Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
All compounded things are impermanent. We have dependent origination. We don't say that it is all one thing, regardless of which one thing we may pick. Even if it were all one thing that one thing would be impermanent, unsatisfactory, and not me or mine.
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
I am not even sure what non-dualism means.SarathW wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 3:57 amhttps://suttacentral.net/sn35.95/en/bodhi’ When, Maluṅkyaputta, you are not ‘therein,’ then you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two.
Is "in between the two" the non-dualism, which Buddha rejected?
or
What Buddha called non-dualism is different to the non-dualism explained by other sects?
Can I say that the Buddha's Path (Noble Eightfold Path) non-dualism?
The above to me means that the centre/subjective experiencer or the "I am" conceit(asmiimana) is no more.
There is no Bodhi tree,
Nor stand of a mirror bright.
Since all is void,
Where can the dust alight
Huineng
“Mendicants, I will teach you a duality. Listen …
And what is a duality? It’s just the eye and sights, the ear and sounds, the nose and smells, the tongue and tastes, the body and touches, and the mind and thoughts. This is called a duality.
Mendicants, suppose someone was to say: ‘I’ll reject this duality and describe another duality.’ They’d have no grounds for that, they’d be stumped by questions, and, in addition, they’d get frustrated. Why is that? Because they’re out of their element.”
"Now, if there are any who ask, 'Would there be the right contemplation of dualities in yet another way?' they should be told, 'There would.' 'How would that be?' 'Formless phenomena are more peaceful than forms': this is one contemplation. 'Cessation is more peaceful than formless phenomena': this is a second contemplation. For a monk rightly contemplating this duality in this way — heedful, ardent, & resolute — one of two fruits can be expected: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
That is duo pair. It is not duality.pegembara wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 7:23 amI am not even sure what non-dualism means.SarathW wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 3:57 amhttps://suttacentral.net/sn35.95/en/bodhi’ When, Maluṅkyaputta, you are not ‘therein,’ then you will be neither here nor beyond nor in between the two.
Is "in between the two" the non-dualism, which Buddha rejected?
or
What Buddha called non-dualism is different to the non-dualism explained by other sects?
Can I say that the Buddha's Path (Noble Eightfold Path) non-dualism?
The above to me means that the centre/subjective experiencer or the "I am" conceit(asmiimana) is no more.
There is no Bodhi tree,
Nor stand of a mirror bright.
Since all is void,
Where can the dust alight
Huineng
“Mendicants, I will teach you a duality. Listen …
And what is a duality? It’s just the eye and sights, the ear and sounds, the nose and smells, the tongue and tastes, the body and touches, and the mind and thoughts. This is called a duality.
Mendicants, suppose someone was to say: ‘I’ll reject this duality and describe another duality.’ They’d have no grounds for that, they’d be stumped by questions, and, in addition, they’d get frustrated. Why is that? Because they’re out of their element.”"Now, if there are any who ask, 'Would there be the right contemplation of dualities in yet another way?' they should be told, 'There would.' 'How would that be?' 'Formless phenomena are more peaceful than forms': this is one contemplation. 'Cessation is more peaceful than formless phenomena': this is a second contemplation. For a monk rightly contemplating this duality in this way — heedful, ardent, & resolute — one of two fruits can be expected: either gnosis right here & now, or — if there be any remnant of clinging-sustenance — non-return."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
The only duality I see in the Dhamma is division on: dukkha and non-dukkha; things that lead to more dukkha and things tgat lead to freedom from dukkha.
Imho.
Imho.
We don't live Samsara, Samsara is living us...
"Form, feelings, perceptions, formations, consciousness - don't care about us, we don't exist for them"
"Form, feelings, perceptions, formations, consciousness - don't care about us, we don't exist for them"
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
Buddha's highest teaching is non-duality!
Nirvana is below the non-duality!
Nirvana is below the non-duality!
“As the lamp consumes oil, the path realises Nibbana”
- DNS
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17232
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 4:15 am
- Location: Las Vegas, Nevada, Estados Unidos de América
- Contact:
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
I didn't listen or watch the video, but see that it is Professor Thurman. He is a Vajrayana (Tibetan) Buddhist, not Theravada. As I mentioned, some forms of Mahayana could be considered non-dualism in their doctrine, but not Theravada.
Re: Is Buddhism about non-dualism?
Non dualism does not negate dualism, akin to mandalas in Himalayan Buddhism. The opposed forces at circumference are resolved at the still center. In dualism, there is no still center.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.