--- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In [email protected], Peter <drpetersutphen@> wrote: > > > > People make a mistake when they view advaitin > > teachings as presenting conceptual models of > > Realization for a waking state intellect. For the > > waking state intellect they are obviously lacking as > > you and others have pointed out. It doesn't mean what > > they say is false or wrong, its just that they are > > meant to be applied in two ways: as a tool for > > transcendence or as a conceptual understanding of a > > direct experience that you are having. Contrast this > > with MMY's teaching which presents a conceptual model > > of Realization for a waking state intellect. The > > waking state mind has something to chew on... > > I would add, "and to cling to, as a mechanism for > keeping the actual experience of realization away..."
And some waking-state minds cling to this notion about other waking-state minds, fervently believing (hoping?) that these other minds chew on the conceptual model in order to keep the actual experience of realization away, when in fact "chewing on" and "clinging to" aren't necessarily always joined at the hip (especially when one has the regular experience of transcending). > > ...as it > > were, and functions as a belief system to motivate the > > seeker to continue doing sadhana. The real value is in > > the sadhana, day in and day out, doing the program, > > not in the conceptual model. But once Realization > > occurs, the wakingstate model doesn't fit anymore. It > > is recognized as a "useful fiction" for waking state > > sadhana. Only in Realization do the advaitin teachings > > make any conceptual sense. Prior to Realization they > > appear to deny the rather clear experience of the > > space-time reality of waking state. > > Well said. > > In general, those who don't "get" the advaita > approach have not had the direct experience of > realization. For those who have, they make sense. If the advaita approach "makes sense," it's not the direct experience of realization. (I'm nit- picking, but "making sense" can be said only of a waking-state model, strictly speaking. We don't really have any good terms for it other than the one Heinlein invented, "grokking.")
