You are hereForums / Non-Duality / the one is not
the one is not
just a little thought experiment in order to better appreciate non-duality.
What if the One infact is not and actually the Universe/reality is just comprised of meaningless multiplicity?
What if the One only comes about through the agency of human subjects acting conceptually on that meaningless, materialist multiplicity?
If these 2 premises were true, then non-dual consciousness (e.g. I am that) would by definition be a human/subjective construction, a necessary construction to ward off the threat of nihilism faced by creatures hudddling together for comfort in the face of the void.
Since our most enduring experience of reality seems for the vast majority of humans (including seekers) to be one of duality rather than one-ness it seems to me that this particular point has not been particularly well addressed by non-dual thinkers.
No doubt at this point most non-dualists would say something along the lines of "forget it, THIS can't be understood by the mind", but some might say that this seems a convenient let out clause which is all too convenient, a bit like Creationists saying that God put the fossils on Earth to test our faith.
- 286 reads
-
No 'person' has ever noticed or not noticed the true nature of things. The true nature of things is simply aware of itself (not that it has any need to be aware of itself). It simply is. It is only the 'content' of thought that appears to suggest otherwise.
Non-duality is redundent in the recognition of the true nature of things - this very moment. It's staring itself right in the face - right here right now.
quote: ¨non-dual consciousness (e.g. I am that) would by definition be a human/subjective construction,¨
I agree with this. But I don´t see it as a way to ward off nihilism or anything. Although it could be used in this way, but then it´s a religion.
It makes me think about Buddha´s analogy of his teaching being a raft on a river. Once you crossed the river the raft has no use anymore.
Perhaps the teaching could be seen as fingers snapping. Wake up!
I think it has to be beyond Oneness and Multiplicity. And ultimately even beyond being beyond.
Understand me correctly: the teaching has a function. But shouldn´t there finally arise the need to go beyond the teaching? So I like your guts to look beyond even the big words.
What we're talking about is not a philosophy or even a teaching. It is a simple pointing of what some people notice and most don't. That you exist and that this existence is aware. And this non-conceptual presence-awareness is what you are. While this can be discussed and formalized and conceptualized (usually not very well), what it is pointing to is simple and verifiable by anyone who will look for themselves.