--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mar 25, 2008, at 5:51 PM, Larry wrote: > > > As I have heard, UC is recognition of Self in another object > > (person/place/thing) . . . as UC matures, recognition becomes more > > frequent and the 'scope' of the object expands . . . till entire > > universe can be appreciated as Self. > > This is how Shankara describes in his nondual stages, from the POV of > Unity: > > pratyahara : seeing the 'self' in objects of senses and thereby > submerging the mind (manas) into consciousness (chiti), dharana > wherever the mind goes, seeing Brahman there and holding the mind > therein, > > dhyana : 'I am the very Brahman by such vrtti remaining without any > object of concentration (niralambana), grantor of supreme joy, > > samadhi : becoming free of all transmutations (nirvikAra), > maintaining the vrtti of being identical with Brahman, then forgetting > the very vrtti. > > Needless to say, this is quite different from how Patanjali sees things! > > > However - in BC the fullness of > > 'inside' and 'outside' collide and that inside/outside or > > subject/object distinction becomes only a matter of practicality. > > Also, in BC the Self is gone because there is no sense of anything > > that is non Self, no inside/outside, no subject/object. Like CC, UC > > feels very natural and a normal way for a human being to live. > > However, in BC there is absolutely no doubt that something really big > > happened, things are really different . . for one thing, you are no > > longer a human being - and That does not feel natural. > > There is a sense that one becomes the center of ones own mandala and > all items in the field of awareness are unified elements that have a > relation to your "energetic" manifestation of universal chiti. > > At the level of unity, thought takes on a very different role. When I > hear someone making a claim of Unity, one of the things I'll listen > for is how they integrate thought from their nondual POV. > > The analogy one of my Bonpo masters gave was it's like watching fish > move within water. >
More like water within water. Different currents have a different character, but its all water. Lawson
