What is Non-duality?

[Limahong]

1 minute ago, Jonesboy said:

Thank you

 

Hi Jonesboy,

 

Your post sparked something in my empty head. Thank you.

 

- LimA

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Jonesboy said:

 

I guess that would be the difference between KS and Buddhism.

 

 

I think perhaps it is important to differentiate between formulations which come from the whole approach of the path and fundamentally real distinctions.  The Buddha had his own teachings based on dependent origination and non-self (in contrast to for instance Jains and Ajivikas who stressed the fundamental reality of the Atman) - this developed into 'emptiness' - teachers of Buddhist non-duality will continue this tradition.

[Wu Ming Jen]

The unity of opposites is the central category of dialectics, said to be related to the notion of non-duality in a deep sense.It is viewed sometimes as either a metaphysical concept, a philosophical concept or a scientific concept. It defines a situation in which the existence or identity of a thing (or situation) depends on the co-existence of at least two conditions which are opposite to each other, yet dependent on each other and presupposing each other, within a field of tension.

 

Red hot coals the most energetic compared to ash black the least energetic makes red and black polar complete. Man and woman are polar complete, water and fire, blind folded being burned is a numb feeling and touched by ice has a burning sensation. so the person is not delusional thinking a burning feeling is in fact fire.

 

Duality is for comparison and human minds uses this for separating and categorizing things.

 

There are three sides to a coin yin and yang and the edge of the coin. The edge is understanding non duality BUT it must be actual polar complete opposites.

 

Using awareness then everything is empty and it is only our thoughts that go around labeling, categorizing and separating reality.

 

[doc benway]

3 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

If the mind is simply at rest, then how do you know it is not simply torpor?

 

Non-dual is vibrant, pristine and clear... Also, in my view, both pure and impure vision are part of the natural state.

 

You know it is not simply torpor because of the vibrancy and clarity.

Letting the mind rest does not mean to fall into dullness, that is one of the two basic obstacles to meditation, it is not resting the mind. The other obstacle is agitation.

 

It's important to make the distinction between mind and the nature of mind.

There's a priceless teaching in the tradition I follow called the 21 Nails.

The first chapter focuses on this distinction in detail.

When I say resting the mind I mean to allow the thinker, the observer, the subject to rest.

That resting is what allows awareness of the underlying nature, especially in the beginning.

When the mind is not resting, duality is present.

 

Yes, pure and impure vision are both the energetic display of the base.

With enough stability and confidence in the base, all appearance can be seen effortlessly, at all times, as empty and vibrant... all is bliss.

 

I'm not quite there yet...

 

The way to "get there" is to rest the mind, to get to the point where no effort of any kind is necessary, which is precisely why dzogchen is referred to as non-meditation. One does not meditate, one rests, and meditation occurs, it's referred to as self-arising or self-illiuminating meditation (gompa rangsal). As the pure and impure visions arise, the mind is always allowed to rest hence the ubiquitous instruction to "leave it as it is." 

 

Edited to add - Sorry about all the Bön/Buddhist talk. If it's annoying anyone I'm happy to bow out.

Edited December 7, 2017 by steve

[Apech]

@ Steve - nice one thanks.

 

Can I just add from my mahamudra studies that ultimately at least the resting mind - or perhaps result of shamatha - and the active mind (full of thoughts and perceptions and so on) are both 'sealed with emptiness.  So the non-dual realisation is not confined in any way or reliant on a settled or still mind - it is just that resting the mind aids the process - but it is not in itself the goal.

 

As Milarepa put it:

 

"If you felt fine in meditating on the sky, so be it with the clouds."

[C T]

I think the important adjective to remember when pointing to duality is... 'Seemingly'

 

Duality is a mirage... it only appeals to patterns of thinking that are confined by delusion. Even within the outcomes of delusory habits there are moments when clarity extinguishes set patterns of habit, and in those moments the seer connects with the real nature (which is non-dual by default) of existence, gets a taste or a glimpse of what that is, but due to unfamiliarity and a lack of confidence, remains unsure of what has transpired, but at the same time, gets a sense that the experience was wonderful, good, noble, profound, and therefore worthy of repeat. This lack of surety is what prompts the disconnection to those momentarily profound insights, and this appearance/loss dynamic that occurs as a result, in fact in greater frequency than most realise, is what perpetuates craving and aversion. 

[3bob]

Atman

Om Tat Sat, Om Tat Sat, Om Tat Sat Om...

[dwai]

5 minutes ago, 3bob said:

Atman

Om Tat Sat, Om Tat Sat, Om Tat Sat Om...

And Hari Om too

[doc benway]

Why are the best Buddhist discussions in the Hindu room?

[Limahong]

23 hours ago, steve said:

Why are the best Buddhist discussions in the Hindu room?

 

Hi steve,

 

My own personal feel - it is time that the 'messing about' needs to be checked. It is amassing out of perspective and proportions.

 

What discussions can there be in the middle of a muddle?

 

- LimA

Edited December 10, 2017 by Limahong
Enhance ...

[dwai]

7 hours ago, steve said:

Why are the best Buddhist discussions in the Hindu room?

Dare I say the best Buddhists are Hindu 😜

 

ok ok just kidding (ducking as the bricks fly by)...

[3bob]

no biggy if the bricks are illusions of nothingness...

[doc benway]

4 hours ago, dwai said:

Dare I say the best Buddhists are Hindu 😜

 

ok ok just kidding (ducking as the bricks fly by)...

 

Could be...

[Fa Xin]

Someone told me once buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu. 

 

*backs away slowly*

😀

[C T]

7 hours ago, Fa Xin said:

Someone told me once buddha was an incarnation of Vishnu. 

 

*backs away slowly*

😀

 

Fear not. In higher buddhatantras there are similies made to Vishnu as an all-pervading principle. 

 

For example: 

"Having cognised essential reality itself, 

The purity devoid of fixation and so forth, 

Being without self (grasping) or afflictions, 

I am therefore called Vishnu."

[3bob]

again, sounds like its time for this thread to go to the general forum, 

[Limahong]

15 hours ago, dwai said:

Dare I say the best Buddhists are Hindu 😜.

 

Hi dwai,

 

I embrace Buddhism just as a philosophy. Yet your tongue (😜) hits me hard - be it humor or otherwise. 

 

- LimA

[Limahong]

On 12/10/2017 at 7:15 AM, dwai said:

Dare I say the best Buddhists are Hindu 😜.

 

Hi dwai,

 

Why are you thanking me? I do not understand.

 

- LimA

[Gunther]

On 07/12/2017 at 6:08 PM, Jeff said:

 

Not sure what you are trying to say here?  That the "presence that knows the quiet mind" is the "natural state"?

Yes, you are always in the natural state by definition. But without awareness you don't know it.

The kingdom of heaven (pure land) is within. That's pure advaita Vedanta

[Limahong]

On 12/10/2017 at 7:15 AM, dwai said:

Dare I say the best Buddhists are Hindu 😜.

 

Hi dwai,

 

When people thank me, I need to know the basis - without which I cannot accept what I do not deserve.

 

- LimA

Edited December 11, 2017 by Limahong
Enhance...

[Jeff]

3 hours ago, Gunther said:

Yes, you are always in the natural state by definition. But without awareness you don't know it.

The kingdom of heaven (pure land) is within. That's pure advaita Vedanta

 

Abhinavagupta (Kashmir Shaivism) responds.... 

 

"True, but even though it shines there, it has not truly become a conscious apprehension. Without conscious apprehension, even if a thing exists, it is as if it did not exist..."

[C T]

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

 

Abhinavagupta (Kashmir Shaivism) responds.... 

 

"True, but even though it shines there, it has not truly become a conscious apprehension. Without conscious apprehension, even if a thing exists, it is as if it did not exist..."

 

Aren't the both of you basically saying the same thing? 

[Jeff]

21 minutes ago, C T said:

 

Aren't the both of you basically saying the same thing? 

 

Are we? Depends on the definition of “conscious”.  He goes on to say...

 

"The question is thus appropriate because contentment (enlightenment) is not possible without a conscious realization. Contentment is of two kinds. The first is effected by means of absorption (samavesa) and consists of magical powers. The second is attained by reaching a condition of conscious heart-felt realization, and it is the state of being liberated while still alive."

Edited December 11, 2017 by Jeff

[Limahong]

On 12/10/2017 at 7:15 AM, dwai said:

Dare I say the best Buddhists are Hindu 😜.

 

Hi dwai,

 

Why are you thanking me? I do not understand.

 

I am posting this again as your tongue (😜) hits me hard - be it humor or otherwise. 

 

- LimA

[dwai]

5 hours ago, Limahong said:

 

Hi dwai,

 

When people thank me, I need to know the basis - without which I cannot accept what I do not deserve.

 

- LimA

Think of it this way -- if you don't accept what people give you, where does it go?