Why I think the Non-Duality Stuff is a Psy Op

[Omni]

If we don't have a problem with darker things, how can we stop manifesting them? How can we oppose dark forces on earth if we do not identify them as wrong? I'm predicting more channeling on non-duality stuff in the future coming from the US government 'ET Disinformation Division'. I've seen it popping up from the more credible and/or popular channelers and sites. I believe the source is a psy op based on potent ET philosophy. I have been taught some of this philosophy so I can see from which it derives from… Most ET based channeling psy ops, by my perception, work with derivatives of philosophy etc they learned from ETs.

Some points on non-duality from my perspective (I'm sure there are differing one's here).

I have been over ideas very similar or relating to non duality philosophy. A lot of it is in this thread:
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?74310-Why-Dark-Forces-are-Allowed-to-Influence-Undeveloped-Worlds--Exopolitics-

The ET philosophy I believe they made a derivative of, is the philosophy that all ET life should be able to carry out their true nature. As a respect to nature's creation. You could say as a respect to God's design if you believe in that sort of thing. Like in christianity God created the 'evil' forces too. One thing that has been asked to me telepathically many times before is this:
"Do you really think your judgment of a perfect universe, is more perfect than the current universe?"

I have always replied no.

When asked(in very complicated ways via AI through a long portion of time many questions related to):
"Design your own universe."

I designed:
"This exact Universe."

I wasn't arrogant enough to change anything, because I didn't understand all the mechanics…. Now having a better understanding of the mechanics I still wouldn't change anything other than planetary stuff and my own life etc...

I have always had respect for elder ETs, even dark ones. I do not treat them as an enemy(the dark ones). Some have told me they view me as one of their incarnational enemies on earth, but I tell them back that I do not perceive them as my enemy. However, taking this philosophy down to our own kind(making it a universal judgment that all energy is the same, so whats the difference: nothing), is I believe where the deception and agenda is.

Who gains most from the philosophy that all energy is the same, and should not be judged by our own divine discernment abilities(if one has them). It is meant to make people accept negative things amongst humans. The philosophy to allow an ET race to fulfill their nature's is enlightened, in a allowing darkness for a reason sort of way. The philosophy that it is acceptable for certain behaviors in humans is counter-productive to our own experiences IMO. Unless you think rape, molestation/child abuse, slavery, and things like that(I could go on writing a long list of things I am against) are A ok, you have not transcended dualistic opinions… Among humans on earth is where we can make a change. And to make that change if any changes are to be made we must oppose darkness on earth by at the very least providing an alternative to it(which in itself is kind of opposing it). Not be docile because we no longer view it as anti-us. There is an anti-human agenda on earth. However it is unimportant if you "choose a side". Most people do not consciously choose a side. They just have certain energies they prefer to sponsor in their life. And by that they contribute to a side. All people are energetic players to earth... And the energy manifestation is all kept track of. Dark forces want not much more, than to make certain people less likely to oppose them or even better, to start manifesting darkness. Non-duality philosophy is a form of being energetically inert or indifferent, unless the whole belief in the philosophy is based on illusion. Just fooling the perception you have no bias of energy you like to receive or give...

On top of it I believe being a mind candy philosophy where people still have basis for duality plenty…. Non-duality philosophy is a step towards manifesting darkness in one's life. If you are truly indifferent when it comes to the energy you manifest(AKA seeing all energy as the same), more darkness has a possible tendency to come through. And if it is all positive things being manifested while this philosophy is held, duality is a value in life regardless and it is simply an illusion based on mind candy philosophy IMO that one has transcended it. A mind candy philosophy to me is one that often expands the mind of a person hearing about it, thus is more likely to be accepted simply based on that. The base of most candy is sugar, and the base of most mind candy are illusions(in the way I use the words).

So to the people who follow non-duality type philosophies I ask this:
Do you oppose certain energies/realities being manifested in your own life, and other's lives?
Do you truly feel indifferent about the energy you manifest? IE: Darkness is just as valid as light, so who cares about doing both? And if you do not manifest darkness, how can you say you have transcended duality, when you clearly have a bias in the energy you want to sponsor?

[Hogswitch]

The roots of non duality are over a thousand years old are you seriously suggesting that Buddha and Shankara were agents of the shadow government?

Just because one doesn't accept the dualistic concepts of good and evil doesn't mean you have to accept what you don't want to see in the world. It seems to me that we live in a consensus reality where we all contribute our own preferences to the collective mindset and what we end up experiencing is a negotiated settlement. If the world is dark it's because that's what the majority prefer.

Take responsibility, make choices and live them don't rely on paternalistic rules and hierarchical structures to fix things. It's no use looking up to the divine rulemaker and screaming for justice, all choices are valid, this is our freedom, change the balance if you can or learn to live with the choices of others.

Hog.

[Omni]

The roots of non duality are over a thousand years old are you seriously suggesting that Buddha and Shankara were agents of the shadow government?
The same influences were around back then as now. Same negative ETs performing psy ops then, as the US government is performing psy ops now... I have often wondered what the catch was for buddha. Throughout history many of the biggest contributors were sacrificed... It's possible some of his teaching were in fact from a psy op source. I can't be certain. I do think Buddha was a very wise man... I don't see him above ETs though, as they were above him watching him and potentially helping him along the way(what I believe anyway)..

What Buddha said is probably valuable in ways for knowing... I see value in transcending 'certain' dualistic views and 'at times' is how I find them valuable. Not all times. I practice them holographically so I am not in a stasis form when viewing them. I just find the basis of seeing "all things as valid' amongst humans is counter-productive. We must refine what is acceptable, and we must further do this. That is very important for our development IMHO. If this philosophy was largely present back before we changed slavery how could people oppose slavery and define it as darkness if all things are valid? I found it a very counter-productive philosophy. I have not studied the way buddha has mentioned it. I'd be interested in hearing it from his words though if you know a good source...



all choices are valid

So molesting a child is a valid choice you are suggesting... I can't accept that. I see it as one of the choices in the universal possibilities. I wouldn't delete it from existence in the universe. But I would stop all cases of it on earth if I had the power to...

[Jake]

Okay, (Jake cracks knuckles.. lol. :))

If I am pickin up what you are putting down,,, the crux of the question of duality (from your point of view) is the existence of negative manifestations,, (pain, murder, war, violence, death, suffering,, etc...) So, with this in mind, you cannot consider that the manifestation was a choice, especially for those who suffer... All I will say is that the manifestation is not created from our physical/earth viewpoint. I view an overall consciousness having thoughts and questions about itself,, in doing so,, physical reality manifests in a nature that reflects the inner seeking of consciousness itself. Perhaps their IS suffering within our sphere of consciousness... Perhaps THAT is the reason that it manifests in physical 'reality'. How we work it out in physical reality can only help our higher selves to understand itself better, which in turn will manifest a better, more 'whole' physical reality, without all of the suffering..

I cannot understand the manifestation of anything without there being an underlying duality.. Perhaps I am broken? ;)


Do you oppose certain energies/realities being manifested in your own life, and other's lives?
Yes, wholeheartedly,, some more than others... I also embrace certain energies /realities being manifest in my own life and others. It depends on the 'alignment' of the energy,,, (dark/light,,,, (duality)) My opposition to any specific aspect of reality/manifestation is not my 'observation' of it. Therefore, my opposition cannot be considered the primary experience,, but rather the act of 'learning/experiencing',, and the 're-creating of reality' from the physical perspective requires more balance between self/higher self... (observer/participant)


Do you truly feel indifferent about the energy you manifest?
I guess I don't understand the question,, could you clarity? Indifferent? I only seek to react positively to the situation around me.. My creation of it is a reflection,,, my reaction to it is my gift back.. I think that there is a big gap between the understanding that we create our realities,, and we create WHAT WE WANT AND/OR DESIRE!!! Is there really a question that we create it? The idea is resisted because folks don't look around and see the 'suffering' as 'barriers'... Victimization is a slippery slope... Folks see suffering and immediately separate themselves from it. It is only natural. I posit that we are not separate, and that the manifestation of suffering comes from suffering that we are facing on a soul/conscious level,, and it manifests in front of confused/limited versions of ourselves...


how can you say you have transcended duality, when you clearly have a bias in the energy you want to sponsor?

I would love to say that I have transcended duality.. Of course, I cannot. I have only recognized the variables of my environment... I cannot say that I have 'taken the reigns'... That is the next step, but it requires a bit of a leap of faith,,, I guess. manymany OBEs ... So clearly, I am biased. :) I can say that I have become lucid in THIS dream... it was magical, but the 'moment' passed... This is another level of the dream...

A follow-up question to myself... Do you claim to know everything?

No, absolutely not.. Not by a long shot. I am quite the absurd idiot compared..... :)

Cheers,
Jake.

[shadowstalker]

I have to agree with the both of you, (Omni,Hogs)
I mean, where do we think religion came from, some came from misdirected interpretation of the gods (little g)
And most still believe, and yet the ET's that aloud it to happen wont change the facts, they love being praised, do they not?

Same goes with Some spirituality.

Only we can change that

[Hogswitch]

all choices are valid

So molesting a child is a valid choice you are suggesting... I can't accept that. I see it as one of the choices in the universal possibilities. I wouldn't delete it from existence in the universe. But I would stop all cases of it on earth if I had the power to...

If it were not a valid choice it could not happen, how could we be living in a universe where child molestation is totally forbidden by the rules of this universe and it still happen? The fact that "bad" things happen means that they are allowed to be in this universe. This is why it's absurd to say that there is a rule in the universe to say that some things are wrong, if that was the case those things could not happen in this universe.

[Omni]

No, absolutely not.. Not by a long shot. I am quite the absurd idiot compared.....
I think you're great Jake. :) You aren't an idiot at all IMO.

[Omni]

all choices are valid

So molesting a child is a valid choice you are suggesting... I can't accept that. I see it as one of the choices in the universal possibilities. I wouldn't delete it from existence in the universe. But I would stop all cases of it on earth if I had the power to...

If it were not a valid choice it would not happen, how could we be living in a universe where child molestation is totally forbidden by the rules of the universe and it still happen? The fact that "bad" things happen means that they are allowed to be in the universe. This is why it's absurd to say that there is a rule in the universe to say that some things are wrong, if that was the case those things could not happen in this universe.

To me there is a difference between a "valid" choice, and a choice when looking at it from any number of perspectives. Attaching the word valid implies things. It is certainly 'a choice', but what makes it a "valid choice". Does it being "valid" make it perpetually fine to be within our society to you?

The reason why we see things as wrong(a lot of people) is because of it's universal effects on people. Child abuse has a lot of negative effects on people. therefore if we are to further perfect our society, we must shun it, and even punish it until it is no longer a part of our society. If no steps were taken against some things, there would be no change in positive societal ways, or at least it would be far more scarce.

[Hogswitch]

all choices are valid

So molesting a child is a valid choice you are suggesting... I can't accept that. I see it as one of the choices in the universal possibilities. I wouldn't delete it from existence in the universe. But I would stop all cases of it on earth if I had the power to...

If it were not a valid choice it would not happen, how could we be living in a universe where child molestation is totally forbidden by the rules of the universe and it still happen? The fact that "bad" things happen means that they are allowed to be in the universe. This is why it's absurd to say that there is a rule in the universe to say that some things are wrong, if that was the case those things could not happen in this universe.

To me there is a difference between a "valid" choice, and a choice when looking at it from any number of perspectives. Attaching the word valid implies things. It is certainly 'a choice', but what makes it a "valid choice". Does it being "valid" make it perpetually fine to be within our society to you?

The reason why we see things as wrong(a lot of people) is because of it's universal effects on people. Child abuse has a lot of negative effects on people. therefore if we are to further perfect our society, we must shun it, and even punish it until it is no longer a part of our society. If no steps were taken against some things, there would be no change in positive societal ways, or at least it would be far more scarce.

When I said "all choices are valid" I was asserting that all choices are allowed by the universe. Those who tell us that a certain thing is "absolutely wrong" are suggesting that this "wrong thing" is forbidden by the rules of the universe. We make the rules of society, the rules of society are nothing to do with what is allowed in the universe. The rules of society are what we say they are. In the context of societal rules any act which goes against the rules of a given society is "invalid" but if it's actually possible then it's valid in the wider context of the universe.

People take their own rules or the rules of their society, which were entirely invented by them, and attempt to pass them off as universal rules, rules of the universe. They attempt to add weight and authenticity to their personal choices by trying to tell us that their chosen rules are universal laws.

Hog.

[Agape]

You see , for example the Dzogchen ( great accomplishment ) teachings that are older than Buddhism and truly non-sectarian teachings - are told to be priced highly not only on Earth but among various civilisations in Space - so the old masters said, and so it's written in some sutras .
Now unless you ever get the real 'taste' of the method&view from an authentic master claiming that you understand what 'non-duality' is ,
is pure intellectualism and that's where similar type of teachings led to in the 'West' and were used and misused ,
together with many other types of internal instructions and practices that formerly belonged to 'initiates only' .

I don't think it was the 'bad ETs' who did it because you can meet all types of mindsets here on Earth, all kinds of situations .. from the highest to the lowest .

Earth is unique in that regard containing boundless diversity , biological and psychological, spiritual , of all levels .. if you search the Space for archetypes of beings and behaviours you can bet your cap on finding similar 'type' of human to them on this planet alone .
It's because human 'genome' is incredibly rich in potential .

The old masters had warned about this forwards .. and truly, in times of old, high level teachings and initiations were payed by gold, literally or not,
at the same time - you could not pay authentic master to give you anything you were not ready for .

The warnings were manifold .. to those who accepted knowledge with some impurities left in their minds ..and therefor were bound to lead others astray later ,
or fall for low practices and really repulsive behaviours, harming others instead of helping them . Higher the teachings more the warnings .

Since old times ..the 'samayas' , sacred wows and promises were broken too many times , there were many false masters, teachings were ( and are ) given en mass to unprepared students ,
people who can't understand .. thus .. the effect of 'deliberate psy'ops' .

I don't believe it is intentional and don't have any ETs associated with such trend or philosophy in my mind - they have more important concerns - and secondly ,
they have means - mostly technical - or naturally advanced minds - to accomplish their immediate goals if they need it .

Teachings on non-duality ( such as Dzogchen = Dzogpa Chenpo = the Great Accomplishment ) require what's called 'direct introduction to the nature of your mind' .
It's called 'initiation' sometimes or empowerment, can be done in any manner but it only passes right from individual master to individual disciple .

It's the same true about every other esoteric teaching and the meaning .. all relies on personal experience, that's where the real teachings starts, not ends .

Without experiencing a glimpse at least to what the teacher talks about , the 'theory' has almost no meaning . That's how it turned many scholars here 'knowledgable' without ever understanding the essence,
of course ..this is nothing new . In India itself, many pundits of old were known to be just 'pundits' , and as the saying went 'even parrot can recite Vedas' but it does not make him realised the truth .

So you know ..without turning this post too long .... the real 'non-duality' teaching is not to make your mind busy,

the false teaching - that turns to endless intellectual process and dispute, within own mind and within society - can be dangerous because it's misunderstood .

It requires discernment ..and here on Earth, also human master . The problem is not that you can't experience the real state/s yourself or that ETs ( for example ) can't take you through similar ,
the thing is that human master has clear terms and empathy and suppose he's a master, also the highest insight - that goes beyond anything human or non-human.

The teaching is called 'great accomplishment' for that reason alone that it throws the student directly to the state of mastership , even if it's for short time, you understand that it's a level from where there are no more steps to take . It's your own mind without adding anything , and without taking anything away , non-altered clarity .

After such an introduction.. there is usually more practice to do ..that again is taught and instructed to each person personally and is not anything that can be shown to a collective of people or taught as a doctrine.

The sad fact is that most of these teachings proliferated to being taught as some kind of doctrines ..and people believing they're getting 'secret knowledge' simply by memorising certain information etc .

When this is real .. it's a saviour teaching, practice, that's why it is sought for so highly .

The 'intellectual stuff' about it is what fills libraries upon libraries and more to come in future and contributes ..perhaps.. to the fact of gradual evolution of mankind .. but that takes ages to accomplish .

People in this type of society -we are in - can be pretty arrogant about thinking how much they understand about anything ,
I've had this experience with mum over the years who fought very hard against me, against any knowledge that came 'from outside' , fully wrapped in her academic dogma , the 'unity' of spiritual experience is off access to neophytes .

Everything is both internal and external ... at some point in time .. the liberty I believe is large .. those who wish to understand have time and chance to do so ,
those who waste the occasion will stay longer at the same spot to learn .


:hug:

[Maunagarjana]

It's a nice theory, but all you're disproving is your flawed conceptions of non-duality. Maybe you should investigate the subject a little more before you seek to debunk it.

Non-duality to me is a fact, on a physical level, on a psychological level, and on a spiritual level. You simply can't show me where one "thing" ends and another begins, because there are no things, there is no separation. It is, and we are, one being. On a physical level, quantum physics shows pretty well that there is no separation, despite appearances. When it comes to the mind, we are indelibly influenced by our environment and the people we interact with through the course of our lives. On a spiritual level, there are levels of identification that we can have, but most of them are illusory. If you haven't begun to see through these illusory identifications, it will seem solid and convincing to you. That is the nature of illusion. Once you move through those things to a higher level of understanding, a higher level of awareness, the levels below it start to seem silly, and you wonder how you ever took that stuff seriously.

BTW, The Buddha never explicitly taught non-duality in the Pali Canon. He may have understood it, but he must not have thought the people of his time would understand it. And that's understandable, because it's hard for people with a conventional point of view (identifying with the body/intellect/ego/soul) to even approach such things. This thread being evidence of that, imho.

[Maunagarjana]

It seems to me that what you are struggling with, Omni, is the relation between the absolute and relative points of view. Many people get caught up in this, thinking that the absolute (non-dual view) somehow negates the relative. But it doesn't negate it. The absolute includes, yet transcends all the lower levels of relative views. Someone who has an understanding of non-duality is not incapable of seeing dualistic points of view or interacting with the world in that mode. So you need not feel like someone is trying to take anything away from you by imposing some non-dual view on you, if you're not ready for that or feel threatened by it.

[white wizard]

I think reaching a state of non-duality on a planet that specializes in extreme forms of it is miss guided for the vast majority here. The multiverse is full of places where everything is in harmony and from what I’ve heard that is really boring. Not much changes in a place where everyone agrees. Chances are most of you here on this planet agree on a soul level and that’s why you are here to experience the difference in polarity, which really spices things up around here.
I have heard of places where planets overcome duality and move on to a new level of learning, but I think people here have many more lessons before they reach that state.

[Omni]

It's a nice theory, but all you're disproving is your flawed conceptions of non-duality. Maybe you should investigate the subject a little more before you seek to debunk it. Plz spare the condscending perspectives and debate the points of view you think are wrong.


Non-duality to me is a fact, on a physical level, on a psychological level, and on a spiritual level. You simply can't show me where one "thing" ends and another begins, because there are no things, there is no separation. It is, and we are, one being. On a physical level, quantum physics shows pretty well that there is no separation, despite appearances. When it comes to the mind, we are indelibly influenced by our environment and the people we interact with through the course of our lives. On a spiritual level, there are levels of identification that we can have, but most of them are illusory. If you haven't begun to see through these illusory identifications, it will seem solid and convincing to you. That is the nature of illusion. Once you move through those things to a higher level of understanding, a higher level of awareness, the levels below it start to seem silly, and you wonder how you ever took that stuff seriously.

BTW, The Buddha never explicitly taught non-duality in the Pali Canon. He may have understood it, but he must not have thought the people of his time would understand it. And that's understandable, because it's hard for people with a conventional point of view (identifying with the body/intellect/ego/soul) to even approach such things. This thread being evidence of that, imho.

Do you not have tastes of energy you like being subjected to and not? You don't seem to understand how I see it. Which might be similar to your own. Like I said I can view it holographically, and see from a different perspective that does not see dark/light. But I find duality still has value. you do too as you seem to say you still have dualistic notions or something along those lines...

The form of non-duality I find the psy op is very filled with absolutes... There is no form of duality within such things. Looks like we are debating apples and oranges here, yet you seem to be judging me...


Non-duality to me is a fact, on a physical level
Are there not positive physical things and negative physical things? Cancer being negative, something like naturally occurring B vitamins positive. Or vitamin D. Can you argue that duality has basis in every single thing there is?


on a psychological level
Are there not negative and positive psychological mindsets? Or simply put: Mindsets you prefer to experience, and mindsets you do not(pretty much same thing different semantics)? Happiness, zen, contentness, oneness, etc. Or on the other side psychological trauma, negative emotions like hatred etc...


and on a spiritual level
This one is more murky... But I believe souls can be purely lightside. I'm not sure if a soul can be purely darkside though...


if you're not ready for that or feel threatened by it.
You seem to be saying it is superior and are operating in a condescending tone... I don't think you understand me. you pretend you do but such is simply a delusion... Spend less time judging others and more explain your point of view is my advice. I didn't get too good of energy from your judgments upon me nor do I feel they contribute to the discussion....

[johnf]

It seems to me that what you are struggling with, Omni, is the relation between the absolute and relative points of view. Many people get caught up in this, thinking that the absolute (non-dual view) somehow negates the relative. But it doesn't negate it. The absolute includes, yet transcends all the lower levels of relative views. Someone who has an understanding of non-duality is not incapable of seeing dualistic points of view or interacting with the world in that mode. So you need not feel like someone is trying to take anything away from you by imposing some non-dual view on you, if you're not ready for that or feel threatened by it.

That paragraph there is quite on the nose.
Arguing about absolutes is one form of what is called spiritual bypassing.
This is where one has developed some form of escape, and distance from the pain in their lives,
but is still avoiding feeling emotions etc which will still come up.
We have human lives no matter what we have experienced on an internal level.

John

[Hogswitch]

BTW, The Buddha never explicitly taught non-duality in the Pali Canon. He may have understood it, but he must not have thought the people of his time would understand it. And that's understandable, because it's hard for people with a conventional point of view (identifying with the body/intellect/ego/soul) to even approach such things. This thread being evidence of that, imho.

Yep mea culpa on that one, was just trying to suggest the absurdity of labelling ancient wisdom a "psy op" which I understood to be relatively modern concept. On reflection it's perfectly plausible that those in power have been running their own versions of "psy ops" on the rest of us for a very long time indeed. Needless to say that I still do not believe that the teachings and experience of non duality are the results of such nefarious manipulations.

Hog.

[Omni]

On reflection it's perfectly plausible that those in power have been running their own versions of "psy ops" on the rest of us for a very long time indeed.

Glad to help you connect dots, even if you don't agree with the main topic. Psy ops is not a new idea, they just have increased in abundance since the US gov started doing them(from my estimations anyway). Religions are psy ops, gigantic ones...

[Agape]

Do you not have tastes of energy you like being subjected to and not? You don't seem to understand how I see it. Which might be similar to your own. Like I said I can view it holographically, and see from a different perspective that does not see dark/light. But I find duality still has value. you do too as you seem to say you still have dualistic notions or something along those lines...

.

You're bound to have 'duality perspective' as long as you're incarnated in the human world ,
everyone does , even among the so called 'enlightened masters' - unless ..and that's beyond the 'mind teaching' alone you have also transcended the power of the elements and can dissolve this body like an illusion or a rainbow ..or are in the process to it and unless you get to that point - beyond human existence, dualistic perspective is always present .

In Vedic tradition ..suppose you reach 'supreme realisation' and your mind dwells in the non-duality .. the residual karma is called Prarabdha , the one that exhausts itself with this body.
But to be honest ... denying or judging a mind frame of those who had gone that far .. I think is dangerous by itself - an obstacle to ones healthy spiritual evolution.
To an average person such state of realisation 'does not give good meaning' , from purely materialistic perspective as embraced by majority of this society .. it either does not exist, is a nonsense or sign of vegetable state ;) not anything they'd ever desire or think about .


One thing .. where I would correct your pondering slightly is .. 'viewing holographically' , it's an option .. they call it 'mandala vision' ( just a different terminology ) but in itself, it's but a vision.. it's still conceptual vision , not the 'unity itself' .

The real nature of things is beyond conceptuality ..that's how many people find it difficult to capture, especially those without meditation training because human mind has a tendency to hold on to concepts or images .

There are levels 'beyond conceptuality' where you operate without holding on to anything and do not dwell on your experience , past or present or future .

None of the real masters ever denied good and evil to exist . But it's a huge trap .. exploring the 'samsara' is endless endeavour .


Peace

[StandingWave]

As far as I am concerned, non-duality is summed up in this potent statement from Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj (http://www.mpeters.de/nisargadatta/index.cfm):

'You cannot be anything you perceive.'

Contemplate that and allow it to percolate through the filters of your logical, intellectual mind. It will unravel all of your comfortable preconceptions.

Another pointer of note is to clearly see that the only statement that can never be be negated is 'I am'.

[Mu2143]

.......................

[Tony]

Understanding Duality and Non Duality.

As long as we feel “I am aware” we are in a duality.
Duality has a time period. Awareness realising it is aware.

Non duality is merely awareness – pure awareness.
It is spontaneous and timeless.

When a 'me' is in the picture there is duality.
Take 'me' out of the picture that is non duality,
just pure perception.

We always have a choice of sanity and insanity.




Tony

[Maunagarjana]

Do you not have tastes of energy you like being subjected to and not? You don't seem to understand how I see it. Which might be similar to your own. Like I said I can view it holographically, and see from a different perspective that does not see dark/light. But I find duality still has value. you do too as you seem to say you still have dualistic notions or something along those lines...

The form of non-duality I find the psy op is very filled with absolutes... There is no form of duality within such things. Looks like we are debating apples and oranges here, yet you seem to be judging me...

I apologize if my tone seemed judgmental. But just to clarify terms here, when I say "non-dual", the duality that I'm saying isn't real is the duality of Self/Other. You seem to be talking about non-duality in terms of light/dark and good/bad. So we probably are debating apples and oranges.



Non-duality to me is a fact, on a physical level
Are there not positive physical things and negative physical things? Cancer being negative, something like naturally occurring B vitamins positive. Or vitamin D. Can you argue that duality has basis in every single thing there is?

Whether anything is good or bad is all dependent on the point of view, the focus, and the context. Also, some things can be very bad, but it's very existence can help to cause learning to happen on a very deep level by making one face things that are challenging, and this can cause positive growth. Cancer is something I don't want to have, certainly, but there are people who can learn a lot about life and about themselves in the course of having to deal with it.



on a psychological level
Are there not negative and positive psychological mindsets? Or simply put: Mindsets you prefer to experience, and mindsets you do not(pretty much same thing different semantics)? Happiness, zen, contentness, oneness, etc. Or on the other side psychological trauma, negative emotions like hatred etc...

Of course, of course.....what I was trying to say is that who we are as a person is not formed independent of other people. Once again, we may be talking about different things.



and on a spiritual level
This one is more murky... But I believe souls can be purely lightside. I'm not sure if a soul can be purely darkside though...

I think there are souls of all kinds, all across the spectrum.



if you're not ready for that or feel threatened by it.
You seem to be saying it is superior and are operating in a condescending tone... I don't think you understand me. you pretend you do but such is simply a delusion... Spend less time judging others and more explain your point of view is my advice. I didn't get too good of energy from your judgments upon me nor do I feel they contribute to the discussion....

I think I was confused by your use of the term non-dual, which to me has a very specific meaning. Namely, it suggests that there is no separation between you and your environment (whether physical/mental/spiritual), and therefore there is no truly independently existing beings anywhere, no matter how you slice it.

These issues of whether or not there is such thing as cold/hot, pleasant/painful, up/down, etc. do not really interest me. Life as we know it of course is comprised of the interplay of what we experience as opposites. But all of that stuff is arbitrary and based on ones point of view, one's focus, and the contexts involved, which are subject to change. If you pick up any book on the subject of non-duality, you will see that the focus will always come back to this Self/Other apparent dichotomy.

I see now that what you are probably railing against is a false equivalency between light and dark, positive and negative, beneficial and non-beneficial. In that case, I would agree. The people who engage in such false equivalencies seem to be operating on a misunderstanding of non-duality. Also, they just don't want to commit to restraining themselves from acting any way that they feel like, and so they create this mentality of moral relativism, when really they are just being indecisive and immature because they just prefer to live in a state of whimsical ambiguity when it comes to what they really stand for. But sooner or later, I think they will realize this is all BS that they will have to choose a path.

[Apulu]

Wow Omniverse you seem to have a nice habit of creating threads that ask big questions! I don't think have any big answers, perhaps quite obviously, but I quite like to speculate...

I feel it's helpful to draw a line whenever we are talking about non-dual philosophy, or any philosophy for that matter, because it will always be that: a philosophy, and not a reality. Words are not and cannot be reality, obviously, or Truth, if we are talking about the only truth that exists, and surely there can only be one ABSOLUTE truth. I feel there is definitely a danger in talking about non-dualism if one is not living it, because of course there won't be a full understanding of it. It seems to be the same danger any religion has.

It seems throughout history people have made it their mission to discover the truth of reality by stripping away every falsehood within their perception, following, all the way to the end, the simple notion that whatever remains, must be THE Truth. I choose to believe that some, and seemingly only a very few, succeeded completely in this, and that some of those people then chose to attempt to talk about that state (abiding non-dual awarness seems the most accurate term), in the hope of making it easier for others who wanted to follow that path, and do the same thing.

There are plenty of examples around of people, who I believe had reached this state, who were completely mocking the whole concept of a 'philosophy of non-dualism'. No philosophy can talk about that state, accurately, by it's very nature. Perhaps pointers can be given, and points argued, but it seems only an individual using their own, unwritten, criteria, can make that journey to completion.

I have no doubt that those who do truly rid themselves of falsehood, are still making choices dependent on their preferences, and are still able to abide in an awareness that is non-dualistic. I can't imagine those people are sanctioning dark horrible stuff to happen, or would allow it to happen to them, or are causing it to happen on the planet (not suggesting that's what you were suggesting, nececarilly, in this thread Omniverse).

That stuff happens, there's obviously no doubt, and there are people and entities around who perpetuate it. I feel it's the responsibility of everyone and anyone to make choices consciously, according to their preference, about what they are manifesting, and what they want to manifest. I feel as long as there are people on this planet who are not choosing and defining their reality, there will be people around who will be happy to fill the void and make that choice for them, and it's probably not going to be very pleasant!

Perhaps any philosophy can be taken advantage of, by those who would wish to impose their will on others, to make people believe they are choosing, when in fact they are going along with something.

[Hazel]

The group inquiry thats going on in this thread is really stimulating... l had a look around on the topic and found this, thought it may be a good one to throw in for review:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_5APJSPpTI

and this


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLxdYhbNjOc

[andrewgreen]

.

You're bound to have 'duality perspective' as long as you're incarnated in the human world ,
everyone does , even among the so called 'enlightened masters' - unless ..and that's beyond the 'mind teaching' alone you have also transcended the power of the elements and can dissolve this body like an illusion or a rainbow ..or are in the process to it and unless you get to that point - beyond human existence, dualistic perspective is always present .

In Vedic tradition ..suppose you reach 'supreme realisation' and your mind dwells in the non-duality .. the residual karma is called Prarabdha , the one that exhausts itself with this body.
But to be honest ... denying or judging a mind frame of those who had gone that far .. I think is dangerous by itself - an obstacle to ones healthy spiritual evolution.
To an average person such state of realisation 'does not give good meaning' , from purely materialistic perspective as embraced by majority of this society .. it either does not exist, is a nonsense or sign of vegetable state ;) not anything they'd ever desire or think about .


One thing .. where I would correct your pondering slightly is .. 'viewing holographically' , it's an option .. they call it 'mandala vision' ( just a different terminology ) but in itself, it's but a vision.. it's still conceptual vision , not the 'unity itself' .

The real nature of things is beyond conceptuality ..that's how many people find it difficult to capture, especially those without meditation training because human mind has a tendency to hold on to concepts or images .

There are levels 'beyond conceptuality' where you operate without holding on to anything and do not dwell on your experience , past or present or future .

None of the real masters ever denied good and evil to exist . But it's a huge trap .. exploring the 'samsara' is endless endeavour .


Peace

You do a great job of explaining a really difficult subject, thankyou. I'm not qualified to talk on such a subject but I believe there are enough paradox's or glitches in the matrix in the illusion that is our current reality for people to see things probably aren't as they seem. We can act upon our insights through zen practice or similar to explore the true nature of reality, without the hard work and practice no argument will ever be sufficient. Until we commit to practice we will never have an answer one way or the other.

[Hogswitch]

Perhaps any philosophy can be taken advantage of, by those who would wish to impose their will on others, to make people believe they are choosing, when in fact they are going along with something.

It's not a particular philosophy that's being taken advantage of in our current situation, it's the reality of universal freedom. It's absolutely allowed in this universe for a minority, who understand this particular game well, to impose their will upon a majority, who do not. As things stand at the moment, here on earth, the majority are being lead, some willingly, some blindly and some kicking and screaming, down a path of "darkness". This is perfectly fine with the universe.

Those wishing to change this situation dis-empower themselves by thinking that their "masters" are breaking some universal law, and that somehow the universe will punish the "evil doers" and take away their power. The manipulators are simply using universal freedom to impose their will and preferences upon others.

If you don't know the rules of the game you're playing you can't play well. Forget the, "that's bad" rule it doesn't apply, forget your notion of "fairness" that doesn't apply either. Realise that, if your preferences are not being manifested in your experience, then you are probably playing the game ineffectively. You are losing to a better team. Learn the rules (or rather forget the rules that don't apply), shape up and play a better game. Consider the possibility that alone you are probably not powerful enough to make a difference to the overall result. Consider forming alliances and co-operating with like minded players but be wary, your allies may not always be what they seem. It's the only way to see the world you want to see, come into being. Express your preferences!

Afterthought, it's just a game, but for now, for you, and for most human beings it's a game you have to play. Even if you think that somehow you chose to participate, isn't that all the more reason to play well?

Hog.

[Apulu]

Perhaps any philosophy can be taken advantage of, by those who would wish to impose their will on others, to make people believe they are choosing, when in fact they are going along with something.

It's not any philosophy that's being taken advantage of in our current situation, it's the reality of universal freedom.

Hog.

I would agree, except I don't see why you would seem to contradict what I was saying... It is indeed any philosophy that's being taken advantage of it seems, by certain people bent on disinformation, as long as it supports the wider context and agenda of masking the reality of universal freedom

I would also agree with everything else you said there, and well said. Except the bit about forming alliances. That's a choice too, albeit a good one probably for most people, couldn't say for sure. I doubt though that you intended to imply it was a necessity.

[Hogswitch]

Perhaps any philosophy can be taken advantage of, by those who would wish to impose their will on others, to make people believe they are choosing, when in fact they are going along with something.

It's not any philosophy that's being taken advantage of in our current situation, it's the reality of universal freedom.

Hog.

I would agree, except I don't see why you would seem to contradict what I was saying... It is indeed any philosophy that's being taken advantage of it seems, by certain people bent on disinformation, as long as it supports the wider context and agenda of masking the reality of universal freedom

I would also agree with everything else you said there, and well said. Except the bit about forming alliances. That's a choice too, albeit a good one probably for most people, couldn't say for sure. I doubt though that you intended to imply it was a necessity.

Yes, on reflection I don't really want to take issue with you on the question of the abuse of certain philosophies. I think I carelessly used that as starting point for my exposition. And no I didn't intend to imply that forming alliances was a necessity just to suggest that it might be a pragmatic choice for many.

Hog.

[Milneman]

[The supreme state] is not perceivable, because it is what makes perception possible. It is beyond being and not being. It is neither the mirror nor the image in the mirror. It is what is - the timeless reality, unbelievably hard and solid.

Ok, so if it's not perceivable, then how does one know it exists?

I'm working through this idea of duality right now, and it makes sense.

There is honey.

There is the pot that holds the honey.

There is the hole the pot that holds the honey is in.

There is bear in the hole, unable to get the honey.

Our senses provide us with input. The mind perceives. Is mind physical? I don't think so. J. P. Moreland did some amazing work on this issue...I'll dig the book out.

http://www.jpmoreland.com/books/body-soul/ Good read. :)

[Hazel]

for my 2 pennies, simply put:

we are bound in a 'world' of constructs, therefore 'duality' / 'non duality' as such are equally imposing and diluting upon my state(s) of awareness..

If 'thought is form' and there exists ways of perceiving and knowing that are wordless in those preverbal full / empty spaces between words...
those to me are still inextricably constructs in and of themselves.

for consciousness to be unshackled and expansive... we need to abandon the philosophising and get on with immersing ourselves within the unchartered lands of our forms of multidimensional experiencing.

How to connect and how to be with this exploration is my primary concern...

27155

[boutreality]

I do enjoy Taoist philosophies in general- proper cycle of elemental energies; balancing one's own endocrine system and nervous systems and using these precepts to found and strengthen shamanic "actions" which one may take as a way of working for the universal good. This post reminds me of an article I read in Parabolic journal about a Taoist monk/master living in New York city. There are hints here and there throughout Taoist literature that somehow Buddhists 'missed the point. -That in some way what most consider Mindfulness training and focusing thought toward non-dualistic principles are each valuable as preliminary mind structuring techniques and are in no way the end all be all of one's practice. Anyway, in said article, the subject of the interview says he wonders often that Buddhist teachers are failing their followers by not truly preparing them for greater reality. As I've said in other posts, there is a concerted effort to contain man's potential and corral us into ineffectual activities. I have not problem say these agendas and those that pursue them on all levels of existence are evil or negative and They ought to be opposed. The best way to do this is for one to garner their own power with as little reliance as possible upon other beings seen and unseen. To say that other side is simply being in their own way - that to oppose them play into their validity - boils down to a dangerous semantic game.