NDM: Did you ever formally study traditional
Advaita Vedanta?
Ramesam
Vemuri: I should at the outset say that other than
as a matter, perhaps, of curiosity, ‘me’ or what I
did is utterly inconsequential, not to be considered
important. I never studied Advaita formally under a
Guru-Sishya sampradaya (tradition) nor did I
pursue any particular teacher or ashram. In fact I
feel hesitant to “follow” any organized system that
upfront demands obsequious obeisance, dictates a
belief structure, creates a hope and promises a
distant carrot.
My
spiritual inquiry, if I may use that term, has been
more like the pursuit of research in science –
define the problem as it arises, do a literature
search, then investigate, check and cross check to
the extent possible and so on. Undoubtedly there is
a greater influence of Advaitic thought of the
ancient Indian texts on me simply because they are
some of the finest philosophical texts based on
logic and they were also the more readily accessible
resources for me. I am indebted to them and to the
innumerable people/teachers who helped me in
arriving at a clear understanding.
NDM: Is there any particular method or study out of
all these various ways that clicked with you over
the others?
Ramesam
Vemuri: To me it looks that the best way is: Never
give up questioning even in the face of an
apparently convincing answer. Keep wading through
the jungle (of information) until a clear meadow is
in sight and you begin to feel the fresh breath of
air just like that at the daybreak after a stormy
night (sorry for the mixed metaphor; but hope you
got the picture!).
NDM: Why exactly do you feel hesitant to follow any
organized system that demands obsequious obeisance
exactly?
Ramesam
Vemuri:: A Philippine friend of mine used to quote
a proverb. If you want the bird in your hand to fly
high, you have to loosen the grip of your fist.
There cannot be free inquiry when you are already
told to fall in line with a system / a method. An
open wondering mind is a pre-requisite for any new
discovery, particularly so in the case of the
unknown.
Let me quote from Scientific
American, July 2010, about a research paper
regarding a questioning mind: (www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-willpower-paradox&page=2)
:
"[T]hose
with questioning minds were more intrinsically
motivated to change. They were looking for a
positive inspiration from within, rather than
attempting to hold themselves to a rigid standard.
Those asserting will lacked this internal
inspiration, which explains in part their weak
commitment to future change. Put in terms of
addiction recovery and self-improvement in general,
those who were asserting their willpower were in
effect closing their minds and narrowing their view
of their future. Those who were questioning and
wondering were open-minded—and therefore willing to
see new possibilities for the
days ahead."
Supplication or obedience to an authority or
subjugation or deference to a power is a poor
imitation of what happens in ‘surrender’ after
Self-Realization. True Surrender is an effortless
collapse of an individuating 'self.' One cannot
impose by force upfront the lakshana
(quality) that automatically comes with the
attainment of lakshya (goal), more so in this
peculiar situation where lakshya and
lakshana are one and the same!
Any
extraneously imposed discipline / method / system
requires a rigid disciplinary structure, an
adjudicating authority and a policing mechanism.
These systems then acquire a life of their own and
struggle for their survival and perpetuation. They
adopt all the tricks of the ‘ego’ in creating a
“personality” for themselves, ultimately proving to
be counterproductive and detrimental to the very
‘death of ego’, the ostensible purpose for which
they have come in the first place!
NDM: Have you read the Guru Papers: Masks of
Authoritarian Power by the way? Here is a short pdf
from a chapter from this book. Assault on Reason.
www.joeldiana.com/downloads/guru_papers/gp-Assault_Reason_col.pdf
Ramesam
Vemuri:: Thanks John for the Link. I have not read
the book. I do vibe with questioning any authority,
however spiritually high it is rated to be – not out
of derision or disrespect but in order not to be
impeded in my own search being fed by second hand
wisdom transmitted with a diktat to obey.
Most of
the Gurus, whatever color robes they come draped in
– black, orange, white, pink, yellow and so on – are
concerned most of the time with human
‘relationships.’ Some of them treat Oneness as a
theory from which societal ‘user apps’ can be
derived. In the process they build up empires of
their organizations, expand with imperialistic
ambitions, develop loyal colonies and be lost in a
plethora of monetary and material problems – all in
the name of transcending those very problems!
Advaita
teaching is not aimed at groups. It is not a group
activity or team effort. It is an individualistic
inquiry, deconstruction of one’s own imaginary world
until it is sublated into an ineffable
Existence-Consciousness-Infinity (satyam jnanam
anantam).
NDM: So without a teacher/guru of some kind,
how does one navigate a path through this non-dual
jungle? How did you do this without falling into all
the traps like getting stuck in the absolute, or
only seeing half the picture and the other pitfalls?
Ramesam
Vemuri:: Non-duality is not the jungle.
Non-duality is clarity. Information on it, about it
and around it is the jungle!
One of the derivative
meanings for the Sanskrit word Guru is, as you
know: the dispeller of darkness. In
the
ancient times when knowledge is transmitted through
oral tradition, a human Guru (dispeller of darkness
or ignorance) was necessarily required because the
Guru was the only information source. Each Guru
developed, used and expanded certain terminology to
explain the Truth as realized by that Master to a
lineage of his disciples.
Fast
forward to the present day. We have now multimedia
storage devices as information resources and
satellite communication technologies for its
dissemination. These do dilute the mandatory
requirement of a human Guru (dispeller of
ignorance).
The more
important question is how do we manage with the
information ‘overload’ and distinguish the grain
from the chaff.
No acid
tests are available. No guarantees provided. No
Bureau of Standards certifications.
I do not
know how it happens, but normally some or the other
appropriate information source becomes accessible
when a seeker is seized with an intense yearning.
(Maybe because information is existent everywhere
or whatever the reason). You resonate with the
information that opens up before you and keep moving
with your inquiry without giving up questioning as
we discussed (in the beginning of Part - II).
NDM. How does one know if one is deluding oneself
without some outside source, authority, validating
the persons understanding and knowledge and
experiences?
Ramesam
Vemuri: Tests, validations and approvals by an
external agency can certify an acquired and
accumulated knowledge and expertise.
True
Knowledge is not accumulative nor does it get
stored. It’s ever fresh, always in the “Now.”
Yes, it
is quite possible a person may be wallowing in
his/her deluded understanding. Advaita does not
have a British Pharmacopeia or an American DSM to
prescribe a standard line of therapy for such
situations. (In the strictest sense of Advaita,
ultimately everything is okay ‘as Is’; nothing needs
to be changed! So no need for any prior manuals of
remedies). A thumb rule is: Keep on questioning (as
we already discussed). When the questions get
exhausted, question who/where is the questioner.
If a particular
individual is unclear, gets a doubt at one time or
other, it is (s)he who has to define his problem and
probe deeper into it. No one else can hold a brief
on his behalf or pose the question and look for an
answer. No proxy will work to ask and seek
solution. Each individual seeker has to himself
pose his question as it arises to (in) him and find
the solution. (The surprise is that the “questioner”
is the problem; not the form or
content of the question! The answer does not lie in
a solution but in the dissolution (of the
“questioner”)).
NDM : Do you see we are living at a time of the end
of the traditional guru? Or the days of the cyber
guru, giving email satsangs, or the universal guru
that speaks one language only. English.
Greg Goode says: No longer can people believe that
liberation speaks only Tibetan, or that the world
was created from holy Sanskrit syllables. People are
saying, "If it can't be said in my language, then it
isn't so universal after all." Even as recently as
thirty years ago, seekers of self-awareness had to
trek to India or the Himalayas to see someone who
could impart a message of liberation. These days
there are many routes: Barnes & Noble, Borders,
Amazon, Yahoo, Google, mobile phones and
BlackBerries"
www.heartofnow.com/files/other.writings.html
Ramesam
Vemuri: Any stored information will always be
something of the “past.” It can never be in the
present like a live teacher is. Further, human
communication is predominantly non-verbal. In
contrast a storage device conveys what is merely
stored. A live teacher may be able to convey more
than that in an interactive mode and also through an
appropriate interpretation of the info in a more
contemporary manner.
For
example, ocean and waves were an ancient metaphor
for Brahman and the world. In the mid 20th
century cinema and film projection was the oft-cited
example. Present day teachers talk about computer
screen and the multiple documents on it!
At any
given point of time, the Advaitic search is for the
“Unknown” and not for what is known. Every new
generation may come with new questions in the light
of their own backgrounds and experiences. A
static dead information device cannot meet such
growing demands.
Thus a
live teacher may not get totally replaced. A seeker
in the cyber age may be able to pursue his inquiry
in greater physical comfort under a distant human
Guru providing an occasional interface.
NDM: Also what about this sensitive money issue that
seems to hit a raw nerve whenever it’s raised.
Is
there anything right or wrong with doing this? Is
there any thing right or wrong with making a few ,
rupee's on this ancient non dual teaching? What is
your take on this controversial and almost taboo
question?
Ramesam
Vemuri: First of all no question need be a taboo.
If a particular doubt posits itself as a stumbling
block, well, it should be attended to.
The ancient Indian
system advises a student to redeem his indebtedness
to the teacher by rendering service, by payment in
kind or cash or in the absence of any other means of
repayment, by passing on the
wisdom
obtained by him to others after obtaining Guru’s
permission. This obviously shows the necessity of
some accepted social structural norm to preserve and
propagate the knowledge to others. It is also
important that a seeker had to be eligible (ready)
to receive the wisdom, the most important criterion
being his single minded unswerving devotion for
liberation in exclusion of any other desire
(including food, clothing, wealth, status etc.
beyond the barest minimum required for sustenance).
Another
point I may mention is that the ancient sages
foresaw a danger in throwing open the knowledge for
one and all because it can be detrimental to the
very health of the individual and the society, if it
is misunderstood and/or incompletely understood or
perverted in interpretation.
For
example, if everything is Brahman, is it okay to
feed dog shit to a hungry beggar? Or because all is
One and there is nothing like right or wrong, is it
okay to go on chopping off the heads like the Queen
in Alice’s wonderland? Is not one accountable for a
crime as per Advaita?
The
point is one has to stick to the full course of
Self-inquiry, right up to the very end – the end
being he, his separate individuating ego with all
its desires, plans, wishes, needs etc. etc. is
completely dissolved. When that happens a
spontaneous morality will shine in him, not the
acquired or assumed or imposed type of social order/
rules and regulations.
As
declared in the Upanishads and repeated in
Bhagavad-Gita, a Self-realized man is feared by none
nor is he afraid of anyone. He harms no body nor
does anybody harm him.
Such
sages, during the ancient times, were the conscience
keepers of the nation state whose rulers always
sought their guidance and advice (by visiting their
forest dwellings if necessary) in the governance of
the country.
The
social fabric too was designed in the ancient times
to facilitate the development of the individual
through four stages of life – learner, householder,
forest dweller and renunciate. A supportive
economic rubric was built around this structure as
if the entire nation state is one smoothly
functioning organism, not composed of disparate
individuals.
Under
such circumstances, what for are the green backs or
red francs required by a Jivanmukta?
Now the
cyber-guru has thrown open free access to the
knowledge without the necessary social support
structure for his own maintenance. On the top of
it, promises (misleadingly in some cases at least)
of permanent happiness are made by some teachers
even in the absence of some ground preparation by
the seeker. Have we then reduced Non-dualism to the
gimmicks of market forces and ad campaigns? Can it
then be called true teaching?
NDM: If one is pure
actionless non dual awareness, A Jivanmukta, then
who is doing the spending of this money that is
earned through the teaching? Who is the
doer/enjoyer/spender/earner? Would a so
called Jivanmukta, or a so called arharant be
interested in making some rupees from this
knowledge?
Ramesam
Vemuri: We have already seen that a full blown
Jivanmukta who does not have even the consciousness
that there is a separate body with limbs for him
would hardly need any money. His life goes
‘effortlessly’ taking things as they happen, eating
whatever is available, sleeping wherever possible
without any sense or claim of possessions, ownership
or doership or experiencership.
But we
have seen (in Part – I) that there is usually a time
gap between the attainment of firm unswerving
abidance in Brahman and obtaining Knowledge on
Brahman. A seeker is not totally unaware of his
body and a need to feed it during this intermittent
period. How will he survive in this phase?
The
guiding texts (in the traditional system of
teaching) for the three stages of Listening (shravana),
Reflection (manana) and Contemplation
Meditation (nidhdhyasa) are the Upanishads,
Brahmasutras and Bhagavad-Gita respectively. Thus
Bhagvad-Gita is the life-strategy manual to answer
any questions regarding correctness of one’s actions
and conduct in each phase. That was the system
followed in the olden days.
But we
are now in instant coffee days. We want instant
enlightenment and instant permanent abidance in
Brahman. Unfortunately we are unable to shed the
accumulated baggage of habits and thought patterns
equally instantly!
We have
the super structure but lack the lower floors in the
cyber age. Some people even put Non-dualism up for
sale to make both ends meet. Driven by market
forces, they may like to have their own USP and wear
their wisdom as a flashy ornamentation. In the
process are we forgetting that we are back in the
old game of the worldly miasma presenting itself in
a new avatar?
NDM: Ok, what about the belief in karma?
Reincarnation? Whatever the incorporeal essence is
that some believe transmigrates.
It is known in different spiritual traditions;
"the most sacred body" (wujud al-aqdas) and
"supracelestial body" (jism
asli haqiqi) in Sufism, "the diamond body" in Taoism
and Vajrayana, "the light body" or "rainbow body" in
Tibetan Buddhism, "the body of bliss" in Kriya Yoga,
and "the immortal body" (soma athanaton) in
Hermeticism.
Karana-Sarira - causal body, subtle body, Jiva,
Atman" and "Purusha" in Vedanta. Budhuta, Linga
Sharira in Theosophy. Rudolf Steiner's
Anthroposophical teachings usually referred to the
Etheric and Astral Bodies. American Indians and
indigenous peoples from around the world refer to
this as a spirit, animism, or guide.
Others like James Hillman call this psyche. These
are the various ethereal bodies that some believe
contain
samskaras, or sin
and so on? Do you believe that such an ethereal
essence or a thing exists?
What are all these various traditions talking about
or pointing to exactly?
Ramesam Vemuri: When we
discussed ‘samskaras and vasanas’ in Part – I, we
have seen how we invented those explanatory
fictions. Karma is no different. Transmigration
and re-birth are further stories to back up the
fiction of karma. (please see:
www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/teachers/karma_ramesam.htm
)
The
three bodies you are referring to – gross, subtle
and causal – correspond to the three states of
awake, dream and deep sleep. They are said to be
made up of finer and finer substances. It is said
that the grossest part of the food you eat is
excreted. The grosser part goes to make the
physical body. Finer material goes to make the
subtle body and the finest the causal body. You can
draw your own conclusion on what all this would
mean.
In the olden days dreams were
a complete mystery. They believed that dreams
belonged to the mental body (subtle or manomaya
kosa) made up of mind-stuff of the mental
world. The mental world was said to be accessible
to yogis and gods. It was believed to have its own
life even after the death of the physical body.
Thanks to the modern research, we have much better
picture now about dreams. Of course, the last word
is not yet said in science. But we are able to
pierce through some of the mystery. We may even get
a handle in future to control our dreams (see:
www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=how-to-control-dreams).
That
being the case, do you still like to go along with
all these bodies and stories?
Further,
when we understand that nothing is really born,
nothing has a birth, where is the question of a
variety of sheaths (koshas) or re-birth?
Rebirth for whom – an unborn ‘something’?
NDM: What would you say is the difference between
"crazy wisdom" teachings and simply being crazy?
Ramesam
Vemuri: I do not know what is “crazy wisdom”
teaching.
NDM: I would like to ask you about non duality
awareness and dissociative disorders such as
derealization and depersonalization. If you look at
this list of symptoms below, how different are they
from what you described earlier concerning
Jivanmukta?
Continuous or recurring feelings that you're an
outside observer of your thoughts, your body or
parts of your body .
Numbing of your
senses or responses to the world around you
Feeling like a robot or feeling like you're living
in a dream or in a movie
The sensation that you aren't in control of your
actions, including speaking
Awareness that your sense of detachment is only a
feeling, and not reality
How would you make the distinction between someone
who is self realized, and someone with a
dissociative disorder of some kind?
Ramesam
Vemuri: There is another psychiatric problem
referred to as Cotard’s syndrome. An individual
claims that he is dead because he feels that he does
not possess a body! Such people even take up some
actions that could endanger their body or prove
fatal under the false impression of having no body.
Obviously it is a pathological case.
At the
same time, it is true that our ancient scriptures
also say that sometimes it is hard to distinguish a
mad cap from a highly realized individual. That is
why any assessment by an external onlooker is said
to be impossible about the realization status of an
individual.
While
neuroscientists do have some knowledge of the
pathological state of the brain of sick individuals
having a variety of symptoms as listed by you, we
have absolutely no known record of the brain scans
of a realized man. It is high time we should build
up this information base and examine what sort of
signature Self-realization leaves in the brain, if
It does so at all.
NDM: R.D. Laing said "True sanity entails in one
way or another the dissolution of the normal ego,
that false self competently adjusted to our
alienated social reality... and through this death a
rebirth and the eventual re-establishment of a new
kind of ego-functioning, the ego now being the
servant of the divine, no longer its betrayer."
In the west, when this happens it is referred to as
when an ego collapses, fragments, or disintegrates
and when the shadow and archetypal contents flood in
from the personal and collective unconscious causing
psychosis, or a psychotic break from reality.
In
the east, its considered Self-realization or
God-realization, seeing the face of God, Shiva and
so on?
How do you make the distinction between a psychotic
break like this here and a satori or awakening
experience?
Ramesam Vemuri: Any
of the psychological phenomena, hallucinations, lack
of control, inability to filter diverse and
dissonant signals coming to the brain (e.g.
schizophrenia) are all related to the activity of
the mind. So also the visions etc. These leave a
clear foot-print in the brain. Orgasmic or epiphany
states are
also clearly seen in the
activity of different cortical regions (see:
Pleasure of Sex vs. Bliss of Self in Brain Scans,
Ramesam, V. in Religion Demystified , 2008, p:
86-88. (www.zenpublications.com/forms/frm_g_book_catlogue.aspx?ltr=
).
In
contrast, Advaita is about when the activity of the
mind is nulled. As per the metaphor provided by the
sages, still wind is Brahman. Moving wind is the
world. Movement implies that work is done. It is
energy expensive. In other words, Stillness is
Consciousness, movement is mind. But again, Still
mind is Consciousness. When mind becomes still, the
cognizer, what is cognized and the process of
cognition become one. There is no subject, a
separate distant object and the process of acting.
It will be quite interesting to see the scan of such
a brain. This has got to be different from
epiphany.
NDM. Do you think it is wise for someone to make
self evaluations, self assessments, self
enlightenment claims and assertions, with it being
thoroughly questioned, tested, investigated by
someone who knows the ropes, has been there and done
that so to speak?
Ramesam
Vemuri: self-evaluation and self-assessment is
advised in Advaita. The very fact that he is
conscious of a ‘self’ within him to do an evaluation
barely conceals the final answer to be expected.
But
Advaita does not and cannot support declartions and
assertions of self-enlightenment! A claim to do so
is an oxymoron. The very loss of ‘self’ is
enlightenment. Who or what is there to make a claim
then and addressed to whom?
An
external agent, as we have already discussed, can at
the best provide some pointers as and when a
question is raised by a specific individual. It is
up to the individual to see the “moon”
in the direction of the finger. Another person
cannot see it for him!
NDM; Is entrusting someone's eternal soul just as
important as entrusting someone's mind or physical
body to a doctor for an operation? I ask this
since there are many snake oil salesman out there,
masquerading as gurus?
Ramesam
Vemuri: Is there an “eternal soul” that you
really are in possession of? And does that “eternal
soul”, if any, need a fixing?
Or are
all such beliefs the marketing tricks of the snake
oil salesmen?
NDM; How should someone make a decision like
this?
Ramesam Vemuri: If
you are going by the metaphor of handing over your
body-mind to some doctor: A “You” sitting here do
not surrender to other “some one or something” there
in Non-dualism. If you and the other are two
distinct entities to be related by ‘surrendering’,
it is dualism. Jivanmukti does not exist
in
dualistic philosophies.
NDM: How do you know if a guru is legitimate or not
if they do not belong to some kind of tradition and
have been thoroughly tested by their own teacher?
For example, I could even say I was a guru, anyone
can make this claim?
Ramesam
Vemuri: This is an age-old question, discussed even
in the Indian scriptures too. There are innumerable
schools of thoughts and equally highly competent
individuals in all lines of teachings. The advice
we find in the scriptures is that a seeker should
explore what appeals best for him, find a
knowledgeable man in that school of thought and
discuss with him all the issues in detail. The
seeker then may adopt an approach that resonates
best to his heart. If, by chance, he finds later on
that that particular teacher was a fake, he should
leave that teacher and find another. There need not
be any feelings of regret or guilt, for what he
needed at that time perhaps was just that – whatever
he got!
Some
sages suggest that the Guru need not be a fully
realized person to communicate the teaching. In
fact Sankara says that some of the Jivanmuktas may
not even teach because they do not find an ‘other’
to impart knowledge to.
NDM: Do you think some sort of guru test could be
devised, to measure the gurus knowledge about
enlightenment, as well as teaching it?
Ramesam
Vemuri: The sort of industrial mass scale
manufacturing model of assembly line production,
quality tests, setting standards with tolerance
ranges, franchising the technology for replication
may be inapplicable to Advaita, its core message
being there is only One, no other.
Having
said that, I would also like to point out, as
already expressed in Part –I of our discussion, it
will be interesting to investigate if a ‘footprint’
of the absence of doership, universal care, Deep
Sleep with Awareness (Yoganidra) and such other
markers can be found in the ‘brain’ of a Jivanmukta.
Maybe someday an organization will take up this
research work!
NDM: You
touched on the dangers of mis-understanding these
ancient non-dual teaching and how they are out there
on the internet for anyone to see, and use.
However
in the west, what seems to be happening is the final
parts of the Vedanta traditions have been cherry
picked, appropriated, taken out of context.
Can one
really understand advaita without having a deeper
knowledge of Vedanta in general? The other aspects
that are taught with this to do with dharma and so
on?
Ramesam
Vemuri: I am not competent to provide a scholarly
response to this question from an academic angle.
I shall highlight, however, a few points to be
considered.
The core
message of Advaita is straight and simple, invariant
with respect to time and space, independent of any
background or experience: The Eternal Truth is no
thing is ever born. There is a caveat though:
until a thought interferes creating a ‘cognizer’ in
you here separating from what is ‘cognized’ out
there.
Anything, if arises, exists within That Nameless,
Formless One. So any entity that is created (arises
or born) is already and naturally a ‘part’ of IT
only. All ‘parts’ being already and automatically
within That One Nameless thing, the ancient sages
considered the entire creation (universe) as one
whole (vasudaiva kutumbakam). So no ‘part’
required a ‘citizenship’ certificate or conversion
from one to another thought process. Hence the
‘concept of proselytizing’ was never there in
Advaita which always pointed only to the Oneness.
If the
above message is understood clearly, unambiguously
and without a speck of doubt , all pedantic Vedantic
discussions, backgrounds of upbringing ,
epistemological, grammatical, linguistic expertise
are unnecessary and ritualistic rites and mandatory
obligations are irrelevant. All such techniques
have relevance and a need when one wants to enlarge
the individualistic philosophy of Advaita as a
mass-curriculum of lessons for teaching purposes. In
order to increase the success rate of the teaching,
one would also devise methods of preparation
(pre-qualifications) for receiving the teaching,
minimum eligibility criteria etc.
In this
sort of picture, things start to become more
complicated particularly when the “theory” is
inseparably mixed up with social conditions of life
and human relationships using the same terminology
interchangeably (e.g. dharma).
In
short, IMHO, understanding the core message of
Advaita in its Purity has nothing to do with what
background one hails from. An excellent example
right in our midst now is Peter Dziuban who arrived
at the same Truth of “Nothing is ever born” all by
himself without any exposure to Advaita. I am sure
there could be many more.
NDM: These teachings were deeply
rooted in grounded in the matrix of the Indian spiri
tual culture and society
as a whole.
Do you
think its possible to uproot this teaching from a
deeply fertile spiritual soil like India and
transplant them in a culture like the United States
that is very different in many regards.
I ask
this because it appears that the US culture is also
more about a culture of war, aggression. The morals
also are very different?
Ramesam
Vemuri: The “deeply spiritual soil like India” is a
myth. What were the geographical boundaries of that
India of the past where the Advaita philosophy was
developed, propagated and taught? Do they coincide
with the present political nation state? Has entire
India and every individual within India retained the
same pristine Purity of that ‘matrix’ you imagine to
be mandatory? Were there no wars and aggressions in
ancient India? Were there not constant battles
between the so called Gods and Demons even in the
Vedic period?
I do not
know even if the Hyderabad soil, where I live now
and try to understand Advaita, was a part of that
ancient Vedic India.
Prof. R.
Nisbett and later a few Japanese and other
scientists did find a difference in the American
culture and that of the people in the Far East. The
Western education trains the mind to focus on the
central core issue, whereas the people in the Far
East are trained to be more aware of the totality of
the scene and the inter-relationships of the
elements within. The American culture believed in
creating an opportunity for the growth of the
“Individual” whereas the social and family structure
was more hierarchical in India (at least from what I
have seen). Okay, we are aware of these
differences. But why should they come in my way of
true understanding of the basic message of Adviata?
As we have already discussed earlier, the moral
values (lakshana) will automatically come
with the “Understanding” (lakshya). How can
putting the cart before the horse help?
The
Advaitic message is universal, eternal,
non-conceptual and unlimited by
politico-religious-legal-moral boundaries. There is
no question of uprooting the message. It is already
there everywhere!
See
part 1 of the interview
here
For more info visit
Blog
Page:
http://beyond-advaita.blogspot.com/
Web Site:
http://ramesam.tripod.com