about non duality

[cabinintheforest]

Heres a question regarding non duality.

Humans gives things names. In non duality is there no names then? No classification?

Let's use the example of 2 plants.

The first plant is a rose. The second plant is a tulip.

Both the plants are different.

In non duality what is the rose and the tulip? Are they the same? Or are they different?

If anyone can answer this that would be great thank you.

[zendancer]

Cabin: They are neither the same nor different. "Same" and "different" are words representing ideas. "Rose" and "tulip" are other words representing other ideas. You have to see the truth before the mind abstracts and then labels what is seen. Just look in silence like the lens of a camera. What your eyes see is the truth. So, without describing what you THINK you see, tell me what you DIRECTLY see in such a way that I will know you have seen and understood the truth. This is your homework. Bring me a good answer. Cheers.

[enigma]

That's good, but wouldn't his answer have to be a description of what is seen, which is what you suggest he avoid? Or maybe you're talking about describing the experience of seeing?

[zendancer]

Apr 26, 2010 20:45:49 GMT -5 enigma said:

That's good, but wouldn't his answer have to be a description of what is seen, which is what you suggest he avoid? Or maybe you're talking about describing the experience of seeing?

Enigma: No, what he's asked is actually a classic koan. Koans can be answered in many ways. Sometimes with words, sometimes with an action, and sometimes with something else that I won't mention (LOL). Most koans require a physical action.

If a teacher holds up a bell and asks, "What is this?" he/she is asking the student to show, concretely, that he/she sees the existential truth directly and understands it. If the student answers, "It's a bell," the teacher will respond by saying something like, "You're attached to the idea that you're looking at a thing." If the student answers, "It's Santa Claus," the teacher will say something like, "You're attached to emptiness." If the student remains silent, the teacher will say something like, "Are you deaf or are you a mute?" If the student grabs the bell and throws it through the window," the teacher will say something like, "You're scratching your left foot while your right arm itches." There is only one 100% correct "just like this" answer that will satisfy the teacher.

If the student correctly answers the koan (using a physical action in this case), the teacher may still act as if the answer is not accepted just to test the student's certainty and clarity. This is not typical with beginning students, but with advanced students it is more common. This is the kind of thing that goes on in private one-on-one interviews in the Zen tradition. As the student gains clarity, it eventually leads to a kind of playful dharma combat between teacher and student.

[enigma]

Oh, okay. All I know about Zen is the stick thingy, and I think it must hurt!

[Portto]

Yeah, I got whacked with the stick a couple of times.
"Andrew G" definitely needs to know that stick.

[eputkonen]

Apr 26, 2010 14:41:46 GMT -5 @cabinintheforest said:

Heres a question regarding non duality.

Humans gives things names. In non duality is there no names then? No classification?

Let's use the example of 2 plants.

The first plant is a rose. The second plant is a tulip.

Both the plants are different.

In non duality what is the rose and the tulip? Are they the same? Or are they different?

If anyone can answer this that would be great thank you.

Not the same, but not different.

[Guest]

Not the same, but not different.

I keep seeing this in zen buddhism, non duality etc.

I don't understand it.

How can something not be the same and not be different?

Isnt non duality 'Nondualism is the implication that things appear distinct while not being separate.' But that is not what you are saying.. so what kind of non-dualism are you talking about?

You seem to be saying things are not the same or not different? How does that work. So nothing is same or different to you?

Even so you avoided the question in some way and didn't explain.

Cabin typed

The first plant is a rose. The second plant is a tulip.

So what IS the rose and what IS the tulip if they are not the same or not different. What are they, what do they look like?

So you look at it and you are telling me you see those 2 different plants (the rose red) and (the tulip orange) not different but they are different colours and different plants!! You then say they are not the same either.

Please explain!!

[zendancer]

Guest: In order to understand you must learn to see without knowing. You did this automatically as a young child, but as an adult, you are in the habit of think-seeing. If you stop imagining, reflecting, thinking, cognizing, and filtering everything you see through your intellect, what will you see? You will see "what is." You will see the world like the lens of a camera, without distinction. Go look at what we call "a rose" without thinking words and ideas like "rose," "flower," "red," or anything else. Go look at what a rose IS. Become present. Look at the rose with your eyes rather than with your discriminating intellect. The living truth has no name and no form. It is what it is.

If you set yourself the task of discovering what the rose IS, you are in for a big surprise. It is not what you think it is. So, just for fun, set a rose in a vase on a table, sit down, and put your full attention on it. Just look. When thoughts interrupt your looking (and they will), gently bring your attention back to what you can see with your eyes. Do this again and again. Stay focused on what you see and keep the following question in the back of your mind "What is a rose, REALLY?" Or, use this question, "What am I looking at beyond name and form?"

If you do this with sufficient intensity and persistence, you will sooner or later have a breakthrough; you will directly experience the truth that underlies language and thought. You will then understand the posts on this thread. Until you do this, you will remain stuck in your mind living in a dream. Come back and let us know when that breakthrough occurs. Cheers.

[cabinintheforest]

Zendancer i need some help with this homework.

Can you please tell me from personal experience what the Rose and Tulip look like please.

If i was to say the rose is red and the tulip is orange (which they are) is that wrong then in non duality?

If you stop imagining, reflecting, thinking, cognizing, and filtering everything you see through your intellect, what will you see? You will see "what is." You will see the world like the lens of a camera, without distinction.

So without distinction what is the rose and tulip? How would you describe the rose or tulip?

[zendancer]

Cabin: What I see when I look at a rose or a tulip cannot be described. It is not like anything you can picture in your mind because the truth cannot be pictured. It is unimaginable. No one can describe THAT because it is beyond the intellect. To understand, you must look at the world with the eyes of a young child who has not yet gotten into the habit of thinking about what is seen.

If I held up a rose in front of ten ordinary adults and asked, "What is this, REALLY?" I might get ten different answers, such as, "It's a rose." "It's a flower." "It's a red thing." "It's an object." "It's organic matter." "It's a plant." Etc. If I did the same thing in front of ten enlightened people, I would only get one answer--the same answer-- from each person.

The Buddha supposedly taught a sermon on this very issue at Vulture Peak about 600 BC before an audience of several thousand people, and only one person in the audience, Mahakasyapa, understood. The Buddha reportedly looked at Mahakasyapa, realized that he understood, and said, "I have passed the wordless teaching to Mahakasyapa."

You must find the truth for yourself. No one can do it for you. Simply look at the rose and contemplate the question. What are you looking at prior to the existence of name and form? You already know the answer, but your thinking is preventing you from seeing it. Good luck.

[enigma]

C: So without distinction what is the rose and tulip? How would you describe the rose or tulip?

The description IS the conceptual distinction that hides the essence of both. The nature of mind is to form distinctions, and so we can perhaps form a distinction to point beyond distinctions. There is a rose....and there is the idea of a rose. They are not the same.
When you see a rose, which of these two is being observed?

[klaus]

enigma,

The "I" sees a "rose" both concepts.
Once we see through the concept of "I" seeing through the concept of "rose" will follow.

The root cause of not being able to see a "rose" or any "thing"without concepts is the concept of "I."

[eputkonen]

Apr 30, 2010 8:45:15 GMT -5 @Guest said:

Cabin typed

The first plant is a rose. The second plant is a tulip.

So what IS the rose and what IS the tulip if they are not the same or not different. What are they, what do they look like?

So you look at it and you are telling me you see those 2 different plants (the rose red) and (the tulip orange) not different but they are different colours and different plants!! You then say they are not the same either.

Please explain!!

One level of it...

They are neither the same nor different.

To say they are the same, overlooks their differences.
To say they are different, overlooks their similarities.

Another level of it...

Only the form differs...like if you saw a gold ring, a gold fork, a gold plate, etc. We could melt down the fork and turn it into a necklace. They are different in form, and yet all the same gold. That which does not come and go is the same.

And in now being given the answers, you are no better off...and likely worse off. Now you have more concepts instead of direct knowing/realization.

[eputkonen]

May 4, 2010 10:20:10 GMT -5 @cabinintheforest said:

i need some help with this homework.

Can you please tell me from personal experience what the Rose and Tulip look like please.

If i was to say the rose is red and the tulip is orange (which they are) is that wrong then in non duality?

They look like they do.

You can label as a rose and label the rose as red.
You can label as a tulip and label the tulip as orange.
This is just mental labeling...i.e. thinking and concepts.

The thinking mind sees differences...it is a difference engine. Language only has meaning in differences. The word "rose" only has meaning because there are things that are not "roses". The problem is we start to believe that there really is two separate things here. But in reality...there is no other. There is no separate individuals and things at all. That is what nonduality is. No other...not two.

So, when you ask...in nonduality - are they the same or are they different. They answer is "not the same, but not different". To say they are the same or different is DUALITY.

It is not that it looks any different. It is understood differently (there are many different forms, but the essence is unicity). And this understanding does not mean you can not say "this is a rose, and that is a tulip". You can...you just realize that these are the labels for the concepts of the forms that are in essence unicity.