My point was to show you that Jnana Yoga is not the ultimate means as you had portrayed it to be with the authors you mentioned.odysseus wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 3:18 pmI will take this mean this: once you have taken the interpretative enterprise, that is, philosophical thought, to the point where you understand that a perceptual encounter in the world is not an irreducible event, but has, if you will, parts, and thus analyzable, and analysis then shows you that the truth you seek is foundational truth, something that is truly not reducible, and is the basic "given" of the world, then you will encounter nihilism: the failure to find meaning in meaning, value in value (see Witgenstein's Tractatus, btw. He understood this threshold very well). At this point, one needs faith, which is where Bhakti yoga becomes helpful. Kierkegaard can be understood to have said the same thing.Veritas Aequitas wrote
I started with advaita vedanta and was a Jnanist [Jnana Yoga] for a long time and I have now graduated from Jnana to be a generalist.
Any yoga master will advice Jnana Yoga is the intellectual approach and it must be consummated with Bhakti to "yoke" with the ultimate Brahman.
The trouble with this thinking is that faith becomes naive when the world is closely examined, and it is also a terrible distraction from the serious undertaking you are in. The point is, or part of the point, is to let thought and interpretation (thought is inherently interpretative) fall away altogether.
The facts is the diversified humans are born with different types of propensities, thus there are 5 main types of Yoga to cater for the different proclivities, but according to advaita vedanta, the yogi must always complement whatever yoga adopted by various individuals with Bhakti yoga.
Within advaita vedanta, Bhakti yoga is not blind faith like those of the fundamentalist Christians, Muslims. i.e. just believe and viola one is saved. Bhakti yoga in its more sophisticated form entail lots of meditation and mental practices.
Whatever is of human actions and behavior [other than auto and reflex actions] are represented by specific neurons in the brain.Targeting neurons? I don't take your meaning. Though I do take that you mean neurological studies can be useful to an end, somehow. But then, there are no neurons, and to participate in the world as if there were is to buy into that which you're trying to undo. In my understanding, the very nature of the concept of Eastern "illusion", regardless of the literature (one must see that what others tell us, even if it is dead right, is only a utility for personal enlightenment. The "telling", the scriptures, the philosophy, is, all of it, only a means to an end, and, as the parable goes. Thought itself is yoga, the "light of reason" that attends our karmic journey) is interpretative error: things are not what we "say" they are. They are something entirely Other.I believe reduction is necessary in all fields of knowledge, in this case 'spirituality' but reduction in spirituality is to ensure the spiritual practice is holistic.
In this case, one can target the neurons and parts of the brain specifically so as to expedite the spiritual process rather than rely on trial and error [hit and miss] or the experience of past masters where there is no final verification that all of them are right and precise.
positive empathy and compassion are represented by the working of specific neurons in the brain, [hypothetical represented by mirror neurons],
by identifying those specific neurons and targeting to improving their workings,
then each person will be able to have optimal empathy and compassion to increase their 'spiritual' quotient.
This is not easy due to the complexity involved, but we will be able to do it in the future riding upon current researches into the brain.
Hope you have not missed it, NATO = No Action, Talk Only.Fortunately, this is not true. I care nothing for the politics as it has no place here.From the Jnana perspective, the Jnana yogi would definitely be interested to understand the brain if such knowledge was available for the Jnana yogi of the past. But then neurosciences were only active merely about 50 years ago.
As I had stated, the authors you mentioned would qualify to be described as adopting the Jnana Path, but they don't delve into the practical path or even recommended any. There are merely armchair philosophers of NATO.
But sadly, I cannot convince you of the value of Husserl, Heidegger, and the rest in a post. You would actually have to read Heidegger's Being and Time yourself. But, alas again, he is thoroughly embedded in Western philosophy, so this requires a lot of reading besides. I can present an idea or two. For one thing, Heidegger explains is a very well reasoned argument what the nature of illusion is, though, of course, this is not his explicit aim. He makes phenomenology clear as a bell, and he leaves Truth an open concept, which is exactly where philosophy should take a person.
Husserl predates Heidegger, and this philosopher is, for some, closer to the Eastern notion of liberation. He took the presentation of the world as a Given, when observed phenomenologically. The trouble with traditional philosophical approaches was that it lacked the significant movement from mere abstract thought to actuality, and his epoche invites just this: it is a perceptual event of removing from t he perceptual field what would make an implicit knowledge claim on it. Husserl leads one the fountain of "selflessness" where things themselves in the perceptual act are seem AS SUCH. His phenomenological reduction (epoche) is a practice!
I have read Being and Time [BT] quite thoroughly and have even prepared numerous detailed flowcharts for various systems within Being and Time.
Heidegger did critique Kant very strongly but what I noted is Being and Time is still entrapped by the drive toward the self-in-itself or BEING-in-itself.
So far, I am aware Kant's CoPR and his other books [spent 3 years full time on them] still override [one-up on] BT and others.
Box?Re the brain, the Indian yogis [Vedic and Buddhists] reflected deeply into consciousness from outside the box and established various methods to achieve various states of consciousness.
Thinking outside the box is a metaphor that means to think differently, unconventionally, or from a new perspective. This phrase often refers to novel or creative thinking. -wiki
I agree BT is quite extra-ordinary than the average views because Heidegger had made a very serious attempt to improve on the thoughts of the ancients and modern on the idea of 'Being'.What Heidegger sought was a way back to experiencing the world that has been lost in the thick of very bad thinking over the ages. We are alienated in our lived habits, and he sought to show the way back to the primordial experience that were once in place, and this could be achieved through ontology, a stepping back from the usual world to get to what underlies it. He believed that the world is constructed, as with Kant, of thought and what is given, though, the given is always given AS thought. For him, there is no separation. The world of thought is "of a piece" with actuality. People are thought constructions.Heidegger interacted with Buddhist scholars but he never talk of Buddhist practices nor did he adopted any spiritual approaches. ??
He is so illuminating because once one goes through the reading of Being and TIme, one understands the empirical self, the divisions that separate and allow things to be things, the pragmatic (instrumental) nature of our everydayness, and so on. His is a vehicle to a higher understanding of what the East calls illusion, and if you can see this in the clarity he presents, disillusionment is possible.
But then most are susceptible to the following which Kant warned;
As I had stated the above impulse is psychological and deeply embedded as a primal instinct.They are sophistications not of men but of Pure Reason itself. Even the wisest of men cannot free himself from them.
After long effort he perhaps succeeds in guarding himself against actual error;
but he will never be able to free himself from the Illusion, which unceasingly mocks and torments him.