Beware of Neo-advaita Trap- Read this long elaborate essay

[Shanmugam]

1 minute ago, SOUL said:

@Shanmugam

What I observe is that the complication of the teaching often brings even more self-caused suffering which is why I prefer to focus on the simplicity of being present.

 

I always wanted to ask you, how did you get introduced to the spiritual path in the beginning and who was your teacher? Could you elaborate on your journey? 

Because you must have been so fortunate to not to condition yourself with many teachings. That is what I think based on what you are saying. And what you are saying is also true..

But here in India, the situation is different. Many people get exposed to a lot of teaching and learn many things intellectually. They can't very easily empty their cup. I sometimes used to wonder if westerners more easily understand things than Indians these days.

Once a person has already fed a lot of information into his system, sometimes there is a need to go in their way. Ever since I started my blog, I get questions from people which are solely based on the concepts they learned. If I tell them to let go of all these concepts, they don't listen. Their questions are like 'What do you think about kundalini awakening?', 'Have you read Upanishads', 'Do you hear the omkar nad?', 'Have you seen God' etc etc etc.  Their identification with such concepts is so deep. I recommend certain books or teachers based on their conditioning.

 

[Shanmugam]

13 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

@Shanmugam I don't like the Levels of Reality idea.  There are no levels of reality.  That's a story.  I don't want to have any stories like that about reality.  Reality doesn't need a story!  That's the whole point of Enlightenment is to dislodge all your stories about reality.  Reality needs a story like a dog needs fleas!

 

I don't think we disagree here..

But when someone asks what is your name, you still reply your name is Joseph Maynor. That is what I am talking about. But anyway, all these concepts are not the truth. They are only used as aids, for better communication. You are the truth, but relatively speaking, you are Joseph Maynor. These terms for levels of reality is only used for a convenience in communication. 

But there are certain teachers who just play with words and deny the story completely. The story exists as a story. A dream that you see at night is not true. But let us say your best friend whose name is Jack appeared in the dream last night. If I tell you the person who appeared in the dream was not Jack but your another friend David, you would say 'No that is not true, it was Jack'.. This doesn't imply that the dream is true..

[SOUL]

11 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

That's a story.  I don't want to have any stories like that about reality.  Reality doesn't need a story!  That's the whole point of Enlightenment is to dislodge all your stories about reality.

That's your story about reality so if you want to create and believe it this way then that is your choice for your subjective inner experience of it.

Although, that story isn't an absolute truth, it's just yours so be at peace with it.

[Joseph Maynor]

1 hour ago, SOUL said:

That's your story about reality so if you want to create and believe it this way then that is your choice for your subjective inner experience of it.

Although, that story isn't an absolute truth, it's just yours so be at peace with it.

POINT AT ISSUE:

"[T]hat story isn't an absolute truth, it's just yours so be at peace with it."

MY COMMENT:

Ok.  Let's assume you're right.  But then that you be your story, would it not!  There seems to be an infinite regress problem with your position.  I wanted to believe you, it sounds plausible at first glance.  But them I'm like -- ah!  there's a problem with that too.  There is such a thing as empirical reality that can be appealed to.  Reality is not unreal.  Reality can be appealed to.  It's not hidden from us.  So, in that sense, the relativity thesis regarding belief is technically unsound.  Reality is right there, simple, and not hiding.  There is an objectivity to reality that is plain to the eye and the eye of the mind.  So, not all beliefs are relative.  Some beliefs are more sound and grounded better than others.  Reality is not subjective.  Our thoughts are subjective, puzzled, relativistic, confused -- but not reality!  Reality is simple, readily observable, and never puzzled.  So, no it's not just my story!  That implies there's a me and a not me.  Reality is one.  That relativity paradigm gets used like a sword in this work -- and it shouldn't be, because it's false.

Video on point to watch:

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[SOUL]

@Shanmugam My spiritual path started to heal childhood trauma, it wasn't about 'enlightenment' and it's never been about it. As the healing happened in my life there was awakenings that came along with it that others would association with 'enlightenment' but it still wasn't a focus of mine.

I definitely was surrounded by many kinds of 'teaching' from western to eastern varieties, atheist, scientific, self help, empowerment, the list goes on. Although, I felt imposed upon by so many of them, there was so much pressure to adopt values and perspectives that had nothing to do with my healing but instead framed as being 'right', 'good' and 'truth' which only supported their own belief systems.

If it didn't resonate with me it was portrayed as me being wrong, bad or false and until I submitted to them and their beliefs I wouldn't and couldn't get healing. I intuitively knew I could get it without their belief systems and ultimately without their input at all so I went an autodidact way and it came in a genuine way but with so much more. A sense of peace, joy and fulfillment that transcended anything I observe in others around me not that I cared to compare it to justify me.

I spent many years contented in this and didn't really seek out discussions about spirituality like I have on here but I would use my real life as an opportunity to let people I would cross paths with to let them know healing and peace was possible. I became very adept as feeling out what people really were searching for and what methods of understanding appealed to them and catered my words to fit their language, kind of like what you say you do.

Yet I find myself constantly walking a razor's edge of challenging people's comfort zones or comforting that hurting inner child, or not being an either-or as sometimes people need to be challenged so the healing can happen. I still don't claim to know or seek 'truth' or 'enlightenment' but do acknowledge the awakening of our inner life as a way to healing and bringing, joy, fulfillment and peace.

[Shanmugam]

@Joseph Maynor i will give you an example from our own forum. One day, in a discussion about a guru, I posted saying that he was a fake one and just pretending to be enlightened to make money and expand his empire.. Another forum member responded to it by saying that everything is fake, implying that all forms are unreal and illusions. He said this as an objection to what I said.

Though what he said was true, it was not a valid objection. But by using these terms like absolute and relative truth, I can very easily explain to him why it is not a valid objection. What he said was true in the absolute level but the discussion is about the relative reality of forms..

So, these terms are there just to make sure we are on the same page. 

 

[SOUL]

@Joseph Maynor Yes, it is my story although I don't suggest my story is a universal absolute truth that is everyone's story, I let people create or destroy their own story as they see fit and let the reality of living their life be their story.

[Deep]

@Joseph Maynor @Shanmugam @SOUL Don't you guys get tired of intellectualizing? 

[SOUL]

2 minutes ago, Deep said:

@Joseph Maynor @Shanmugam @SOUL Don't you guys get tired of intellectualizing? 

Do you?

[Joseph Maynor]

Deep said:

@Joseph Maynor @Shanmugam @SOUL Don't you guys get tired of intellectualizing? 

//

My Reply:

Questioning beliefs is what reduces ignorance which is what gets you Enlightened.  It's odd that this needs to be pointed out.  There's always someone who chimes in like clockwork at regular intervals on this Forum challenging thinking with more thinking!  Seen that before haha?   Do you see a paradox there?  It's like -- dude if you were really against thinking you wouldn't be on here.  Common sense right?  Let's not have a double-standard.  Pretending to be "anti-thinking" sounds good, but upon reflection it's quite silly and trite.  And predictable to boot!  

Edited February 20, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Shanmugam]

26 minutes ago, SOUL said:

@Shanmugam My spiritual path started to heal childhood trauma, it wasn't about 'enlightenment' and it's never been about it. As the healing happened in my life there was awakenings that came along with it that others would association with 'enlightenment' but it still wasn't a focus of mine.

I definitely was surrounded by many kinds of 'teaching' from western to eastern varieties, atheist, scientific, self help, empowerment, the list goes on. Although, I felt imposed upon by so many of them, there was so much pressure to adopt values and perspectives that had nothing to do with my healing but instead framed as being 'right', 'good' and 'truth' which only supported their own belief systems.

If it didn't resonate with me it was portrayed as me being wrong, bad or false and until I submitted to them and their beliefs I wouldn't and couldn't get healing. I intuitively knew I could get it without their belief systems and ultimately without their input at all so I went an autodidact way and it came in a genuine way but with so much more. A sense of peace, joy and fulfillment that transcended anything I observe in others around me not that I cared to compare it to justify me.

I spent many years contented in this and didn't really seek out discussions about spirituality like I have on here but I would use my real life as an opportunity to let people I would cross paths with to let them know healing and peace was possible. I became very adept as feeling out what people really were searching for and what methods of understanding appealed to them and catered my words to fit their language, kind of like what you say you do.

Yet I find myself constantly walking a razor's edge of challenging people's comfort zones or comforting that hurting inner child, or not being an either-or as sometimes people need to be challenged so the healing can happen. I still don't claim to know or seek 'truth' or 'enlightenment' but do acknowledge the awakening of our inner life as a way to healing and bringing, joy, fulfillment and peace.

Interesting.. Thanks for sharing

[Shanmugam]

27 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Questioning beliefs is what reduces ignorance which is what gets you Enlightened.  It's odd that this needs to be pointed out.  There's always someone who chimes in like clockwork at regular intervals on this form challenging thinking with more thinking?  Do you see a paradox there?  It's like -- dude if you were really against thinking you wouldn't be on here.  Common sense right?  Let's not have a double-standard.  Be anti-thinking sounds good, but upon reflection it's quite silly and trite.  And predictable to boot!  

Thinking in itself is not bad. What causes problem is the involuntary monkey mind. As Eckhart Tolle puts it, a typical person doesn't use his mind but his mind uses him..

Using the intellect is just like using your hands. If your hand is out of control and making involuntary movements, it won't be good. But you use your hands when you want to use it.

And I am talking about something very simple. It is really not that complicated. To say it as something intellectual would be an extreme exaggeration. I am just saying that your name is Joseph Maynor. it is as simple as that.

If someone calls your home phone number and asks you how many people are currently present in your house, you won't say 'there is no other.. All that exists is reality and there is no duality'. Instead you might say 'I am watching TV with four of my friends'... And I am sure a 10 year old kid would answer the question the same way.

[Shanmugam]

37 minutes ago, Deep said:

@Joseph Maynor @Shanmugam @SOUL Don't you guys get tired of intellectualizing? 

Not very easily.. Because my mental energy is not invested in multiple problems that has to do with past and future. Once the monkey mind is gone, a lot of energy is saved. Again, I am not talking about getting rid of intelligence or memory. I am talking about what is usually referred to as 'monkey mind'. I have spent a whole day in writing a blog post or Quora answer, while being completely immersed in the work I do and while retaining the same peace and freedom which has never left me after 2014.

[Joseph Maynor]

6 hours ago, Shanmugam said:

Thinking in itself is not bad. What causes problem is the involuntary monkey mind. As Eckhart Tolle puts it, a typical person doesn't use his mind but his mind uses him..

Using the intellect is just like using your hands. If your hand is out of control and making involuntary movements, it won't be good. But you use your hands when you want to use it.

And I am talking about something very simple. It is really not that complicated. To say it as something intellectual would be an extreme exaggeration. I am just saying that your name is Joseph Maynor. it is as simple as that.

If someone calls your home phone number and asks you how many people are currently present in your house, you won't say 'there is no other.. All that exists is reality and there is no duality'. Instead you might say 'I am watching TV with four of my friends'... And I am sure a 10 year old kid would answer the question the same way.

Sure.  How could I disagree with this?  There is a sense in which things are reasonable, but it's not hard and fast.  All thought is not truth, but some thought is closer to it than others.  That's what makes a wise person.  Their imperfect thought points better at the truth than others' do.  That's plain to see in experience.  Philosophers aren't stupid.  There are much worse ways to spend one's time than thinking about important issues in Spirituality.

Edited February 20, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[SOUL]

2 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

TRUTH AIN'T RELATIVE

"truth:

the quality or state of being true."

"true:

in accordance with fact or reality.

accurate or exact.

loyal or faithful.

honest."

Truth is relative according to the standard it is applied on. A personal truth is according to a personal standard, scientific truth is according to what is revealed by the scientific method, reality truth is according to reality which is often associated with life and is comprised of objective and subjective experience.

Truth is a comparison to a standard so it is relative to the standard set and measured by, truth isn't compared to itself other than it is being true and what is true is a measure of a standard as well.

Science - accurate fact

Personal - loyal, faithful, honest

Reality - objective and subjective experience

So, the question is what's the standard one will measure to find if it's truth? Reality? Ok, that awesome but there is subjective experience associated with reality that I cannot determine for you and you cannot determine for me. "Spinach tastes delicious"...how is the "truth" of this statement determined? It is subjective, there is no objective standard that the "truth" can be compared to so "reality" has subjective truth qualities.

A universal "absolute truth" that people may suggest exists is a belief paradigm story that is created according to their experience. You may say it's "no story reality", some may say it's "Jesus saves", others may say it's "science rules".... who is to determine which is "absolute truth"?

I'm hungry for food.... can you determine if it's "truth"?....hehe

 

[Joseph Maynor]

10 minutes ago, SOUL said:

"truth:

the quality or state of being true."

"true:

in accordance with fact or reality.

accurate or exact.

loyal or faithful.

honest."

Truth is relative according to the standard it is applied on. A personal truth is according to a personal standard, scientific truth is according to what is revealed by the scientific method, reality truth is according to reality which is often associated with life and is comprised of objective and subjective experience.

Truth is a comparison to a standard so it is relative to the standard set and measured by, truth isn't compared to itself other than it is being true and what is true is a measure of a standard as well.

Science - accurate fact

Personal - loyal, faithful, honest

Reality - objective and subjective experience

So, the question is what's the standard one will measure to find if it's truth? Reality? Ok, that awesome but there is subjective experience associated with reality that I cannot determine for you and you cannot determine for me. "Spinach tastes delicious"...how is the "truth" of this statement determined? It is subjective, there is no objective standard that the "truth" can be compared to so "reality" has subjective truth qualities.

A universal "absolute truth" that people may suggest exists is a belief paradigm story that is created according to their experience. You may say it's "no story reality", some may say it's "Jesus saves", others may say it's "science rules".... who is to determine which is "absolute truth"?

I'm hungry for food.... can you determine if it's "truth"?....hehe

 

 

Edited February 20, 2018 by Joseph Maynor

[Nahm]

It’s funny that the title of the post warned of the trap. 

[Joseph Maynor]

8 minutes ago, Nahm said:

It’s funny that the title of the post warned of the trap. 

What?  The Neo-Advaitans like to argue about beliefs moreso than other do?

[snowleopard]

4 hours ago, Deep said:

Don't you guys get tired of intellectualizing? 

One Dreamer ... limitless dream perspectives. None are precluded. Dream on, dream Ones. 

[YellowButterfly]

I think what some people have difficulty with in this is that an enlightenment experience, this process, this understanding is merely a growth phase. A condensed growth phase, but from my experience a growth phase none the less. What causes you to heal and reconcile your life, what you've been taught, understanding. Like a growth spurt or puberty in your teens. People are just growing up through a very rapid process of understanding in their own minds. For some reason, probably because of the way human society has developed, it typically takes quite extreme circumstances to have an experience of "enlightenment", or a boost in maturation. What I see from Neo-Advaita is like an analogy I made before. A person who has been locked in a room their entire life only to finally be released and to see for the first time that there is an outdoors and to experience the outdoors might for a time develop an aversion to the indoors or confined rooms. Not simply holding a belief comfortably recognizing it is one, but instead clinging to it in desperation. Reconciling and balancing duality with non-duality and being cautious not to vilify duality. To not discard aspects of reality. This said person might then cling to the outdoors desperately until they start to become uncomfortable where others might say, "Just come inside, get some food, rest. You've been outdoors for days!" They might rail against it. Like a form of ptsd, if you will, out of fear of being confined again. When a person experiences true freedom it can be entirely overwhelming and a person will want to cling to something, to have a sense of control to stabilize themselves and feel safe amidst such freedom. For a person just coming into this understanding Neo-Advaita teachings might be helpful at pointing the way, but to not grasp and cling in desperation after an understanding has been made like clinging onto a hot coal. Unless one wants to of course. It's up to the person to choose and to reconcile. You can help and assist people with a lot of things, but unfortunately you cannot assist with another's mind. They have to do that themselves.