I responded to a message of Shargol on this thread
New Interview with Daniel about Bikkhu Analayo's article in Mindfulness - Discussion - www.dharmaoverground.org
where I said, I've some experience to back this up which I did not want to put there. Here that goes:
The whole post will consist of experience & proofs. Intuitively, I go for experience. However, the mathematician in me wants to prove everything. The two will follow one after the other, but they are intertwined.
1. [[Experience section]]
I think the last time I posted with experience was March/April.
If I recall correctly, I said about experiencing God right in the center of the heart region. The whole thing was ironical because ``experiencing God'' started out when I was not looking for God, rather, I was on a Buddhist retreat. In any case, the whole thing repeated when I was doing/trying to do some Buddhist formless realm meditations -- when again, my attention went to God in the center of the heart. The whole thing reminded me of Saint Teresa of Avila -- The Interior Castle or Mansions.
In any case, I realized there were still questions. The two that were on my mind were:
a. What is re-birth? Does the Sutta view of re-birth make sense?
b. What is asmimana, or, the conceit, ``I am'' -- the last fetter to go, per Sutta's. "I making" and "my making" have been fairly clear to me -- that I do this -- but I did not have any real handle on the conceit "I am" -- and there are various theories floating around.
I was reading the Majjhima Nikaya. I was not doing any formal meditations but I was just trying to understand the nature of reality. And at some point, I was coming to sensations. And I was coming to the point of there being sensations and that's as much as I can tell. I was, in one way or the other, coming to the conclusion that I'm limited by human cognitive capabilities -- finally everything is sensations of one form of other -- beyond that there is the human cognitive capabilities, and there's no reason to believe that human cognitive capabilities can explain reality. In other words, ultimate reality cannot be discerned. At this point I started reading the Upanishads more and found verses about the Brahman being experienced in the center of the heart -- the similar conclusion of St. Teresa. Beyond that I started reading Paul Deussen's ''Elements of Metaphysics'' -- more on this in point number 2. where I go into proofs. Reading this, what started happening is that something inside me was ``shutting down'' (I don't know how better to describe this) -- and the whole Universe was collapsing into me. Statements like: "I am the Brahman" and "The whole Universe (trilok for the sanskrit word) is inside me'', and "all there is, is the Brahman" started making sense. The question of what is the conceit "I am" has not bothered me much since then. Not saying I have answered it in the Buddhist way. All I am saying is that it is not bothering me as much.
Another thing that happened is that one day when I was lying down, in my brain, I started seeing my past lives rolling around since time eternal. Nothing concrete as is described in the Buddhist suttas. But what it made me feel, in part, is that time might be an innate faculty of the human mind, thus, it talks about past and future, and thus it talks about past life and future life, and it also made me feel that morality might also be just a faculty, which thinks of consequences of actions, and thus, past lives and future lives. The whole of creation (be it a tree, or anything that I saw) seemed like a creation of the mind as opposed to being real.
This is the best I can describe it.
2. [[Proofs section ]] I started reading Elements of Metaphysics of Paul Deussen. The hard copy version I started reading can also be found as a PDF file on archive.org.
Part I of the book (consisting of System of physics and System of metaphysics) -- without the appendix -- I think are pure gold. Part II of the book, though, I think is wishy-washy -- it has an agenda of proving advaita vedanta as correct.
In any case, Part I aims to prove scientifically (using arguments, not machines) that ultimate reality of things cannot be discerned by the human faculties, and that, time, space and causality are faculties of the mind, and there is no inherent truth in them. I found it rather thought provoking and I have not managed to find a flaw in Part I. Reading this is what led to something inside me shutting down and the whole universe collapsing into my heart.
Part II of the book is where he starts to talk about experience of Atman in the heart (which I have) and then starts to prove it -- but I find the whole thing wishy washy.
In any case, this is my current journey. The main conclusions that I draw from it:
P1. A feeling that Ultimate reality of things cannot be known via human faculties.
P2. I had already experienced God in the center of the heart area. Now, I experienced the whole human collapsing into it. Further, I also experienced the whole Universe coming out of it. Various statements like "I am Brahman" making more sense. Also, statement like "That are thou" making more sense.
P3. A feeling that re-birth might just be in the mind. Similarly as a tree is also just in the mind. There is one difference though: everyone who can see will agree to a tree being there if it seems there, but thoughts are personal and differ for different people. The conventional view of re-birth, though, as promoted by Buddhism and Vedanta, that since time eternal (Vedanta says time eternal, Buddhists say beginningless) we are being reborn is correct though in a conventional sense, and there is no reason to invoke the ultimate reality of the Abhidhamma.
P4 Scientific proofs offered for P1. offered by Deussen in Part I of his book which seem fine to me. Some sentences on Atman-Brahman etc. coming up in Part II of Deussen's book which are part meaningful but mainly seem wishy-washy.
I know there are all kinds of controversies of whether Vedanta and Buddhism are saying the same thing. And I'm also aware of the whole controversy of Sutta vs. Abhidhamma.The whole controversy will last likely till the end of the Universe. I have nothing more to add to that beyond what I've said above.
Much gratitude again, to Ingram, the moderators, and whoever keeps this forum running -- where I can speak what is on my mind.
Edits: The following come to mind:
1. I say Deussen's book Part I is great, Part II starts being wishy-washy. I mean on the matter of rigorous arguments. Part II is good too from point of view of heart/intuition, I think.
2. The book also has a good appendix on Vedanta, in my opinion.
3. I don't claim any attainments, be it Buddhist or Hindu or Christian. I said above "Part II of the book is where he starts to talk about experience of Atman in the heart (which I have) and then starts to prove it" -- in particular, I say, "which I have" -- all I mean is whatever I've experienced in whatever shape or form in this message and other messages of mine (note that Atman = Brahman in Upanashadic/Vedantic terminology)