Advaita Vedanta

[Pluto]

I have been planning to make a post for some time on this topic. The intention is to share an Eastern perspective that can take credit for me being alive at all. If this helps even one person whose main challenges pertain to matters of life purpose, it will all be worth it.

Philosophy
The Sanskrit word Advaita translates to 'not two', hence the similar phrase 'nondualism' in English. Its origins in India date back thousands of years. Despite the enormity of volumes of literature and commentary on the topic, the fundamental teaching is infinitely simple: the only thing that is real is consciousness, a.k.a. the Self, and it is a single entity. And because your own existence is self-evident to you, the Self alone is your true nature. All else is illusory, most notably the idea of being an individual person with a body and a story.

The implications of this are radical in the extreme. Statements like "this life is a dream", "other people don't exist", "I am not the body", "nothing ever happened", etc. are fairly typical of Advaita teachers. For one who has actually realised the Self (i.e. attained a pure state of consciousness, or realised the truth of themselves), this is their actual perspective; such teachings are offered to help others to attain that same state for themselves.

Comparison to Religion
Most Advaita teachers are averse to money and insist that they be available to all sincere seekers of all backgrounds. Those who achieve the most advanced purity of consciousness insist that words cannot describe that state, and that others must realise it for themselves. Hence, there is very little theory, a discouragement of merely intellectual understanding and no reliance on 'faith'. Note: while Advaita Vedanta is derived from the Hindu tradition, there are similarly purified branches of other religions, e.g. Zen in Buddhism and Sufism in Islam, which all guide seekers to exactly the same ultimate truth.

Many religions promote ethical behaviour, self-improvement, devotion or peaceful inner states. None of this is the direct goal for an Advaita seeker, though all of those things will happen naturally when the selfish ego-mind is destroyed. The goal is death of the ego-self that is identified with the body. In offering guidance, teachers will often say that there is no such thing as an ego-self. They will also say that there is no one to teach, and no teacher.

Perspective on Western mainstream
For an analogy, if the normal human condition is akin to being in a dream state and being deluded into thinking it is real, the goal is to wake out of it, not create more pleasant conditions within the dream. Or if you have been wearing a VR headset, the goal is to remove it and find out what is actually real. Hence the much-sought goals of materialism - power, prestige, physical pleasure, relationships, money - are either considered irrelevant or even a time-wasting distraction.

Suffering is considered an inevitable outcome of functioning from the deluded state of consciousness. This is because all things perish, so even a best-case scenario of getting what one wants still means having to go through the suffering of loss at some point. To a master, there is nobody to suffer and nobody to want anything, as all of this is part of the illusion. For practical purposes, though, suffering motivates people to seek a way out of the cycles of misery.

Compatibility with scientific theories
Some advanced theories, such as string theory, involve higher dimensions. In a temporal dimension, for example, this means that a past 'you' and a future 'you' have to exist in parallel to the 'you' of this present 'time'. Just as you appear to experience yourself at your current age rather than childhood or old age (even though you are actually one with them both), it is only a small stretch to further postulate that you are also unknowingly one with all other beings in the cosmos.

Pure science is based around presenting and testing hypotheses. The difference is that the revelation of the Self that you will experience cannot be described to others and is thus very personal, except that you will find that there is no person! Language becomes laughably messy and contradictory at this point. You are reading this now but you are also writing it, and you are also the one who didn't click to view this text. And you are none of this, as only the consciousness looking out through your eyes is real. Get it? There's nobody there to get it.

Methodology
Certain beings in a very advanced state have the power to put others in the same state simply by being in their presence. One was Ramana Maharshi, a 20th century south-Indian saint who for many years did not speak at all, yet people flocked from around the world to be in his presence. When he later began to verbalise teachings, his most common advice was along the lines of "You are already consciousness, just stop regarding the unreal as real."

For those wanting more practical advice, investigating one's own nature via the question "Who Am I?" is a technique known as self-inquiry. The false sense of 'I' will be traced to its source and ultimately perish, as it cannot survive without being attached to external identities. One who is already in an advanced state of readiness - which could be any one of you - will realise the Self in a short time with little effort. For others, the process is long, but nonetheless inevitably brings peace along the way because the ego-mind will not continue causing mayhem when it knows it is being investigated. A concise summary of Ramana's teachings can be found here:

Invitation for Discussion
I have most certainly not realised the Self, as there is still a strong belief in the reality of my problems and the tragedy of my personal hardships. And yet, pretty much the only thing that brings any real happiness is pondering this topic, and the hope is there to achieve the same liberation that many others have before. Thus, as a reasonably learned devotee, this thread is intended as an 'ask me anything' for anyone who may be interested or have any questions regarding this topic. And thank you to anyone who has read this far!

 

[mistvissione11e]

After you temporarily erase the ego…what happens when you revert?

After you temporarily erase the ego…what happens when you revert?

How do you hang on to life after you have realized this ultimate state of consciousness and are unable to retain it?

 

[Pluto]

After you temporarily erase the ego…what happens when you revert?

How do you hang on to life after you have realized this ultimate state of consciousness and are unable to retain it?

Yes, this is a common dilemma! In Buddhist terminology, a momentary experience of pure consciousness is known as Satori. It is like a taste of our true nature, but does not last. It can be a double-edged sword, as it can motivate a renewed seeking, but also brings with it expectations, strong intentions and other factors that dilute pure seeking.

Sometimes, people with no background in any sort of spirituality are at an advantage, as they have no pre-conceived notions of what it would be like to go through an awakening. There were times when random people off the street had profound experiences in the presence of teachers like Papaji, and immediately began speaking in the same manner as the sages. In rarer cases, the experience lasted and became integrated into daily life.

Profound as it was, the experience you speak of is in the past, and being attached to it will actually become counterproductive. This is because we tend to create a story, and reinforce a personal identity. "I had an awakening experience, and I want it back. I am a spiritual person on a journey. Etc."

The 'you' in this scenario is actually the same ego that has been causing trouble all along, now in a subtler form and wearing fancy white robes! I liken the spiritual seeker ego to Bowser, the final boss in Super Mario. He must be defeated like all the other obstacles, but will put up a heck of a fight.

The technique of self-inquiry repeatedly brings attention back to your consciousness. In the case of the experience you had, you may ask, "To whom did this experience occur? Who was the experiencer? Who is striving to recreate it?" The purpose of this questioning is not to find an answer, but to dissolve the questioner. When the last nuggets are destroyed, you will come to realise that the ego was never actually real in the first place.

The only theory lesson needed is that the real 'you', the pure consciousness, can only be described in the negative. It is without qualities - no gender, no birthday, no past history, no future ambitions... it just is. Ramana Maharshi loved the Bible quote, "I am that I am." I hope this helps somewhat!

 

[motel rooms]

Be still... No mind can be fully still. I understand your deep need & yearning for "stillness"/peace, but all of this stuff has nothing to do with our/my everyday reality. I live in this world, in this body, I don't spend my time floating in some hypothetical womblike cosmic Self. I can call the pain inflicted on me an illusion till the cows come home, but it sure doesn't feel illusory. This life is a dream, nothing ever happened, other people don't exist... All of that looks so good on paper, but who can afford to live like it's true except a handful of gurus who sit on their holy butts all day while their followers (who don't really exist because they're other people) pay all their bills? Like you said:

I have most certainly not realised the Self, as there is still a strong belief in the reality of my problems and the tragedy of my personal hardships.

------------------------

And yet, pretty much the only thing that brings any real happiness is pondering this topic, and the hope is there to achieve the same liberation that many others have before

Comparison to Religion
Those who achieve the most advanced purity of consciousness insist that words cannot describe that state, and that others must realise it for themselves. Hence, there is very little theory, a discouragement of merely intellectual understanding and no reliance on 'faith'.

How is that not reliance on faith? You even called Ramana Maharshi a saint; how come you used that term if Advaita Vedanta has nothing to do with faith & religion? Pondering this topic is the only thing that brings you happiness because it allows you to escape your harsh reality for a while. That's perfectly understandable & deeply moving, so I feel like a bit of a dick for writing this, but you did say you were open to discussing this theory.

 

[Pluto]

That's perfectly understandable & deeply moving, so I feel like a bit of a dick for writing this, but you did say you were open to discussing this theory.

Not at all, your contribution is welcome.

What you say is completely true from its own perspective. I would only be antagonising you by proselytising as a spiritual salesman (which I am decidedly not; most people in my life have no idea I am into this stuff), and I will not be baited into a conflict of that nature. Any alternative viewpoint is worthless if one is not genuinely open towards it, but nonetheless I can reply to your questions.

Can the mind be fully still?
Generally no, that is not its nature. The Advaita perspective is far more radical than Western 'mindfulness meditation': they say the mind can be exposed as a fictitious entity and thus killed. The mind consists entirely of software in the brain based on accumulated post-birth experiences, so is unreal in the same way that a video game playing on a screen is unreal. It has nothing to do with the question of who are are. The techniques such as self-inquiry aim to help individuals to realise this for themselves.



Is pain an illusion?
Obviously the experience is extremely real from a conventional perspective. And to one who is in the throes of distress, any intellectual excursion into the nature of time, or whether our sense of 'I' is real, is inappropriate. Some teachers emphasise that the present moment is all that is real, therefore the past only exists as a mental image. Again, this is not appropriate under the circumstances.

You've seen my posts for some time, and I trust that you have never once seen me respond to someone in distress by saying, "It's just an illusion." My life story has been shitty enough that I can at least somewhat relate to most things that most people here have gone through, and strive to make them feel understood and validated.

Is Ramana Maharshi a saint?
He is often referred as such as he certainly meets the definition. In short, he had a permanent awakening at the age of 16, was available 24 hours a day to help others do the same, never had any possessions, nor relationships, nor any scandals (unlike most 'gurus') until his death in 1950. But all this is a very unimportant point in the scheme of things as it only creates a sense of elitism that he himself would strongly object to. The teaching itself is the thing of value, not labels to put on long-deceased people.

What is the role of faith?
Using the scientific method, there first needs to be a genuine openness to a possibility (somewhat analogous to faith), then comes a testing phase, using appropriate methodology, followed by drawing a conclusion. Without an initial openness, a conclusion has already been drawn and the process is of no value.

Most people who would consider CTB-ing do so with the expectation that it would involve a radical transformation into non-existence, or a journey to a higher realm in which all their problems are left behind. The claim made by the most advanced sages is that we are already in such a state, but don't know it yet. The claim is so radical that it is easy to dismiss as madness, or may easily trigger a flame war (which I am trying to avoid).

My own policy is simple if my pain levels cross a certain threshold over a long enough period of time, I've accumulated everything I need to CTB. I have no real unfinished business, except for a deeper exploration of this very topic.

In short, to anyone who is not in a state of immediate distress (thus needing a totally different kind of support), or a hardened cynic of all non-materialist perspectives, I am available to share what I've learned in my decades of research. To anyone who has an existing worldview that they are happy with, I say keep doing what you're doing. Hopefully this is reasonable.

But there have been numerous posts here in which individuals have had satori and other awakening experiences and been unsure of what to do with themselves. I suspect more will come out of the closet as this thread progresses. I hope we can agree that it should be fair for people with an interest in this topic to engage in discussion. This is not an exercise in antagonising people in pain by sitting on a high horse and saying that your suffering is an illusion. Hopefully this point has been made abundantly clear.

 

[BeansOfRequirement]

Very nice post!

I think neuroscience confirms the no-self thing to some extent. Are you sure that the quantum physics stuff applies to this sort of thing? I'm very susceptible to hadephobia, so I avoid everything religious like the plague--but mindfulness (might be that watered-down western version) has helped me deal with emotional pain. Also, a healthy lifestyle will complement this (increased calm, energy and willpower to stay present during emotional distress).

 

[motel rooms]

Certain beings in a very advanced state have the power to put others in the same state simply by being in their presence. One was Ramana Maharshi, a 20th century south-Indian saint

You really buy this? How is this not a religious delusion? What do concepts like "sainthood" have to do with science?

What is the role of faith? Using the scientific method, there first needs to be a genuine openness to a possibility (somewhat analogous to faith), then comes a testing phase

Don't worry, I'm not interested in pointless conflicts. I hope you achieve "enlightenment"...

 

[Pluto]

You really buy this?

Yes, I am open to it on the basis of countless reports, and a resonance with the words spoken. If there comes a time when you have a genuine interest in the topic, and I'm still alive (!), I'd be happy to help. Wishing you the best always!

Regarding your point, yes certain teachers tend to be venerated and it can reach a point where it contradicts the basic nondual message by putting people on a pedestal. Devotion can be a pathway (known as Bhakti Yoga in the Hindu tradition) but is easily quoted out of context or misunderstood. One who in an advanced state will generally treat all beings equally, including animals.

Very nice post!

I think neuroscience confirms the no-self thing to some extent. Are you sure that the quantum physics stuff applies to this sort of thing? I'm very susceptible to hadephobia, so I avoid everything religious like the plague--but mindfulness (might be that watered-down western version) has helped me deal with emotional pain. Also, a healthy lifestyle will complement this (increased calm, energy and willpower to stay present during emotional distress).

Thank you. Yes, the Western versions of yoga, meditation, etc. tend to be very watered-down but sometimes serve as a bridge to advanced seeking. Eckhart Tolle is a good example, as his online videos' main market seems to be office workers trying to calm their minds, and yet his own awakening experience was very similar to Ramana's, and thus he can be considered the real deal. I used his work as a gateway myself and still refer to it at times. I can recommend his work as you will likely be among the millions who have found it useful.

There is a certain amount of scientific interest in exploring these topics, such as MRI scans of experienced meditators. But the mainstream scientific community's worldview is strictly materialistic and thus tends to taboo a lot of open exploration of these topics. This will likely evolve in the coming decades. As such, I tend to avoid debates when the best results come from diving headfirst into the perspective of the most trustworthy and reputable teachers.

 

[whatevs]

"Certain beings in a very advanced state have the power to put others in the same state simply by being in their presence."

@Pluto
Have you experienced this or have some kind of proof to back it up? I'm quite drawn to Buddhist/Early Hinduist mysticism and appreciate these posts but I think these epistemological demands that motel-rooms made are needed to discuss spirituality and mysticism. To an extent, spirituality and mysticism can and need to be intellectually defended. It isn't blind faith... Or is it?

For me, the largest "proof" of Buddhism having "something to it" is how this Buddhist monk set himself on fire and died without uttering a sound or changing his position. At the very least, he proved that suffering CAN be rendered null with their meditation techniques. The video is restricted by age on TheirTube.

 

[Pluto]

"Certain beings in a very advanced state have the power to put others in the same state simply by being in their presence."

@Pluto
Have you experienced this or have some kind of proof to back it up?

My main source for historical information is David Godman, who had direct experiences with many of Ramana's devotees, some of whom went on to become teachers in their own right, who possessed this same purported power of transmission (not all beings who realise the Self have this ability).

As an example, Godman spent 18 months in the '70s doing self-inquiry for 8 hours per day. He then met Lakshima Swami, who himself had realised the Self in Ramana's presence back in 1949. Lakshima Swami simply looked at him, and Godman said that he experienced more peace and silence in that moment than he had achieved in his 18 months of intensive practice. He has interviewed hundreds of other people who have had these experiences and thus is a fabulous source of information.

All of the 'proof' is based on other people's reports and direct experiences. This goes back to the point made in the initial post that it is for each individual to find this out for themselves, whenever they are ready. There are many lifetimes to go for many of us.

Regarding the pain thing, Ramana's life ended due to cancer and he should have been in extreme pain, though he denied it. There was another time when he was tested by some sceptics who smeared some sort of chilli paste on his body, and he passed the test. Even when he was close to death, he calmly remarked that he was not the body so there is no concern for his leaving. So there is no doubt that people in an advanced state have a totally different take on the subject of pain.

EDIT @whatevs :
Want to add one last thing before I go to sleep for the night. This quote is taken from what is actually the very latest exceptional NDE on the NDERF website. Following a death experience, this woman reports:

I can't do a lot of things I could before. But...I have been different since my experience. I can sense others' emotions, human and animal, and especially animals respond to me differently. They are soothed by my presence.

I have found that I have the same effect on human patients and for some time after becoming a nurse I chose hospice care to provide whatever comfort the dying seem to sense within me. I haven't talked about that with anyone ever because almost everyone I meet notices something they can't name but some are made uncomfortable by it, and for the first several years I felt like a freak. So much so that I spiraled downward in my late teens and attempted suicide.

I mention this as the idea of people having a powerful presence is something that is common whenever some sort of spiritually transformative experience occurs.

 

[motel rooms]

Yes, I am open to it on the basis of countless reports, and a resonance with the words spoken. If there comes a time when you have a genuine interest in the topic

I'm interested in the topic, but I'm a (c)rude guy who's fond of evidence. Perhaps that makes me incurably spiritually retarded... I was raised Catholic & I'm extremely allergic to the concept of sainthood & fanciful stories about "saints".

I sincerely wish you the best too, you're a decent, respectful person. I wish I could believe that it's possible for us human animals to get rid of our dumb ego-minds without killing our brains & achieve blissful reunification with this fancy hypothetical Self / Eternal Consciousness / Ultimate Reality / Brahman / Whatever. Everything in the Universe may fundamentally be one, but that means absolutely nothing to me. I'm not a carefree subatomic particle, I'm human. I can't walk up to a lion or a deranged homophobe with a knife & say, "Life is just a dream & you're under the illusion we're separate, why do you want to hurt yourself by hurting me?"

 

[whatevs]

I'm interested in the topic, but I'm a (c)rude guy who's fond of evidence. Perhaps that makes me incurably spiritually retarded... I was raised Catholic & I'm extremely allergic to the concept of sainthood & fanciful stories about "saints".

I sincerely wish you the best too, you're a decent, respectful person. I wish I could believe that it's possible for us human animals to get rid of our dumb ego-minds without killing our brains & achieve blissful reunification with this fancy hypothetical Self / Eternal Consciousness / Ultimate Reality / Brahman / Whatever. Everything in the Universe may fundamentally be one, but that means absolutely nothing to me. I'm not a carefree subatomic particle, I'm human. I can't walk up to a lion or a deranged homophobe with a knife & say, "Life is just a dream & you're under the illusion we're separate, why do you want to hurt yourself by hurting me?"

At the end of the day Monism is simply the most elegant and coherent worldview . What one is supposed to do with the realization that both the victim and the perpetrator are one is to become less entrenched in ego-trips and aggression, and eventually overcome the lust for life, or will to life (Schopenhauer). The famous quote from "Jesus" of turning the other cheek and loving your enemy is an indication that part of the New Testament was created under the influence of the same mystery schools or mystic ideas than say the Upanishads.

You could say that people like us are mystical efilists or antinatalists, while some others in the forum are materialistic efilists/antinatalists. We agree that there seems to be something to reject about being alive, but the mystical ones believe there is something before and after death.

 

[callme]

Where does any of this lead, other than nowhere and apparently, for no reason?

 

[motel rooms]

What one is supposed to do with the realization that both the victim and the perpetrator are one is to become less entrenched in ego-trips and aggression, and eventually overcome the lust for life, or will to life (Schopenhauer). The famous quote from "Jesus" of turning the other cheek and loving your enemy

Both Jesus & "Jesus" can kiss my butt cheeks, I've got one for each of them.

You could say that people like us are mystical efilists or antinatalists, while some others in the forum are materialistic efilists/antinatalists. We agree that there seems to be something to reject about being alive, but the mystical ones believe there is something before and after death.

I don't really think about what happens when we croak. There's no point in worrying about shit, as Jesus or "Jesus" said. "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." I'm only moderately evil, I haven't hurt too many assholes (bad people ). I don't get off on messing with inexperienced college kids like so many pigs my age. I'm nice to the elderly. I feel tenderness for my husband & I really want him to like himself. Maybe that counts for something. Then again, maybe my "love" for him is actually just a form of selfishness.

Maybe we'll simply disappear, hopefully me first, maybe we'll burn in Hell just 'cause we're homos although we both had hellish childhoods, maybe we'll end up in Hades as 2 shadows trying to find each other as the coldest of winds blows, who the fuck knows? Time to pop another Xanax, eat & finally decide if I should have a proper gay midlife crisis (intensify my workouts, ramp up my protein intake & start obsessing over my abs & muscle gains like a dumb teen who takes selfies next to the toilet every 30 minutes).

 

[GentleJerk]

I enjoyed reading this. Thank you for sharing!

It seems like it's part of the Vedic school of thought, or falls under a broadly Hindu umbrella at least. But from a quick glance it lacks any sort of solid characteristics. Are the Vedic god(s) featured in Advaita belief and practice? Or even a view where the various gods are recognized through a One God = many Gods type lens? I'm asking because at a glance it seems solely practical and philosophical, but like the practices stemming from the Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita, even Buddhism, any teaching that was ever written in sanskrit usually features many mythologies, even if not introduced at a surface level.

Also, I know a lot of these spiritual practices focus more on a philosophy at the surface level, but as one goes further in, it usually begins to involve more rules and practices such as diet or austerity. I'm guessing as a practice which recognizes a non-duality of consciousness, there must at least be some degree of vegetarianism, as is standard. How strict is Advaita practice on vegetarianism, does it stay cool, accessible and appealing by accommodating for the meaty minds of the masses, or is it a more exclusive meat-shaming VIP club like the Krsna conscious?

 

[motel rooms]

I hope I didn't annoy you, @Pluto. Maya is something my mind is too tormented to be able to see through. That lyin' bitch be powerful, I know you're painfully aware of that.

 

[empty sighs]

Interesting. I like the idea that we are all one you know like the "we are star dust" ideology. I like the idea that we are everything, but the idea that everything is nothing at all is greatly disturbing to me. Also isn't ego-death the same as schizophrenia and the what the effects of LSD can do to you? Not having a stable sense of self or having one at all might be a bit disastrous. At least to me. Idk. I like the idea of this Carl Jung human hive mind kind of thing; but the idea that everything outside of self isn't real doesn't make sense to me, because if everything is self doesn't that make everything real? If we are all one, one with god, one with everything? That seems more comforting to me then the idea that everyone outside of yourself is an illusion. I kind of get what you're trying to say though, that worldly things don't matter I suppose. Sorry this is just random thoughts lol.

 

[Pluto]

G'day all, thanks for the replies. It will probably be a few days before I can reply properly as it does take time to do justice to the points made. Thanks for your patience.

 

[Pluto]

Finally I can sit and write!

"Certain beings in a very advanced state have the power to put others in the same state simply by being in their presence."

@Pluto
Have you experienced this or have some kind of proof to back it up?

In addition to the aforementioned NDE link, I had an experience last week worth mentioning. I was visiting a new customer for the first time and she warned me that the dog was going to start barking and jumping, but it never did. After requesting some pats, the dog ultimately wanted to sit and relax beside me. I have always had that effect on animals; apparently even my current mental issues don't hinder it. Not sure if this counts for anything.

Meanwhile, the notion of advanced states of consciousness being transmitted is a constant theme. A good example of a success story is Lakshima Swami, who permanently realised the Self in Ramana's presence in 1949. David Godman met Lakshima Swami in the'70s and has repeatedly told the story; David had been meditating for 8 hours a day for 18 months, yet he experienced a far more silent state after just a few seconds when this man looked at him. There are too many other reports of this phenomenon to mention here but other examples associated with Ramana include Maurice Friedman, Mastan Swami, Papaji, etc.

At the end of the day Monism is simply the most elegant and coherent worldview . What one is supposed to do with the realization that both the victim and the perpetrator are one is to become less entrenched in ego-trips and aggression, and eventually overcome the lust for life, or will to life (Schopenhauer). The famous quote from "Jesus" of turning the other cheek and loving your enemy is an indication that part of the New Testament was created under the influence of the same mystery schools or mystic ideas than say the Upanishads.

Yes, these are some of the practical implications if we treat this as a religious belief system. The only thing I would add is that the goal of hardcore seekers is to see the false sense of self for what it is. Those who have actually gone through the process report that life then unfolds completely spontaneously; there is very little mental activity, no belief systems, no particular intentions and all actions are directly prompted by the Self. It can be difficult to explain to a Western audience why this is considered a desirable state.

I'm glad you brought up Jesus. Leaving out the nonsense of judgement and hell, Jesus' teachings are describing the same truth. Examples include, "The kingdom of heaven is within you" (Ramana phrased it, "Happiness is inherent in man, and is not due to external causes.... one must realise the Self to open the store of unalloyed happiness."). Jesus also said, "I and the father are one". And, "That which you do to the least of my brethren, that you do unto me."

There was a time when some ill-informed thieves came to Ramana's ashram, only to learn that there was no money there to steal. One of them hit Ramana on the leg with a stick. Ramana replied, "If you like, you can hit my other leg, but we still don't have any money for you." This reminds me of your 'turn the other cheek' quote. In short, Ramana's work has the benefit of being recently recorded, direct and pure, but speaks of the same ultimate truth.

Where does any of this lead, other than nowhere and apparently, for no reason?

Going nowhere for no reason is the nature of the universe. Sometimes people make up ideas about meaning, only to find that the things that they attach to are perishable. Hence the inevitability of suffering. And yet, those who have realised the Self - including the Buddha - describe an unconditional happiness and an intrinsic awareness of immortality. However, they say that that state cannot be described and must be experienced for one's self.

Beyond a certain point, trying to understand this mentally is futile, in contrast to religions that are artificially curated to align to people's desires and fears (heaven/hell/etc.) and their psychological conditioning (eg. God/Jesus the angry parent). Hence, knowing and following the practices are key.

Both Jesus & "Jesus" can kiss my butt

Thank you for the fine question. There's a lot to unpack here (not talking about your butt).

My mother was an insane Catholic and pushed her religion on the kids in such a way that we all came to despise it. My eldest sister ended up hypersexual and I ended up the opposite, partly because my sisters attacked me constantly to try and cope with the misogyny of the religion. Of the 3 siblings, basically none are on speaking terms to this day.

Even on this forum I have made very unsympathetic comments about Catholicism, such as referring to the 'give us your money or else burn eternally in hell' as the greatest scam in human history. In my youth, my favourite Marilyn Manson album was Antichrist Superstar and I was always soothed by the venomously anti-religious inferno. As such, I cannot judge anyone else for having such feelings.

Still, the first point to make is that it is helpful to have more nuance when directing anger. Jesus was a Jewish man who never condoned Christianity, just as early Christians never condoned Catholicism. There is no link whatsoever between Jesus and modern hypocritical, homophobic, child-molesting religious movements. Even less so the world of Eastern philosophy.

It may be viscerally satisfying to say, "Fuck all religious/spiritual bullshit" just as my sisters liked to respond to my mother's misogyny by repeatedly slamming me with, "All men are pigs". But for actual progress, we need to discern what exactly must be rejected and what is actually needed. Once the venting is done, it is better to use a chisel than a sledgehammer to avoid discarding the baby with the bathwater. (Bad example in the context of anti-natalism, but whatever.)

Having a very difficult mind can be of benefit in two ways. Firstly, we can reach a point where it becomes unbearable and we are driven to explore alternative viewpoints. Secondly, it can lead directly to dramatic awakening experiences. Eckhart Tolle's awakening occurred during an intense suicidal episode; he spontaneously did self-inquiry and found that his entire ego collapsed; he described it like watching a plug pulled out of an inflatable toy.

All thoughts and beliefs can be considered false from the ultimate perspective. But it is particularly important to avoid buying into thoughts about being 'spiritually retarded'. It is utterly impossible to know how close we are to a breakthrough, and a benefit of these practices is that they bring a reasonable amount of peace even without achieving the ultimate goal of ego death.

I have seen your posts and am aware of your struggle to contain the wild bull of the mind; I've noticed this in myself as well and it does seem to make the process more difficult than for a person with a more sheltered background. The abuse you went through was on another level even compared to me, so if I have not overcome it I am not going to insult you by pretending it should be easy for you.

In my own case, I coped with my sadistic father by striving to become the most un-sadistic person ever. It helped me to resonate with the gentle nature of the likes of Ramana, though there has also been the torment of being, as you once put it, a lamb in a lion's den (if I remember correctly). Some say that it is dangerous to attempt to 'spiritual bypass' serious issues that warrant other forms of healing. I can't comment conclusively on this.

There is another teacher named Nisargadatta Maharaj. He was in the same state as Ramana but by contrast, his teaching style was fiery, argumentative, borderline abusive at times. He smoked cigarettes all day long. And yet, the core teaching is identical. I can definitely recommend him if you ever find yourself wanting to look into this more deeply; his main book is called I Am That.

That said, if this topic causes inflammation rather than help, it is fine to discontinue it. Or if there is anything constructive to be gained, I am happy to continue.

It seems like it's part of the Vedic school of thought, or falls under a broadly Hindu umbrella at least. But from a quick glance it lacks any sort of solid characteristics. Are the Vedic god(s) featured in Advaita belief and practice? Or even a view where the various gods are recognized through a One God = many Gods type lens? I'm asking because at a glance it seems solely practical and philosophical, but like the practices stemming from the Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita, even Buddhism, any teaching that was ever written in sanskrit usually features many mythologies, even if not introduced at a surface level.

Also, I know a lot of these spiritual practices focus more on a philosophy at the surface level, but as one goes further in, it usually begins to involve more rules and practices such as diet or austerity. I'm guessing as a practice which recognizes a non-duality of consciousness, there must at least be some degree of vegetarianism, as is standard. How strict is Advaita practice on vegetarianism, does it stay cool, accessible and appealing by accommodating for the meaty minds of the masses, or is it a more exclusive meat-shaming VIP club like the Krsna conscious?

Many interesting points there.

I mentioned earlier that the word Advaita translates to 'not two'. The word Vedanta translates roughly to "the ultimate knowledge of the vedas". It is one of several schools within the Hindu tradition, and there are often references to the countless associated Gods like Siva, Krishna, Ganesh, etc. I think the mythologies of the Bhagavad Gita are intended as metaphors for the challenges of spiritual awakening.

The challenge here is that while certain people may be attracted to certain Gods/Godesses, a particular guru, or certain approaches (devotional, knowledge-based, action-based, etc.), all of them are ultimately false because only the Self (Brahman, pure consciousness) is real. However, for practical purposes there is almost always a need for the intermediate stage of destroying the false sense of self.

Where a lot of seekers get lost is in the importance of returning to the core of oneness. Anyone who claims superiority has already lost the plot. Anyone who buys into any sort of elitism has to return to square 1. And getting lost in the endless complexity of the different schools of thought is not likely to be of true benefit. It is very easy to fatten the ego via associating it with arcane Eastern wisdom. You will find a lot of this, which is why it is good to have high standards and go directly to the most reputable sources like Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramana Maharshi, etc.

Regarding austerity, the context is not to do with rule-making but avoiding distractions. And those who have realised the Self come in all shapes and sizes. Ramana himself chose a vegetarian diet and spoke of sattvic foods in modest quantities, and I personally have been vegetarian for well over 20 years purely out of a visceral repulsion towards cruelty. But this is not universal and it is important to avoid getting side-tracked from the core teaching about our true nature.

Interesting. I like the idea that we are all one you know like the "we are star dust" ideology. I like the idea that we are everything, but the idea that everything is nothing at all is greatly disturbing to me. Also isn't ego-death the same as schizophrenia and the what the effects of LSD can do to you? Not having a stable sense of self or having one at all might be a bit disastrous. At least to me. Idk. I like the idea of this Carl Jung human hive mind kind of thing; but the idea that everything outside of self isn't real doesn't make sense to me, because if everything is self doesn't that make everything real? If we are all one, one with god, one with everything? That seems more comforting to me then the idea that everyone outside of yourself is an illusion. I kind of get what you're trying to say though, that worldly things don't matter I suppose. Sorry this is just random thoughts lol.

A lot of interesting thoughts there! Yes, there are people who have had genuine, profound spiritual experiences of oneness via psychedelics such as DMT or 5-Meo-DMT. Of course there can be dangers in that approach, too. I believe Swami Ram Dass used this approach but did not experience permanent awakening until he found his guru, Maharaji.

The statement that 'other people don't exist' needs careful understanding. If your own 'person' is seen as false (eg. a sort of dream, or virtual reality) and only your consciousness is real, it follows that the same is true for other people also. It is not an excuse for mistreating others; indeed the 'love' spoken about by Jesus and others is based on understanding and experiencing your oneness with others. People who have realised the Self also find themselves directly experiencing the feelings of others; Ramana even felt discomfort when some men were outside hitting a mango tree with a stick. Love and care for others at this point is 'self-interest' because there is only one of us.

All that said, it is important to pursue the direct experience of non-duality rather than try and speculate as to what it may feel like to be in that state. But it has been noted that nobody who has realised the Self has ever expressed regret or wanted to regress to human-identification.

Hope this helps and much love to you all!

 

[KimKevorkian]

Be still... No mind can be fully still. I understand your deep need & yearning for "stillness"/peace, but all of this stuff has nothing to do with our/my everyday reality. I live in this world, in this body, I don't spend my time floating in some hypothetical womblike cosmic Self. I can call the pain inflicted on me an illusion till the cows come home, but it sure doesn't feel illusory. This life is a dream, nothing ever happened, other people don't exist... All of that looks so good on paper, but who can afford to live like it's true except a handful of gurus who sit on their holy butts all day while their followers (who don't really exist because they're other people) pay all their bills? Like you said:



------------------------





How is that not reliance on faith? You even called Ramana Maharshi a saint; how come you used that term if Advaita Vedanta has nothing to do with faith & religion? Pondering this topic is the only thing that brings you happiness because it allows you to escape your harsh reality for a while. That's perfectly understandable & deeply moving, so I feel like a bit of a dick for writing this, but you did say you were open to discussing this theory.

I really wanted this to be an avenue toward less reactivity (sorry if that sounds like a Scientologist--woof). Like the prior respondent, it doesn't help much when I'm slammed with survival and real-world things. To somehow reason oneself into an alternative conceptualization of "reality" is just a mind-game, to me. My favorite parts of the book, I AM THAT, by Nisargadatta Maharaj, for example, are his interlocutors who challenge him frustratedly for his abstruse abstract replies which tend to dismiss real-world concerns and sufferings. Seems a bit disassociative and lacking in empathy and not something I'd wish to emulate. But, hey, Shanti shanti. I still do Sanskrit mantras, hoping there's some credence to vibrational energy. But that's because I have a froot loop gene, apparently.

 

[motel rooms]

Seems a bit disassociative and lacking in empathy and not something I'd wish to emulate. But, hey, Shanti shanti.

I posted this last year (yes, I know Advaita Vedanta isn't Buddhism):

"Dear Stoics/Buddhists/CBT pushers, please indulge us & conduct this harmless little experiment. Lather yourselves with honey & sit on a large anthill. Inspect all the silly, irrelevant thoughts, feelings & physical sensations that arise in you as the ants nibble away at your flesh extremely carefully, soberly, impartially; don't move, don't attempt to fight what you are experiencing in any way, embrace & overcome/transcend it by sheer power of your reason & will. We are confident that you will triumph over adversity & that something as trivial as being slowly eaten alive will never erase the serene, dignified, wise smiles on your faces."

I'm unable to transcend what my tormented brain perceives as reality. I'm of the opinion that no one is able to figure out what this universe & life are all about. Concepts like "enlightenment" simply don't speak to me. I appreciate poetic language & I'm truly intimate with my partner (we don't just fuck), that's as close as I'll ever get to being "spiritual".

 

[KimKevorkian]

I posted this last year (yes, I know Advaita Vedanta isn't Buddhism):

"Dear Stoics/Buddhists/CBT pushers, please indulge us & conduct this harmless little experiment. Lather yourselves with honey & sit on a large anthill. Inspect all the silly, irrelevant thoughts, feelings & physical sensations that arise in you as the ants nibble away at your flesh extremely carefully, soberly, impartially; don't move, don't attempt to fight what you are experiencing in any way, embrace & overcome/transcend it by sheer power of your reason & will. We are confident that you will triumph over adversity & that something as trivial as being slowly eaten alive will never erase the serene, dignified, wise smiles on your faces."

I'm unable to transcend what my tormented brain perceives as reality. I'm of the opinion that no one is able to figure out what this universe & life are all about. Concepts like "enlightenment" simply don't speak to me. I appreciate poetic language & I'm truly intimate with my partner (we don't just fuck), that's as close as I'll ever get to being "spiritual".

Amen

Amen

Come to think of it I had an aunt who called me "Honey". Perhaps this hints at something far more diabolical than I hitherto envisioned. You gave me (sweet) food for thought. I need insulin.

 

[KimKevorkian]

LI like the title of this song (right in line with advaita vedanta/nonduality): "It Starts When We Disappear" (However what starts? What is "it"? Who/what is observing? Who/What is observing the observer? Is it naughty naughty to do a neti neti? If a record skips and there's no one to hear it...

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSDaO1BLhqo

 

[whatevs]

I posted this last year (yes, I know Advaita Vedanta isn't Buddhism):

"Dear Stoics/Buddhists/CBT pushers, please indulge us & conduct this harmless little experiment. Lather yourselves with honey & sit on a large anthill. Inspect all the silly, irrelevant thoughts, feelings & physical sensations that arise in you as the ants nibble away at your flesh extremely carefully, soberly, impartially; don't move, don't attempt to fight what you are experiencing in any way, embrace & overcome/transcend it by sheer power of your reason & will. We are confident that you will triumph over adversity & that something as trivial as being slowly eaten alive will never erase the serene, dignified, wise smiles on your faces."

I'm unable to transcend what my tormented brain perceives as reality. I'm of the opinion that no one is able to figure out what this universe & life are all about. Concepts like "enlightenment" simply don't speak to me. I appreciate poetic language & I'm truly intimate with my partner (we don't just fuck), that's as close as I'll ever get to being "spiritual".

Yes, it's proven that an accomplished mystic can endure similar deaths to the one you proposed. I supplied with a "burned alive without showing the slightest discomfort" proof, but there are also instances of monks sitting still while being mummified by an special diet including drinking poison.

You didn't disprove anything with that example, it only points out that normal people such as me or yourself are unable to trascend suffering.

Japanese Monks Being Mummified While Alive! | KCP International

Sokushinbutsu in Japan is the process of self-mummification that begins while the person is still alive. It was outlawed in the late 19th century.

www.kcpinternational.com

 

[motel rooms]

Yes, it's proven that an accomplished mystic can endure similar deaths to the one you proposed. I supplied with a "burned alive without showing the slightest discomfort" proof, but there are also instances of monks sitting still while being mummified by an special diet including drinking poison.

You didn't disprove anything with that example, it only points out that normal people such as me or yourself are unable to trascend suffering.

It wasn't my intention to disprove anything. I don't give a crap about the superpowers of a minuscule number of Buddhist monks. To be perfectly frank, I only care about what I & my partner are able to achieve, & we're sure as hell never gonna become impervious to pain. Unfortunately, we can't afford to spend all day meditating so we can set ourselves on fire without feeling anything. Incel NEETs are so privileged!

 

[callme]

I can't help my understanding, but see a very expensive hobby aimed at well-to-do western people who are not satisfied with living in a capitalist system. It appears to be very interesting in theory, sometimes unexplainable and not understandable but without having direct experience and decades of study, it's impossible to attain all the high points needed to live the high state.

This is why Eckhart Tolle is so popular and sells courses and books. Eventually spiritual teachings become a venture and unless somebody interested either moves to a temple permanently or attends one of those costly retreats many times, only surface-level understandings won't get them anywhere. But they think so, of course.

Unattainable without a very developed intelligence, imagination and generally calm atmosphere. Intelligence especially, because practise would have to start by self-inquiry and that wouldn't progress without knowing what to ask.

Sri Ramanapranam Astu in the link your provided of the summary said: "not seeking what is other than the Self is desirelesness or detachment; not leaving the Self is wisdom". It's all very cryptic and confusing. If the ego is just an image, why not leaving the Self (capitalised at that) is wisdom? Sounds selfish. Just before that, he said something that made sense, but contradicts and even more confuses it: "Wisdom means the appearance of no object".

If one's image is immaterial, why not leave the self and how? And why is that very wise?

 

[whatevs]

It wasn't my intention to disprove anything. I don't give a crap about the superpowers of a minuscule number of Buddhist monks. To be perfectly frank, I only care about what I & my partner are able to achieve, & we're sure as hell never gonna become impervious to pain. Unfortunately, we can't afford to spend all day meditating so we can set ourselves on fire without feeling anything. Incel NEETs are so privileged!

>Implying that I me, the semi-NEET incel actually meditates or can withstand pain better than normal people instead of being notably whinier

 

[Britvik]

A good summary of Vedanta. For me, it is the most likely of all the theories I've heard regarding existence. Studying it helped me to observe my ego and realise I cannot be what I observe. Unfortunately, my ego rarely takes a break and I'm far from enlightened, so I soon become consumed by events again! And I don't have the patience to meditate.

I'd still like to understand why things are as they are. Some say it is the Creator/Self experiencing itself?
Hmmmm……

 

[whatevs]

A good summary of Vedanta. For me, it is the most likely of all the theories I've heard regarding existence. Studying it helped me to observe my ego and realise I cannot be what I observe. Unfortunately, my ego rarely takes a break and I'm far from enlightened, so I soon become consumed by events again! And I don't have the patience to meditate.

I'd still like to understand why things are as they are. Some say it is the Creator/Self experiencing itself?
Hmmmm……

It definitely seems to be that, but that doesn't really satisfy a miserable being in search of relief. "Don't you worry, your agony is fine! It is exactly what a superior version of you wants to feel!" This is why for me the point is more like showing that these monks etc really overcame suffering so we could do the same. Not that some revelations that we as non-mystics can only appreciate intellectually will rid us from suffering but a very practical and effective way of getting rid of it.

Which means that we should meditate and do all that shit, or we have to put up with this shitshow with the lame tools we are equipped with.

 

[callme]

It definitely seems to be that, but that doesn't really satisfy a miserable being in search of relief. "Don't you worry, your agony is fine! It is exactly what a superior version of you wants to feel!" This is why for me the point is more like showing that these monks etc really overcame suffering so we could do the same. Not that some revelations that we as non-mystics can only appreciate intellectually will rid us from suffering but a very practical and effective way of getting rid of it.

Which means that we should meditate and do all that shit, or we have to put up with this shitshow with the lame tools we are equipped with.

Unlikely unless you spend thousands in pursuit of it? I doubt meditation alone will be enough.