Let’s take first what you refer to as ‘life,’ which
you’ve described as akin to a dream or an illusion.
Now, within that dream or illusion, there is suffering
and there is joy, there is birth and there is death,
there is the entire manifestation of the pairs of opposites.
And it is there also, within the dream, that there is
bondage and liberation for the ‘illusory’ individuals.

The above describes one level of reality, which in
Sanskrit is termed ‘mithya.’ The definition of mithya
is that it is neither totally unreal, i.e. non-existent
(like the horn of a rabbit), nor is it totally absolutely
real (unchanging). It is called the ‘relatively real,’
or relative order of reality.

So then what is absolutely real? What is absolutely real,
is neither subject to change, birth or death. It is
neither bound by time or space, but transcends them both,
and is indeed the actual content, the nondual substance of
that which is relatively real. That is atma/brahman, the
self, and there are other words which are used as well.

These last two paragraphs above cannot necessarily be understood in a finger snap, and may take a lot of contemplation and teaching in order to ‘get’ what they mean.

If you really get the above you’ve pretty much gotten
the whole teaching.

You ask above, “…what does it matter in the end whether any individual mind seeks enlightenment? If one has achieved it we all have achieved it correct?”

Actually that statement isn’t correct. If one illusory
dream character has achieved it, that doesn’t mean
the others have as well.

And I will tell you why. In order to explain it, we have
to examine and understand where it is that enlightenment
takes place. Enlightenment takes place, as you have suggested, in the mind of the individual.

Thus, enlightenment takes place within the illusion,
within the dream, within the mithya, or relatively real,
order of reality. It is akin to a dream character
recognizing from within the dream, “All of this dream
has for its being, my being. And my being is free from all of it.

Whatever goes on in this dream has no ability to change or affect my actual being in anyway, just as a slide show or movie has no ability to affect the light of the projector. I am the light from which the dream is projected, and I am the content and substance of the entire dream.”

So enlightenment takes place in the mind of the individual and from within the dream, the dream character recognizes that ‘he’ or ‘she’ is now free from the effects of the dream, and yet the dream still continues, and the mind and the body being part of the dream, are still subject to the order which governs the entire dream. That order is not a creation of the individual
dream character’s mind.

So, when one dream character recognizes what is going on, it
does not mean that all of the other dream characters do. That particular one enlightened dream character can try and tell the others what is going on if those others are interested, but probably most of them will not be.

Now, where none of this matters is from the POV of absolute
reality, from the POV of atma/brahman, the self, which has
never been bound, and thus is ever free. Free from birth,
free from death, free from change, from the POV of the
actual unchanging ‘substance’ of the dream.

It is the self/atma/brahman which the mind recognizes as
my self, and the self of every living thing, and the actual
self of the entire ‘illusion.’ So that recognition is called
enlightenment. There is only ‘one’ thing here which
exists absolutely. Thus all is advaita, nondual.

So now does it matter if the illusory mind of
the dream character is liberated?

It matters to the illusory dream character. When one
mithya mind gets enlightened, does that mean the other
mithya minds are liberated as well? No, it doesn’t.

The atma is ever free. Some people recognize that. They
are the ones with self-knowledge.

Some people haven’t recognized it, and most haven’t
even heard that there is such a thing nor are they interested.

These are the ones whose minds have self-ignorance,
(the lack of the recognition of what the actual reality
of the dream is.)

In your second paragraph above you say, “I still have difficulty believing that our awareness of a universal oneness explains everything.”

The recognition that everything is, in the final understanding, nondually one, doesn’t *explain* everything, but it does solve the individual’s problem of taking who I am to be a small separate, independently existing being, subject to birth, death, suffering, and the bites of every passing mosquito.

If you want an explanation for everything, then you
are getting into different territory. Vedanta can
provide an explanation, but whether one accepts
it or not, is up to the individual. If you would like me
to, I can provide my understanding of what Vedanta says
about this subject in another post, as I think it’s
too big a topic to go into in here.

Then, when you say nothing matters in the end. I
would say the end of what and for whom? It really
matters for the duration of the dream character’s life.
There is no end to brahmatma, to who you really are,
because there never was a beginning. Brahman is
ever the same.

But from the point of view of the ‘dream’ character,
if you are having a nightmare, wouldn’t you rather know
without a shadow of a doubt that the nightmare can’t harm you, rather than believing that it can? Think about it.

So I hope that I was able to make the subject somewhat clear. These are really big topics and could require a lifetime’s of contemplation in order to understand them deeply.

We can discuss it some more if you would like.

Best to you,
Dhanya/Durga

I am just a casual seeker / explorer and a question that comes up when considering any “Eastern” philosopy is this:

If “no difference between my Atma, and your Atma, or anyone’s Atma. Atma is only the one Self” what does it matter in the end whether any individual mind seeks enlightenment…if one has achieved it we all have achieved it correct? In the end, what does it matter? If our perceived separate lives are just an illusion and The One is everything, then nothing matters in the end. Life is just a dream (or creative play) of The One in infinite variety.

I still have difficulty believing that our awareness of a universal oneness explains everything. I tend to think that their must be a higher “mind” that is responsible for everthing. When an “enlightened” experience passes on direct knowledge of creation that science has yet to discover then we will know the knowledge is there to be tapped.

I would appreciate your comments and corrections.