neo-advaita

Q. Do Neo-advaita teachings point to the same realisation as traditional Advaita Vedanta and Ramana Maharshi?

~ Tom Das ~ 1 Comment

Q. Tom, do you believe that the neo advaita teachings do point to the same realisation as Sri Ramana’s teachings? Because from what I have read of the neo advaita teachings, they do not even point to the Absolute Self in a clear way and are not even talking about the same realisation. They don’t speak of the Absolute Self but “the absolute appearing as the relative” in their words, so I think that following those teachings do not lead to the same realisation.

Tom: I agree, the neo-advaita teachings do not lead to the same genuine realisation in my view. They do not lead to genuine absolute love, non-duality and cessation of suffering. Please see the introductory articles on the tomdas.com homepage and my recommended reading list for more on this.

Q. YOU SAY NEO-ADVAITA CAN SOMETIMES BE HARMFUL. PLEASE CAN YOU EXPLAIN?

~ Tom Das ~ 2 Comments

Tom: it varies. Here in the UK there are quite a lot of neo-advaita teachers and being UK based myself, over the years I have dealt with many people who have been very traumatised by these teachings and I have guided them through the process of undoing many of the false concepts and beliefs present in neo-advaita teachings.

The neo-advaita ‘non-teachings’ can be very abrupt and triggering and not leave (apparent) people with any sense of agency or empowerment to deal with the consequences.

I have seen near psychotic breakdowns, severe anxiety and panic disorder, depersonalisation and derealisation, relationships fall apart, people losing their jobs, lots of confusion and disorientation, depression…

In my experience Neo-advaita tends to be a feel-good teaching in the moment for those it helps, and mainly is for the intellect.

It feels good in the moment but the sense of duality and confusion keeps on returning, and it doesn’t lead to a genuine realisation of truth or love. When one engages with genuine self-enquiry we come to see just how superficial the neo-advaita teachings are

Neo-Advaita is actually far away from the true teachings even though some of the words sound similar. In some ways neo-advaita is more intellectually coherent than true Advaita teachings, but that doesn’t make it true or effective.

In my experience the true teachings, such as the teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi, guide us directly and unfailingly to realisation, the shortest route so to speak, with the minimal amount of suffering along the way.

Q. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NEO-ADVAITA AND ADVAITA?

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Tom: Neo Advaita says all is already one, there is already no ego-self, and no need for any practice. In fact, any practice just perpetuates and strengthens the illusory notion of an ego-self. Suffering and worldly happenings are just things that occur to ‘nobody’.

Advaita says all is already one, there is already no ego-self, but due to ignorance there appears to be a world consisting of many people and things, of which you are one. Through self-enquiry, in which one places ones attention onto ones own self, the Subject, and ignores/turns away from objective phenomena, one can destroy this ignorance and realise that the apparent mutiplicity is an unreal illusion and there is only the formless self which is devoid of suffering. It is then seen that ignorance never actually occurred and there were never any actual people or things at all.

My own experience is that neo-advaita, whilst sounding intellectually coherent, does not lead to liberation at all and suffering, duality and egotism all actually continue, whereas Advaita, whilst appearing to be dualistic in some ways, is totally liberating and ends suffering and duality completely. They are actually quite distinct teachings that both claim to be ‘non-duality’.

Note that in my experience many prominent Advaita and Advaita Vedanta teachers actually teach distorted teachings, and that the genuine teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi are the best teachings I have come across to point the way to liberation.

The importance of spiritual practice to attain liberation | Sri Ramana Maharshi | Sri Shankara

~ Tom Das ~ 2 Comments

The following is from a text written by Shankara called Vivekachudamani, as translated by Sri Ramana Maharshi. We will see the following points being made:

  1. Merely stating ‘I am Brahman’ does not in itself lead to liberation. Similarly we can infer that by mere affirmation of other similar spiritual slogans such as saying ‘I am free’ or ‘I am already the Self’ or ‘there is no ego/self’ or ‘all is already one’, etc, mere affirmation of these does not lead to liberation.
  2. In order to attain liberation, ignorance must be removed and the Self must directly be experienced.
  3. Similarly, merely by hearing the truth ‘I am Brahman’ , liberation is not (usually) attained
  4. One must first hear the truth from someone who has experienced the truth first-hand (for only they will be able to tell you the way to truth)
  5. Then one must meditate upon the truth heard and experience the truth directly though constant meditation.
  6. Unless this practice is carried out, maya (aka ignorance) will not be removed and liberation will not be attained.
  7. Every effort must be made to root out ignorance for liberation to result

‘Just as a person’s sickness is not removed without taking medicine, so too his state of bondage is not removed by scriptural texts such as “I am Brahman” without his own direct experience of the Self. One does not become a king by merely saying, “I am a king”, without destroying one’s enemies and obtaining the reality of power.

‘Similarly, one does not obtain liberation as Brahman Itself by merely repeating the scriptural text “I am Brahman”, without destroying the duality caused by ignorance and directly experiencing the Self.

‘A treasure trove hidden under the ground is not obtained by merely hearing about it, but only by being told by a friend who knows it, and then digging and removing the slab that hides it and taking it out from below the ground.

‘Similarly, one must hear about one’s true state from a Guru who knows Brahman, and then meditate upon It and experience It directly through constant meditation.

‘Without this, the true form of one’s own Self, that is hidden by maya [“that which is not”], cannot be realised through mere argumentation. Therefore, those who are wise themselves make every effort to remove the bondage of individual existence and obtain liberation, just as they would to get rid of some disease.’

Also see: Sri Ramana Maharshi: the necessity of Meditation

Q. Tom, what do you think of neo-advaita?

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Questioner: Tom, what is your view on some of the Neo-Advaitists who do not seem to agree that there is a Self? All I hear from them is ‘there is only what is; there is no self’?

Tom: If you find these types of teaching helpful, meaning if they provide you with some kind of ease/happiness/peace/fulfilment/a sense of freedom, then that is good, and in that case I encourage you to engage with them as there is likely to be something of value there for you.

However my sense is that for the most part they are not truly liberating teachings but are predominantly spoken of from the mental/intellectual level. But what do I know! It is for you to decide what is right for you. What do you think?

Questioner: I’ll be totally honest with you. I can find some peace of mind with many ‘spiritual’ teachings. For instance I sometimes envy my Christian friends who seem so sure they will be spending eternity in heaven, but I left Catholicism and I can never believe that again. With Buddhism and nonduality I see different views within each, some saying there is a self, others denying self.

For me I can navigate life somewhat with some peace and happiness, but there always seems to be the ultimate fear of death no matter what. The neo-Advaitists say they have conquered death because they’ve died already, so to speak. But isn’t that throwing the baby out with the bathwater? So many contradictions.

In Buddhism some say the ‘self’ reincarnates, some, like Zen say there is no such thing. For Ramana is the Self immortal? What Self is there after death? Is it just silent and empty? You say it is found in deep sleep. But deep sleep is still ‘on this side’, in life. It is not the same as death. How can one know death while alive? How is one certain I AM is not also impermanent? Isn’t Ramana’s Self also an objectification? Like I doubt the truth of my Christian friends’ heaven, I always doubt that Self.

Tom: Yes, I had all these same doubts as you. My idea was to keep on searching until I found something that gave me all the answers I was looking for. The problem is that you will not find such a thing! There are always unanswered questions and problems with all spiritual systems and teachings on the conceptual level if you are intellectually probing/questioning enough.

However for me what then happened is that I unexpectedly fell in love with Sri Ramana Maharshi, and started to develop faith in his teachings (even though I perceived many ‘flaws’ and problems with his teachings). However, it was following his teachings with faith and love and devotion, despite the apparent problems with the teachings, that allowed all my doubts and questions to be answered and resolved so that now none remain. So this is what I share now.

Namaste

How can any enquiry initiated by the ego reveal the ego’s own unreality? Sri Ramana Maharshi

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Devotee: How can any enquiry initiated by the ego reveal its own unreality?

Sri Ramana Maharshi: The ego’s phenomenal existence is transcended when you dive into the Source wherefrom arises the aham-vritti [I-concept].

D: But is not the aham-vritti only one of the three forms in which the ego manifests itself? Yoga Vasishtha and other ancient texts describe the ego as having a threefold form.

M: It is so. The ego is described as having three bodies, the gross, the subtle and the causal, but that is only for the purposes of analytical exposition. If the method of enquiry were to depend on the ego’s form, you may take it that any enquiry would become altogether impossible, because the forms the ego may assume are legion. Therefore, for purposes of jnana vichara, you have to proceed on the basis that the ego has but one form, namely that of aham-vritti.

D: But it may prove inadequate for realizing jnana.

M: Self-enquiry by following the clue of aham-vritti is just like the dog tracing its master by his scent. The master may be at some distant, unknown place, but that does not at all stand in the way of the dog tracing him. The master’s scent is an infallible clue for the animal, and nothing else, such as the dress he wears, or his build and stature etc, counts. The dog holds on to that scent undistractedly while searching for him, and finally it succeeds in tracing him.

The teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi, Maharshi’s Gospel. Chapter VI ‘AHAM AND AHAM-VRITTI’

If ‘all is already one’, why is a practice required?

~ Tom Das ~ 4 Comments

84. Because the true Self is eternally perfect awareness-love-bliss and eternally free of all suffering, some people think there is no need for spiritual practice. Such a notion is an ego preservation strategy. The purpose of practice is not to gain the true Self. The purpose of practice is to remove the illusion of a body, a world, suffering, etc. so that what remains is only the eternal experience of the True Self.

85. In other words, those who have let the ego trick them into thinking there is no need for spiritual practice, because the True Self is eternally free of suffering, etc., are still having the experience of suffering, a body, a world, etc. Thus their experience is not consistent with their concept that the True Self is eternally free of suffering and perfectly blissful. This is an example of intellectual ‘spirituality’. This is an example of people confusing a journey through concepts, ideas, beliefs and opinions with an authentic spiritual journey. Practice leads to the direct experience of Infinite-Eternal-Awareness-Love-Bliss

86. A journey through spiritual concepts, ideas, beliefs, teachings and opinions is a journey through illusions.

87. Practice is what is essential. It must not be a spiritual practice that is creaed by the ego for the purpose of preserving the ego.

88. With the Awareness Watching Awareness Method, the practice is the progress. The habit has been developed of always looking outward towards the seen. The Awareness Watching Awareness Method reverses this. Every time a thought arises, or the tendency to look outward, the attention is taken away from the thought and turned towards the seer.

89. Thus with the Awareness Watching Awareness Method a new habit is developed and the practice is the progress…

The above is an excerpt from the book The Most Direct Means to Eternal Bliss by Michael Langford. You can download a copy of the entire book here.

There is a beauty in honest & natural expression | Advaita | Neo-Advaita

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

There is a beauty in honest natural expression. Self-censorship limits your honest expression and creates blocks. You must be honest with yourselves if you want to progress, develop, heal, free, liberate yourselves.

This video was recorded live during an online meeting and put together by volunteers;

For further information visit: https://tomdas.com/events/

Neo-Advaita vs Traditional Advaita – what is the difference?

~ Tom Das ~ 5 Comments

Q. What is the difference between neo-advaita (or ‘radical non-duality’) and traditional advaita. Or are they just pointing to the same thing in different ways?

Tom: There is an essential difference.

This essential difference is one of SADHANA, or spiritual practice, and SUFFERING.

Neo-Advaita states there is no separate person or jiva that could engage in any sadhana, and that any sadhana perpetuates the illusion of duality. Neo-Advaita also does not claim to end suffering.

(Traditional) Advaita emphasises the importance of sadhana as being absolutely necessary (for most) in order to realise the Self and go beyond and END all suffering and duality.

Ramana Maharshi: ‘Those crazy-minded people…’ | The importance of dispassion towards sense-objects

~ Tom Das ~ Leave a comment

Those crazy-minded people who do not know as real anything other than the objects of the senses, and who are thereby ruined, will term the jnana that flourishes luxuriantly through dispassion towards sense-objects ‘dry Vedanta’

Guru Vachaka Kovai, verse 148

Tom’s comments:

The way to the Truth Within (ie. jnana, meaning wisdom or knowledge), which, for practical purposes, is within each and everyone of us, has always meant we have to turn away from sense-objects, as well as mind-objects (ie. turn away from both gross and subtle objects).

However, for those tamasic and rajasic ones, who are attached to the sensory world of objects, they would call this type of teaching ‘dry’ or ‘life-opposing’ or ‘life denying’. However it is these so-called ‘life-affirming’ teachings that actually keep one in Maya-Samsara-Suffering, for the ‘life’ that is affirmed is simply ‘Maya’ (illusion) and continued suffering.

They who only know the sense-objects, and they who consider these as being real, they betray their underlying attachment to body-mind. How so? It is this underlying attachment to body-mind, and thinking body-mind to be real, that actually causes the world to also appear to be real, and for the sense-objects to thereafter gain so much importance.

These people are ‘crazy-minded’ and ‘thereby ruined’ according to Sri Ramana, his somewhat harsh tone driving the point home emphatically in a compassionate attempt to reveal the true path to liberation.

Let us take heed, and turn away from body-mind-world and discover the Treasure that lies deep within us. Let us reject the small, temporary life of Maya-suffering and instead let us come upon and merge into Life Eternal Within, wherein we become One with Him, Our Beloved.