dwai Posted November 28, 2017 14 minutes ago, steve said: I often wonder whether there is any definitive correlation between practice and a true 'awakening' of the non-dual awareness? I suspect there is but some practice a lifetime and never experience that connection, while others have it spontaneously with no training whatsoever. A close friend had such an awakening at ~9 years of age. It's very interesting to hear her description of it. That is a good question. There are many theories abound about it. Karma, etc etc. I think the dualistic world is like a video game. Whatever that is, assumes all these various characters and does plays this MMPORPG . The "awakening" is a very simple and ordinary event, that happens to all of us many times in the game. However, we are so engrossed in the role-playing that we fail to see this event when it happens. And even if we do see this event, we look it over because we are so engrossed in the game. This happens often in dreams when we become aware that we are dreaming but the dream continues as we don't exercise the freedom that arose from that awareness. I too have a friend who was "awake" from childhood. He is often mistaken as being "naive" or "foolish". But he has no guiles whatsoever, innocent like a child. He "knows" a lot of stuff but doesn't know what they mean or even that they are supposed to be these mega-super-powerful-nuggets of "enlightenment". So when I tell him stuff he'll go "Wow...you are teaching me a lot!". Haha...no I'm not teaching him squat...he already knows. He even had a dream that I am his spiritual "confirmer" My Master is like that too...innocent like a child. But with him, there is also a confidence that arises from total faith in the Dao. Each of his acts are acts of pure compassion and detachment. Yet he is actively involved in helping people all the time, pretty much throughout the day. When i look back at myself, I know the point when I lost this "innocent connectedness". So there is something to the "losing innocence" bit. But the fact is, that the true nature is always there, just masked by the contrivances and modifications of the mind and body. I think each of us can identify this sort of thing at a certain point in the journey. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
3bob Posted November 28, 2017 (edited) 45 minutes ago, steve said: I often wonder whether there is any definitive correlation between practice and a true 'awakening' of the non-dual awareness? I suspect there is but some practice a lifetime and never experience that connection, while others have it spontaneously with no training whatsoever. A close friend had such an awakening at ~9 years of age. It's very interesting to hear her description of it. Similar in the Mahayana - I vow to liberate myself so that I may effectively assist others... I'd say there is a definite correlation to confusion and doubt when mixing up various forms of Buddhism and Hinduism along with throwing in some Taoism and whatever else into the mix, which is something some of us get away with doing here... (myself included) Edited November 28, 2017 by 3bob 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dwai Posted November 28, 2017 4 minutes ago, 3bob said: I'd say there is a definite correlation to confusion and doubt when mixing up various forms of Buddhism and Hinduism along with throwing in some Taoism and whatever else into the mix, which is something some of us get away with doing here... (myself included) And then there is no confusion and no doubt at all 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gunther Posted November 28, 2017 2 minutes ago, dwai said: And then there is no confusion and no doubt at all Exactly😀 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
s1va Posted November 28, 2017 23 minutes ago, steve said: I do not hold there to be any underlying One so I don't think Vishishtadvaita would apply. The Brahman per Vishistadvaita is not underlying 'One'. If that is the case, then there won't be any room for duality. It is just stated as something unique. What you mentioned by non-dual and dual and other thoughts were very similar to this. I was simply pointing out the similarity. Anyway, Thanks for your clarification. It's fine, if you think they are not similar. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
vonkrankenhaus Posted November 28, 2017 Non-duality means all opposites are relative. Relative means Complimentary. If someone toss you a coin, we say you can get "either" heads or tails. If you try to get the head side only, both are always there. Psychologically though, many are trying! If you cut off tails side, another tail is instantly created. Because coin is One coin. All "things" - same way. -VonKrankenhaus 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 28, 2017 (edited) On 11/28/2017 at 1:55 AM, steve said: If everyone and everything are already non-dual, what does it mean to talk about duality and in what way does it exist? Hi Steve, If everyone and everything are already dual, what does it mean to talk about non-duality and in what way does it exist? When we start a statement with 'if', we can always ask a question. On 11/28/2017 at 1:55 AM, steve said: I find considering the converse statement or question can be very helpful when exploring challenging concepts... Converse statements/questions can better balance conceptual equations. 22 hours ago, steve said: Another factor at play in the arising of duality is having the capacity for language. It seems to me that humans distinguish the "self" from "other" as a function of language, at least in part. Language lubricates. It can be used to create new angles. But some angles can get too slippery and some converse check/balance is good to prevent falling down slippery slopes. 22 hours ago, steve said: All living creatures need to be able to distinguish threat from asset but I wonder to what degree the distinction between self and other arises in living creatures other than humans. The threat/asset equation is already there in Nature. But humans destroy what Nature creates? Such destruction divides - thus 'self' and 'other'? 22 hours ago, steve said: Do lions eat water buffalo because there is the sense that "I" must survive? Or is it simply a natural consequence of experiencing hunger and having the appropriate physical characteristics to hunt and eat along with learning from their parents and pride... Is "I" a part of Nature? Ask the lions but don't get too close... 22 hours ago, steve said: Perhaps our primary distinction between self and other resides in our capacity for abstract thought. Abstract thought is predicated upon the capacity for language. Abstract thought is good if it creates; bad if it destroys. Bad management divides and rules. What is management? An abstract threat or asset? 22 hours ago, steve said: For me, a practical and effective way to define duality is the conceptual discrimination between self and other. Non-duality is simply non-discrimination between self and other. Yes. I second that. 22 hours ago, steve said: This is not conceptual, however, it is experiential. I understand Nature much much better experientially, rather than conceptually. 22 hours ago, steve said: Understanding what non-duality is has nothing to do with resting in non-dual experience. In fact, I suspect it may be an obstacle for many people. 'Understanding' something incorrectly can be an 'obstacle'. 22 hours ago, steve said: I'm not as interested in understanding as I once was although that curiosity and tendency to think and analyze is still there. I've found that, for me, my "understanding" of non-duality has little to do with questions and answers and far more to do with having adopted what seems to be an effective practice that encourages, cultivates, and reinforces a deeper level of non-dual experience. Yes - practice over theory. Effective practice. 22 hours ago, steve said: Over time there is more familiarity with that absence of self - other distinction. It gradually comes off the cushion and into action and interaction. I feel that it can be cultivated into a very high level of application and consistency. Moving => => => closer to Nature and its essence? 22 hours ago, steve said: I also agree with those who emphasize the importance of things like devotion, surrender, trust, gratitude, and so forth. Those are the fuel and the context within which blessings tend to manifest. I find PEACE in the midst of these words. 22 hours ago, steve said: I've never seen this play out more clearly than in my practices of dream and sleep yoga. It's quite astonishing at times. Yes - it is 4:30 am at my end. Time for me to sleep. I find your posts in this thread refreshingly clear and clearly refreshing (no duality/non-duality here). Will look into your other posts here another time. - LimA Edited November 28, 2017 by Limahong Correct errors. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted November 28, 2017 3 hours ago, s1va said: The Brahman per Vishistadvaita is not underlying 'One'. If that is the case, then there won't be any room for duality. It is just stated as something unique. What you mentioned by non-dual and dual and other thoughts were very similar to this. I was simply pointing out the similarity. Anyway, Thanks for your clarification. It's fine, if you think they are not similar. I'm not very knowledgable about Vishistadvaita. Perhaps my views are closer than I know. 4 hours ago, 3bob said: I'd say there is a definite correlation to confusion and doubt when mixing up various forms of Buddhism and Hinduism along with throwing in some Taoism and whatever else into the mix, which is something some of us get away with doing here... (myself included) Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism.... just words and concepts. While I do find it useful to practice within a specific tradition for consistency, I also see value in looking for the common essence in the variety of traditions. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
steve Posted November 28, 2017 3 hours ago, Limahong said: Abstract thought is good if it creates; bad if it destroys. Destruction is not always bad.... 3 hours ago, Limahong said: 'Understanding' something incorrectly can be an 'obstacle'. I think it may be possible for correct understanding to be an obstacle. I appreciate your reply 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 (edited) 37 minutes ago, steve said: Destruction is not always bad.... 37 minutes ago, steve said: I think it may be possible for correct understanding to be an obstacle. Good morning steve, Sure - ying and yang are not absolute thus: So duality and non-duality - not absolute? Lord Shiva is the "destroyer of evil and the transformer" (Wikipedia). So the destruction of the bad is good? - LimA Edited November 29, 2017 by Limahong Correct errors. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted November 29, 2017 8 hours ago, steve said: Destruction is not always bad.... I think it may be possible for correct understanding to be an obstacle. I appreciate your reply Then it is not real understanding. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 1 hour ago, Apech said: Then it is not real understanding. Hi Apech, On a lighter side, I accept steve's input as converse statements. Perhaps steve is trying to share his understanding conversely. On a heavier side, destruction is good as it leads to creation. Please follow these: Ying and yang are not absolute as reflected thus: - LimA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted November 29, 2017 @Limahong It wasn't an important point. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 6 minutes ago, Apech said: It wasn't an important point. Hi Apech, My apology for posting an unimportant point. - LimA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted November 29, 2017 54 minutes ago, Limahong said: Hi Apech, My apology for posting an unimportant point. - LimA Don't apologise it's has no import. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 1 minute ago, Apech said: Don't apologise it's has no import. Hi Apech, I like your . - LimA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted November 29, 2017 16 hours ago, vonkrankenhaus said: Non-duality means all opposites are relative. Relative means Complimentary. If someone toss you a coin, we say you can get "either" heads or tails. If you try to get the head side only, both are always there. Psychologically though, many are trying! If you cut off tails side, another tail is instantly created. Because coin is One coin. All "things" - same way. -VonKrankenhaus that is just mindspeak... duality. to try to explain non-duality (one Coin). Forget the two sides... then forget the coin holding two sides. It is not the release of a preference for either side, it is that neither side is even there... if neither side is even there, is there even One ? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, dawei said: It is not the release of a preference for either side, it is that neither side is even there... if neither side is even there, is there even One ? Hi dawei, If a coin gets me One cup of coffee, it is all that counts. - LimA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted November 29, 2017 3 minutes ago, Limahong said: Hi dawei, If a coin gets me One cup of coffee, it is all that counts. sure.. enjoy duality... have a cup of joe.... the concept of One is still duality Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 1 minute ago, dawei said: the concept of One is still duality Hi dawei, After drinking my coffee, the One cup disappears. Then after a little more, I will visit the washroom and flush it away. - LimA 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted November 29, 2017 1 minute ago, Limahong said: Hi dawei, After drinking my coffee, the One cup disappears. Then after a little more, I will visit the washroom and flush it away. - LimA The cup's content's disappears... into a body... and the body flushes it away. So what is the body? The One Cup remains in the cabinet. Enjoy that cup remaining as One. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 (edited) 15 minutes ago, dawei said: Enjoy that cup remaining as One. Hi dawei, I am now sharing one can of beer with a friend - two sharing one. Care to join us? We will buy you one can. If you come, then it is three having a fine time on two. - LimA Edited November 29, 2017 by Limahong Enhance ... 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dawei Posted November 29, 2017 1 minute ago, Limahong said: Hi dawei, I am now sharing one can of beer with a friend - two sharing one. Care to join us? We will buy you one can. If you come, then it is three having a fine time on two. - LimA I will join you... so three share one.... the one disappears into the three... so the three can claim to contain that one beer....once we flush it later.... there is no-One... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Limahong Posted November 29, 2017 2 minutes ago, dawei said: I will join you... so three share one.... the one disappears into the three... so the three can claim to contain that one beer....once we flush it later.... there is no-One... Hi dawei, Correction - three sharing two. Once we flush later... there is no-One, no-two... but three good friends? - LimA Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dwai Posted November 29, 2017 All things, after having served their purpose, get flushed down some drain. Is this the fate of this thread? Has the purpose of the OP been served? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
