Interacting with the Non-Duality circuits and seeing what “teacher(s)” of such a domain have to say, prescribe, postulate, propagate
…….there is noticing that Advaita (Nonduality) is seemingly held to be something…
Interacting with the Non-Duality circuits and seeing what “teacher(s)” of such a domain have to say, prescribe, postulate, propagate
…
….there is noticing that Advaita (Nonduality) is seemingly held to be something…
.. some doctrine to be understood…..some way of living life…… some state to be reached.
Thus, it is held that just as there are Christians, Buddhists, Islamist…. there are these Nondualists.
And thus the question arises of how a nondualist would behave, say coming across a beggar in a street……
….. how would the nondualist would deal with the issue of say environmental degradation,……..deceit in politics…
….. Jasmine rising in the Middle East…
.. Third world poverty... or the shenanigans of Wall Street Bankers…
...the possible impending collapse of Eurozone.
The question of how a nondualist would behave …. with any issue appearing to define life.
Would a nondualist be proactive, reactive, empathetic, compassionate, derisive or indifferent ?
All of this rests on a misunderstanding(so to say)…..that there is something as a nondualist person.
That….. Advaita is a position.
That…… apperception of Advaita, is at the level of human-body object….. i.e. it is some intuitive flash of understanding happening to a person…
..such occurrence supposedly to be happening in time.
That......this transformation of the person at the body-mind level….can be brought about as an effect of an cause.
An effect, which can be then conveyed, propounded, taught, spread with evangelical zeal.
Thus, the plethora of narrations of the “moment of awakening” or some epiphanic experience.
Advaita has nothing to do with carrying a notion of what ……..Advaita….. supposedly is.
Advaita cannot be understood, explained, conveyed, doctrine-ed….. pondered upon…because thought cannot touch anything other than what thought itself has created.
The process of understanding, explaining, conveying, indoctrination, ponderng....
...are all the creative play of thought, of what it itself has "birthed" out of itself.
Since thought cannot touch....... "it"..... is not an experience, which is recorded as memory.
Thus "it"....is not recallable, not assertable, not propoundable, cannot be taught or conveyed in any medium of expression ....or by any means.
Even the stating that "it" cannot be conveyed..... is a conveying.
And thus even the infinite forms of negations are just that.....i.e. the sense of utterances, whether as sound, or ink-stains or pixels, as right now.....negating nothing.
Affirmation<=>Negation.
The apperception( to use a mere word) of Advaita is indeed seeing the absurdity of duality.
Which is seeing ….as well…… the absurdity of Advaita.….a seeing which consumes the very seer of such a seeing.
Apperception of Advaita is not in time.
Nor can it be said to be in the timeless.
A Non-dualist is an oxymoron.
A Non-Dualist teacher, teaching Non-Duality to someone else (who necessarily has yet to be a non-dualist)……is a play of oxymoronic proportions.
On the other hand, the sense of persisting duality……. can be understood.
Objects….. considered as existing apart from what is not the object…… constitutes a sense of duality.
Objects…… considered as having their own qualities of an existence inherent as that object… …. is the sense of duality.
As one-self considered itself as an object with consciousness……
…. the sense of apprehending other objects……. from a position in time and space…
…. is the sense of duality.
I.e. objectification…….., which is really a seemingly process of arising cognizing and the immediate ascribing of a meaning to the cognizing…
…..the cognizing and the meaning ascribing… neither able to exist without the other…
...is the sense of duality.
And yet there is a sense of interacting ......in and as the world of assumed objects…
….. with language that references qualities, states, constructs.....and with contrasts of
experience.
A sense of interacting...... while simultaneously…… this sense of interacting is not constituted by that sense of a world of assumed objects.
Or constitued by any assumption.
The sense of living in and as that world…
….. which is not produced by that world.....
...a world
which itself .....is as-if constructed.
Apperceiving that there is no objectification occurring in this seeing……
...
even when one apprehends and refers to objects in the world…
….the entirety of the all the issues which appear to define Life…
……"gets resolved"..... in the very moment.
As gets resolved …. the issue of how to relate to….. in and as the moment…
… to whatever be the content of the moment.
So for example, alleviating of stark grinding poverty, in whatever manner, to whatever extent possible……..takes place.
Or there is a total absence of any apparent response to such stark grinding poverty.
In neither movement……… a meaning gets ascribed.
Including the meaning that a "movement" took place via an action or via the absence of an action.
No meaning getting ascribed .......because no objectification occurs…
.…in the apparent responding .....or in the apparent lack of responding.
The sage (which is not the body-mind biological object…… labeled as so) …
…...remains “un-awared” of the proceedings…
…..while seemingly fully engaged in and as the moment.
As much “un-awared”……… of how that engaging is judged by an other.
As much "un-awared" of what consequences is wrought about by such an engaging.
Words…… either of one self, or gathered from a second hand source…
…...indeed require units of meaning, implying definable units, definable object.
Apperception, while itself another word….. doesn't rely on words, units, or objects.
I am the here-now, “un-awared” of anything as the here and now.
I am all that there is and all that there is not…
…..”unawared” of being all that there is …
… “un-awared” of being all that there is not.
Back to Path of Understanding-Index Page
