anonymite

If Advaita or philosophies like it that say the universe is the manifistation of a single conscience held, wouldn't those that achieve enlightenment then be able to do things that easily demonstrate this structure?

For example if everything is really the same, and generated from a single mind, wouldn't someone who reaches enlightenment:

1. Become one with that mind
2. Obtain the powers of that mind
3. Use the powers of that mind however he wants (Like the power we have over our dreams)

Is there some part of Advaita that addresses this point? Is it valid?

Seraphim

1. Becoming one with the Mind.

Yes. Goal of HIndusm is becoming one with the Mind (aka God). Usually done when one release oneself in cycle of life and death at moment of death. Some sages (like Buddha) did so (achieve Enlightnment) while still alive and choose to teach others.

2. Obtaining the Power of that Mind.

Yes, possible but it will not be able to (fully) achieve the first goal of being one with the Mind and being a separate entity who could demonstrate such powers.

Do remember - such powers could corrupt ones' mind and bring forth the Self which a person seeks to deattach himself from. So seeking such power and seeking Unity is like a two options with a single choice.

3. Use the powers of that mind however he wants (Like the power we have over our dreams)

Depends on the person who weild it as well. If a person who weild it become egoistic and boostful (bring forth SELF), then his source of the power (the Mind) is cut off since the main reason why a person get such power is because of the unity.

PS : Just how many of us do have power over our dreams?

anonymite

Seraphim-

Thanks, that goes a long way towards answering my question. Dream might have been a freudian slip- I meant thoughts, but maybe both of those are harder to control than I think.

Though the discussion about Buddha is what I had in mind. Upon achieving enlightenment, Buddha theoretically realizes that everything around him is an illusion (or just a manifestation of his, anyway). So why the effort to teach, or even interact? I would think that realizing everything, Buddha would either ignore everything, like the figments of his imagination it is, or else convince them through their shared conscience without ever going through the meticulous process of teaching or meditation.

It seems like Buddha climbed his way over a gate through his effort and then tried to teach everyone else how to climb, instead of just opening the gate, or else making the gate disappear altogether.

Seraphim

Thanks, that goes a long way towards answering my question. Dream might have been a freudian slip- I meant thoughts, but maybe both of those are harder to control than one thinks?

My reply : Not very sure what Freudian slip means.
However, I could say that dreams are not something one can control easily. You just have to allow yourself to "float" with the dream and be an observer rather than an active participant in it, because the dream will dissappear once the body start to react (to whatever the dream shows).
To make things less complicated, to control a dream, be a thought behind the dream rather than trying to achieve control over it. You could see some interesting things which your eyes didn't see before. At least, that's my opinion from experiences.

Though the discussion about Buddha is what I had in mind. Upon achieving enlightenment, Buddha theoretically realizes that everything around him is an illusion (or just a manifestation of his, anyway). So why the effort to teach, or even interact? I would think that realizing everything, Buddha would either ignore everything, like the figments of his imagination it is, or else convince them through their shared conscience without ever going through the meticulous process of teaching or meditation.

It seems like Buddha climbed his way over a gate through his effort and then tried to teach everyone else how to climb, instead of just opening the gate, or else making the gate disappear altogether.

My reply : Very Good question.

Like you said, Buddha climb over the wall and teach others to climb instead of opening the gate. WHY?

Logical answer (considering I never met Gautama Buddha or anyone enlightned yet) could be is because Buddha is NOT a God.

He is still vurnable to cycle of Death (he just stop his rebirth, NOT his death) thus if he behave like a God and give other enlightnment, it could be useless since after his death, his student may not have full understanding of how to lead other through the gate.
So he started from scratch ... which in this case, climb over the Gate.

Amit Misra

Sorry, anonymite, I can't quote chapter and verse, but here's my response to your formulation:
1. Yes, but becoming one with the Universal Mind would result in obliteration of the previous self.
2. To "obtain" would require a transaction, but the previous self has vanished. Ergo, no giver and no taker of (hypothetical ) powers.
3. "Use" and "want" would also require placing a self in the context of an environment. The union would also efface all traces of an environment distinct from the entity, making use and want redundant.

Like I've said before, these ancient-medieval Indian philosophers are really slippery. This particular method of dividing reality into res cogita and res extensa lets them have their cake and eat it too!

Amit

bagong

Some clarifications: Advaita is a philosophical position that is not shared by all Hindus. It is associated with the philosophy most commonly recognised as "Hindu" in the West, namely classical Vedânta, but many of the medieval bhakti schools like Saiva-siddhanta and Gaudiya Vaisnavism who are much more influential in modern Hindu practice actually adopt a dualist or qualified non-dualist position; i.e. some distinction between the Absolute and the individual Soul remains even after enlightenment.

Similarly, *no* Buddhist school accepts the advaita position-even the Yogacarins (who have often been accused of merely restating Upanishadic advaita in Buddhist form) maintain a subtly different philosophy. The various abhidharma (Buddhist ontology and epistemology) philosophies are extremely complex and I won't even attempt to explain them (honestly I don't understand a lot of it myself), but suffice it to say that Buddhism rejects advaita.

OK, on to your question: "So why the effort to teach, or even interact? I would think that realizing everything, Buddha would either ignore everything, like the figments of his imagination it is, or else convince them through their shared conscience without ever going through the meticulous process of teaching or meditation."

Well, as I said, Buddhism rejects advaita, so it doesn't believe in a shared consciousness. Neither does it believe that everything is just a figment of our imagination (well, Yogacara philosophy does to a certain extent believe this, but Theravada and Madhyamika-the 2 other current philosophical schools-do not). So the simple answer is that the Buddha physically interacted and taught because the method you suggest (manipulate the Absolute to reveal Itself to all) is impossible, as there is no Absolute to manipulate.