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

[3bob]

the most pure is the most simple, and the most simple is the most pure, thus the mind of cunning is turned upside down and inside out.

 

(which has nothing to do with simple mindedness)

[Bindi]

1 hour ago, Apech said:

 

I can't understand why you keep trying to impose concepts on yinyang like 'channels'.  Right and left brain functions are not the same as conscious and unconscious.  Wuji and Taiji are two sides of the same coin, so to speak.  Non-duality is not abstraction, it is realising what is real.

 

 

 

Isn't yin-yang unashamedly dual? Male/female, left/right, conscious/unconscious, how could duality be anything else than tangible, of the body, psycho-spirituality based on the material body. 

 

Things of the earth are yin, I cannot perceive anything real beyond what is of the earth, anything else is conjecture, a philosophy that you choose to run with, that you don't even question. 'Know the white (yang), keep to the black (yin). This formula is "the model for all under heaven, eternally." What is in our bodies is a microscosm of what is in the heavens, I don't see the point of looking towards the heavens directly. 

 

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

Isn't yin-yang unashamedly dual? Male/female, left/right, conscious/unconscious, how could duality be anything else than tangible, of the body, psycho-spirituality based on the material body. 

 

Things of the earth are yin, I cannot perceive anything real beyond what is of the earth, anything else is conjecture, a philosophy that you choose to run with, that you don't even question. 'Know the white (yang), keep to the black (yin). This formula is "the model for all under heaven, eternally." What is in our bodies is a microscosm of what is in the heavens, I don't see the point of looking towards the heavens directly. 

 

 

My point is that the right and left brain functions are not the unconscious and the conscious:

 

http://brainmadesimple.com/left-and-right-hemispheres.html

 

The earth in Chinese thought is not the physical as understood by science but more like a powerful nurturing force perhaps a little like 'mother earth'.  

 

I agree that the body is a microcosm but it is important to get the correspondences right.

 

 

[Bindi]

19 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

My point is that the right and left brain functions are not the unconscious and the conscious:

 

http://brainmadesimple.com/left-and-right-hemispheres.html

 

The earth in Chinese thought is not the physical as understood by science but more like a powerful nurturing force perhaps a little like 'mother earth'.  

 

I agree that the body is a microcosm but it is important to get the correspondences right.

 

 

 

The laboratory for Neidan is the body. The dantians and channels in the body/subtle body, the brain area, anywhere within the body. I am aware of the current scientific understanding of left and right processing styles, but terms like conscious and unconscious are very apt for yin and yang qualities, as are left and right. 

[s1va]

3 hours ago, Marblehead said:

Non-duality is real.  But duality is real too.

 

 

 

Yes, both of them are real and valid simultaneously.

[steve]

A useful and accessible illustration of non-duality can be seen in the contemporary approach to biology.

 

Here is a link to the abstract from the first in a series of foundational papers on the subject.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10333975

Another good example of this line of thinking can be seen in the seminal social systems work of Niklas Luhmann (thanks Yueya!)

 

Biological systems can be partially described by focusing on individual organisms and each can be said to exist independently but that is a partial and incomplete view. While any given organism can live and die as an "independent" entity, there is no example of any organism ever existing in the absence of its environment. The organism and environment are mutually interdependent. This is at the manifest level. 

 

One can make similar observations at levels of energetic processes and consciousness. Whether considering statistical thermodynamics or quantum mechanics, everything interacts with and influences everything else to some degree. Even the observer influences the observed in terms of mental processes. Regarding consciousness and mental process, we are influenced and conditioned by every conscious interaction with others, with nature, with ideas, imagery, etc... 

 

Duality is real but is only a limited perspective. Non-duality is real and is also a limited perspective.

This is the basis for the two truths doctrine in Bön and Buddhism.

Both are also inherent in the Wuji/Taiji model.

As Apech points out, the Wuji/Taiji model is not at all time-dependent, to view it that way is an error.

It's not saying Wuji was a long time ago and now is Taiji and in the future Wuji again.

Wuji is the fundamental basis of being, similar to emptiness in Buddhism.

Taiji is the infinite potential, the dynamism of polarity that manifests in experience as the 10,000 things.

Returning to the void is analogous to realizing the empty nature of self.

It is not that duality goes away, it is a shift in perspective that shows the validity of both dual and non-dual aspects of 'existence'

 

At least that's one limited perspective on how these things seem to dovetail in my mind and practice. 

[steve]

3 hours ago, Bindi said:

 

Isn't yin-yang unashamedly dual? Male/female, left/right, conscious/unconscious, how could duality be anything else than tangible, of the body, psycho-spirituality based on the material body. 

 

 

No, yin-yang is unashamedly and simultaneously dual and non-dual.

It expresses polarity while always embracing unity.

There is no yin without yang and no yang without yin.

They define each other. 

Left is meaningless without right, male is undefined without female, heat always implies cold, up establishes down, etc...

This fundamental interdependence is a critical point of yin-yang theory, IMO.

[3bob]

37 minutes ago, steve said:

 

No, yin-yang is unashamedly and simultaneously dual and non-dual.

It expresses polarity while always embracing unity.

There is no yin without yang and no yang without yin.

They define each other. 

Left is meaningless without right, male is undefined without female, heat always implies cold, up establishes down, etc...

This fundamental interdependence is a critical point of yin-yang theory, IMO.

 

which could mean there is an Eve to go with Steve, although that is none of our business, 

[liminal_luke]

1 hour ago, steve said:

 

Biological systems can be partially described by focusing on individual organisms and each can be said to exist independently but that is a partial and incomplete view. While any given organism can live and die as an "independent" entity, there is no example of any organism ever existing in the absence of its environment. The organism and environment are mutually interdependent. This is at the manifest level. 

 

 

Physicists have equations to describe how gases diffuse into a space.  Squeeze the nozzle of an oxygen tank emptying the contents into a closed room.  At first the oxygen will be concentrated in the area immediately surrounding the tank, but before you know it the air will be uniformly saturated with the gas.  Diffusion happens.  

 

Is there an equation to describe how love diffuses into a space?  Perhaps some personal experimentation is in order.  As Steve says: The organism and environment are mutually interdependent.  It`s fantastically empowering, this idea that we are seamlessly connected with the larger world.  I can be influential and I love that!  Say I want my partner to be more loving or gentle or a more disciplined washer of the dinner dishes.  I can cultivate the desired quality in myself and simply allow the expansion.  Actually, I don`t have to allow anything.  Good vibes are contagious; it`s a natural law.  I`m goin` viral.    

[Spotless]

On 8/16/2018 at 7:34 PM, Bindi said:

Is non-duality actually a fundamental truth, or just another philosophy? Is there some overwhelming proof beyond intellectual assertion? Is it only a Vedantic philosophy, or is it also asserted in Buddhism, Daoism, New ageism? Is it practical to even contemplate when we are physical beings with physical limits? 

It is just another philosophy until it is not.

 

If you had been fed intravenously all of your life because you were born without a mouth we could talk about the taste of food and watch all the food channels until the cows come home but you would not experience taste.

 

And the greatest teachers of taste on earth could not make anyone in your position able to understand them.

 

The greatest teachers regarding non-duality have never found an unrealized student that "understood them" - it is not possible.

They can only point.

 

One who has even had a strong Awakening experience has only had a glimpse and though they may now move with sureness cannot grasp with real understanding Awakening and Abiding Awakening.

 

Would all the talk and "proof" of the nature of taste, the sensation and flavors be overwhelming proof that it is true and or as remotely good as it is said to be? One could point to the pain and pleasure of touch as an example of physical sensation and say this is an example of the swings in flavors found in taste - one could point out wetness upon the skin and cooling and heating, moisture and dryness. But would the person with no mouth "understand your teaching" - would they come to know/experience taste?

 

Science has just arrived at about the same place as mechanical science was when it discovered the wheel. It was not long ago that Science considered the idea that - the attention of experimenters on an experiment could effect the outcome of the experiement - was a ludicrous absurd and wholly loony madness.

 

A million people of seeming clarity teaching that taste does exist and pointing to what it would be like if you could taste does not mean that it is not some fantasy - but it might occur to one not wilfully jealous that such an outpouring of affirmation that it is real is probable cause to think it might be so and if possible take steps to gain the faculties of taste or to simply admire such an ability.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[steve]

On 8/18/2018 at 3:05 AM, rideforever said:

And if you are intelligent you will consider that Ramana Maharshi and J Krishnamurti taught for decades, and at the end said that nobody understood them.
Do you see what that means ?
It means they did not understand their own realisation well enough to instruct others.

So it's good not to be too confident in idealogies, and just work with a practical and hopeful spirit.

 

14 hours ago, Goldleaf said:

But with the above I am not sure it does mean this.  Maybe they did understand their own realisation, but its just that others were not open and willing enough to understand...

 

1 hour ago, Spotless said:

The greatest teachers regarding non-duality have never found an unrealized student that "understood them" - it is not possible.

They can only point.

 

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.

Edited August 26, 2018 by steve

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, steve said:

A useful and accessible illustration of non-duality can be seen in the contemporary approach to biology.

 

Here is a link to the abstract from the first in a series of foundational papers on the subject.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10333975

Another good example of this line of thinking can be seen in the seminal social systems work of Niklas Luhmann (thanks Yueya!)

 

Biological systems can be partially described by focusing on individual organisms and each can be said to exist independently but that is a partial and incomplete view. While any given organism can live and die as an "independent" entity, there is no example of any organism ever existing in the absence of its environment. The organism and environment are mutually interdependent. This is at the manifest level. 

 

One can make similar observations at levels of energetic processes and consciousness. Whether considering statistical thermodynamics or quantum mechanics, everything interacts with and influences everything else to some degree. Even the observer influences the observed in terms of mental processes. Regarding consciousness and mental process, we are influenced and conditioned by every conscious interaction with others, with nature, with ideas, imagery, etc... 

 

Duality is real but is only a limited perspective. Non-duality is real and is also a limited perspective.

This is the basis for the two truths doctrine in Bön and Buddhism.

Both are also inherent in the Wuji/Taiji model.

As Apech points out, the Wuji/Taiji model is not at all time-dependent, to view it that way is an error.

It's not saying Wuji was a long time ago and now is Taiji and in the future Wuji again.

Wuji is the fundamental basis of being, similar to emptiness in Buddhism.

Taiji is the infinite potential, the dynamism of polarity that manifests in experience as the 10,000 things.

Returning to the void is analogous to realizing the empty nature of self.

It is not that duality goes away, it is a shift in perspective that shows the validity of both dual and non-dual aspects of 'existence'

 

At least that's one limited perspective on how these things seem to dovetail in my mind and practice. 

 

Quote

 

Wújí (simplified Chinese: 无极; traditional Chinese: 無極; literally "without ridgepole") originally meant "ultimate; boundless; infinite" in Warring States period (476–221 BCE) Taoist classics, but came to mean the "primordial universe" prior to the Taiji 太極 "Supreme Ultimate" in Song Dynasty (960–1279 CE) Neo-Confucianist cosmology.

 

 

The (11th century CE) Taijitu shuo 太極圖說 "Explanation of the Diagram of the Supreme Ultimate", written by the Zhou Dunyi (1017-1073 CE), was the cornerstone of Neo-Confucianist cosmology. His brief text synthesized Confucianist metaphysics of the Yijing with aspects of Daoism and Chinese Buddhism. In the Taijitu diagram, wuji is represented as a blank circle and taiji as a circle with a center point (world embryo) or with broken and unbroken lines (yin and yang).

Zhou's key terms Wuji and Taiji appear in the famous opening phrase wuji er taiji 無極而太極, which Adler notes could also be translated "The Supreme Polarity that is Non-Polar!".

Non-polar (wuji) and yet Supreme Polarity (taiji)! The Supreme Polarity in activity generates yang; yet at the limit of activity it is still. In stillness it generates yin; yet at the limit of stillness it is also active. Activity and stillness alternate; each is the basis of the other. In distinguishing yin and yang, the Two Modes are thereby established. The alternation and combination of yang and yin generate water, fire, wood, metal, and earth. With these five [phases of] qi harmoniously arranged, the Four Seasons proceed through them. The Five Phases are simply yin and yang; yin and yang are simply the Supreme Polarity; the Supreme Polarity is fundamentally Non-polar. [Yet] in the generation of the Five Phases, each one has its nature.

 

 

 

Confucianism and Buddhism have altered the meaning of wuji. Originally it meant infinite and boundless, without end, limitless. In the 11th century wuji was redesignated as 'stillness' where Wu = Nothingness, Void, Zero; Chi = Energy.

 

Neidan doesn't lead to stillness or emptiness or void, it leads to refined energy and fullness and the birth of an immortal Self, and that Self continues to multiply endlessly. 

 

Is this philosophically speaking a non-dual or a dual outcome?

 

 

[rideforever]

16 minutes 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.

 

Unfortunately this is not the case.
In fact I have noticed Mooji and Sadhguru Jaggi Vasudev still currently alive doing the same thing.
They have been "teaching" for many years but they notice it doesn't work.
Osho likewise died saying "I leave you my dream".
Being realised and understanding your realisation to teach are 2 different things.
Of course you can inspire and even transmit energy, but real explaining is for a select group of rare teachers.

Additionally the Daoist path does not seek  understanding through "conscious intelligence" like the Indian teachers.
It seems geared towards energetic "understanding" or instinct.

 

But .... people get realised every day on Earth.   Most of them you will never hear about.
The big flocks of seekers and teachers etc... give a silly view of what is really happening.

 

It is available to you if you want it and are willing to pay the price.
If so, then it is simple.

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, steve said:

 

No, yin-yang is unashamedly and simultaneously dual and non-dual.

It expresses polarity while always embracing unity.

There is no yin without yang and no yang without yin.

They define each other. 

Left is meaningless without right, male is undefined without female, heat always implies cold, up establishes down, etc...

This fundamental interdependence is a critical point of yin-yang theory, IMO.

 

Yin and Yang should ideally complement each other. But, Yin and yang are not complementary without work to make them so, they are out of sync, uninvolved, they have different agendas, they have different modes of operating which when not working together mean fundamental order cannot be attained. 

 

With neidan they come to work in a mutually dependant manner, what yin lacks Yang provides, and together they create order where before there had been chaos and separation. 

 

Is this interdependence? 

[Marblehead]

2 minutes ago, Bindi said:

Is this interdependence? 

IMO, Yes.

 

[Bindi]

16 minutes ago, Marblehead said:

 

 

 

 

2 hours ago, Spotless said:

It is just another philosophy until it is not.

 

If you had been fed intravenously all of your life because you were born without a mouth we could talk about the taste of food and watch all the food channels until the cows come home but you would not experience taste.

 

And the greatest teachers of taste on earth could not make anyone in your position able to understand them.

 

The greatest teachers regarding non-duality have never found an unrealized student that "understood them" - it is not possible.

They can only point.

 

One who has even had a strong Awakening experience has only had a glimpse and though they may now move with sureness cannot grasp with real understanding Awakening and Abiding Awakening.

 

Would all the talk and "proof" of the nature of taste, the sensation and flavors be overwhelming proof that it is true and or as remotely good as it is said to be? One could point to the pain and pleasure of touch as an example of physical sensation and say this is an example of the swings in flavors found in taste - one could point out wetness upon the skin and cooling and heating, moisture and dryness. But would the person with no mouth "understand your teaching" - would they come to know/experience taste?

 

Science has just arrived at about the same place as mechanical science was when it discovered the wheel. It was not long ago that Science considered the idea that - the attention of experimenters on an experiment could effect the outcome of the experiement - was a ludicrous absurd and wholly loony madness.

 

A million people of seeming clarity teaching that taste does exist and pointing to what it would be like if you could taste does not mean that it is not some fantasy - but it might occur to one not wilfully jealous that such an outpouring of affirmation that it is real is probable cause to think it might be so and if possible take steps to gain the faculties of taste or to simply admire such an ability.

 

 

It also might occur to one who is not wilfully jealous that the non-dual emperor isn't actually wearing any clothes. 

 

 

 

Edited August 26, 2018 by Bindi

[Marblehead]

7 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

It also might occur to one who is not wilfully jealous that the non-dual emperor isn't actually wearing any clothes. 

 

Just following Nature's Way.  I find no fault with that.

 

[steve]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

Confucianism and Buddhism have altered the meaning of wuji. Originally it meant infinite and boundless, without end, limitless. In the 11th century wuji was redesignated as 'stillness' where Wu = Nothingness, Void, Zero; Chi = Energy.

The former meaning is far closer to the Buddhist concept of emptiness than is the latter.

 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

Neidan doesn't lead to stillness or emptiness or void, it leads to refined energy and fullness and the birth of an immortal Self, and that Self continues to multiply endlessly. 

I respectfully suggest you not bias yourself with too many expectations or assumptions. 

Be open to what you encounter as your practice of neidan deepens.

Neidan most certainly does include cultivation of stillness and emptiness, not necessarily in a direct and obvious fashion however.

One must first be empty before the birth of genuine fullness and immortality is possible.

The parable of the empty cup comes to mind.

 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

Is this philosophically speaking a non-dual or a dual outcome?

One could say both or neither and be equally correct, IMO.

I don't find much value in such labels.

[steve]

1 hour ago, rideforever said:

Additionally the Daoist path does not seek  understanding through "conscious intelligence" like the Indian teachers.
It seems geared towards energetic "understanding" or instinct.

 

I think it's reasonable to say that Daoism has elements comparable to all 3 paths in Buddhism - intellectual or causal and sutric (there are nearly 1500 texts in the Daoist canon; conscious intellect is engaged in yijing, geomancy, divination, and other aspects), energetic or tantric (neidan), and simple being or dzogchen (zuowang). They're certainly not identical but all elements are present in both. 

[Apech]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

 

 

Confucianism and Buddhism have altered the meaning of wuji. Originally it meant infinite and boundless, without end, limitless. In the 11th century wuji was redesignated as 'stillness' where Wu = Nothingness, Void, Zero; Chi = Energy.

 

Neidan doesn't lead to stillness or emptiness or void, it leads to refined energy and fullness and the birth of an immortal Self, and that Self continues to multiply endlessly. 

 

Is this philosophically speaking a non-dual or a dual outcome?

 

 

 

 

No, sorry, the ji part of wuji is not the same as chi.  It means either ridgepole or boundary.  Thus wuji means 'without boundary' - the ridgepole idea is from the highest point of a roof - hence 'without limit'.  This imagery begins with the Yijing and does not change through Buddhist influence.

 

Neidan does rely on cultivating stillness as in 'Cultivating Stillness - a Taoist Manual for Transforming Body and Mind' - Eva Wong. (dated to the Six Dynasties Era 220 - 589 AD).

[steve]

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

 

Yin and Yang should ideally complement each other. But, Yin and yang are not complementary without work to make them so, they are out of sync, uninvolved, they have different agendas, they have different modes of operating which when not working together mean fundamental order cannot be attained. 

I respectfully disagree.

The very point of Daoism for me is to allow the interplay of yin and yang to occur unimpeded.

Yin and yang will always find balance, it is only my mind that suggests otherwise.

Non-interference with the Way allows that balance.

That is wu wei.

 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

With neidan they come to work in a mutually dependant manner, what yin lacks Yang provides, and together they create order where before there had been chaos and separation. 

Chaos and separation are the workings of the conceptual mind.

 

1 hour ago, Bindi said:

Is this interdependence? 

Yes

[Wu Ming Jen]

动静无偏
Movement and Stillness 
without Deviation and Inclination

One should move when time to move, one should be still when it is time to be still time.
This is about the right timing of movement and stillness.

This is called ‘the Gong of Purity, Tranquillity and Non-action’.

 

When movement and stillness are being inappropriate, then the disaster of Yin and Yang flourishing unilaterally ensues. Yin and Yang will be deviated to one side. This is a hidden danger. The reason is the following:

 

“When movement is in its extreme one must then form stillness.
If one is not tranquil, 
Yang flourishes and injures the Spirit.
When stillness is in its extreme one must then form movement.
If one is not moving, Yin flourishes and injures Qi. “

 

Always in Wu-Ji the two earths intermingle and turn into the jade tablet.
Wu stands for the thoughts; Ji represents perceptions, the spirit feeling and the sixth sense
It draws up an image of Post-Heaven and Pre-Heaven thoughts unifying, the sixth sense merging with the Post-Heaven thoughts, the Pre-Heaven Spirit and Post-Heaven thinking combine into One, congealing into s sphere or circle.

 

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.

 

Neidan sitting still in a cave in solitude, no urgent matters, no thing to attend to while fasting and cleansing the body and mind taking out the garbage. This takes place for the endurance of the adept then a minimum break is 28 days. Prior to this practice is the preparation for your body to adjust to fasting in solitude.

 

A person needs to be physically and mentally strong to endure the neidan practice.  Sitting under a tree is cool too ,I heard of someone doing that before.

 

 

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, Apech said:

 

 

No, sorry, the ji part of wuji is not the same as chi.  It means either ridgepole or boundary.  Thus wuji means 'without boundary' - the ridgepole idea is from the highest point of a roof - hence 'without limit'.  This imagery begins with the Yijing and does not change through Buddhist influence.

 

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

 

3 hours ago, Apech said:

Neidan does rely on cultivating stillness as in 'Cultivating Stillness - a Taoist Manual for Transforming Body and Mind' - Eva Wong. (dated to the Six Dynasties Era 220 - 589 AD).

 

'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. 

 

 

[Bindi]

3 hours ago, steve said:

I respectfully disagree.

The very point of Daoism for me is to allow the interplay of yin and yang to occur unimpeded.

Yin and yang will always find balance, it is only my mind that suggests otherwise.

Non-interference with the Way allows that balance.

That is wu wei.

 

Yes wu wei is non-interference, and I agree it appears to be the point of Daoism. But wu wei is not alchemy. 

 

Quote

Chaos and separation are the workings of the conceptual mind.

 

We can only disagree on this point. To me chaos exists because Yang is not 'conjoined' with Yin naturally. Trying not to rock the boat mentally or emotionally cannot fundamentally change the initial opposition between Yin and Yang, though I suspect that might be the main method people cling to. To me this method would seem to require endless effort, because the fundamental principle hasn't changed, but it can resemble true balance. 

 

Quote

Yes

 

Edited August 27, 2018 by Bindi

[steve]

50 minutes ago, Bindi said:

 

Yes wu wei is non-interference, and I agree it appears to be the point of Daoism. But wu wei is not alchemy. 

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.

 

50 minutes ago, Bindi said:

We can only disagree on this point. To me chaos exists because Yang is not 'conjoined' with Yin naturally. Trying not to rock the boat mentally or emotionally cannot fundamentally change the initial opposition between Yin and Yang, though I suspect that might be the main method people cling to. To me this method would seem to require endless effort, because the fundamental principle hasn't changed, but it can resemble true balance. 

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!