Philosophy Now Forum

The philosophy of Vedanta, "Aham Brahmasmi" (roughly translated as "I am the Absolute Truth"), could be interpreted as solipsism in one of it's primitive senses, as the world is but an illusion in the mind of the observer. However, Advaita Vedanta can be understood to be non-solipsistic when it is recognised that it does not actually deny the existence of a world 'external' to the Self or Atman. Rather, it is asserting that the consciousness and awareness of the individual pervades all of that person's experience, to such an extent that absolute notions of 'inside' and 'outside' are arbitrary. The universe is the same as the self, as the universe can only be experienced through the self and the self is submerged within the universe as an integrated part[citation needed].

However, Advaita (Non-duality) is strongly divergent from solipsism in that the former is a system of exploration of one's mind in order to finally understand the nature of the self and attain complete knowledge. The unity of existence is said to be directly experienced and understood at the end as a part of complete knowledge. On the other hand solipsism posits the non-existence of the external void right at the beginning, and says that no further inquiry is possible.

To attain complete knowledge of self is the end of knowledge for a self.

All knowledge is sourced in not-knowing. Source it self which is unknowable...rendering all knowledge an illusion.

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:46 am..understand the nature of the self and attain complete knowledge.

Complete knowledge of what?

Know thyself?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:50 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:46 am..understand the nature of the self and attain complete knowledge.

Complete knowledge of what?

What ever wants to know?

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:51 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:50 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:46 am..understand the nature of the self and attain complete knowledge.

Complete knowledge of what?

What ever wants to know?

.

Are you suggesting that someone in India, or yourself know everything about the universe?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:00 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:51 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:50 am

Complete knowledge of what?

What ever wants to know?

.

Are you suggesting that someone in India, or yourself know everything about the universe?

It's not a ''someone'' who knows knowledge. You are the knowledge that cannot be known.

That which is unknown will eventually become known..but that which is unknowable can never be known.

.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:50 am
Know thyself?

Know thyself to be no self.

In knowing itself, the "knower" would be altered by the knowing.The new knower would again have to change to accommodate the new knowing.
On and on it would go.......never quite catching up.

The eye cannot see itself, the tooth cannot bite itself, the finger cannot feel itself and the knower cannot know her/himself.

Not-knowing knowing.

You cannot show up to your own show.

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:06 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:00 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 10:51 am

What ever wants to know?

.

Are you suggesting that someone in India, or yourself know everything about the universe?

It's not a ''someone'' who knows knowledge. You are the knowledge that cannot be known.

That which is unknown will eventually become known..

Contradiction in terms.
If I am the knowledge that cannot be known, then it is contradictory to state next that, that which is unknown will eventually become known.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:17 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:06 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:00 am

Are you suggesting that someone in India, or yourself know everything about the universe?

It's not a ''someone'' who knows knowledge. You are the knowledge that cannot be known.

That which is unknown will eventually become known..

Contradiction in terms.
If I am the knowledge that cannot be known, then it is contradictory to state next that, that which is unknown will eventually become known.

Unavoidable.

The contradiction is also part of the not-knowing knowing. (Conceptually speaking)

.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:29 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:17 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:06 am

It's not a ''someone'' who knows knowledge. You are the knowledge that cannot be known.

That which is unknown will eventually become known..

Contradiction in terms.
If I am the knowledge that cannot be known, then it is contradictory to state next that, that which is unknown will eventually become known.

Unaviodable.

The contradiction is also part of the not-knowing knowing. (Conceptually speaking)

I usually avoid your threads and posts for such inept at best, but rather poor reasoning, but i'll ask you this, do you think that between your ears there is a brain that contains more knowledge about the universe than I do?

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:52 am
I usually avoid your threads and posts for such inept at best, but rather poor reasoning,

Thanks for showing up to your own show. Sorry for the unreasonable. But that's just who I am here...when reason does come to me here, only I know it's there because of my ability to discern between the apparent two perceptions ...so being unreasonable is not a problem for me here, I know reason when it comes to me. So the problem is yours if you can't discern what's being said here, not mine.

It's actually very good reasoning from here, simply because I understand everything I am saying to myself, because I am the author of my own knowledge.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:52 am but i'll ask you this, do you think that between your ears there is a brain that contains more knowledge about the universe than I do?

I don't know, dont ask me.

You can only know what you know, you cannot know what you don't know. I don't know you, I only know me, what I know, so I cannot answer whether I know more than you, because I don't know what you know, only you can know what you know..not me.

.

Advaita Vedanta says that the Self is the Absolute and that the world and all experience arises and passes through/within Self.

When someone speaks of solipsism, they are probably taking Self to be the body/mind complex. From that perspective of course it's ridiculous to say that the world for everyone else passes when your world passes.

Your world is your world. When all of your karmic momentum stops and there is no desire for more experience another world/life will not manifest.

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:52 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:29 am

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:17 am

Contradiction in terms.
If I am the knowledge that cannot be known, then it is contradictory to state next that, that which is unknown will eventually become known.

Unaviodable.

The contradiction is also part of the not-knowing knowing. (Conceptually speaking)

I usually avoid your threads and posts for such inept at best, but rather poor reasoning, but i'll ask you this, do you think that between your ears there is a brain that contains more knowledge about the universe than I do?

Sit in a chair in a quiet room without doing anything or thinking anything, for an hour.

Just sit there and don't think.

Inept?

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:51 pm...so being unreasonable is not a problem for me here, I know reason when it comes to me. So the problem is yours if you can't discern what's being said here, not mine.

It's actually very good reasoning from here, simply because I understand everything I am saying to myself, because I am the author of my own knowledge.

...and the contradictions continue.

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:51 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:52 am but i'll ask you this, do you think that between your ears there is a brain that contains more knowledge about the universe than I do?

I don't know, dont ask me.

lol

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 12:51 pmYou can only know what you know, you cannot know what you don't know. I don't know you, I only know me, what I know, so I cannot answer whether I know more than you, because I don't know what you know, only you can know what you know..not me.

I do hope ultimately you are sane. Not that it probably matters these days..

roydop wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 1:08 pm

attofishpi wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:52 am

Dontaskme wrote: ↑Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:29 am
Unaviodable.

The contradiction is also part of the not-knowing knowing. (Conceptually speaking)

I usually avoid your threads and posts for such inept at best, but rather poor reasoning, but i'll ask you this, do you think that between your ears there is a brain that contains more knowledge about the universe than I do?

Sit in a chair in a quiet room without doing anything or thinking anything, for an hour.

Just sit there and don't think.

Inept?

Yes, you are.

I'm not in to being bored for an hour. You do real eyes that there are sounds, smells, sight that continue to pervade ones consciousness? ..however boring.
What exactly is your point, oh spiritual one.

When "i" sit in a chair quitely for an hour there is peace and absolute (not dependent on anything) happiness.

The boredom you feel when it's just you is a symptom of something much deeper.

But feel free to continue on with your Samsara.