tech_browser

Great thank you

Question for jpallen if you're still reading - do you plan to support unicode fonts? I write some documents using the Sanskrit2003 font and compile them with xelatex locally. Wondering if sharelatex plans to support non-commercial unicode fonts?

How else would a person learn or hear about the Self? It is not a solid thing that can be perceived by the senses. Neither is it as abstract as nothingness. It is one's real nature and the source of the notion "I am". Further, it is that which makes it possible for the mind and senses to function.

You may argue that all this information can be gleaned by reading a book. At best, this will remain in the realm of theoretical knowledge. Only a person who has treaded along this path can offer some insights into what the Self is and how it may be realized. If you don't like to label this person as a teacher/preceptor, feel free to give him any other name you like.

To tell a person that he's the body and mind requires no knowledge. Further, such ignorance is well established in every individual. The knowledge of the Self is something a person has to discover after being introduced to it via some medium.

Yes, Ashtavakra Gita is a vedantic text that focuses on describing the absolute truth.

Bhagavad Gita is more versatile since it covers the many aspects of action (karma), devotion (bhakti) and knowledge (jnana). The highest truth about the Self is described in a few verses that are sprinkled throughout the text and many other aspects such as creation of universe, modes of mind, action, renunciation, imbibing godly qualities, shunning demonic qualities etc. are all found in it. Shankaracharya's commentary on it makes it very special too.

Well said.

There is no need. Note that every person has a different conditioning of the mind and not everyone reacts in the same manner to a philosophical statement. Consider several pieces of firewood, each with a varying degree of dryness. Each of them will react differently when ignited with a spark.

The process of understanding the Self requires a teacher, at least in the beginning stages. There are exceptions to the norm, as always. Ultimately, an individual is best equipped to decide what's best for him. Contemplation on the wise sayings of seers may be suitable for some, whereas studying scriptures under a teacher and practicing austerity might be appealing to others.

You are right. To beginners, self-realization is pointed as a goal worthy of pursuit. As one treads along this path, one realizes that nothing new is to be pursued or attained. If the Self were attainable as an object with the passage of time (and some exertion), it is not a worthy goal since everything within the realm of time will perish. The Self is ever-realized. One only needs to forego incorrect notions and predilections for the Self to manifest in all its glory. This is the method recommended by many teachers of non-duality to know the Self. In fact, there is nothing akin to knowing the Self, for it would then become an object and the division of seer-seen will again appear. To know the Self is to Be the Self.

The answer is simple. A human's life remains unfulfilled regardless of his material gains such as wealth and pleasures. The fear of oldage, death and disease looms large and so does the uncertainty of the future. If one were to examine the world objectively, one would find that whatever I've mentioned above is seen aplenty.

The entirety of a human's life is based on the notion I-am-the-body-and-the-mind. If one were to discover one's true nature and shed these limitations, eternal happiness and peace follow. The path to learning this is fraught with difficulties. The biggest obstacle is to learn things differently from what we already know. A cursory reading of books isn't sufficient. This is where the Upanishads and Gita stand out in comparison to other texts on philosophy. Not only do they describe in great detail the true nature of the Self, but also prescribe many practices on reaching the goal.

There's every reason to pursue Self-realization or enlightenment as the only worthy goal of life. Such a goal never comes in one's way of being employed, raising a family etc.

Gita doesn't say that God created the caste system. The four "varnas" are loosely translated as "castes" but that is not quite so. A varna is defined by an individual's occupation. Those who teach are brahmanas, those engaged in ruling the kingdom and protecting people are kshatriyas, those involved in business are vaishyas and those performing jobs like construction, farming etc. are shudras.

It is unfortunate that many consider a "varna" to be the same as "caste". The latter is a degeneration found aplenty in the Indian society whereas the former is simply a way of classifying people based on their occupation.

There is no parallel to the teachings of Gita. In 18 chapters, it covers all aspects of God, universe and individual and also the means of attaining liberation.

Mooji's teachings very much follow Ramana Maharshi's method of self-inquiry. That he has a cult-like following is an unfortunate side-effect. I have seen his videos and noticed that some of his "followers" worship him. This phenomena is not surprising. Teachers of philosophy, devotion etc. are often surrounded by parasite-like followers who pay very little attention to teaching and practicing it in their lives. Their focus is mostly to hang around the teacher and hope for a miracle to happen.

Some of his teachings are indeed present in the Upanishads. Especially, his statements about the Self, happiness etc. all do exist in Indian Scriptures. He was a maverick philosopher that shunned the traditional system of teaching.

There's not a specific book where this information is laid out. I'll write what I know and can refer to source if you have questions. At the outset, I'd like to mention that there are dualistic (dvaita), non-dualistic(advaita) and qualified non-dualistic (vishishta-advaita) interpretations of the Upanishads. As a follower of advaita, I clearly see from texts that non-duality is what these scriptures teach.

The Mandukya Upanishad talks about "ajata-vada", ie the argument that nothing is ever born. Its teaching is very close to buddhist philosophy.

The Mundaka Upanishad talks about the creation being God itself. A famous mantra quotes an example of a spider which is not only the efficient but also the material cause of the webs that it spins.

Chandogya Upanishad chapter 6 has the "maha-vakya" i.e. great statement "tat-tvam-asi" - thou art that.

Of course, reading a translation will not be sufficient to understand the depth of this text. These texts are usually expounded by scholars who are steeped in the tradition of studying and understanding them. For advaita (non-dualistic) philosphy, the master-commentator Shankaracharya has written brief commentaries on all the Upanishads. Their translations are available in English, but like I said earlier, a mere reading of them may not bring about the desired affect of "oh my god this is so awesome".

Most religions claim that God is a person and maintain that God created the universe, thereby making God and the universe two separate entities. Further, religion and philosophy are also mixed up. "God in heaven", "Good actions give heaven and bad ones yield hell" etc. are some statements that we often hear.

The distinguishing teaching about the Upanishads is that 1. God is not a person 2. The universe, as we perceive, is an illusion and its underlying reality is God 3. The individual (a person like you and me), is not just a collection of bones, muscles and tissue. Neither is the individual his/her mind. The true-nature of an individual is the indestructible Self. 4. The individual Self and God are one and the same.

There's no such teaching like this in the world. It blows my mind as I read and contemplate on the verses that talk about it. There are several saints who have realized this truth and their position on the issue of God, individual and world are identical to what the Upanishads teach.

IMHO A person who has put to test the teachings of the Upanishadic in his/her own life, and lives by its vision is a real teacher.

Krishnamurti's teachings are based on scriptures such as Upanishads and Gita. He was averse to the notion of having a Guru (or teacher) because the teachers he had seen in his time were very steeped in orthodoxy, despite their learning. He was also against quoting verses from scriptures because he wanted to break away from the traditional teacher-student model.

His teachings are appealing to many people who do not have a sufficient background in the study of Vedanta (the culmination or final word of vedas). There are many contemporary teachers whose teaching is similar to that of JK. Eckhart Tolle, Mooji, Robert Adams, Nisargadatta Maharaj, Ramana Maharshi etc.

To appreciate the teachings of any of the above spiritual giants, one needs to have an intense/burning desire to seek the Self. Once it is realized, it puts an immediate end to all suffering and seeking. The glory of the Self has been described in great detail in Upanishads and Gita. There are supplementary texts that also discuss the approaches to attain it.

I had similar experience at VMware where my boss just didn't care enough about me. He never assigned me to any good projects, and prevented me from seeking opportunities in other teams, even if was a simple trial for a few months. Further, he was surrounded by his buddies from his previous work place and I always got the feeling that one needed to be in his clique to get any attention. Whenever I approached him for a different assignment he lectured me on how technology was just about sending data from point A to point B in the most efficient manner and he insisted that I focus on my current assignment.

As time progressed, I noticed that engineers who hung out with him often and discussed interesting topics such as good school districts, real estate, investments, sales at frys electronics etc. were rewarded not just with better work but also promotions, some of them undeservedly. When I finally decided to quit there was not even a "thank you" from him or his minions for my hard work. There were several disgruntled employees in my org who never kissed his bottom and they were all treated with similar nonchalance.