Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00876)

In a message dated 11/22/02 9:02:29 PM, mhart@idirect.ca writes:

>Robert wrote: <<But Adwaita Vedanta is but one 
>interpretation of Vedanta. >>
>
>Right. Interpretations have to do with duality, and 
>duality is mayavic. 
>
>Speculatively,
>Mauri
>
>PS And because duality is mayavic, I prefer to keep my 
>distance, as per "my speculative stance," not that . . .

And to that, I agree entirely and positively... Although, only when it comes 
down to opinions about the nature of God from a religious point of view... 
But not on the logic of the metaphysics of Cosmogenesis when it depends on 
the non mayavic existence of the fundamental laws of nature, or of God in 
Nature. In that, there can be no duality -- since the ALL is a trinity, and 
that can only be considered as a unity. Therefore, personal experiences, 
subject to the illusions of Maya (since the inner eye or "I" can only see 
things as a duality) can never be used as a "proof" of anything. In the 
Bible or any religious scripture, substitute the word Law for "Lord," and 
everything becomes clearly understood. When Moses asked the God he spoke to 
who he was, the answer was "I am that I am" -- which proves that Moses knew 
he was talking to himself. But how could anyone else know that? Trouble is 
that those who hear that statement believe that God had to be a separate 
personality -- since they can't think of themselves as being a unified 
duality, and their mayavic "experience" also confirms that they are separate 
from everything else in the Universe.

LHM