with 'I noticed that...' and after half an hour switched to 'I haven't noticed that...' and was astonished at seeing being written down 'that I was allright all of the time'. So I started to look into that and it became perfectly clear to me, that underneath all this suffering, I was okay all along. This, then, for a while, brought me in a semi nihilistic state, where it was hard for me to be compassionate, as the focus was more on the illusionary aspect of suffering. This resolved and now compassion is as present as it can be (or so it seems), always accompanied with the insight into the true nature of it. This is a tremendous gift that helps in being really there for other people. I can't really tell what my path has been, I can see however, how these two paths (intellectual and devotional) in the end turn into two aspects of one path (and both are needed). Right now I am conceiving of a 'basic model' of how others can be supported on their spiritual path. Trying to see the commonalities under the different methods. In a few weeks I'll mail you what I've come up with so far, and look forward to your comment on that. Have a nice week!
L6: Hi L9, you made a good choice. As a recent interview suggested, it's better to take care of bad habits before awakening because afterwards there is no one to fix them. (laughs) Also, cleaning house prior helps the process itself be much clearer and allows the refinement you described to be noticed more. A friend of mine woke up. His wife is in a different tradition and was competing a little on "better path". In the end, he couldn't talk to her about it. But the benefits are there. Many couples I know have both woken after one of them did. In one case, she refuses to give him any credit. But it doesn't matter. It's not the person doing any of that. Yes the whole platform of how we relate to our life shifts. Nothing has changed and yet everything. Emotions for me are an aspect of how one layer of subjectivity responds to experiences. To some extent it suggests there is a choice there now that didn't used to be there. But in another way, there is an allowing of what arises. Just one thing if you're going to build models. If it reflects what is, it will be true in all stages of development, even if seen differently in each. After you are established in a new stage, it is easy to forget how we used to see the world. Our memories of being 8 years old are from where we are now, not when we were 8. Much the same with being ego bound. (laughs) Yeah, the heart shifts can create attractions. But sadly they're not attracted to you. (laughs) It's the "vibe". That's awkward to communicate sometimes. Yeah, some teachers are caught in that "illusion of suffering" thing. It's a good insight and common experience but as you note, it's good to move through that and integrate it. You've made really good progress. Yeah - some take the paths a little too black and white. We usually are something of a blend and different aspects are key at different points. Devotion is key during the heart opening for example, and the intellect during the Unity shift. Activity itself unfolds aspects of all stages in a lived way. Thank you. I'd love to see what you come up with.
AAU: Dear L6, Response to: "In dreams, the body is asleep but the mind awake. In deep sleep,….." ---- There is no point in discussing dreams when you have not understood that the waking state itself is a dream. Nevertheless few points are addressed to help you to recognise that the waking state indeed is a dream. This is not a bizarre opinion. It is the statement of the wise sages, and the statement will be explained in detail at the appropriate moment. The body is asleep in the waking state as well. This will be explained in detail later and not now. The mind is awake during sleep and therefore dreams are present, which is dreamt by the feeling of me, and to the feeling the dream is real until the dream lasts. The dream continues in the waking state by the concept of me by a different familiar dream that passes away as does a dream during sleep. This signifies the concept of me during the waking state too is a dream, as was the feeling of me during sleep was a dream. You have yet to define what is meant by illusory? If what is illusory is understood rightly, you would understand nothing vanishes because it is illusory, let alone the body. Understand that the witnesser is a synonym for observer to whom absolute understanding has happened. That witness or observer is an evolved ego to whom absolute understanding has happened 24/7. Once established he witnesses dream during sleep and realises that the waking state too is just a dream. To a witnesser there are just two states: waking state and sleeping state (meaning deep sleep). What deep sleep is will be explained later and not now. Illusion does not mean it does not exist. Please convey your understanding of what illusion means, backed by common sense and science. This is a repeat request as you would surely know. Okay sattva does not see, so does the perceiver in whom sattva is dominant see the divine being present in every speck of existence? He should be able to see the divine, as divinity is everywhere and so is existence. Please convey what you understand by the word real? The understanding has to be backed by common sense and science. Man experiences labels of everything and not the nature of everything. The nature of everything is consciousness. For example, man does not experience the nature of a tree. He experiences the label tree and not the nature of a tree. Similarly, man experiences the label consciousness and not the nature of consciousness. He just cannot experience the nature of anything, let alone consciousness, not because he is unable to, it is because it is not the function of the ego, the witnesser, the mind, knowledge or wisdom. To practise anything one would need time. Life is however timeless. Life flows in the ‘here’ and the timeless ‘now’ which is eternity. Meditation happens so that man may understand that every moment is meditation no matter what he is doing or not doing, and that man is not the doer. Samadhi will be explained later and now. To the one to whom relative understanding has happened, absolute understanding would not make any sense and cannot be expected to either. He is impatient and annoyed as well. That it does not and would not make sense is understood by him to whom absolute understanding has happened. He waits patiently for it to happen. To who absolute understanding has happened realises that even wisdom which is absolute understanding is illusory too.
L10: AAU said : absolute understanding is illusory too. Big time agreement - this displays the principle. True enlightenment is the knowing that there is no enlightenment. The Buddha said - there is no path to happiness, happiness is the path. When opposites become dualities, and dualities become Unity there is only what is. There is only ever a perfect Love of what is now. Now has not alternatives or variations. The drama is over and now you are the Master of you. What you going to do next ??? Confusing isn’t it. It is a Mystery …………….. not a solution. Love that …………..
AAU: Dear L6, response to: "AAU - what you completely miss in your comment on L9…." ----
What is completely missed out is the fact that whatever is described as an experience of the world would be illusory and not real. And whatever is discovered in the process of experiencing the world would only be illusory too. L9 is seen as a living being; but is understood as illusory as it complies to common sense and scientific facts. Understand if anything were real it just cannot be here and yet not here, the real will always be here. The sages have proclaimed that everything is here and yet not here, because they understood everything that exists is illusory and not real. It is only that which is illusory could be appear to be here and yet not here. Concepts create an illusion because concepts are illusory too. What is in front of us is the nameless ‘here’ and the timeless ‘now’, which is eternity. Therefore, the ‘here’ and ‘now’ is beyond the mind and therefore beyond the mind is not any distant place; real or imaginary. I understand that whoever says what you are saying is surely not self realised; but dreams that he is.
AAU: Dear L10, Wise words from you indeed; few minor points. Opposites manifest illusory duality in the mind. Dualities become Unity when dualities are understood to be non-dual. Then only there is. There are no alternatives or variations in the now, because ‘now’ is timeless and thoughtless. The master sees the real as a drama. It is not confusing to the master; for he realises something illusory always happens including the not happening. The solution too is a mystery.
L10: We agree - but using different chop sticks. “Would that words could-not bind the glorious eternity that waits within.” A wise man once said
AAU: Dear L10, A wise man said; ‘as eternity is everywhere -eternity is within meaning everywhere’
L6: AAU re: "when you have not understood that the waking state itself is a dream." I was not discussing dreams, I was pointing out that dreams and sleep can be witnessed and thus known, contrary to your assertion. Your responses are once again not a discussion of points but reaction to statements. We're just going in circles. Further, I have already explained several times about the 3 stages - waking as real, waking as dream and waking in divine play. Waking state is a dream at one stage, I fully agree. But it is not the complete truth. Maya and Lila. If you have not grasped that, you have not gained anything from the exchange. You have clearly not witnessed sleep if you think the mind is awake throughout sleep. Aspects of the brain continue to function but the mind itself goes offline, except during dreams. I took a grad course in brain physiology and can assert that science largely agrees with this. Now you're telling me what a witness or observer is? You're describing an interpretation of waking state which your prior statement says is a dream. Someone who witnesses no longer dreams?? Sorry, but this is drivel and clearly not based on experience. A simple EEG test will confirm otherwise. Illusion - dream - mirage. No confusion there. "does the perceiver in whom sattva is dominant see the divine being present in every speck of existence" Yes, this is what develops over time. This is what I was talking about with L9, in part. And I'll say it again - timeless = no time. Eternity = all or infinite time, ergo an illusion in your books. You cant have it both ways, just because you like the quote. However, if you see a progression of development that results in a series of realities, then you will see that eternity is true for a time and illusion for another. NEITHER is THE truth. The grasping for one absolute truth arises from the ego's need to control. This back and forth is resulting in you picking up terms and changing them to fit your model. Rather than seeking understanding, you are seeking bigger concepts to build a larger edifice. You are not open to the inconsistencies in your approach and are creating distortion. One of the biggest problems in spiritual circles today is this kind of conceptual distortion. It's a bad thing as it leads people way from truth rather than pointing towards it. You are welcome to believe what you like. But you'd be better to come up with your own terms than co-opt the language of non-duality and other traditions. It's very simple to understand. If you use the word Pound, you use it in common meaning to communicate. If you use it to mean gram, then you do not communicate and instead cause confusion. This dos not serve you or your readers. Rather than feeding the monster, I'll leave it at that. If anyone is interested, I've made my case in prior comments. Have a great holiday season!
L5: Hi AAU, You write "Opposites manifest illusory duality in the mind. Dualities become Unity when dualities are understood to be non-dual"… You are correct, but… It is not a matter of understanding. It is our mind that creates the 'experience of duality' in reality duality does not exist at all. Compare this with a picture. The fact is that a picture is nothing more than some chemicals on a peace of paper. The mind is capable thru its conditioning (thought-form) to 'experience' sepprate objects like a person or buildings within this picture, but those objects are all false. When this thought-form/maya ceases to exist as in reaction to the psychological death that is necessary for awakening, only the 'picture/unity' remains. That is why not only the 'me' dissolves, all others are gone to. That is why it is not a matter of understanding.
AAU: Dear L5, You understand that words are dual, relative and real, without understanding you cannot know that words are dual, relative and real. Similarly you understand that a word has two sides to it, just as a coin has two sides and not just one side. Only through absolute understanding you know that a word has two sides; one is structure and the other side is its content (the meaning a words has). Through absolute understanding you realise that both the structure and the content are illusory and not real. Through understanding you realise that dualities are in fact non-dual. The mind does not create anything at all. It is in our mind that the experience of duality is manifested by the mysterious transformation of sound (which is basically light) into words and meanings. You are correct in reality duality does not exist at all as it is light. Duality neither exists in the mind as well, it only appears to exist. It is an illusion. You are correct. A picture is illusory meaning false. The picture is seen through the mind. It would mean that the mind has created something false, meaning illusory. An illusion does not mean it does not exist. It exists but not in the way the mind thinks it exists. Similarly writing too is a picture of ink on paper. The intelligence of life manifests through the intellect in the mind a deception of reality. Therefore, everything that exists is actually illusory just as a picture is false, meaning illusory. This is revealed by absolute understanding. Nothing ceases to exist. Everything that exists is energy or light. It is not a belief for it is a fact of life. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Energy which is light only transforms from one form to another. So nothing dies a psychological death, absolute understanding reveals that psychological death is the transformation of psychology into wisdom. The me does not dissolve the me just evolves to a witnesser. All others do not go too. They will be there as long as they are meant to be there. You only understand how they are there as long as they are there. You either understand totally or do not understand totally. If you are happy every moment of every day right through your life time, then surely it is not a matter of understanding for you.
L9: "An illusion does not mean it does not exist. It exists but not in the way the mind thinks it exists." Wow, some progress, after all ;-)
L10: AAU said - You only understand how they are there as long as they are there. Understanding this mind can do. To understand quantum mechanics, the logic of computers, the passions of Shakespeare. My mind will find a way. But to know - to know the expanse of my silence, to know the warmth of Love for my children, to know my elation when joined with the Merkaba of a clear blue sky. To understand some things is to imprison them. Some of this now has no fix point existence and it’s a mistake to look for one.
AAU: Dear L6, response to: "I was not discussing dreams,….." ---
Thanks for clarifying that you were not discussing dreams. A reaction has past and future as reference points, while a response has only the nameless ‘here’ and timeless ‘now’ as reference points. Relative understanding reacts while absolute understanding responds. So it is not the same circle that is being discussed. The waking state as a divine play IN consciousness and not Of consciousness (Lila) is just light and sound. The waking state as a divine play in the absolute is just light where even sound is absent. You clearly have not understood that AAU has neither claimed to witness sleep nor mentioned that the mind is awake throughout sleep. The mind is not awake during DEEP sleep. When the mind is awake and dreams it is not sleep, it is still the waking state. Relative understanding makes man believe that man dreams only in sleep. Absolute understanding realises that dreams state is a waking state too that relative understanding does not understand. Life gives a clue that it is, by making man day dream. Science is relative as well as absolute. For example relative science does not define what the nature of energy really is, it defines energy as the ability to do work. Absolute science knows what the nature of energy is and is yet to make it known to the public. Life has not made it happen as yet through science. Life has made it happen through man as sages, as it is doing now as a man. Firstly, a witness or an observer is the ego (you). The witness or an observer could also be an evolved ego which is the witnesser. An ego witnesses and observes an illusory action as real. An evolved ego as the witnesser witnesses a movement and not an action, and understands that an action is illusory and not real. A simple EEG test will confirm an activity but not what the activity means to an evolved ego (the witnesser). Therefore dreams happen to the ego to which the dream is real until it lasts. Dreams happen to the evolved ego (the witnesser) as well to whom the dream is illusory until it lasts.. No confusion surely but the description illusion-dream-mirage, lacks clarity. Illusion does not mean the real does not exist. The real exists but not in the manner the mind thinks the real exists. Life gives a clue that the real is like a dream or a mirage for they exist too, and everybody knows that a dream and a mirage are illusory and not real. The definition of illusion was pointed out to L9 as well. Thank you for clarifying that the perceiver in whom sattva is dominant sees the divine being present in every speck of existence. Taking your clarification further, it would imply that every speck of existence would be light including the perceiver as divinity is light. Hence, divinity cannot perceive itself, and neither could there be a perceiver who could perceive divinity. Science says it now and the wise sages have declared ages ago that time is illusory and not real. Therefore if eternity is equal to infinite time it would only imply to common sense that eternity is illusory as well, and in which case you would be right that eternity is all or infinite time meaning illusory. Please clarify what you mean by the sentence ‘ergo an illusion in your books. You cant have it both ways, just because you like the quote.’ You are again right that neither is the truth. Two strikes for you today. One that eternity equals all time is illusory and now that neither is the truth. To the ego its beliefs are the absolute truth, because the ego does not understand that a belief is just an opinion shared by many and not the truth. Terms are not changed but only clarity to your terms is brought in. It is not to fit to any model for that model too would be illusory. It has been mentioned that absolute understanding is illusory too. What is shared is not a belief. What is shared is life as it is. Absolute Non-duality can be spoken in any language or any tradition, just as relative non-duality can be with relative understanding. Pound means either a weight or English money. Gram means a weight too. How does one use weight or money in common to communicate. If you do use it please explain. The case has been shared as well, to anyone who is keen to understand. Wish you a great every moment of every season.
AAU: Dear L9, Glad the definition made some progress in you. Regards AAU
AAU: Dear L10, to understand some things as real is to imprison them. To realise that everything is illusory is freedom. Nothing has any fix point in life. There are no mistakes in life either.
L10: looks like we agree .............. in an agreeable way. The occurrence of knowing is visible to our beings.
L11: An interesting thread. I find the concept of Advaita, if you would determine it as a concept, difficult to grasp. I think direct experience is indisputable but the problem being in this forum it is only direct for the person who experiences it. So we are left to ponder and meditate and find our own path to the truth. Namaskar.
AAU: Dear L11, Advaita is not difficult to grasp. What makes advaita difficult to grasp is our belief of the direct experience of what is real to us. Find out if our direct experience of the real, is real or illusory? Illusory does not mean that the real experienced directly does not exist. It only means that the real does not exist in the manner our direct experience tells us. AAU
L9: Yes L11, every grasping is difficult. And every concept, including the concept of Advaita, colours direct experience and in that sense stands in the way of realization. And yes, there is only one path: you own path. Namaskar.
AAU: Dear L9, Correct. Absolute understanding of your own path is the way to realization. Absolute understanding is advaita, so neither is absolute understanding nor advaita a concept. A concept is an abstract idea. Advaita and absolute understanding is not an abstract idea. AAU
L12: Advaita is not absolute understanding. There is nothing to understand.
AAU: Dear L12, Absolute understanding is advaita, for absolute understanding reveals that the world and everything in it is not two, and advaita means not two. This is what man needs to understand so that he may realise who he is. AAU
L12: Hi AAU,, Calling advaita "absolute understanding" is a misleading statement in my opinion. What means "understanding"?
L10: Right now truly I AM a momentary bridge between a place where water is wet and humans are real and a place very different. I AM bridging those experiences of the now and at the very same moment experiences of a place of the mind. Unlike a machine I AM porous and flexible ever changing as fluid in a fluidity but positioned on the shoreline connection between solid land and fluid sea. I AM is neither solid or fluid but both in unison. I AM bridging. Understanding is only to feel this way without doubt or consent of others. Feeling our true union of infinity. The human mind will feed reality to I AM as a string of awe and reverence. Understanding, is a daily acceptance of this condition and the joy of a life to ebb and flow as master and slave of a human true reality I AM.
AAU: Dear L12, Since advaita means not two, absolute understanding reveals what not two is. Advaita is not two but has not given an explanation of what not two is. Absolute understanding explains that not two is duality and that duality is illusory and not real. Illusory does not mean duality does not exist. It means duality does exist but it does not exist in the manner the mind with relative understanding thinks it exists. Understanding is an inherent characteristic of man. Man has not made understanding to happen to him, understanding has happened to man. Understanding is the ability to know and to understand what is known. AAU
AAU: Dear L10, What is ‘now’ and could experience happen in the ‘now’? What is the nature of experience (not a description) in the mind? Machine is porous too and flexible as it is prone to wear and tear and changing as fluid in a fluidity. Both machine and man are positioned on the shoreline of solid land which is porous too and ever changing as fluid in fluidity, but in unison. What is the nature of feeling that could feel the true union (again not a description)? What is the nature of master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow (not a description)? AAU
L10: Thanks AAU, you asked - What is the nature of master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow (not a description)? The nature of these things is not a description. The nature of these things is whatever nature you give them. You are a sentient being sentient of yourself. Be it illusion, Advaita or a circular mirror eternally looking into itself. The nature of anything is not a described, because you AAU must enable your reality. Does this planet revolve or does the universe revolve around the planet. You must decide because only you can experience your reality of being AAU. This affect must apply to all sentient life. We the humans are sentient self-aware, this is the nature of now. Life awareness is happening now in you AAU. Life awareness that has needs like oxygen, without oxygen life awareness is no longer human. Unification is a feeling ………….. a truth.
L12: Hi AAU, You wrote: ""Since advaita means not two, absolute understanding reveals what not two is. Advaita is not two but has not given an explanation of what not two is."" The "understanding" is not the absolute. It does not reveal anything, it fouls you with a new kind of knowledge an it enhances the conditioning one is in. ""Absolute understanding explains that not two is duality and that duality is illusory and not real. Illusory does not mean duality does not exist. It means duality does exist but it does not exist in the manner the mind with relative understanding thinks it exists."" Duality only exist thru thought, without thought there is none. ""Understanding is an inherent characteristic of man. Man has not made understanding to happen to him, understanding has happened to man. Understanding is the ability to know and to understand what is known. "" Man is the root cause of trying to onderstand Life, what is an act of foolishness and confusion (eg. duality in action). The only thing we need to understand is how our computer works, or how to get from a to be, etc, things needed to live daily life. Seeing the act of trying to understand, being fully aware of it, the movement in the mind, can stop it, and shatter it to peaces. That is where duality can end. Be careful where you look at, it might hurt. :-)
AAU: Dear L10, By nature, it was meant what it is made up of? Not what you make of it, which would be a description. AAU
L10: Thanks AAU, You ask - By nature, it was meant what it is made up of. Nature is made up of you and your observation of it. Not what I or anyone else observes but you AAU. AAU is making nature. Your nature, not anyone else's nature. AAU is the title you carry and being AAU has the nature of your hands, legs and surroundings. Your nature is made by you. My nature is made by me. This is not a description, a disruption is --- noun: description; plural noun: descriptions a spoken or written account of a person, object, or event. "people who had seen him were able to give a description" synonyms: account, explanation, elucidation, illustration, representation, interpretation You discribe yours, only yours. I AM saying you make up your nature. I make up my nature. We cohabit this illusion and cooperate in the NOW.
AAU: Dear L12, Of course, neither relative nor absolute understanding is the absolute. Relative understanding reveals opinions, doubts, beliefs etc. Absolute understanding reveals wisdom. Point out one conditioning which absolute understanding enhances? Duality and the known exist only as thoughts. You are right that without thought there is none, meaning duality and the known. Absolute understanding reveals what a thought actually is with complete reason and logic, whereas relative understanding does not know what a thought actually is. Relative understanding makes you understand that you have to try, but does not explain what duality really is. Absolute understanding does explain what trying and duality is which makes you realise what life is. Relative understanding informs you how the computer works and how to get from a to b, whereas absolute understanding reveals how this all happen to man, as man is not the doer as the enlightened have proclaimed that man is not the doer. If seeing the act of trying to understand and being fully aware of it, and the movement of the mind does stop it and shatters it to pieces, you will come to know about it, just as you have come to know how to work the computer, or how to get from a to b. Duality will never end as long as there is life and man in it. Even to an enlightened man who is alive on earth, duality will exist, but to him the duality will be illusory and not real every moment of his life. One surely has to be careful not to look to the sun directly, for it will hurt anyone. AAU
AAU: Dear L10, What it is made up of was asked, and not what it is made up of who is separate from it or their observation of it. AAU
L10: AAU asked - What it is made up of was asked and not what it is made up of, who is separate from it or their observation of it. AAU, this question sounds much like its answer. Please read this - who is separate from it or their observation of it. Separate from it --- observation of it. Outside-inside. Example, When you look at a tree, in that moment the tree and you are one. No separation. The moment is filled with you and the tree and it. In this example there is no you, no observation, no it and no separation. This example is a complete whole moment you, tree, observation each apparent element is in fact its wholeness, its completeness. In your moment. The tree remains oblivious. Without past, present or future the moment of unison of tree and you is what is. Beyond illusion and reality dualities is the human application of a moment’s unification. This moment is real.
AAU: Dear L10 What is a tree made up of? What is man made up of? I agree past, present and future is illusory and not real. So, what could be a moment and what is it made up of? How could a moment accommodate man, tree and everything within it? If there is no you, no observation, no it and no separation how could you be porous and flexible and bridging this shore which is wet and the other, as you previously wrote? I agree there is no real you, no real observation and no real separation. What could it all be? That is why I asked what is master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow made of? AAU
L12: AAU, Thanks for a wise comment. I like your clear point of view on this.
L10: Thanks AAU, always a pleasure, You asked - That is why I asked what is master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow made of? The answer is - these are all apparent illusions created by the mind of AAU. If you say that you do-not exist then claims of nothingness might be fully justified. But nothingness would or could not say anything. Nothingness is not real or true. AAU is being, by these words and their intentions. AAU is. Garand is being. These master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow are potential within this Garend being. These potentials have existence in AAU, or any sentient human being. To ask `what is’ master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow made of - is a simple denial of self-awareness. Advaita is the Human condition of truth. Without self-awareness you are no longer human. If you are human then you have experienced emotions and feelings. If you have experienced emotions and feelings then you understand the meanings of `master, slave, doubt, consent ebb or flow’ and how these human emotions and feelings can arise within the self. You exist therefore you know both the answer and the question. They are made of human emotions and feelings. AAU, you knew this so this is not truly your question, what is your true question? Do you understand that Advaita understands and respects that human illusion is reality? The vanity of Questions, are very human attempts to capture and farm this our infinite probability. To release the questions then dance and sing with our Mystery we only need to trust what is. Trust all of now and joy and bliss will replace `what is - made of’ . Chicken and egg games to busy the Faithful .....
AAU: Dear L12, When all the issues of the mind become clear, it brings calmness to the mind in every situation of the day. I too was like everyone else, emotional in every situation. But once the issues of the mind became clear to me by understanding it absolutely and not relatively, I began to be calm in every day situations in which emotions such as anxiety, doubt, anger etc., were strong before. Absolute understanding of the issues in the mind brings calmness to man in every situation of the day. AAU
AAU: Dear L10, What are the apparent illusions made up of? I did not say ‘you do not exist’. I said there is no real you, no real observation and no real separation. I have not denied anything. Advaita means not two. You will understand what is not two if you understand what a human and his feelings are made of. My true question is, what is a human, his feelings and everything that exists made up of? The father of advaita has said that he respects the illusory world which man takes as a reality. He trusts what is, because he worked out what everything that exists is made up of. AAU,
L9: Dear AAU I am happy to see that you feel comfortable again using the words 'I' and 'my'.
AAU: Dear L9, When use the words ‘I’ and ‘my’, I realise that the words happen to me and I do not use them. Just as it does to everyone, but who believe that they use those words. AAU
L10: Thanks AAU, You said - I realise that the words happen to me and I do not use them. This is also known as denial. The condition of Advaita is not that you don’t exist. This would be a simple denial of what is. Advaita is a human condition of awr and reverence for all that is. It is perhaps better explained that you are everythingand everything is you. All that accompanies you in this moment is you. True reality is everything you experience in the now. Thoughts, emotions, hopes and fears, trees and computers, all this is you. The momentary happening you describe is fullness and entirety of your complete sum of conscious awareness. Therefore it is the only illusion you can observe. It is not a contest or subject to approval. What is happening right now is whole and complete-ness of everything that can be. You decide, are you nothing or everything. Which of these could offer opinion ???
AAU: Dear L10 Correct. Advaita is better explained that you are everything and everything is you. This would mean that everything and you have to be the same, and it is. So what could be everything and you made up of? AAU
L13: God is as real as you are!
L12: AAU, You wrote: Correct. Advaita is better explained that you are everything and everything is you. And earlier: I realise that the words happen to me and I do not use them. Sounds like a contradiction to me. Like someone who distinguish himself of what he really is. In my opinion you (thought-form) make things happen.
AAU: Dear L12, There is no contradiction. I realise that the words happen to me and I do not use them, means the word happen means use. Wisdom uses the same words that knowledge uses, there is no words separate for wisdom. If I write I use the words but I do not use them, would it make sense to you? All that is needed is absolute understanding and not relative understanding. An opinion is a belief that is shared by more than two, but an opinion is not the truth. Man believes that he makes things happen but it is not the truth, it is just an opinion. AAU
L10: AAU said - Man believes that he makes things happen but it is not the truth, it is just an opinion. In my opinion you are right ??? If I believe you are correct then I AM convinced that your words are true. Thus opinion and truth for me on this subject are the same. Perhaps - Man believes that he makes things happen.
AAU: Dear L10, If in your opinion I am right, and you believe that I am correct then you should be convinced that I am correct, but not convinced that it is the truth. The truth would be what correct could or would be? Opinion and truth on the subject would be the same to you, as relative understanding has happened to you, and not advaita or absolute understanding. You are right man merely believes that he makes things happen, as advaita or absolute understanding has not happened to him. So what could everything and you be made up of including correct? AAU
L12: Hi AAU,, All the advaita (absolute) knowledge is written from the perception of the awakened one. It is useless to thought form the one in search for the truth. It is the biggest mistake made with this knowledge. The thinking mind or thougt-form proclaims enlightenment where there is only more separation between thought-form and life as it is for real. (and somehow you know this). If one is awake for real, one is clueless about what is happening, because there is no such thing as "happening" (what is though-form) anymore. There is no distinction anymore of what is and what one is, for all life is one or unity.
L10: Thank you L12, L12 said -- There is no distinction anymore of what is and what one is, for all life is one or unity. Totally and utterly agreed. Not complex is the truth. This is the true human condition of Advaita, a psychological attitude where no longer any distinction to dominate or define. This moment is a compete and perfect moment. All that is apparent in this moment is utterly compete and perfect. The mystery becomes the joy and celebration seeing our truth.
AAU: Dear L12, It is important to recognise the form of the awakened one, and not thought form (interpret) his movements in search of the truth. It is the biggest misunderstanding of relative knowledge and not advaita or absolute understanding. There are no mistakes in life, let alone in advaita or absolute understanding. An enlightened one never proclaims enlightenment. The awakened one is aware and clear (not clueless) that life is an illusory singular movement, and is aware what is happening is illusory (meaning nothing actual) and not real. He lives life and does not think life, so is aware and clear about every moment of what is happening, albeit illusory, for he has to relate with those living with him. The awakened realises there is no distinction of what is and what one is, but he lives the drama of life. An awakened one is alive and living in Holland, and it is not me. I and few others recognise him, and that recognition has happened to me and them. AAU
L9: What is the point of your reference to me in this discussion, AAU?
L10: Thanks AAU, You asked - So what could everything and you be made up of including correct? Nothing is the answer. There is no making-up, no correct or no opposition or truth. What is, is exactly what is. Now is everything. But only now, it is our human memories and projections which delude. Now is what is. Words are all that I can give you if we are to pretend to be having this discussion. Our pretence of existence is all I can give. The question gave evidence
AAU: L9, The point of reference to all readers, is to ponder whether what the mind says about the world by the knowledge it has, is real or not, because the enlightened have proclaimed that the world is illusory. Illusory does not mean the real does not exist. It means the real exists but not in the manner the mind thinks the real exists. AAU
AAU: Dear L10 You say ‘nothing’ is the answer to my inquiry, I affirm it. And you further say ‘now’ is everything and ‘now’ is what is. I affirm this too. So, would what is in the ‘now’ be nothing, would it make any sense to you? If what is in the ‘now’ is made up of has no cause for it to be in the ‘now’ but yet is in the ‘now’ then that would be nothing. That is the inquiry. So what is in the ‘now’ which has no cause, but yet it is there? AAU
L9: AAU, you misunderstood my question. "An awakened one is alive and living in Holland, and it is not me. I and few others recognise him, and that recognition has happened to me and them." :-) As for your last question: "So what is in the ‘now’ which has no cause, but yet it is there?" There is nothing outside the now - so why would you want to bring in the concept of causality at all?
AAU: L9, Firstly what is your question that was misunderstood by me? Secondly, I did put forth a question to you. To your question, Prove that everything in the now is without a cause. AAU
L9: AAU, is your ST memory lacking? "L9, Firstly what is your question that was misunderstood by me?" L9, 2 hours ago: "What is the point of your reference to me in this discussion, AAU?" AAU, a while later: "L9,The point of reference to all readers, is to ...." As for: "Prove that everything in the now is without a cause" No need to prove. Why don't you prove there is, if you believe in it? First of all, you look around and inside of you, and show me any cause you see :-) Second: In the now there is only what is now. No future, no past. Causality needs time. Therefore: no causality.
L12: Hi AAU,, There are mistakes possible in life, else such a thing as advaita would not exist :-) Life ends it mistakes, for example it will end humanity within an few decades. You state: "The awakened one is aware and clear (not clueless) that life is an illusory singular movement" Life as it is is far from an illusion. All that is is very real. There is noting to be aware off. Awareness and Life are one and the same thing, without distinction.
AAU: L9, My ST memory is not lacking, for the question was answered. But, you have not answered what was misunderstood by me. Who is lacking ST memory? You need to prove for you believe there is in the now. Again you need to show any cause that you see around you, as you see the now around you. Also how do you SEE inside you? If there is no past or future, which I affirm, what could be the present? If causality needs time, which I affirm, how does anything exist in the now? AAU
L9: Yes L12, quite so. I do not have a life, I am Life. No distinction. :-)
L14: The 'problem' I am having with all these questions is that they are conceptual, and invite a conceptual answer, which could lead to further conditioning (words and concepts are part of a belief system, which is fine of course, as long as yoy recognize it, but pure awareness is unconditioned). I agree totally with L9: no need to prove as it can be observed (self-inquiry: being aware of your pure awareness, your presence).
L12: Okay AAU, I'll spell it out for you: I dit answere 'what question was understood by me?" - and the answer was: "What is the point of your reference to me in this discussion, AAU?" I agree you wrote something in return but recycling my some of my words into a different meaning and context is not 'answering' as in 'dialogue' but more like an conditioned response elicited by certain keywords. You seem to fail to properly understand what is said to you. You do not seem to realize there is a lot of interpretation in what you write. For instance in: "For you believe there is..." Let me assure you, there are no believes here. (And I never wrote 'There is in the now' - I don't even know what that sentence is supposed to mean...) Also, you assume I have to prove a lot. I don't know what makes you think I have to prove things at all. You won't gain anything from it. Don't you know how it works? If you want to find out truth, reading proofs of others won't help you. That only gives rise to dead words (dead to you, that is). Only by realizing Truth yourself, these words can come alive. It is however, the possibility of getting a smell of Truth by opening to words of others, but this takes a special attitude - that of openness, of receiving in the heart. (Receiving in the mind is receiving what is being said or written within a contextual framework, within your own referential conceptual paradigm, receiving in the heart is naked awareness, hearing or reading without grapsing, understanding, processing. Just simply receiving.) As for your mindgames: "If causality needs time, which I affirm, how does anything exist in the now?" The fact is: noting exists other than now. Can you drive me around in yesterday's car? I don't think so. If you use reasoning, you have to be careful - your reasoning only has value when it acknowledges reality. You can not reason away what is, but in your head. Therefore the world you create in your head, is always an inadequate reflection of reality. When you do regular reality checks, your mind might function adequately as a helpful resource in daily life. Mistaking what you construe in your head for truth, and communicating and reasoning based on that, leads to ignorance and creates suffering. Ignorance means here: overlooking what you really are. As for instance expressed in 'life is an illusory singular movement'.
L10: So what is in the ‘now’ which has no cause, but yet it is there? You are ......................
L14: Yes, in the gospel of Thomas Jesus formulated a similar question (translation by me): "What is it that you can observe without seeing, hearing, tasting or feeling it?"
L10: Yourself ……………. The Gospel of Thomas is awesome. Allegedly the oldest of all the gospels but too direct for the church to promote. That living self is all that humanly co-creates and co-exists this moment of real illusion. There is only what is.
L12: "What is it that you can observe without seeing, hearing, tasting or feeling it?" Thought-form, What else is there to observe? What you are is seeing, hearing, tasting and feeling, without any distinction.
L12: L14 said: "The 'problem' I am having with all these questions is that they are conceptual, and invite a conceptual answer, which could lead to further conditioning" Exactly ! If you see this very clear, you leave this behind and burn your books. Any questioning relies on a (mental/conceptional) answer (condition) that is already there.
AAU: Dear L12, Respond to: "here are mistakes possible in life...." If duality and the mind were understood absolutely, then you would know that mistakes are an illusion in the mind. Advaita exists as does other knowledge and none are mistakes in life, as man has neither made advaita nor knowledge. Man does not know when life began and so will not know when it will end. If man knows when life began then he would know when life will end. The enlightened have proclaimed that life is illusory, and you would know that life is illusory if you know what life is made up of. You would then know all that appears real to the mind is the illusion. To know is not the same as to be aware. If man is aware he would realise life is a singular movement, and this movement is interpreted as multiple actions by the ego. Awareness is applicable to an individual who is an evolved ego known the witnesser. Life is life. AAU
L12: AAU, As the Life that I am, I made the mistake of escaping from my true nature, and I forgot who I am. As the life that I became, I made the mistake that advaita could bring me back home. As the life that I became, Life made me see that advaita is just a kind of knowledge, like any knowledge, and leads to more conditioning (of thought-form). I am life, and I can make mistakes, and as the life that I am I can undo those mistakes. Life has never began, and will never end. So logically knowledge of the begin or the end of it can not be. But if one understands the mistake of Life in the expression of humanity, than it is known that life will correct this mistake. So AAU, what is the basic mistake and movement of humanity? Life is only illusionary for the ones that are in a dream state. If the dream is over and thought-form ceased to exist the life that reveals itself is as real as it is. There are now illusions anymore. Can there be such thing as an evolved ego? Sounds to me something has to become something else. Is there such thing as an evolved ego? To me someone with an evolved ego just is someone with a bigger ego.
AAU: Dear L14, Respons to; "The 'problem' I am having with all these questions is...." What is observed is to be realised whether it is real or illusory. When you realise that the ego and everything that exists is illusory, you become pure awareness and live being aware of the illusory world which is no longer real to you, but understand that it is real to other. Self-enquiry leads to this realisation. AAU
AAU: Dear L14, Respons to; "Yes, in the gospel of Thomas Jesus formulated a...." It is love, as love is not what the mind thinks or believes love is. AAU.
AAU: Dear L10, Response to; "Yourself ……… " I affirm that there is only what is. But what is that only which is? What that only which is, is reasoned by logic and not beliefs. AAU
AAU: Dear L10, Surely reason and logic would confirm that my parents are the cause of me, as are you caused by your parents. By total reason and logic what is in the ‘now’ which has no cause? AAU
AAU: Dear L9, You spell out incorrectly and not correctly. Here is proof of the incorrectness. My inquiry was “what is your question that was misunderstood by me” and not as you rephrase it as 'what question was understood by me?" Also this was written “The point of reference to all readers, is to ponder whether what the mind says about the world by the knowledge it has, is real or not, because the enlightened have proclaimed that the world is illusory. Illusory does not mean the real does not exist. It means the real exists but not in the manner the mind thinks the real exists.” These are my words that you say are recycled into different meaning and context. Where is the recycling of your words? The words are direct and logical. A dialogue has to be bounded by logic and reason, which my words do. You are understood properly and there is nothing interpreted for you write… “There is nothing outside the now - so why would you want to bring in the concept of causality at all?”. This means that if nothing is outside the now, it only means that everything is in the now. I do not assume you have to prove a lot to me, you need to prove it to yourself that everything exists in the now, and not to say anything without proof, as this would be like a blind leading the blind, because others read it too and believe like you do, that everything exists in the now, as it does not exist outside the now. It is not for me to gain it is for you and others to see the blind belief that the real exists in the now, but not that the illusory that exists in the now is believed to be real. That everything exists in the now is not denied, but to accept them as real, just because man says so, is no proof that what exists in the now is real. Nothing should be taken as the truth just because man says so, unless verified by reason and logic, just as the statement of the enlightened is not to be taken as the truth just because they say so. They need to be verified by reason and logic as well, which the intelligence of life has provided man. I shall prove it to you that what exists in the now is illusory, just as the enlightened have proclaimed, and not real with sound logic and reason, and not as a belief. If you think that truth is found out by following what everyone believes, it just keeps you stagnant. By understanding what is in the now truth is realised and you become alive. You write… It is however, the possibility of getting a smell of Truth by opening to words of others, but this takes a special attitude - that of openness, of receiving in the heart. Now understand it is only your mind that understands and not your heart. The heart just pumps blood. The openness of receiving in the heart happens in the mind if anything is absolutely understood and not relatively understood. Simple logic informs that time is required for anything to exist. I do not deny that everything exists. I affirm that everything exists The inquiry is how does everything exist? As time is illusory and not real, look up science and it affirms time is illusory. Again logic and reason informs that yesterday’s car is today’s car in the now, just as yesterday’s car was also in the now. Yes nothing exists other than the now, which is timeless. So one has to have clarity of this fact, and it is possible once you have absolute understanding of the ‘now’. Reasoning and Logic has value only when the reasoning and logic of reality is really real. When reasoning and logic acknowledge reality and with it come the usual emotions that prevail in every situation which also is acknowledged as reality, man is in pieces. But when the acknowledged reality is understood as illusory but nevertheless is present in the now, suffering that is usually present in situations is understood as illusory too and calm is the outcome in any situation. Ignorance is knowledge too though minimal which needs to be understood as illusory by sound reasoning and logic. Ignorance surly means overlooking what you really are. You would know who or what you really are when you understand by reason and logic what you are made up of. AAU
L9: Dear AAU, I'm sorry for the typing errors, and how they prevented you from understanding my point. As for dialogs: reason and logic are helpful, I agree. But it does not suffice. It also needs listening to the other person, and some effort to understand what is being said. I'm not going to repeat myself once more. In my experience, when many misunderstandings unfold, it is proof there is no connection on a deeper level. Reasoning and logic have value in the relative domain, but do not lead us to the Truth of what we are. (Although, to a certain extent, it can be of support, on the path to liberation.) "…you need to prove it to yourself that everything exists in the now…" This is just a thought happening to you, and has nothing to do with 'me' at all. Maybe this is how it works for you? "If you think that truth is found out by following what everyone believes, it just keeps you stagnant" Good point! Since you are the one repeating phrases and / or dogmas of Shankar and coming up with prhases like 'just as the enlightened have proclaimed', my guess is, this was meant as a reminder for yourself.... "Now understand it is only your mind that understands and not your heart." Funny misinterpretation, which can only stem from a strong identification with mind. I wrote 'receiving' and you assume this ‘receiving’ should lead to 'understanding' ... see what I mean? Truth is not to be understood - truth is to be lived - in 'just being' - and one can experience truth - maybe 'resonate with it' is a good word for it, in one's heart, even if not (yet) having realized 'it'. One instance: it can be experienced in the presence of an enlightened being. Something inside you resonates with what is being said. But it is not (or not just) in the words. Some experience this resonance as a deep inner stillness, others as love, which may take on (for a while) the form of deep love for that enlightened - but actually this love is not personal; it is love recognizing itself, life recognizing itself, the heart receiving / resonating with truth. Truth is experienced at the deepest level - call it energetic or whatever words you want to give it. And only later, maybe, it can be put into words - which will always fail short. Maybe for you it is working somehow - trying to grasp Truth through understanding, but to me it seems like a Baron von Münchhausen effort (lifting himself out of the swamp by pulling his hair upward)... The mind trying to outthink itself.... "Simple logic informs that time is required for anything to exist." Okay, I can live with that (in fact, I AM living with that). But why on earth would you be satisfied with 'simple logic' - what good will that do for you? When logic is your path, why not delve a bit, or a lot deeper? Inquiring into all underlying assumptions, inquiring into the nature and rules of logic itself, inquiring into the fallacies, strengths and limitations of 'the reasoing mind' itself, would be a good starting point. Inquiry into the many illusionary aspects not only in the perceptual domain, but in the 'rational' and emotional domain as well, would probably bring about a more solid, less simple logic. Many sages have gone that path, so in ‘the scriptures’ there can be found a lot of support along these lines. "You would know who or what you really are when you understand by reason and logic what you are made up of." Another Baron von Münchhausen effort.... ;-) Even if one would make the giant leap toward understanding what one is made up of: understanding is not realizing it. It is just intellectual play. And realizing what you are, is so much simpler. And more accessible. Myself being scientifically (and also methodologically) highly trained and educated, I have come to appreciate logic and reasoning as a instrumental to accumulating knowledge and science - and of no use whatsoever on the spiritual path. And it is precisely in the deep experience of the not knowing (by which I mean: not just understanding one actually knows nothing, but really, really experiencing it), and the surrender to that, that the joyful dance (of every single particle) called life can be experienced, the joy that life is - and the oneness expresses itself as unconditional, all encompassing love.
AAU: Dear L12, One can observe that seeing, hearing, tasting and feeling happen to him and he does nothing to make them happen to him. One should ponder whether the observed thought-form is real or illusory. What I am seeing, hearing, tasting and feeling is with distinction, which needs to be understood that they happen to man and man does not make them happen to him, and are illusory and not real, including the distinction. Illusory does not mean they do not exist. Illusory means that they exist but not in the manner the mind thinks they exist. AAU
AAU: Dear L12, Response to: "L14 said:......." It is not denied that concepts lead to further concepts. It has to for the drama of life to continue. One needs to understand whether concepts are real or illusory, once they are understood to be illusory by sound, reason and logic, the drama is over, meaning the concepts do not evoke emotions but a calmness prevails to whichever way life unfolds. AAU
AAU: Dear L12, Response to; "As the Life that I am, I made the mistake of ....." Nobody makes mistakes especially a mistake of escaping from his true nature. The mind has been conditioned by life which has made man forget his true nature. Life will make man remember his true nature at the right moment. You have not become any kind of life, life has made you to be the way you are. How could it be a mistake when you have not yet understood where and especially WHAT your true home is? Life has made an understanding happen to you that advaita is knowledge; it will also make you understand that advaita is wisdom and not knowledge if it is meant to happen to you. Man is not the doer and you will undo (albeit illusory) the mistakes if it happens to you. There are no real mistakes in life or the mind. This is the basic misunderstanding. The misunderstanding is, the mind thinks it knows what is best, but does not understand that life knows better. Life has expressed humanity the way it is meant to be i.e., illusory. If anything needs to be corrected it will be corrected, albeit illusory. There is mistake, albeit illusory, and the movement is a singular flow of what life is (meaning what life is made up of) that projects an illusory humanity as real to the mind. If life were illusionary for the ones that are in a dream state, it would mean that the enlightened ones where in a dream state all along. They have in fact said that the waking state is a dream state. This is correct and can be proven by reason and logic. When it is realised that the waking state is a dream, the dream that the world is real is over and you begin to live life any way it flows. Everything has become something because of evolution, which sophisticates every moment. Man has not made evolution to happen, and neither can he sophisticate evolution nor the moment. As everything evolves and sophisticates there is no reason why the ego will not evolve and sophisticate. The ego evolves and sophisticates as an enlightened being, who witnesses the singular way the illusory life unfolds. AAU
L9: "So what does logic mean? Logic means the intelligence of life cannot be comprehended by logic. Author: Dr. Vijai S. Shankar© "
AAU: Dear L9, Response to: "I'm sorry for the typing errors, ...." You can only listen and understand the other person with reason and logic and not without. The connection on a deeper level arises only if there were total reason and logic. Misunderstandings happen when total reason and logic are absent and only beliefs prevail. Beliefs happen when reason and logic are not total. That reasoning and logic have value in the relative domain, is a belief of many and I respect that, as this what has happened to them as they cannot make total reason and logic to happen to them. If reason and logic are a support on the path to liberation and liberation happens once truth is reached, it is obvious that total reason and logic leads to the truth and not beliefs. It is reasonable and logical to find out whether what exits is real or illusory. The enlightened have proclaimed it to be illusory. The thought does not work for me it is obvious to me what exists in the now. What exists in the now is present everywhere. What is it that is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient? It is a fact and not a belief. Shankar does not speak in phrases or dogmas. He reveals simple facts based on sound reason and logic. I therefor am not repeating phrases or dogmas, I am merely sharing simple facts, based on sound logic and reason and not beliefs. I clarify that the word understanding was meant to signify receiving. Truth cannot be understood because truth cannot be known. An enlightened beiing will point to everyone to live life as life happens to you and you do not make life happen. He will also explain why you do not make life and also will explain what life is. When life is explained what it is, you will understand that any experience including the one that resonates in the heart is a belief and not the truth (meaning real). It is obvious to me that experiencing a resonance in the heart is similar to Baron von Münchhausen effort. AAU
AAU: Dear L9, If time is required for anything to exist, and you can live with that, understand that even logic would require time to exist and can you live with that? Logic is not my path as logic and any path would require time to exist and I know that time does not exist in life. Time is an illusory thought in the mind that has the power to make man believe time is real in life. It is not a giant step to understanding what one is made up of. We all have been to school and so it is easy. Realising what you are becomes simple when you understand what you are made up of. As you are scientifically and methodologically highly trained and educated, the question asked must be a cake walk to you. I am surprised it is not a cake walk to you as yet. I affirm it is of no use on any spiritual path. And it is precisely in. AAU
AAU: Dear L9, Response to: "So what does logic mean? ......" That is correct. AAU
L9: Dear L9, I missed responding to the last para which was in the last comment you sent. So here it is. What is that every single particle of life? You are getting closer now as what life is. AAU
L9: "The connection on a deeper level arises only if there were total reason and logic. Wow, so you reasoned yourself in love?
L9: "That reasoning and logic have value in the relative domain, is a belief of many" The many that live in houses, walk on streets, drive cars, cross bridges, all the products of reasoning and logic... wow, a belief of many.... :-)
L9: AAU: "Shankar does not speak in phrases or dogmas. He reveals simple facts based on sound reason and logic." Shankar: "The real, therefore, cannot be written about, spoken about or thought about: it is only the illusory that can be. So, all knowledge about the real has, paradoxically, to be illusory – a beautiful story at that, which puts man to sleep."
L9: "It is obvious to me that experiencing a resonance in the heart is similar to Baron von Münchhausen effort. The me that is speaking in this statement, is the mind. And the mind is not what you really are.
L9: AAU: <<If time is required for anything to exist, and you can live with that, understand that even logic would require time to exist and can you live with that????>> You misquote me. The full remark started with: <<"Simple logic informs that time is required for anything to exist." Okay, I can live with that (in fact, I AM living with that). >> What I meant: I can live with the fact that people (like you) make use of simple logic and therefore arrive at false conclusions. And I continue by inviting to drop simple logic for a deeper logic, based on inquiry.
L9: Dear AAU, these were my last comments I write to you. I have read quite a few 'exchanges' you had with others in this forum, and felt challenged to try to interact with the real AAU you are, but it is only your mind that keeps on answering, and is great at fitting everything it meets into it's frame of reference and understanding. It was fun while it lasted, but having read your last responses, I lost my interest, so I am moving on. Have a good life!
AAU: Dear L9, Respond to: "That reasoning and logic have....." Yes the belief is however illusory and not real, meaning actual. Understand that illusory does not mean the belief does not exist. Logic means the intelligence of life cannot be comprehended by logic. AAU
AAU: L9, Respond to: ""The connection on a deeper....." Did I tell you that I reasoned myself in love? Or do you assume it? Love is not what the mind thinks or believes love is. AAU
AAU: L9, Respond to; "Shankar does not speak in phrases or...." He is correct. The statement means that knowledge about the real has put man into sleep. This is why the enlightened have proclaimed that the waking state is a dream AAU
AAU: L9, Respond to: "It is obvious to me that experiencing a....." That me is AAU and speech happens only through the mind. Who said the mind is really what anyone is? What is the mind? Has anyone seen it? And still everyone believes the mind is real. What a beautiful illusion, manifested by the intelligence of life. AAU
L12: Just a lot of crappy mindstuf going on here. a waste of words...
AAU: Dear L9, It is only through the mind that a relative answer and an absolute answer do come. No body so far have admitted that they cannot answer a simple question which can be answered, they just defend their believes, as you do. If they admit then I will willingly give the answer, and nobody has asked for it either. They just run away, as you do. I am having a good life and meant it for all. AAU
AAU: Dear L9, Respond to: "<<If time is required for anything to exist,....." The full remark is “Simple logic informs that time is required for anything to exist. Okay, I can live with that (in fact, I AM living with that)”. The full remark does mean that you accept that time is required for anything to exist. Do you being a scientist believe that time is a reality in life? Shocking. It is exactly what I continue to invite by deeper logic. Is time present in life?, what is life and everything that exists in it is made up of? AAU
AAU: Dear L12, Simple logical and reasonable questions were posted. Are simple logical and reasonable questions crappy mind stuff? AAU
L12: It ain't logic, it is fools pingpong. You all know this very well ...
L10: Dear AAU, friend and fellow human. AAU said --- they cannot answer a simple question which can be answered, they just defend their believes, as you do. If they admit then I will willingly give the answer, AAU this is not the case, we are all equal here and there is no right or wrong answer. You must firstly appreciate that Advaita, or the unity of human actuality is never absolute or defined. All is what is, equally. We are the sentient being sentient and this illusion of being is our reality. You or anyone else who professes to have the one only answer is deluded by spiritual arrogance. Krishna, Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed where all historical spiritual icons who’s teaching and ideas grew into the their much loved persona. As individuals they were sentient being sentient in actuality, just like all the peoples of today. Arrogance of opinions is a very small prison-cell and you pay the price of emotional confinement. To see the good in all things is one path to appreciating the beauty and spender of all the actual real now. Equally all life, illusion, delusion and reality make up the actual real now. This moment is perfect in every way, to share this love is a gift. I AM not correct or incorrect. I AM not the answer or the question. I AM not defending my believes or supporting anyone else’s. I AM that I am, is my truth about me in this actually very real moment. I suspect this is equally true about everyone else but every heart beats to its own rhythm. AAU good friend - where is your compassion, tolerance and patience ???? Please don't lock away your ideas, there is so much more to reality.
AAU: L12, Point out any illogical statement, before stating that it is not logic, it is fools ping pong. AAU
L14: Please keep in mind that all this talk about 'logic' and logical statements is only about dualistic logic! The logic we should be dealing with will transcend the bifurcation of subject and object, mind and matter, being and non-being, etcetera. As long as we stay in the mutual conditioning of opposites in the world of antithesis we will never be complete. The 'logic of the illogical' should be used, where one looks upon all things as beyond every form of expression and demonstration, transcending knowledge and argument. Do not misunderstand: it is about the knowledge that is not knowledge. This is paradoxical, it is true, but one can only obtain an absolute standpoint if one discards all the ordinary logical laws. The (seemingly) logical dissection of reality will never bring about a unifying point of view. A unifying point of view can only be achieved by the intuitive method which not only transcends subject and object but also all logical categories, including affirmation and negation. Pure, absolute experience is the one where subject and object are not separated. This is also called ZEN philosophy. For instance: being and non-being are identical propositions: "The true State is no state. The gate of Dharma is no Gate. Holy knowledge is no knowledge." The identity of a concept and its negation expresses the whole of truth! But let me stop here. Those interested in this 'superlogic' can ask me for more information if they want it.
AAU: Dear L10, It is not about who is right or who is wrong. All are unique and equal because knowledge or wisdom has happened to man and man has not made it happen. Hence, I was waiting patiently for the readers to let me know that they do not know, so that I could share it with the readers the knowledge that has happened to me, for which I do not take any credit. Have I ever professed that I only have the answer? If I have point it out to me please? Sentience too has happened to man and man has not made it happen to him. Opinions are not shared, but only simple facts that are backed by science, reason and logic. Do you honestly feel that man now sees the good in ALL things and appreciate the beauty and splendour in ALL the actual real now? It is possible to see the good in all things and appreciate the beauty and splendour of all the actual real now, if one were to understand by total reason, logic and science, what is in the ‘now’ which has no cause? If the now were real, meaning actual, the division between delusion, illusion and real should be actual meaning real, is it though? Either the now is real or illusory, it cannot be both. That they are both is merely a belief and not the truth. You are correct and incorrect as well, your daily life has proof. You have answers as well as questions; your daily life has proof. It is nice to know that you not defend your beliefs nor support anyone else’s. I am that I am is a realisation while living in this illusory world. I am that I am is true for everything that exits in the world. You would know my compassion, tolerance and patience if you know me daily, or enquire from those who know me daily. I have not locked away any idea and it is not possible either, for I know that ideas are illusory and not real, and they come and they go. AAU
L15: The Knowledge of Advaita or nonduality essentially frees the human being from perceived alienation from the whole. You are self-evident and there is no second, so you are the whole. So the bhaya hetu, the reason for fear - of insecurity, lack of fulfillment, mortality - is essentially not there. So the study of Advaita Vedanta is to understand this by studying with the help of a Guru. Words essentially have been coined to deal with relative reality. The same words are handled by the Guru carefully removing the relative meaning of the words in the mindset of the student to lead him to the Vision of the Whole which the Guru in turn has received from his Guru through the sampradaya (teaching tradition) what they call, karna paramapara, listening tradition. You, the being is the Whole – isness - the invariable, by its sheer presence, throws light on all thought frames bringing alive a thing of the past, thus so called time comes into being, a thing in a different place, thus so called space comes into being, image of horse different from image of cow, thus bringing alive a so called object, the object is nothing but a name, word and form, meaning associated, which can be further broken down to parts, names, words and meanings, stitched together by a niyati, order, which can be bifurcated into physiological order, biological order, psychological order, order of karma, so on and so forth. The orders themselves trace their origin to the being 'isness' which is the source of 'all-knowledge' sum total of all orders. The orders on display are the so-called objects and activities. Pardon me for using the word so-called repeatedly, because the truth is only the 'isness', everything else is transitory, characterised by the word 'mithya' in the sastra, meaning relative reality, ‘anirvacaniiyam,’ means indeterministic, being continually in a flux, so no matter or energy is ever created or destroyed, it is all in a flux. Hence, the person 'isness' gives life to the world and the world itself is nothing but the same 'isness' as 'all-knowledge', a permutation and combination of all orders, giving an ever-changing appearance of objects and activities - sat-cit-ananta(aananda). Thus goes the study of Advaita Vedanta.
AAU: Dear L9, Shankar is a doctor and a scientist as well. He has requested me to convey this message as a courtesy to a colleague. He is sure you will understand and acknowledge. His message “everything that exists in the ‘now’ which is human beings, animal kingdom, vegetation, objects, matter, atmosphere including human breath which comes out as speech is made up of atoms, quarks, leptons, bosons and Higg’s boson. The energy present within them is light. Therefore every speck of existence is light. The intelligence present within light which is light too, projects an auditory and optical illusory world, man and mind within visible light and certain audible sounds as speech. How the illusory world is manifested cannot be understood by Logic. AAU
AAU: L14, What you say is understood and not denied. Understand that dualistic logic is present to indicate "The true State is no state. The gate of Dharma is no Gate. Holy knowledge is no knowledge." Presence and absence indicates duality. Yes, when the identity of a concept is identified truth is revealed. The inquiry is to determine what is the identity of a concept? If the identity of a concept is determined with irrefutable proof, it would not require negation. If you are interested to know the identity of a concept, please let me know. Just logic which has happened to man, and man has not made it, is enough. AAU
L12: Hi L15,, You wrote: "The Knowledge of Advaita or nonduality essentially frees the human being from perceived alienation from the whole. You are self-evident and there is no second, so you are the whole." Knowledge/knowing can not free man from bondage or duality, no method, knowledge or system is able te end it. We all know that, and it is written all over, but stil we like to believe it does. L14 said this very well: "The (seemingly) logical dissection of reality will never bring about a unifying point of view. A unifying point of view can only be achieved by the intuitive method which not only transcends subject and object but also all logical categories, including affirmation and negation. Pure, absolute experience is the one where subject and object are not separated."
L9: L14, I read your comment with a smile on my face. Well put. I have come to see in my own biography how logic is not logical at all - even if the reasoning is sound, the facts the reasoning 'filled with', are picked based on deeper reasons (irrational and sometimes even random) that are out of reach of 'reason'. Here the Pascal quote applies as well: le coeur connait des raisons que le raison ne connait point.... the heart knows reasons reason does not know of ;-) There is a lot of logic used in the 'mystical' writings, that is: the way it is worded makes use of logic, but there is not (the usual) logic in it. Only when certain shifts in perception, also referred to as awakening take place, the reason in this logic is understood (and acknowledged). One instance is the 'and / or binarly' reasoning that is big part of logic, and which you also refer to. This is based on our way of living in the dreamstrate, which is based on polarities. Part of the awakening is a process which I can best describe as a ''rewiring of the brain' (which can actually be experienced), which renders, in this instance, the exlusive thinking, dualistic thinking in dualities, impossible. This, in turn, affects not only the 'being in the world' but also the language and thinking. The reason I use so many words is because I am interested in what you called 'superlogic'. Presently I am developing a course - and part of this is transmitting what 'right thinking' looks like, and how it can be 'learned' while still being in the dream state. The project also includes 'right feeling', 'right action' - all this not in a moralistic sense but 'right' as in 'natural'. I am familiar (purely based on reading) with the zen approach, but to me it sounded you have more to say about it then I came across in what I have read.
L9: Wow L15, so much insight in so little words...
AAU: Dear L15. He is a Guru who brings about the understanding why there is no second, and it is not possible for even the one either to exist as real. He brings about the understanding that everything including you and him is an illusory reflection of the whole. He is a Guru who explains that words have not been coined by man, but words have happened to man, and that words are an illusory manifestation of sound, and they refer to relative which forms knowledge and point to wisdom as well. He is a Guru who brings absolute meaning to the relative words by using words which are illusory by their nature. He is a Guru who explains that any vision is illusory and not real. He is a Guru who explains that the whole is light, and there cannot be a person to see this vision, for the person would be light too. The ‘isness’ which is the truth is light, for everything that exists is light. Since all is in a flux and it is in a flux for it is a singular movement of light, the ever changing appearance of forms, objects and activities has to be illusory and not real, including every order. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, for energy is light which exists everywhere and has no cause for its existence. Only the effects of light are present which are the illusory world, man and mind including all forms of knowledge which includes the sum total of orders. This is the real meaning of advaita. It is not a study it is a revelation that the whole is pure light. How the illusory world is manifested that appears real to the mind cannot be understood by logic. AAU
L16: Thank you, AAU, for setting the ‘record’ straight and for leaving no ‘question’ nor ‘answer’ lingering – and, indeed, Dr. Vijai S. Shankar is such a Guru, a manifestation of life itself, a precious gift for life’s own mankind. The revelation that the whole is pure light, is undoubtedly the real meaning of advaita. Meanwhile it is understood that logic is not able to understand how the illusory is manifested that appears real to the mind. Such is life’s intelligent and wonderful manifestation to be a magical play of light and sound - making appear its world, its vegetation, its animal kingdom, its mankind, its man and mind, ……and, indeed, also its Guru. Within a Guru life as man realised itself to be life – absolute understanding is more certain and therefore without any doubt the hallmark of a Guru. L16
L12: If all is illusion, logically advaita is an illusion, logically the dream is re-painting the house with another dream.
AAU: L12, To point out an illogical statement was enquired, it is awaited. Advaita is illusory too, because knowledge and wisdom as well is illusory. They are illusory because words are used to understand knowledge and realise wisdom. Words are an illusion of sound because, when man speaks the sound waves are made up of human breath which is made up of mainly nitrogen, minor gases, bacteria and other constituents which are all made up of atoms which in turn are made up of quarks, leptons, bosons, and Higg’s boson all of which is energy which is light. Therefore light comes out as sound waves and not words as sound waves. Therefore words are an illusion of sound. The intelligence of life cannot be comprehended by the intellect within the mind. Your sentence ‘logically the dream is re-painting the house with another dream’ is illogical and not logical. AAU
L14: @AAU: "Therefore words are an illusion of sound". This is complete non-sense. Words and concepts are not only spoken. And if they were, so what? Please stop using the words logical and illogical in this way. You are caught in your own trap!
L10: Thanks L12, I thought this was very poignant and a good metaphor. Human truth is not rational or logical. Love and beauty, self-awareness past and future. All these daily distractions haunt most honest normal humans. (it is not a competition) The human attitude or condition which expands these experiences is simply to embrace with courage and strength the illogical or irrational elements of our being. These are not the unbalanced conditions of madness or insanity, but quite the opposite. L12 said --- logically Advaita is an illusion, It is at this point the mind will accept -- reality is an illusion. Therefore our illusion is our reality. We need words to communicate especially across the internet. If you can merge with my mind then my truths could be observed by yourself. For now words are all we have and L12 said -- the dream is re-painting the house with another dream. I agree and see the elegance and truth in this very human statment. My rebirth or re-dream happened this morning and so far it has been a great adventure. Hopefully, another re-birth re-dream will happen tomorrow …………………
AAU: L14, When man speaks sound waves come out and not word waves. It is evident that an unknown foreign language appears as sound. This is logical proof that when man speaks sound waves come out. Here is logical scientific proof; when man speaks human breath that comes out is made up of 90 % nitrogen, other minor gases and constituents such as bacteria. The gases, bacteria and constituents are made up of atoms, quarks, leptons, and bosons. These contain energy which is nothing but light. Therefore light appears as sound waves and not words. These sound waves are mysteriously transformed as words in the mind. The words and concepts mysteriously get spoken and are illusory and not real. I am only trying to help all to get out of the trap of the mind, albeit illusory. AAU
L16: All, AAU: ‘I am only trying to help all to get out of the trap of the mind, albeit illusory’. Indeed, life makes mind expose its believes, so that minds illusory trap-nature becomes obvious. The more elaborate the trap of the mind, the more opportunity for man to pierce its illusion. Hereby the help of a Guru is indispensable, for the intelligence of the illusion is so fabulous, that it needs absolute understanding to unmask its mechanism. This way the mind-trap, albeit illusory, becomes man’s doorway to liberation. One through who life made absolute understanding happen, considers mind’s illusory trap as life’s precious gift, which allows man to realise his true nature, to be light. L16
AAU: Response to what L10 wrote to L12l, Absolute truth cannot be known because it is absolute and not relative and only the relative can be known. E.g. if "right" is the truth for man, it only is right because of "wrong". therefore "human truth" can be known and it is always relative. Human truth must be logical, however, only within a certain frame of premises. Absolute truth reveals itself, yet cannot be known, when all premises and reference points are understood to be illusory meaning just relative, giving meaning to each other without any absolute reference point. Yes, all these distractions, which are partly logical, meaning relatively logical, but not totally logical, nevertheless appearing as totally logical to the ego, haunt normal humans, meaning every man with relative understanding and not absolute understanding. The human experiences will be embraced including the logical and rational rejection, when the human experiences are absolutely understood to be illusory and not real. Otherwise the embracement and preaching is behaviour to defend what has been preached or invested into by the ego. Love is not what the mind thinks it is because the mind needs reference points for love to be defined. These are beliefs, expectations and interpretations of actions, speech and thoughts which are, however, relative and not absolute. The same applies to beauty, self-awareness, past and future. Words are used by a knowledgeable man to convey the "same" meaning to the other as he has in mind. "Merging of minds" is a deception. It would not be possible as meanings are always private. If this is understood, the illusion reveals itself as illusion which is what a sage points to by using daily words and meanings, too. Truth is neither yours nor mine. Truth is truth. If one merges with another mind and their beliefs are the same, the beliefs appear to be the truth, but beliefs are not the truth. If a mind has the absolute understanding that life is timeless and thoughtless and that the mind is full of time such as the past, present and future and thoughts about what beauty, love and other distractions which are illusory and not real, then that mergence will be invaluable. If not it is merely one mind confirming the other that what it believes is the truth. That is why one mind needs the other to merge with it. A mind which has absolute understanding of life and mind would not need any mind to merge with it or observe it. Yes, everybody's illusion appears as if it were real. It is "our reality" meaning not absolute reality. This is meant by illusion. Illusoriness is the reality of our experiences that are real to us. When you understand that a dream is illusory, you would never wish to paint another dream. Surely tomorrow another dream will happen in life, to L10 Hughes. Life gives you many such dreams ever day so that you may understand that a dream is illusory and not real. Death means the transformation of life into another form, whereas life remains life eternally, and change is inherent in this timeless flow, albeit ilusory. AAU
L12: @L10,, "My rebirth or re-dream happened this morning and so far it has been a great adventure." It is to live it without doubt or questioning. I'll guess you know this. All doubt and questioning of ourselves is the cause of our duality.
L12: Hi AAU, That is a lot of illogical stuf you are putting on me there. "quarks, leptons, bosons, and Higg’s boson" That stuff does not even exist. It is created by mind and is all theoretical nonsense. You are using one theory to prove the truth of another. "The intelligence of life cannot be comprehended by the intellect within the mind. Your sentence ‘logically the dream is re-painting the house with another dream’ is illogical and not logical. " True, but as the life that I am I know when something smells bas or not :-)
L10: Thank you kindly ……… for sharing. Only opinion --- it is this spirit of adventure that completes the circle. Human fear and doubt or more precisely, my fear and doubt are some of the many diversions from the obvious real truth of what is. Our intellect and powers of reason have become so busy that we (normal honest humans) fill our minds, our days and eventually our whole life with intellectual rhetoric and nominate logic and reason as the sole custodians of truth and reality. Yet unrelenting is our inner self which tells a different story as with courage and strength we bridge the divide between two apparent and normal honest human conditions. Science and Love. Logic verses the illogical and reason verses unreasonable, is game we play and its adventure is our experience of sentient being today. My dearly loved brother says this is all mumbo jumbo and from his point of view he is perfectly correct. His beliefs make-up most of his truths, as do mine. Although our opinions differ, the creative intelligence which enabled this moment is not going to intervene and declare one man right or one man wrong. No, this moment in all its glory and delusions of human reality is yet another perfect example of expanding intelligent energy, which includes human sentient being. Today’s adventure is the entire infinite human universe intrinsically connected as single strand in motion. Reality illusions, relevant and irrelevant are all the same to the adventurer who knows what is, is exactly what is.
AAU: Dear L12, They do not exist as a reality but yet they do. They exist so that man may understand that what he believes does not exist either, but yet they do. Science too is illusory just as any knowledge is. Wisdom too is illusory just as any knowledge is. It is only the illusory that can point to the absolute real by explaining the relative real to be illusory. Response: Understand that bad is illusory and not real. AAU
L12: AAU, The illusory has no knowing of the absolute. Neither can it point into that direction. We like to believe it does, so we can hold up to our believes, and continue to dwell in them.
AAU: Dear L10, The real truth of what is, is that fear and doubt are illusory and not real, because fear, doubt and diversions are never in the ‘now’ but always in the next moment which is the future. Science, logic, reason and the lack of it are all illusory, including our inner self which is nothing but the mind, albeit illusory. The moment has all the glory because the moment is thoughtless. What is, is exactly what is, is light. Light reflects an eternal adventure, albeit illusory, which appears as illusory yesterday, today, and tomorrow’s adventure. AAU
AAU: L12, The illusory has no knowing of the absolute because the absolute cannot be known. The direction that illusory points is that, the absolute cannot be known. We like to believe that the real does know the absolute and has direction towards it, so we hold up to our beliefs in the directions and continue to dwell in them. AAU
AAU: Dear L10, The real truth of what is, is that fear and doubt are illusory and not real, because fear, doubt and diversions are never in the ‘now’ but always in the next moment which is the future. Science, logic, reason and the lack of it are all illusory, including our inner self which is nothing but the mind, albeit illusory. The moment has all the glory because the moment is thoughtless. What is, is exactly what is, is light. Light reflects an eternal adventure, albeit illusory, which appears as illusory yesterday, today, and tomorrow’s adventure. AAU
AAU: L12, The illusory has no knowing of the absolute because the absolute cannot be known. The direction that illusory points is that, the absolute cannot be known. We like to believe that the real does know the absolute and has direction towards it, so we hold up to our beliefs in the directions and continue to dwell in them. AAU
L14: I suggest you allow yourself to be amused with the illusion of self, experiencing all the while that the individual only seems to exist… have fun!
L10: Well said sir, allow yourself to be amused with the illusion of self. This is the crux. Chasing rainbows was never going to light the candles of humans being human. Thank you. the expression nut shell comes to mind ........... as in - all knowladge can be put in a nut-shell.
L9: haha, that's why the brains look like a walnut ;-)
AAU: L14, The individual exists but only seems to think that his existence is real while it is not. The individual has fun when things go his way and not otherwise. He will live when he understands that even the meaning of words is illusory and not real. Only then would he remain calm no matter whether he has fun or not. AAU
L14: @AAU, Why do you take everything so seriously? We can have always fun, even when it is just mind juggling.
L16: All, One smells air, sees daylight, hears sound, tastes food and feels the body - this happens to man spontaneously without him questioning nor resisting any of these. Only when an enlightened being happens as spontaneously to cross his path, man’s ego-alarm system seems to go off and to burst with anger, to defend its believes and to reject life’s invitation. Finding an enlightened being crossing once path, is life’s spontaneous and generous invitation to smell, to see, to hear, to taste and to feel the flavour of absolute understanding an enlightened one has become to realise and therefore radiates. Indeed, ‘serious’, ‘fun’, ‘juggling’ and any other interpretation is but a concept put by life in man’s mind – life instead is without interpretation nor concept, for life is without mind, indeed life is but pure light. L16
L10: Totally agreed, Life must be fun. Dance with the Mystery is the best attitude to human inner awakening. Love and give away all, work hard to enable the growth of all you encounter. Cherish the beauty in all that you perceive. Take full responsibility for your attitude to all that shares your moments. control the beast. Promote the positive and lead by your examples of compassion, tolerance and patience for everything including your illusion of you. Own nothing, not even time, own only the magic of I AM THAT I AM and you will be having all that human fun that can be. The kingdom of heaven of Heaven is within you …………. It’s all been said before. Nothing is new.
L9: L10, If I understand you correctly what you are saying is: if someone walks on the street and bumps into an enlightened being, an alarm system goes of, as his ego feels the need to defend itself. Is this based on you experience and, if so, what was your role in this situation)?
AAU: L9, Just as a rainbow is an illusion of light, so too is the brain that looks like a walnut an illusion too. It does not mean the rainbow does not exist, one should ponder how real could the existence of brain that looks like walnut be? AAU
AAU: Dear L10 When one understands the self is illusory and so are thoughts, he begins to admire the intelligence of life. Human will be humans when they understand that even the rainbow is because of light just as any human, or knowledge in a nutshell is because of light. AAU
L12: OMG (try to stay nice here), A rainbow is as real as it is, trying to claim everything in life as an illusion is nothing else the fooling yourself en trying to escape the life that is. That is not what is ment by advaita, but only proclaimed by pseudo enlightened fools.
L12: Ask yourself this,, When life as real as it is is a non-dual unity. Is it then possible for one to be awake and another to be not?
L9: L12, thank you for mowing my lawn :-)
L16: All, Life is awakened, energy or light, indeed, but one whom life still makes believe thoughts to be real has not yet realised life’s awakened state, and one whom life made understood life to be an illusion in total has become to realise life’s awakened state. Therefore, the question ‘Is it then possible for one to be awake and another to be not?’ is posed by man, not by life.
L9: L16, your comments are based on a severe misunderstanding of 'the scriptures' or 'what the masters say', which can only stem from trying to grasp spiritual truth with the mind. So let me put a few things straight. You do think. You do have thoughts. Denying that, is ridiculous. What is meant by all which has been written and by other means conveyed by ' the sages' is something you can (and should) check for yourself: when you don't inquire into the nature of thinking, a twofold illusoir may arise: 1) thoughts are an expression of what you are 2) thoughts are of importance and have validity (contain truth) What mystica / sages point at, is that you can transcend this state of illusoir and re dis cover what you really are. Here a problem arises, for the logical mind cannot grasp what is explained. In Buddhism (the heart supra) a famous way to try to point to the truth of what we are is: form is emptiness, emptiness if form. Form is emptiness is what in many ways AAU is expressing. Sometimes he misses the deeper meaning, but there is a lot of truth in what he says. The second: emptiness is form, is also true. You are this person L16, living this singular life. In reality you cannot deny that: whatever you make yourself believe, you will remain an expression of consciousness (or, in your lino: of light) in this particular form referred to as L16, no matter what you believe. And yes, you are more then that. Our mind is binary programmed, meaning, that it tends to think in polarities - you are form, or you are emptiness. Well, actually, you are both. You are this individual, and you are the universe. That simple. All questions being posed are not being posed by life, but by life as expressed in a particular form (a human being). There is, when you have a closer look, sometimes a lot of wisdom hidden in simple words. Take the word individual. Nowadays it is used to express the singularity of a person - that which makes him stand out from the crowd. And this is a good way of using the word. What is forgotten, is that the word actually says: un divided - that is: not separate. So actually the expression 'L16 as an individual' points to the fact that you are this single person which cannot be separated from the whole. In my way of expressing truth, this lifeform called L9 and his psychological makeup, his biography, his knowledge, is called the relative domain. Oneness and the truths that point to that, I call the absolute domain. On the absolute domain, we are all the same. We are all consciousness. In the relative domain, this expresses as objects and scentient beings. Both are true: many forms, one fabric. All these are dead words, not truths, but pointers to what can be realized. Once you come to realize this (which means: incarnating - living it), these words become alive to you. Advaity is like a pudding. Don't think about it - the proof is in the eating.
L9: What I forgot is to finish where I started: about thoughts. The truth is: thoughts do happen - but you are not your thoughts. And the truth is: thoughts may be an expression of where you are - on the psychological level, in the relative domein, but never are an expresion of what you really are. So, from the absolute viewpoint: thoughts are illusory and have no substance.\ When you find a way to let go of paying attention to, let alone investing in thoughts, even for a few seconds, you will experiecne the truth of what you really are - that which has no beginning or end, no qualities, which is pure and empty, and unaffected, timeless and spaceless.
L10: Thanks L9, You asked -- if someone walks on the street and bumps into an enlightened being, an alarm system goes of, as his ego feels the need to defend itself. This I very much doubt. - opinion only - We are all on a path and at different stages along that path. Put another way, we are all vibrations of a single strand but we co-exist in different vibrations of the strand. There is sometimes a clear recognition and powerful linkage that occurs when two people of a similar vibration cross paths. This may appear as alarm bells but I would prefer to believe that if feels more like joy. My point is referring to our sublime connect-ability. Perhaps a better words is synchronicity but the effect on the individual is one of wholeness and fulfilment. A very human condition of revelation, supreme contentment and the end of personal fear and doubt. Perhaps your question is concerning our humanly innate fear of the unknown and some intuitive recognitions without formal introductions and explanations. Fear of the unknown is one of the instruments of control corruption uses to maintain the slaves. Example - devils and demons are in the darkness. This controls the adventurous paths of the fearsome. The human ego must be told and reassured of its freedom, because only the human soul knows of it’s true freedom. Much of the masses are controlled by feeding them a belief of freedom. The trick is simply to allow the soul to reassure the ego. This is to Master the self …………….
L9: Oops, L10, thanks for your answer... actually I made a mistake, I was quoting Paul and the question was meant to be directed at him. For it is not my quesiton, but I question the assumption (bumping into...) he made in his comment. As for the content of your reply: I tend to agree with most of your previous comment (that is: with the exception of " tame the beast"). :-) As for 'the trick' to allow the soul to reassure the ego: what worked for me, was stop believing my thoughts and feelings. Simply surrendering.
L16: Dear L9, Thank you for your extensive reaction and your (needless) worrying about ‘severity’. Your words bring one right back to Dr. Vijai S. Shankar’s accurate, outstanding and unquestionable article ‘WHAT DOES ONENESS MEAN?’
L9: L16, If I understand you correctly what you are saying is: if someone walks on the street and bumps into an enlightened being, an alarm system goes of, as his ego feels the need to defend itself. Is this based on you experience and, if so, what was your role in this situation?
L9: Thank you L16, no worrying here... I have to congratulate AAU for having found such a dedicated sidekick.... ;-) What would remain for you to say if quoting were not allowed? Quoting someone else is producing dead words. Only in the expressioin of what you live yourself, words become alive. Words that are alive, to parafrase L12, smell fresh - they have the smell of truth. Be it relative or absolute. I smell nothing of the kind when you hide behind quotes of Shankar.
AAU: L14, The forum is essence of Non-Duality. The topic is what does oneness mean and not what does joy mean? The topic is to inspire deep thoughts about oneness and not inspire deep thoughts about joy. I guess one needs to be serious to respect the forum.
L9: Essence of Non-Duality is joy. Seriousness is a psychological phenomenon, created by mind. Joy is the expression of life.
L16: Dear L9, The smelling is in the ‘I’ who smells, even when ‘nothing of the kind’ is smelled. The one who hides is the mind, albeit illusory, hide-and-seek is a mind's duty. Oneness, which is pure light, hides nothing for it is one.
AAU: L10, Look around you at the violence and poverty present does that make ‘life must be fun.’ The forum is essence of Non-Duality and not essence of fun. All that has been said before, and pertains to the forum is, is to realise the waking state is a dream and to wake up from the dream.
AAU: L12, A rainbow is illusory just as a mirage is illusory. Colour is dependent on light without light there is no colour. The real which the mind thinks is real is depended on light too as the real is made up of light, whether anybody likes it or not. Advaita points to this fact by pointing to the fact that everything is not even one for the second to be present.
L9: Dear L10, time for a crash course.... "everything in life is a catastrophe in motion, when thought through the mind!" So the mind will tell you to be serious - no room for fun. "However, when everything is witnessed from beyond the mind, life appears as a transforming process of energy! Life is indeed mysterious!" "Spiritualists who want to change the world to a better place show disrespect to God, for it is He who has created it in the first place." So there you are, L10, you are allowed to enjoy life after all, as these quotes come from Shankar himself :-) Okay, just to leave no room for doubt, one more: "Happiness is a state of life without the mind present within it: the mind with its formulae, with its solutions of what is right and what is wrong, or what to do or what not to do, or what should be done. These are primordial thoughts which drive man: what should be done now?" So yes L10, the essence of Oneness or Advaita is the happiness and joy in which life expresses itself in us and through us. Have fun! Dance with the mystery.
L9: See what the realization of oneness looks like - again a quote from Shankar.... "Man is not addressing life as it is; he is addressing life based on what the mind says life is. He is addressing life with words and is yet to address life as life. Equate life with life and not with the mind. Man approaches life through words. So long as you approach life through words, you are thinking and not living. Thinking is not life. The realisation that you are alive as you are in the timeless ‘now’, without any part of the ego, is what ushers in happiness. In every moment you will be in that state of happiness because every moment is the same moment, not expecting and not formulating."
AAU: L12, Response to; "Ask yourself this,...." Glad that at last some profound enquiry, instead of defending beliefs. If by awake you mean the waking state and by not awake you mean the sleeping state. The one in the waking state is an illusory manifestation of light, meaning only light is present. The one in the sleeping state who dreams is just the same, and one who does not dream is light too. All of them appear real to the mind of the observer, the observer being light, his mind being light too but appearing as sound. If by awake you mean enlightened, the awakened realises that he is an illusory manifestation of light and so is the observer, but appears real to the observer. Therefore it is possible for one to be awake and another not to be, the possibility is nevertheless illusory and not real. This is why life is non dual, because it is illusory and not real which the mind takes it to be. Keep in mind that illusory means that it exists but not as real meaning the awake and the unawake exist as an illusory manifestation of light.
L9: AAU, again you are trying to escape life by some logic you make up for yourself. And in my humble opinion you are the one defending believes of the knowledge of advaita which has just as much meaning to humanity as any other bad fairytale. If you (or your teacher) think you exist of light, jump of a building. It will not hurt you in anyway. It does not matter to me, you do not really exist other than a fake of my imagination. You fool yourself telling that one who is awake realizes that he is an illusion. One who is awake, realizes nothing. Thought/mind is gone. The brain then only functions for the continuation of the existence of the body for as long as is necessary, till life ends. 'Awaked' ones telling you that they have fully realized that they know that they are an illusion, just sit to long on their meditation pillows, or took to much dope in my opinion.
L13: What is kind of funny is that so many people dream that they are awake!
AAU: L9, Response to: "Essence of Non-Duality is joy....." Essence of Non-Duality is Bliss, which happens when understanding happens that joy and suffering is duality which is illusory. Seriousness is illusory duality manifested by life in the mind and not created by mind. Joy and suffering is duality which is an illusory expression of life.
AAU: L9, Understand the quote then. Shankar is saying life and mind are not synonyms. He is pointing that beliefs and knowledge are illusory and not real. He is sharing that we are alive in the ‘now’ which is timeless and thoughtless. The mind and duality is being addressed in the forum as being illusory and that life is non-dual. Shankar is well aware of what is being posted. Every reply form the forum is sent to him for his response.
L10: Yes, exactly AAU said -- Joy and suffering is duality which is an illusory expression of life. Reality is an illusion therefore --- all we can ever be is a choice of illusion. The point here is not duality. It is choice. When all is illusion, even being is a choice. You can-not say you do-not exist. Such a statement is naïve and pointless. You choose. Fun, emptiness, joy or misery these illusions are your choice. Even if you choose to be a nothing you have to make a choice. Even if you choose to be an invisible provocative non-existed coordinator of absolute understanding. You must choose. There is no judge, only Life being living. make a choice …………….. I like being L10 although he is a bit smelly and very strange.
L16: Dear AAU, Thank you for your accurate, thorough and indisputable pointing out of the essence of Non-Duality as being Bliss, and which happens when understanding happens that joy and suffering is duality which is illusory, that seriousness is illusory duality manifested by life in the mind and not created by mind and that joy and suffering is duality which is an illusory expression of life.
L9: AAU, agreed, bliss is the word commonly used for. Words are just labels, pointers. Your teacher uses the word 'happiness here'. In Dutch I find the word ' vreugde' to be most appropriate. The word joy is also okay, as long as it is not taken for joy in / about something. For bliss is without subject or object. As for 'understand the quote then': you have this strange habit of assuming no-one understands. The 'crash-course quotes' were used because they are an expression of Truth. The reason I posted them was a bit provocative - to provoke you into seeing that L10 is using different language, but pointing to the same Truth as Shankar is.
L16: Dear AAU, AAU: 'Shankar is well aware of what is being posted. Every reply form the forum is sent to him for his response'. In that case, of course, thanks also is meant to go to Dr. Vijai S. Shankar, for His patience, compassion and His precious gift of Absolute Understanding which is shared by Him so generously, with whole of humanity.
AAU: Dear L12, Advaita means not two, if advaita were knowledge it would not mean not two, as there are more than one type of knowledge. Therefore I am not defending the beliefs of the knowledge of advaita. I am in fact pointing out that beliefs and knowledge are illusory as advaita points that out too. Man understands that he has to look left and right before crossing the street. He also understands what will happen if he jumps of a building. He further understands that a car may hit him if he does not look before crossing the road and it will hurt him, similarly he understands that if he jumps of a building it will hurt him. What man does not understand is that the hurt will be illusory and not real, and illusory does not mean hurt does not exist. You are right each one is an imagination in the mind of the other, which appears real. If thought/mind is gone and the One who is awake realises nothing then he would be a vegetable. Awakened ones never tell that they are fully realised, but explain why meditation, the world and everything is illusory and not real. If they tell that they are fully realised, they surely are not awakened but only believe that they are, and their belief is further strengthened by their disciple’s belief that they are fully realised. Such an awakened one and his disciples both are on dope and sit on meditation pillows.
L13: The other is you from a different point of view.
AAU: Dear L13, A dream that minds can dream is unimaginable.
AAU: Dear L10, Understand therefore that choice may or may not happen too, and when it happens it might or might out work out, albeit illusory and you do not have the free will to make one. You certainly do not have a choice of being in life. You are in life and you have no choice about it. Point out where it has been said that you do not exist. I have been explicit in stating that illusory does not mean that it does not exist. I certainly did not choose to coordinate and I am certain that I exist and that Iam very visible.
L9: Understand that anything that is called unimaginable first is imagined.
L9: I have to correct my last comment - happiness (in the sense used by Shankar) is not the same as bliss, although they belong together. Happines is always there. It does not come and go. It could be described as 'the experienced state of well-being', but this is not personal: it is the realization that everything is perfect as it is. So even in the midst of compassion with suffering, happines does not go. Bliss however is a state that arises at times (expecially when not engaged in activities), it comes and goes, sometimes quiet en gently, sometimes overwhelming - an experienced state, a side-effect of having realized oneness. Having realized oneness, in the play of life it expresses itself as compassion and unconditional love. Also this is unpersonal, not an act of will or intent.
AAU: Dear L9, Shankar is not my teacher and neither does he claim to be a teacher to anyone. A teacher teaches knowledge, whereas Shankar shares wisdom. He wrote happiness to mean bliss, he included the word state of happiness as most people want to be happy rather than bliss in ordinary daily life. I do not assume that no one understand, this is your assumption and not mine, you have not verified from me whether it is my assumption before concluding that it is. I understand that others understand relatively but not absolutely as yet. They are quotes to drive home the point that the mind is not synonymous with life, which is absolute understanding No need for provocation, as I can see clearly that to him it appears duality, actions, time, labels are real and not illusory. Surely he finds life is fun, good for him and for the fortunate ones as well, but what about the unfortunate ones?
AAU: L13 My view is however that a dream is illusory and not real, as is the waking state illusory which is an absolute point of view and not a relative point of view in which the waking state is real and not illusory.
L9: Yes, AAU, it is an assumption. No need to point that out. On the relative level there is no absolute knowledge, so all is based on assumptions, and I am aware of that. I check my assumptions explicitly when I have serious doubts or when it is important - normally assumptions are confirmed or corrected in the process. So thank you for confirming my assumption - "... others understand relatively but not absolutely as yet'. This was I referring to. And although in general your ' others understand relatively but not absolutely as yet' may be correct, this can not be applied in specific cases. This is why I drew your attention to this 'habit of yours'. So my provocation, although justified, did not work - you still choose to misinterpret L10' words. Not that it matters - your judgment does not change reality. As to words: they are just pointers, blown in the wind. Sometimes people use different pointers while talking about the same 'uneffable'. My assumption is, you can't acknowledge that. Using different vocabulL12s not necessarily is an indication, let alone proof, of ignorance.
L10: AAU likes to push, his approach to helping others is to push until you realise that only you can determine you. AAU knows there is no absolute understanding and how accepting this truth is the only way to live in peace un-tormented by rhetorical questions. Humans have developed many bad habits, the practice of demanding understanding is one of them. AAU sets himself up as the bad guy so that people can arrive at their own knowing. The truth is inside us all. We just struggle with the AAU inside us all. Its all an adventure, a wonderland. AAU is the white rabbit ...............
AAU: L13 Is that which is unimaginable first, is later imagined, or is that which is unimaginable, is first imagined?
AAU: Dear L9, Happiness is a state of being happy. One is always not happy every moment of his life. Surely one is happy with a state of being well or well-being. Compassion is concern for suffering and compassion is never with suffering, meaning you do not have compassion and suffer as well, meaning feel hardship, distress or agony. Surely you do not feel happy when there is suffering, for you or others. Happiness comes and goes for happiness is duality and exists because unhappiness exists. Duality comes and goes. When everything is understood to be precisely where it is meant to be, be it a thought, object, humans beings, animal kingdom, vegetation and elements, and they are illusory and not real, one would understand that everything is perfect as it is, and not until then. Then both happiness and Bliss mean the same, they both do not go away, but you will have compassion for others who do not understand that the world is precise every moment and illusory as well. When one has realised that the world is illusory he is in Bliss or happiness even when he is not engaged in activities, he is in fact in bliss or happiness every moment of his life. Bliss and happiness come and go for he who has not realised that the world is precise, perfect and illusory. He realises oneness when he realises everything is precisely where they are meant to be and is perfect as it is every moment, and they all are an illusory reflection of light which is oneness, for light is one, not two and is everywhere, whether anybody likes it or not.
L9: AAU, what have you been drinking just now? ;-) In a way your last comment is the inversion of a summary of what I just wrote (that is: saying the same thing in more words) but there are some strange sentences that are either typing / translation errors or misunderstanding... As Shankar put it: "Happiness is a state of life without the mind present within it" So maybe you don't know it, but this does not mean it does not exist... You write 'Happiness comes and goes' - yes, this may be your experience. This is true so long as (identification with) mind comes and goes or, as you put it, duality comes and goes. Please do not forget: duality does not come and go. Oneness is. It is just that your experience of separation comes and goes. Your perspective is not truth. Losing your perspective - this is the door to Truth. The rest of your comment... what can I say? The first time ever I read a summary of my comment that was longer than the origninal??? I don't know AAU- are you just parotting or do you really live what you write? My guess is: your mind does a good job of understanding conceptually, your tongue has not tasted it yet.
L13: Dear AAU, to your question above: The value of an answer to any question depends upon the authenticity of both the one who answers and the one who puts the question. Little I know about you. But from what I read you seem to be tied up with a guru type teacher person. If this is so it means that you are of the opinion that you have found the one source that inspires all answers and you have probably lost the ability to enter into genuine inquiry with other people. That would mean that your question is rhetoric. And I don't answer rhetoric questions. On the other hand if - contrary to my assumptions - there is genuine interest behind your question, I am happy to peruse the dialogue. The responsibility is yours. With best regards L13.
AAU: L10, To push will require compulsion, demand, instructions to do, or authority. AAU merely explains and does not employ compulsion, demand, and instructions to do or claims any authority. These requirements would nevertheless be explained to be illusory and not real. AAU knows that absolute understanding is not about accepting anything as the truth. AAU knows that absolute understanding is about verifying whether the known is illusory or real by total logic and reason. AAU does not set himself up as this or that, for he understands that he is what he is whether he likes it or not. And what he is, is illusory and not real. People will arrive at whatever knowing happens to them and they do not make that knowing happen to them, though they believe that they can arrive at the knowing. The truth is just not inside us, it is in every speck of existence, which is pure light and not visible light. We struggle with illusory words inside our mind and this struggle too happens and we do not bring it on. The world is Alice I wonderland.
AAU: L9 So, if assumptions do not happen and clarity sets in, it is a step towards absolute understanding. Absolute understanding does not discuss the logical or lexical semantics of linguistics or its social protocols. Absolute understanding explains that the meaning of any word is illusory and not real, that the nature of a meaning, word, thought, and everything that exists in the world is illusory and not real. Relative understanding makes people think that there are different pointers to the real by different words. Absolute understanding reveals that there is no pointing TO the real WITH words but the real REVEALS itself by understanding the illusory nature OF words.
L9: Ah, you become even more funny, AAU. When you write about yourself, you use sentences like 'AAU does not...' When you write about the concept 'absolute understanding', you turn it into a person: 'Absolute understanding does not...', 'Absolute understanding explains...' Wake up, get real. If Shankar really is such a control freak as to read your posts and discussion - and does not correct you, it is advisable to find a new teacher - aaahhh sorry not a teacher, a new Shareholder of Truth.
AAU: Dear L9, I have always said everything exists, but I have also said they do not exist in the manner the mind thinks it exists. Happiness is a state of life without the mind present in it meaning that the mind and interpretations are illusory and not real. Oneness does not come and go. Duality comes and goes because it is illusory; if duality were real it would never go. A dream goes away because it is not real, similarly what happens every moment in the waking state comes and goes away because it is not real. Understand that man does not make the moment in life or what happens every moment in life, meaning neither does he make it come nor makes it to go. The enlightened have rightly proclaimed life is a dream because everything comes on its own and goes away on its own. Experience and separation too come and go for it is within the dream. How many words are needed to make absolute understanding to happen, one can never know. Words have happened to my mind and the absolute understanding of them too, I did not do anything for either the relative or the absolute understanding to happen. My tongue tastes food and it happens and I do not do anything to make taste happen.
AAU: AAU, Could you not understand that perhaps someone is writing on behalf of AAU. I have informed that Shankar follows the responses closely. He also conveyed a message to you, if you could remember. Absolute understanding and relative understanding is neither a he nor a she, so it cannot be turned into a person. I am sure you understand this. I would wake up if I realise that the real is illusory and not real. I understand that it is. Shankar does not correct anyone, for all are correct where they are. Shankar merely discusses absolutely and not relatively. Nobody can hold the truth for truth cannot be known.
AAU: Dear L13, Authenticity depends upon how much relative understanding has happened or how much absolute understanding has happened to either of them. I am not of the opinion that I have found one source that inspires all answers. I have not lost the ability to enter into genuine inquiry with others to determine right or wrong or is anything the only answer. I am waiting to enter into genuine inquiry to determine if everything is real as it is taken to be or is it in fact illusory, but nobody seems to be interested in doing so. The explanation why everything is illusory and not real is what a Guru provides, not any answer. I would be interested if anyone knows that question which cannot be answered or that one answer that cannot be questioned. That would be an authentic question and an authentic answer. If you would like to know please let me know and I shall provide them both. The interest I have is to share that the world, man and mind is illusory and not real. Illusory does not mean it does not exist, It means it does exist but not in the manner the mind is made to believe it exists
L9: Dear AAU, "Could you not understand that perhaps someone is writing on behalf of AAU." No, don't be ridiculous. I would neverhave assumed that some of your post are not written by you, but by some other who does not hesitate to sign with 'AAU' - that would have been too weird an assumption. But since you tell me this is going on for some time, I take your word for it. So now I don't even know who I am answering right now. Therefore, mr. Shankar, whenever you write on this forum, please have the courtesy of using your own name. "He also conveyed a message to you, if you could remember." Well AAU - one can only remember what one has knowledge of, would't you say? "I am sure you understand this." Well, of course you are, since I brought it up. But do YOU really understand this?
AAU: L9 The post are written by me and signed by me, and parts that refer to ‘AAU does not…’ has been written to me to be conveyed to you, just as the message for you was written to me to be conveyed to you. I can understand it was difficult for you to assume this. Whoever you are answering to, let it make absolute sense and not elative sense. One should have knowledge of what he has written or received in a forum. If not then a forum which means a meeting or a media where ideas or views of a particular issue can be exchanged would have no meaning, but would be a waste of illusory time. I understand what you brought up makes no sense.
AAU: L9, The forum is essence of non-duality and the question posed is, what is oneness? Therefore your question marks requires a response. The response to the forum question is; oneness is light. The response to the question mark is: the question mark when made by pen on paper begins as a dot as the pen tip touches the paper, and as the tip moves along and completes the symbol of question mark i.e. ‘?’. The symbol is made up of dots joined together, which appear as the symbol to the eye. The ink dots are nothing but light appearing black to the human eye. The question mark on the computer screen is nothing but light, this is obvious to a scientist.
L17: True self is only the one part, two part or more part is the mind
L18: Nothing that appears has built in meaning though we could say oneness is pointing to something very intimate, that which is it's -own- meaning, life itself...
AAU: L18, You are correct; nothing that appears has built in meaning. The meaning to that which exists is donated by the mind in the form of thoughts which is in memory. Without memory man would neither experience nor be able to give a meaning to that which exists. When that which exists is examined it is evident that it is made up of atoms, which is basically light. Logic and reason cannot explain how light could appear as that which exists, and as well as thoughts, but evidently light does appear. So surely oneness is pointing to something very profound, which is light. Light that is everywhere and is life. The appearance of life is therefore illusory and not real.
L10: AAU said -- The appearance of life is therefore illusory and not real. A complex statement no doubt, can you help me. If as you say -- “life is therefore illusory and not real” why is this illusion called L10 trying to understand this delusion of illusion. Put in simple terms -- Why does illusion appear then question and doubt ??? Put another way -- How could “absolute understanding” occur within illusion ??? How could AAU claim to-be giving a serious reply to this post, if AAU believes “life is therefore illusory and not real.” Because -- Illusion is realty for most human sentient being sentient. Trust me.
AAU: L10 is not trying to understand a delusion of illusion, because delusion is a contradiction of reality or rational argument. He is trying to understand the reality of illusion as illusion does not contradict reality or rational argument. So that man may understand that question and doubt are illusory too. So that man may ask a question or a doubt that cannot be answered, so that he may come to an answer that cannot be questioned or doubted. Illusion does not mean absolute understanding does not exist. Just as everything that occurs or exists is illusory, so too does absolute understanding occur or exist. So that man may understand that life is illusory and happens precisely, spontaneously, uncontrollably and unpredictably, as it is meant to happen, which man can neither control nor premeditate the aliveness of every moment of life with certainty is serious enough. Reality is reality and not illusory for all sentient beings. It is obvious.
L10: Sorry about this AAU, You said -- Reality is reality and not illusory for all sentient beings. It is obvious. You also said -- life is therefore illusory and not real. Please help me to understand. How can both these statements have any value or seriousness if it is the delusion of life that makes these statements. If a delusion told you the moon was made of cheese how can you, as another illusion place any serious or value upon such words ??? It is the same intellectual vortex as the statement “I am a liar” Could you see any value and seriousness in such dilemma ??? If life is illusion then where does the sentient being go to find reality. Please do not say death …….. death has no voice in this chat group.
AAU: L10, Reality is reality and not illusory for all sentient beings, but it is illusory, whether they like it or not, but they do not know that it is illusory. I said life is therefore illusory for reasons that are obvious. You missed mentioning the scientific reasons that make life illusory. It has value and seriousness because they are not delusional. It is based on scientific facts, so cannot be delusional. I would not place any value or seriousness on a delusional statement, I merely would accept it for this is what is happening to him, for scientific facts cannot be understood by a delusional. If the dilemma is understood to be illusory, one could see the value and seriousness of life’s intelligence, in making even the knowledgeable to appear as liars, albeit illusory. He need not have to go anywhere to find reality. Reality is right in front of him every moment. The illusoriness of reality is the reality. Death too is illusory. A transformation process of life is all that is present and the transformation process appears as death. Nothing dies for energy transforms from one form to another. All forms that appear are illusory and not real.
L19: oneness to me was the moment years ago.. where everything just became a clearness and interconnected.. like ice sculptures.. sound, site all of it.. just one.. nothing else.. laughter then appeared and again and again.. the mind had shut down run its course..
L10: Yes AAU we agree -- you said -- The illusoriness of reality is the reality. Thank you Kindly. On a slightly different thread you said -- Death too is illusory. This is also interesting, as death does not exist. Death has no substance. Death is a powerful human emotion for a past memory. We humans created the word death to label the unknowable. When we contemplate illusion we consider our perceptions and experiences of an occurrence. For the subject of death we have no such comparison. Death cannot be illusion or reality there is only life. It is a very real awakening to grasp this fact. You and I will never know death. We are life. When these bodies fail to support the soul, the soul will droplet to the ocean. AAU as you say -- The illusoriness (unreality) of reality is the reality. You might consider the duality of illusion and reality as the early stages of acceptance. Being able to feel comfortable and secure knowing that illusion and reality where simple stepping stones to the broader dimensions of living in the now. To feel connected and completed by this moment and know you never needed reality or illusion. The more we try to understand, the further away from the joy and elation of we become. Everything is you, no life or death, no illusion or reality. Welcome pilgrim ……………
AAU: L19 The clearness and interconnections like ice sculptures including sound and all of it could have been clear only in the mind and nowhere else, because it is only the memory in the mind that recognises, registers and recalls connections, sculptures and sound. Laughter that appeared again and again occurred in the mind too. It is impossible to know when the clearness began and ended for laughter to begin. It is also impossible to know what ended for the clearness to begin. It is also impossible to know when laughter began and ended for words to begin. The mind had not shut down though it appears to have done. The clearness of oneness is valuable and authentic if it is present every moment of whatever that happens in life.
AAU: L10, Thank you for responding to benefit all. You agree now but never before, for you have never said illusoriness of reality is the reality. The sentence is meant to mean that reality is illusory and not real. Death exists but its existence is illusory. You have not understood that illusory does not mean it does not exist. And you say you agree that the illusoriness of reality is reality. This points that you have not understood the statement that you agree with, for now you say death does not exist. You say that death has no substance, but death has substance and the substance is the dead body. Death is a word from memory which is the past, and a word is illusory and not real, but to you a word and emotion is real and not illusory and yet you say you agree with me that illusoriness is the reality of the real. When we contemplate illusion seriously, we have to ponder whether our perception and experience could be real or illusory. Death can be compared to the alive. A delusional mind will only say a dead body is not in front of it. A man with relative understanding will be emotional about a dead body. A man with absolute understanding too will be emotional about the dead body, but he is aware that the dead body and the emotion is illusory and not a reality, meaning the illusoriness of reality is the reality to man with absolute understanding. No one will ever know death while they are alive, not even the dead would know anything about death. The body does not support the soul. The soul supports the illusory body. The soul is present in every droplet of the ocean. If soul were not present in every droplet of the ocean, the ocean would not appear as ocean, albeit illusory. You are connected and completed by this moment which is eternal and not multiple, but surely in need of the illusory for the body to exist and work. And he who is connected and complete by the moment will never say death does not exist. He will be aware that death exists but is illusory and not real. A man who is connected and complete in the moment realises that man cannot try to understand: understanding happens to man, and the more man believes he tries to understand the further away is he from the eternal moment. ‘You’ are not pure light to be everything: without life, illusion or reality. Pure light surely is everything without death, illusion or reality. ’You’ and everything with life and death, are an illusion of light. Welcome pilgrim
L12: Why calling things illusionary? What is, is here, and stating that it are illusions makes our mind up for an escape, fore denial. Thoughts and feelings are there, and must be "questioned" without any assumption or conviction.
L12: "Oneness means that everything in life, though illusory, is a happening, by life - and man, in no way, is the thinker, speaker nor the doer. " Again. Denial and escape here. One is the root cause of his own duality. Nothing else is. It is very importend to see and acknowledge this for oneself.
L12: "Life runs the show, in all its appearances - including man’s illusory confusion as wel as man's understanding of the illusion of his confusion. " I am life, with the ability to cause, and even so end duality in my life.
AAU: L12, respond to: "Why calling things illusionary?......" You are right, what is, is here. Thoughts and feelings are there too and must be questioned without any assumption or conviction. For example the thought and feelings about a ‘wooden chair’ is there and should be questioned without any assumption or conviction. So let us question the ‘wooden chair’: if the atoms of a ‘wooden chair’ were wood, then that chair would really be a wooden chair. If the atoms of a wooden chair were basically light, then that chair would be an illusion of light and nothing besides that. If on scientific examination the atoms of a wooden chair were found to be light, would you call that ‘wooden chair’ real or illusory? Also please answer our previous discussion for the benefit of readers and respect to the forum. If you do not know what the discussion was please let me know and I shall forward it to you.
L12: A wooden chair is a wooden chair. Things concerning our daily life have nothing to do with duality.
L10: When questioning -- So what does oneness mean. It was said -- God is real oneness, and visible light, which reflects the world, man, and mind, including time, is illusory oneness. So there you have it. One sentence in a nut shell. Real oneness is God all else is a mere reflection of God, all else is not the real God or Oneness. So we the reflection are not real. This world, my mind and the time given a the bottom of this screen are not real. Surly if it were as simple as this then we could all understand ??? Understand that we live and exist each day in a joint collective illusion. My day and yours is no more than a collective dream. These words and cloths on your back are all non-real reflections of God. God has separated us from itself, we of the unreal creation. None of the above sounds right to my heart. The above is not truth. Oneness could not entertain a counterpart like non-oneness or illusionary oneness. In this moment here and now is pure perfection, no need of oneness or illusionary oneness. No need to understand. what is, is what is. What more do you need? Now is real (now is God) …………. Why not ???
AAU: L12, Response to: ""Oneness means that everything in life, though illusory, is a....." Thoughts and feelings that man is the thinker, speaker and doer should be questioned without any assumption or conviction. Scientific examination provides ample evidence that man is made up of atoms and so too human breath that comes out during speech. Human atoms are not made up of human flesh, bone, blood, tissue or muscle. If human atom were made up of human flesh, bone, blood, tissue or muscle, then a human would be real. But, human atoms are basically light, it therefore proves that man is an illusory appearance of light and not real. The atoms of human breath are not made up of letters and words. If the atoms of human breath were made up of letters and words, then speech would be real and so too would letters and words be real. But the atoms of human breath are basically light. Therefore speech is an illusory appearance of sound, which is basically light at a lesser speed. By these findings it is obvious that thoughts too are basically subtle sound i.e. light at a lesser speed that appears as thinking. Therefore man just cannot be a speaker, doer or thinker, though they happen. How doing, speaking and thinking happen cannot be understood by the intellect. The enlightened have rightly proclaimed that the world man and mind is an illusory manifestation of light. Those who assume and are convinced that man is the doer, speaker and thinker, deny and escape from life that is. The word oneness is used to mean that whatever is present, it is present everywhere. The word is not used to mean a numerical value. It is important to have absolute understanding of words and their meaning and not to assume or be convinced that relative understanding of words and their meaning are absolute.
AAU: L12, A wooden chair is a wooden chair, albeit illusory. Things concerning our daily lives have everything to do with duality, albeit illusory. If they have nothing to do with illusory duality, then our daily life will not function or exist.
AAU: L10, They are not real, they are illusory but appear real to the mind. The time given at the bottom of the screen is proof that time is illusory. What appears on the screen is as illusory as is a film on this screen. It is only electronic light signals in digital format that appear as a film with actual forms or time to the mind, in a nutshell. Understanding is an inherent characteristic in man, of which he is not in control. Understanding will happen if it is meant to happen. It is simple for life is simple. It is the mind that makes life not simple. God is pure light and pure light is not separate from us. Pure light as reflected light (consciousness) appears as us. The heart does not understand simple physics, the mind does. Truth can never be known, because the cause of light can never be known, not even by physics. The reality to the mind is illusory oneness. This moment is perfect because it includes imperfection too not separate from perfection. This moment is perfect because the moment is a singular movement of light. This moment is perfect to him who can explain that the separation between perfect and imperfect is illusory and not real. This moment is perfect to him who can explain that this moment can neither be made by man nor be controlled by man. Only those who live with you would know whether the moment is pure perfection to you or not, whether you need anything or not. Now is a reflection of God and not God, because God is pure light and pure (absolute) light cannot be seen by man. Man cannot see absolute light because he cannot see some of forms of even relative light, like radio waves, micro waves and many other forms of relative light. If man cannot see even some forms of relative light do you think he could see absolute light?
L10: Thanks for the reply, much appreciated. AAU said -- “Man cannot see absolute light because he cannot see some of forms of even relative light, like radio waves, micro waves and many other forms of relative light” Why do you assume the light referred here is a frequency of photons ??? Do you believe that God or pure light is classified by frequency ???. AAU also said -- “To be real man has to see it, but he has neither seen the mind nor time in life, hence they both are illusory and not real.” This is simply not true. The sun and the moon remain to be real even though they are not seen. What is real to humans is what they believe is real. Back in the 1940s the German people believed that Adolf Hitler was a great leader, their support and belief made Hitler their leader. Garand - do you believe that the sun and the moon exist even when you can-not see them ??? It is belief that determines personal human reality ……………….. Like it or not, spacetime for you or me can cease to be personal ly real. Spacetime may continue for others that still believe. Likewise if you believe that God is a frequency of photons. Then once again for you this is your real. I think the important point here is to remember -- you (each one of us) must determine personnel reality. We traverse two main dimensions, the solid land and the fluid seas. A bridge which dwells in both worlds. The solid ground at your feet and the fluid ideas of the mind. The light referred in these exchanges is the light of enlightenment. God is pure awareness without the body, pure enlightenment unbounded by spacetime. Universal, everywhere and everything. Omniscient, omnipotent and omnipresent. Alpha and omega. Complete and whole in this moment right here and right now. There is no reality or illusion, these are mere stepping stones to the human emotion of acceptance and revelation. To feel this emotion you have to believe and know …………….
19 April 2014
L20: There is on oneness, it implies twoness
L20: Oneness happens when we open our mouth or identify with a thought, oneness is also the story, the paint on the canvas.
L3: Knowing is the key!
20 April 2014
AAU: L10, It is not assumed that light is a frequency of photons, because even photons are light, and so is an assumption an illusory manifestation of sound which is light at a lesser speed nevertheless. You do not believe when things are clear to you. How could you classify pure light that cannot be known or experienced? Light that is known or experienced, can be classified by frequency. Remember any frequency is light and therefore illusory, whether anybody likes it or not. The sun and the moon are seen. Man cannot see the sun directly, or the moon all the time. Any notion of time would be a thought nevertheless. So many times I have repeated that a belief is a personal opinion shared by more than one, but not the truth. Truth can never be known. Simple logic and reason will tell you that you cannot see the sun and moon for obvious logical reasons, though they exist. This does not logically tell you that that they do not exist. I have repeated several times that illusory does not mean that it is does not exist, but you seem to have not understood what illusory means. To a man with relative understanding, a belief surely determines reality, whether anybody likes it or not. But to a man with absolute understanding with logic, reason and science a belief is illusory and so too the meaning a belief conveys. NOTE: This does not mean a belief or its meanings does not exist. If space time ceases to personally exist as real as a happening backed by logic, reason and science then such a man will not say that the statement “To be real man has to see it, but he has neither seen the mind nor time in life, hence they both are illusory and not real.” is simply is not true. Space time will continue for all but it appears illusory to him, if an understanding has happened that it is illusory and not real, but as real to those to whom an understanding has not happened that it is illusory. I do not believe That God is a frequency of photons is neither a belief nor a fact for me, for reasons given above. Both the feet, solid ground and ideas of the mind are illusory and not real. A good sound, logic, reason and science would point to this fact. But, how the illusory come to exist sure is a mystery to logic, reason and science. That is correct. Light is complete and whole in this moment, therefore that which appears in this moment is an illusion of light and not real. There is neither reality nor illusion to God or pure light. Illusory and reality are stepping stones to man to REALISE that everything is light, with logic, reason and scientifically, relative light which is omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient. And to realise that God is pure light and therefore omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient.
AAU: L20 The twoness is oneness too, as the twoness is an illusory manifestation of oneness, which is light.
AAU: L20 Man can neither premeditate the precise moment when his mouth will open with certainty nor the exact thought within a moment with certainty. They both happen to man and man does not do them, though he believes he does. The same principle applies to a story or paint on canvas. How they all happen is oneness, albeit illusory.
AAU: L3, Knowing implies a knower and the known and therefore, knowing is the key that locks man in bondage. Realising that knowing, the known and the knower is illusory and not real, is the key.