 |
| gary weber |
G. Advaita/non-duality, has been around for a long time, simply because it works. It can be dated as early as 6000 BCE when it was an oral tradition. (Buddhism started about 500 BCE.)
What often happens in this work, even w/close fellow spiritual travelers and some "students", is that they get really close, imagine/sense what complete "surrender" entails, and then stop out of fear and refusal to let go of their attachments (including the ego).
Creative, intellectual ones then search for an alternative philosophy. They want their pleasures, the perceived security of their current "state" complete w/ego, and can't imagine living w/o their thoughts, feeling of "free will"/control and on-going self-reinforcing internal narrative. Not wanting to "fail" at awakening, they also still want to declare themselves "more" enlightened than others.
Kashmir Shaivism, which some call "qualified non-duality", arose/was created about 800 ACE to solve this dilemma; it allows virtually everything under the hubris of "embracing the world", stating "The world is not an illusion (as in advaita vedanta), rather the perception of duality is the illusion." If one "understands" the illusion, even just intellectually, so the teaching goes, they "get to keep their cake and eat it too".
Folk get to keep their pleasures, identities, emotions, attachments, desires, ego, feeling of "free will" and superiority by helping "unfortunate others" and by claiming they are "more enlightened" than anyone following any other approach (which is typical of religions). It is the contemporary philosophy du jour on the East and West Coasts, w/the message that it is more "modern", suited to today's world and that "ancient" approaches require going to a cave or the jungle, and are "selfish". (None of which is correct - 20th century Ramana discouraged folk from going to a cave or the jungle and encouraged them to remain "in the world".) Almost identical approaches appear in Buddhism.
i have good friends who teach Kashmir Shaivism, one of whom i went around India with last year. As one might expect, there are mountains of elegant and complex philosophy required to explain and justify such a complex and "innovative" approach. Ramana Maharshi's "Direct Path", by contrast, is completely explained in a 12 page Q&A, "Who Am I?", which is all that one needs; i give it to the folk i work with. Ramana's 60 line "Upadesa Saram", a complete description of advaita/non-duality which can be chanted, is so comprehensive it is taught as a course in advaita by the two leading advaita vedanta schools in the U.S.
One of these Kashmir Shaivite teachers said to me emotionally that "I just enjoy sex with my wife too much (to be a non-dualist)". (FYI, there is no requirement to be celibate to be a "real" non-dualist; Ramana Maharshi never encouraged anyone who was married to abandon their wives and families.) This friend suffered greatly over an event that, IMHO, should have been "no problem". The system, or its Buddhist parallel, just doesn't work in practice. Attachment still produces suffering just like Buddha said in the Four Noble Truths, 2500 years ago.
In my direct experience, the "I" is an intellectual construct. When it disappears, or is severely diminished, there is no one to hold experiences, no one to help others, no others to help, no one to attach to emotions or sensations, no one to have free will, no one to have self-reflective thoughts, etc. Surprisingly, actions are clearer, deeper, more attuned, useful and appropriate, and without the "clouding and clinging" which accompanies actions motivated by desire, validation, gratification, pleasure, good karma, etc. Surrendering your very own ego turns out to be the ultimate compassion and sacrifice for others.
The really great news is that with "real" non-duality, suffering disappears, attachments disappear, and self-referential thoughts and fears disappear. Problem solving, planning, learning and functioning in the "real world" are actually enhanced. There is an unimaginably deep, sweet, fullness and stillness to which nothing could be added or taken away that would improve it. It truly is "the peace that passeth understanding".
Works for "I Am". Reading "I Am That". These conversations that Maharaj had with his visitors blows the concept of the self out the door with no return in sight.
ReplyDeleteHi Max,
DeleteYes, after i had been "passed" by my principal Zen master, Toni Packer of Springwater, i asked her what does one do "now", i.e. how does one navigate in this state and she told me to read "I Am That".
i had only heard Nisargadatta's name a few times, and hadn't read any of his work as i was totally focused on Ramana Maharshi's work (which is different). i got a copy of "I Am That" and read it through and agreed with every word of it. i still have that copy, only now it is underlined, highlighted, dog eared, and duct taped. It is a wonderful book.
i did find, subsequently, however, that Nisargadatta's work ends in a different place than Ramana Maharshi's does, and have found Ramana's work to really go to the end. The difference can be felt in just working with Nisargadatta's "I am" as opposed to "Who am I?" (Ramana's first thin book) for a while.
It is also apparent in Nisargadatta's later books where there is, IMHO, considerable confusion around "consciousness", "awareness" and the existence of something beyond both of these. Ramana is very clear and correct, IME, in making no distinction between "consciousness" and "awareness" and having nothing beyond them.
stillness
Nisargadatta correctly makes a distinction between consciousness and awareness because they are very different. Awareness only knows itself consciousness knows itself as "something else".
DeleteHi Marc M,
DeleteAs mentioned above in the response to Max Rudolph, in Nisargadatta's later books, there is much confusion about "consciousness", "awareness" and the need for "something", some subject, that is beyond both of these, indicating how incomplete his teaching is compared to Ramana Maharshi's.
In Ramana's Upadesa Saram, which is in my book, "Happiness Beyond Thought", in Verse 23, he states "Existence is consciousness is awareness."
Is there some other consciousness that produces your beingness, awareness, your presence? Looking with great curiosity and integrity, you do not find another source for beingness. Consciousness, awareness and beingness are all the same. It is your fundamental, basic experience, your true nature.
This is pure nonduality, advaita, and is found throughout the nonduality texts, contemporary and ancient. Nisargadatta's approach leaves you still in duality.
Trust this is useful.
stillness
gary