What is non duality?

Originally Posted by Molearner

It seems to me that we must have a concrete experience of love before we can have any ethereal experience of love(non duality)…….

If all you ever knew was non-Dual Love, what then? Many take walking down the street for granted or being able to see, what if you spent a week in a wheelchair or wore a blindfold?

Originally Posted by The Cobbler's Apprentice

Radical freedom. The realisation of non-duality within duality.

Ands the realisation that there's something more.

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

Maybe to experience non duality within duality, we need a middle non-man, or transcendental.

Draw a circle, that represents so-called 'non-Duality'. Draw two circles. One represents 'this' and one represents 'that'. That's Duality. Two dimensions. Draw two circles overlapping and another circle to encompass them. That's Triplex Unity, where there is 'this' there is 'that' and their is 'both'. That gives you three dimensions, and the encompassing circle represents consciousness, and because you're looking at the paper and the diagram you have another dimension of consciousness - five in all.

Non-duality is simply an attempt by the mind that creates duality to transcend its creation by creating another Duality.

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

To Create God Consciousness.

Consciousness prefixed is an ego construct.

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

But there is something in the PHYSICAL nature and its deviance of consciousness that allows the consciousness to transcend its own dual self reflective nature, and become aware of the ultimate source beingness without becoming.

Consciousness itself is non Dual, and there is nothing and nobody that isn't consciousness - there is no absence of consciousness/Brahman.

[The Cobbler's Apprentice]

Originally Posted by Molearner

real freedom points to freedom from choices rather than freedom of choices…..

Yes, as observed from the Hsin Hsin Ming to Eckhart to who knows who.



(I'm always happy to get a second opinion)

[The Cobbler's Apprentice]

Originally Posted by Molearner

More for the fire……:) It seems to me that we must have a concrete experience of love before we can have any ethereal experience of love(non duality)…….

"To have a child is to know the heart of a parent.”

(I have a quote for every occasion. )

[The Cobbler's Apprentice]

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Ands the realisation that there's something more.

To twist a few words of Merton's, this we must "know" without knowing it.

"To teach students the power of the present moment as the only moment is a skillful teaching of buddha ancestors. But this doesn’t mean that there is no future result from practice."

(Dogen's teacher in China to Dogen)

On a slightly different tangent, much as Meister Eckhart saw "pure and perfect" obedience as simply praying "Thy will be done".

(Therefore asking to be "an instrument of his peace" is one step away from perfect obedience, however noble the desire)

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

And I could not disagree more! hahahahah I don't need an authoritative observable fact for much of anything
to believe what someone tells me they exp'd happened...esp when it coincides with my experiences.

Just sayin, I exp'd at 8 yr old all 'this place' was unreal, a dream.
That may be meaningless to you; I get that.

It is not meaningless to JASG or others that have also exp'd it, tho.
So your post is your opinion...albiet, for many scientists, too!!
But regarding spirituality who cares about them...kidding.

PS Maya is there for anyone to exp..sit ...Be still.

I was not talking about Maya being impossible to experience I'm talking about this thing called "actual reality" and how no one can prove it to exist

Originally Posted by HITESH SHAH

There are practical difficulties in what you expect like

1. That consciousness can not be put in limits of words . Words fall short to describe it . So everyone may have different shot at it and may use different words to convey it . So same words may not be available from any 2 different persons on this globe.
2. Observable facts posits shorter time and space limits whereas spiritual laws have a larger time and space to understand cause /effect and a very difficult to infer co-relations . So at times there may really be seeker prejudices / mistakes in understanding the experiences . And its very difficult to segregate one's prejudices / mistakes also from their account of descriptions . But that simply does not negate the experience as such.
3. Life goes by the documented experiences of well meaning, sane ,hardworking , intelligent people . Only when u believe spiritual experiences of great people in history like what u believe in scientific laws , u can have faith in spiritual laws .
4. Like many things in life like taste, aroma, sensation ,beauty etc no one bothers to standardize the lingo and insist on giving numbers to it . All that matters is experience (taste of the pudding is in eating ) . So for spiritual experiences also one must not be overly concerned with observable standard descriptions / numerical expressions .

Exactly thats my point is that we are going to have different experiences from one another and so 2 two people cannot have the same identical experience ergo there is no grounded consistent thing called "real reality" in which to anchor the statement that "this life is Maya and there's a real reality beyond this"

It makes such a statement just a concept it has no authority behind it because there's no anchor point because the anchor point does not exist which therefore the belief that we need to transcend Maya and see the real world would actually be the real illusion because there is no real world in the sense of illusion-free

[alanantic]

“Brahman(God) is the only truth, the world is unreal, and there is ultimately no difference between Brahman and individual self.” Maya, Shankara etolled, is a “trick of the magician.” – Shankara

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by MAYA EL

Exactly thats my point is that we are going to have different experiences from one another and so 2 two people cannot have the same identical experience ergo there is no grounded consistent thing called "real reality" in which to anchor the statement that "this life is Maya and there's a real reality beyond this"

There always has to be a comparison for the state experienced or supposed . The problem I find is that there is no comparison given.


x dazzle x