The Battle of Duality

[AaronStar]

I wanted to share my opinion on the battle of duality. I constantly hear the asserted opinion that without the day there can’t be the night, that without evil there isn’t goodness, that the two extremities are necessary so that they can complement each other and keep the balance. However, I believe this is not exactly so! The battle of duality is a scholar programme, that was allowed with the objective for development of the experience and proficiency of a soul, even its ordeal. This does not mean that the duality is the only principle used for creating worlds, for testing souls, and for gaining experience. If you start believing that this is the absolute principle, you would not be able to get balanced, as you won’t be aiming to the centre but to the dance of the cluster of mass chaotioc emotions.
The idea is, when you see evil, to declare the position of neutrality and light. This is how balance comes, the balance that many people believe is achieved by the battle between good and evil. Yet have you noted that those who partake in the battle can’t really be balanced, because on the inside they feel stormy emotions that drive them into brawls.
And at the same time people explain it to themselves that this is what is necessary in order to equilibrate the scales, maybe because they want to get revenge, to show the world who they are and assert a position. I believe that the participants in such storms stand only on the one side of the scales. I would define it as scales with only 1 platform. And it starts weighing down, sinking.
When you have lived in this illusion and realise that the divine is harmony, light and unison, you start feeling you don’t need to suffer anymore as experience, and you start aiming to get back to the centre, and then to remain there.
Maybe you start believing that somewhere, beyond the world of time and space, matter, feelings and organisations are in a different form that we haven’t believed that existed.
Duality, I believe, is not the absolute structure of physical and astronomical laws, but a decor of a school scene podium, where every single one of us is trying to rediscover themselves, to enrich themselves, to that at the time of the new exhale of the Creator, what the deserving disciples have created as Co-Creators at the time of the inhale, to be spread once again.
Maybe the goal is to get enriched and to arise where we have descended from but different. And then, to deserve to create in the eternal Breathing of God.
When I ride by the tide of music, on Creation, I feel that everything is exactly that - a never ceasing inspiring creation, where everyone is a brave adventurer who promised themselves and God to Be. And to Be Love.

ps. Anyway, this is the choice of the soul that needs to be respected and not underestimated - to live in duality until it decides to move on to another form of experience. I would not delve into the topic whether the potential for unlocking duality remains, as I have not gathered enough evidence. The power unlocked during duality, should not be underestimated, either.

[Rah nam]

It is my view, and those around me, that in order of consciousness to expend it needs the dualism.
How we move within this dualistic system is our choice.

It is true, as we move through the system there will be a need to come to a balanced state at some point. No matter which path we took to get there.

Originally Posted by Rah nam

It is my view, and those around me, that in order of consciousness to expend it needs the dualism.
How we move within this dualistic system is our choice.

It is true, as we move through the system there will be a need to come to a balanced state at some point. No matter which path we took to get there.

Consciousness just Is. It neither expands nor contracts. What does change is mind and its realization of consciousness. That is the stiller one's mind the more consciousness "feels" like it expands when in reality the only expansion is our realization of what is, was and always will be, unchanging, infinite and absolute - Consciousness.

[neil]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Consciousness just Is. It neither expands nor contracts. What does change is mind and its realization of consciousness. That is the stiller one's mind the more consciousness "feels" like it expands when in reality the only expansion is our realization of what is, was and always will be, unchanging, infinite and absolute - Consciousness.

Yes, you are simply "a conscious being"...you simply "are" conscious.

& your awareness via the mind expands/grows through experiences. You experience, learn & become increasingly more learned.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Consciousness just Is. It neither expands nor contracts. What does change is mind and its realization of consciousness. That is the stiller one's mind the more consciousness "feels" like it expands when in reality the only expansion is our realization of what is, was and always will be, unchanging, infinite and absolute - Consciousness.

Consciousness is like an 'eye' - some people 'romanticize' and go gaga over it, believing it to be THE Cat's Meeow! But its just a ubiquitous (nothing 'special' about it, IMO) 'faculty' or 'tool' that is accessible by and at all 'nodes' of Life. What really matters (IMO) is the degree of the Intelligence of the Being (node?) that uses/wields 'consciousness'. Though stupidity abounds, many Beings (not just 'humans') are amazingly/impressively Intelligent!

Originally Posted by davidsun

Consciousness is like an 'eye' - some people 'romanticize' and go gaga over it, believing it to be THE Cat's Meeow! But its just a ubiquitous (nothing 'special' about it, IMO) 'faculty' or 'tool' that is accessible by and at all 'nodes' of Life. What really matters (IMO) is the degree of the Intelligence of the Being (node?) that uses/wields 'consciousness'. Though stupidity abounds, many Beings (not just 'humans') are amazingly/impressively Intelligent!

And without consciousness it's all a bunch of neurons, synaptic connections and electrochemical firings across networks and minus experience. In other words nothing more than a zombie, philosophically speaking. Or a sophisticated computer, if you will, devoid of meaning.

The same One consciousness illuminates all minds, regardless how well (or not so well!) they might be developed, and not only human minds.

Your position is consciousness is just a tool in the mind's toolkit. My position is mind is but a tool of Consciousness to explore Itself via the multiplicity.

[davidsun]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Your position is consciousness is just a tool in the mind's toolkit. My position is mind is but a tool of Consciousness to explore Itself via the multiplicity.

That's an accurate statement, I think. But your 'analysis' just doesn't 'cut the mustard' with me. I would instead say that, without the Intelligent application of mind by way of making deeply thoughtful comparisons, rigorous logical analyses, etc., one might as well be a 'donkey' trying to "explore Itself" (via whatever).

For instance, there are a lot of people here who think their 'conscious' realizations are THE Cat's Meeow just because they have meditated to the point where they have stopped all (conscious ) 'thought' and, being delighted to discover that such a thought-stopping phenomenon relieves them pf any feeling of stress and/or conflict, as well as 'ignoring' what psychologists have discovered and shared about the phenomenal[!] nature of unconscious processes, then think that they must have just 'mystically' registered 'absolutely' real truth.

Even if you continue to disagree with me on the above score, which I fully expect that you will, I hope that you at least appreciate the LOGIC which has led me to above 'explanation' to and for myself. (Please note: I often 'meditated' in the above fashion for fairly long periods of time in the past, and sometimes, though less often and much more briefly these days, do so now.)

Thank you for opportunity for me to 'volley' across the internet with you on this score, JASG.

P.S. This link is to a post I addressed to you in the past. I include here for any other reader who might be interested in reading a more comprehesive statement pertaining to how I see/think 'mind' and 'Intelligence' are connected: http://www.spiritualforums.com/vb/sh...postcount=1185

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

And without consciousness it's all a bunch of neurons, synaptic connections and electrochemical firings across networks and minus experience. In other words nothing more than a zombie, philosophically speaking. Or a sophisticated computer, if you will, devoid of meaning.

The same One consciousness illuminates all minds, regardless how well (or not so well!) they might be developed, and not only human minds.

I was driving long at 70mph when a truck pulled into my lane from stationary, I had a barrier on one side and a line of traffic on the other. I was conscious of being shown to a chair in a dark room, and after that I wasn't aware of much of what was going on. I managed to piece together a sequence of events from what Mrs G told me and dashcam footage, and it was obvious that there was a lot going on in my mind that I wasn't conscious of. I heard Mrs G scream but in the distance, I was very vaguely of a slight pressure on my foot as I braked, and heard a muffled bang as we hit the truck but it was all very.... unreal. I know the vision of me being shown to a chair was a reaction to the trauma and the consciousness 'detaching' itself from the scene, it's a normal survival mechanism.

Whether all of that was devoid of meaning I don't know, but Mrs G said that I did some pretty cool driving to keep us both alive. Certainly minus the experience. After walking away from an insurance write-off I was well and truly ticked because I'd not long filled the fuel tank, and it took a couple of days before I was myself again.

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Your position is consciousness is just a tool in the mind's toolkit. My position is mind is but a tool of Consciousness to explore Itself via the multiplicity.

I disagree with both you and David, and would say that one is not subordinate to the other but they are in a symbiotic relationship. Another way to put it is that the body/brain/mind mechanism and consciousness are in a feedback loop with each other. But yes, exploring itself via multiplicity or consciousness becoming conscious of itself.

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

The same One consciousness illuminates all minds, regardless how well (or not so well!) they might be developed, and not only human minds.

Another feedback loop, according to Nassim Harramein.

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

Consciousness just Is. It neither expands nor contracts. What does change is mind and its realization of consciousness. That is the stiller one's mind the more consciousness "feels" like it expands when in reality the only expansion is our realization of what is, was and always will be, unchanging, infinite and absolute - Consciousness.

This is open to question, and depends on what we mean by consciousness.

What some people call unchanging, infinite and absolute Consciousness, other people would call Being. And that Being individualises as consciousness, a point of separate awareness, the Observer. The sense of expansion or contraction depends on what consciousness identifies with.

And does the mind really realise consciousness? Or is it that when the mind becomes still then it creates a space for consciousness to enter the mental body. The mind is just a tool, and it is in the absence of mind that consciousness is realised on a mental level.

"the only expansion is our realization of what is, was and always will be, unchanging, infinite and absolute - Consciousness." This gives rise to the question, what is it which is doing the realising?

We are dealing with subtle differences in our understandings and definitions, but these subtle differences may distort communication.

Peace

Originally Posted by iamthat

This is open to question, and depends on what we mean by consciousness.

What some people call unchanging, infinite and absolute Consciousness, other people would call Being. And that Being individualises as consciousness, a point of separate awareness, the Observer. The sense of expansion or contraction depends on what consciousness identifies with.

And does the mind really realise consciousness? Or is it that when the mind becomes still then it creates a space for consciousness to enter the mental body. The mind is just a tool, and it is in the absence of mind that consciousness is realised on a mental level.

"the only expansion is our realization of what is, was and always will be, unchanging, infinite and absolute - Consciousness." This gives rise to the question, what is it which is doing the realising?

We are dealing with subtle differences in our understandings and definitions, but these subtle differences may distort communication.

Peace

Sat Chit Ananda. Existence Consciousness Bliss. It doesn't need to enter anywhere or into anything because it already is everywhere and everything.

Body, mind and any other object is but name and form of Sat Chit Ananda. The Chit illumines all forms and names (thoughts are also form and name) and through Its illumination the mind perceives and experiences. So mind doesn't posses inherent consciousness but is illumined by the One consciousness. It's just a reflection or manifestation and it's always there but not recognized for what It actually is.

Eye of the eye. Mind of the mind.

Anyway this is the non-dual view, at least of Advaita and that's one of the oldest non-dual spiritual traditions dating back over 1,400 years and in truth its teaching go even further back to the Upanishads dating back another 1,400 years.

If everyone defines it as they see fit it's kind of pointless, confusing and doesn't facilitate understanding by others. This is why I recommend studying the teachings of either one of the great non-dual traditions, Advaita or Buddhism. At least then it's internally consistent and in truth there's really not a whole lot of difference between the two as far as I can tell, though my knowledge of Buddhism is much more shallow .