Wanted: Non Dual Teacher

[troysantos]

I live at the Asoke temple here in Ubon. I've been with the group for a total of nearly five years. But lately I've been looking around for a Zen or some other sort of non-dual teacher. Though I think this group is really great in many ways, my heart is more drawn to the non-dual teachings and practices.

I think Adyashanti's teachings and the practices that he teaches are great. He's an American guy in California NOT here in Thailand. But his teaching is a great example of what I have in mind.

Ajaan Cha's temple is nearby, as is the IMF, so I'll certainly visit those temples to see if a spark is lit. I'll head south someday to Surat to visit Suan Mokh. Also, I realize there are some Thich Naht Hahn groups in Thailand. I'll visit at least one of them. I haven't done any looking around yet, just asked a few people but without any hits.

Next step is to do some searching in Thai language but that'll go slower so I'm asking here first.

I'm really open to seeing what all is available.

One Thai friend I've asked has read tons of books on "the new paradigm" which is sort of a contemporary non-dual teaching. He himself would also like to find a teacher and a community.

If I really want that style, you could say I'm in the wrong country. But I'm happy to live here just the same.

Thanks much.

[fabianfred]

Don't know what you mean by non-dual!!!???

[huli]

Don't know what you mean by non-dual!!!???

in this case, dual would mean self and the world, as usually conceived and described by people.

Non-dual would be difficult to describe because the nature of language is dual or duality.

In my opinion, the non-self of Buddha's teaching is closely related to non-dualism. Another way of defining the ultimate goal of Buddhism is to overcome dualism.

I think non-dualism is a good term. Another way of describing the goal of the path, so to speak.

[IMA_FARANG]

I live at the Asoke temple here in Ubon. I've been with the group for a total of nearly five years. But lately I've been looking around for a Zen or some other sort of non-dual teacher. Though I think this group is really great in many ways, my heart is more drawn to the non-dual teachings and practices.

I think Adyashanti's teachings and the practices that he teaches are great. He's an American guy in California NOT here in Thailand. But his teaching is a great example of what I have in mind.

Ajaan Cha's temple is nearby, as is the IMF, so I'll certainly visit those temples to see if a spark is lit. I'll head south someday to Surat to visit Suan Mokh. Also, I realize there are some Thich Naht Hahn groups in Thailand. I'll visit at least one of them. I haven't done any looking around yet, just asked a few people but without any hits.

Next step is to do some searching in Thai language but that'll go slower so I'm asking here first.

I'm really open to seeing what all is available.

One Thai friend I've asked has read tons of books on "the new paradigm" which is sort of a contemporary non-dual teaching. He himself would also like to find a teacher and a community.

If I really want that style, you could say I'm in the wrong country. But I'm happy to live here just the same.

Thanks much.

----------------

As a Zen practitioner myself....I think you might be jumping into the "deep end" of the pool with questions about non-duality before you learn to swim in the shallow end.

You will find it difficult to find a 'teacher" or guide in Thailand....you will need to be doing much of your learning on your own.

Anyhow here's a on-line source you can search:

http://zenforuminternational.org/

The site is called Zen Forum International.

You can read posts on the forum without becoming a member as a guest....but if you want to post a question or a reply to someone else's post....you will need to register and decide on a username for yourself. Registration is free.

However, to reigister you do need to read and accept the rules of posting....mainly they expect poliyeness and "right speech"....being courteous and polite to oyher posters on the forum.

There are two on-going topics that might be of interest to you.

First there is a "beginners" topic....designed for beginers to ask question about Zen and practices including meditation and the practice of Zazen meditation.

Then there also a topic called, "Ask a Teacher"....where you can post a question regarding Zen to accredited Zen teachers.

If your question is selected, a Zen teacher will answer your question directly.

I visit the forum often....my username is "Quiet Heart:.

Give that forum a try...since you obviously have access to the internet already.

Edited September 12, 2012 by IMA_FARANG

[troysantos]

Thanks much for the suggestion. I do realize that online communities are one option. Would like to have a body nearby but may settle for a voice and a face! Thanks, really, I do appreciate it.

[Xangsamhua]

I agree with IMA_FARANG. Non-duality is not easy to grasp, especially in its implications, which, if not kept in balance, can lead to some strange conclusions.

I agree with you (the OP) that you need a qualified and credible mentor to understand the teachings on non-duality and find your way around the paradoxes. Some mentors, especially in the Japanese Zen and Tibetan traditions, have been found to be wanting in their ability to combine knowledge with wisdom and ethics.

I would think that Thich Nhat Hanh is an estimable teacher, but his understanding of non-duality, though orthodox Buddhism, is not the view put forward in either Dzogchen (Vajrayana Buddhist) teaching or that of the Upanishads, which really do need to be considered. Nevertheless, TNH is easy to read.

Anatta is, as Huli suggests, a form of non-duality in a sense, but is the opposite of oneness, that which is regarded as the essence and totality of non-duality by schools based on non-dualist foundations. Anatta is an unfortunate outcome of the Buddha's self imposed constraints in developing a non-pragmatic philosophical system. He did not wish to enter into discussions on Atman as that which grounds people and other phenomena in a oneness, a unified field that gives rise to and sustains phenomena, and this refusal to debate on matters he said did not conduce to the conquest of suffering gave rise to the dogma that all beings are just aggregates originating in interdependent and ungrounded relationships. There is no whole, only parts, in this view - the opposite of non-duality as the underpinning reality from which all phenomena arise. Anatta, then, is not non-duality, but an infinite plurality of relationships ungrounded in any substance. Non-dualists would argue that the "substance" that grounds phenomena is consciousness, and that this consciousness constitutes a unified field.

The Upanishads are probably the most easily accessible and readable sources for non-dualistic thought. For a Vajrayana (Dzogchen) view, "The Supreme Source" (Kunjed Gyalpo) focuses on non-duality as the natural condition grounded in primordial reality (Dharmakaya). Where I think you would need a mentor is in unpacking this text where it speaks of things like the following:

It is thought that creates the duality of mind and object. It is wisdom that perceives them as non-dual. Meditation means understanding that there is nothing to enter into or exit from. Not grasping what appears is the state of self-liberation.

Simply abiding in the state of total relaxation, effortlessly, and without correction or alteration, one achieves realization.

Many teachers advise to "meditate without meditating", and this is the precise truth; there is nothing on which to meditate.

Realization is not achieved by striving for it; it arises spontaneously when one abides in the natural state without seeking anything.

Do not turn what is one into two! Happiness and suffering are one in the state of enlightenment ... Do not accept happiness, do not reject suffering! Remain in the natural condition and you will attain everything.

[Brucenkhamen]

I agree with Huli duality is really just a product of language, we differentiate between subject and object, this and that, compare and contrast.

I think non-dual is just not buying into the way language defines our reality as if that were an accurate ultimate description of the world we experience. Any kind of Buddhism would encourage us to look deeper than that.

If we say this kind of Buddhism is dual and that kind of Buddhism is non-dual don't we create a duality?

[Xangsamhua]

I agree with Huli duality is really just a product of language, we differentiate between subject and object, this and that, compare and contrast.

I think non-dual is just not buying into the way language defines our reality as if that were an accurate ultimate description of the world we experience. Any kind of Buddhism would encourage us to look deeper than that.

If we say this kind of Buddhism is dual and that kind of Buddhism is non-dual don't we create a duality?

Hello, Brucenkhamen. Nice to hear from you again. Your suggestion has got me thinking.

Here’s my take on the matter:

Language produces something other than itself when it is performative, i.e. when a speech act occurs that, by itself, creates an outcome. Examples would be the naming of a ship or the sentencing of an accused. In saying “I name this ship …” the ship in fact acquires a name (and is launched). When the judge says “I sentence you to …” then a set of events is set in motion. However, if I say “There is One God who has created many things”, then am I making something happen? Or if I say “There is one Truth and many paths to it”, am I creating a duality or a plurality? I am simply expressing an idea, aren't I? Manifesting in language some thoughts and concepts organized as a proposition.

Now the statement I make may be a product of a confused or tentative thought, e.g. that all beings are manifestations of a unity, unified field, unbounded and all-pervading consciousness, or whatever, but what is produced is a product of that thought, not of the language itself. Am I right?

If I observe that there is a plurality of institutions and schools of thought that call themselves “Buddhist”, but I comment that they draw on a unified core of beliefs (5 precepts; 8-fold path, etc), then am I arguing that Buddhism is at heart one, not many, though it is manifested in different forms, or am I producing a non-duality by my comment?

Incidentally, Mrs Xangsamhua, who is rather strict and a keen supporter of Phra Bhodiraksa, argues that the Japanese form of Zen, for example, is not Buddhism, regardless of what they claim. In asserting this, has she produced a non-Buddhist category in which Japanese Zen is found, or is she just manifesting her thought by linguistic means?

Of course, one can argue that thought is really just sub voce talk, but I won’t go there for now.

[rockyysdt]

Two things which come to mind for me are:

• When I consider the phrase "Non Duality" I conceptualize what this may mean or entail.
  

My conceptualization may be far removed from reality, particularly as revelation requires experience rather than thought.

• What I believe or conceptualize can only serve to initially influence my desire/or lack of desire to practice the eightfold path, but it cannot alter the truth.
  

Without motivation, desire, and some faith with which to begin and maintain my journey, I can never reach a point of experience from which truth begins to reveal itself.

Each of us cannot avoid the need to regularly practice.

The key to a good teacher, suitable environment and support is that they facilitate ones practice, rather than obstruct it.

I'd say a good teacher might include one who has reached the summit and imparts through personal experience regardless of whether they use concepts such as duality or non duality.

Edited September 15, 2012 by rockyysdt

[huli]

I agree with Huli duality is really just a product of language, we differentiate between subject and object, this and that, compare and contrast.

I think non-dual is just not buying into the way language defines our reality as if that were an accurate ultimate description of the world we experience. Any kind of Buddhism would encourage us to look deeper than that.

If we say this kind of Buddhism is dual and that kind of Buddhism is non-dual don't we create a duality?

Not only language, but also all thought is based on duality, being careful with the definition of “thought”. So I would say yes, Brucenkhamen, statements made about different kinds of Buddhism are clearly dual, as are, statements about anatta and the aggregates, Xangsamhua.

I greatly enjoyed a discussion of non-duality in The Spectrum of Consciousness by Ken Wilbur. To summarize, if I may, dualism is illusory and impossible to overcome with thought. Different religious traditions, such as Zen, the Tien Tai school of Buddhism, and Taoism have come up with similar suggestions, however. According to Wilbur, there are three necessary factors: active attention, the suspension of thought, and passive awareness. The concluding chapter of the book elaborates on these, should anyone be interested.

The conviction that anatta is a fact may be an outcome of non-dual awareness. Buddha’s teachings, however true they may be, must forever be inherently dual, because they consist of words and thoughts. However, his admonition to meditate points the way to non-dual awareness. It is quite interesting to compare the Buddhist meditative path to overcoming dualism.

[Xangsamhua]

My brain hurts.

All this thinking and discussing. I don't think I'm up to it.

Maybe better to follow Zen Master Seng Ts'an's advice:

The more talking and thinking,

The farther from truth.

Cutting off all speech, all thought,

There is nowhere that you cannot go.

Returning to the root, we get the essence;

Following after appearances, we lose the spirit.

If for only a moment we see within,

We have surpassed the emptiness of things.

Changes that go on in this emptiness

All arise because of our ignorance.

Do not seek for the Truth;

Religiously avoid following it.

More at http://www.mendosa.com/way2.htm

Chien-chih Seng-ts'an (d. 606 AD) was the Third Zen Patriarch

[Xangsamhua]

OK, maybe I should take Master Seng Ts'an's advice, but I've just come across some possibly apt comments from Aldous Huxley.

[in Mahayana teaching] Appearances are discriminated by the sense organs, then reified by naming, so that words are taken for things and symbols are used as the measure of reality. According to this view, language is a main source of the sense of separateness and the blasphemous idea of individual self-sufficiency, with their inevitable corollaries of greed, envy, lust for power, anger and cruelty. And from these evil passions there springs the necessity of an indefinitely protracted and repeated separate existence under the same, self-perpetuated conditions of craving and infatuation.

(The Perennial Philosophy, Kindle loc. 2584)

[Godfree]

I studied with a non-dual Teacher for 30 years, until His death. He had realized the truth of what we call non-dualism, and he demonstrated it in every moment, and was kind enough to teach it verbally–to the degree that it can be communcated in words. It is, as He used to say, a paradoxical matter: at once extremely subtle and blindingly obvious.

If you've coming to Chiang Mai, IM me and we can chat about it over lunch.

[Xangsamhua]

Thanks for this offer, Godfree.

Are there TNH and/or Advaita groups in Chiangmai?

[rockyysdt]

Anyhow here's a on-line source you can search:

http://zenforuminternational.org/

The site is called Zen Forum International.

You can read posts on the forum without becoming a member as a guest....but if you want to post a question or a reply to someone else's post....you will need to register and decide on a username for yourself. Registration is free.

However, to reigister you do need to read and accept the rules of posting....mainly they expect poliyeness and "right speech"....being courteous and polite to oyher posters on the forum.

There are two on-going topics that might be of interest to you.

First there is a "beginners" topic....designed for beginers to ask question about Zen and practices including meditation and the practice of Zazen meditation.

Then there also a topic called, "Ask a Teacher"....where you can post a question regarding Zen to accredited Zen teachers.

If your question is selected, a Zen teacher will answer your question directly.

Good reference IMA.

I particularly like the "Ask a Teacher" section for authoritative answers.

I also like the requirement that "Teachers, and Monastics" include their lieage, position and place of practice to further identify/authenticate themselves.

What percentage of questions make it through (answered)?

[Several]

Duality seems to be two things. Conceptual, where we define an idea or perception. Hard if not impossible to avoid if we want to communicate this to another. Unless we all follow the Zen way and start slapping each other. (I'm all for it, but alas, Vinaya)

Duality is also my favourite song by Slipknot.

Interestingly in Genesis duality begins when Adam eats the fruit of knowledge, yet prior to that he had been tasked with naming (describing) everything. So duality is the cause of the 'fall of man', but conceptual thinking is not.

So it would seem with enlightened masters of any Buddhist branch. They are not struck dumb by overcoming duality, though a dualistic mind attempting to concieve what a non-dualistic statement means experiences difficulties. 'Like having a red-hot iron ball in your mouth that you can neither swallow nor spit out' as Zen says. Even when the greats write poems about not thinking etc, they are still forced to use language. Though I do love the Zen poets.

For me it always comes back to the first lines of the Tao Te Ching; "The name that can be named is not the eternal name, the word that can be spoken is not the eternal word..."

So a rose is still a... Mu!

[Several]

Just a thought. Does non-duality have its own name (monoality?) or is it described as 'not two'?

[meadish_sweetball]

Thanks for this offer, Godfree.

Are there TNH and/or Advaita groups in Chiangmai?

Green Papaya Sangha practices in the tradition of Thich Nhat Hanh.

[Xangsamhua]

Thanks for this offer, Godfree.

Are there TNH and/or Advaita groups in Chiangmai?

Green Papaya Sangha practices in the tradition of Thich Nhat Hanh.

Thank you.

[sabaijai]

Just a thought. Does non-duality have its own name (monoality?) or is it described as 'not two'?

Monism.

[Several]

Just a thought. Does non-duality have its own name (monoality?) or is it described as 'not two'?

Monism.

Ah. Of course. I guess the OP is looking for a monistary then.

[Several]

I agree with IMA_FARANG. Non-duality is not easy to grasp, especially in its implications, which, if not kept in balance, can lead to some strange conclusions.

I agree with you (the OP) that you need a qualified and credible mentor to understand the teachings on non-duality and find your way around the paradoxes. Some mentors, especially in the Japanese Zen and Tibetan traditions, have been found to be wanting in their ability to combine knowledge with wisdom and ethics.

I would think that Thich Nhat Hanh is an estimable teacher, but his understanding of non-duality, though orthodox Buddhism, is not the view put forward in either Dzogchen (Vajrayana Buddhist) teaching or that of the Upanishads, which really do need to be considered. Nevertheless, TNH is easy to read.

Anatta is, as Huli suggests, a form of non-duality in a sense, but is the opposite of oneness, that which is regarded as the essence and totality of non-duality by schools based on non-dualist foundations. Anatta is an unfortunate outcome of the Buddha's self imposed constraints in developing a non-pragmatic philosophical system. He did not wish to enter into discussions on Atman as that which grounds people and other phenomena in a oneness, a unified field that gives rise to and sustains phenomena, and this refusal to debate on matters he said did not conduce to the conquest of suffering gave rise to the dogma that all beings are just aggregates originating in interdependent and ungrounded relationships. There is no whole, only parts, in this view - the opposite of non-duality as the underpinning reality from which all phenomena arise. Anatta, then, is not non-duality, but an infinite plurality of relationships ungrounded in any substance. Non-dualists would argue that the "substance" that grounds phenomena is consciousness, and that this consciousness constitutes a unified field.

The Upanishads are probably the most easily accessible and readable sources for non-dualistic thought. For a Vajrayana (Dzogchen) view, "The Supreme Source" (Kunjed Gyalpo) focuses on non-duality as the natural condition grounded in primordial reality (Dharmakaya). Where I think you would need a mentor is in unpacking this text where it speaks of things like the following:

It is thought that creates the duality of mind and object. It is wisdom that perceives them as non-dual. Meditation means understanding that there is nothing to enter into or exit from. Not grasping what appears is the state of self-liberation.

Simply abiding in the state of total relaxation, effortlessly, and without correction or alteration, one achieves realization.

Many teachers advise to "meditate without meditating", and this is the precise truth; there is nothing on which to meditate.

Realization is not achieved by striving for it; it arises spontaneously when one abides in the natural state without seeking anything.

Do not turn what is one into two! Happiness and suffering are one in the state of enlightenment ... Do not accept happiness, do not reject suffering! Remain in the natural condition and you will attain everything.

So, does this mean that there might be Atman, its just one of those things Buddha found to be fruitless to discuss? (my brain is also hurting now)

[dlarsenn]

existence cannot be conceptulized because it is prior to thought. if prior, then existence is not an object and therefore not subject to time.

anything nameable comes and goes and is therefore object and not real.

conceptualization has no author. thinking but no thinker. ask this: 'what's the next thought?' no answer. mind quiet. why? becasue an idea asks the question. you are not the thinker. you do nothing to see, hear, taste, touch ,smell, or THINK. that's why buddha called thought the sixth sense.

the mind is in the painting. how can it ever know the painter? whatever you take yourself to be cannot be true for you are always prior. therefore you are not an object.

consider all that appears to happen an accident. a witness is necessary. like standing on the corner BEFORE a car wreck. but there is no one there, witnessing but no witness.

what appears as reality is actually the unreal. like a cartoon. flip the pages, the cat changes positions but nothing actually happens. therefore all nouns are verbs.

ask' what am I?' over and over until it is seen that no one is inquirying. when man sees that man is an idea, peace on earth. for if no thought, identify the enemy.

waht you are is actually powerless. the powerless witnessing of manifestation. all happens spontaniously, by grace. so rest easy, for what ever the station in life it could be no other way.

a young boy said to socrates: if I don't think, what should I do? reply: just go on thinking that you think.

a top 12 of non duality quotes:

12. the dawn of creation wrote what the last day of reckoning shall read. omar khayyan

11. every moment is the seed for the next. nissargadatta

10. man is God in drag. rumi

9. what's wrong with right now unless you think about it. bob adamson

8 human is an idea. karl renz

7. see that the senses do not connect some 'you' to an outside world and there is instant realization. huang po

6. events happen deeds are done but no doer thereof. buddha

5 .forgive them for they know not what they do. jesus

4. beyond right and wrong there is a field. I will meet you there. rumi

3. nothing real can be threatened and nothing unreal exists. therein lies the peace of God. course in miracles

2. I take my stand prior to all. I am the primal ground. nissargadatta

1. I am not God but of God. jesus

Edited October 6, 2012 by dlarsenn

[huli]

existence cannot be conceptulized because it is prior to thought. if prior, then existence is not an object and therefore not subject to time.

anything nameable comes and goes and is therefore object and not real.

conceptualization has no author. thinking but no thinker. ask this: 'what's the next thought?' no answer. mind quiet. why? becasue an idea asks the question. you are not the thinker. you do nothing to see, hear, taste, touch ,smell, or THINK. that's why buddha called thought the sixth sense.

the mind is in the painting. how can it ever know the painter? whatever you take yourself to be cannot be true for you are always prior. therefore you are not an object.

consider all that appears to happen an accident. a witness is necessary. like standing on the corner BEFORE a car wreck. but there is no one there, witnessing but no witness.

what appears as reality is actually the unreal. like a cartoon. flip the pages, the cat changes positions but nothing actually happens. therefore all nouns are verbs.

ask' what am I?' over and over until it is seen that no one is inquirying. when man sees that man is an idea, peace on earth. for if no thought, identify the enemy.

waht you are is actually powerless. the powerless witnessing of manifestation. all happens spontaniously, by grace. so rest easy, for what ever the station in life it could be no other way.

a young boy said to socrates: if I don't think, what should I do? reply: just go on thinking that you think.

a top 12 of non duality quotes:

12. the dawn of creation wrote what the last day of reckoning shall read. omar khayyan

11. every moment is the seed for the next. nissargadatta

10. man is God in drag. rumi

9. what's wrong with right now unless you think about it. bob adamson

8 human is an idea. karl renz

7. see that the senses do not connect some 'you' to an outside world and there is instant realization. huang po

6. events happen deeds are done but no doer thereof. buddha

5 .forgive them for they know not what they do. jesus

4. beyond right and wrong there is a field. I will meet you there. rumi

3. nothing real can be threatened and nothing unreal exists. therein lies the peace of God. course in miracles

2. I take my stand prior to all. I am the primal ground. nissargadatta

1. I am not God but of God. jesus

dlarsenn

that's a good post IMO, many good quotes and interesting comments

I continue to consider that overcoming dualism is another way to conceptualize the Buddhist Path

keep 'em coming

Huli

[dlarsenn]

existence cannot be conceptulized because it is prior to thought. if prior, then existence is not an object and therefore not subject to time.

anything nameable comes and goes and is therefore object and not real.

conceptualization has no author. thinking but no thinker. ask this: 'what's the next thought?' no answer. mind quiet. why? becasue an idea asks the question. you are not the thinker. you do nothing to see, hear, taste, touch ,smell, or THINK. that's why buddha called thought the sixth sense.

the mind is in the painting. how can it ever know the painter? whatever you take yourself to be cannot be true for you are always prior. therefore you are not an object.

consider all that appears to happen an accident. a witness is necessary. like standing on the corner BEFORE a car wreck. but there is no one there, witnessing but no witness.

what appears as reality is actually the unreal. like a cartoon. flip the pages, the cat changes positions but nothing actually happens. therefore all nouns are verbs.

ask' what am I?' over and over until it is seen that no one is inquirying. when man sees that man is an idea, peace on earth. for if no thought, identify the enemy.

waht you are is actually powerless. the powerless witnessing of manifestation. all happens spontaniously, by grace. so rest easy, for what ever the station in life it could be no other way.

a young boy said to socrates: if I don't think, what should I do? reply: just go on thinking that you think.

a top 12 of non duality quotes:

12. the dawn of creation wrote what the last day of reckoning shall read. omar khayyan

11. every moment is the seed for the next. nissargadatta

10. man is God in drag. rumi

9. what's wrong with right now unless you think about it. bob adamson

8 human is an idea. karl renz

7. see that the senses do not connect some 'you' to an outside world and there is instant realization. huang po

6. events happen deeds are done but no doer thereof. buddha

5 .forgive them for they know not what they do. jesus

4. beyond right and wrong there is a field. I will meet you there. rumi

3. nothing real can be threatened and nothing unreal exists. therein lies the peace of God. course in miracles

2. I take my stand prior to all. I am the primal ground. nissargadatta

1. I am not God but of God. jesus

dlarsenn

that's a good post IMO, many good quotes and interesting comments

I continue to consider that overcoming dualism is another way to conceptualize the Buddhist Path

keep 'em coming

Huli

isn't that the hook? there is nothing to overcome.

[huli]

existence cannot be conceptulized because it is prior to thought. if prior, then existence is not an object and therefore not subject to time.

anything nameable comes and goes and is therefore object and not real.

conceptualization has no author. thinking but no thinker. ask this: 'what's the next thought?' no answer. mind quiet. why? becasue an idea asks the question. you are not the thinker. you do nothing to see, hear, taste, touch ,smell, or THINK. that's why buddha called thought the sixth sense.

the mind is in the painting. how can it ever know the painter? whatever you take yourself to be cannot be true for you are always prior. therefore you are not an object.

consider all that appears to happen an accident. a witness is necessary. like standing on the corner BEFORE a car wreck. but there is no one there, witnessing but no witness.

what appears as reality is actually the unreal. like a cartoon. flip the pages, the cat changes positions but nothing actually happens. therefore all nouns are verbs.

ask' what am I?' over and over until it is seen that no one is inquirying. when man sees that man is an idea, peace on earth. for if no thought, identify the enemy.

waht you are is actually powerless. the powerless witnessing of manifestation. all happens spontaniously, by grace. so rest easy, for what ever the station in life it could be no other way.

a young boy said to socrates: if I don't think, what should I do? reply: just go on thinking that you think.

a top 12 of non duality quotes:

12. the dawn of creation wrote what the last day of reckoning shall read. omar khayyan

11. every moment is the seed for the next. nissargadatta

10. man is God in drag. rumi

9. what's wrong with right now unless you think about it. bob adamson

8 human is an idea. karl renz

7. see that the senses do not connect some 'you' to an outside world and there is instant realization. huang po

6. events happen deeds are done but no doer thereof. buddha

5 .forgive them for they know not what they do. jesus

4. beyond right and wrong there is a field. I will meet you there. rumi

3. nothing real can be threatened and nothing unreal exists. therein lies the peace of God. course in miracles

2. I take my stand prior to all. I am the primal ground. nissargadatta

1. I am not God but of God. jesus

dlarsenn

that's a good post IMO, many good quotes and interesting comments

I continue to consider that overcoming dualism is another way to conceptualize the Buddhist Path

keep 'em coming

Huli

isn't that the hook? there is nothing to overcome.

It is interesting to have a little discussion with you, dlarsenn

I would like to comment on your statement that "there is nothing to overcome".

This might be true, as the viewpoint of a person who has achieved non-dual consciousness, and it might be true in terms of ultimate truth, but most of us have not achieved this yet. Consequently there are forums where people make posts like you and I about dualism, and the possibility of overcoming it.

Surely, the human condition as we know it is one of dualism. Even the idea that dualism can be "overcome", or that life is actually non-dual, goes against the grain of everyday thought. But a few people glimpse this, and wish to investigate it further by forums such as this.

I would say that there is "nothing to overcome" puts an end to such conversations, by denying the need for them.

There is no need to overcome dualism because there is nothing to overcome? Only for a person who is already living a non-dual life, there is for the rest of us. I believe this is self-evident.

To discuss "overcoming dualism" is a meaningful statement, IMO, even if the non-dual state can not be described in words.

Regards

Huli

[Several]

How do you intend to overcome nothing?

[huli]

How do you intend to overcome nothing?

Several,

Duality-infused consciousness is not "nothing", nor is non-dual consciousness. There is a difference, and it is useful to discuss the difference, do you not agree?

In Buddhist terms, one intends to overcome samsara, with a goal of reaching nirvana using the 8 fold path. True some Buddhist revisionists say we are all already a Buddha, but I think that is nonsense. Why bother being a monk if a person is already a Buddha?

regards

Huli

[Several]

Hey there. My post was aimed at mr. Dlarsaan but for some reason my phone won't quote. Just says no permission. I should have been clearer, and I'm all for discussion. It gets me thinking, which apparently isn't good.

[Several]

Maybe a better term would be Unfettered by Dualism. It is an almost inescapable consequence of rational communication to use dualistic terms but we then fool ourselves into believing that it provides some level of understanding. Detachment from this postion leaves one free to communicate without becoming enamoured of eloquent description. A painting of a thing is not the thing itself regardless of how masterfully executed.