The "Big Bang", God and the Absolute

Ahimsananda's picture

Average: 4 (3 votes)

A number of us in non-duality have come from belief systems that we rejected or questioned either before we found non-duality or as we found non-duality. Some have had a bad time with organized religion, or our intellectual understanding "outgrew" our "faith". Many left their belief system in hostility or anger.

As a Gay man, I know many Gay people that reject and hate religion of any kind. I too felt confused and troubled about my church and it's beliefs, but spent time studying what was actually said in the Bible and interpreted it based on my own "lights". I found that I was supported by scripture and many in the church itself. Although I spent my later teen years and twenties as an agnostic, I never felt a need to reject the church or spirituality. It simply was put on the back burner for sixteen years or so.

I see a parallel to the rejection of the church, God, and sometimes even "spirituality" by Gay people, and in some people in non-duality. Once "God" is seen as an "illusion", many non-duelists toss out faith, belief, worship and the idea of "divinity". That may be a good thing, as this "reality" has to be faced and dealt with, but if it results in a rejection of "spirituality" itself, it becomes a dead end, as trying to find "truth" with the mind is impossible. This is the mind seizing the truth and separating faith vs. no faith, belief vs. non-belief, worship vs. rejection of worship. And often in this separation an anger develops toward faith, belief, and worship.

This hostility is expressed as ridicule toward those who see an "unknowable" in the "Absolute" or consciousness, but are aware of it's presence. This hostility is often directed at the "seeker"; him or her self. From there it is projected to others. This is sad for a "seeker", as it cuts off areas of the One. This is particularly unfortunate in a "teacher".

When a teacher claims to be a speaker or writer in non-duality, but rejects spirituality itself, it is easy to see that their "knowledge" is all in the mind. It has been suggested by some of these "teachers" that we are mere zoological creatures evolved from the "Big Bang". Science becomes more important than continuing a "search" that the mind rejects. I don't think the "Big Bang" is any more "scientific" than the "Absolute", or consciousness. These are the teachers that will use their brilliant minds (and most of these are brilliant), to ridicule those who have had "spiritual experiences" and demonstrate their brilliance. But arguing for a "Big Bang" is no different than arguing for "God". They are both ideas, only one is "liked" and the other "disliked". This is ego and duality itself, so why call yourself a non-dual writer or speaker?.

To "rest" in the "Big Bang" is to give up the search out of fear of the Truth. It is the scientists' "cop out". The "Big Bang" is not an answer, it is a way of expressing "we have no clue". It raises more questions than it answers. What banged? What was before, that could bang? This is as scientifically sound as the "creation story" in Genesis. But this is where the mind wants you to stay; Think theories the mind understands, fear venturing beyond the mind. If the mind can't conceive it, it isn't "true". These are the words of those who have given up, and come to rest in a "theory". Wel,l if you choose to believe the "Big Bang", then so be it. But don't hold it up as a "better" answer than "God" or the "Absolute".

When I wrote the examination of a Christian religious community through the "eyes" of non-dual understanding, I was very concerned with "the true". I wanted to see how and if a Christian religious "rule" could be true and faithful to the "Truth" as seen from a no-dual perspective. My understanding of "God" and the "Absolute " were the same, only "God" is "personal " and the "Absolute" is "universal ". "God" vanished, as did "I ". What was left was the connection of gratitude; Love. Love and the Absolute are the same. I have experienced this, this is not theory like the "Big Bang".

Christ, Buddha, Sankara, Ramana Maharshi, Nisargadatta Maharaj, and many others have experienced the Truth of the Absolute; the non-dual seeing, and shared it with mankind. To ignore their experiences in favor of a "Big Bang" is the biggest laugh of all. It demonstrates a fear of stepping beyond the mind into silence, where the heart and mind open to truth in silence. The mere fact that these "teachers " laugh at the experiences of Christ or the Maharshi, or mine and yours even, shows a fear of even entertaining ideas outside of the mind.

Non-duality means being open to everything. not constructing boundaries between "real " and "unreal " or "true " or "false ". All ideas belong to the Absolute, they "become " "real " and "unreal " when the mind enters the picture. The "Big Bang " is as much a part of the Absolute as is "God ". They are thoughts "arising ". But you can only experience what you are by being it, not by theorizing about it. If you have not let go of the mind, you will not understand. If you live only in the mind, you cannot understand.

I would suggest to those "teachers " who are afraid of the silence to find some courage and just do it. Most of these "teachers " are young enough that you can see that they put little time into their "spiritual efforts " before they gave up and bought into the "word play " of science and society. If you are seeking "truth " you need to go beyond the mind, and be persistent. For thousands of years, saints, sages and mystics have pointed to the truth. We can ignore them, and reduce ourselves to nothing but a chemical process resulting from the "Big Bang", or we can have the courage to seek at least "what banged?" Could it be God or the Absolute?

angel76's picture

The pitfall of absolute reality

Good article.

The pitfall of absolute reality is maybe one of the cruellest of all spiritual pitfalls. It is the main error of those called neo Advaitans.

While we still live and cognize in relative reality, absolute reality is just a myth, a theory for us. Relative reality in which there is duality, separation of form objects, is our current reality, whether we want it or not, it is our starting point.

Negating our starting point based on a theory assures that we will remain in this starting point.

angel76 | Tue, 04/19/2011 - 08:42