FROM A SITE VISITOR: The manifestation of consciousness results in "basic duality", without which I couldn't have write this mail.So the basic duality must exist in order to understand the unicity, meaning, only in the relative we can understand the significance of absolute from the absolute view point. Post manifestation, post "basic duality" there is no "one" to understand the absolute. Is my understanding right? Raja
F.: Hello, Raja. First, thanks for a question that does not deal with “what if” scenarios and “what would you do if” scenarios. When those type questions were received in the past, they were not answered, as you know, because…
(1) they ignore the fact that the cause of all is all, so predictions about what would happen before all causes have happened would be useless, and (2) because they assume a do-er exists when it does not.
Now, you’ve submitted an inquiry that is relevant to your positioning on “the path,” so thank you. It’s content will be addressed.
R.: The manifestation of consciousness results in “basic duality”
F.: NO: There is no "basic duality," or any other kind. There is perceived duality, which is a misperception. To see the I AM THAT; I AM as duality is to see rain and snow as dualities. Imagine H20 could talk. It could say, “I am H20 which is currently manifested via a space or form that persons perceive as rain and label as such. At other, colder times, persons will believe that I am something different and call me 'snow'.
“In both cases, their perceiving is in error and their labels are nonsense. I am not ‘rain’ and I am not ‘snow.’ I am H20. Just because it might appear to persons that I am manifesting as many different things, and just because they might label me “river” and “lake” and “stream” and “ocean” and “mist” and “steam” and “clouds” and “hail,” does not make it so. I am H20, only.”
To understand that I AM THAT; I AM does not suggest duality, imagine the manifested conscious-energy expressing its nature in this fashion instead: "I AM THAT Which is temporarily manifested as this I-AM-ness; however, be not mistaken about my 'True Identity,' contrary to any appearances or labels: I AM THAT."
R.: the basic duality must exist in order to understand the unicity
F.: NO: Consider what you just said. To paraphrase, you have said, “A lie must be believed in order to understand truth,” tantamount to saying, “You must believe that H20 as rain and H20 as snow really and truly are two different things if you are to ever understand H20.” See the fallacy in that reasoning?
Belief in duality blocks any possibility of understanding the unicity. It is not “basic duality” that must precede any understanding of the unicity; it is, instead, manifestation and Realization that must happen in order to understand the unicity. Please enter the silence of contemplation. (To be continued)
RELATED TO TODAY’S POST:
“The Advanced Advaitin Seeker’s Package”: From the I to the Absolute, Consciousness/Awareness, and From the Absolute to the Nothingness. To order, visit http://floydhenderson.com/order.htm .
F.: Hello, Raja. First, thanks for a question that does not deal with “what if” scenarios and “what would you do if” scenarios. When those type questions were received in the past, they were not answered, as you know, because…
(1) they ignore the fact that the cause of all is all, so predictions about what would happen before all causes have happened would be useless, and (2) because they assume a do-er exists when it does not.
Now, you’ve submitted an inquiry that is relevant to your positioning on “the path,” so thank you. It’s content will be addressed.
R.: The manifestation of consciousness results in “basic duality”
F.: NO: There is no "basic duality," or any other kind. There is perceived duality, which is a misperception. To see the I AM THAT; I AM as duality is to see rain and snow as dualities. Imagine H20 could talk. It could say, “I am H20 which is currently manifested via a space or form that persons perceive as rain and label as such. At other, colder times, persons will believe that I am something different and call me 'snow'.
“In both cases, their perceiving is in error and their labels are nonsense. I am not ‘rain’ and I am not ‘snow.’ I am H20. Just because it might appear to persons that I am manifesting as many different things, and just because they might label me “river” and “lake” and “stream” and “ocean” and “mist” and “steam” and “clouds” and “hail,” does not make it so. I am H20, only.”
To understand that I AM THAT; I AM does not suggest duality, imagine the manifested conscious-energy expressing its nature in this fashion instead: "I AM THAT Which is temporarily manifested as this I-AM-ness; however, be not mistaken about my 'True Identity,' contrary to any appearances or labels: I AM THAT."
R.: the basic duality must exist in order to understand the unicity
F.: NO: Consider what you just said. To paraphrase, you have said, “A lie must be believed in order to understand truth,” tantamount to saying, “You must believe that H20 as rain and H20 as snow really and truly are two different things if you are to ever understand H20.” See the fallacy in that reasoning?
Belief in duality blocks any possibility of understanding the unicity. It is not “basic duality” that must precede any understanding of the unicity; it is, instead, manifestation and Realization that must happen in order to understand the unicity. Please enter the silence of contemplation. (To be continued)
RELATED TO TODAY’S POST:
“The Advanced Advaitin Seeker’s Package”: From the I to the Absolute, Consciousness/Awareness, and From the Absolute to the Nothingness. To order, visit http://floydhenderson.com/order.htm .
