Nonduality

[Lightkeeper]

I was having a discussion last night about nonduality. One person said it was a state in which there was no longer separateness. I see it in a different way.

What is your understanding of nonduality?

[vivamis123]

Nonduality to me is not a state but our true essence. All "states" are within consciousness...we are beyond.

Nonduality to me is being One in and of spirit.

[RainbowRider]

This explains non-duality better than I can.

What is Nonduality - Explanations and Definitions

[angeleyes]

Good posts, Viv and RainbowRider!

[evangelicalhumanist]

Originally Posted by RainbowRider

This explains non-duality better than I can.

What is Nonduality - Explanations and Definitions

Sorry, RainbowRider, but it doesn't explain it at all to me. In fact, I read it very carefully, and discovered it to be ultimately completely circular.

For example, near the beginning of the essay, it says that "there is just One Eternal Spirit in existence, and that everything in the Universe was created by it and is an inseparable part of it. At the same time, nonduality also says that the world is not real, but is an illusion perceived by the mind."

Well, it does not say, but implies it quite indirectly, that this One Eternal Spirit, which it claims to be the only thing in existence, must have first conceived of "the mind" (or in fact many separate minds) in order for the world to be an "illusion perceived by the mind." Now, if this is not a desirable thing, then why, I wonder, would the One Eternal Spirit do it?

Further, the essay goes on to say that the "mind finds it hard to accept the concept of non duality, because it does not accept that the world is a creation of the senses and is not real."

So, once again, while it does not say so explicility it implies that the senses must be a construct of the One Eternal Spirit, because otherwise there would be no manner in which "the world is a creation of the senses." So once again I am left wondering whatever purpose there might be for having arranged for mind and senses, whose only purpose, one is led to suppose by the article, is to trick billions of separate bits of the One Eternal Spirit into imagining that which is not.

Not only that, but since it seems so important to stop being thus tricked, apparently this trickery is a Very Bad Thing, done by the only thing in existence to itself.

Doesn't make any sense to me.

[sendy47]

Originally Posted by evangelicalhumanist

Sorry, RainbowRider, but it doesn't explain it at all to me. In fact, I read it very carefully, and discovered it to be ultimately completely circular.

For example, near the beginning of the essay, it says that "there is just One Eternal Spirit in existence, and that everything in the Universe was created by it and is an inseparable part of it. At the same time, nonduality also says that the world is not real, but is an illusion perceived by the mind."

Well, it does not say, but implies it quite indirectly, that this One Eternal Spirit, which it claims to be the only thing in existence, must have first conceived of "the mind" (or in fact many separate minds) in order for the world to be an "illusion perceived by the mind." Now, if this is not a desirable thing, then why, I wonder, would the One Eternal Spirit do it?

Further, the essay goes on to say that the "mind finds it hard to accept the concept of non duality, because it does not accept that the world is a creation of the senses and is not real."

So, once again, while it does not say so explicility it implies that the senses must be a construct of the One Eternal Spirit, because otherwise there would be no manner in which "the world is a creation of the senses." So once again I am left wondering whatever purpose there might be for having arranged for mind and senses, whose only purpose, one is led to suppose by the article, is to trick billions of separate bits of the One Eternal Spirit into imagining that which is not.

Not only that, but since it seems so important to stop being thus tricked, apparently this trickery is a Very Bad Thing, done by the only thing in existence to itself.

Doesn't make any sense to me.

for me it does sound circular...for me that is what seems to bring it about as one... hence the circle is one solid circle...all connected..all one .....no matter the experiences or conversations...life styles ....

in the description the sky is all there is never changing...the cloud formations they come and go no matter the ability to see the sky...or how much of it peers through..it is unchanging it remains...

I see that as no matter what we think we see.. know.. do ..where we are or be...what ever the whole of it is is

the continues communication seems to be about...what the is ...is...

my life has given or shown me many answers for myself..and as i have grown new things are opened up and seen...

in life often when one is spaceing out...day dreaming ...what ever the choice of word for another might be...in those times odd thoughts of how things are operating ...come to mind...and what i find interesting is the vast difference of life style of people and education etc...yet having not been aware of studys or books or many thoughts of others...then seeing or hearing and people shareing there experiences of there functioning and thoughts ...how there is no ability that is rational to describe the sameness least none that would bring it all together with out loop holes ...of how we have something in us about us...that has answers and awareness that is as if one thought just shared in times of different location and frames of life...i know i am rambling now...and consider deleting but today i choose not to...one can read and or not and make what they will good bad or indifferent...it is all good...

[Lightkeeper]

Here is a zen definition of enlightenment or nonduality.

So, the Zen teachings are very clear as to what enlightenment is. It is the state of residing in such great understanding and depth, that no matter what life throws your way, you are at peace with it, you are able to say, "That’s OK, nhttp://www.anmolmehta.com/blog/2007/12/21/zen-definition-of-spiritual-enlightenment/o problem."

Another view of nondualism.

In both cases, a shift of awareness is what creates an encounter with the non-dual nature of Reality. Such a shift of awareness can produce an experience such that one encounters the emptiness or absence of the sense of separate existence. There are states where the organism continues to function, with each sense organ working perfectly, but there is no center or "i" to be found.

So in my view, Hinduism and Buddhism only differ in the nature of the non-dual experience. If you are experiencing the natural working of the organism, without any sense of separation, you are enjoying a Buddhist enlightenment experience, while if you feeling the expanded sense of the Oneness with everything, you are experiencing enlightenment from the Hindu perspective.

These non-dual (or enlightenment) experiences can range from being swept away by the enormity of the mountains, the flow of great love, the ecstasy of sexual union, to experiences with the greater sense of Self (Big Mind in Zen Meditation), Bliss, Divinity, Natural Spontaneous Living, etc. So from here I can even come to a definition of life which I am comfortable with…

Life is an opportunity to set the stage for this shift of awareness to occur.

This shift of awareness is something that happens to you. As explained in the article, Interesting Osho Quote on Enlightenment, the mystic sage Osho simply defines enlightenment as the reward for living a mindful life. This is echoed by great spiritual masters throughout history.

Enlightenment, or the necessary shift in awareness, is not something you can force or create in any way. What you can do though, is help set the stage to facilitate it’s occurrence. This is where meditation, yoga, self-study and spiritual living comes in. They are the tools for preparing the soil such that the flower of Truth can blossom.

Understanding Non-Duality, Hinduism, Buddhism, Enlightenment & Life!

[Astreja]

Would nonduality be an eradication of the subjective/"ego" mind, or an integration of subjective and objective into some third state?

[Lightkeeper]

I personally think it's an integration.

[Astreja]

My suspicion is that it's a merging where the whole is greater than the parts. I don't know what role the ego plays in the new state, but my sense is that it is there, somewhere.

A lot of traditions make a big deal about kicking the ego out of the picture (and, from outward appearances at least, kicking it out permanently). That never sat well with "me" -- And now I think I understand why. It's somehow necessary to complete one's perception of life, the universe and everything, and if it isn't allowed to participate it's akin to having a jigsaw puzzle with a missing piece.