Ask a nondual "person"

[mikkel_the_dane]

I disagree with this point. Biological life has value, and is wondrous. Even beyond that, everything in the subjective world has value for us, because of the subjective qualities they have when perceived by us. The perceptible “world” is not some trick which has been played upon us in an attempt to deceive.

The problem is not that other people have different individual value systems to the point, that they claim it is objective. The fun starts when they claim that it is the objective standard for us all.
I had to learn that one the hard way, because I have 3 psychiatric "disorders", so I both had to learn how to deal with than, but not to fall for the normies' claim of "my brain is the objective standard for how we all have to do it".
So I am really individualistic when it comes to how to make sense of the world as an "I".

 

[Zwing]

From an Advaita Vedanta perspective, the perceptible world only has borrowed existence, not intrinsic existence.

Yes, “borrowed”, and transitory, but is not all the beauty and wonder available to us here in this world, where we have a mind with which to appreciate it? If when we have ceased to manifest as objects of matter, and have reverted to ultimate reality, and we have ceased our individual existence, what beauty awaits us in Brahman other than having that of having utter unity with our fellow earthlings? Of what value to me is being one with the absolute (an apparent eventuality) if I will not be sensible of it for having ceased to exist as an individual?

Does not the great beauty of an Advaitist worldview lie in the fact that we can recognize now in this life and world, that you and I are merely emanations of the same thing, a substance which we will ultimately both rejoin in unity? I feel like I am missing something of which you conceive.

EDIT: I will admit that this is the beauty of mystical experience. It gives the sensate mind of those capable of mystical experience a glimpse of the wonder of ultimate/absolute reality now, while they yet have a mind to enjoy the experience. As a person of such capability, you have a wondrous thing.

 

[Viswa]

Vyavaharika is an appearance in Paramartika, isn't it? Everything in vyavaharika is an appearance. So to say my personhood is an appearance in an appearance doesn't really make sense, does it? Nothing in vyavaharika has intrinsic value. All has borrowed existence as a result of Maya within Paramartika. All is verily Brahman.

If you have a gold necklace with a gold charm, is charm a form of (appearance of) the necklace? No. Both the necklace and the charm are a form of (an appearance of) gold. Neither the charm or the necklace have their own intrinsic existence. They both borrow their existence from gold.

This is a good example you pointed out. Take Gold.
What I understood from Aup's reply is, the Charm and Necklace is an appearance in Relative (Relative means transactional/Mind level), but in Absolute there is no appearance of Necklace /Charm and only Gold.
What Viswa say is, there is no Charm/Necklace Appeared ever. If one say that "there is an Appearance of Charm and Necklace", then it is just Ignorance of misunderstanding Gold.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you believe that all events in spacetime are predetermined?

They are not. Events are determined by Chaos, Randomicity, Probability and Uncertainty. There is no guarantee what side Brahman will turn to.

Does not the great beauty of an Advaitist worldview lie in the fact that we can recognize now in this life and world, that you and I are merely emanations of the same thing, a substance which we will ultimately both rejoin in unity? I feel like I am missing something of which you conceive.

Completely agree with you except for the last sentence. The feeling that you are missing something is because of your prejudices, the imaginary umbrella of protection and certainty that the God idea provides.

 

[Zwing]

Vyavaharika is an appearance in Paramartika, isn't it?

This is an essential question. Is subjective reality an appearance within objective reality, or separate from objective reality? When something manifests as something else, does the manifestation continue to exist within that thing, or does it have its own existence? I can’t say that I know at this moment.

 

[Viswa]

Did your dream "really appear?" If you enjoy a cookie before you go to bed, and then you fall asleep and dream, and in that dream have two cookies, can you wake up the next morning and say, "I ate three cookies?" Of course not. You only ate one. The other two didn't really appear, though you thought in your dream state that you ate them. You thought this because your dream character was ignorant of the dreamer lying in bed asleep and dreaming of cookies.

If you are really awake always, how can the dream really happen? If there is an Absolute reality always, how can Relative Reality appear? If there is only Rope always, how can Snake appear?
It's only one's ignorance to say that "there is a dream, and in that dream I thought of eating 2 cookies, in that dream I played and danced in a form of a character, etc.".

Truly, there is no dream at all and one is awake always.

Relative reality and dream reality are both appearances in Brahman. Neither is more real than the other. Guadapada validates this in chapter 2 of the Mandukya Karika.

Mandukya Upanishad with Gaudapada's Karika

The Mandukya Upanishad is 12 verses on AUM Mantra. Gaudapada's Karika is commentary relating to those 12 verses.

www.swamij.com

I'm sorry. That's where I see the difference between Gaudapada and Vasistha. Vasistha never tried to give meaning upon Ignorance, but Gaudapada tried and that's why Shankara too had such conception. Gaudapada tried to create a conception upon Ignorance/Maya/etc., where it is not even necessary to do that and it misleads, and that's how he differ from Vasistha, and that's what the difference between their disciples - Shankara and Rama.

What Vasistha says "There is just Brahman, nothing else. Fix that in your mind, and remain peaceful". But, what Gaudapada tried is "Maya/dream/appearance is an aspect of Brahman, Snake is an Appearance of Rope, etc., and remove such snake from your mind and attain Rope." As Shankara have Vairagya and much trust in his guru's guru, become Enlightened of this way of perception, but it is no different from Buddhist disciple attaining Enlightenment by trusting words of Buddha. Also, nowadays, Nondual seekers gets confused/entangled by such concepts and never remain peaceful of such concepts about Relative Reality "How/why it came", and never try to understand what Sages/Vasistha/etc., try to point out that there is no Relative Reality at all and just shun your Ignorance and wake up.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

This is an essential question. Is subjective reality an appearance within objective reality, or separate from objective reality? When something manifests as something else, does the manifestation continue to exist within that thing, or does it have its own existence? I can’t say that I know at this moment.

Or both in different "senses". But I don't know either.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This is a good example you pointed out. Take Gold.
What I understood from Aup's reply is, the Charm and Necklace is an appearance in Relative (Relative means transactional/Mind level), but in Absolute there is no appearance of Necklace /Charm and only Gold.
What Viswa say is, there is no Charm/Necklace Appeared ever. If one say that "there is an Appearance of Charm and Necklace", then it is just Ignorance of misunderstanding Gold.

If you have a gold necklace with a gold charm, is charm a form of (appearance of) the necklace? No. Both the necklace and the charm are a form of (an appearance of) gold. Neither the charm or the necklace have their own intrinsic existence. They both borrow their existence from gold.

That was exactly what Chandogya Upanishad said around 600 BCE:

yathā somyaikena lohamaṇinā sarvaṃ lohamayaṃ vijñātaṃ syādvācārambhaṇaṃ vikāro nāmadheyaṃ lohamityeva satyam || 6.1.5 ||

(O young one, it is like this: By knowing a single lump of gold you know all objects made of gold. All changes are mere words, in name only. But gold is the reality.)

Chandogya Upanishad, Verse 6.1.5 (English and Sanskrit)

Verse 5: O Somya, it is like this: By knowing a single lump of gold you know all objects made of gold. All changes are mere words, in name only. But g...

www.wisdomlib.org

The writer (Uddalaka Aruni gave scores of example to explain that). The difference is that Aupmanyav does not discard the reality of transactional world, though it may just be apparent. What is happening in the transactional world is important for the denizens of that world (like the Ukraine war).

 

[Zwing]

is an essential question. Is subjective reality an appearance within objective reality, or separate from objective reality?

With respect to this, I think the Upanishadic Shanti Mantra has something to say:

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदम् पूर्णात् पूर्णमुदच्यते |
पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ||
ॐ शान्तिः, शान्तिः, शान्तिः ||

Basically, “that which comes from the whole is, itself, whole”. This, particularly because the source is infinite (Brahman); a whole can be removed from the infinite, and yet the infinite remains infinite (a mathematical axiom). Can something which is whole exist within another whole? Perhaps so, but being whole, it can certainly also be indepenent of its source. I think that whether or not that independence exists is left to individual interpretation. For me, it is helpful to our conduct of life in this world to interpret that independence as fact.

(BTW, I remembered this as a response in a language forum that I have occasionally participated in. I am no Dharmic scholar!)

 

[Viswa]

What is happening in the transactional world is important for the denizens of that world (like the Ukraine war).

So Aup already distinguished One from the denizens of the world. Isn't all the denizens are mere appearance of Oneself in your view? Why Bother/worried in mind of such appearances?

 

[Aupmanyav]

So Aup already distinguished One from the denizens of the world. Isn't all the denizens are mere appearance of Oneself in your view? Why Bother/worried in mind of such appearances?

It seems like that. They are one. But we perceive it that way in the transactional world. The reality is not that. See. in my previous post I said even a murderer or a rapist is none other than Brahman. Pol Pot, Saddam, Bin Laden, Hitler, all too were none other than Brahman. Wish they understood Advaita.
Till we are in this transactional world, we have to care for it. This world is of multiplicity. Tell me, won't you run if a rabid dog attacked you?

 

[Aupmanyav]

With respect to this, I think the Upanishadic Shanti Mantra has something to say:

ॐ पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदम् पूर्णात् पूर्णमुदच्यते |
पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ||

"pūrnamadah pūrnamidam, pūrnāt pūrnam udachyate;
pūrnasya pūrnam ādāya, pūrnam eva vashishyate."
(This is whole, that is whole, they say this whole arises out of that whole;
give the whole from the whole, what remains is still the whole.)
That is Hindu Quantum Mechanics, Holography, prior to Buddha's time.
A most revered verse. Invocated in two Upanishads.

 

[Viswa]

It seems like that. They are one. But we perceive it that way in the transactional world. The reality is not that. See. in my previous post I said even a murderer or a rapist is none other than Brahman. Pol Pot, Saddam, Bin Laden, Hitler, all too were none other than Brahman. Wish they understood Advaita.
Till we are in this transactional world, we have to care for it. This world is of multiplicity. Tell me, won't you run if a rabid dog attacked you?

Two kind of situations happen in my life. One, when I see that there is a dog (rabid or not), sometimes there is a fear of Jaws/claws (only Jaws and claws but not about disease). Other times, even if I see a dog (as there are many street dogs here), I see it but never mind even if I am very near to that dog whether it is diseases or not, and remain Peaceful.

A sudden body injury fear happens, but that too reduce in awareness. But, never I mind about Diseases. It's fine for me. I had stayed near a Trash can with much awkward smell and possibilities of many diseases without any regret/fun/etc. and never feared/suffered, and you know how much unclean in some Indian streets. I never cared about it.

Only fear is Jaws, claws of animals,etc., and that's what show me that I am still fear of death, and I'm now upto that to be ready for death/injury whenever it shall happen - fearless and Peaceful always.

 

[Viswa]

It seems like that. They are one. But we perceive it that way in the transactional world. The reality is not that. See. in my previous post I said even a murderer or a rapist is none other than Brahman. Pol Pot, Saddam, Bin Laden, Hitler, all too were none other than Brahman. Wish they understood Advaita.
Till we are in this transactional world, we have to care for it. This world is of multiplicity. Tell me, won't you run if a rabid dog attacked you?

There is no necessity to take care of it. If people really have Good Karma and good intentions, the world will change. I possess no Bad intentions and create Bad Karma upon world like those Ignorant Scientists and Technologists.

I know that there is God watching this Appearance, and he knows what to do and when and where and by whom. I also don't wait for such action, and also don't have desire to change any course of world.

 

[Valjean]

There is no necessity to take care of it. If people really have Good Karma and good intentions, the world will change. I possess no Bad intentions and create Bad Karma upon world like those Ignorant Scientists and Technologists.

I know that there is God watching this Appearance, and he knows what to do and when and where and by whom. I also don't wait for such action, and also don't have desire to change any course of world.

Change? There is no change. It's an illusion. Past present and future coëxist in a timeless NOW.

 

[Viswa]

Change? There is no change. It's an illusion. Past present and future coëxist in a timeless NOW.

Yup. That's why I leave the Illusion/Appearance/Relative (including body,mind,etc.) to the feet of God (if there is such "Illusion/etc.", then be under control of God) and never mind about it (never mind and be as if there is no Illusion understanding Ignorance), and dwell in Peace-Absolute.

 

[Aupmanyav]

There is no necessity to take care of it. If people really have Good Karma and good intentions, the world will change. I possess no Bad intentions and create Bad Karma upon world like those Ignorant Scientists and Technologists.

I know that there is God watching this Appearance, and he knows what to do and when and where and by whom. I also don't wait for such action, and also don't have desire to change any course of world.

It is very good to hear that you do not have any bad intentions. I wish all people (except those ignorant scientists and technologists, they are incorrigible and bad) were that too, but the apparent reality of the transactional world is that all people are not like you.
I have no problem with your being a theist. Theists also can be good people, but IMHO, not all are.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Only fear is Jaws, claws of animals,etc., and that's what show me that I am still fear of death, and I'm now up to that to be ready for death/injury whenever it shall happen - fearless and Peaceful always.

It does not seem appropriate for an enlightened person to have a fear of death and not be peaceful. Kindly continue with your efforts/austerities to achieve 'nirvana' and be in proximity / merge with your God.

 

[Viswa]

It is very good to hear that you do not have any bad intentions. I wish all people (except those ignorant scientists and technologists, they are incorrigible and bad) were that too, but the apparent reality of the transactional world is that all people are not like you.
I have no problem with your being a theist. Theists also can be good people, but IMHO, not all are.

In my view, Scientists and Technologists are not incorrigible, but it's just that they are not aware of the effects of their discovery.
When I meant Bad Intentions, it is their disbelief upon God. Wherever there is disbelief upon God, there Ego arises. If they Grow Good Intentions (meaning a belief upon God's Existence), then this world won't face destruction and they will limit their science only to preserve organisms by learning Medicine,etc., but not Nuclear,Atoms,etc..
Though they are inclined in doing this by their previous bad Karma, if they implant belief upon God then World will change by their Good Intentions.

Even like Moses Maimonides, they shall research Religious texts and write books like "Guide for the Perplexed" and teach Goodness to their people around them. Putin will listen only if the Scientists and Technologists strike against him (refuse to work) and point him towards God/Religion and wage a Just war (for Betterment of Russians against aggression of US) in belief upon God but not relying upon Nuclear Weapons. It is the discoveries of Science and Technology creates a Strong Belief upon People like Putin, and if Scientists and Technologists believe on God and do what is Good for the World and not fear upon Life then Heaven is Here Physically.

Scientists and Technologists are considered Modern Living Gods/Angels and Role Models to many, and if they belief in God then it will have great impact on World in Good Manner.

 

[Viswa]

It does not seem appropriate for an enlightened person to have a fear of death and not be peaceful. Kindly continue with your efforts/austerities to achieve 'nirvana' and be in proximity / merge with your God.

Nice Teasing Attempt, I will try to laugh.