Duality is what i would describe as the default state we are not born in sin we are born in ego with our past samsara. The life time mission is to transcend the ego to the atman to self realization namaste
I disagree with this profoundly, but I hope we can have a respectful discussion about it.
I don't think you understand dualism very well. None of the western philosophers you reference were dualists.
According to the Buddha (who Mani -- an actual dualist -- respected very much), the root of suffering is desire. But I think that the root of suffering is suffering itself. Suffering is corrupting, it drives us towards anger and sin, and we must ignore it and not allow it to influence our actions. It is not part of the oneness of God.
I ask you this: If there is only one God, one essence, and everything is one, everything is a part of God, then why is there so much conflict, bloodshed, torture, suffering, and violence in this universe? The universe is full of division and distinctions. These western philosophers, bigoted and archaic in their thinking as they were, are not making some categorical mistake by pointing out the obvious. Here, in this very post, you yourself build divisions: You draw distinctions between east and west, between non-dualism and dualism. Is this not in itself a form of dualism by your loose standards? For if even Aristotle was a dualist, then so are you, for drawing this distinction between eastern oneness philosophy and western "dualism".
Suffering is evil. We know this with certainty from the only thing which we know with certainty: our own self, our own consciousness. Suffering drives us to evil, and, besides this, it just feels like evil in a way that is ineffable.
Suffering is Mara, yet there is no illusion. The suffering I feel does not come from myself or from the Self, the Atman; it comes from the enemy. I will not be deceived: Suffering is not part of the oneness of God, and we should not conflate it with God's will or God's creation. Suffering is what we must overcome to come closer to God.
These are my thoughts. I hope you will come to understand where I am coming from even if you do not agree with them, and I hope that in the future you will not use "dualism" in such a loose and haphazard way.
Substance dualism it is ineffable: either you experience it yourself or you don't. If it I didn't experience it directly, I wouldn't believe in it, either.
So there is nothing to debate. We would just be talking past each other. I am not interested in debate with you, only discussion, to help myself understand how you see the world and perhaps help you understand how I see it.
But I wish you the best, and farewell -- I think I understand you better now.
Profound and excellent! I have to read it again, so booking it too.
Yeah, I think this is brilliant.
The only thing I would say is that I believe dualism to be a necessary step towards eventually realizing nonduality.
Duality is what i would describe as the default state we are not born in sin we are born in ego with our past samsara. The life time mission is to transcend the ego to the atman to self realization namaste
Indeed.
Also https://youtu.be/hXRCGYnJXUs?si=HVPgF7EESswAStC0
This is one of the teachers i greatly appreciate https://youtu.be/7E2QdOKtLME?si=BGWS_CuR7cRLr_1S
I disagree with this profoundly, but I hope we can have a respectful discussion about it.
I don't think you understand dualism very well. None of the western philosophers you reference were dualists.
According to the Buddha (who Mani -- an actual dualist -- respected very much), the root of suffering is desire. But I think that the root of suffering is suffering itself. Suffering is corrupting, it drives us towards anger and sin, and we must ignore it and not allow it to influence our actions. It is not part of the oneness of God.
I ask you this: If there is only one God, one essence, and everything is one, everything is a part of God, then why is there so much conflict, bloodshed, torture, suffering, and violence in this universe? The universe is full of division and distinctions. These western philosophers, bigoted and archaic in their thinking as they were, are not making some categorical mistake by pointing out the obvious. Here, in this very post, you yourself build divisions: You draw distinctions between east and west, between non-dualism and dualism. Is this not in itself a form of dualism by your loose standards? For if even Aristotle was a dualist, then so are you, for drawing this distinction between eastern oneness philosophy and western "dualism".
Suffering is evil. We know this with certainty from the only thing which we know with certainty: our own self, our own consciousness. Suffering drives us to evil, and, besides this, it just feels like evil in a way that is ineffable.
Suffering is Mara, yet there is no illusion. The suffering I feel does not come from myself or from the Self, the Atman; it comes from the enemy. I will not be deceived: Suffering is not part of the oneness of God, and we should not conflate it with God's will or God's creation. Suffering is what we must overcome to come closer to God.
These are my thoughts. I hope you will come to understand where I am coming from even if you do not agree with them, and I hope that in the future you will not use "dualism" in such a loose and haphazard way.
To grasp duality one requires to experience non duality. Non duality is the acknowledgment of the ego
Of you want to have a debate propose propositions with axioms and references meanwhile, you can visit my metaphysics at https://sacredmetaphysics.org/
Substance dualism it is ineffable: either you experience it yourself or you don't. If it I didn't experience it directly, I wouldn't believe in it, either.
So there is nothing to debate. We would just be talking past each other. I am not interested in debate with you, only discussion, to help myself understand how you see the world and perhaps help you understand how I see it.
But I wish you the best, and farewell -- I think I understand you better now.