Duality/non duality

[Guest guest]

Hello all,

 

Throughout the scriptures, everywhere I look, two things seem to be

big bugaboos: ego and duality. There is at least an implication that

somehow those need to be transcended, destroyed; somehow, at least by

implication if not explicit, those seem to be enemies to self-

realiztion.

 

Those are always with us, though. I'm not sure they can be gotten rid

of.

 

I perceive duality, the pairs of opposites. There must be a

definition of duality even to conceive of it. So, in simple, everyday

terms duality is male/female, up/down, profit/loss, night/day,

heaven/hell, earth/sky, self/other, self-realized/unrealized...etc. I

could write forever, trying to name every opposite pair!

 

Duality=the pairs of opposites.

 

I'm suggesting that " I " , who can see the pairs of opposites am one

and therefore beyond the pairs of opposites, duality. The one is what

sees the duality. If " I " were not one, I would not be able to see the

pairs. As long as I am one, the pairs, duality, is there

also.Therefore, there is nothing to be gotten rid of, no struggle

against " the pairs " , no sadhanas to be performed, no immense span of

time in which to " attain " , nothing to be done in this arena other

than keep duality alive and well. I'm suggesting that " unity "

and " plurality " arise together and that trying to get rid of duality

is the same as trying to get rid of unity, oneness. When I lose sight

of duality, I've also lost sight of unity. Following this logic, I've

already transcended the pairs by seeing them. As long as the one can

witness the pairs, the witness cannot be the pairs by virtue of

witnessing the pairs, so unity/duality is always already the

case..anyway, one guy's musings on this without claim of any

authority whatsoever!

[Guest guest]

greetings. :-)

 

i am a newcomer to the advaita path, so take what i say with many

grains of salt. ;-)

 

i, like you, see the world to a significant extent in terms of

yin/yang pairs ... but over the years i have come to feel that, like

yin/yang, these pairs are deeply interconnected. there is yin. there

is yang. and these each possess individuality. yet: yin contains yang;

and yang contains yin. i think of this as non-dual duality. :-)

 

for me the advaita notion of brahman (ONE) as being the only reality

is somewhat alien. i struggle with it, hence my recent posting on

" individuality. " i see the ONE in everything, but i also see the MANY

in everything. for me, it is a beautiful interplay of individual and

collective. just seeing the collective seems like a loss to me.

 

advaita adepts oh please help us to understand. :-)

 

 

advaitin , " otnac6 " <otnac6 wrote:

>

> Hello all,

>

> Throughout the scriptures, everywhere I look, two things seem to be

> big bugaboos: ego and duality. There is at least an implication that

> somehow those need to be transcended, destroyed; somehow, at least by

> implication if not explicit, those seem to be enemies to self-

> realiztion.

>

> Those are always with us, though. I'm not sure they can be gotten rid

> of.

>

> I perceive duality, the pairs of opposites. There must be a

> definition of duality even to conceive of it. So, in simple, everyday

> terms duality is male/female, up/down, profit/loss, night/day,

> heaven/hell, earth/sky, self/other, self-realized/unrealized...etc. I

> could write forever, trying to name every opposite pair!

>

> Duality=the pairs of opposites.

>

> I'm suggesting that " I " , who can see the pairs of opposites am one

> and therefore beyond the pairs of opposites, duality. The one is what

> sees the duality. If " I " were not one, I would not be able to see the

> pairs. As long as I am one, the pairs, duality, is there

> also.Therefore, there is nothing to be gotten rid of, no struggle

> against " the pairs " , no sadhanas to be performed, no immense span of

> time in which to " attain " , nothing to be done in this arena other

> than keep duality alive and well. I'm suggesting that " unity "

> and " plurality " arise together and that trying to get rid of duality

> is the same as trying to get rid of unity, oneness. When I lose sight

> of duality, I've also lost sight of unity. Following this logic, I've

> already transcended the pairs by seeing them. As long as the one can

> witness the pairs, the witness cannot be the pairs by virtue of

> witnessing the pairs, so unity/duality is always already the

> case..anyway, one guy's musings on this without claim of any

> authority whatsoever!

>