What is nonduality?

[Joseph Maynor]

There are other interpretations of how to deal with the issue of monality, duality, triality, and quadrality.  E.g., a triality would be this: past vs. present vs. future. 

 

Transduality is different from nonduality.   Transduality is different from duality.  

 

Aristotle: Finding the "middle way" between two ends of a duality, if such a middle way is best (and it isn't always).

Derrida: Finding the interplay and rupture between the ends of dualities, trialities, and quadralities.

Nonduality: Realizing dualities are an illusion from an absolute perspective.

Me: There's a "working with" between the poles of dualities, trialities, and quadralities.

Examples:

Monality: Love
Duality: Love vs. Hate; Subject vs. Object
Triality: Past vs. Present vs. Future
Quadrality: Important/Urgent vs. Non-important/Urgent vs. Important/Non-Urgent vs. Non-Important/Non-Urgent
 

Edited April 25, 2022 by Joseph Maynor

[Mandy]

@Joseph Maynor How do you define one, what makes one, one? 

[Phil]

Neat video. 

 

[Zeroguy]

@Phil It even has your transparent empty glass balls  too.

GD with Awareness itself.

[Silver]

non-duality is truth, and truth is not two. all is one, as is absolutely obvious. non-duality is not a philosophy, but a way of perceiving, of being, of understanding existence, in a deep and real way, going beyond of the fragmentation of the mind. 

Edited April 26, 2022 by Silver

[Faith]

@Silver Welcome to the forum! 💙

[Joseph Maynor]

On 4/25/2022 at 8:58 AM, Mandy said:

@Joseph Maynor How do you define one, what makes one, one? 

 

I tend to think each spiral stage has a different account of "the individual/the part vs. the other/the whole" duality.  From a practical standpoint I tend to find it useful to think of myself as an individual and also the collective as an individual.  However, I also find it useful to think of myself as a plurality and the collective as a plurality.  So, from my perspective, the symbol "one" depends entirely on the metaphysical or mystical framework from which one is viewing things through at a particular stage on the spiral.  I tend to think "the one vs. the many duality" is a symbol.  I also think "the one" or "the individual" doesn't make sense unless it is contrasted with "the many" or "the collective".   Probably none of you are going to resonate with the way I think about these issues.

Edited April 27, 2022 by Joseph Maynor

[Winter]

On 4/23/2022 at 5:46 PM, Blessed2 said:

What is nonduality?

 

What is spirituality / the path? What's the point?

 

Have you ever wondered what is a question? We basically sequence words together and then expect a response. This expectation comes from the fact everyone assumes this is the way communication works. In reality questions are no different than any other series of sounds.

 

It's great because this allows for communication and sharing of information, when communicating with human beings. But we must not forget that what comes after the question will always be just an answer, a message, information with some meaning that may be interpreted by a human. 

 

When you say "What is nonduality?" you are asking for a reply that would give you a definition of the term nonduality. In english the word "is" is used to define things and the word "What" is just a placeholder. Finally "?" implies that you are requesting the listener to respond. You might have asked the same question like

____ is nonduality (please fill in).
Please define nonduality.

However "definition" and "duality" are synonym so you might as well ask:

Define nondefinition.
Create a duality that isolates nonduality.

 

Which is literally impossible, by definition. You might then well "non duality is when you stop defining" but this implies that there is someone making definitions and that they suddenly stop. 

 

Any concept you may have of nonduality, spirituality or "the path" is entirely bogus and a distraction from experiencing actual nonduality. Every newborn is already a nondual master, there is absolutely nothing to "get into" here. There is nothing to subscribe to and if you forget entirely about dualities and nondualities, you won't be missing out on anything. 

 

 

Edited April 28, 2022 by Winter

[Mandy]

@Joseph Maynor That's ok, I meant thinking in super simple terms about what makes one one. If there is space and a stars appears in space, there is one. But that's not true, there is star and there is not star IS space. So the formation of one is two. The formation of one is exclusion, separation. Nonduality says this never became, that the awareness of the star is neither a thing or not a thing but is not two. 

[Zeroguy]

True Nature=❤

[Joseph Maynor]

@Mandy ❤️  your post.  I probably need more explanation though. 

I'm starting to agree with @Zeroguy too that the essence of things is love or care.  I like the word care.  Even when the symbolic mind and ego is wiped out, feelings are still there, care is still there.  I determined this on my 5-MeO-DMT trip. Of course drawing inferences from psychedelic trips might be totally wrong, but it influenced me.  Before this trip, I was already realizing that my feeling is the most important thing.  One of the worst things we do (but not always) is repress our feelings in favor of some kind of symbolic understanding.

Edited April 29, 2022 by Joseph Maynor

[Blessed2]

On 4/25/2022 at 3:14 PM, Phil said:

What’s the point of going on a vacation?

 

ACIM says the world/life is projection of guilt and fear 🤔 doesn't seem like a vacation, more like hell.

[Phil]

@Blessed2

I’m not ACIM expert, but I believe if you continue reading it, it elaborates explaining a distinction between egoic projection (hell) and God’s projection (heaven). If I’m not mistaken, it talks about why this is and how to go about clearing the lens / projection. I think the main underlying theme or clarifying means or factor is forgiveness. I think it uses the term ‘mirror’, similar to my use of the terminology of ‘popping the bubbles of beliefs’ resulting in clarity, or seeing the world as it is, which it (ACIM) would refer to as ‘God’s projection’ or ‘heaven’. 

 

My most recent video might be useful or insightful in this regard if the word’ hell’ was added to the words arising representatively as thoughts (of the left sphere on the screen) which seem to be the same as perception (the sphere on the right side).  Essentially the video is illustrating thought attachment / belief(s), and the communicative aim is to recognize the projection of the thought attachment ‘onto’ perception. 

 

With respect to a thread entitled ‘what is nonduality’, though nonduality can never actually be said or communicated, the implication of ACIM and of what I’m suggesting, is that when all ‘dualities’ or ‘twoness’ ‘miscreation’ & ‘misperception’ is inspected, all dualities are ‘seen through’, ‘seen’ as the activity of thought,  and what remains is love, which is ‘not two’. (As opposed to what remains being hell). 

 

Perhaps the single most effective means of inspection, is questions, rather than statements. This typically results in inevitably ‘seeing what is’, vs what ‘seems to be’, or assumptions, or beliefs (duality) projected upon what is (nonduality).

 

A / the vacation… is the point… of going on vacation… just as life is the point of life. But this is veiled with the activity of thought, such as dualistic conceptualizations of ‘life purpose’, which is in actuality a dualistic Self conceptualization. That’s a ‘bubble’, and not what the word ‘perception’ points to. Considering the term ‘vacation’s purpose’ might be clarifying specifically to the duality the term adds, in the sense we commonly think of going on a vacation for the vacation, as opposed to conceptualizing a ‘vacation’s purpose’. 

 

Also, there’s another illustration in this video that might be insightful… around 4:30.

[Joseph Maynor]

Nonduality is about going beyond a kind of privileging one side of the I vs./and No I duality.  It has more to it than this, but I'm being forward and a bit provocative with this because I say this to people and it seems not to resonate.  It's nonduality!  You don't get to nonduality if you're privileging one end of dualities without knowing what you're doing and why and also seeing the larger picture.  Let's continue this discussion because I find that a lot of people talk about nonduality but they're not really practicing that and their theory is more dualistic than they realize without any caveats in place.  Nonduality is a very deep thing.  And it has an embodiment aspect and a conceptual aspect to it too.  There are different teachings that point to nonduality from different vantage points as it were.  But there is something to nonduality as a kind of very advanced place to get to in development work.  It's hard to teach it too.  I'm interested in having a group discussion here about this as I don't think most people thoroughly understand and embody nonduality.  @DMT Elf You're welcome to pick back up here where we left off our discussion.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Jonas Long]

17 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

Nonduality is about going beyond a kind of privileging one side of the I vs./and No I duality.  It has more to it than this, but I'm being forward and a bit provocative with this because I say this to people and it seems not to resonate.  It's nonduality!  You don't get to nonduality if you're privileging one end of dualities without knowing what you're doing and why and also seeing the larger picture.  Let's continue this discussion because I find that a lot of people talk about nonduality but they're not really practicing that and their theory is more dualistic than they realize without any caveats in place.  Nonduality is a very deep thing.  And it has an embodiment aspect and a conceptual aspect to it too.  There are different teachings that point to nonduality from different vantage points as it were.  But there is something to nonduality as a kind of very advanced place to get to in development work.  It's hard to teach it too.  I'm interested in having a group discussion here about this as I don't think most people thoroughly understand and embody nonduality.

Nonduality isn't something you work for and achieve.  It's how it already is.  You seem to really want it to be the pinnacle of some Heirarchy, but it is no such thing. 

[Joseph Maynor]

9 minutes ago, Jonas Long said:

Nonduality isn't something you work for and achieve.  It's how it already is.  You seem to really want it to be the pinnacle of some Heirarchy, but it is no such thing. 

 

You're entitled to your opinion.  I'm not going to play whose right or whose wrong.  I just want perspectives to appreciate.  I feel like people aren't speaking up and I want to see different perspectives here.  People use the word nonduality a lot but it's rare in my experience that we get an open air discussion about the topic.  I feel like it's a term that is BSed around a lot.  I appreciate you gave me a firm answer.  I like that.  I'd like to see a video from you on your perspective on this.  I know you could do it if you wanted to.  Post it here.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Jonas Long]

Just now, Joseph Maynor said:

 

You're entitled to your opinion.  I'm not going to play whose right or whose wrong.  I just want perspectives to appreciate.

I just feel like you are missing something very essential here.  You could say breathing air is "advanced stuff" but you are doing it automatically.  You would be doing it even if you had no concept of "air" or "breathing".  It's not like you only start breathing after learning all about it and how to do it.  Nobody "embodies" nonduality.  Or, nobody can not embody it.  

[Phil]

@Joseph Maynor

The term nonduality doesn’t mean anything. The term specifically points to whatever it might seem to mean, that would be ‘the second’, and it’s not that. There is no perspective on nonduality, whatever that perspective is, it isn’t that. 

 

Not to imply in any way whatsoever nonduality shouldn’t be talked about. 

[Joseph Maynor]

21 hours ago, Phil said:

@Joseph Maynor

The term nonduality doesn’t mean anything. The term specifically points to whatever it might seem to mean, that would be ‘the second’, and it’s not that. There is no perspective on nonduality, whatever that perspective is, it isn’t that. 

 

Not to imply in any way whatsoever nonduality shouldn’t be talked about. 

I actually agree with this.  We all have different ways to talk about nonduality but none of that is it. 

I don't think it's useful to say nonduality doesn't mean anything because that is just more talk.  It's not that either.  I think a better way to say it would be that whatever meaning is attributed to the word doesn't capture it.  Instead of saying it's meaningless a better way to say it imo is to wave your hand or something like a Zen Master would do.  Even saying "Mu" is not quite right.

I think it's useful to talk about nonduality personally.  To talk about it is better than to not talk about it because at least you can discuss some pointers.  

The Tao that can be named is not the Eternal Tao.  But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't talk about the Tao -- That's what the Tao Te Ching does.  Notice that after they say it can't be named they talk about it -- that work is about talking about the Tao.  It's a paradox.  We know it can't be talked about and we also know it much be talked about.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Joseph Maynor

[Joseph Maynor]

22 hours ago, Jonas Long said:

Nonduality isn't something you work for and achieve.  It's how it already is.  You seem to really want it to be the pinnacle of some Heirarchy, but it is no such thing. 

Your definition of nonduality isn't it either.  You're putting that definition in a hierarchy over mine.  That's not quite right either.  See Phil and my discussion above.  It's fine to have a definition but any definition isn't it too.  It's a paradox -- on the one hand no definition captures it, and on the other hand we should work with different ways to talk about nonduality.  It's almost like one could say there are different ways to dance around the Tao using words, and not all pointers to the Tao are created equal because some are more direct than others.  The Tao Te Ching is pretty good as a pointer.  But that ain't it either because like the first line famously says -- The Tao that can be named is not the Eternal Tao.

Edited March 28, 2023 by Joseph Maynor