Is the non in nonduality just an antiquated terminology?

[Mellowmarsh]

Does it make any sense to add the non to what already is duality, actually?

How can nonduality be realised if there’s no one who is realising there is no duality. Does this even make sense, surely the path to realisation is for the path to make sense as it’s being travelled.

 

Wouldn’t it be better to make this message relatable and use a terminology like “uni- duality” instead of “non- duality” . I mean make it make sense, make it more human, so to speak. 

 

What do you think?

[Sugarcoat]

I don’t get your point. It says non duality because it’s precisely not duality. Where’s the error?

 

Unfortunately all the contemplation in the world does nothing for me 😔*cries in duality* What is the point in even writing on this forum. 

[Hojo]

Nonduality is saying it duality dosent exist. Its saying everything is a line and each end of the line are the same thing.

Like hot and cold are the same thing temperature and theres no difference between them at all beside what the subjective experiences of temperature.

Salt and sweet are the same thing consciousness, your experience of sweet and salt is a dot on a line of the same thing.

The feeling of love and fear are literally the exact same emotion.

 

Edited May 4 by Hojo

[Mellowmarsh]

1 hour ago, Sugarcoat said:

I don’t get your point. It says non duality because it’s precisely not duality. Where’s the error?

Not suggesting an error. Rather, I’m suggesting a better terminology.

 

Can Duality be Not?

When duality clearly Is without doubt or error.
Can “what is’ be ‘what is not”?  surely there’s just “ What Is” without doubt or error, right?

Seeing and what is being seen, what is being “looked upon” may well be one unitary action, but this unitary action can only be realised or known via a relational, interfacing, alternating, interaction between subject and object.

This realisation surely must be relational and not just absolutism, I mean how can absolutism know it’s self without splitting itself in two? Into knower and known?

 

A concept is always known, not not known. There’s surely no such thing as a not known concept, or a non-concept. 
A concept is a concept, it’s not a ‘not concept’  is it?

 

 

[Sugarcoat]

@Mellowmarsh So you’re saying duality is not illusion? I would agree that , only way to know is through duality, but it’s said non duality is not a knowing. And non duality is a concept , but it describing something beyond concepts, which is what all concepts do, although non duality is special in that it’s describing nothing at all and everything simultaneously 

[Princess Arabia]

1 hour ago, Sugarcoat said:

Unfortunately all the contemplation in the world does nothing for me 😔*cries in duality* What is the point in even writing on this forum. 

Exactly, and there no point in NOT writing on this forum either. Your statement is suggesting that in non-duality, there's something in it for someone when it's message is there's no one. There's no point to/in anything. My comment, no point.

[Hojo]

@MellowmarshTo define words you define them by what they are not. The word concept by definition is not concept.

[Hojo]

@Princess Arabia No the confusion is good thats how you see it.

[Princess Arabia]

1 minute ago, Hojo said:

@Princess Arabia No the confusion is good thats how you see it.

Yeah, I know.

[PurpleTree]

non-duality just sounds nicer and flows better than uni duality i guess.

What do you even mean by uni duality?

[Princess Arabia]

18 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

Not suggesting an error. Rather, I’m suggesting a better terminology.

 

Can Duality be Not?

When duality clearly Is without doubt or error.
Can “what is’ be ‘what is not”?  surely there’s just “ What Is” without doubt or error, right?

Seeing and what is being seen, what is being “looked upon” may well be one unitary action, but this unitary action can only be realised or known via a relational, interfacing, alternating, interaction between subject and object.

This realisation surely must be relational and not just absolutism, I mean how can absolutism know it’s self without splitting itself in two? Into knower and known?

 

A concept is always known, not not known. There’s surely no such thing as a not known concept, or a non-concept. 
A concept is a concept, it’s not a ‘not concept’  is it?

 

 

Keep going. You're unto something. You're on the lukewarm scale...getting warmer and warmer till you reach the hot scale, then the very hot, then the scorching, then the I got burnt, then you burn up, turn to ash, disappear and back to neutral where it doesn't matter. Hehe

Edited May 4 by Princess Arabia

[Princess Arabia]

20 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

Seeing and what is being seen, what is being “looked upon” may well be one unitary action, but this unitary action can only be realised or known via a relational, interfacing, alternating, interaction between subject and object.

Very nice. This is describing how things appear but not what's actually the case. The actual case is there is no space between subject and object, there really is no unitary action that is realized or known and nothing or no one relating, interfacing, alternating to an object. Imagine the space to also be an object. Where would the space come from for the interactions. First answer what is space. 

[Princess Arabia]

9 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

non-duality just sounds nicer and flows better than uni duality i guess.

What do you even mean by uni duality?

Lol. This shit can go on for infinity. Do you see it...it never ends...

[Hojo]

Duality - There are two seperate things sweet and salty

Non duality - There is a line going between both concepts and you can slowly get down from sweet to salty both link in the center, the center point being not sweet or salty and what they actually are. So at the center you can just overlap both sweet and salty you dont need an up or down its just the base state of the qualia and of all qualia. Thats where sweet and salty come from. You also need salty for sweet to even exist.

You can do this with any duality.

 

Edited May 4 by Hojo

[Yimpa]

27 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Lol. This shit can go on for infinity. Do you see it...it never ends...

@Breakingthewall

[Sugarcoat]

4 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

Exactly, and there no point in NOT writing on this forum either. Your statement is suggesting that in non-duality, there's something in it for someone when it's message is there's no one. There's no point to/in anything. My comment, no point.

I see

[Mellowmarsh]

14 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

 

What do you even mean by uni duality?

Uni ..as in universe/whole. Consisting of only Oneness, or everything.

Including apparent separation, multiplicity.

Sounds better to me, but it’s personal preference. The world arises as both the personal and impersonal, all inclusive.

One without a second can be realised, but to label it, is to claim it, which is to divide it into knower and known.
And that’s what’s apparently happening all by itself.

 

But don’t take my word for it, just silently realise it. And you do, that’s why we’re here.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 5 by Mellowmarsh

[Mellowmarsh]

14 hours ago, Princess Arabia said:

First answer what is space. 

(Space) is the empty gap between objects known as words or thoughts in this conception.

(Space) is necessary in order to make sense of the world. This gap is necessary for the duality of fundamental oneness appearing as multiplicity instantaneously differentiating apparent difference where there is none.

Duality is a very persistent illusion, appearing as empty-fullness. 

This is just my opinion though.

There’s a myriad of different ways to describe what is this immediate “WHAT IS”.

It’s what we do. It’s just what’s happening, so to speak.

[Princess Arabia]

30 minutes ago, Mellowmarsh said:

(Space) is the empty gap between objects known as words or thoughts in this conception.

(Space) is necessary in order to make sense of the world. This gap is necessary for the duality of fundamental oneness appearing as multiplicity instantaneously differentiating apparent difference where there is none.

Duality is a very persistent illusion, appearing as empty-fullness. 

This is just my opinion though.

There’s a myriad of different ways to describe what is this immediate “WHAT IS”.

It’s what we do. It’s just what’s happening, so to speak.

Ok

[Mellowmarsh]

47 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

Ok

🙏