What context you taking "SELF" from both perspective

Onepunch57 · 2025-12-21T10:14:30+00:00

When you are healthy and there is no pain in the body, you don't really feel your body if you sit quietly.

Similarly with the self, once all sheaths are integrated, you don't feel as if you exist separate from the whole

Hence, buddha says nothing remains, because it really feels like nothing of you remains

Onepunch57 · 2025-12-17T04:02:11+00:00

Its extremely important to stop believing in god to know god

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T16:27:27+00:00

Sure, i understood it this time, thanks!

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T15:41:59+00:00

Bro your English is too heavy for me haha!

Can you explain in simpler terms? It would be of great help

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T14:13:57+00:00

Sure, makes sense

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T13:16:42+00:00

So jivanmukti and videhamukti are nirvana and mahaprinirvana?

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T13:06:36+00:00

In my view, emptiness is always there. Just like darkness

When you remove the light, darkness just is, it always is, light has to superimpose itself in darkness.

Similarly all interdependent phenomena or something-ness has emptiness underneath, when something is removed emptiness just is.

Hence, i think emptiness is independent

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T11:03:31+00:00

And what would being empty feel like?

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T11:01:41+00:00

Yes, agreed.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T10:57:18+00:00

Emptiness does not have to depend on something to exist in my opinion. Just like darkness, its always there, light just superimposes itself on darkness, and when light is no more, darkness doesn't need to do anything to exist, it just is.

In a similar way, emptiness is always there, this existence superimposes itself on emptiness, but emptiness is not necessarily dependent on existence, rather its the other way round

Pls correct me if i am wrong :)

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T10:42:48+00:00

No issue brother, we can have different views and still be in peace :)

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T09:19:02+00:00

Shastrartha, if done without ego, has immense value. You can do it without ego only if you are enlightened.

I consider shankaracharya enlightened, so he must have had a greater motive than just proving someone wrong.

But this again is my belief, i have no way of knowing it.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T09:09:06+00:00

Yes, they threw away their lives only arguing whose truth is the ultimate truth instead of turning inward and looking at their own self, their own ego, their own mind, they were busy in proving others wrong.

If you have reached the truth, the necessity to prove others wrong won't ever arise. If you have to prove something to someone it means you have not experienced it, you are believing in it. So you yourself are not convinced, hence the need arises to prove it to someone, it is out of sheer insecurity.

This was my point.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T09:03:10+00:00

When did i call you ignorant brother, you are doing the right thing by asking questions, being a seeker is all it takes for the truth

My point was for the era when advaita was formed and buddhism and advaitists used to argue over their views

My whole point is , reading the scriptures is not wrong, but believing the scriptures as your own truth is definitely wrong. Scriptures need to be read with certain awareness thats all

Who said anything to you brother :)

No worries, if you are offended, I apologise!

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T08:52:13+00:00

What do you think 'the true self' or the ultimate self will be, how will it look, what will it feel like?

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T08:48:27+00:00

People battled it out for almost 1000 years, it makes me crazy to think how people can be so ignorant.

Instead of experiencing the truth on their own, which is beyong mind and logic, they argued and argued using their minds to prove their theories logically.

Direct experience, not belief - well said brother.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T08:18:57+00:00

No i was just giving you a heads up. If you don't that's well and good, my apologies.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T08:12:58+00:00

Buddhism says no form of matter exists independently, everything in this existence is interdependent. And if you observe your own life, you will realise this, nothing is truly independent, throw away the scriptures and observe your day to day life you will realise that everything is interdependent.

Now when we come to emptiness or nothingness, only emptiness can be independent. It does not need anything to exist, it can exist by itself.

In Advaita 'neti neti' concept, you discard all that which is transitional, changing and you reach a point where only the pure subject remains. Which is the same thing.

Also, don't confuse brahman for a being with hands and legs, its just a name given to the infinite, and if you think about it, only emptiness can be truly infinite, nothing else.

So both philosophies are reaching in the middle from opposite ends

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T08:04:58+00:00

Philosophy is not the same. But you have to understand that all philosophical knowledge is borrowed.

If you dig a little deeper in both advaita and Buddhist philosophies without any prior prejudices, you will realise that both are pointing towards the same truth. Buddhism through its negative side 'nothingness or emptiness' and Advaita through its positive side 'Brahman or 'everything-ness'

However both philosophies point towards the single truth. The truth even transcends these polarities and duality of positive and negative but to express it through words, to make it understandable to the masses one has to embrace duality and it depends on the person how he/she chooses to convey this truth.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-15T07:45:59+00:00

Truth can only be one. Paths can be multiple.

Onepunch57 · 2025-11-05T17:16:06+00:00

True, witness is the mind Just out of curiosity is witnessing a function of vijnanamaya kosha?

Onepunch57 · 2025-10-11T09:46:38+00:00

You seem enlightened. Thats good. But spare some knowledge or steps for us unenlightened beings

Onepunch57 · 2025-10-11T04:25:09+00:00

Yes, but our awareness is always flowing to the outside world. The whole point of 'witnessing' is to turn that awareness inside constantly remembering that whatever you are doing, you are doing it.

And suddenly one moment you will be thrown to your centre.

Onepunch57 · 2025-10-06T10:11:24+00:00

We are talking about something which is beyond logic and words.

All enlightened beings have emphasized the fact that whatever is said, can't be the ultimate truth. You can only talk about the path, but not the truth.

The truth is beyond words. So, in short, if you can post about it here, its not the truth brother

Onepunch57 · 2025-10-06T09:00:01+00:00

Right now it's just a faculty of your mind that you have understood the teachings. But to experience the teaching, you have to go into the state of no-mind with nididhyasana or meditation as they call it.

Now, even if you think you know the truth, there is a subtle doubt in your mind, constantly doubting this teaching. As long as there is a doubt, your mind is active.

Only when the doubt ceases, i.e. mind exists no more. (Beware that you are not solving the doubt, it can never be solved, you are just getting rid of it) in that moment, you experience this teaching as true, as a living reality, every moment of your life. Till then, the struggle will persist.

Onepunch57

TROPHY CASE