Does it occur to you that possibly these are metaphors or not something that can be intellectualized or turned into a philosophy. The sense of oneness that one feels with the existence and the desire to somehow share it with others results in these metaphors, turning into a philosophy leaves most to be confused. But I agree enlightenment is very personal, the most personal and intimate.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" <yifuxero@...> wrote: > > Correction: true: "there is no individuality as a center of consciousness". Sorry. > > But false statement: "There is no individuality", or "There are no individuals". > > Correct statement: "There are dream-like entities that can be considered conventional individuals". > > Otherwise, there would be no Dr. Pete to make posts. You (Dr. Pete) are a dream-individual although (true) there is no locatable center as that entity. > I never said there was. These are different issues!. > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "yifuxero" yifuxero@ wrote: > > > > Nobody is saying there is no individuality "as a private center of consciousness". What people (many people including Buddhists) are saying that "individuals as dream entities are real" (i.e. they are real dream entities having the property of individuality). It appears that all non-dualists are agreed on your statement as to the "center of consciousness". But isn't this rather obvious? > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > > > > > You keep on making this conceptual argument which does make sense from a waking state context. But if you have clear CC experiences it becomes quite clear there is no individuality as a private center of consciousness. This is only a neo-advaita trap when people try to argue there is no self in waking state. Of course there is a self in waking state. There just isn't one in CC. So what happens to this relative self in CC? The answer is nothing. It becomes clear that the sense of relative self was a delusion. This is why the rope and snake metaphor is so powerful. You could argue that the snake exists as a concept or belief. But this would be like saying from waking state that your dream of a tiger was real. Only in the dream is the tiger real. Once you shift into waking state, the tiger is no longer real in this new context. The same thing happens to the sense of individuality in CC. It's not there. There's only consciousness which has no relative > > > measure. > > > > > > Non-localization is not a conceptual argument that can be understood in waking state. It sounds absurd, of course. Imagine trying to tell your dream ego that there is no tiger as it experiences the tiger chasing it! But it is a conceptual tool that helps you in CC. > > > > > > By the way, I completely agree with you that neo-advaita is nonsense, but not for the same reasons you argue. Neo-advaita is nonsense because it offers no tools to facilitate realization and it takes concepts that make plenty of sense in Realization, but make no sense in waking state. > > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 3/7/11, yifuxero <yifuxero@> wrote: > > > > > > > From: yifuxero <yifuxero@> > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Is Enlightenment Personal? > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > Date: Monday, March 7, 2011, 11:10 PM > > > > What you're saying is a "pov" > > > > differing from the pov's of others. In Waite's version, > > > > entities such as me, I, you, (any so-called conventional > > > > individuals); are indeed "real" although non-substantial and > > > > dream-like. > > > > Nowhere (almost nowhere) in Buddhism is there any Scripture > > > > or Authority saying such entities are non-existent. They are > > > > simply non-substantial, possibly coincident with Shankara's > > > > superposition or superimposition principle. The veneer of > > > > individuality is "superimposed" on existence through > > > > dream-like apparent conventionality. > > > > Thus, consistent with Buddhism as a whole and what Waite's > > > > saying, individuality: (I, me, Thou, them, etc); are "real" > > > > dream-entities in the sense of existence; but insubstantial > > > > in relation to Being, the Self. > > > > > > > > Otherwise, there would be no dream-entity Dr. Pete making > > > > the posts!! > > > > Bringing in the false notion of non-existence (the null > > > > set); only results in a consistent Neo-Advaitic trap. I've > > > > seen that before. > > > > ... > > > > Take the Ribhu Gita. The horns on a hare metaphor is > > > > actually incorrect, (imo). There is no such thing, even as a > > > > dream-entity. > > > > The rope/snake example would however be appropriate, since > > > > the snake is delusional but the rope ACTUALLY exists. > > > > Or, take a mirage seen in the desert. The heat trap > > > > making the mirage is a real phenomenon, though not what it > > > > appears. In a sense, the mirage is non-substantial though it > > > > can be explained scientifically. > > > > ... > > > > otoh, the horns on a hare metaphor doesn't hold, since > > > > there is no such thing. It's in the null-set, not a delusion > > > > like a mirage. > > > > ... > > > > Again, the Dr. Pete character as a dream entity does indeed > > > > exist, though is non-substantial; otherwise, you wouldn't > > > > have said you live near some town in Florida. (what town was > > > > that, Boca Raton)?. > > > > ... > > > > So even your mention of non-locality doesn't hold water wrt > > > > the dream entity Dr. Pete. He/you, does indeed live > > > > near Boca Raton as you said "yourself". > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, > > > > Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Character and self are not them same. Character refers > > > > to tendencies. Self refers to a psychological/mental > > > > identity. In enlightenment there is no psychological/mental > > > > entity that terms such as "me" and "I" refer to. There is no > > > > private self. When the mind tries to find it, nothing, quite > > > > literally, is (not) there. > > > > > > > > > > --- On Mon, 3/7/11, yifuxero <yifuxero@> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > From: yifuxero <yifuxero@> > > > > > > Subject: [FairfieldLife] Is Enlightenment > > > > Personal? > > > > > > To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > Date: Monday, March 7, 2011, 9:46 PM > > > > > > Interesting answer by Dennis Waite, > > > > > > especially the last 2 sentences including "The > > > > dream > > > > > > character continues being a dream character". > > > > > > > > > > > > If what Dennis says is a. "the truth", > > > > essentialy; with no > > > > > > self-contradictions, > > > > > > > > > > > > b. then one could (imo) insert the word > > > > "individuality" > > > > > > here and there, placing it into Waite's context > > > > such that > > > > > > the statement: > > > > > > "there's no individuality in E." wouldn't quite > > > > match what > > > > > > Dennis is saying. Individuality as a dream entity > > > > would > > > > > > simply continue after E. along the lines of > > > > chopping wood > > > > > > and carrying water. > > > > > > > > > > > > A further question would be how much importance > > > > people give > > > > > > to their/any dream characters. Ramana said "you > > > > give too > > > > > > much importance to the body" (easy for him to > > > > say). > > > > > > ... > > > > > > at: > > > > > > http://advaita-academy.org/Pages/Q_A_Details.aspx?cid=68&qid=111 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > Or go to: > > > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: > > > > fairfieldlife-subscr...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > Or go to: > > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ > > > > and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > > > > > fairfieldlife-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
