dwai Posted July 18, 2020 (edited) I like the general thrust of what heās saying, Ā He does articulateĀ the Hindu system atĀ a high school level Ā (incomplete/incorrect technically).Ā Ā For instance he says in Hinduism there are three ālevelsā - Brahman, Atman and Jiva. But really Atman and Brahman are the same. In theĀ Ā nondual traditions within Hinduism, Atman is realized as being the same as Brahman or Shiva.Ā What he calls the āsoulā is the Atman veiled in ignorance, which thinks it is an individual entity that transmigrates from life to life.Ā What he calls āawakeningā and distinguishes it from ābreaking the cycle of rebirthā is not correct either, as awakening in the Hindu tradition is called Brahma jnana or tatva jnana, and it is the entry into jivanamukti, or liberation while embodied. So awakening in the true sense ensures full liberation. Duration is dependent on what kind of preparatory work has already been done.Ā As I watched on, there are many other things deficient in his explanations. But Iām assuming that it drives from his lack of depth in Hinduism. I notice that he uses Hindu terminology a lot,Ā for a Daoist.Ā But many might accuse me of using a lot of Daoist terminology, for a Hindu. š Ā The biggest issue I have isĀ with what he says wrtĀ āmerging of individual soul to an undifferentiated soulā. There is no merging that occurs inĀ nondual Hindu traditions. Rather, awareness Ā realizes that it is not the ālimited beingā which transmigrates, and knows that it IS nondual awarenss, Ā which it always has been and will always be.Ā Ā Edited July 18, 2020 by dwai Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
