Is non-duality actually a fundamental truth, or just another philosophy?

[MIchael80]

Non-duality is a shift in perception......not something to think endlessly about.

 

However we have to be carefull here....the first shift in perception (awakening to the pure awarness that is experienced as the source of all) can very well be a great shift and feel like "the end" but there is usually sublte duality there.

If the experience is that the world or creation is an ilusion or just a dream then we have this subtle dualism (the "true" unmanifest and the "illusory" creation) only with deepening into awareness, more clearing and refinement and further shifts do we come to a true unity where the unmanifest and the manifest creation are exactly the same and hence forth a true unity.

 

To the alchemy: there are very old methods of neidan that still use xing and ming (xing and ming is a more primordial form of yin and yang and has to be merged in the process). The "methods of the first emperors" is one of them.....and these old neidan has a more powerful alchemical principle than most of the "newer" neidan forms (or better said ...less obscured alchemical principle).

 

Are there writtings about that? Yes inside some schools not official...BUT there are writings from the tamil siddhas and they had masters much further back in time and they have a system called vaasi yoga that is very similiar to neidan. (and uses these alchemical principles).

 

best

[Marblehead]

Has anyone considered that there is no duality in truth?

 

[Apech]

6 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Has anyone considered that there is no duality in truth?

 

 

 

yes and no.

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, Apech said:

 

The quote you give is an exposition of yin-yang which is itself a non-dual position.  If you look at the Yijing you can see that even the most complex situations and the specific moment in such situations can be expressed as 'layers' of yin-yang.  Just as with your computer everything it does can be reduced to a series of 0 and 1.  This is based on electronic switches which either allow a current to flow or don't, if there is a flow its a 1, if there isn't then its a 0.  So the 0 and the 1 are not things in themselves but can be universally applied to describe everything (that happens on your computer).  This universality of the application of yin-yang is not however a basic dualism - since as in the classic illustration of a hill with a sunny side and a shady side - if you bulldoze the hill these two qualities which define the spatial geometry of the hill disappear - as they are mutually dependent.  This is why it is saying that they are 'not absolute' - so it is not a dualism.

 

I see what you're saying, maybe I have a different understanding of yin and yang. Unlike the forever changing pattern of sunlight on a hill I see Yin and Yang as more permanent qualities within our own brain level of functioning, Yang is always Yang and Yin is always Yin, and they are always paired. What changes is their focus, Yang goes from outward looking to looking towards Yin. If I were to make an analogy with the hill, an entire half of the hill would physically rotate on its axis, so I suspect I have a fundamentally different idea of how Yin and Yang operate. To me therefore I think they are still a dualistic pair, their interaction level with each other just changes. 

 

To me True Yin and True Yang follow the same principle, they exist in 'isolation' from each other, and what changes is their association with each other. It is this pattern that I imagine can keep repeating beyond our known boundaries.  

 

3 hours ago, Apech said:

I think you may have a wrong understanding of what 'non-duality' is, as you call it a state that can be experienced for any given period of time.  If you think that is what it is - then I can see why trying to achieve it in your view would lead to stagnation - as any 'state' is as its name suggests static.  And the idea that it is temporary is also inherently self-limiting.  However non-duality is a liberation from these constraints (of space and time).  But then I have no idea why you have come to your conclusion, you don't tell us, so it is very difficult to tell why you are saying what you are saying.

 

Any reports I have ever read of people's experience of non-duality show evidence of their non-duality state falling apart and having to be shored up by further  meditation, or samadhi, or workshops, or further teaching etc. This is of course as far as I have read or heard, which is what I then form my opinion from. How could we actually be liberated from the constraints of space and time permanently while we are alive? If it's not permanent, then it's not non-dual. 

[Wu Ming Jen]

Movement and stillness are cycling; Yin and Yang are revolving.
Yin turns into Yang, Yang turns into Yin.
Without deviation to one side, one is able to obtain the objective

 

Only double cultivation is without deviation. The Gong of innate nature and life-destiny’s are equal in standing. When one’s Skill reaches this point, it means that Yin and Yang face no danger of being inclined to one side, no danger of being out of balance. Therefore there will be no disastrous consequences. Extreme movement and stillness are repeated over and over. 

 

Male-female cultivation is a mistake and misinterpretation of the dual cultivation principle and must be criticized here. The bed-chamber arts are therefore side doors, the unorthodox Tao.  Believing semen is vitality is a major mistake  a crooked path

 

Unite yin and yang then there is balance of eternal movement where is the opposition or duality now? 

 

[Bindi]

11 minutes ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

Movement and stillness are cycling; Yin and Yang are revolving.
Yin turns into Yang, Yang turns into Yin.
Without deviation to one side, one is able to obtain the objective

 

Only double cultivation is without deviation. The Gong of innate nature and life-destiny’s are equal in standing. When one’s Skill reaches this point, it means that Yin and Yang face no danger of being inclined to one side, no danger of being out of balance. Therefore there will be no disastrous consequences. Extreme movement and stillness are repeated over and over. 

 

Male-female cultivation is a mistake and misinterpretation of the dual cultivation principle and must be criticized here. The bed-chamber arts are therefore side doors, the unorthodox Tao.  Believing semen is vitality is a major mistake  a crooked path

 

Unite yin and yang then there is balance of eternal movement where is the opposition or duality now? 

 

 

Even united yang is still yang and yin is still yin, they're just co-operative. It just sounds more like a healthy duality to me, two forces working together for the greater good of each. 

[3bob]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

 

yes and no.

 

don't forget maybe 

[3bob]

so  when can we go with Matthew 6:33 King James Version (KJV): (?)

 

33.  But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.

 

and just how fitting and universal is this saying if given some cross-correlation for all the far out, super dude or dudett immortal stuff? 

Edited August 24, 2018 by 3bob

[Apech]

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

I see what you're saying, maybe I have a different understanding of yin and yang. Unlike the forever changing pattern of sunlight on a hill I see Yin and Yang as more permanent qualities within our own brain level of functioning, Yang is always Yang and Yin is always Yin, and they are always paired. What changes is their focus, Yang goes from outward looking to looking towards Yin. If I were to make an analogy with the hill, an entire half of the hill would physically rotate on its axis, so I suspect I have a fundamentally different idea of how Yin and Yang operate. To me therefore I think they are still a dualistic pair, their interaction level with each other just changes. 

 

To me True Yin and True Yang follow the same principle, they exist in 'isolation' from each other, and what changes is their association with each other. It is this pattern that I imagine can keep repeating beyond our known boundaries.  

 

 

Any reports I have ever read of people's experience of non-duality show evidence of their non-duality state falling apart and having to be shored up by further  meditation, or samadhi, or workshops, or further teaching etc. This is of course as far as I have read or heard, which is what I then form my opinion from. How could we actually be liberated from the constraints of space and time permanently while we are alive? If it's not permanent, then it's not non-dual. 

 

The image of the sunlit hill is from Chinese accounts of the nature of yin and yang - and indeed the derivation of the terms.  It's not something I have made up.  It has nothing to do with 'brain level functioning'.  If you want to understand Yinyang then I can recommend 'Yinyang - the way of heaven and Earth in Thought and Culture' by Robin R. Wang pub. Cambridge.

 

I don't know which reports you have read of non-dual states - but I would discount many of these accounts as being just some kind of subjective experience - and even just emotional/psychological reactions and not the real deal.  It is however true that some people glimpse the non-dual only to have the effects of their own obscurations intervene again.  This is not because the non-dual state is temporary but because those people have just had a momentary and partial experience of it.  Some other people however are born with non-dual awareness and never lose it.  

 

 

[Wu Ming Jen]

2 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

Even united yang is still yang and yin is still yin, they're just co-operative. It just sounds more like a healthy duality to me, two forces working together for the greater good of each. 

Exactly, When opposition disperses united as a whole yin and yang reconcile there differences what is left is balance and harmony.

 

There is something where the laws of yin and yang do not apply and it is non physical and silent but always with you no matter how many changes you have during your life time.  After life is pure speculation, we do not go there but to know the end we do need to know the beginning. Make life awesome now. everything else follows like a shadow.

 

Taoist seem to be impatient and do not wait to die to join with heaven it just seems like a waste of time. Many invest their time in the perishable world but what ever works for one may not work for another. 

[Marblehead]

7 hours ago, Wu Ming Jen said:

but what ever works for one may not work for another. 

Oh, I'm going to live until I die.  No waiting around for me.

 

[Bindi]

10 hours ago, Apech said:

 

The image of the sunlit hill is from Chinese accounts of the nature of yin and yang - and indeed the derivation of the terms.  It's not something I have made up.  It has nothing to do with 'brain level functioning'.  If you want to understand Yinyang then I can recommend 'Yinyang - the way of heaven and Earth in Thought and Culture' by Robin R. Wang pub. Cambridge.

 

Using the sunny and shady side of a hill analogy (which I was aware of but chose to ignore), can you explain how yin and yang unite and  reconcile their differences, and using the same analogy can you explain how True Yin is differentiated from Yang and True Yang is differentiated from Yin and reconciled with each other?  

 

10 hours ago, Apech said:

I don't know which reports you have read of non-dual states - but I would discount many of these accounts as being just some kind of subjective experience - and even just emotional/psychological reactions and not the real deal.  It is however true that some people glimpse the non-dual only to have the effects of their own obscurations intervene again.  This is not because the non-dual state is temporary but because those people have just had a momentary and partial experience of it.  Some other people however are born with non-dual awareness and never lose it.  

 

 

 

[Lost in Translation]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

Using the sunny and shady side of a hill analogy (which I was aware of but chose to ignore), can you explain how yin and yang unite and  reconcile their differences, and using the same analogy can you explain how True Yin is differentiated from Yang and True Yang is differentiated from Yin and reconciled with each other?  

 

You may enjoy this thread from the Yijing sub group.

 

 

[Bindi]

Freeing the Mind from the Prison of Non-Duality

The doctrine of non-duality remains the primary influence within all major spiritual traditions which pursue self-realization. Not only Advaita but all the Buddhist schools base themselves around this concept. Moreover, non-duality has also deeply influenced the relatively independent teachers such as J. Krishnamurti who, in spite of his external rebellion against traditions, was in fact expounding another version of this philosophy. Nowadays the whole neo-advaitic satsang culture that has taken root in the collective spiritual mind is but a shallow commercialization of that very same non-dual conception.

So what is wrong with the non-dual philosophy? On the surface it appears rather convincing. However, this perspective lacks imagination and the necessary self-knowledge. Furthermore, the fact that it appears convincing does not make it any more true. Intellect alone is a very limited tool with which to discover the paradoxical nature of existence.

Before we begin to examine the flaws of non-duality, we need to confront the very sad fact that while humanity has developed on many levels since the times of the Upanishads and Buddha, the science of enlightenment has hardly evolved at all. We still live in the dark ages of spirituality in the sense that all spiritual teachings are based on the constant repetition of what was discovered thousands of years ago. We often hear about a global awakening or a new age of spirituality, but who is awakening to what? People are as ignorant of their true nature as they always were. The globalization of spiritual information should not be confused with global awakening. If truth be told, spirituality is just becoming increasingly superficial and so are the spiritual teachers who sell cheap and absurd versions of enlightenment to the unconscious masses. Humanity has evolved psychologically to a large extent, but it appears to have stagnated, if not regressed, spiritually.

There is no one version of non-duality. The concept varies from one tradition to another and from extreme views to more moderate ones. For example, in Buddhism there is the idea of two truths: a higher and a lower truth. The lower truth accepts a certain level of duality on a daily, practical level, whereas the higher truth can be described as the absence of self or emptiness. In Advaita there are also various conceptual approaches, such as the one which accepts the existence of the personal god, Isvara, as an aspect of the one self, Brahman. It is important to bear in mind that Advaita was deeply influenced by Buddhism via the exchange of ideas between Hindu and Buddhist scholars who were fighting at the time for spiritual and political dominancy in India. Moreover, Buddha himself created a path and philosophy that was deeply conditioned by the non-dual concepts that were already present in ancient Hinduism. Buddha, like Krishnamurti, was a rebel but perhaps not rebellious enough to free his intelligence from a pre-advaitic model of reality.

The intention here is not to over-analyze these different views, but rather to capture the main energy of that mind-perception which forms the major influence on past traditions of enlightenment, a perception which, in many ways, cripples the further exploration of truth beyond non-duality.

The next question to ask is: does the experience of self-realization or awakening naturally give rise to a non-dual understanding? Or is it the other way around – that a non-dual concept of reality conditions the very nature and experience of self-realization? The latter question points to the role of our intelligence in interpreting any awakened state. Here, the first thing to realize is that it is exceedingly difficult to properly comprehend and reflect any awakening experience in the mind. The inner world is totally unknown and incomprehensible to human intelligence when the mind only knows how to function and orient itself in the realm of objects. Therefore, most of those who walk the path have very little ability to understand what they are experiencing when they shift into any of the awakened states. What they may translate as an experience of oneness or non-duality can easily be a trance-like condition of the mind which cannot properly grasp the nature of altered consciousness. As such, being unable to understand what they experience, most resort to interpreting their realization through the concepts offered by their respective traditions. And because the science of enlightenment was originally conceived from a non-dual philosophy, non-duality has become the paradigm for all those who lack the imagination and sensitivity to question its basic assumptions.

Therefore, it is this model of non-duality that determines the interpretation of most of the awakening experiences, not the opposite. Because intelligence has such a long way to evolve, many seekers are as if blind, trying to orient themselves in a landscape that is beyond their ability to see and comprehend. This lack of orientation in the inner world naturally leads one to seek the easy solution. But to do so is to give away the creative freedom of the mind by agreeing to become indoctrinated by an external authority.

Reality demands balance; existence is a play of polarities. The non-dual philosophy has come into being as a rejection of the state of separation, as if offering a simplistic resolution to it. Duality has been defined as a problem to be overcome, but this is a wrong assumption based on a false and hypocritical premise which is rooted in self-denial.  Rather, one has to begin by understanding the positive nature of duality. Those who live in unconsciousness of the ego do not experience true duality; they experience insubstantiality, the pretension of living. Positive, true duality requires one to possess a clear sense of self. Duality is the essence of creation, the force through which life moves. It is present not only within the mind and senses but as an intrinsic aspect of any reality, including all the states of awakening. There is even duality in pure consciousness and in natural samadhi. This duality constitutes the base of the enlightened relationship between our sacred individuality and the light of creation.

Those who do not honor our unique individual consciousness as the true base of evolution and enlightenment are the false prophets of non-duality. They give us the illusion of freedom while taking away our power and dignity. Speaking about oneness and the absence or illusory nature of ego inevitably leads to the denial of human life. But one must be wary of those who exploit such simplistic spiritual notions for their own gain, either using these notions to justify the unguarded pursuit of desire or having the power to subdue their desires and claiming sainthood through rigid adherence to morality. Those who confuse their natural disinterest in the things of the world with spiritual truth have often somewhere on the way lost the passion to live. Overall, such messages have a crippling effect on humanity, spiritually speaking.

Duality is sacred. Non-duality is the passive principle of existence; duality is the active spirit of creation, the precious force through which anything and all can exist. There is no self-realization without duality. Enlightenment does not dissolve duality. On the contrary, it illuminates the consciousness of duality so that for the first time we can see what is truly dual and to whom duality refers.

In all the traditions of self-realization, the most important element and understanding is lacking – who we really are. The self-enquiry of Advaita or Buddhism leads us to the wrong conclusions: it begins with the preconception that our unique sense of self is unreal and only the universal is real. Those who perform such dishonest self-enquiry already have their answer, which is based on either trying to either disidentify from our natural, relative sense of self or to identify with the impersonal existence. They are not really enquiring; they are hypnotizing their minds into another false perception, one which is taking them even further from the truth.

No one has correctly answered the question ‘who am I?’ because their minds are not free and there is no space for understanding to arise. Initially, we cannot answer this question at all, not only because our higher self is simply absent, but also because our relative self is completely fragmented. If a mature seeker with the basic stability of mind were to pursue this question with absolute honesty, someone who was conscious enough to know where to look but whose soul is still dormant, he would discover as his answer the fundmental consciousness of me. Me is our innate sense of self, the subject to all thoughts and perceptions. All living beings possess the sense of me, otherwise they would not know that they exist. When our me is sufficiently developed and becomes fully conscious, it can experience itself in separation from thoughts, independent from the mind.

This realization is what we call ‘conscious me’, which in some traditions was termed ‘awareness’. Awareness is not our higher consciousness but the knowledge of me in itself. For the deeper answer to the question ‘who am I?’ to arise, we must awaken to something that we are not yet; we must awaken to our potential. The light of I am has to enter our existence and integrate with the consciousness of me in order for the consciousness of our soul to awaken. When the soul is not met, not realized, one can very easily misconstrue this state as impersonal, as universal consciousness, forgetting who one is. This kind of identification with the impersonal is one of the major pitfalls on the path as it jeopardizes the actualization of our divine individuality.

Realization of our pure nature is a complex process. Those who simplify it artificially have not realized themselves and are deceiving others. Furthermore, realizing who we are is not the end of our spiritual evolution but the true beginning. That beginning points in two directions: the inner and the outer – the never-ending deepening of our realization of the mystery of the inner world and the constant expansion into creation. The true subject to that evolution is our soul. The soul should not be confused with some kind of ego-consciousness. She is our higher being that must be actualized, otherwise she remains non-existent. The soul, when awakened, embraces our human nature, allowing the human in us to become whole, to reach purification and healing, and to fulfil our essential human desires.

Blessings,
Anadi

[Apech]

That last post which I won't quote/copy cos it is so long is the most ill informed thing I've ever read, it is so full of mistakes and false assumptions that I don't know where to begin.

[Apech]

10 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

Using the sunny and shady side of a hill analogy (which I was aware of but chose to ignore), can you explain how yin and yang unite and  reconcile their differences, and using the same analogy can you explain how True Yin is differentiated from Yang and True Yang is differentiated from Yin and reconciled with each other?  

 

 

 

 

Yes I can.

 

 

[Bindi]

5 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

Yes I can.

 

 

 

I would love to actually hear your explanations. 

[Fa Xin]

One thing I dislike about the article is it takes an absolute view. Saying one way is wrong and another is right. It’s just as bad as some non dualist saying that duality is false etc. Should we really limit ourselves like this and be boxed by one view or the other?

[Bindi]

27 minutes ago, Apech said:

That last post which I won't quote/copy cos it is so long is the most ill informed thing I've ever read, it is so full of mistakes and false assumptions that I don't know where to begin.

 

You could just put a pin in randomly and start there. 

[Apech]

40 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

I would love to actually hear your explanations. 

 

I'd rather just talk about what I want to talk about.

[3bob]

'that last post" was not written from a Buddhist perspective and also unfortunately glosses over or perhaps misdirects on the teachings of the Upanishads...yet I'd say it has a lot of very important points a major one being "soul" which is personal and of the potential of the "Son" or "Christ", who realizes the "impersonal/impartial"  or Father through the power of the "Holy Spirit"...which are not exactly kosher ways to use and or stretch those terms but what the hell, I gave it a shot.

 

 

[Apech]

22 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

You could just put a pin in randomly and start there. 

 

 

Well just a detail but not all Buddhist schools are non-dualist.  Given according to his biography he spent a long time in Zen Buddhist monasteries you would think he might know this.  But then again maybe not.

 

 

[Apech]

I've googled around a bit to see if there are any good definitions of non-duality out there - and I can't find any (beyond the 'one without a second' business).  So I think this might be the problem as it has become a bit of a buzz phrase like 'energy' and 'consciousness' which people throw around willy nilly.   But because it is profound in nature you can't really do that.  It's also the reason people read 'non-dual' to mean 'monist' or even doubting the presence of duality in the ordinary sense.

 

Properly used (in my opinion) non-dual is not referring to a transcendent higher truth which reduces the ordinary world.  Actually it is saying in every normal sense there are subject/object, yin/yang and so forth - this is ok - but if you examine the essence of what those are they can be seen to be mutually interdependent.  As in the TTC where it says without ugliness, beauty does not exist and so on.  They are relative - but then relative truth is not untrue or false.  It is true but so is absolute truth.  Both are true that there is subject/object and yin/yang etc. and at the same time there is not.  This is in effect why it is called non-dual and not mono.

 

This takes some time getting your head around - that there is a cup and yet there is not, that there is a self and yet there is not - it doesn't make an immediate appeal to the intellect and so is puzzling and paradoxical.

 

But we don't live in a world of pure essences.  We don't ordinarily perceive yin/yang at work directly - we infer their presence/activity.  In alchemical processes it is indicated that you work with the world of mixed elements.  That is the ordinary world/perception of it - to perform certain transformations - such as purification, distillation, circulation and sublimation - to first realise the pure yin/yang (or in this case heaven and earth) and then to realise their mutual interdependence and their unpolarised (wuji) essence.  In our ordinary state which is mixed or combined (like metal ore) our LDT contains 'water' which is yang but sandwiched in yin.  This element is considered dangerous/perilous because the power/intent is hidden in softness.  In the MDT the fire element is an inverse of this as it is yang on the outside and yin inside.  So like a flame it is outwardly bright/'hard' but inwardly yielding.  So we have in this arrangement a certain instability, perilousness (we don't know ourselves), an outwardly focussed mind actively seeking but not finding.  The alchemical process is to circulate and refine these elements until the yang in water recombines with the heart/fire and forms the pure yang of heaven and the yin lines combine to form earth.  This is a return to original unmixed purity.  Not the end of course but something of a beginning.

 

 

[Marblehead]

Non-duality is seeing the entire picture; duality is identifying the objects in the picture.

 

[Michael Sternbach]

51 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

Well just a detail but not all Buddhist schools are non-dualist.  Given according to his biography he spent a long time in Zen Buddhist monasteries you would think he might know this.  But then again maybe not.

 

 

 

Why do you think Zen is not non-dualist?