Buddhism and the Self

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Thu, 18 Sep 1997, Martin Gifford wrote:

> Perhaps there are 4 approaches to the word 'Advaita' for our purposes.
>

Your purposes maybe.

> 1. Traditional scriptural based advaita.

This is the only acceptable definition.

> 2. Non-traditional scriptures with similarities of expression to traditional
> advaita.

How can you know "Non-traditional" works  are similiar unless you first
understand the traditional ones.

> 3. Living claimers of realisation that call theire realisation advaita.

Why would call it Advaita unless it actually was?  And if they are lying
what good are they to anyone else?

> 4. Theoretical advaita for those who have not realised.
>
> I presume our purpose is to realise non-duality. Some try to do it through
> investigating and discussing scriptures. Some try to do it through hanging
> out with a supposedly realised sage. Some try to do it with contemplation of
> a mixture of many seemingly related thoughts.
>
> So if you _believe_ in only one of the above then you would automatically
> reject all else.  But if the bottom line is realising non-duality then you
> will listen to anything that helps.
>

But you will not actually be helped unless you actually understand what
you are hearing.

> I would add that it's very safe to keep to inanimate scriptures while a real
> guru is more likely to blow our cherished limiting ideas away. Not to
> mention the energetic factor of a true guru's presence.
>

And in which fantasy land did you find these people?  In real life, the
tradition is for the Guruji to read from the shastra.  (Until very most
people couldn't afford an "inanimate" scripture of their own)  The
students read after him and memorize the text.  Then they discuss it
arguing for and against the position and at the end the Guruji explains
the siddhanta.  No lack of energy or cherished assumptions there.

> I can't imagine a real guru saying eg. "yes you are right, Buddhism is/isn't
> advaita". Wouldn't s/he be more inclined to say "don't worry about that,
> worry about who you are and what life is all about experientially rather
> than theoretically".
>

Do yourself a favor and  actually read what "real gurus" have actually
written on the subject.  You'll find that they discuss many different
views accepting some and rejecting others.  In fact most shastras are
structured as conversations leading to definite conclusions.

--
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>
I got engaged! See the pictures ==> http://www.braincells.com/jaldhar/sagpan