[tech_browser]

The answer is simple. A human's life remains unfulfilled regardless of his material gains such as wealth and pleasures. The fear of oldage, death and disease looms large and so does the uncertainty of the future. If one were to examine the world objectively, one would find that whatever I've mentioned above is seen aplenty.

The entirety of a human's life is based on the notion I-am-the-body-and-the-mind. If one were to discover one's true nature and shed these limitations, eternal happiness and peace follow. The path to learning this is fraught with difficulties. The biggest obstacle is to learn things differently from what we already know. A cursory reading of books isn't sufficient. This is where the Upanishads and Gita stand out in comparison to other texts on philosophy. Not only do they describe in great detail the true nature of the Self, but also prescribe many practices on reaching the goal.

There's every reason to pursue Self-realization or enlightenment as the only worthy goal of life. Such a goal never comes in one's way of being employed, raising a family etc.

[ZenoArrow]

>"There's every reason to pursue Self-realization or enlightenment as the only worthy goal of life. Such a goal never comes in one's way of being employed, raising a family etc."

What if the only way to understand it was to not pursue it?

[tech_browser]

You are right. To beginners, self-realization is pointed as a goal worthy of pursuit. As one treads along this path, one realizes that nothing new is to be pursued or attained. If the Self were attainable as an object with the passage of time (and some exertion), it is not a worthy goal since everything within the realm of time will perish. The Self is ever-realized. One only needs to forego incorrect notions and predilections for the Self to manifest in all its glory. This is the method recommended by many teachers of non-duality to know the Self. In fact, there is nothing akin to knowing the Self, for it would then become an object and the division of seer-seen will again appear. To know the Self is to Be the Self.

[ZenoArrow]

Then why is it necessary to follow this or that belief system to get to something so obvious? Why is it necessary to read up on this school of thought or another when the only thing they can teach you is they have nothing to teach you?

[armitron]

Because there's a difference between intellectual understanding of the Self or non-dualism as a concept, and actually manifesting that "truth" by living it. Or as someone once wrote: Philosophical truths are transmitted through "praxis", not like pieces of eight. You've spent years conditioned to think a certain way, decades building that self-model you call "you". These associations will not be destroyed easily, just by someone saying so.

The Hindu/Vedantic systems emphasize self-enquiry and the importance of having a teacher guide you, which may look like pushing belief systems to outsiders, but it's really a process.

The western mystical tradition is more explicit in how important process/techniques are rather than dogma.

[ZenoArrow]

Let's put it like this. The main benefits of self-inquiry are not tied to one school of thought. To observe the change in ones thoughts and senses with equanimity does not require anything from old scriptures.

The reason Hindu/Vedantic systems and other systems of spirituality have extra merit is not in what they teach per se, but in the sense of pleasure we get from their poetic expression, and from feeling connected to other practitioners.

That's not to say schools of spirituality have no merit, they do have merit as a social construct, but in terms of self-exploration all you really need is the basic technique and some time to do it.

[tech_browser]

Well said.

[tech_browser]

There is no need. Note that every person has a different conditioning of the mind and not everyone reacts in the same manner to a philosophical statement. Consider several pieces of firewood, each with a varying degree of dryness. Each of them will react differently when ignited with a spark.

The process of understanding the Self requires a teacher, at least in the beginning stages. There are exceptions to the norm, as always. Ultimately, an individual is best equipped to decide what's best for him. Contemplation on the wise sayings of seers may be suitable for some, whereas studying scriptures under a teacher and practicing austerity might be appealing to others.

[ZenoArrow]

>"The process of understanding the Self requires a teacher, at least in the beginning stages."

My question is, why? What does the student gain from this when the path is one of self-study?

[tech_browser]

How else would a person learn or hear about the Self? It is not a solid thing that can be perceived by the senses. Neither is it as abstract as nothingness. It is one's real nature and the source of the notion "I am". Further, it is that which makes it possible for the mind and senses to function.

You may argue that all this information can be gleaned by reading a book. At best, this will remain in the realm of theoretical knowledge. Only a person who has treaded along this path can offer some insights into what the Self is and how it may be realized. If you don't like to label this person as a teacher/preceptor, feel free to give him any other name you like.

To tell a person that he's the body and mind requires no knowledge. Further, such ignorance is well established in every individual. The knowledge of the Self is something a person has to discover after being introduced to it via some medium.