dwai

Admin
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    8,286

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

Everything posted by dwai

  1. The words “real” and “unreal” are bandied about with wanton abandon (Like they’re a pile of fall leaves being tossed about hither and tither by a vagabond wind)... Let us understand what real means...and what unreal means. Is real the same as existent and unreal the same as nonexistent? The word “real”, to me, means independently existent. “Unreal”, then means, that which doesn’t exist independently. So then nothing we experience in this world (waking or dreaming) is “real”. What then is real? That which knows the unreality of things and experiences...
  2. https://www.medhajournal.com/non-dual-awareness-is-without-attributes-but-what-about-love/
  3. a dream within a dream. All happens in the mind of the one who is awake
  4. Know that you are the Light without any iota of doubt. And then don't react with fear. When you know what you are, then you aren't afraid of anything anymore. Find your Self my friend...find your Self. I had a visitor like that once (not a shadow one though). A being with the face of a fox. He came towards me and my first reaction was defensive. He immediately manifested into 7 other copies (just like in the movies). But then immediately I remembered I was the Light already. So I just embraced them all with a loving hug. And he/they simply disappeared ....
  5. Let us look at the topic from the perspective of the 5 properties of any object, and find out why Prema (Love) is an intrinsic nature of Brahman/Atman/Pure Awareness. Any object has five aspects -- Asti, Bhati, Priyam, Nama and Rupa. Of these we normally only consider the Asti and the "Nama Rupa" aspect (which are in the domain of jagat/material or transactional world). However Asti which indicates existence, Bhati which indicates the effulgence/illumination by and in awareness, and priyam indicates the desirability of the object (I like or I don't like), are not considered explicitly in our transactional reality. But this priyam or "desirability", when understood in the right context leads us through a path as follows -- So, while Nama Rupa are the jagat aspect, Asti, Bhati, Priyam actually lead us to Brahman as they are of the nature of Brahman (BrahmarĹŤpam). Therefore we can see that Prema (which is analogous with Priyam) is an intrinsic nature of Brahman.
  6. According to Vedanta, any object that is known to us has five characteristics. They are — asti - “Is-ness”/existence bhati - shining/illumination (ie is known) priyam - desirability (which is actually a trigger for experience of/seeking pleasure) nama - name rupa - form This Article does a very good job of explaining the subject (https://www.advaita-vision.org/becoming-oneselfpart-22/) I am quoting from it below...
  7. Individuals don't get enlightened. Enlightenment recognizes its true nature...and the fact that the individual is just a collection of memories and imaginations

  8. Lust and demons?

    dwai replied to greatsaiyaman's topic in Healthy Bums

    In my experience, the way to eliminate unnatural sexual desire is to stop trying to control it, and at the same time, not act upon it. Just let it rise in your awareness, and watch. It is not very hard to do...but might take a few attempts to do so. Little by little, you become aware of where it is rising from. And eventually it will subside once you know its root cause. PS: When it naturally rises (due to biological reasons), it is not a problem. When it becomes a chronic mental clinging is when it is a "problem". I'm sure there are benefits to abstaining at regular intervals. But depending on your age, the drive will gradually subside (the biology triggers it at regular and progressively expanding intervals).
  9. Kannada...a south indian language It is a shortened version of Dwaipayan...means "born on an island"
  10. "illi" means "right here" in another language...

  11. A heartfelt recommendation

    dwai replied to Boy's topic in Hindu Discussion

    Swamiji is a "tour de force", a true modern day Master of Advaita Vedanta! Thanks for sharing...I'd not gotten around to seeing these videos yet.
  12. Agreed. We are never not that . In fact nothing ever really happens...but that is just too much for most human minds to comprehend, given that we seem to exist in space and time, and appear to have a beginning and an end. The physical “you” is just an appearance within the non-physical you. In fact, the entire universe also is just an appearance, a mirage, a play of name and form, that we take so seriously. The “you” that really is, is by itself ecstasy and bliss, love and joy, unattached and ever free. There is no question of forgiving. How can there even be? For example if you fall asleep and dream that you are serial killer and responsible for the murder of hundreds of people. When you wake up and remember that dream, would you forgive yourself or just say “wow that was a terrible nightmare”? its the same with the non dual awareness. There is nothing to forgive as there is no culprit
  13. Er...actually it is a matter of observation. Often this type of discussion leads people to greater vehemence than even utterances of "love".. Okay...I'm assuming you are making a general statement here Yes...we need to expand beyond our limited body-mind constructs. The way to do that is to understand what we are NOT first...peel away the layers of the proverbial onion until the core is known (which is Pure Being/Pure Awareness). From there we can expand beyond the local body/mind. But the main work is in uncovering and realizing the Pure Awareness as being our own true nature. We don't need elaborate alchemical processes to do that. Those are good for stilling the mind. Once the mind is still, it becomes like a clear lake and we can see the base/bottom. Then the idea is to proceed as that unaffected awareness that underlies every thing (all knowing). I think you do have a lot of valuable insights, but may I request that you please unabashedly use paragraphs in your writing? My head reels when I see your posts because all i see is a jumble of words.
  14. I know you are. Most language is ultimately unhelpful. It would be easier if we could communicate in Sanskrit
  15. No it is an empirically verifiable fact . Awareness as it is, cannot ever be said to have any properties. Why? Because in order to know properties of something, awareness is a prerequisite. The only thing that is known about awareness is that it IS, always, and unaffected by anything. Oh boy...now that might stir up the hornet’s nest... Awareness is — in the parlance of nondualists, pure objectless consciousness. No it isn’t. It is what makes attributes of things known.
  16. I think we've noted this with Nisargadatta Maharaj's words in the past as well. Maybe due to the fact that he spoke in vernacular marathi and his words were later translated to english. Beautiful!
  17. If the amusement was fake, it would be a really sorry thing. Fortunately for me it is not. I genuinely find the fact that so many people react so strongly to some unknown person's post on the internet, amusing. Its always is a good idea to introspect and see what part of one's psyche reacts so strongly to another's thoughts and ideas.
  18. I'm just using a word used by others who were masters with non dual realization. We could call it abacabadaba for all I care
  19. We have to start with our intellect, which may or may not be accurate in its assessment. Eventually it comes down to direct experience. So long as one doesn't have a direct realization of the non-dual truth, the understanding remains the realm of the intellect. After realization, it becomes clear that they are all essentially pointing to the same thing. I 100% agree that different paths (non dual traditions) have different courses mapped out, but they eventually lead to the same mountain top. We might call it by different names. They work at different levels. But there are overlaps. One version I've heard is that the chakras exist purely in the subtle layer while dantiens have a physiological component to them (Damo Mitchell says this a lot - I have all his books, and have read them, though I don't agree with everything he writes). But in the indian/yogic system, the chakras also work at the physiological level (ie have effect). The reason why this mistake is made, imo, claiming that Chakras and dantiens are different -- is because of different theoretical basis (as opposed to empirical). In the Yogic system, there are three bodies that are said to exist. The Causal Body, the subtle body and the physical body. The Causal body is essentially just awareness with countless impressions dormant (or in seed form). From this causal body arises the subtle body, which is where the mind, subtle energies (five winds including prana) work, as do the subtle organs associated with the outer sensory apparatuses. From the subtle body rises the physical body, and therefore the subtle body always controls the physical body. The chakras in a sense are the interface between the subtle and the physical bodies. But lets not get sidetracked by this -- which can be its own topic of discussion and draw extended and (even more vehement) commentary I'm not hurt at all. I am amused however I've been where you are...so I know where you are going to be eventually...call it arrogance if you will, though that is not my intention at all. It's just that "been there, done that" thing for me. That seems to be a result of your personal bias because you are not able to go beyond your reaction. Your mind says "no...not going to consider it...purity of traditions are sacrosanct". When you get to a point where you see that no system is the end, but all systems are the means to an end...you will realize that all traditions eventually need to be set aside. There's an old allegory about crossing the river on a raft, but then to walk to the other side, the raft must be left behind. That is not unusual for people to do. We develop attachments. In the Advaita Vedanta world, this attachment is called "Shāstra vāsanā" and is considered the hardest hurdle to overcome in the path to liberation. Could be. But David Loy is a highly respected Zen teacher and scholar. His works have been cited here on TDB many times too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Loy I found several translations that use the word "love". http://www.wussu.com/laotzu/laotzu13.html https://www.centertao.org/essays/tao-te-ching/dc-lau/chapter-13-commentary/ https://ttc.tasuki.org/display:Year:1972,1988,1996/section:13 What does the word "care for" connote? Is the "caring for" here used in the sense of someone doing a job, or does it connote something else..."love" perhaps?
  20. Thanks What is contrived about it? Could it be that there's something within each of those who reacted so intensely that resists the idea of love as expressed in the article? I saw multiple translations that show the same word "love" being used. Can you post an alternate version you think is better? As far as the meat grinder is concerned, instead of meat grinder, why not consider that each of these traditions have said pretty much similar things? I'm assuming you have some understanding of Non-dualism. Each of the traditions outlined are non dual traditions. So it is not likely that they will be saying similar things? My clarity and discernment (or lack thereof) don't seem to be getting you guys going...there seems to be something else. Why can't you accept this as another view? Right or wrong, it's a view. Why not challenge it with the sharp edge of truth instead of name calling (such lack of humility, disrespectful, etc)? Tell me why I am wrong (someone told you so is not a good reason)... It wasn't hard at all. Could it be possible that you feel the way you do because of your biases?
  21. Why just scholar? We can say it’s a scholarly way to discuss it. Yes...of course
  22. I wonder what makes so many react with such intensity Its okay if you don't like "love"...I love you all...even you, Drew
  23. Wow! Such vehement reactions...😲
  24. If we’re using words, it is in dualism. All concepts are also only in dualism. do you disagree with the article?
  25. Been there, done that...found out that it doesn't matter in the end. I gave an example, it was not an extrapolation . If you read carefully, I said "X is to Y what A is to B". That doesn't mean X = A. Yes it is a speculation. But there is an inherent difference between the (ancient) chinese mindset and the modern western one. My suggestion was pointing to that. Love is a victim of said difference imho. When we say love in the western context, it usually gets conflated to a type of clinging/associated with a form of ownership. There's an entire section in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad (hindu text) that deals with dispelling misconceptions about what "love" truly is. http://upanishads.org.in/stories/yajnavalkya-and-maitreyee Of course they aren't. However, are you familiar with the term "categorical framework"? A categorical framework is one which posits certain "truth claims", based on rules of categorization and hypotheses. The same thing can be proven to be right in one categorical framework and wrong in another. Context indeed is the key. But not from the perspective of just one categorical framework. That is being short-sighted. It is a good idea to stick to one path, until that path no longer is necessary. As far as Hinduism and Buddhism are concerned - the former is the parent of the latter. So they are related. Buddhism influenced Daoism, so they too are related. I have only shared my thoughts based on your responses to my comment. If you don't want to discuss this further, it's okay. I do believe I have provided enough material for the discerning reader to understand. An open mind is key.