Hindu Only: Brahman

[Valjean]

Scientists like Schrodinger and Werner Heisenburg have pointed out the similarities between Vedanta and quantum physics.

But mere intellectual understanding, scripturally or scientifically, is not going to make anyone enlightened and wise. It is the conscious, diligent and austere development of nondual perception that brings about enlightenment.

The goal of science is ontological Truth, not enlightenment.
Enlightenment is the goal of Yoga.
Intellectual understanding vs conscious awareness. Apples and oranges.

 

[ajay0]

The goal of science is ontological Truth, not enlightenment.
Enlightenment is the goal of Yoga.
Intellectual understanding vs conscious awareness. Apples and oranges.

It is through enlightenment that one gets to proper ontological Truth or proper understanding of being.

Science or scripture for that matter, gives intellectual understanding, but understanding how an apple tastes intellectually, is not the same as tasting it through real experience.

Science can also not guarantee love or virtuous conduct in the human being. The Nazi scientists who performed live experiments on human beings were among the best in the world in those times. So are those who are building wmd these days.

Recently, I was thinking it to be highly ironical that the Nobel peace prize is named after someone who profitted from the sales of arms and explosives.

 

[Valjean]

Leaving aside the pseudo-science, what you're basically saying is that people need a way of recognising Brahman?
And yet in the Upanishads, everything is Brahman, both the seen and the unseen. So why the need for the distinction?

People "need" food , water, air, shelter, &c. Experiencing Brahman isn't a need, it's a mental aberration. It's an experience, insight or merger with ????

Yes, Brahman underlies everything, like a screen on which"things" are projected. Should we not make a distinction between screen and picture?

Millions of compounds are formed of only 92 elements, and these from 3 particles. These are unifying aspects, of increasing unity, underlying the diversity of the world. Are the distinctions irrelevant?

There's unity and there's diversity. Dive deep, dissect the diversity, and you find increasing unity. What's at the bottom?
The distinction is relevant.

 

[ajay0]

People "need" food , water, air, shelter, &c. Experiencing Brahman isn't a need, it's a mental aberration. It's an experience, insight or merger with ????

Brahman is our natural state of being, characterized by effortless bliss and peace. No one is content being in an unnatural state of misery which fosters constant pleasure-seeking.

Study the teachings of masters like Ramana, Shankaracharya, Nisargadatta Maharaj and H.W.Poonja so that you can sort out your doubts on advaita.

Millions of compounds are formed of only 92 elements, and these from 3 particles. These are unifying aspects, of increasing unity, underlying the diversity of the world. Are the distinctions irrelevant?

There's unity and there's diversity. Dive deep, dissect the diversity, and you find increasing unity. What's at the bottom?
The distinction is relevant.

Perhaps you may find the sayings of these two female enlightened masters helpful in this regard...

“There is One unchanging indivisible Reality which, though unmanifest, reveals Itself in infinite multiplicity and diversity.” ~ Anandamayi Ma


It is through the multiplicity of name and form that one can arrive at the One. It is from this One that this Infinite Variety has manifested. In the end all return to that effulgent One.~ Shivayogini Matha

 

[Valjean]

It is through enlightenment that one gets to proper ontological Truth or proper understanding of being.

It's through enlightenment that one directly perceives ontological Truth. It's through science that one begins to understand and communicate it intellectually through a universal medium.

Science or scripture for that matter, gives intellectual understanding, but understanding how an apple tastes intellectually, is not the same as tasting it through real experience.

I have yet to see scripture give intellectual understanding, and how an apple tastes is an individual qualia, not within the purview of science.

Science can also not guarantee love or virtuous conduct in the human being. The Nazi scientists who performed live experiments on human beings were among the best in the world in those times. So are those who are building wmd these days.

True, but so what? What does intellectual or technical competence have to do with morality? Religion has a pretty poor track record, as well.
But I'd bet the study of human behavior: psychology, neurology, sociology, &c would be more useful in improving social well being than religious tradition ever was.

 

[Valjean]

Brahman is our natural state of being, characterized by effortless bliss and peace. No one is content being in an unnatural state of misery which fosters constant pleasure-seeking.

Study the teachings of masters like Ramana, Shankaracharya, Nisargadatta Maharaj and H.W.Poonja so that you can sort out your doubts on advaita.

Which doubts do I need to sort out?

Perhaps you may find the sayings of these two female enlightened masters helpful in this regard...

Which regard?

“There is One unchanging indivisible Reality which, though unmanifest, reveals Itself in infinite multiplicity and diversity.” ~ Anandamayi Ma

It is through the multiplicity of name and form that one can arrive at the One. It is from this One that this Infinite Variety has manifested. In the end all return to that effulgent One.~ Shivayogini Matha [/QUOTE]OK. Very nice, but I don't follow your point.

 

[ajay0]

It's through enlightenment that one directly perceives ontological Truth. It's through science that one begins to understand and communicate it intellectually through a universal medium.

Did Ramana Maharshi or Nisargadatta Maharaj depend on scientific validation to pin their hope on their religious methodology and follow it to its conclusion !

I have yet to see scripture give intellectual understanding, and how an apple tastes is an individual qualia, not within the purview of science.

Advaita deals with nondual perceptioin which is a matter of finetuning your own consciousness through selfinquiry and meditation. There is a sufficient amount of intellection involved in this, and this is why the term Jnana Yoga or yoga of intellect is used to address this branch.

True, but so what? What does intellectual or technical competence have to do with morality? Religion has a pretty poor track record, as well.

The conscious can use intellectual tools or technical competence morally and progressively, while in the hands of the unconscious these can become destructive.

But I'd bet the study of human behavior: psychology, neurology, sociology, &c would be more useful in improving social well being than religious tradition ever was.

It is just a bet. These studies have never created a Buddha or Ramana or Rajini Menon .

Psychological warfare is part of military warfare studies in many countries.

 

[ajay0]

Which doubts do I need to sort out?
Which regard?

Schrodinger , Heisenburg and other quantum scientists have perceived a seeming correspondence between vedanta and quantum physics. You are however stuck on seeing Vedanta from their scientific pov gelled with some other ideas of your own and using the tag of Vedanta (reform) without any proper grip of the scriptural understanding and methodology in Advaita Vedanta. This is actually dishonest and does not serve the purpose of advaita, which is direct nondual perception and not the validation of it by science. There are enough enlightened sages throughout the modern world who have validated it by their own perception.

We are in a dangerous phase of time when nondual perception is a growing necessity in these times of dualistic perception that consequently results in regressive warfare and bloodshed.

“There is One unchanging indivisible Reality which, though unmanifest, reveals Itself in infinite multiplicity and diversity.” ~ Anandamayi Ma

It is through the multiplicity of name and form that one can arrive at the One. It is from this One that this Infinite Variety has manifested. In the end all return to that effulgent One.~ Shivayogini Matha

OK. Very nice, but I don't follow your point.

This understanding and direct perception of unity is what Advaita vedanta is all about.


And unless this direct perception is there, all intellectual ideas about it is bound to be deluded and distorted. It is like the four blind men studying an elephant with their hands and coming into all sorts of incorrect conclusions and misunderstandings.

 

[Valjean]

Did Ramana Maharshi or Nisargadatta Maharaj depend on scientific validation to pin their hope on their religious methodology and follow it to its conclusion !

Of course not. You're comparing apples and oranges. Science and Yoga are completely different things, aimed at different ends.

Advaita deals with nondual perceptioin which is a matter of finetuning your own consciousness through selfinquiry and meditation. There is a sufficient amount of intellection involved in this, and this is why the term Jnana Yoga or yoga of intellect is used to address this branch.

I always wondered about the mechanism of action associated with jnana. I don't see scientists and scholars suddenly achieving states of Samadhi in any great numbers. I do, however, see mystical states happening from many more causes than self-inquiry or meditation. Intellect doesn't seem to be much of a factor.

It is just a bet. These studies have never created a Buddha or Ramana or Rajini Menon .

Psychological warfare is part of military warfare studies in many countries.

I was thinking more of psychotherapeutic modalities, law enforcement and rehabilitation, mental health or family counseling, political negotiation and diplomacy, &c.

 

[Valjean]

Schrodinger , Heisenburg and other quantum scientists have perceived a seeming correspondence between vedanta and quantum physics. You are however stuck on seeing Vedanta from their scientific pov gelled with some other ideas of your own and using the tag of Vedanta (reform) without any proper grip of the scriptural understanding and methodology in Advaita Vedanta. This is actually dishonest and does not serve the purpose of advaita, which is direct nondual perception and not the validation of it by science. There are enough enlightened sages throughout the modern world who have validated it by their own perception.

I see your point, and quoting 'scriptures' and throwing Sanskrit terms around might be interesting to aficionados, but it's no way to explain the underlying concepts to the general public. Their eyes will just glaze over.

Methodology? Vedanta's a philosophy, a metaphysical theorem, about a Reality that can be experienced in expanded conscious through a mystical experience of a numinous Unity.
Any methodology -- yoga -- that will achieve this is fine, but if you're going to talk about it rather than experience it, I don't think the convoluted 'scripture' and traditions of Hinduism are going to resonate with the general public. The concepts are very different from the Abrahamic ideas. The closest Western ideas are found in theoretical physics, and that's where I often turn for analogies, as I'm sure you've noticed.

How is discussing metaphysical concepts in a familiar language and idiom dishonest? I see it as practical and expedient.

We are in a dangerous phase of time when nondual perception is a growing necessity in these times of dualistic perception that consequently results in regressive warfare and bloodshed.

This 'dangerous phase of time' has persisted throughout human history, has it not?

This understanding and direct perception of unity is what Advaita vedanta is all about.

OK, so where are we in disagreement? Vedanta is a philosophy revealed through mystical consciousness and direct experience. Like quantum mechanics, superstring theory or multiverses, it's counter-intuitive. You're unlikely to give any credence to it unless you either experience it, or some of its precepts are demonstrated mathematically and experimentally. For the non-yogis, the latter approach is the more fruitful, I think.

And unless this direct perception is there, all intellectual ideas about it is bound to be deluded and distorted. It is like the four blind men studying an elephant with their hands and coming into all sorts of incorrect conclusions and misunderstandings.

And without the direct experience, the intellectual ideas are all we have.
I see people discussing it readily enough, you included.
Are you advocating full enlightenment or nothing? If so, maybe we should stop talking about it completely, but then, we're Hindus, not Buddhists. We're obsessed with talking things to death in intricate detail.