Spirituality vs Non-Duality

Hi all. There are many confusions and misunderstanding happens in Non-duality (advaita), where they consider it with equal to spirituality or spiritual experiences

Advaitam is not a speak-able thing like Physicality and Spirituality. Advaitam is not a knowing thing like Physics and Soul. Advaitam is not an experiencing thing like Sensual/Mind/even Soul.

Non-duality is the END of all speech,knowledge,experience,universe - where everything begins in TIME.

One can seek spiritual experiences, but not non-dual.

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by Viswa

One can seek spiritual experiences, but not non-dual.

Ramana Maharshi might disagree with this.

Yes, there are many spiritual experiences we might have within duality, but spiritual realisation is the realisation of the non-dual Self.

If non-duality cannot be realised as a state of Being then no-one is qualified to teach anything about it.

Peace

Originally Posted by iamthat

Yes, there are many spiritual experiences we might have within duality, but spiritual realisation is the realisation of the non-dual Self.

Hi iamthat.

See, this is the misunderstanding happens. There is no word like 'non-dual self' or 'adavaita self'. Non-duality, does not mean, there is only one. Non-duality is not "Sat-Chit-ananda". If you refer Mandukya or Varaha Upanishad, the "Fourth" or "Chaturtham" is called "neither being nor non-being" "neither consciousness nor non-consciousness" and cessation of all, could not be experienced/understood/spoked about. It is something beyond "Existence-Consciousness-Bliss".

By negating what is not you, ultimately you feel "TRUE BLISS". And, they, Shankara and Ramana, considers those Consciousness-Bliss is the only I and other all are unreal. Personally, I was also caught in that view before. But, there are many views in Upanishads to put away this.

The, Existence-Consciousness-Bliss, is also a state/experience. Everything is self. What we experience as body,mind,etc.. is also self too. The self has Infinite forms, it has the form of "Bliss" - Anandamaya and all other Koshas is also it's form. If these are not it's forms, then it means there are 'two or more'. Nope, there is only one Self, and all is self, including body,mind,atoms,etc.. Even in Bhagavat gita, Chapter 13, verse 12 to end of that chapter, it is said that "Purusha and Prakriti is also eternal", where Shankara debates to put down this view. Everything we see is eternal - body,mind,etc.. and all are the Infinite forms of "One". Purusha means "Atma" without qualities. Prakriti means "forms with qualities". The Atma, experiences the Prakriti, where Prakriti is all the forms of Ananda to Body. But as a whole, both Purusha and Prakriti is eternal, and 'Purusha' is self and "Prakriti" is forms of self. Wherever there is experiences, both Purusha and Prakriti has to be present, where Purusha is the experiencer and Prakriti is the experienced. This is duality. If one can experience "Sat-Chit-ananda" means, Sat-Chit-ananda is also a form, an experienced, also Prakriti. Purusha cannot experience itself. But the merging of Kshetra and Kshetrajna comes to an end, all experience ceases, that is Non-duality.

We experience one self in many forms because of Duality. Even the "Sat-Chit-ananda" is also a form, and one can experience it only in duality. The Self can be realized only in a form. Without form, it cannot be realized, whether it is present or not, and the highest form is "Sat-Chit-ananda", and fixing to that form gives "liberation from all other forms".

Non-duality is the End of these experiences of forms, as it is the end of duality, like the end of all universes and worlds and lokas. Only when there are Koshas, experiences happen as duality. If there is no Koshas, That is Non-duality, no experiences happen, no consciousness of "I AM" itself.

Originally Posted by Viswa

no experiences happen, no consciousness of "I AM" itself.

Exactly, and no consciousness of 'I am in a non-Dual state'.

This is the anthropomorphic perspective of mind. That being the case and aside from remaining silent imprecise words are the only option. However we label It is wrong and yet we "know" It intimately because we are It and the challenge is "realization". Of course that "realization" can only be related with horribly imprecise words. LOL!

Originally Posted by Greenslade

Exactly, and no consciousness of 'I am in a non-Dual state'.

Originally Posted by JustASimpleGuy

This is the anthropomorphic perspective of mind. We are It and the challenge is "realization".

[Unseeking Seeker]

To offer a direct, simplistic view:

In duality, we are inside the universe

In nonduality, the entire universe is within us

No wonder, the nondual experience cannot be delineated

Originally Posted by Unseeking Seeker

No wonder, the nondual experience cannot be delineated

Originally Posted by Unseeking Seeker

No wonder, the nondual experience cannot be delineated [/color]

The experiencer and the experienced are one and the same, there is no Duality in the first place and therefore no so-called non-Duality. There is also no experience without a Jungian ego and the Jungian ego is the creator of both Duality and so-called non-Duality.

Originally Posted by Greenslade

The experiencer and the experienced are one and the same, there is no Duality in the first place and therefore no so-called non-Duality. There is also no experience without a Jungian ego and the Jungian ego is the creator of both Duality and so-called non-Duality.

That seems very anthropocentric.