"Nondual" In Buddhadharma

[idiot_stimpy]

High low, left right, all has the same taste.

[Jetsun]

Jetsun is saying Advaita is superior.

 

Not really, whatever works best for the individual is superior for the individual, but I think its harder for people to use Advaita to help solidify a separate sense of self, sure some people probably use it for that but its harder I think to pin your identity as an Advaitan because there are fewer religious and sectarian trappings to get entangled in to delay your unfolding and to pin an individual sense of self upon. But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

[yabyum24]

fewer religious and sectarian trappings to get entangled in to delay your unfolding and to pin an individual sense of self upon. But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

I don't know enough about Advaita to comment but the point you make here is something we shouldn't overlook. For many people, the religious trappings are a kind of support and comfort. For some initially, for others indefinitely.

 

Most sectarians are people who can't let go of this stuff and feel compromised or threatened by other points of view. There are clear lines they can't go beyond, as they fear losing that security.

[RongzomFan]

Not really, whatever works best for the individual is superior for the individual, but I think its harder for people to use Advaita to help solidify a separate sense of self, sure some people probably use it for that but its harder I think to pin your identity as an Advaitan because there are fewer religious and sectarian trappings to get entangled in to delay your unfolding and to pin an individual sense of self upon. But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

You keep repeating that Advaita has fewer sectarian trappings.

 

But even Gatito differentiates between his "Direct Path" bullshit Advaitins and other Advaitins.

 

Why don't you all get on the same page, and then start posting?

[RongzomFan]

But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

There is nothing direct about Advaita.

 

There is no direct introduction, nor even a premise that you are supposed to recognize anything.

 

Its lower than Zen.

[gatito]

Not really, whatever works best for the individual is superior for the individual, but I think its harder for people to use Advaita to help solidify a separate sense of self, sure some people probably use it for that but its harder I think to pin your identity as an Advaitan because there are fewer religious and sectarian trappings to get entangled in to delay your unfolding and to pin an individual sense of self upon. But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

 

Absolutely true.

 

And for me, the advantage of advaita is the Vedanta.

 

If an advaitin isn't able to agree with the teachings of the Vedanta then whatever they're espousing isn't Advaita Vedanta - obviously.

 

Unfortunately, Vedanta needs to be unfolded by someone who is already established in the Truth over a period of years and from what I've seen here, I strongly suspect that 99 % of the time it can only be taught in person.

 

I also strongly suspect that there's a considerable element of direct transmission that takes place in person.

 

We've all been around happy people and that happiness is undoubtedly catching

[Simple_Jack]

Not really, whatever works best for the individual is superior for the individual, but I think its harder for people to use Advaita to help solidify a separate sense of self, sure some people probably use it for that but its harder I think to pin your identity as an Advaitan because there are fewer religious and sectarian trappings to get entangled in to delay your unfolding and to pin an individual sense of self upon. But the disadvantage for many is that it is too direct and sudden that it can't be understood.

 

http://dharmaconnectiongroup.blogspot.com/2013/06/madhyamaka-and-advaita-vedanta.html

 

*Greg Goode: "Soh writes, "Clinging to non-conceptual presence/awareness/etc is as much a cause of suffering as clinging to conceptuality"

If clinging to anything is possible, then clinging to nonconceptual awareness is possible. You may also say, clinging to the notion of nonconceptual awareness is possible. Of course nonconceptual awareness is not the kind of thing that can do clinging. But if we allow a vocabulary any clinging in the first place (such as saying "he clings to that"), then we must allow for the possibility that one can cling to (at least) the idea of nonconceptual awareness.

I am not so interested in the subtleties there, since "being nonconceptual awareness" plays no part in the Buddhism that I participate in.

What I am interested in is how people can cling to awareness as they see it.

I know two very prominent nondual teachers in the more Advaita tradition. They have a pretty good rap and rep. "The world and the self are nothing other than Awareness." When you get near them, you can feel a kind of anxious energy. It is not the exalted energy of spiritual accomplishment. Rather, it is a complex of almost needy beliefs, demands, assertions and bodily "hexis" (positions and contractions). I have an energy worker friend who saw one of these teachers at a restaurant where he was eating before going to give a "satsang." My friend was struck by a kind of dark, demanding furrowed-brow-type energy. He felt like the teacher was about to stab the table with a fork. But this is that teacher's normal state. I regard that as clinging to awareness. Sure, global awareness is not doing any clinging, but it's nice to have some sorts of words for this phenomenon!"

 

I don't know enough about Advaita to comment but the point you make here is something we shouldn't overlook. For many people, the religious trappings are a kind of support and comfort. For some initially, for others indefinitely.

 

Most sectarians are people who can't let go of this stuff and feel compromised or threatened by other points of view. There are clear lines they can't go beyond, as they fear losing that security.

 

Non-sectarianism should not automatically equate to perennialism - http://www.religioperennis.org/documents/Fabbri/Perennialism.pdf: "...They claim that the historically separated traditions share not only the same divine origin but are based on the same metaphysical principles, sometimes called philosophia perennis."

 

http://dharmaconnectiongroup.blogspot.com/2013/06/madhyamaka-and-advaita-vedanta.html

 

Greg Goode: "I agree about the different paradigms. I have talked to many, many people who are very resistant to the idea that different paths might not be talking about "the same thing," or taking a person to "the same place." It can bring up a lot of anxiety, because then people believe they have to investigate and in advance, determine which is true and which is false. I think this tension underlies a lot of perennialism. Which could be summed up crudely as "All paths lead to the same thing - the thing that I happen to be talking about." Or, "Deep down, your path is actually my path." Or, "My path is the essence of all paths."

To my own way of thinking, this gestalt has ethical problems and lacks compassion. It removes a person's right to speak for their own path, and puts one's own characterization over theirs....Of course I would say that paths are not inherently different either."

 

* The same Greg Goode that differentiates between "Emptiness teachings" and "Awareness teachings" which gatito has previously referred to on this board.

[Simple_Jack]

Greg Goode - Another Kind Of Self-Inquiry: Chandrakirti's [Gelug influenced] Sevenfold Reasoning On Selflessness - http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/2009/02/another-kind-of-self-inquiry.html

 

Greg Goode wrote:

 

"Matt, when you say

'can someone show me how it's [awareness] not an eternal, non-separate essence?'

and

'as soon as you point to a phenomenon upon which awareness would be dependent, awareness was already there,'

are you assuming that awareness is one, single unified thing that is already there before objects are? That awareness is present whether objects are present or not?

That is a particular model. It sounds very similar to Advaita. But there are other models.

The emptiness teachings have a different model. Instead of one big awareness they posit many mind-moments or separate awarenesses. Each one is individuated by its own object. There is no awareness between or before or beyond objects. No awareness that is inherent. In this emptiness model, awareness is dependent upon its object. And as you point out, the object is dependent upon the awareness that apprehends it. But there is no underlying awareness that illuminates the entire show.

That's how these teachings account for experience while keeping awareness from being inherently existent.

This isn't the philosophy that denies awareness. That was materialism. We had a few materialists in the fb emptiness group, but they left when they found out that emptiness doesn't utterly deny awareness. So you see, there are people who do deny it... In the emptiness teachings, things depend on awareness, cognitiion, conceptualization, yes. But it is the other way around as well. Awareness depends on objects too.

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

Greg wrote:
Speaking of *after* studying the emptiness teachings.... After beginning to study the emptiness teachings, the most dramatic and earth-shattering thing I realized the emptiness of was awareness, consciousness.

It came as an upside-down, inside-out BOOM, since I had been inquiring into this very point for a whole year. It happened while I was meditating on Nagarjuna's Treatise. Specifically verse IX:4, from “Examination of the Prior Entity.”

If it can abide
Without the seen, etc.,
Then, without a doubt,
They can abide without it.

I saw that a certain parity and bilateral symmetry is involved. If awareness can exist without its objects, then without a doubt, they can exist without awareness. True enough. Then there is a hidden line or two:

BUT - the objects CAN'T exist without awareness. Therefore, awareness can't exist without them. This was big for me."

[gatito]

I don't know enough about Advaita to comment but the point you make here is something we shouldn't overlook. For many people, the religious trappings are a kind of support and comfort. For some initially, for others indefinitely.

 

Most sectarians are people who can't let go of this stuff and feel compromised or threatened by other points of view. There are clear lines they can't go beyond, as they fear losing that security.

 

Yes.

 

We've seen lots of that on this thread

 

A clinging to sectarian belief systems is a clear indicator of someone blinded by Maya.

 

Some people also get pretty desperate in their attempts to discredit anything that threatens their sense of individuality.

 

For example, witness the sustained personal attack on Greg Goode (who teaches Buddhism nowadays ).

 

It's one of the main reasons that I concentrate on Advaita Vedanta myself, as there's a marked absence of these petty internicine squabbles and it's also much easier to point back to the elegant simplicity of these established time-tested teachings.

[Simple_Jack]

Yes.

 

We've seen lots of that on this thread

 

A clinging to sectarian belief systems is a clear indicator of someone blinded by Maya.

 

Some people also get pretty desperate in their attempts to discredit anything that threatens their sense of individuality.

 

For example, witness the sustained personal attack on Greg Goode (who teaches Buddhism nowadays ).

 

Yes, the Vedantins/perennialists in this thread have demonstrated this fact. I'm posting Greg Goode's material, as a way to demonstrate how someone originally from a background in Advaita Vedanta, can have no hang-ups on discussing the differences in philosophy, practice, etc. between what he calls "Emptiness teachings" and the "Awareness teachings".

[gatito]

Yes, the Vedantins/perennialists in this thread have demonstrated this fact. I'm posting Greg Goode's material, as a way to demonstrate how someone originally from a background in Advaita Vedanta, can have no hang-ups on discussing the differences in philosophy, practice, etc. between what he calls "Emptiness teachings" and the "Awareness teachings".

 

So who are "the Vedantins/perennialists on this thread"?

[gatito]

And a supplemental question

 

Do you endorse Greg Goode's teachings on Buddhism?

[gatito]

And a further supplemental question

 

Do you condone the sectarian claptrap and this personal insult directed at Direct Path Advaitins from your fellow "Buddhist"?

 

You keep repeating that Advaita has fewer sectarian trappings.

But even Gatito differentiates between his "Direct Path" bullshit Advaitins and other Advaitins.

Why don't you all get on the same page, and then start posting?

 

There is nothing direct about Advaita.

There is no direct introduction, nor even a premise that you are supposed to recognize anything.

Its lower than Zen.

Edited December 24, 2013 by gatito

[Simple_Jack]

And a supplemental question

 

Do you endorse Greg Goode's teachings on Buddhism?

 

Sure.

 

And a further supplemental question

 

Do you condone the sectarian claptrap and this personal insult directed at Direct Path Advaitins from your fellow "Buddhist"?

 

His behaviour attends to his own volition, therefore what he condones is of no concern of mine.

[gatito]

Sure.

 

 

His behaviour attends to his own volition, therefore what he condones is of no concern of mine.

 

That wasn't my question.

 

I asked if you condoned the sectarian claptrap and this personal insult directed at Direct Path Advaitins from your fellow "Buddhist"?

[gatito]

Yes, the Vedantins/perennialists in this thread have demonstrated this fact. I'm posting Greg Goode's material, as a way to demonstrate how someone originally from a background in Advaita Vedanta, can have no hang-ups on discussing the differences in philosophy, practice, etc. between what he calls "Emptiness teachings" and the "Awareness teachings".

 

And we're still waiting for you to identify the Vedantins/perennialists in this thread

[RongzomFan]

There is no such thing as Direct Path Advaita.

[RongzomFan]

And a further supplemental question

 

Do you condone the sectarian claptrap and this personal insult directed at Direct Path Advaitins from your fellow "Buddhist"?

 

 

 

you have extreme cognitive dissonance.

 

You trash certain advaitins, and praise others.

[C T]

It would be nice to hear what Simple Jack himself practices, on a daily basis. He is well rehearsed in intellectual Buddhism, there's no denying that, but often i do wonder whether he actually has a formal practice in place. Im sure i am wrong to hold such a presumptuous thought, but still, it'd be great to read about his own stuff, and not other people's stuff all the time. I dont think i have ever come across any of his personal practice notes before.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

late edit - gram. err.

Edited December 24, 2013 by C T

[RongzomFan]

Gatito you have a thread in your own forum, where you trash neoadvaitins.

 

And then you say you only follow two or three guys, which you brand as direct path.

[gatito]

I'm reminded of this :-

 

The big problem is that arguing effectively with the ignorant can be hard work with little or no reward.

 

It's easy to toss out some ridiculous assertion and see if it sticks, but it can be hard to gather up all the evidence necessary to really bury it.

 

And when you're done, is the fool enlightened?

 

It is the nature of the ignorant that enlightenment does not reach them.

[Simple_Jack]

We should all remember this:

 

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Daniel%20Ingram

 

Many of the juvenile and tedious disputes between the various insight traditions result from fixation on these concepts and inappropriate adherence to only one side of these apparent paradoxes. Not surprisingly, these disputes between insight traditions generally arise from those with little or no insight. One clear mark of the development of true insight is that these paradoxes lose their power to confuse and obscure. They become tools for balanced inquiry and instruction, beautiful poetry, intimations of the heart of the spiritual life and of one’s own direct and non-conceptual experience of it ~ Daniel Ingram

[gatito]

We should all remember this:

 

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Daniel%20Ingram

 

Many of the juvenile and tedious disputes between the various insight traditions result from fixation on these concepts and inappropriate adherence to only one side of these apparent paradoxes. Not surprisingly, these disputes between insight traditions generally arise from those with little or no insight. One clear mark of the development of true insight is that these paradoxes lose their power to confuse and obscure. They become tools for balanced inquiry and instruction, beautiful poetry, intimations of the heart of the spiritual life and of one’s own direct and non-conceptual experience of it ~ Daniel Ingram

 

 

That wasn't my question.

 

I asked if you condoned the sectarian claptrap and this personal insult directed at Direct Path Advaitins from your fellow "Buddhist"?

 

And we're still waiting for you to identify the Vedantins/perennialists in this thread

[RongzomFan]

Swartz, Anadi, Foster, gatito etc. all attack other advaitins.

 

 

Medieval Advaitins did the same.

Edited December 24, 2013 by RongzomFan

[gatito]

It would be nice to hear what Simple Jack himself practices, on a daily basis. He is well rehearsed in intellectual Buddhism, there's no denying that, but often i do wonder whether he actually has a formal practice in place. Im sure i am wrong to hold such an presumptuous thought, but still, it'd be great to read about his own stuff, and not other people's stuff all the time. I dont think i have ever come across any of his personal practice notes before.

 

And response :-

 

We should all remember this:

 

http://awakeningtoreality.blogspot.com/search/label/Daniel%20Ingram

 

Many of the juvenile and tedious disputes between the various insight traditions result from fixation on these concepts and inappropriate adherence to only one side of these apparent paradoxes. Not surprisingly, these disputes between insight traditions generally arise from those with little or no insight. One clear mark of the development of true insight is that these paradoxes lose their power to confuse and obscure. They become tools for balanced inquiry and instruction, beautiful poetry, intimations of the heart of the spiritual life and of one’s own direct and non-conceptual experience of it ~ Daniel Ingram