To: K-list
Recieved: 2000/11/21 11:54
Subject: RE: [K-list] Dr. Trasi's "Basic Tenets of Advaita" Point 4:
From: AntiSalon Salon
On 2000/11/21 11:54, AntiSalon Salon posted thus to the K-list:
thank you for this email. i appreciate your respect for the power of distinction (and your ability at it) as well as the questions you posed at the end.
in response to your statement: "we can hardly afford to be messy with the use of words," i want to add briefly that language shapes consciousness and this is why it is such a powerful tool of transcendence when attended to with care and precision.
namaste
laura
>Cc: <HarshaSatsanghATnospamegroups.com>
>From: "Wim Borsboom" <aurasphereATnospamhome.com>
>Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2000 01:45:07 -0800
>Subject: [K-list] Dr. Trasi's "Basic Tenets of Advaita" Point 4:
>
>Hi all,
>
>http://www.here-now4u.de/eng/advaita_and_science_.htm
>http://personal.vsnl.com/ntrasi/
>
>If what Dr. Trasi writes has to do with the science
>and enlightenment, I would expect a sharper
>scientific mind and more illumination.
>
>|----------------------------------------------------------------|
>| If these articles were about something trivial |
>| I would ignore them. |
>| But we are talking here about |
>| physicality, reality, existence, soul, god, you, I. |
>| We can hardly afford to be careless |
>| with the use of words. |
>|----------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>THE CONCLUSION OF THIS POST IS A BIT DRASTIC.
>MAYBE SOLSTICE IS HITTING ME EARLY,
>OR SOME BURST OF SOLAR FLARES
>IS BOTHERING ME A BIT TOO MUCH.
>
>FORGIVE ME IF I AM TOO FIERY AND
>SHORT ON COMPASSION
>
>I am onto something.
>
>"I am not paranoid" I said to my pursuer.
>"Yes you are, I am not really after you."
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>So here goes:
>Point 4 as quoted from Dr. Trasi's "Basic Tenets of Advaita":
>
>>>> 'We', as the separate individual entities that we unquestioningly take
>ourselves to be, are also not different from Brahman or the Source. Our
>sense of being separate psychological entities each with our own separate
>individual consciousness, IS AN ILLUSION caused by our defective way of
>thinking. This delusory power of our thinking is termed maya. <<<
>
>There definitely could be something 'strange' produced by a defect that our
>thinking may have picked up. But instead of investigating what the nature of
>the defect is, and what may have caused that defect, Trasi discusses what
>the alleged defect produces. He is then very messy in defining the results
>of the defect with a choice of seemingly similar words of which the meanings
>are very different indeed: 'illusion' and 'delusory'.
>
>The whole paragraph is actually very messy.
>
>>>>>. 'We', as the separate individual entities that we unquestioningly take
>ourselves to be, are also not different from Brahman or the Source. Our
>sense of being separate psychological entities each with our own separate
>individual consciousness.... <<<<
>
>First he mentions: "separate individual entities." Then he uses the
>expression: "separate psychological entities." Well what is it?
>"Separate individual entities" may well refer to physical, unsplittable
>entities, indivisible ones, individuals, human bodies.The other expression
>"separate psychological entities" could refer to psychological
>personality-disorder concepts. A "separate psychological entity" is
>definitely not the same as a "separate individual entity" in the proper
>sense of the words. Psychologically an individual can definitely be split
>into different personalities but not into different individuals. We would
>lose our life if we were to split our individuality, would we not?
>
>>>>'We', as the separate individual entities that we unquestioningly take
>ourselves to be, are also not different from Brahman or the Source. <<<
>
>In this context, Brahman cannot be an _individual_ entity, indivisible. If
>that were so, "the separate individual entities that we unquestioningly take
>ourselves to be," can not be "not different" from Brahman, even if we do
>*exist* in some psychological form of separation whether from defective
>thinking or not.
>If Brahman is "the Source" then that source like 'a river', may produce many
>different streams in its delta. It may all be water and one source, all
>under one name e.g. the Meh Kong and its delta, but there is no doubt about
>the different geographic locations of the streams.
>
>>>>...our own separate individual consciousness, IS AN ILLUSION caused by
>our defective way of thinking. This delusory power of our thinking is termed
>maya. <<<<
>
>Illusions are not delusory. Illusions are not delusions
>|----------------------------------------------------------------|
>| Now this difference in meaning between |
>| these words would not matter too much if the |
>| topic was trivial. But we are talking here about |
>| reality, existence, God, you, me, I. |
>| We can hardly afford to be messy |
>| with the use of words. |
>|----------------------------------------------------------------|
>
>. Illusion has an illuminating connotation. It is actually something
>positively energetic that our brain can do... and our thoughts and
>thought-forms absorb, reflect and/or project that light. Illumination can
>shed light. Even if it is illusive in the usual flawed sense of the word, it
>can still produce insight on and about "maya".
>Maya is that which is 'measurable' when, as, how, with what intensity and
>where we shed light upon it.
>E=Maya= M.C squared.
>This is science,
>This is experience,
>This 'makes' sense.
>
>. Delusion has a shady, de-luminating connotation. It takes light away,
>it leaves one in the dark. It creates separation, excommunication, we
>exclude deluded people, we shut them away and up.
>
>Delusion affects our brain affectivity and our thinking negatively.
>Aha!!!!
>It is the cause of defective thinking.
>
>Delusion undernourishes the brain, it creates unclarity, doubt, suffering,
>mental defects.
>
>>>>...is an illusion caused by our defective way of thinking. This delusory
>power of our thinking is termed maya. <<<
>
>Who causes our "...defective way of thinking. This delusory power of our
>thinking..."?
> NOT MAYA
>Who causes delusion, or illusion (if you want to use the flawed meaning of
>the word)?
>Somebody who threatens to "kick the living daylight out of you" if you do
>not succumb to their abuse and violations, divulge those or blow the
>whistle.
>
>How do I know?
>Because it happened to me.
>
>The following is a bit heavy and I am almost tempted not to send it, but I
>shall.
>
>Brahman (later deified) was tempted to sacrifice his son.
>(I remember some of that, 'akashik'ly.)
>Abraham was about to sacrifice his son Isaac.
>(He was told to, luckily he got stopped.)
>My father was about to burn me.
>(I remember that, he was beside himself, got stopped just in time)
>My brother was about to kill me.
>(I remember that, had to do with mercy and grace.)
>
>I was ALMOST about to do this others.
>when I was in a states of delusion
>nothing was real
>all was a dream
>it did not matter
>as matter did not matter
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>The following are quotes from Trasi and my deliberations The quotes are
>somewhat out of context, but not too much. I want to be fair.
>Maybe I am somewhat unfair, but I will try it anyway. I need to work this
>out.
>I know I am onto something, I want to understand psychopathic and
>sociopathic behaviour, I was too close to that, the temptation in my 40 days
>of desert.
>
>Quotes:
>>>> God is not a person - 'God' in Advaita refers to this same impersonal,
>indefinable force. <<<
>Could this mean, that such a God could hide behind impersonality, so as not
>to be known as the 'killer' of the individual soul or the physical being.
>Reminds me of Yahweh in Eden who was introducing death into Adam and Eve's
>life.
>
>>>>This force cannot be accurately described in words, and so any
>description must be accepted with that caveat. In fact 'we' are mere
>apparitions, illusions, which arise in the body-minds during the process of
>seeing<<<
>This seems like what could go through the mind of a psychopathic killer who
>is deluded and tries to desensitize his guilt to justify his actions as not
>having physical consequences in reality.
>
>>>>Now we can understand why the scriptures repeatedly state that the
>Reality cannot be known. <<<
>Can this also mean that some ancient writers did not want us to know the
>extent of our (filled with fear) realities, that befell us when we
>experienced being violated, doomed or 'killed' (I remember one hanging). We
>are supposed to forget who the violator really is.
>
>>>>As there is no separate soul, there can be no question of either free
>will or of rebirth<<<
>A psychopath or sociopath could think this as well to clear some kind of
>conscience.
>Why do advaita type of philosophies attempt to deny physical existence, what
>is behind all this?
>I remember my deluded states, good thing I had these angels (ancestors)
>looking over my shoulders.
>
>Thanksgivings Day.
>Love, Wim
>
>
>
>
>http://www.onelist.com/community/Kundalini-Gateway
>http://www.kundalini-gateway.org
------------------------------------------------------------
DAILY NEWS ATnospam http://www.PhilosophyNews.com
FREE EMAIL ATnospam http://www.Philosophers.net
1/9698/2/_/680797/_/974832896/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->
http://www.kundalini-gateway.org
DISCLAIMER!
Home | Archive Index | Search the archives | Subscribe
K. List FAQ | Kundalini FAQs | Signs and Symptoms | Awakening Experiences | K. list Polls | Member Essays | Meditations | List Topics | Art Gallery | Cybrary | Sitemap | Email the moderators.
symbol.