From a site visitor: “As per what i have understood from a few paragraphs on Advaita, the spark of divinity in each one of us (the soul) and the Supreme Godhead (the Brahman) are not two but one. And by practise of yoga and meditation we can go to a unitive state of consciousness (the fourth level) at which we would realize this. At this level of consciousness, the Maya (ie the phenomenon by which a seamless continuity of matter/soul appears as multiple separate entities) is no longer there to confuse us. This got me thinking. How about animals? Animals are living beings too. So are plants. Do they also have the atman in them? And do they have the capability to realize that their atman is but the same as the Brahman? Can you please explain this to me? I would really appreciate any help i can get. Thanks. Regards Sabarish.”
F.: Sabarish, as you know, your e-mail was answered privately. Now some pointers for other site visitors who are trying to understand the Absolute and non-duality can be shared by addressing some of your comments.
First, any concepts that are mentioned on this site, or that will ever be mentioned on this site, are ultimately to be cast aside. A thorn can be used to remove a thorn, but why would any sane person hang on to either of those thorns, once the source of pain and suffering has been removed? All concepts are ultimately thorns, including the concepts offered on this site that can be used to remove the concepts that cause pain and suffering (including the pain and suffering that dissociated persons claim they do not have).
So what are the concepts mentioned in your correspondence?
the spark of divinity
us
the soul
the Supreme Godhead
the Brahman
we
matter/soul
thinking
the atman
atman is but the same as the Brahman
&
any help i can
If the space called “Sabarish” were to cast aside all of those concepts, what would be left? Find that/THAT and you’ll find what is not real, what is Real, and even what is beyond beingness and non-beingness. Only by casting aside all concepts—and thus casting aside all beliefs in the ego-states or false identities that they generate—can Realization happen. What you accurately call appearances as multiple separate entities can only be eliminated when all dualities are discarded. So what dualities are implied?
It is assumed that your use of the lower case “i” indicates that no “I” exists. Accurate enough. [As revealed in the title FROM THE I TO THE ABSOLUTE (A Seven-Step Journey to Realization), nothing is farther removed from the Absolute than the “I.”] However, use of “us” and “we” reveal a subconscious assumption of duality and/or false identities. What other concepts are present?
The spark of divinity
The only “spark” that exists in all living things was identified by scientist Szent-Gyorgyi: “What drives life is thus a little electric current, set up by the sunshine.” That is the only “spark” there is. Sparks of “divinity” are imaginary, magical, mythical, and supernatural. That which is natural is sane and real, but there is no such thing as “super”-natural…no such thing as “very sane” or “very real.” If there is something that is “divine,” then there must be that which is not divine, so the concept is based in duality.
soul & atman
“Soul” and “atman” are concepts. If the terms refer to what remains after any given “dust to dust” cycle is completed, and if it is known that what remains is the conscious-energy than can neither be created nor destroyed, accurate enough. That is natural. If the labels refer to some “holy” or “spiritual” thing that is not natural but is "super"-natural, then the Original Understanding has not been grasped. If it refers to some "Self," then it should be realized that the Absolute is beyond beingness and non-beingness and any Self that is being as well.
F.: Sabarish, as you know, your e-mail was answered privately. Now some pointers for other site visitors who are trying to understand the Absolute and non-duality can be shared by addressing some of your comments.
First, any concepts that are mentioned on this site, or that will ever be mentioned on this site, are ultimately to be cast aside. A thorn can be used to remove a thorn, but why would any sane person hang on to either of those thorns, once the source of pain and suffering has been removed? All concepts are ultimately thorns, including the concepts offered on this site that can be used to remove the concepts that cause pain and suffering (including the pain and suffering that dissociated persons claim they do not have).
So what are the concepts mentioned in your correspondence?
the spark of divinity
us
the soul
the Supreme Godhead
the Brahman
we
matter/soul
thinking
the atman
atman is but the same as the Brahman
&
any help i can
If the space called “Sabarish” were to cast aside all of those concepts, what would be left? Find that/THAT and you’ll find what is not real, what is Real, and even what is beyond beingness and non-beingness. Only by casting aside all concepts—and thus casting aside all beliefs in the ego-states or false identities that they generate—can Realization happen. What you accurately call appearances as multiple separate entities can only be eliminated when all dualities are discarded. So what dualities are implied?
It is assumed that your use of the lower case “i” indicates that no “I” exists. Accurate enough. [As revealed in the title FROM THE I TO THE ABSOLUTE (A Seven-Step Journey to Realization), nothing is farther removed from the Absolute than the “I.”] However, use of “us” and “we” reveal a subconscious assumption of duality and/or false identities. What other concepts are present?
The spark of divinity
The only “spark” that exists in all living things was identified by scientist Szent-Gyorgyi: “What drives life is thus a little electric current, set up by the sunshine.” That is the only “spark” there is. Sparks of “divinity” are imaginary, magical, mythical, and supernatural. That which is natural is sane and real, but there is no such thing as “super”-natural…no such thing as “very sane” or “very real.” If there is something that is “divine,” then there must be that which is not divine, so the concept is based in duality.
soul & atman
“Soul” and “atman” are concepts. If the terms refer to what remains after any given “dust to dust” cycle is completed, and if it is known that what remains is the conscious-energy than can neither be created nor destroyed, accurate enough. That is natural. If the labels refer to some “holy” or “spiritual” thing that is not natural but is "super"-natural, then the Original Understanding has not been grasped. If it refers to some "Self," then it should be realized that the Absolute is beyond beingness and non-beingness and any Self that is being as well.
Only the homogeneous state is Real. Therefore, to suggest that the phenomenon by which a seamless continuity of matter/soul appears as multiple separate entities is no longer there to confuse us only reveals that confusion remains since matter/energy is being mislabeled and mistaken for “matter/soul.” Finally, “atman” originally meant nothing more than “breath” or “vital principle.” Spiritualists distorted the meaning to refer to some “soul” or “universal spirit.” Some might consider the breath to be a vital principle. Some might use the term “vital principle” to refer to the conscious-energy, the “main essence” of manifestation. Either way, the bastardization of the original meaning by persons playing spiritual roles shows how so much nonsense has been generated by such role-players, and the discussion of the bastardized version of the Original Understanding also shows that the focus remains on accumulating spiritual knowledge (learned ignorance) and disseminating spiritual knowledge and analyzing spiritual concepts. Such preoccupation fixes persons at the third level of a seven-step journey and prevents their ever finding the Truth that lies far beyond religious and spiritual movements. Use concepts only for the purpose of finding all the concepts you believe in, eventually be free of all concepts, and then enjoy the simple, natural, AS IF living that follows. Please enter the silence of contemplation. [To be continued]
