Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Theistic Non-Duality And The Absolute Good

page: 1
4

log in

join

posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Non-duality in perhaps the most general sense is beyond good and bad, or any such duality. Yet there appears to be a differing form of non-duality, which could be seen as theistic non-duality. This is, in part, the idea of the absolute good. Now this is perhaps not inherently theistic, but I think something like 'theism' really does sit at the core of the general philosophy. This is the idea that there is an ultimate good underlying everything. Everything is ultimately perfect, and it is limited perception that either creates apparent imperfection or makes one perceive it. And this is because life is the ultimate nature of everything. As such, there is a 'personality' behind everything, driving everything, becoming everything.

So, what is behind the universe is not blind, bland, apathetic, or neutral. It is a vibrant and active personality, brimming with life, being life itself. Thus the very fact of an existence is the willing of it into existence by the one self-existing personality. This one personality drives and becomes all things. That the self-existent life made something so indicates its ultimate good, because non-good would not be willfully chosen. Thus it is from the perspective of this one life, unlimited because nothing opposes it, because it IS all life, that everything is good, perfect.

It is non-dual in that nothing opposes it, or is different from it, because it is everything. It is also non-dual in every other sense, yet with a twist. It is beyond good and bad, and all other dualities. But yet, it is saying these dualities only exist AS limited perceptions, and do not ultimately exist. It is beyond all good and bad that we could possibly conceive or perceive, because all this good and bad is the one life. Yet it is 100% good, from its own perspective. It IS the limitless perspective, and anything that is not this perfection, the willful expression of the one life for its own enjoyment, only appears in response to limited perspective.
edit on 4-4-2014 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TheJourney
 


Yes I agree with that point of view!


In Summary ... existing is 'good' when compared with not existing ever [aka "Bad"]

However the mindset of that personality behind the universe is pretty childlike and it doesn't care about individual outcomes.

That personality is completely insane due to being TOTALLY ALONE!

At that level it is neither good or bad ... just amoral.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 01:02 AM
link   

ZonedOut
reply to post by TheJourney
 
Yes I agree with that point of view!


In Summary ... existing is 'good' when compared with not existing ever [aka "Bad"]

However the mindset of that personality behind the universe is pretty childlike and it doesn't care about individual outcomes.

That personality is completely insane due to being TOTALLY ALONE!


At that level it is neither good or bad ... just amoral.


lol. That is a funny way to look at it, but at the same time an interesting way. You can imagine 'him' completely not caring in one sense, because it is all things, the winner and the loser, the killer and the killed, etc.
edit on 4-4-2014 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 01:16 AM
link   

TheJourney
That the self-existent life made something so indicates its ultimate good, because non-good would not be willfully chosen.


What do you mean by the above statement?

It doesn't seem like a single thought but two thoughts that was smushed together.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Bleeeeep

TheJourney
That the self-existent life made something so indicates its ultimate good, because non-good would not be willfully chosen.


What do you mean by the above statement?

It doesn't seem like a single thought but two thoughts that was smushed together.


All that exists is an expression of the one life and its will. Thus the very existence of something indicates its ultimate good, because 'it' wouldn't willfully create something not good for 'itself' to experience.
edit on 4-4-2014 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by TheJourney
 


This is a trinity, not a duality, isn't it?

Awareness / concept, his will / production, his expression of concept / image of concept.

"good" concept (re)production

Bad comes in not as bad but as unjust good.

e.g. Punishment is good for teaching, like the judicial system, but if done unjustly it is "bad". e.g. If someone thought it was good to hurt someone and you think it was done unjustly, then you say they have done something bad, but in reality, where is bad? They did it thinking it was good, and you said it was bad while thinking it was good to say their action was bad, so bad is a good concept of unjust good. So, nowhere has anyone created bad - they have only created good and unjust good.

That is my interpretation, anyways.

Thoughts?
edit on 4/4/2014 by Bleeeeep because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 02:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TheJourney
 


How are concepts like, perfect vs. imperfect, and ultimate good, objectively real? How can they not be just another duality?

I know you tried explaining it already, but when I think about it, its just another dualistic concept. I believe the truth is that there is neither good nor evil, nor perfection, nor imperfection. In my opinion of ultimate reality, these things dont exist at all.

Ultimate reality, then, would have to be that which doesn't exist as anything in particular. It isn't even the seer, as the seer is in duality with the seen. So, there is no identity, as there is ultimately nothing true that can be identified with. There is only nothing in particular. This is my opinion of what reality is.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


If there is a perfect awareness or an awareness who knows all concepts then everything becomes one concept to him.

You think night and day but what about dusk and dawn or what about the view from Mars?

Even from your point of focus (duality), there is not a good and a bad, but both, good and bad -- a duality which is a singular point of focus, so it is singular.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Bleeeeep
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


If there is a perfect awareness or an awareness who knows all concepts then everything becomes one concept to him.

You think night and day but what about dusk and dawn or what about the view from Mars?

Even from your point of focus (duality), there is not a good and a bad, but both, good and bad -- a duality which is a singular point of focus, so it is singular.


Taking into consideration what you're saying, I see how there could be both good and bad and also neither at the same time.

From a unified perspective, all viewpoints are considered true. But since they all can contradict each other, all viewpoints can also be considered false. So everything can be real and not-real at the same time, but also neither real nor not-real to reconcile the contradictions.

You either have duality or you don't. But since we truly have both, we have to reconcile that contradiction with "there is neither"

In summary, what I'm seeing now is that we are in an unreal reality which is neither real nor unreal.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 05:26 AM
link   

TheJourney

Bleeeeep

TheJourney
That the self-existent life made something so indicates its ultimate good, because non-good would not be willfully chosen.


What do you mean by the above statement?

It doesn't seem like a single thought but two thoughts that was smushed together.


All that exists is an expression of the one life and its will. Thus the very existence of something indicates its ultimate good, because 'it' wouldn't willfully create something not good for 'itself' to experience.
edit on 4-4-2014 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)


If this is true, then how come we experience or can experience "bad"?



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 11:07 AM
link   

smithjustinb
reply to post by TheJourney
 


How are concepts like, perfect vs. imperfect, and ultimate good, objectively real? How can they not be just another duality?

I know you tried explaining it already, but when I think about it, its just another dualistic concept. I believe the truth is that there is neither good nor evil, nor perfection, nor imperfection. In my opinion of ultimate reality, these things dont exist at all.

Ultimate reality, then, would have to be that which doesn't exist as anything in particular. It isn't even the seer, as the seer is in duality with the seen. So, there is no identity, as there is ultimately nothing true that can be identified with. There is only nothing in particular. This is my opinion of what reality is.


Yes, what you describe is the more typical idea of non-duality. Actually, my original intention for the thread was to compare and contrast these two different viewpoints which both at least claim themselves to be non-dual. It just basically ended up being a thread about the one form, though. The comparison ended up just being relegated to...


TheJourney
Non-duality in perhaps the most general sense is beyond good and bad, or any such duality. Yet there appears to be a differing form of non-duality, which could be seen as theistic non-duality.



smithjustinb

If this is true, then how come we experience or can experience "bad"?


From limited perspective. The infinite, which has the infinite perspective, knows no such thing as bad. 'Bad' comes into the equation as necessarily following limited perspective through attachment to limited views and ideas about reality. These limited ideas become manifest in our world, according to the nature of the ideas. And these, the mental structures based on projected/perceived limits, are our karma, which drives our lives.

edit on 4-4-2014 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 11:34 AM
link   

TheJourney
All that exists is an expression of the one life and its will. Thus the very existence of something indicates its ultimate good, because 'it' wouldn't willfully create something not good for 'itself' to experience.

Instead of calling 'it' ultimate good - 'it' (the indivisible one) could be named unconditional love.
All is arises without condition. Nothing is ever created and that nothing appears as what is.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 06:25 PM
link   
reply to post by TheJourney
 


I like your idea, and honestly, I would prefer it to be THE idea, but I can't see it that way. Our relative opinions vary across the dualistic spectrum on an even playing field. Some like broccoli, some do not. Its not because we have deluded ourselves with individualistic ideas and narrow minded thinking that we dont like broccoli. Its just that we simply dont like it. Perception is dualistic at the individual level. There is no cosmic absolute that stands at one end of the dualistic spectrum. The absolute transcends the dualisms of individuals. Taste of broccoli is a property of the broccoli. The fact that some say it is good and some say it is bad is an indication that it is neither. It is that which can be either by, prior to perception, being neither. Prior to perception, there is just potential. It is individualistic perception alone that defines the quality of things.

In other words, you and you alone are the determiner of which end of the dualistic spectrum things are on. There is nothing determining that for you. If all was good, as you say, then it would be.

I agree that you might should see all things as good. But its not because good is absolute, its just because good is good.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 07:55 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


Maybe you can alter the experience by altering the perspective. If you are told that broccoli tastes "good" like candy, when you first taste it you may dislike it even more. If you are told, it tastes absolutely "horrible" but you have to eat it because it's good for you, then when you eat it you may say it's not that bad. The taste doesn't change, but the experience of it does based on the expectations.

In that same way, imagine you are told that Heaven has road made of Gold and Heaven is full of Honor and Glory, if you die and experience The Emptiness of Oneness instead, that may feel scary and like hell to you; however, if you are told in advance that expectations and greed for material gain is what is keeping you unhappy wanting more and more and when you die you will go back to The Emptiness of Oneness, then it may not be so bad.

Yes, there is truth (The taste of the broccoli)
Yes, the experience of that is individual (whether you like it or dislike it)

but Expectations (or the lack of) has an effect on your experience, too.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 

Just speculating here, but maybe, in the beginning when there were no objects outside the one singularity, the singularity was the first consciousness and it was due to there being an "outside" that was nothing in particular and nothing in actuality, that the first consciousness was able to create the universe. Due to there being no expectations and nothing to set a precedent for assumed limits of potential, the first consciousness had a blank slate that was the perfect conduit for ability to create.

The reason we have trouble is because the universe is presented to us as something, when in fact, it is still nothing in particular. So we believe it exists and is real, and are thereby subject to it. Im going to stop believing its real now.
But the seer is real.
edit on 4-4-2014 by smithjustinb because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 08:47 PM
link   
reply to post by smithjustinb
 


This brings me to the idea that the totality of the universe is not god but is of god and neither am i of the universe.



posted on Apr, 4 2014 @ 09:06 PM
link   
good and evil only occur in a universe which contains a conscious able to make such distinctions. Absolute good (to be absolute) would have no distinctions of gradation, therefore could not be perceived by a consciousness as there would be nothing to compare it to. there would just be. no gradations, no duality, no perception, and most of all, no concept of evil therefore no concept of good, absolute or otherwise.





new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join