Can Nonduality to be talked about ?

[Guest guest]

CAN YOU REALLY SPEAK ABOUT NONDUALISM? ISN'T THAT DUALITY?

 

The first reference I am inclined to introduce is well known; that portion of

the Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching (The Way of Life, or, Integrity and the Way, to give

just two translations) which says, " The names that can be named are not the

eternal name. The nameless is the origin of the myriad creatures. But things

have a mother and she has a name. "

 

Thus the nondual nature of reality is recognized. No name is the same name as

that nondual nature or eternal name. But the mother has a name. It is I AM.

Taoism states that one cannot talk about nondual reality, but that one can name

the Mother of creation, a Mother which emanates out of nondual reality.

Buddha wouldn't even bother with the Mother. As Kriban Pillay reminds us: ''No

wonder the Buddha kept silent when asked about the Ground of Being. No doubt if

I were to go up to the Buddha and ask him what I should do in the face of (major

global challenges), his Noble Silence would simply reflect me back upon myself,

challenging me to awaken in the moment, in the now. "

 

In Zen FAQ (author unknown) it is stated, " Zen has little use for words which

don't precipitate or point to, Awakening. Even logic must take a far, far,

second place to the all-important task of a personal realization of the unborn,

undying, pure wisdom source which is the birthright of every human. "

 

The Lankavatara Sutra, an essential chapter of The Buddhist Bible, states:

" ...let every disciple take good heed not to become attached to words as being

in perfect conformity with meaning, because Truth is not in the letters. When a

man with his finger-tip points to something, the finger-tip may be mistaken for

the thing pointed at; in like manner the ignorant and simple-minded, like

children, are unable even to the day of their death to abandon the idea that in

the finger-tip of words there is the meaning itself. They cannot realise

Ultimate Reality because of their intent clinging to words which were intended

to be no more than a pointing finger. Words and their discrimination bind one to

the dreary round of rebirths into the world of birth-and-death; meaning stands

alone and is a guide to Nirvana. Meaning is attained by much learning, and much

learning is attained by becoming conversant with meaning and not with words;

therefore, let seekers for truth reverently approach those who are wise and

avoid the sticklers for particular words. "

 

Renowned scholar of Advaita (nondual) Vedanta, Eliot Deutsch, says that " Brahman

(pure unqualified Being, Ultimate Reality) defies all description or

characterization. " He goes on to say, " All characterizations of Brahman, in

short, are intended in their experiential dimension to aid those who are

searching for Brahman but have not yet realized it. "

And further on: " Human language has its source in phenomenal experience; hence,

it is limited in its application to states of being that are beyond that

experience; logic is grounded in the mind as it relates to the phenomenal order;

hence, it is unable to affirm, without at the same time denying, what extends

beyond that order. "

And: " Advaita Vedanta, then, must labor under this fact, which it explicitly

acknowledges, that whatever is expressed is ultimately non-Brahman, is

ultimately untrue. "

Finally, Becky Fitzsimmons offers this sense of the nondual perspective: " A

sense of the nondual perspective may be gleaned through a kaleidoscopic view of

selected esoteric doctrines and practices. Since doctrines and practices are

necessarily the dry shells of Spiritual Matter, one must place oneself in the

center of a mandala of lifeless words and set the self and the words in motion,

until the bits and pieces whirl and spin into transient patterns of unlimited

beauty, their intricacies as inwardly boundless as their unfolding is ever new,

yet always perfect. "

 

From all these words I've quoted, it is seen how futile the words are. It really

isn't a question of whether words create duality. Or whether what created the

words, creates duality. That's a very peripheral, distracting concern for the

one driven toward development of awareness of nondual reality through the I AM.

 

What matters is that one attends to one's intuition of God, Nondual Reality,

Brahman, The Self, Pure Being, Nirvana, I AM. Having done that, one may use

words to point toward what they intuit. The words, logically presented, do not

impart knowledge of Ultimate Reality. That is their limitation.

 

The Hindu text, The Avadhuta Gita, says: " In Self there is nothing to learn, no

verses to study. The Supreme and Free One, the Enlightened One, absorbed in the

consciousness of the Pure Being sings in his delight of a pure heart, the

highest truth, as a prattler, one who speaks the nearly nonsensical. "

 

Words have limitations. Does that bother the one who " sings in his delight of a

pure heart... " ? Would it bother the one who sings in his delight of a hungry

heart? Aware of the limitation, the heart sings anyway. Duality or no duality.

Nonduality or no nonduality.

 

from Nonduality FAQ

 

..