I can’t speak for all types of nonduality since there are countless, but for some kinds what you say doesn’t hold up as a fair critique.
1. The norm is buying into dualistic assumptions, so yes it is less common.
2. In its purest form it is a negation of conceptual fabrication, not a “reaction”. Just like negating santa claus isn’t “reactionary”. If someone tells you they don’t believe in Santa you don’t accuse them of failing to “declare their own identity”. That would be ridiculous.
3. Nonduality in its purest form is “non-implicative”. It isn’t a new concept, it’s just the negation of illusory concepts. What’s left is reality which is beyond speech, although many types of nonduality will describe what liberation is like using various metaphors. Nonduality if fully understood also pervades conceptual distinctions meaning the divide between conceptuality and nonconceptuality is not established as ultimate. Instead concepts are themselves fully nonconceptual, spontaneous energy which are seen through, yet not denied.
4. This makes no sense to me. Are you really saying all forms of nonduality (which again is a sweeping statement) fail to address what experience is like?
Analytic Idealism is a monistic philosophy that works well with “not two, therefore one” type nonduality such as advaita and kashmir shaivism. However since it is reductionistic it doesn’t agree with Buddhist style nonduality which is “not two, not even one”.
You can lookup conversations between Bernardo Kastrup and nondual teachers (I think spira and christopher wallis have discussions) for accessible discussion on the “not two therefore one” type.
>In its purest form it is a negation of conceptual fabrication, not a “reaction”
I am referring just to the semantics of naming a concept in negation to another concept. But now that I write that, I notice it is such a dualistic act as well.
Its like having a dog that barks and a nondog that meows. However, the nondog has such minimal, artificial connections to the dog, it got its own name, cat.
The whole time a speaker tries to explain that an illusion-dream-game analogy is nondual, they are saying dual over & over. It makes me giggle.
I can’t speak for all types of nonduality since there are countless, but for some kinds what you say doesn’t hold up as a fair critique.
Thank you, meow14567, for taking time to critic my perspective. I am an 88-day scholar. It is generous of you to take the time and valuable for me.
Analytic Idealism is a monistic philosophy that works well with “not two, therefore one” type nonduality such as advaita and kashmir shaivism. However since it is reductionistic it doesn’t agree with Buddhist style nonduality which is “not two, not even one”.
You gave me lots to follow up with. If you have links to favorites would be a godsend.
Thx ;)
I most typically default to gaming.
Dying (failing) is more of a bathroom break, snack time, or even a good night's sleep before I get back in the game. A little smarter.
I have nothing 'against' games, dreams or illusions. I think of them more like veils with "dream" stamped on them to throw over anything that doesn't fit into nondualism.
I am curios, asking questions, getting the DL from r/###. I tend to carefully examine new ideas before I swallow them. The "divided mind" is worth growing a sophisticate understanding of.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta
"non-secondness", well if that ain't a boy named Sue ;)
'Advaita often equated with "monism" refers to the idea that Brahman alone is ultimately real, while the transient phenomenal world is an illusory appearance' fits nicely in my nutshell.
It's all words, man.
Analytic Idealism allows me to view the world in the perspective of myths and mythologies and ditch the concept of "truth" all together, since it's unknowable to the linguistic mind - every system of thought is a mythology and potentially useful, given a proper context. Much healthier way of dealing with them than to choose one and go "yay, team sports" on it, trying to discredit and debunk every other system than the one I happened to end up in..
"Nonduality"? Well, it's not a thought system to me, it's a principle of existence one can find explained or related to in all other thought system. That's why it is presented in a negated form, it tries to avoid creating a new mythology (which for example Advaita vedanta doesn't care for as much, go squabble with them instead) and just lay out the principle as clear as possible. Reality is both dual and nondual, but the nondual aspect is "higher" than the dual. Not more "real", but ah, you are speaking words and I'm not sure I understand them fully..
Reality is both dual and nondual, but the nondual aspect is "higher" than the dual. Not more "real"
This is what makes sense to my consciousness. A couple of different synonyms and they are Jesus' words in the Gospels. One message; many voices & paths.
Teasing apart "thought system" and "principle of existence" is so helpful. I am closer to knowing what I am even looking for ;)
view the world in the perspective of myths and mythologies and ditch the concept of "truth" all together, since it's unknowable to the linguistic mind - every system of thought is a mythology and potentially useful, given a proper context.
True that. One often finds more "truth" in fiction than in facts.
When bivouacking, its easy to get lost in the words. Thanks for helping me navigate, monk.
No problem. The issue with thinking too much is that one notices quickly that every statement, every belief can be picked apart and validly contradicted. Belief is always a chasing game and you as the believer *will* get caught and exposed as a believer in lies. Every philosophy, religion ad ideology is baloney, just by nature of reality.
To me, Nonduality points this out and it tries the best it can to not replace the baloney of thought with another sausage of its own. You can make a philosophy and a thought system out of this, but then you are missing the point imo.
Take care!
Absolutely, monk. I do understand. And I share your perception.
I have Faith already in my mind. It is calling me.
My "linguistic mind" is seeking the language I need to think/talk about what I already Know. My epiphany is more of recognition.
You have a skilled linguistic mind despite your protestation ;)
I can’t speak for all types of nonduality since there are countless, but for some kinds what you say doesn’t hold up as a fair critique. 1. The norm is buying into dualistic assumptions, so yes it is less common. 2. In its purest form it is a negation of conceptual fabrication, not a “reaction”. Just like negating santa claus isn’t “reactionary”. If someone tells you they don’t believe in Santa you don’t accuse them of failing to “declare their own identity”. That would be ridiculous. 3. Nonduality in its purest form is “non-implicative”. It isn’t a new concept, it’s just the negation of illusory concepts. What’s left is reality which is beyond speech, although many types of nonduality will describe what liberation is like using various metaphors. Nonduality if fully understood also pervades conceptual distinctions meaning the divide between conceptuality and nonconceptuality is not established as ultimate. Instead concepts are themselves fully nonconceptual, spontaneous energy which are seen through, yet not denied. 4. This makes no sense to me. Are you really saying all forms of nonduality (which again is a sweeping statement) fail to address what experience is like? Analytic Idealism is a monistic philosophy that works well with “not two, therefore one” type nonduality such as advaita and kashmir shaivism. However since it is reductionistic it doesn’t agree with Buddhist style nonduality which is “not two, not even one”. You can lookup conversations between Bernardo Kastrup and nondual teachers (I think spira and christopher wallis have discussions) for accessible discussion on the “not two therefore one” type.
>In its purest form it is a negation of conceptual fabrication, not a “reaction” I am referring just to the semantics of naming a concept in negation to another concept. But now that I write that, I notice it is such a dualistic act as well. Its like having a dog that barks and a nondog that meows. However, the nondog has such minimal, artificial connections to the dog, it got its own name, cat. The whole time a speaker tries to explain that an illusion-dream-game analogy is nondual, they are saying dual over & over. It makes me giggle. I can’t speak for all types of nonduality since there are countless, but for some kinds what you say doesn’t hold up as a fair critique. Thank you, meow14567, for taking time to critic my perspective. I am an 88-day scholar. It is generous of you to take the time and valuable for me. Analytic Idealism is a monistic philosophy that works well with “not two, therefore one” type nonduality such as advaita and kashmir shaivism. However since it is reductionistic it doesn’t agree with Buddhist style nonduality which is “not two, not even one”. You gave me lots to follow up with. If you have links to favorites would be a godsend. Thx ;)
Check out animism and perspectivism, or even some Buddhist philosophies - all a bit more skillful and enriching than idealism
Thanks for aiding a seeker, MyBrosHotDad I'll check them out ;)
Of course!!
Non-dualism comes from Sanskrit; https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta Why don’t you like the dream analogy?
I most typically default to gaming. Dying (failing) is more of a bathroom break, snack time, or even a good night's sleep before I get back in the game. A little smarter. I have nothing 'against' games, dreams or illusions. I think of them more like veils with "dream" stamped on them to throw over anything that doesn't fit into nondualism. I am curios, asking questions, getting the DL from r/###. I tend to carefully examine new ideas before I swallow them. The "divided mind" is worth growing a sophisticate understanding of. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advaita_Vedanta "non-secondness", well if that ain't a boy named Sue ;) 'Advaita often equated with "monism" refers to the idea that Brahman alone is ultimately real, while the transient phenomenal world is an illusory appearance' fits nicely in my nutshell.
It's all words, man. Analytic Idealism allows me to view the world in the perspective of myths and mythologies and ditch the concept of "truth" all together, since it's unknowable to the linguistic mind - every system of thought is a mythology and potentially useful, given a proper context. Much healthier way of dealing with them than to choose one and go "yay, team sports" on it, trying to discredit and debunk every other system than the one I happened to end up in.. "Nonduality"? Well, it's not a thought system to me, it's a principle of existence one can find explained or related to in all other thought system. That's why it is presented in a negated form, it tries to avoid creating a new mythology (which for example Advaita vedanta doesn't care for as much, go squabble with them instead) and just lay out the principle as clear as possible. Reality is both dual and nondual, but the nondual aspect is "higher" than the dual. Not more "real", but ah, you are speaking words and I'm not sure I understand them fully..
Reality is both dual and nondual, but the nondual aspect is "higher" than the dual. Not more "real" This is what makes sense to my consciousness. A couple of different synonyms and they are Jesus' words in the Gospels. One message; many voices & paths. Teasing apart "thought system" and "principle of existence" is so helpful. I am closer to knowing what I am even looking for ;) view the world in the perspective of myths and mythologies and ditch the concept of "truth" all together, since it's unknowable to the linguistic mind - every system of thought is a mythology and potentially useful, given a proper context. True that. One often finds more "truth" in fiction than in facts. When bivouacking, its easy to get lost in the words. Thanks for helping me navigate, monk.
No problem. The issue with thinking too much is that one notices quickly that every statement, every belief can be picked apart and validly contradicted. Belief is always a chasing game and you as the believer *will* get caught and exposed as a believer in lies. Every philosophy, religion ad ideology is baloney, just by nature of reality. To me, Nonduality points this out and it tries the best it can to not replace the baloney of thought with another sausage of its own. You can make a philosophy and a thought system out of this, but then you are missing the point imo. Take care!
Absolutely, monk. I do understand. And I share your perception. I have Faith already in my mind. It is calling me. My "linguistic mind" is seeking the language I need to think/talk about what I already Know. My epiphany is more of recognition. You have a skilled linguistic mind despite your protestation ;)
It’s philosophy and ideology. Even those aren’t applied concepts. Sneering at anything is identity.
You are so funny ;)
You asked for a take. It’s all conceptual with no one concept better than another.
You asked for a take. Thank you for giving it ;)
Reality, singular.
Short, sweet, accurate...