No duality in nonduality

[Moondance]

Nonduality means not-two-ality. Not-two means One without a second. In the realisation that reality is without a second it’s seen that whatever state/condition is arising - that is it.

Often when people are trying to grasp nonduality with the usual tools for grasping things - i.e. the (left hemispherical) analytical functioning of mind, they reason, ‘my cup has got an inside and outside’ or ‘hey, I’ve got two ears’ and conclude that nonduality can’t be the case. But these sort of objections are misguided. No credible speaker on nonduality rejects the apparent relative dualities, multiplicities, variations and contrasts (up-down, in-out, hot-cold etc.) of everyday experience.

This manifestation of ’everyday experience’ is the very stuff of Source. Things, forms, states, situations, feelings, thoughts etc. are not other than the radiant play of Source just the way they are. They don’t need to be banished or overcome - they don’t need to disappear or be corrected. You don’t need to enter a state of cessation, oblivion, nothingness, absorption or nirvikalpa samhadi for nonduality to be the case. Right now, just as things are - realised or not realised - nonduality is the case.

As Nagarjuna said, “nirvana is not other than samsara - rightly seen”.

[Gem]

Nonduality means not-two-ality. Not-two means One without a second. In the realisation that reality is without a second it’s seen that whatever state/condition is arising - that is it.

Often when people are trying to grasp nonduality with the usual tools for grasping things - i.e. the (left hemispherical) analytical functioning of mind, they reason, ‘my cup has got an inside and outside’ or ‘hey, I’ve got two ears’ and conclude that nonduality can’t be the case. But these sort of objections are misguided. No credible speaker on nonduality rejects the apparent relative dualities, multiplicities, variations and contrasts (up-down, in-out, hot-cold etc.) of everyday experience.

This manifestation of ’everyday experience’ is the very stuff of Source. Things, forms, states, situations, feelings, thoughts etc. are not other than the radiant play of Source just the way they are. They don’t need to be banished or overcome - they don’t need to disappear or be corrected. You don’t need to enter a state of cessation, oblivion, nothingness, absorption or nirvikalpa samhadi for nonduality to be the case. Right now, just as things are - realised or not realised - nonduality is the case.

As Nagarjuna said, “nirvana is not other than samsara - rightly seen”.
Sounds good, but the issue of obstacles to overcome also arose in another thread on non-duality, where it seems the notions of oneness and perfection are like trump cards that rule out all else - but when we speak of the healing, the purification, the alignment, or whatever it can be referred to as - that is not excluded by ideals like oneness or perfection. The issue is complicated by notions that 'I have to do something' to get past obstacles, to heal, to purify myself, which is supported by reactions of aversion toward things that get stuck in the lifeform, along with the desire for that free flow of bliss throughout, and indeed it is the cessation of such reactive dynamics that best enable the purification to proceed.

In The Buddhist lexicon (that being what I'm most familiar with), 'seeing rightly' is called 'samma-samadhi', which is translated as right meditation, right concentration or right observation, depending on context.

[Moondance]

Sounds good, but the issue of obstacles to overcome also arose in another thread on non-duality, where it seems the notions of oneness and perfection are like trump cards that rule out all else - but when we speak of the healing, the purification, the alignment, or whatever it can be referred to as - that is not excluded by ideals like oneness or perfection. The issue is complicated by notions that 'I have to do something' to get past obstacles, to heal, to purify myself, which is supported by reactions of aversion toward things that get stuck in the lifeform, along with the desire for that free flow of bliss throughout, and indeed it is the cessation of such reactive dynamics that best enable the purification to proceed.

In The Buddhist lexicon (that being what I'm most familiar with), 'seeing rightly' is called 'samma-samadhi', which is translated as right meditation, right concentration or right observation, depending on context.

Hello Gem

Firstly for the cohesion of what follows let me restate that there’s a distinction to be made between the assertion that nothing is required for Oneness to be the case - and the realisation of Oneness. They are often conflated but they are not the same. Oneness is the case, realisation or not. For realisation to be the case, realisation is required.

The issue of how realisation comes about is often contentious and controversial - but it needn’t be. What seems to be reported in most cases of this shift is that an opening occurs in which the habitual dualistic projections of the mind are momentarily dissolved or bypassed. Conditions that take us to the edge of our habituated outlook such as meditation, inquiry, existential crisis, trauma etc. often seem to be the correlate in the occurrence of this opening. Does purification play any part in this? I doubt it, but I don’t know.

Beyond this opening/shift, the habitual mind states will continue to arise (the left hemisphere is basically a duality projecting machine.) It doesn’t matter who you are - the Buddha, Ramana, Eckhart Tolle, these dualistic projections will still occur. But now they are not so readily bought into - they are seen to be a movement of Source (so to speak.) I suppose that this could be thought of as an ongoing re-alignment as the biology/psychology of the organism is adjusting to the new orientation.

Does any of this imply a separate instigator/doer/adjuster? Think of a plant receiving energy from the sun. It orients its leaves in order to receive maximum photons from the sun’s rays. It converts the photons into sugars in order for the plant to thrive. Nowhere in this is a separate entity. It's just a moment by moment dance involving the whole gestalt.

This opening/shift/realignment could be said to be like the orienting of the leaves in order to let in the light. It is simply a movement of a 'global event’ entailing no separate parts.

[Gem]

Hello Gem

Firstly for the cohesion of what follows let me restate that there’s a distinction to be made between the assertion that nothing is required for Oneness to be the case - and the realisation of Oneness. They are often conflated but they are not the same. Oneness is the case, realisation or not. For realisation to be the case, realisation is required.

The issue of how realisation comes about is often contentious and controversial - but it needn’t be.
Probably because there is no 'how' to realise. I guess there is a 'way' to see what 'is the case' - but 'the way' and 'how to' are not the same thing.

What seems to be reported in most cases of this shift is that an opening occurs in which the habitual dualistic projections of the mind are momentarily dissolved or bypassed. Conditions that take us to the edge of our habituated outlook such as meditation, inquiry, existential crisis, trauma etc. often seem to be the correlate in the occurrence of this opening. Does purification play any part in this? I doubt it, but I don’t know.
It's probably not the case that spiritual acrobatics we see sold in spiritualism leads to self realisation. The best way forward is to stop seeking something which is not 'here' and start noticing what is.

Beyond this opening/shift, the habitual mind states will continue to arise (the left hemisphere is basically a duality projecting machine.) It doesn’t matter who you are - the Buddha, Ramana, Eckhart Tolle, these dualistic projections will still occur.


But now they are not so readily bought into - they are seen to be a movement of Source (so to speak.) I suppose that this could be thought of as an ongoing re-alignment as the biology/psychology of the organism is adjusting to the new orientation.
Yes, I have often heard this called 'alignment', maybe 'integration'.

Does any of this imply a separate instigator/doer/adjuster? Think of a plant receiving energy from the sun. It orients its leaves in order to receive maximum photons from the sun’s rays. It converts the photons into sugars in order for the plant to thrive. Nowhere in this is a separate entity. It's just a moment by moment dance involving the whole gestalt.
OK... teehee.

This opening/shift/realignment could be said to be like the orienting of the leaves in order to let in the light. It is simply a movement of a 'global event’ entailing no separate parts.
Personally, I couldn't say it any better - but what I can say is we sometimes try to make it into something we know and understand, when to me at least, it's more like the outpouring of universal love (and how that rises within and throughout us).

[no1wakesup]

its always the duality interpretation of non duality...until it isnt. There is nothing in between.

[no1wakesup]

Nonduality means not-two-ality. Not-two means One without a second. In the realisation that reality is without a second it’s seen that whatever state/condition is arising - that is it.

Often when people are trying to grasp nonduality with the usual tools for grasping things - i.e. the (left hemispherical) analytical functioning of mind, they reason, ‘my cup has got an inside and outside’ or ‘hey, I’ve got two ears’ and conclude that nonduality can’t be the case. But these sort of objections are misguided. No credible speaker on nonduality rejects the apparent relative dualities, multiplicities, variations and contrasts (up-down, in-out, hot-cold etc.) of everyday experience.

This manifestation of ’everyday experience’ is the very stuff of Source. Things, forms, states, situations, feelings, thoughts etc. are not other than the radiant play of Source just the way they are. They don’t need to be banished or overcome - they don’t need to disappear or be corrected. You don’t need to enter a state of cessation, oblivion, nothingness, absorption or nirvikalpa samhadi for nonduality to be the case. Right now, just as things are - realised or not realised - nonduality is the case.

As Nagarjuna said, “nirvana is not other than samsara - rightly seen”.

Well said.

[Moondance]

its always the duality interpretation of non duality...until it isnt. There is nothing in between.

Hello no1wakesup

Yes. There’s no duality in nonduality - but thought/language can make it seem otherwise.

[no1wakesup]

Moondance,

Yes.

[youngnostic]

Nonduality means not-two-ality. Not-two means One without a second. In the realisation that reality is without a second it’s seen that whatever state/condition is arising - that is it.

Often when people are trying to grasp nonduality with the usual tools for grasping things - i.e. the (left hemispherical) analytical functioning of mind, they reason, ‘my cup has got an inside and outside’ or ‘hey, I’ve got two ears’ and conclude that nonduality can’t be the case. But these sort of objections are misguided. No credible speaker on nonduality rejects the apparent relative dualities, multiplicities, variations and contrasts (up-down, in-out, hot-cold etc.) of everyday experience.

This manifestation of ’everyday experience’ is the very stuff of Source. Things, forms, states, situations, feelings, thoughts etc. are not other than the radiant play of Source just the way they are. They don’t need to be banished or overcome - they don’t need to disappear or be corrected. You don’t need to enter a state of cessation, oblivion, nothingness, absorption or nirvikalpa samhadi for nonduality to be the case. Right now, just as things are - realised or not realised - nonduality is the case.

As Nagarjuna said, “nirvana is not other than samsara - rightly seen”.

I like this. This is something that at times would be held as intellectual property, so I feel free to share share my Peace as well:
Ultimately it's not that Duality is none existent, it's that even a seeming duality of self and subject-object-form such as your body can be seen as pointing to an I that is deeper than the body...
Love is the only Union of the pans of Understanding and Bliss that acquits you of your debt to the earth and the cycle of rebirth.
"You Live that you may learn to Love: You Love that you may learn to Live; no other lesson is required of Man."

[youngnostic]

Another example of duality is the fact that we can't remember our time in the womb or even our years of 1-2. That's simply because we had a different vision.
So ultimately what we see is not the only form of vision.
Also we see differently during deep sleep.
Could that state becoming closer to our Truest Nature?
What happens after Death must be a kin to what we see in our dreams.
At least such states are the only rational hints.
A Zoroastrian would not renounce the chance to enter into the flame in the afterlife whereas a Western Orthodox Christian who is raised to believe in hellfire connoting damnation would be less likely to find brilliance in a flame, the Sun, lighting a variety of incense, whereas True Unification of Self is only perceived through Formlessness. That's why there is generally four attention holders: audio/visual; words/numbers; nature; and emptiness.
Emptiness is the only constant.
0 = infinity -> 0 / infinity = 1
In essence zero; nothing; Nothing; no thing; is all there is.
It's the Source, the Way, and Goal of the 10,000 things that arise side-by-side in pairs.
Our shadows teach us that we are far more Timeless when we close our eyes in Silence.

[youngnostic]

To Learn to Love is none other than to Strive to Extend Understanding, as we ultimately cannot Love that which we cannot Understand. Love is the fruit of Understanding; of which is the fruit of Bliss, which ultimately leads to Holy Freedom. The shift between states ranged from a twinkle to some to an Aeon in others. Our goal is the Outstripping of Time and the Outgrowing of Space. Once that has taken place duality will not be misconstrued as real.