What is non duality?
 

I have been wondering what could non duality possibly be. Yet alone that there is some concept of non duality that there is a section devoted to it.

Nonduality
 

It's a way of life which recognizes while things look dual , it is also non-dual and lead the life with belief n conviction also in non duality.

Non-duality is great fun when you step back and watch a thread on it. It's people who are often too wrapped up in the Spirituality to realise that they're using duality to argue the existence of something they've already acknowledged the existence of.

In a way it's whatever you want it to be . No-one has got jurisdiction or the monopoly of what it means . It's made up as a concept but for many it refers to there is no separation that exists even within individual experience but the waters muddy when peeps think it refers to One entity fundamentally, which then personalises God or what you are prior to experiencing individuality .

Non duality from another perspective reflects duality because you can't have non duality without it's comparison present .

It would be like saying there is only thin people in a world without knowing or having realised that opposite .

You will never have a constant regarding the mentioning of non duality and that's why this concept can potentially run and run and run through similar motions forevermore .


x daz x

Simply - there was never, is never and won't be ever 2 of anything.
There is Only One, m'dear sis.
We appear to be separate. We appear to be many.
We seem to have individualized souls. But, nope.
We are still all within or part of or extensions of The One. :icon_cheers:
Have I experienced it directly, up-close and personal rather then read about it?
Oh yeah. Mind blowing, jaw dropping experience, I must say!

Yet, outside of source there has to be duality to some degree.

Without it there can not be any expansion.
And expansion is what creation is all about.
Expansion of consciousness.

Agreed. :smile: I would add even more than 'just' expansion.

I can understand and accept if some people have an idea or belief in something such as non-duality or different religious beliefs...to each their own.

But what you stated only express's a conviction of a belief and accepting that as a way of life. Without actually expressing the ideology behind the conviction of said belief.
An example: What is Judaism? It's just a convection that I follow in Life in something I believe in.
That's cool, but I still have no clue what Judaism is though.

If that's your philosophy in Life, cool beans.

For me my Philosophy is just to attempt to understand something, instead of acting like I know something.

Too or To? Ehh I just use to...Too makes me think of Tootsie rolls then I forgot to learn which one is used properly :(

We experience a world of form, and the nature of form is limitation. Where there is limitation there is duality.

Pervading all form is formlessness, and the nature of formlessness is limitlessness. Limitless ever-present formlessness is non-duality.

This limitless ever-present formlessness is our own Being. When we know our own Being then we realise that there is just Being everywhere.

And then we realise that form and formlessness co-exist. Duality and non-duality co-exist. The paradox is that non-duality cannot recognise non-duality, so recognition of non-duality requires a state of duality. That which is everywhere cannot perceive itself. It can only be perceived by that which is somewhere.

Peace

This kinda sums up Philosophy and the way I see non-duality as.
This also refers back to what I commented on about conviction in a underlining way.

Philosophy, in a way is to attempt to understand or to seek that which is unknown without actually knowing.

Belief, which involves a conviction of knowing something even if it's unknown to some or refused by some. In that one should be able to express, explain, or show. Or else it's like having Blind Faith in something.

As I mentioned in my OP since there is a section devoted to non-duality as there is some form of set belief in non-duality. If there is an actual belief in it I am interested in learning about it.
I'm not knocking nor wanting to ridcule anyone's idea of non-duality. I think the belief of Duality is very good and important. And the philosophical idea's of non-duality as well.

Philosophy is becoming a lost art and has became like a underground way of thought..outcasted.
Let's take Psychology for example when it branched and disowned the way of Philosophy and took on the Scientific approach. It has created a disdain casualty to the human race.
Now instead of thinking they know, Psychology act's as if they know. And sweep their mistakes under the rug with the denial within Psychology today. But the human race suffer's from this ill sickened belief that Psychology holds onto ans forces people to believe. Mostly to blind faith of science.
Carl Jung was probably one of the last profound person in Psychology that kept his passion for Philosophy and blended that with a scientific approach. Of course most people think he was some spiritual, metaphysical, or what have you person. Due to Freud's slander campaign that still works to this day, props to Freud though.

Now, this I can see as a way to express what non-duality might be,
which is also the closest way I have came close to forming an idea of non-duality.

There's no satisfactory answer outside of analogy and that's dualistic because of the nature of mind.

We can say things like "Earth, Sun, Moon and stars revolve inside me" or "I am everything and everything is Me" or "It's the waking equivalent of a lucid dream".

It's a subjective "knowing" or realization that's frustratingly impossible to relate and even to reconcile within one's own mind because of its very nature. LOL!

In the end each of us has to "know" It through our own deep inner exploration and even one tiny glimpse into That reality is beyond profound.

If I had to recommend two practices that would be a good starting point to facilitate that "knowing" they would be:

1 - Techniques that facilitate Awareness of Awareness (a meditation path).
2 - Teachings that elucidate the significance of that Awareness (a knowledge path).

I do like the way you see things.
If I may, creating and building that bridge between Heart and Mind. Is a multiplexity design, an unfortunately so many believe that they are where they want to be or should be. Instead of where they need to be or could be....so one is lead to believe there is no need for such a bridge or incapable to build it on there own.

Deabting, I am sad to hear that you believe this is a debate. That does seem to be the social norm now though. In which as ties together in a underlining way again from my previous comment. About how Philosophy is dying as an way of thinking. Anyone who believes they are having a discussion within Philosophy and it's nothing but a argumentative debate. Is far far from the heart of philosophy.

As your name in a way points towards the Tao, I am sure you can feel what I mean.
Also the world needs bridge maker's, the demand is plenty and the supply is so few.

Did you experience ‘it’ only once, and is that enough, or do you wish to experience it again? Could someone experience it always? Was it related to a kundalini experience?

Oh my, you're making me reminisce...thank you! No, not just once - no kundalini involved.
I'd say if my heart, mind and soul wanted to exp it more I would buckle down and sit more
often in long meditation!!!!
Alas ---just being content and Practicing the Presence, acknowledging God in all my ways, satisfies me too much!!
Funny how we are truly all One - yet, I love the role of lover and Beloved.
I mean that's why I am a separate soul...for the Divine Romance.

(Btw, there is NO difference between yourself and me and an enlightened yogi!
All it takes is a sincere desire in the heart ...
a wonderfully focused, burning, exquisite desire.)

You’re welcome!

Nice for you. I am not content, and it’s my ‘focused, burning, exquisite desire’ that keeps me looking for more, specifically, to have greater connection between my normal mind and my higher Self.

Define form?
Because form it's self is ever-changing the form of nature, the form of though, the form of life. Just as Evolution teaches us that form can be limitless. For those who as God Like put it if your thin and never seen or heard of a fat person Will the thin person limit there thinking or understand that thinking can be limitless? {Yes I said it}
So close minded thinking can't recognize open minded thinking. And vise versa.

This begs me to think what is to recognize? Is recognition required to be real or true.
Which now leads me to think of does a tree make a noise when falls idea or Schrodinger's cat idea. Does this imply that co-existing is also just an idea of recognizing in order to be real or true. Yet, the very notion of co-exist implies recognition of two separate existence. And in order to recognize two existence. One has to recognize that One exist then recognize that another One exist. Which brings coexistence of 2.

Does this mean that your saying the paradox is just an illusion that trap's existence in perpetual state of confusion caused by what is real in comparison to what one think's or believe's is real. So in this train of thought is recognition the answer or problem or both?

Being a Mod - I had to go back and shorten the quotes.
And sorry, had no idea Matty was a guy's name.
I guess I was thinking Maddy, Madeline, dah.

Hahahahahahaha, Bingo. :thumbsup:
Or as Meher Baba put it, paraphrased and shortened from memory --
God is Love. And love must love.
Since He is the Only One ---there is no one for Him to love but Himself.
So as the Lover He imagines a Beloved to love.

(Us) :hug3:

Thank's everyone for helping me on the search to understand non-duality.

There is not two - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSuGD0fqotw

And The One only exists in relation to the many - so there is the understanding. The One is both One and many.

Sometimes I just like watching threads because often it becomes full of character rather than Spirituality. That's not a judgement it's an observation I enjoy watching play out.

I think the gist of non-duality seems to be the reconciliation of opposites such as light and dark, love and hate being the 'classics'. Spiritual vs human. Often it's binary thinking because one of them is sent to the trashcan so there's little reconciliation between the two. It becomes one-dimensional Spirituality and most of the time self-defeating, trying to argue the non-existence of something that you've acknowledged the existence of is not Right Thinking.

Is that a Tootsie Roll or a roll from Toostsie? Asking for a friend.

I think the belief is very limiting because for the most part people tend to create their beliefs and when the cognitive dissonance kicks in so does the Spiritual 'fight or flight' response kicks in. Few seem to want to understand what creates duality and few seem to want to expand their consciousness past it. There are things both 'above and below' duality that make sense of everything.

Non-duality is the bonkers that acknowledges the existence of duality then argues that it doesn't exist. Duality is binary thinking - 'this' vs 'that'. Non-duality is a binary thinking attempt to transcend binary thinking by using binary thinking - duality vs non-duality. The non-duality argument seems to choc-a-bloc with duality. It's all very one-dimensional.

It would be interesting here to include some psychology because the Jungian model of the self resolving the paradox between the conscious and conscious to create/expand consciousness explains it all very well. Unfortunately duality rears its ugly head because psychology has no place in Spirituality because many Spiritual people don't understand how well the ancients of the Indus Valley knew about psychology.

Then again, the Triplex Unity model that the pre-Taoist alchemists resolves the paradox of duality vs non-duality - or any other 'this' vs 'that' in a nicely five-dimensional way. It's the undifferentiated consciousness of the self rather than the differentiated consciousness of the ego - which is the 'source' of duality, both Spiritually and psychologically.

"The world, indeed, is like a heat haze.
Things have no form in themselves"
The Tao Te Ching
Mary English translation.

B it we make a thing of duality and non-duality.

non-duality
 

If u feel its a set of religious beliefs , that may historically be true . But scientifically we are non-dual many times . Common case being in sleep . In sleep though person is breathing and is alive ,he/she does not remember anything in this world while in sleep and is one with universe relishing the refreshing blissful experience of sleep. This is quite common-place experience and nothing extra-ordinary about it.The people with belief in non-duality try to practice day to day common-place reality with more intensity at more granular level while in action in awake status. In pursuit of these efforts , lot of humane qualities develop in the seeker.

Non-duality is not denial of duality but it is recognition and appreciation of non-duality in seemingly apparent duality situations.

As regards understanding ideology of non-duality , here JASG/imathat have explained in quite better terms and also this sub-forum is full of lot of discussion hereon.

Yup. :)
The Paradox with a capital P ...like, agony is also ecstasy...crazy world!!:biggrin:
Death is the doorway to adventure! Huh?
Nothing is what it seems in this place.

PS ---Matty, if you wanna understand this non duality stuff ...get into quantum physics more. :thumbsup: Don't ask us bozos.
My thought is you think a chair is really a chair, still, yeah? :tongue: Nope.

It's the exact opposite. The non-dual is intrinsic existence and the dual is extrinsic existence. Intrinsic existence always Is whether manifest or not. Extrinsic existence only is when manifest. The many only exist because of the One but the One has no such dependence on the many.

Clay exists whether or not pottery exists. Pottery cannot exist without clay. The ocean exists whether or not waves exist. Waves cannot exist without the ocean.

Your assertion is only true from the perspective of mind, of the manifest.

Indeed, form is ever-changing. There may be a limitless number of forms but no form is limitless. That which is limitless cannot change. That which changes is not limitless.

Peace

For me it's an owl, a tree, a Tootsie roll of thoughts. All in all that's Philosophy, inspire ourselves to think for ourselves. As opposed to be just told what to think or believe.
You state that it's bonkers to ponder on non-duality because it acknowledge's duality. While finding it amusing to watch. And yet try to imply that your non judgmental and reinforce that idea by saying that it's wrong thinking or not right thinking.
That's like a double negative of judgement. Since you like to speak of Psychology, Your saying that only your way of thinking is right and anyone who doesn't think like you is wrong. To the point that you find it amusing to watch as an attempt to put them down.
What Psychology term would be applied to such a person?

Me personally if you don't like philosophical discussion. That's completely fine and I mean that with complete non judgment. People have the right to cognitively think the way want.
After all that is why Carl Jung spent so much time and embarked deeper into the heart of Psychology. Because Freud would try to insult and label Jung psychotic because the way he thought. ( Mostly out of jealousy) Jung rejected Freud's labels, eventually wrote a book that proved Freud label to be nothing more than a judgemental notion from a point of view from not understanding.

Spirituality and Psychology is meant to coincide. Psychology of today isn't the same Psychology of before. Psychology today is in the name of science and science should also coincide with spirituality. Now science disowned and tries to disprove spiritually.
Mind, body, and soul should be the spiritual way. All these chain of events has also changed the way spiritually is treated.
All the greats Buddha, Lao Tzu, Jesus, etc etc all spoke of the mind, body and soul. I learned more about "psychology" way before I ever touched a psychology book. I still don't like how psychology is today.

I think paradox seems to be used a tad to lighly so far, but paradox just as so many other words has created to much of a subjective nature.
I am glad you decided join the thread instead of watching from the bench.

I didn't say that it was a religious belief.
But if what your saying about sleep through your scientific belief is your conviction in life. Then thank you for expressing your belief.

Don't sell "us" short... when science catch's up to spiritually I may ask them bozos.

What chair? There is no chair

So cute, I luv it. That's right!
No chair! :hug2:

It's us that creates the paradox when we don't realise the intrinsic Isness of it, instead we put it into opposition.

I wasn't talking about duality or non-duality though, that's the difference. So yes, clay does exist whether or not pottery exists or not but without the pottery the clay is just the same as the rest of the dirt. When the potter comes along and forms it into something beautiful it's something more.

Yes the ocean exists without the waves but with the interaction of the moon and the tides - or the storm - it becomes an awe-inspiring force of nature.

When intrinsic and extrinsic come together something bigger, better and bolder happens.

Just the same as we are 'increased' by external influence, when we talk to to others and read books, etc.

The One all on its lonesome is just One, but when the One becomes both the One and the multitude what you get is a deeper understanding. So while you're talking about Duality I'm talking about Triplex Unity.

EDIT: Because something popped into my head.

The Father, the son and the Holy Spirit. The Trinity. God is because we are, we are because God is. One is because the multiplicity is, multiplicity is because One is. Without us there is no God, without God there is no us. Without the One there is no multiplicity and without the multiplicity there is no One.

It is amusing sometimes, especially in the context that one of the mainstays of Spirituality is awareness. If people were a bit more aware of what they were saying then maybe we wouldn't have a non-Duality discussion - maybe we'd be talking about beyond Duality instead.

What I said was that the case for non-duality doesn't make sense and to me it's neither common sense nor logic. If you think that's judgement then be my guest, but that's your perceptions and your choice. If you actually think about the term 'non-Duality' you'll understand what I'm trying to say - what's being said there is that the duality that you acknowledge the existence of doesn't exist. How is that sensible? The case for non-existence is nonsense.

By using the word you acknowledge that it exists and most of the arguments against duality are dualistic themselves. How is that Right Thinking? I enjoy the philosophical discussion but I need it to make sense, I can't make sense of a dualistic non-duality discussion. If you can see reason and logic in that, be my guest because I'd really enjoy reading it. To me, it's bonkers and maybe what we need to do is look to the thinking instead of reinforcing the personal dogma/narratives.

Perhaps if we were more aware of what was actually being discussed? Because the discussion of Duality is not about Duality and the discussion of non-Duality is not about non-Duality.

Science isn't interested in disproving Spirituality and many scientists are either Spiritual or religious. Jung was a scholar of Advaita Vedanta and that's where he took his model of both the self and the ego from. He described the self as "The God inside" because the self was the resolution of the paradox between the conscious and the unconscious. Einstein, as with many others, believed in God and still believe in God. Scientists can live with religion/Spirituality but few Spiritual people can live with science. Max Planck used science to say that God must exist and hinted that the Universal Field of quantum theory is God - and if you look at both the science and the religion they're not so far apart after all.

I'm sure most scientists have better things to do than try to debunk Spirituality. Spirituality is built on the framework of psychology and they're two very different areas of understanding. Beliefs can be anything anyone wants them to be and are the end result of the processing of the unconscious - which is largely what you are.

Science moves forwards when concepts are debunked, when people challenge the established trains of thought. That's what Jung did but Jung didn't sit on his beliefs, he took the scientific approach to understanding. How many Spiritual people do the same? How many are willing enough to put their beliefs aside in the light of new information/thinking?

How many are going to talk about understanding beyond both Duality and not-Duality?

Spirituality is the "What?" and psychology is the "How?"

They all had a firm grasp of what we in the West call psychology. The Right Thinking of the Eightfold Path is mostly constructive cognitive behaviour, for instance. The religion/philosophy of the Indus Valley went into what we call psychology in great detail. If you want to understand the ego from a Spiritual perspective then Ahamkara is the place to go, and what you'll find there is what we call psycho9logy - especially when you delve into Chitta.

You can use the word 'dichotomy' if you like, I've seen that thrown about in similar threads. Duality and paradox are pretty much the same thing, it's 'this' vs 'that' but it's not the way it works, 'this' vs 'that' gives us something else again. So Spirituality and psychology are a duality/paradox but putting them both together makes for a very different Spirituality. Maybe that's why we are so far apart from Buddha, Jesus and so many others - maybe it's because they embraced their understanding of psychology and used it to their benefit and didn't ignore it and let it bite them on the backside.

So putting psychology and Spirituality together, Duality is the differentiated conscious of the ego while so-called non-Duality is the undifferentiated conscious of the self - the self has solved the paradox of conscious vs unconscious to 'create' consciousness. There is no inherent Duality in the discussion of Spirituality and psychology until one is created out of.... what?

"God, thou art the Love by which I Love thee."

Ultimately there is no extrinsic. It's just an appearance of and within the Intrinsic so they never come together because they are never anything different. Ahamkara "makes" the extrinsic appear real, different. That's the illusion.

Can't blame Ahamkara because it too is an appearance of and within the Intrinsic. The confusion arises from identifying with/as Ahamkara.

It's exactly like within a mundane dream identifying with the dream self and attaining lucidity within the dream is liberation from the dream self. "Knowing" it for what it is and that it is not the real Self. That the dreamer is the real Self.

The dreamer is intrinsic and the dream is extrinsic. Before the dream started, while the dream's occurring and after the dream ends the dreamer exists. The dream neither adds to nor detracts from the dreamer.

Non-Dual Awakening - How does one go from an intellectual understanding of the ‘Self’ to a living realization? https://youtu.be/DVmWlRmOnSo?t=3725

''Non-dual Awakening'' - good to place a title... so many will not click a link if
their life depended on it.
As usual you placed it on just the spot to start to listen, thank you, buddy!! :wink:

I KNOW! Right! It's HIS love!! You get it, GS. :thumbsup: