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

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

My information on Buddhist influence regarding the term is unfortunately only from wikipedia. 

 

 

'Cultivating Stillness - a Taoist Manual for Transforming Body and Mind' - Laozi again? If his philosophical approach is wu wei, I imagine his manual for transforming body and mind would rely heavily on cultivating stillness. A little calmness and quietness are required in order to attend to the energies within, but alchemical transformation requires a lot more than just stillness to be cultivated. 

 

First you wei and then wu wei remains the principle of alchemy. 

 

 

 

 

Wiki is ok for looking things up but not for detailed guidance.  I would concede that in the Song dyn. the way in which wuji was used may have changed slightly - and as is very often the case with these things they started to talk about it as a primordial state, probably the wuji diagram is suggestive of this - but I would argue if properly understood it had a consistent meaning throughout.

 

That text is attributed to Laozi but it wasn't written by the Laozi of the TTC.  Its an honorific attribution.

 

Even with neidan (and also Nei gong and qi gong) stillness cultivation is the first thing you need to do and is vital as it draws qi into the body, its the way of getting power-up and without it nothing really works.

 

Wu wei or strictly speaking wei-wu-wei is not stillness - it is spontaneous action which meets the needs of the situation.

 

Where did you get this 'first you do you wei and then you do wuwei' from?  Is it in a specific teaching you have learned?  Just curious.

[Apech]

35 minutes ago, steve said:

Wu wei is not alchemy but in many ways it is an important objective and result of alchemy. 

At very least it is a symptom of growth through alchemical practice.

 

My point is it is effortless.

The effort is the chaos, the natural balance is restored through letting go of effort. 

Certainly there are things that need to be done and when we get out of the way, they will happen naturally, when needed.

Once again, wu wei. 

 

We can certainly disagree and I apologize if I come across as pushing my perspective on you.

Your perspective is every bit as valid to you as mine is to me. 

Best of luck in your practice!

 

 

That's very generous of you Steve but is there not such a thing as right and wrong?

[Bindi]

21 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

 

Wiki is ok for looking things up but not for detailed guidance.  I would concede that in the Song dyn. the way in which wuji was used may have changed slightly - and as is very often the case with these things they started to talk about it as a primordial state, probably the wuji diagram is suggestive of this - but I would argue if properly understood it had a consistent meaning throughout.

 

That text is attributed to Laozi but it wasn't written by the Laozi of the TTC.  Its an honorific attribution.

 

Even with neidan (and also Nei gong and qi gong) stillness cultivation is the first thing you need to do and is vital as it draws qi into the body, its the way of getting power-up and without it nothing really works.

 

Wu wei or strictly speaking wei-wu-wei is not stillness - it is spontaneous action which meets the needs of the situation.

 

Where did you get this 'first you do you wei and then you do wuwei' from?  Is it in a specific teaching you have learned?  Just curious.

 

A. It is my experience, and B. when I saw a reference to it in sifting through various writings on Neidan I resonated with the idea. 

 

Quote

 

The Nanzong mode of Neidan self-cultivation, instead, consists of a gradual (jian) process that focuses on the cultivation of Ming at the initial stage, but is concluded with the cultivation of Xing. Cultivating Ming requires "doing" (youwei), while cultivating Xing is done by "non-doing" (wuwei). A poem of the Wuzhen pian ("Jueju", no. 42) describes the Neidan process as beginning with "doing" and ending with "non-doing":

 

It begins with doing, and hardly can one see a thing; 
when it comes to non-doing, all begin to understand. 
But if you only see non-doing as the essential marvel, 
how can you know that doing is the foundation?

 

http://www.goldenelixir.com/jindan/nanzong_beizong.html

 

 

[doc benway]

28 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

That's very generous of you Steve but is there not such a thing as right and wrong?

 

Perhaps, but only from the perspective of the one who judges. Each of us needs something unique to our circumstances to allow growth, be that right or wrong from another’s perspective. If I were a teacher and Bindi were a student, I might have responded differently. That is not the case. This seemed to me the best approach in the moment, right or wrong.

 

 

[doc benway]

9 hours ago, Bindi said:

It begins with doing, and hardly can one see a thing; 
when it comes to non-doing, all begin to understand. 
But if you only see non-doing as the essential marvel, 
how can you know that doing is the foundation

 

I like to paraphrase Peter Fenner - 

‘if I didn’t do what I didn’t need to do, I wouldn’t know I didn’t need to do it.’ 

 

I think it is misguided to presume we know what others need, particularly in matters of dual and non-dual perspective. We can share our perspective but must come upon it in our own way. In some way, our present perspective is offering what we need at this moment for our growth, be it pleasant or painful.

 

Edited August 27, 2018 by steve
misquote

[Bindi]

My mistake, just some crap. 

 

 

Edited August 27, 2018 by Bindi

[Spotless]

8 hours ago, steve said:

 

 

 

Perhaps this is what Krishnamurti and Ramana Maharshi meant when they said that no one "understood them." They were not lamenting failure but continuing to guide those able to hear in the direction of realization - away from understanding, away from the conceptual.

They were not pointing to an understanding but to a profound shift in perspective.

 

The Dao that can be told of is not the eternal Dao;

The name that can be named is not the eternal name.

The Nameless is the origin of Heaven and Earth;

The Named is the mother of all things.

In Awakening the illusion that was the student ceases - the seeker cannot Awaken - the Seeker falls away upon Self Realization.

That which Awakens is not the facade of positions and held frequencies that "was the identified personality / student".

[3bob]

1 hour ago, Spotless said:

In Awakening the illusion that was the student ceases - the seeker cannot Awaken - the Seeker falls away upon Self Realization.

That which Awakens is not the facade of positions and held frequencies that "was the identified personality / student".

 

a problem (perhaps) for some here is seeing the student as an illusion instead of as an evolving soul.  Sure - the Self does not evolve (which is pointed out)  but the soul/matrix for the Self does evolve and every influx of awakening truth furthers such evolution.  So one might ask what is spotless poking around at - can the soul ever find or know its place with this transcendent Self or is it just a collection of illusions that is not able to Be and never was or will Be?  Or does it reach peace in knowing the Soul of it's soul and carry on evolving fully to an unbreakable, never really broken connection of satchidananda, its natural state?

Edited August 27, 2018 by 3bob

[Bindi]

Just some more crap.

Edited August 27, 2018 by Bindi

[Apech]

Quote

It begins with doing, and hardly can one see a thing; 
when it comes to non-doing, all begin to understand. 
But if you only see non-doing as the essential marvel, 
how can you know that doing is the foundation?

 

 

I get where you are coming from now.  But I would say that to 'do' non-doing you have to do some doing and to do 'doing' you have to be able to 'not-do' - maybe this is why the Northern and Southern schools merged.  Actually it is a good illustration of the non-duality of the two approaches - and Xing and Ming.

[3bob]

so how much time do we have to get all of this straight and in place, and what happens if we only get part of it but not the rest, and is anybody worried if they don't?  Btw. is the Tao worried about any of this in any way...

[Cheshire Cat]

Non-duality stands to fundamental truths like to accept myopia stands to actually healing your eyes. 

 

People manipulate energy, store Qi in the immortal dantian and prepare themselves for immortality. Yet, none of them is able to cure myopia. 

People kill imaginary giants but they can't trample the humble ant. 

 

Can you see the fundamental truth? 

[Marblehead]

8 hours ago, Apech said:

Wu wei or strictly speaking wei-wu-wei is not stillness - it is spontaneous action which meets the needs of the situation.

Important so I am repeating it.

 

[Apech]

8 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

Non-duality stands to fundamental truths like to accept myopia stands to actually healing your eyes. 

 

People manipulate energy, store Qi in the immortal dantian and prepare themselves for immortality. Yet, none of them is able to cure myopia. 

People kill imaginary giants but they can't trample the humble ant. 

 

Can you see the fundamental truth? 

 

 

No!  I think I must be myopic.

[Apech]

8 hours ago, Bindi said:

My mistake, just some crap. 

 

 

 

 

Crap is gold.

[Apech]

I'd forgotten about the dispute between Northern and Southern schools - and I think at least some of it is just that old human habit of rivalry.  It seems to occur in all walks of life - people desperate to prove their way the best at the expense of the others - sometimes even leading to bloodshed and war.

 

Sitting and forgetting about such concerns is probably the best practice.

 

I think it is inescapable, that no matter what system/religion you follow at the end of the day, it's just you and your mind/energy/body and nothing more.  You have to find your own path with that.  People can spend a lot of time on ceremony, on thinking, on trying to be better and so on - some of which is very helpful (even if only later on and not immediately) - but in the end you're just back with yourself with no filters.  So in the sense that 'non-duality' is something you might read about and study - it just falls into the category of possibly helpful ways of thinking, nothing more.  If it is about an experience - say of giving up, falling away, suddenly realising there's no 'you' while doing the washing up.  Well bravo for doing the washing up at least.  Otherwise beware - if it leads to any sense of abstraction, of floaty non-being, of emotional (what would you call it?) attenuation - then beware - not only is this not the real deal but just a brief rest - it's not non-duality either.

 

Non-duality, the real deal, is the goal of various yoga systems et. al.  But it is called this because it is such a profundity that it goes beyond what we can conceive, what we can cling to or emotionally desire.  The way to it is various depending on the person and the circumstances (including culture etc.).

 

 

Edited August 27, 2018 by Apech

[Cheshire Cat]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

[...]

 

Non-duality, the real deal, is the goal of various yoga systems et. al.  But it is called this because it is such a profundity that it goes beyond what we can conceive, what we can cling to or emotionally desire.  The way to it is various depending on the person and the circumstances (including culture etc.).

 

 

 

Not to mention non-triality which is such a profundity that it goes even beyond the Dynkin diagram.

 

it is said that mopai level 72 one can stabilize the mind in non-quaternality of which the classical non-duality is nothing but a special case.

[Spotless]

8 hours ago, 3bob said:

 

a problem (perhaps) for some here is seeing the student as an illusion instead of as an evolving soul.  Sure - the Self does not evolve (which is pointed out)  but the soul/matrix for the Self does evolve and every influx of awakening truth furthers such evolution.  So one might ask what is spotless poking around at - can the soul ever find or know its place with this transcendent Self or is it just a collection of illusions that is not able to Be and never was or will Be?  Or does it reach peace in knowing the Soul of it's soul and carry on evolving fully to an unbreakable, never really broken connection of satchidananda, its natural state?

In Awakening individuation is still present and is capable of immense expansion - while the unborn divine essence is ever present and now tangibly felt and abided in.

That which was a hundred thousand Chinese finger prisons of position and resistance and enertias and reactions known by its former name "the seeker" falls away and with it the suffering and dissatisfaction.

 

(The Individuation mentioned above is IN oneness - though one may not have reached a unity state - and it is very possible to reach a unity state prior to Awakening. A Unity state or state of Oneness can and is often mistaken for Awakening)

Edited August 27, 2018 by Spotless

[Marblehead]

54 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

Not to mention non-triality which is such a profundity that it goes even beyond the Dynkin diagram.

That's a new one for me.  Non-Triality.  Right now its not fitting into my brain.  Square block trying to go into a round hole.

 

[Spotless]

There are many states that will be progressed through in Awakened abiding awareness - though in the former they appear as wilfull aspirations and resistances, formerly as the cloak of personhood it was a politicalised state of identifications.

 

Freed from these tauntings and springs of resistance and willfulness - initially it takes quite some time to settle - and residual elements of the personhood still remain though one is no longer vested in them - there are no held enertias. One may still find a flare up of temper but it does not last and is somewhat foreign.

 

For some the allure of positioning pulls them back from abidance in the Awakened state and they have only the experience - having experienced Awakening - referred to as an Awakening Experience. 

 

There is a grey area in the use of the terms Enlightenment and Awakening - both are the end of suffering (once one is truly abiding in 

Awakened Awareness). Many references to Enlightenment are more references to Awakening - the falling away of the personhood and the end of suffering.

Enlightement is also a misnomer in the sense that it implies a sort of finished state - it is "a sort of finished state" but not actually a "finished state".

 

From Awakened Awareness great emergence will take place - it is Enlightening.

Edited August 27, 2018 by Spotless

[Cheshire Cat]

13 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

That's a new one for me.  Non-Triality.  Right now its not fitting into my brain.  Square block trying to go into a round hole.

 

 

One should start with non-duality and antinomian oness before delving into the principle of negation of the three vectors. 

[Marblehead]

This is enlightening too:

 

Spoiler

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=guy+hit+by+lightning+twice&&view=detail&mid=0D40D9601DCB922332E60D40D9601DCB922332E6&&FORM=VRDGAR

 

Edited August 27, 2018 by Marblehead

[Marblehead]

19 minutes ago, Cheshire Cat said:

 

One should start with non-duality and antinomian oness before delving into the principle of negation of the three vectors. 

Well, I've got non-duality down fairly well, and I have never had a problem with duality.  Beyond that?  Duh?

 

[Cheshire Cat]

46 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

Well, I've got non-duality down fairly well, and I have never had a problem with duality.  Beyond that?  Duh?

 

 

How about antinomic oneness of phenomenal extistence? That's pretty important to grasp triality!

[3bob]

1 hour ago, Spotless said:

There are many states that will be progressed through in Awakened abiding awareness - though in the former they appear as wilfull aspirations and resistances, formerly as the cloak of personhood it was a politicalised state of identifications.

 

Freed from these tauntings and springs of resistance and willfulness - initially it takes quite some time to settle - and residual elements of the personhood still remain though one is no longer vested in them - there are no held enertias. One may still find a flare up of temper but it does not last and is somewhat foreign.

 

For some the allure of positioning pulls them back from abidance in the Awakened state and they have only the experience - having experienced Awakening - referred to as an Awakening Experience. 

 

There is a grey area in the use of the terms Enlightenment and Awakening - both are the end of suffering (once one is truly abiding in 

Awakened Awareness). Many references to Enlightenment are more references to Awakening - the falling away of the personhood and the end of suffering.

Enlightement is also a misnomer in the sense that it implies a sort of finished state - it is "a sort of finished state" but not actually a "finished state".

 

From Awakened Awareness great emergence will take place - it is Enlightening.

 

a drop is finished when goes into the ocean,  btw. does the ocean rule itself yet it is not in need of rules