From a site visitor: I’m in a 12-step group and have been given some readings on the deconstruction of the ego. I’m now dedicated to pursuing that process of deconstruction and have been reading Derrida and looking at Kabbalah and also visiting your site for awhile. It seems that is really what your site is all about. It seems you’re trying to convince people to deconstruct the ego. Right?
F.: No. “Deconstruction” would not be accurate. If your actions should eliminate ego, that is, free you of your belief in all of the false “I’s,” so be it. If the use of ego-defense mechanisms should end (a use triggered by believing that your assumed ego-states are real), then so be it. But the consciousness which speaks here never tries to convince anyone of anything.
F.: No. “Deconstruction” would not be accurate. If your actions should eliminate ego, that is, free you of your belief in all of the false “I’s,” so be it. If the use of ego-defense mechanisms should end (a use triggered by believing that your assumed ego-states are real), then so be it. But the consciousness which speaks here never tries to convince anyone of anything.
The consciousness which speaks here would “un-tell” everything you've been told and would then tell nothing "new." The consciousness which shares pointers from the Advaita philosophy via this site would actually bring to an end all philosophy and all study and all ideas and all concepts.
For the concepts of Derrida and Kabbalah and other deconstructionists to be accurate, the requirement would be for something to have been constructed in the first place. Understand that there is never an effort among Realized Advaitins to attempt to deconstruct anything or to construct anew anything. Why?
There is nothing to “deconstruct” since what appears to have been constructed has not really been constructed at all. For example, no mirage has ever been constructed so no mirage can ever be deconstructed. The invitation here is to simply see that a mirage is a mirage and then be done with it.
Rather than trying to convince anyone of anything, the words that emanate via the site can hasten the end of the belief in the “one” who is speaking, in the "one" who is believing in ego, or in the "one" who is behaving in an egotistical fashion during the relative existence.
Most who have come for satsanga after having tried to read anything by Derrida admit they failed. (A few claimed to have read Right of Inspection, but the suspicion is they bought the book for the pictures rather than for the explanation.)
Yes, Derrida and some Kabbalahists do touch on a significant aspect of the Advaita teaching, namely, the abandonment of binary (dualistic) thinking, binary (dualistic) vocabulary, and actions that are driven by such dualities as well; however, that is not their primary focus.
Also, Derrida did teach that the self is not Real; that “meaning” is only a concept; and that enculturation generates separation and inequality. He also spoke of the “nothingness” or the “Emptiness.” Yet both Derrida and Kabbalahists speak in dualities. Derrida spoke of “good,” of “birth,” and of “reincarnation.”
Many strict Kabbalahists, adhering to a set of teachings with religious (Jewish) roots, speak of “God,” of “God’s creation,” and of “empowerment,” all concepts that inspire persons to accumulate even more concepts rather than pointing toward a position of neutrality and the rationality of zero concepts. Please enter the silence of contemplation.
READINGS RELATED TO TODAY’S POST:
WORKING ON BEING FREE OF RELIGIOUS PROGRAMMING AND DOGMA?
For the concepts of Derrida and Kabbalah and other deconstructionists to be accurate, the requirement would be for something to have been constructed in the first place. Understand that there is never an effort among Realized Advaitins to attempt to deconstruct anything or to construct anew anything. Why?
There is nothing to “deconstruct” since what appears to have been constructed has not really been constructed at all. For example, no mirage has ever been constructed so no mirage can ever be deconstructed. The invitation here is to simply see that a mirage is a mirage and then be done with it.
Rather than trying to convince anyone of anything, the words that emanate via the site can hasten the end of the belief in the “one” who is speaking, in the "one" who is believing in ego, or in the "one" who is behaving in an egotistical fashion during the relative existence.
Most who have come for satsanga after having tried to read anything by Derrida admit they failed. (A few claimed to have read Right of Inspection, but the suspicion is they bought the book for the pictures rather than for the explanation.)
Yes, Derrida and some Kabbalahists do touch on a significant aspect of the Advaita teaching, namely, the abandonment of binary (dualistic) thinking, binary (dualistic) vocabulary, and actions that are driven by such dualities as well; however, that is not their primary focus.
Also, Derrida did teach that the self is not Real; that “meaning” is only a concept; and that enculturation generates separation and inequality. He also spoke of the “nothingness” or the “Emptiness.” Yet both Derrida and Kabbalahists speak in dualities. Derrida spoke of “good,” of “birth,” and of “reincarnation.”
Many strict Kabbalahists, adhering to a set of teachings with religious (Jewish) roots, speak of “God,” of “God’s creation,” and of “empowerment,” all concepts that inspire persons to accumulate even more concepts rather than pointing toward a position of neutrality and the rationality of zero concepts. Please enter the silence of contemplation.
READINGS RELATED TO TODAY’S POST:
WORKING ON BEING FREE OF RELIGIOUS PROGRAMMING AND DOGMA?
WORKING ON BEING FREE OF AN EVER-ACTIVE "MIND"?
WORKING ON BEING FREE OF THE INFLUENCES OF PERSONAS AND PERSONALITY?
Click LIBERATION
