duality and non-duality in theravada

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Saengnapha » Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:18 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:25 am
Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:37 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Tue Jul 10, 2018 1:47 pm


A couple of challenges to this interpretation:

1. In the suttas the description of the name+form nidana looks roughly equivalent to the five aggregates, so I fail to see how it could equate merely to the "objects seen" by "me". This interpretation seems to hinge on the idea of a mutual dependence of consciousness and name+form, and the interplay between them. The problem here is that most DO suttas don't describe this, they actually describe name+form arising in dependence upon consciousness.
2. In the suttas the sense-bases and contact are described in terms of physical organs and processes, and not as a purely mental bifurcation of internal/external. For example eye-consciousness arises in dependence upon eye and visible form - and note that replacing "eye" by "ability to see" doesn't change the basic meaning here.
Unless you are an Arahant, you cannot analyze DO successfully. Why? Because what Nanananda describes is the illusion that veils this seeing, the subject/object dichotomy. Unless this dichotomy is put aside, the focus on DO is always interpreted through this dichotomy and therefore inconclusive in one's own life. The best you could hope for is an intellectual understanding which is not the same as true insight. The subject/object duality is key to breaking through, or rather, dissolution of this view.
There are many interpretations of DO. Perhaps you could explain exactly what is wrong with the challenges I have made above.
There's nothing wrong with your challenges. What I'm saying is that your desire to understand DO is based on discursive thought while the Arhat's is not, it is based on penetrating insight into the nature of subject/object dichotomy. It is the difference in what some people call the supramundane view and the conventional view. The supramundane can't be understood through our thinking mind because of the duality inherent in the thought structure. This is why no explanation of DO can satisfy you or anyone else. But, you can still try and see if there is anything to what I'm saying.

auto
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by auto » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:36 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:18 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:25 am
Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 4:37 am

Unless you are an Arahant, you cannot analyze DO successfully. Why? Because what Nanananda describes is the illusion that veils this seeing, the subject/object dichotomy. Unless this dichotomy is put aside, the focus on DO is always interpreted through this dichotomy and therefore inconclusive in one's own life. The best you could hope for is an intellectual understanding which is not the same as true insight. The subject/object duality is key to breaking through, or rather, dissolution of this view.
There are many interpretations of DO. Perhaps you could explain exactly what is wrong with the challenges I have made above.
There's nothing wrong with your challenges. What I'm saying is that your desire to understand DO is based on discursive thought while the Arhat's is not, it is based on penetrating insight into the nature of subject/object dichotomy. It is the difference in what some people call the supramundane view and the conventional view. The supramundane can't be understood through our thinking mind because of the duality inherent in the thought structure. This is why no explanation of DO can satisfy you or anyone else. But, you can still try and see if there is anything to what I'm saying.
Know there is people who not only read what you type but also feel with the body what were read and try to solve the sensation in body what comes up.
..and getting it off my heart i share what i did, to get into next phase i push the submit button


*hey we have almost same many posts made if to take 1 away from your post count.
Last edited by auto on Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:43 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Saengnapha » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:43 pm

auto wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:36 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 9:18 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:25 am


There are many interpretations of DO. Perhaps you could explain exactly what is wrong with the challenges I have made above.
There's nothing wrong with your challenges. What I'm saying is that your desire to understand DO is based on discursive thought while the Arhat's is not, it is based on penetrating insight into the nature of subject/object dichotomy. It is the difference in what some people call the supramundane view and the conventional view. The supramundane can't be understood through our thinking mind because of the duality inherent in the thought structure. This is why no explanation of DO can satisfy you or anyone else. But, you can still try and see if there is anything to what I'm saying.
Know there is people who not only read what you type but also feel with the body what were read and try to solve the sensation in body what comes up.
..and getting it off my heart i share what i did, to get into next phase i push the submit button
Alright.

auto
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by auto » Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:48 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 2:43 pm
Alright.
yes, when to read someone, then you will go through all sorts of "postures", some or many are inappropriate and better to work further.

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Saengnapha » Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:30 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:35 am
I think you could say that self-view is derived from the raw experience. Nanananda seems to be arguing that the bifurcation is a purely mental process, I am observing that it isn't described like this in the suttas. In the suttas the initial bifurcation is physical and functional, based on sense organs and sense objects.
The bifurcation is a parallel movement. The senses don't bifurcate, the perceptions do. This parallel movement is happening perhaps at the speed of light. What the suttas describe is the natural state of the senses, seeing is seeing, not someone who is seeing. The continuity of this parallel movement gives rise to the sense of self. The senses which are involved with seeing, hearing, etc., are themselves devoid of the sense of self, or self-view. There is no bifurcation of subject/object in seeing or any of the other senses. The parallel movement is World Mind (illusion), which is conditioned and absorbed (believed) by us as the reality that we experience. This parallel movement is all about survival, continuity. It is the psychological. The body, the physical processes, go on without the psychological interfering with them in the natural state. So, in a very real sense, cessation is a physical process that shuts down the psychological and all of its dukkha. The whole sense of you, which can also be felt, is terrified of coming to an end. The psychological is created through fear of its own death. It creates the illusion of continuity and immortality. It is all about desire to exist.

auto
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by auto » Thu Jul 12, 2018 11:55 am

Saengnapha wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:30 am

The bifurcation is a parallel movement. The senses don't bifurcate, the perceptions do. This parallel movement is happening perhaps at the speed of light. What the suttas describe is the natural state of the senses, seeing is seeing, not someone who is seeing. The continuity of this parallel movement gives rise to the sense of self. The senses which are involved with seeing, hearing, etc., are themselves devoid of the sense of self, or self-view. There is no bifurcation of subject/object in seeing or any of the other senses. The parallel movement is World Mind (illusion), which is conditioned and absorbed (believed) by us as the reality that we experience. This parallel movement is all about survival, continuity. It is the psychological. The body, the physical processes, go on without the psychological interfering with them in the natural state. So, in a very real sense, cessation is a physical process that shuts down the psychological and all of its dukkha. The whole sense of you, which can also be felt, is terrified of coming to an end. The psychological is created through fear of its own death. It creates the illusion of continuity and immortality. It is all about desire to exist.
Buddha taught dependent origination, in regards to these there is no self, these phenomena are impermanent. Don't mix it with the 'here and now person' who talks and communicates.

at 4th jhana, ignorance is abandoned in regards to specific sensations not all feelings, so you will repeat. This type feelings and 4th jhana is done after you have done 1-8 jhana(8th is cessation of perception and feeling).

Stream entrant opens dhamma eye, dhamma is what makes life possible. Body has telomers or whatever the science says, body forgets and don't replicate what is oblivious, basically you need be heedful, observant.

Sense of self, you use your dhamma eye to locate it, you will feel it matters and is lifesustaining, its relevant for idk how much more there to come.

If you say there is no-self then what motivates you to be heedful, mindful etc to practice to be even more heedful? how you suppose to avoid evil destinies?
You think that its thought constructs and thinking its the very essence of dhukka and suffering..i think you misunderstand life.
Last edited by auto on Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Dinsdale
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:38 pm

Saengnapha wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:30 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:35 am
I think you could say that self-view is derived from the raw experience. Nanananda seems to be arguing that the bifurcation is a purely mental process, I am observing that it isn't described like this in the suttas. In the suttas the initial bifurcation is physical and functional, based on sense organs and sense objects.
The bifurcation is a parallel movement. The senses don't bifurcate, the perceptions do. This parallel movement is happening perhaps at the speed of light. What the suttas describe is the natural state of the senses, seeing is seeing, not someone who is seeing. The continuity of this parallel movement gives rise to the sense of self. The senses which are involved with seeing, hearing, etc., are themselves devoid of the sense of self, or self-view.
I can see that self-view is added to sense-experience, but my point is that sense-experience itself depends on a duality, that of sense-base and sense-object. To put it simply, there is no seeing without both the ability to see and something to be seen. This is a functional thing, not to do with perception.

Returning to the OP, I'm still not clear what is actually meant by "non-duality", and whether it corresponds to the absence of self-view in a Theravada sense.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Dinsdale
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Dinsdale » Thu Jul 12, 2018 1:10 pm

2600htz wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 4:07 pm
But what do you mean by duality and non-duality?
A good question, as yet unanswered. Probably there are a number of different answers.
Buddha save me from new-agers!

Saengnapha
Posts: 1350
Joined: Wed Sep 13, 2017 10:17 am

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Saengnapha » Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:35 pm

Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:38 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:30 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 11, 2018 8:35 am
I think you could say that self-view is derived from the raw experience. Nanananda seems to be arguing that the bifurcation is a purely mental process, I am observing that it isn't described like this in the suttas. In the suttas the initial bifurcation is physical and functional, based on sense organs and sense objects.
The bifurcation is a parallel movement. The senses don't bifurcate, the perceptions do. This parallel movement is happening perhaps at the speed of light. What the suttas describe is the natural state of the senses, seeing is seeing, not someone who is seeing. The continuity of this parallel movement gives rise to the sense of self. The senses which are involved with seeing, hearing, etc., are themselves devoid of the sense of self, or self-view.
I can see that self-view is added to sense-experience, but my point is that sense-experience itself depends on a duality, that of sense-base and sense-object. To put it simply, there is no seeing without both the ability to see and something to be seen. This is a functional thing, not to do with perception.

Returning to the OP, I'm still not clear what is actually meant by "non-duality", and whether it corresponds to the absence of self-view in a Theravada sense.
I agree with you but I wouldn't call it a duality because the sense base doesn't divide itself as the perceptual does. The sense base as you say is only functional.
Non-duality is the absence of self-view, imo. It isn't a state in itself. The first time I met UG, I asked him if he was in the non-dual state. He replied that there was no such thing as the non-dual state.

auto
Posts: 370
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:02 pm

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by auto » Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:27 pm

wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perception
Perception can be split into two processes, [5] (1) processing the sensory input, which transforms these low-level information to higher-level information (e.g., extracts shapes for object recognition), (2) processing which is connected with a person's concepts and expectations (or knowledge), restorative and selective mechanisms (such as attention) that influence perception.
When you have cessation of perception this processing cease. Because at 8 jhana there won't be another perception to arise. This kind of information proccessing is an aggregate of perception. Perception is not a thing, its conglomerate of things.

After this process has peaked you enter the department where the image is done. But i assume peeps think perception is to be ceased because its casue of dhukka or something..
--
anyways at least i can enter the perception where the object what i see there are not my hands(believe it or not there are subtle hands) or any attachment just objects float in space and of course next things start happen with the body. Information processing making things better and better, can see more and faster. Discerning sensations into more detailed so that a blanket word has bazillion aggregates.
---
i realized just new thing, by abiding on that state, i noticed there a sensation and recognized it. At least that's how i meditate, being in actual dwellings.

fornoxe
Posts: 52
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2018 8:14 pm

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by fornoxe » Sun Jul 15, 2018 7:29 am

2600htz wrote:
Mon Apr 23, 2018 6:22 pm
Hello Dudette:

The thing is that non-duality is not a buddhist concept, its part of hinduism (vedanta).
And since the idea of Atman (or true self) is rejected by every school of buddism, because its "personality view".
Talking about the non-duality "of the atman with the Brahman" doesn´t stand a chance :).

Regards.
For me, living in non duality is the true. When you live in duality, thats mean you have your ego/personnality/atman and the rest. And Because ego is just mind creation, living in non duality is the real being.

I think thats 100% ok with dhamma.

Dinsdale
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Dinsdale » Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:36 am

Saengnapha wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 3:35 pm
Dinsdale wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 12:38 pm
Saengnapha wrote:
Thu Jul 12, 2018 4:30 am


The bifurcation is a parallel movement. The senses don't bifurcate, the perceptions do. This parallel movement is happening perhaps at the speed of light. What the suttas describe is the natural state of the senses, seeing is seeing, not someone who is seeing. The continuity of this parallel movement gives rise to the sense of self. The senses which are involved with seeing, hearing, etc., are themselves devoid of the sense of self, or self-view.
I can see that self-view is added to sense-experience, but my point is that sense-experience itself depends on a duality, that of sense-base and sense-object. To put it simply, there is no seeing without both the ability to see and something to be seen. This is a functional thing, not to do with perception.

Returning to the OP, I'm still not clear what is actually meant by "non-duality", and whether it corresponds to the absence of self-view in a Theravada sense.
I agree with you but I wouldn't call it a duality because the sense base doesn't divide itself as the perceptual does. The sense base as you say is only functional.
Non-duality is the absence of self-view, imo. It isn't a state in itself. The first time I met UG, I asked him if he was in the non-dual state. He replied that there was no such thing as the non-dual state.
Fair enough. I think "absence of self-view" is more specific to Theravada, since "non-duality" appears to have a range of possible meanings and nuances.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nondualism
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Grigoris » Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:51 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:36 am
Fair enough. I think "absence of self-view" is more specific to Theravada
No. Absence of self view is at the core of Buddhist non-duality theory/practice.
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.

Dinsdale
Posts: 5868
Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
Location: Andromeda looks nice

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Dinsdale » Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:35 am

Grigoris wrote:
Wed Jul 25, 2018 7:51 am
Dinsdale wrote:
Sun Jul 15, 2018 9:36 am
Fair enough. I think "absence of self-view" is more specific to Theravada
No. Absence of self view is at the core of Buddhist non-duality theory/practice.
I'm not sure. Could you support this assertion with some examples from other Buddhist schools?
Buddha save me from new-agers!

User avatar
Grigoris
Posts: 288
Joined: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:43 am

Re: duality and non-duality in theravada

Post by Grigoris » Fri Jul 27, 2018 8:23 am

Dinsdale wrote:
Wed Jul 25, 2018 8:35 am
I'm not sure. Could you support this assertion with some examples from other Buddhist schools?
ALL Buddhist traditions take anatta/anatman as a given. It is not worth debating this point. To even think that Buddhists traditions, other than Theravada, do not have the Three Dharma Seals as their basis is just sectarian delusion.
ye dhammā hetuppabhavā tesaṁ hetuṁ tathāgato āha,
tesaṃca yo nirodho - evaṁvādī mahāsamaṇo.

Of those phenomena which arise from causes:
Those causes have been taught by the Tathāgata,
And their cessation too - thus proclaims the Great Ascetic.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: binocular, Bundokji, JamesTheGiant, paul, retrofuturist, Sam Vara, Yahoo [Bot] and 75 guests