Question on method of arriving at conclusions

[egodust]

Ian wrote:
>  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.
>

Is not the idea (thought) expressed as: "The idea that thoughts lead away from
the Self is a dualistic fallacy," ITSELF a dualistic fallacy [because it, being
a particular thought, is leading one away from the truth]?  From this one might
infer that there are therefore true thoughts vs fallacious thoughts.  More
dualism--and more overt than the dualism that preceded it!  Technically, you're
partly correct, IMO.  Adi Sankara's triune formula addressed maya definitively:
***1. Brahman is the lone Reality;  2. The world is maya;  3. Brahman is the
world.***  And the important thing to remember in the formula is that the world
(which is the Mind or realm of thoughts) is maya only in the sense if/when we
consider it isolated and unto itself--separate from brahman.  Which leads me to
point out that I was talking about 'philosophical analysis', which implies a
*separative* belief system pertaining to the nature of reality which must be,
by Sankara's advaitic formula, illusory.

Namaste.