James-Re: Pastlife,life, life lifetimes

06-22-2001, 03:43 PM

Hi Omkara,

Thanks - I see your point about defining 'nondualists'.

- If there is a nondualist then it isn't nondualism.

So does that mean that nondualists nondualism is an oxymoron?

If yes, what implications does it have on the 'Vndists'
commentary?

Love,
james

--- In HarshaSatsangh@y..., "Omkara" wrote:
>
> Hi James,
>
> --- In HarshaSatsangh@y..., "james traverse" wrote:
> > Basically I agree with Tony on this one - a nondualist
> > is 'one' who practices 'nondualism'.
>
> Could you define 'nondualism' in this context?
>
> > (I am not accusing you of this because it is VERY clear in your
> > posts that you have many problem with the word
>
> It just sounds 'weird' :-). In fact, i would go so far as to say
> there is no duality or nonduality... these are just 'isms' or
> philosophies... Reality 'knows' nothing of any of this :-).
>
> > It also appears (to me) that 'you' have been able to see beyond
> > the non-dual words because of the 'non-dual' words.
>
> i don't know. It could be entirely acausal and accidental, or even
a
> matter of 'destiny'. i have given up the search for answers to
these
> and other questions... it can be fun to speculate occasionally,
> that's all.
>
> > And, I say the above so that I can say that I feel that there is
> > something " " that is greater than the sum of the parts, which
> > are non-duality and unity.
>
> Yes, i like the way you put that, 'greater than the sum of the
> parts'. The parts are mental - the mind creates the divisions.
> The "sum of the parts" is still just a bunch of parts.
>
> > " " includes and is beyond both.
>
> Nicely put... yet knowing of " " definitely precludes all
> attachment and clinging.
>
> > You, Dan and I (and I am sure others)have expressed
discontent
> > with all labels for good reason - they are not the thing - yet
they
> > can point beyond themselves
>
> i'm not sure about the term "nondualist" though. "Nondualism"
> or "nonduality" is one thing... "nondualist" is just a strange one,
> in fact in light of 'nonduality' (no "ists" anywhere) is in fact
> nonsensical.
>
> Namaste,
>
> Omkara / Tim