Permanent Duality?

[Summerlander]

I have no idea why you did what you did. But you did. And I asked you to correct the record, but you did not, you played dumb. Even after pointing out exactly for you the quote you attributed to me (but that you really just made up out of thin air) ... you did nothing.

And then here again you falsely accuse me, once more. Profanity? (This would be out of character for me but I was a bit miffed at the time... so I went and checked). Nope... I could find no profanity -- unless "dadburn Canucks" falls in that category. I did say that. More dishonesty on your part, Summer.

You know,  I pm'ed the other parties you mentioned and received helpful advice from several of the others involved on how I might better handle the situation and there was even advocacy and intercession on my behalf. We came to a mutual understanding.

When I saw your relationship I wondered if you might also have some helpful part to play here and so I asked if you were in communication with a key player on the matter. But what I mistook as a healthy relationship apparently turns out to be just low-down brown nosing. my bad. Now I know better.

Ok, Rudy.

[Xanth]

C'mon guys, let's drop the personal attacks here please and get back to the topic... or this will get locked.  Your call.

[Summerlander]

Ok, Xanth. It's your call, Rudolph. I've got no beef with you and I will steer clear of you. I believe we can co-exist here in a civilised manner and engage in discussions together. I know you to be a very intelligent man so I am pretty sure that we can come to a compromise here. Deal?

[Rudolph]

deal

[Xanth]

\o/

Great to hear guys.
Let's keep things positive and discuss ideas on those terms. 

These last few posts probably should have been PMs though.  Just sayin. 

[Yamabushi]

It can be useful to differentiate between language and states. The term "contemplation" can refer to "being in the state of nondual-contemplation", a state where attachment to concepts of self and other is cut through. The compulsion or need to conceptually define consciousness is cut through. The presence or absence of the concepts themselves is peripheral. The utility lies in knowing that you don't have to do anything you don't want to.

If consciousness exists before thought and things then consciousness exists regardless of the presence or absence of thought and things. If consciousness is the ground of thought and things, then consciousness is also "the conceptual mode of defining self and other" since distinguishing the difference between "consciousness" and "the conceptual mode of defining self and other", is itself another conceptual mode of defining self and other.

...the conceptual mode of defining self and other, isn't necessarily the ultimate definition of consciousness, and therefore there isn't necessarily an ultimate difference between consciousness and thought & things...since that difference is asserted by thought & things and not by consciousness.

On the other hand, if thought & things assert self and other, and if there is no ultimate difference between consciousness and thought & things, yet one is asserting self and other and the other does not, then how can there be any ultimate assertion of the existence or non-existence of subject and object?

I know this is convoluted, but thats sort of the point. Intellectual thought or even duality isn't necessarily antithetical to the "non-dual state"...can in fact be its primary vehicle. This is signified by the concept of Achintya-Bhedha-Abheda in Vedic thought, the inconceivable power of the non-dual Absolute to "be" dual as well.

In fact the Absolute is neither dual nor non-dual. Non-duality depends upon duality, being its polar opposite. It is also a concept, and one that is relinquished in the state of non-dual contemplation. Then the question of permanent duality, impermanent duality, permanent non-duality or impermanent non-duality cease to have any meaning.

[manwesulimo2004]

Ah yes. Now I understand... lol

[kurtykurt42]

It can be useful to differentiate between language and states. The term "contemplation" can refer to "being in the state of nondual-contemplation", a state where attachment to concepts of self and other is cut through. The compulsion or need to conceptually define consciousness is cut through. The presence or absence of the concepts themselves is peripheral. The utility lies in knowing that you don't have to do anything you don't want to.

If consciousness exists before thought and things then consciousness exists regardless of the presence or absence of thought and things. If consciousness is the ground of thought and things, then consciousness is also "the conceptual mode of defining self and other" since distinguishing the difference between "consciousness" and "the conceptual mode of defining self and other", is itself another conceptual mode of defining self and other.

...the conceptual mode of defining self and other, isn't necessarily the ultimate definition of consciousness, and therefore there isn't necessarily an ultimate difference between consciousness and thought & things...since that difference is asserted by thought & things and not by consciousness.

On the other hand, if thought & things assert self and other, and if there is no ultimate difference between consciousness and thought & things, yet one is asserting self and other and the other does not, then how can there be any ultimate assertion of the existence or non-existence of subject and object?

I know this is convoluted, but thats sort of the point. Intellectual thought or even duality isn't necessarily antithetical to the "non-dual state"...can in fact be its primary vehicle. This is signified by the concept of Achintya-Bhedha-Abheda in Vedic thought, the inconceivable power of the non-dual Absolute to "be" dual as well.

In fact the Absolute is neither dual nor non-dual. Non-duality depends upon duality, being its polar opposite. It is also a concept, and one that is relinquished in the state of non-dual contemplation. Then the question of permanent duality, impermanent duality, permanent non-duality or impermanent non-duality cease to have any meaning.

I'm done with "contemplation"...

[dotster]

In fact the Absolute is neither dual nor non-dual. Non-duality depends upon duality, being its polar opposite. It is also a concept, and one that is relinquished in the state of non-dual contemplation. Then the question of permanent duality, impermanent duality, permanent non-duality or impermanent non-duality cease to have any meaning.

Even simpler would just be "singularity" which voids all aspects of dualism and the paradoxes that it creates.