Does the word New describe nonduality?

[Ewwerrin]

Hi,
Over the years I've listened to many speak about nonduality. And hear them describe it like many things. And I've always wanted to find a word that checks all the boxes of all claims made about nonduality.

It seems to me that New checks most boxes if not all of them.
But what do you think?

Forever. Infinite. Now. Infinite, eternal. Everything. Nothing. Mystery. Unchanging. Unknowable. Beyond identity. No self. Absolute.

The word New seems to check those boxes. Especially the most common description of "Unknowable, And beyond identity. Because it is always new so its so new that one cannot even know it because it is so new. And its always so new. That we always have no knowledge of it, nor of our identity being always new aswell, in the absolute sense.

Do you think new is a good word to describe nonduality? Or not?

Is it the silver lining that connects all things? New is such an absolute unchanging thing.

EDIT: Oh I almost forgot. The most important one: Non acquivalence, no likeness and no unlikeness, no comparison, absolute. It also is described by word New. New involved a believe in linear time. Therefor I often use Unique or Uniqueness interchangably with New or Newness. Maybe Uniqueness is an even better word to describe the absolute.

But I'm curious on your perspective of these words, new, uniqueness. Do you think they uphold or are they flawed, and if so, in what way?

Thank you.

[vortex]

i don't think you can put it in a box like that even the label nonduality is a bit off its one of those experiences or ways of being words don't describe well
and every body will experience it differently

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

But what do you think?
Do you think new is a good word to describe nonduality? Or not?

Not for me.
Now, if you had said ''Old News''...I might have,
(There is) ''Only One'' I like. I think R.Maharshi would like that one, too!

[Hemera]

When I first noticed the thread I thought the word was 'now'!

And actually, for me, that does seem to describe non duality quite well.

But I agree with Vortex, it's impossible to really put non duality in a box, as doing so makes it one thing and not another by default, so it becomes dualistic. Or in my dualistic thinking anyway.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by vortex

i don't think you can put...
... experience it differently

Hi, thanks for reply.

If I may ask.

Aren't you describing newness/uniqueness when you say "every body will experience it differently."?

Thanks.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Not for me...
... like that one, too!

Haha, ok, good to hear your view on this.

Can I suggest maybe old news is older by the day and therefor different and new every day.
And isn't the quality of "the one without the other" that it is absolute in it's uniqueness and therefor newness? Because it has no comparison or likeness, it is so unique and absolute in its uniqueness that it stays unchangingly being new forever as all things are being new without becoming anything else. Doesnt that make newness absolute and "the one"?

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

Can I suggest maybe old news is older by the day and therefor different and new every day.

A thought, ''Ever New".

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by Hemera

When I first...
... dualistic thinking anyway.

Thank you for sharing your perspective on this. I really appreciate it.

If I may ask. Doesn't the word "new" describe everything?
For example, you may think, well if it is new, then it is not old. But old things get newer in their oldness by the day.

When I try to describe everything as being old "been there, done that". It assumes that it is possible to experience the same thing twice. Even the twiceness of it is new. Not only is our consciousness new, perspective new, now. New now. Everything seems to be always new now. In the absolute sense. That there exists nothing that is not being new. All of the time. Therefor all is newness itself. Which must then be the union of all life as one. Newness.

Even if you can experience the exact same thing a thousand times (which is nearly impossible), the very fact that it is the new thousandth perspective, makes it new.

And doesnt newness imply that it can never be known, nor does it have to be known. Because it is always new. So there is never a definition for it. That describes literally all of reality.

Sorry for gabbing so much. I am just trying to find counter evidence as you so kindly provided. And it sounds convincing.

If it is new, then it must not be old. But in reality, old things become newer every day. Today its 1 day old. Tomorrow it's 2 days old. 3 days old. It is always new.

I cant find the "other thing that it is not." It seems that newness is the unifying principle of all reality and unreality and existence itself being so new and unique that its polar opposite, non existence literally does not exist. It has to be the one. And all. Absolute.

It never became and will never end. It is forever just being new in one moment and place. Being new/unique without becoming new/unique. Newness as an absolute unchanging state of being. Transcending all definitions and boxes, polarities and opposites.

Is it not so? Or are you still thinking, no, newness is not the word. Maybe I wasn't as convincing as I thought.

Sorry just being curious.

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

A thought, ''Ever New".

Haha ok, it's just a thought/concept. But if I really test it, put it to the test, it seems to uphold as an absolute truth in and of all things. And completely nondual and unifying.
I can' t find anything that is not being new.

If even old things are new, then it must be existence itself. It is very surprising. Because I thought existence must be stagnant, but the most stagnant thing about existence is that it is always being new. Mind blowing.

Thank you all so much for sharing your perspectives. I love it. Thank you.

[Ewwerrin]

The concept is that the absolute reality, nondual, is newness itself. You may have many ideas why new cannot define nonduality, but I have found that all reasons given only furtherMORE validate that New is indeed a word that describes nonduality perfectly.
Like "nonduality cannot be defined/grasped."
This does not unvalidate New as a concept to define nonduality.
Because, and you have guessed it! New cannot be defined/grasped!

New cannot be put into a box.
So if you say, "No, the word New cannot describe nonduality, because nonduality cannot be put into a box."
Can you put something new into a box? Can you even grasp what is new, if it is unknown by definition? If nonduality cannot be defined, the word New can equally not be defined. That which is new cannot be described. Once it has been described, it is old. It becomes a concept in the mind. And that has got nothing to do with the reality of nonduality.
Nonduality is absolute newness.

And if you denie the word New, because nonduality cannot be put into a box.
Well, then you also validate the word New. Because its definition cannot be put into a box.

And new is now. Now is not different from the word now. You can have old now, which is a false idea. But without now, you can still have timeless newness. Or uniqueness. So the word new can even survive defining nonduality in higher dimensions. Newness, uniqueness, does not require change to be new and unique.

If you think you understand New, then you haven't really understood its definition.
If something can be understood, it must be old, and thus imaginary.
Reality = nonduality = absolute = new = ungraspable.


Just like nonduality cannot be grasped. New cannot be grasped, because it is everything forever. New is defining everything and everywhen. It is the absolute reality, which cannot be grasped, because its attribute is newness itself. And it describes everything just like nonduality does.

So far every reason someone has given, for why "New" cannot define nonduality, has only furtherMORE confirmed that new is indeed the word that defines nonduality.

Not one valid counter evidence has been be shown to denie that. Or can be shown.

I challenge anyone to unvalidate new as a nondual concept.