Zebulon

Interesting -- I had a similar thought recently. We can view the universe in a reductionist way (atheism) or in a synthesist way (pantheism). The difference is like viewing the same object while peering through opposite ends of a telescope.

Tolle

From my experience, the heart of the Buddhist teaching is the realization (i.e. to make real) that the universe is 'one'. Intellectually perhaps it would be best to think of the universe as one big organism - everything is interconnected, nothing is created or destroyed, every action has its re-action. The difficulty with that though is the intellectual concept is limited because you a drawn into speculating of what is 'outside' this big organism. Non-duality is a dificult concept to grasp precisely because it cannot be grasped. To grasp is perpetuating duality, there is the grasper and there is the 'thing' you are trying to grasp. Meditation is not simply a nice way to relax - true meditation leads to the transcendance of the idea of separateness. If you meditate thinking you are going to 'get somewhere' or you are doing it for a result then you have missed the point entirely. Meditation is simply concentrating on 'what is'. When done properly, not identifying with the grasping mind, then duality is seen for the illusion it is. There is no 'other'. To realize this is to find true liberation from suffering. Suffering is a result of seeing yourself as somehow separate from everyone else - when we are not. It is only our false identification with the mind that creates that illusion. Recognise your thoughts for what they are, that is observe them as thoughts, don't get sucked into them and deceived into thinking they are 'reality' or 'you'. You are not your thoughts. If you can simply be aware of them, be the observer, or the 'observing' and suddenly you will see that the universe is 'one'.

The whole rebirth thing is a difficult one. When you die, your body decomposes, gets recycled and turns into something else completely. Athiests think you cease to exist after death, but they accept that the body gets recycled. So ... the question arises, if you are not your body, what are you? Your personality? Your wants/fears? Your ideas? Your history? These are illusion. You are essentially the perceiver that comes before any defined label. To die whilst still living in illusion will lead to rebirth. There is still that 'wantingness' remaining - thus perpetuating samsara. To 'die before you die' however is the escape. To see the 'self' as the illusion it is leads to the instantaneous popping of that bubble. If you can become aware of that self then it no longer exists. There is no longer the 'wantingness' - there is no longer the separation, so there is no longer a 'self' to be reborn. That is true liberation.

Or anyway - that's how i look at it. And thats what i base my practice on

abaddon

In a nicely Kafka-esque movie by Roman Polanski, The Tenant, the main character named Trelkovsky muses: "At what precise moment does an individual stop being who he thinks he is? You cut off my arm, right? I say 'me and my arm.' You cut of my other arm. I say 'me and my two arms.' Take out my stomach, my kidneys—assuming that were possible - and I say 'me and my intestines.' And now, if you cut off my head; would I say, 'me and my head,' or 'me and my body'? What right has my head to call itself 'me?'"

It's to illustrate his descent into insanity, where he becomes completely dissociated from himself (in fact, he loses his own personality and becomes a suicidal female personality). But it rather illustrates the "insanity" of normalcy in most humans. We don't just talk about but perceive even our eyes and heads and brains as something other than "Me." We say "my brain" and "my eyes."

When we intellectualize and say "Well, that's not really true. Of course I'm my brain and my eyes and all of my body... I just don't know how to say it except dualistically." But that's not how we feel and perceive. As usual when we only intellectualize about it, we're just abstracting and denying a dualism that rules our attitudes and behavior, and is part of our culture including its science.

aupmanyav

Tolle: You cannot escape the question even after realisation of oneness and cessation of the idea of duality by meditation or science, 'whence the oneness?' At the moment we have no answer to that, all our efforts in that direction will fail. You said 'Meditation is simply concentrating on what is', concentrating is no different from thinking. I have serious objection to this 'concentration' thing.

Realisation of this is not liberation from suffering, it is understanding. Like for an terminal AIDS or cancer patient, when the person understands one's position, what is likely to happen, how and with what troubles he/she has to go through. The person understands his/her suffering better. Many a times such patients become worry free, 'que sera sera'. Suffering is not understanding one's position. A subordinate may suffer in an office job because he/she has not come to terms with his/her situation, where he/she has to go by what the boss says.

You, as an entity, do cease to exist after death, though what you were constituted of does not cease to exist and goes through various chemical changes. You, your body, your personality, your wants/fears, your ideas, your history, are temporary. But I do not understand this 'perceiver' thing. I would go with your saying, 'to die while still living will lead to rebirth'. I suppose you mean the death of the 'non-understand' you and a birth of an 'understanding you'. After that even if some 'wantingness' remains, it really does not matter, like Buddha's 'wantingness' of nirvana of all people. The 'Samsara' will vanish for you, but it perhaps has a few billion years to go for others.

Lastly, depending on your explanation, I presume that you are a hindu and not a buddhist. Please correct me if I am wrong, though you could also be a westerner familiar with Hindu arguments.

Abaddon: Such intellectualization is completed when we understand that like everything else in the universe, we are pulsating quantum field which creates all our illusions, energy/substance/self/time/space.

jbarntt

As best I can tell panentheism is an attempt to reconcile pantheism with deism, god is both external to the universe and immanent in it. Seeing others as an aspect of yourself sounds more like solipsism to me. In any case, if others are another aspect of you, then there are no "other persons(s)", there is just you. Conflict and retaliation is just an internal conflict in your mind, you are arguing with yourself.

aupmanyav

jbarntt, it is not correct to combine the two things, the substrate (Brahman) and our situation in the world. My adversary and myself, both are constituted by this substrate. It does not matter to the substrate if we both survive, or one of us survives, or none of us survives, because we still remain the substrate. That is why Krishna said 'there is no killed and no killer'. (For me, Krishna is not a God, he is not an avatara, he is not a historical person, he is the cumulative wisdom of India).

Knowing that it does not matter, a realised person would do his utmost to avoid conflict and would remain on the side of 'dharma' (which benefits the society). Which means that my adversary is against 'dharma'. In that case, it would be my duty to nullify him. I could do it in four ways, Sama, Dama, Danda, Bheda (by advising him, by paying him off, by punishing him, or by creating a dissention within his group so that he becomes ineffective). These are the four ways suggested in hinduism to take care of the adversaries. The Kauravas had to be punished in Mahabharata, there was no alternative, the other things did not work.

c davis

I find the facts about the vampire bats interesting, maybe they have more common sense then humans.

Its funny but it takes the illusion of separateness to finally realize that we are all one and a sense of individual self (Soul) or 'I' ness to finally realize that God is the true individual in all of us.

aupmanyav

God or no God, but all humans, all animals, all vegetation, all non-living things are the result of 'quantum fields', something common to everything. God is really superflous here. Bringing in 'God' creates its own problems. It is simpler without it.

c davis

I can see that you live by your words......

aupmanyav

? Don't put me on a pedastal. Sure, Vampire Bats are interesting. Actually which animal (or vegetation or stone) is not? Each one is unique in its own way.