Non-Duality of Absolute Truth???

 Written by Mathew Naismith

It would seem I need to explain myself a little further in regards to non-duality not being of absolute truth; it’s not that non-duality isn’t of absolute truth; the point is, to have absolute truth you would need to have a sort of an opposite which we call duality. Within this thinking process we have lost being of non-duality, this is because as soon as we are aware of a non-duality and a duality state, we are thinking in duality.

How would you define a non-duality state if there wasn’t a duality state to begin with to compare a non-duality state with? If you were in a non-duality state of existence, you wouldn’t know that was a non-duality state. Let’s look at this a different way, if everyone was crazy in the world, what would then define being crazy? Everyone would be normal unless someone wasn’t crazy and then it’s these non-crazy people who would be deemed to be crazy, interesting isn’t it!! The point is, as soon as we define what is and isn’t of non-duality and absolute truth, we are only being expressive of duality; it’s a bit of a trick actually.

As soon as we defined two separate states, what are we expressing, duality or non-duality?  Actually being unaware of a non-duality state is being more of non-duality than defining two separate states; this is especially the case if we judge one state as being an illusion and the other state of absolute truth.  We have fooled ourselves, there is only one state of being and existing and it has nothing to do with judging what is and isn’t of non-duality, it’s pretty tricky isn’t it? As soon as we have judged one state being different to another, we are only being expressive of duality.

So what is this non-duality, are we going to continue to judge this non-duality as being of absolute truth, if we do we have no idea what non-duality actually stands for, it doesn’t stand for judging any other state as being less worthy than another state but that is exactly what we are doing more than ever.  

So what does non-duality stand for in my mind?

If we realise it or not, we are already in a state that we have judged as a non-duality state, we were never truly out of it.  Now how can this be when we are mainly expressive of duality?  As soon as you judge one state being less worthy or of less truth than another, you are being expressive of duality (within the non-duality state) not (separate from a non-duality state).

 It’s important here to note how I wrote what is in the brackets, within as opposed to separate and within the as opposed to separate from. The represents a single state but from represents a separate state from the.  Did duality come from non-duality or is duality a part of the non-duality state we are referring too? This depends on if we judge one state being any less worthy or less of the truth than another.  

How is duality a part of and not separate to non-duality?

This is interesting because if there not separate, one isn’t any more or less of absolute truth than the other because there is no other to begin with, in other words there is no two separate states of non-duality and duality, this is only the case if we are thinking and being of duality. This is the point in thinking we are only of duality, in what we have judged as a duality state. We are being expressive of duality, it’s within a non-duality state we are expressing duality, this is not separate from non-duality but being expressive of duality within what we deemed as being a non-duality state.  

Picture yourself in a total non-duality state; in this state can duality exist?

It’s obvious to us in duality that a duality state can’t exist within a non-duality state, once you have two or more separate states you have duality not non-duality, so how can duality be of and not separate to non-duality? As soon as we deem duality separate to non-duality, this actually makes non-duality an illusion not duality, we have two separate states, so duality has to exist within non-duality for non-duality to exist and not just be an illusion!!

So how can duality exist within non-duality without making non-duality an illusion?  

This is simple, stop separating one form the other by judging one being more of absolute truth than the other, what we have judged as being of duality is just as much of absolute truth than what we have judged as being of non-duality.  This sounds ridiculous doesn’t it, but it’s not for the main reason, we have obscured this absolute truth with thinking one is separate and less worthy than another, for example, judging non-duality being of absolute truth and duality being an illusion. You should be able to see by now how we have tricked ourselves.

We are existing in what we have judged and titled as being of non-duality, within this non-duality, which is of absolute truth, we have obscured this absolute truth with duality thinking instead of non-duality thinking.  What I’m actually saying here is that non-duality and duality are thinking processes; this means they take thought for them to exist, neither non-duality nor duality exist except within thought processes, in other words they need a thought process for either of them to exist.  To be in a true non-duality state, neither non-duality nor duality exists, they are both an illusion in a sense until we give either of them thought.

Thinking in non-duality is simple, stop thinking separation, think oneness in all and don’t judge one being more worthy or of absolute truth than another, non-duality is but a thinking process, think oneness.          

Note: Sorry but this is as simple as I can write this and no this didn’t take a lot of thinking by me, this just comes to me as I write. Yes I have to reread what is being written by me but, if I didn’t make this more understandable when it comes to me, no one including myself would understand what is being written.  I have to keep asking as I write is what I’m writing correct, sounds balmy but it’s true.