Sunday, March 02, 2008

THE FICTION REGARDING BODY AND MIND MUST BE UNDERSTOOD BEFORE DISCUSSING PERSONALITY, Part Seven

An Advaita Vedanta realization, enlightenment, nisarga yoga site discussing non-duality (nonduality), your original nature, and dwelling in the natural state as taught by Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj.

FROM A SITE VISITOR: Just “found” Advaita and just found your site. Been reading some recent entries. Have dealt with the fallacy of the body idea. All these years, looking for peace of mind—never considered there’s no such thing, as you say. Makes sense now. Problems with personality though I don’t get yet. Can you give me in a nutshell something that would help me understand that and the Nisarga yoga you mention? Thx. Frank.

F.: (Continued from yesterday) Unlike certain religions, this nisarga yoga requires no training or preparation in order to begin. (Regarding “preparation,” please see the pointer from “Ginny” in the 29 February 2008 post. Via some means, the “readiness” must manifest.)

Being “ready” for the message offered via nisarga yoga does typically come about after years of trying to live by the dualistic dictates of the contradictory teachings that mark all religions; the dualistic dictates generated by the egotism of authority; and/or the dualistic nonsense that mars (relatively speaking) all “relationships.”

Also for “the readiness” to manifest, persons must (a) reach a point where they see that after all of their years of religious or spiritual training, they still can’t even identify who (much less what) they are; and persons must

(b) reach a point where they see that even their most diligent efforts to apply the dogma or principles of various systems have failed to provide the peace and stability and happiness promised by their “leaders”; and persons must

(c) reach a point where they see how all of those who have previously tried to explain to them why events in an insane “world” happen as they happen were totally confused, self-contradictory, and self-serving.

[Please note: regarding point “b” above, various studies have shown that Christians are the most likely among the religious to move away from the faith tradition of their childhood upbringing. Nearly half move away, though many simply switch denominations. “Something is missing” or “something is not right,” many finally admit. They are seeking “something,” but do not have a clue as to what that/THAT might be.

Studies also show that those whose faith tradition during childhood was the Hindu religion are the least likely to move away from the religious beliefs with which they were programmed early on.]

Regarding point “c” above, earlier posts have offered the observation of Advaitin Douwe Tiemersma, a member of the Philosophical Faculty at Erasmus University in Holland at the time the following was shared

There are various religions [that] suffer from certain inherent limitations. They couch into fine-sounding words their traditional beliefs and ideologies, theological or philosophical. Believers, however, discover the limited range of meaning and applicability of these words, sooner or later. They get disillusioned and tend to abandon the systems, in the same way as scientific theories are abandoned, when they are called in question by too much contradictory empirical data.

Of course, religions thrive in spite of all of the scientific evidence and all of the “contradictory empirical data” that refute their teachings, but if you would find the truth, a study of the facts should make clear that your search must move beyond those systems.

Recently, a young man seated across a dinner table said, “I think that being raised as a Methodist gave me a moral foundation that I could not have gotten anywhere else.”

F.: “So you suggest that religious people have a monopoly on what you call ‘morality’?”

Guest: “No, but I see that the people I know who are the most moral were raised in Christian homes.”

F.: “Yet you mentioned earlier that your mother has left the church and that your father is involved in Native American spirituality?”

Guest: “Yes, but they were also raised in the church when they were young and got their foundation there.”

F.: “So you do believe that religion has a monopoly on teaching morality. Do you see yourself and your mother and father as all being ‘moral’ persons today?”

Guest: “Absolutely. We are not perfect, but we are very moral people.”

F.: “So it is your belief that, had it not been for church attendance during childhood, attendance which you and your mother and father have all abandoned as adults, all three of you would be ‘immoral’ today?”

Guest: “Well, I don’t know that we’d be immoral…but not as moral.”

F.: “What would the members of the church you were ‘raised in’ have to say about the sexual relations that you have engaged in outside of marriage?”

Guest: “Well, they wouldn’t approve.”

F.: “Is it possible that there are people who behave quite decently, relatively speaking, in spite of never having attended church?”

Guest:I’m sure there are.”

F.: “So considering the members in your former church vs. ‘decent people’ at large, which group do you think would be more likely to judge you, condemn you, invite you to stop what you are doing, and to start living in the exact fashion they live in?”

Guest: [Pause] “Hummm.”

F.: “Dwelling in the natural (nisarga) state, much in the fashion of the deer, there are no means by which you can be judged. The deer has not been programmed with any criteria by which it can critique or condemn.

"The deer has assumed no ego-state and thus suffers no egotism which can inspire it to tell you that you need to be just like him. It has no personality and thus no personas are present to generate beliefs about 'different from' or 'better than'.

"So which is more 'moral,' according to your belief system: people who judge and criticize and who are arrogance and prideful, or those who are none of the above?” Please enter the silence of contemplation. (To be continued)