Beliefs - open discussion

Greetings..

Originally Posted by hybrid

Although many words are used to point to enlightenment or non-dual presence, non-duality is not a philosophy or learned subject. Although it is often treated as a philosophy, the word non-duality is pointing to life itself. You are that life. You are not a person separate from life who must learn the subject of non-duality, memorize it, and tell the story that you have it or get it. You are it. The pointers are pointing the mind into a relaxation, an unlearning of all the positions, philosophies, opinions, and beliefs that make up the "me." - kiloby

As respectfully as possible, i would like to point-out that this too, is a belief.. a concept that is contradicted by other evidence..

Be well..

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..


As respectfully as possible, i would like to point-out that this too, is a belief.. a concept that is contradicted by other evidence..

Be well..

Its a belief to the degree that anything spoken is a belief, but its pointing beyond belief. The question is, how attached is the person saying it to the truth of those words?

[Moonglow]

Hello,

I don't think there can be a debate and or discussion about non-duality.
The way I look at it is non-duality is just the way something is being. Example Light is just Light in of itself. It does not try or oppose anything.
In and of itself it is non-duel.

The duality comes into play when someone defines the light as he/she may come to understand the light. So it gets compared to that which is defined as being the opposition to it. Which would be, for example, dark.

What comes to me when someone gets into a debate about non-duality, duality gets created through the process of each side presenting their view point, definition, or explanation of it. Thus, IMO, what gets discussed forms into a duality of perceptions.

I don't think non-duality has to do with belief. To me beliefs create duality or how one may define and/or identify something and what that is based on.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by Moonglow

Hello,

I don't think there can be a debate and or discussion about non-duality.
The way I look at it is non-duality is just the way something is being. Example Light is just Light in of itself. It does not try or oppose anything.
In and of itself it is non-duel.

The duality comes into play when someone defines the light as he/she may come to understand the light. So it gets compared to that which is defined as being the opposition to it. Which would be, for example, dark.

What comes to me when someone gets into a debate about non-duality, duality gets created through the process of each side presenting their view point, definition, or explanation of it. Thus, IMO, what gets discussed forms into a duality of perceptions.

I don't think non-duality has to do with belief. To me beliefs create duality or how one may define and/or identify something and what that is based on.

Language is a dualistic tool because concepts artificially define and limit something that is beyond definition and limitation. As soon as we say 'light', we also create the existence of 'not-light'. As soon as we say 'God', we also create the existence of 'not-God'. Thats the nature of language, as I think you said, it creates duality.

The peace that passeth understanding (the non-dual state) could be said to be a peace that comes from no longer believing that concepts have an inherent truth or meaning. Which means releasing the need to buy into the truth of 'our' thoughts. Equally, that doesnt mean to say that the thoughts are a lie, they may well be true. The key to the peace is in being open to the possibility either way.

Greetings..

As you can see, "non-duality" is not a 'truth'.. it is a description of speculation about how people 'feel'.. Truth is self-evident, without the need of explanation for validation, it is so because it is so..

Be well..

Its a belief to the degree that anything spoken is a belief, but its pointing beyond belief. The question is, how attached is the person saying it to the truth of those words?

Anything you point to beyond belief is still part of a belief system.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by shepherd

Anything you point to beyond belief is still part of a belief system.

I agree, thats what I said. The question is, to what degree is that person attached to the truth of that belief system.

[andrew g]

Originally Posted by TzuJanLi

Greetings..

As you can see, "non-duality" is not a 'truth'.. it is a description of speculation about how people 'feel'.. Truth is self-evident, without the need of explanation for validation, it is so because it is so..

Be well..

I would say that non-duality and Truth are basically the same thing and essentially are 'feeling' in the sense that Life itself is 'feeling'. Being at peace could be said to be surrendered to feeling, and in allowance of feeling at all times. Its when we believe the truth of 'our' thoughts that we are divorced from feeling to some degree.

I can imagine Kate might quite like the second sentence.....did that grab you Kate?

I agree, thats what I said. The question is, to what degree is that person attached to the truth of that belief system.

I dont think there is a measurement system for attachement as its easy to say there is little attachment until faced with something that challenges the belief. Its like saying I have no interest in food when not hungry.

in regards to non duality....its not so clear that there is no duality or non duality. Some things are clearly quite wrong but why they happened is not so clear or easy to judge. Is there a description for believing in both LOL.

[Moonglow]

Hello,

I would go along that language is just a tool we use to communicate something. I can also see that by creating one thing another thing gets created with in ones thinking. That is, to me, how the thought process works.

I can also go along with that as one observes and or experiences something that there is no need to think about and try to define as being this or that.
To just allow its presence to be.

I would say any words that is used is just a description and not necessarily what that something is. Non-duel to me is having no opposing force, where I see it has also been defined as how one may "feel" something to be. How one "feels" to me may drift into how one defines it to be.

All in all when using words, to me, is communicating how one defines something or thinks (believe) it to be or not at the present moment.

I think it is hard to put into words how one experiences something as being just "what it is" or its presence.

But without these words there is not much of a discussion and I do enjoy and find the exploration and individual expressions fun and interesting.
I learn quite a lot through these words.