Mischief

Mischief

Advertisements

23 thoughts on “Mischief

      • Yes indeed Hariod. On settling. And the impossibility of duality. Though I suppose the view itself might suggest a division.
        This was a fun and spontaneous post today, but the first part of it (before the fickle child) was the underlying theme this week for my yoga and meditation practice. As for Tao… well… that would be where I run and sleep.

      • Hmmm. Perhaps. Or that to chose one view over the other is to place a foot onto the slippery slope. Isn’t Non-dualism impossible without Dualism? Oh dear.

      • Hariod, it hasn’t been a subject of the book I’m reading or something I’ve thought much about lately, but I just turned the page to a new chapter. “The Yamas Beyond Dualism”! What shall we call that?

      • Well, once the mind conceptualises experience, or any phenomenon, as it relentlessly does, then it (the thinking mind) becomes as if something other than the thing in itself, whether we consciously note that or not. There appears to be a duality in and as awareness. But awareness itself is always non-dual, and can’t be ‘stepped out of’, naturally enough. That doesn’t connote a monism, just a not-two-ism, which is why nonduality is named as it is, rather than ‘oneness’, or ‘unicity’, say. In those moments when awareness sees that mind alone constructs the subject/object dichotomy we apprehend, then it’s also seen that non-duality was ever thus. I thought you were pointing to something like this with your remark, Chris. Ignore me if it’s easier! 😉

      • Nope. Ignoring you us out of the question Hariod. My wife just asked, “What are you reading? You have such a big grin on your face.” That my friend, says it all.

      • Missed your comment of 5:00 before replying as I did.

        What can one say? If there is a unicity (let’s call it that), then necessarily nothing can obtain beyond it, for if it did, there would be no unicity!

        Anyway, what’s that about – the ethics of Nondualism? I’ve no idea what that means. o_O

      • Damn, now we’re all out of sync here. To clarify, then when I said “Anyway, what’s that about – the ethics of Nondualism? I’ve no idea what that means”, then I was referring to the title of the book you’re reading – “The Yamas Beyond Dualism”. 🙂

    • You dug deeper than me. Thanks for the link. The word arrived and it’s been so long since I heard it I went for the dictionary. “Meaningless talk” – yep, that fits.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s