ED, "Nondualism is the idea that things appear distinct while not being separate."
The quote above is about as good as you can get using the English language. English and all other languages I know (Thai, Spanish, Brazillian Portuguese) are dualisitic themselves so expressing non-dualism is very difficult. The biggest problem with it for me is it describes non-duality as an 'idea' (or concept) instead of an experience (of reality). I'd desribe non-duality as reality and duality as the 'idea' (concept or illusion). Also the definition above 'distinct' implies multiple items, but then it is qualified by 'appear' (as in not-acutally or illusory)and 'remaining not-separate' which are all good. In 'the zen I practice' experiencing non-duality on an ongoing basis is the fundamental principal. That is what I call 'clear mind' or 'Buddha Mind'. I shy away from calling it an 'objective' only because having an objective implies self and attachment. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], "ED" <seacrofter001@...> wrote: > > > > > "Nondualism is the idea that things appear distinct while not being > separate." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-duality > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-duality> > > > > Bill, > > Is the above statement about non-duality acceptable? If not, what would > be your attempt to state in words what non-duality is about? Is one of > the objectives of zen or Zen to experience non-duality on an ongoing > basis? > > Thanks, > > --ED > > > > --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > Joe, > > > > I respectfully disagree. > > > > The very word 'observer' implies duality. There is someone or > something observing, and someone or something that is the object of the > observation. > > > > Perhaps when you say 'observe' you mean the same thing that I mean > when I say 'aware'. Awareness does not imply duality - at least in the > Bill! lexicon. > > > > It's okay when we disagree about things, especially about words and > their meaning; but it is important at least to me that we resolve the > terms enough to be able to communicate well. > > > > I didn't understand the rest of your comments about Buddha, different > states, advice and compassion. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "maitreya003" joultimo@ wrote: > > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > Observed object and observer is not duality. Observer and object can > exist free from duality. This is how a buddha can forever be in the > world while being in the state that most of the high beings on the site > must negate the world to maintain. Which also explains why most advice > and the state of being through which that advice arises lacks > compassion. > > > > > > Joe > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > I would think that any comparison of Vulcans and zen is 'way off'. > > > > > > > > To answer your question, anything that involves observing does not > sound like zen to me. In the zen I practice there are no dualities such > as observer/observed (subject/object)...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Dave P" <wookielifeday@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > This is another strange question, but I've been watching a lot > of Star Trek, and there's frequent mentioning of how the Vulcans are not > actually unemotional, but simply observe their emotions and not let them > control their actions. Does this sound Zen to anyone here, or am I way > off.? > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
