Non Dual pointers! Pointing at what can't be pointed at.

[movingalways]

Greenslade: I've seen so many threads in this forum of ego as the bad guy, and few have realised that the discussion of what the ego is or isn't is psychoanalysis. It seems few Spiritual people have even heard of the Ahamkara. Similarly with discussions of the 'self' where nobody mentions Atman. It gets very messy. Then we come into Personae or 'masks of convenience' which the 'Spiritual Self' and the 'Higher Self' are.

The mental frameworks that redefine the ego, the self and a few other things also define what non-Dual is - and what Duality is. It's not always about judgement, for me it's about authenticity.

Because you are using absolute terms - define what non-Dual and what Duality is - it certainly appears as if you're asserting that your spiritual map is THE Right Way to Think. Yes? No?

Originally Posted by movingalways

Because you are using absolute terms - define what non-Dual and what Duality is - it certainly appears as if you're asserting that your spiritual map is THE Right Way to Think. Yes? No?

What appears to you is all about you, not me. That's non-Dual understanding for you.

Originally Posted by HITESH SHAH

It is this higher self that runs the entire universe including our bodies & mind .So for me Higher Self is very important.

In Eastern religion philosophy/religion that's Atman, and by extension Brahman. Gnosticism, Jesus' actual religion, said something the same. As did Sufism. In Jungian it's the 'regular' self.

Originally Posted by inavalan

Non-duality is detrimental[/u] to one's evolvement because it shuts down mind's expansion; it throws the baby out with the bathwater.

People's binary thinking does that. People think the ego is the bad guy and then declare ego-death with no clue that all they've done is levelled-up their egos with ignorance. Something similar happens with non-Duality, only this time Duality is the bad guy. The Duality that's talked about in these forums isn't Duality, it's a mish-mash of dichotomies, fake dichotomies, Descartes' Dualism, contradiction, opposites that aren't..... Non-Duality - which us what, the 'opposite' of Duality? - becomes more of the same only worse.

Throwing the baby, the bathwater and the bath out with the bath water might not be a bad idea.

Personally I find non-Duality very liberating. The other thing is I get to choose which lens I see reality through, whether that's non-Duality, Duality, Triplex Unity or Quadruple Consciousness. You should try the Quadruple one, it's a doozy.

[movingalways]

Originally Posted by JayTruther

As now it's seen the mind just cannot do anything at all!

It sounds as if you have realized the truth that reality is not affected by anything that is said about it and that this ceasing of attempting to define what cannot be defined so as to abide without ceasing in your kebab glimpse is The Liberation.

Have you encountered the nondual teachings of Ajata that teach that only the Self-shining eternal reality of the One Absolute exists?

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

What appears to you is all about you, not me. That's non-Dual understanding for you.

But you didn't answer the question.

[HITESH SHAH]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

In Eastern religion philosophy/religion that's Atman, and by extension Brahman. Gnosticism, Jesus' actual religion, said something the same. As did Sufism. In Jungian it's the 'regular' self.

There are many belief systems which talk of atman and deny higher self (paramatman - Param/super atman) . Sankhya school of hinduism , jainism , buddhism have many interpretations to that effect . But largely almost all religions talk of/believe in Higher self - paramatman - brahman - God - cosmic consciousness . And accordinhly I am also a firm believer in Higher Self.


Atman by extension is of same nature of Brahman and but very small particle of Brahman. You can c corollary to that is atman <<<<<(very small than ) parmatman .

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

But you didn't answer the question.

Yes I did.

In your reality Greenslade is an 'object' of your consciousness and that is the Ahamkara at work. You create that 'object' out of your perceptions and what you create from your perceptions is all about you. What you think of me is all about you, not me. And yes, me too.

Duality is you and the 'object' of your consciousness that is Greenslade. In Advaita there are not two things, there is only you and you are not a 'thing'. Paraphrased.

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

How I exist in that person's reality is what their ego needs me to be.

And likewise how we all exist in your reality is what your ego needs us to be.

And when you say things like "I've seen so many threads in this forum of ego as the bad guy, and few have realised that the discussion of what the ego is or isn't is psychoanalysis," then that is simply the interpretation of your own ego rather than anything which we might have said.

Peace

Originally Posted by iamthat

And when you say things like "I've seen so many threads in this forum of ego as the bad guy, and few have realised that the discussion of what the ego is or isn't is psychoanalysis,"

Actually it is, unless your ego is going to re-write psychology too. Spiritually the word is 'Ahamkara'.