On Aug 30, 2010, at 11:41 PM, yifuxero wrote:
Interesting but speculative of course since nobody knows for sure
(and nobody seems to know that, and so on...).
I disagree that there's no doer. Adi Da's metaphysics is simpler
and avoids the enigma of a "doer" since before E., the doer is the
body/mind along with the false identification.
...
After E. the "doer" is simply the body/mind.
If we were to accept the hocus-pocus about not being a doer, then
we'd be forced to conclude that MMY's actions were in a state of
non-doership! (which seems pretty far-fetched).
...
Yeah. One of the key aspects of a jivanmukti in the Shank. trad. is
that s/he has overcome innate "demonic tendencies": hypocrisy,
conceit, anger, rudeness, etc. These tendencies are brought to the
fore by a still present doer, with attachment still remaining to
sense objects. Such a person would still find relative satisfaction
from sense-objects. In such a person eradication of the mind has not
yet occurred.
The Shankaracharya of the South, after a visit from Mahesh, commented
that his mind was like a supermarket. While no doubt a charismatic
guy at one time, it appears he wasn't as evolved as many of us assumed.
