A Discussion Of Non Dual "adviata" Philosophy.

Back to this thing.....

When thoughts appear, they are witnessed by the non dual self. Being identified with the body, the non dual self "forgets" its non dual nature and believes itself to be linked only to that thought. "I thought that."

But as "I" can remember having the thought. "I" must exist prior to the actual thought. I witness the thought as it occurs and just as the eye can't see itself in the act of seeing without the aid of a mirror, a thought can't be thought of as it happens unless the witness of the thought is independent of that thought.

 

The ego doesn't disappear, it's just recognized for what it is.

 

As "I" come to realize that an object can never be perceived without being consciously attended to, and thus they are one and the same, we come to understand that conscious alone exists. Watching the process of conscious observation, the reality of the imposition of the ego becomes known. The ego claims to be that which "sees" the object, thus setting up duality.
Understanding this delusion reveals the true, non dual self in us all.

 

With no one to fear, there is nothing to fear.

 

As all we know comes from the senses, there is no need to think of a difference between mind and body, or mind and matter. Mind, or thought, occurs when when the bodily senses interact with an "object". Perception occurs when subjectivity meets objectivity.
Thought and remembrance is nothing more than successive consciousness of that interaction.

 

When some object is viewed, the realization of the object occurs in the brain. It is subjective.
Without the subjective component the object can't be known. If it isn't known, how can it be considered to be real?

Thus subjective and objective go together. They can't be separated, one engenders the other.
As this is so, what it is that recognizes both the subjective and objective? What is it that "sees" the objective world?
As it can't be the subjective, for the subjective relies on the objective, it must be something else that is unaffected by either.
This something else is consciousness.
Consciousness is non-dual.

 

Finally getting back to this....

Conscious recognition of thoughts, objects, time, space, etc. unites all of these different experiences together. It is the conscious recognition that they are occurring to a single stream of consciousness that unites them.
We remember having had them and the act of remembrance unites them. Re-membering that which appears to be unrelated, bringing them back together.
That's what re membering is.

 

In the final analysis I think they're the same thing.

I think we'll start getting into this, as below.

 

The state of sheer consciousness can't be known from the objective realm, and the conscious self known without the apprehension of an object can't be done. The relationship between consciousness and an object does not rely on them being two different things, nor are they the same. Their relationship can't readily be defined.

 

Where was I?

Consciousness can't be known by individual consciousness, just as the teeth can't bite themselves. However, when an object is seemingly observed, consciousness appears to be that which "sees". Once this is realized the non-dual nature, that is individual-less witnessing is grasped.
Reality is seen to be one, and object and observer are found to be only two different poles of the same thing.

 

We can never really know the relationship between an object and the consciousness of that object. If we consider them to be separate entities, then we must admit that they are wholly different. If they are wholly different how can they be related?
If we view them both as elements of consciousness, then the objective disappears.

If we don't stop to really consider true reality we think that objects are the only real things and that consciousness has no "real" objective existence.

But if we think deeply, we will see that all objects fade. All objects pass. All objects lack inherent reality and the only thing that never changes, that always exists...is consciousness.

 

An explanation of terms and methods used by Levy to transmit his message of non duality.

"The Tao which can be expressed in words is not the eternal Tao; the name which can be uttered is not its eternal name."
Translated by Lionel Giles (1904)​

 

I know that I am. I exist, and so do you. I am conscious, therefore consciousness exists.
To doubt that consciousness exists is to doubt your own existence.

But to doubt one's own existence one must be aware of experiencing the act of doubting. To be aware of the act of doubting is to understand that there must be someone who doubts that they doubt.

If we go further and then question our existence, even though we are aware of the process of questioning...awareness of consciousness must still be admitted to be a reality. All we have done is transcended individual reality and admitted that consciousness exists in spite of the illusion of an ego.

 

Next, The Seer and the Seen, and so on.
We will enter into a discussion of non-duality.....

 

To perceive an object there must always be a subject to do the perceiving.
When we think of ourselves we are objectifying experience. We are perceiving ourselves as an object and as the act of object perception always must be subjective, we must reach the inescapable conclusion that we can't have one without the other.

I can't conceive of myself without having a self to think about the self I'm thinking about. The mere act of self conception conceptualizes the self.
Therefore, the individual self and the recognition of the individual self by an individual self is the same thing.

​

 

To become conscious of something that is not conscientiousness itself would mean that consciousness would have to interact with that which it is not. How can an interaction take place between two completely different things?
If we are conscious of something we can only be conscious of it if it appears in consciousness itself.
If we are not conscious of something, we can't know if it exists. To say we can't know if it exists is the same as saying it's non-existent.
If the knowledge of an object only occurs during consciousness of that object then the object can't have it's own individuality. If we can't say it existed before we are conscious of it, and we can't say it exists after we are conscious of it, we can't impart individual existence to it as we can't know it until we know it.

Thus consciousness/subjectivity and objectivity are in fact the same thing. There is no duality of subject and object as neither can exist without the other.

Why subjectivity an objectivity appear to be two different things rooted in duality will be taken up later.