Question on method of arriving at conclusions

[Ian Goddard]

 At 10:53 PM 7/5/96 GMT, egodust wrote:

 >> vedantins accept "what cannot be disproved beyond doubt as the truth".
 >> Does this method of analysis find acceptance among advaitins?
 >>
 >
 >This method appears to be an invitation to philosophize which, as advaita
 >teaches us, is anathema to the jnanamarga.  Although philosophical analysis
 >has its place in the earlier stages of the marga, when the jiva approaches
 >the critical junction of ready departure from the clutches of the maya/mara-
 >vasanas, it's decidedly a deadly obstacle.


IAN: Since nothing exists external to the Self, nothing can bar access
of anything to the Self. The idea that thoughts lead away from the
Self is a dualistic fallacy.

The idea that thouhgts lead away from the Self is a self-perpetuating meme
(idea) that itself creates the illusion that some "jiva" has been excluded
from the Self. It creates the illusion and then sits back and observes it
as if it was an objective fact apart from itself. All separations exist
only in their fantasy, and not even there. Seperation is pure confusion.

If I can get you to believe that your activity seperates you from the
true Self, I have successded in creating the illusion of bondage.
That is the patent absurdity of "levels" in jnana yoga.
The role of inqury must be to dispell illusion.

  Can you show an example of anything free from the Self?
  If an example of something free from the Self cannot be found,
  what then is the basis for continuing to make any calim that
  implies such separation?


Law of Identity: A is A, relative to not-A. A = (A + ~A)

Law of Nonidentity: If there is 100% A, there is 0% A. A = ~A

absolute reality: http://www.erols.com/igoddard/reality.html