Goodness And Non-Duality

Here's a topic that I'm sure many here will be able to relate to. For a long time, I would characterize my way of thinking as non-dual. What seemed to me to be the spiritual path was breaking down dualities. All dualities were a stumbling block towards the truth. One of these dualities to be broken down was good vs. bad. I developed a dislike of any talk of morality or any such thing. Now I would still think of myself that, in terms of standard dualistic thinking, I was a good person. If anything, in my life I have at times tended too much in that direction, if you understand what I mean, and I think that may actually be part of what inspired my interest in this idea. Nonetheless, when I would read anything spiritual that spoke of something about 'being good,' it made me un-interested.

Yet, having come down from the feeling of spiritual ecstasy that came with apparently dissolving dualities, I find myself coming back to this question of goodness. I must admit to tending towards something like non-duality, or that at an ultimate level things can't be characterized in these sorts of ways. Yet, I come time and time again in my reading to these ideas of goodness, and I find myself thinking about it. Certainly I have always had the tendency towards being good, and towards wanting things to be good in general, for myself and others. This is kind of highlighted in a lot of Mahayana Buddhism, where something like non-duality is espoused and yet at the same time there is so much talk of bodhicitta, loving-kindness and compassion for all sentient beings, the tireless working for the liberation of all. So the question is a central one. If it's non-dual, then why is there this call to be good? Or do you really believe there is no reason to be good?

There are two approaches that come to my mind on this issue. The first, is yes, all dualities we can conceive of are broken down. But what is left after this, is not neutral, but some sort of limitless and transcendent good, which far transcends any conception of good we could have. The other is that, there is this transcendent reality which truly is non-dual. And yet there is also this dualistic reality, and both are valid. Thus we seek to understand and perceive this non-dual, which is perhaps 'ultimate,' and yet at the same time acknowledge the reality of the relative, and seek to make it as happy and loving as you possibly can for yourself and others, because all living beings in the relative world desire happiness, and thus since the relative world apparently exists at all we should strive for that happiness, in an unselfish way. Certainly a great part of all religion and spirituality involves how we act in the world, which would fall under the category of cultivating goodness, even if I or others do not like this word morality. Is this important, or just 'lower teachings?'

I've realized I didn't end up writing some particular viewpoint I wanted to impart to you...moreso just somewhat open-ended thoughts...I don't even have a conclusion in mind, and to try to reach one would just make the thread insanely long, lol...so yea, there's some thoughts, maybe some discussion can follow.

There are many philosophies. Some are conflicting yet still give the same sense of "I've figured it all out!". They all seem to make sense, but you can never know if any of them are the correct one. Whether its achieving nonduality or achieving absolute goodness. Which one is the right path?

As humans, we like to try to figure things out. We like to gain information about various things. But in the case of philosophy, there is no concrete information. There are theories. So I believe its not about trying to find the answers to life, its about enjoying life. I can't know why I'm here. All I can know is that I'm here. For me, its not about trying to figure out why I'm here or what path I should take. Its about where am I now and how can I enjoy it the most. Just enjoy it.

a reply to: TheJourney

Hey, i agree that dualities are becoming obsolete more and more so, but the non-dualistic truth is not beyond comprehension at all. There are strict ethical guidelines that must be met by a person before each new level of knowledge is granted, or at least that's how my experience has been consistently. For instance, the Maya had a calendar named the Tun that charted the evolution and creation of consciousness, and the 8th(started in 1999) of the nine levels is where ethics were supposed to overtake power in Mankind's consciousness. In my mind it happened sometime a while back, but America is being held back very purposefully.

The thing i love thinking about is that moment before the Big Bang that scientists say was unimaginably hot, dense, and small. Yet, they admit that the nature those characteristics are used in didn't exist until after the Bang during inflation. They just cant imagine what it was like, but i love imagining the possible work i could do with that moment as a participant in the present.

Sorry for getting off track, but i would expect each duality must be resolved within physical reality. In fact, duality is one of the oldest remaining objectives to finish for humanity, and as we progress the unraveling will conclude. Part of me thinks we are in the present moment: humans have 3 becoming 1 inside each person, while 2(dualism) is in our perceptive stage, 4 is where we have almost arrived and next, 5 is further out, The 1 is the super moment anchored to Our last perfect save point.

a reply to: smithjustinb

absolute goodness is the right path between itself and the non-dualistic. I assume i will need to be able to say the non-dual truth before i am done with boogers. To assume that a person cannot is a personal hurdle you need to work out, but i like to do work when God hands me tools(mind & senses) just in case i need to be competent.

a reply to: TheJourney

Dualities are simply an opposing degree of opinion- black and white are of the visible light spectrum, up and down are about spatial relativity, even the cold/hot argument becomes invalid because extreme cold can burn too- it is dichotomy, the complete opposition, that is in question on the topic of goodness. Duality is just pieces of a whole. When it comes down to it, as metaphorical light and darkness, in direct truth and direct lies, direct good and direct evil, real opposition is exposed. Benevolence is absence of malevolence. The person, or spirit, who wants to do harm to you is the opposite of someone who wants to do something good for you. If the good is for themselves, it is an entirely different and selfish, probably evil, matter, thus a dichotomy. Goodness is meant to progress entirely. Evil is willful regression.
namaste

There are higher forces that vibrate to awaken us all and those might be referred as both a duality and a singularity. Yeshua for example said this ..."For there will be five in a house, three against two and two against three, father against son and son against father, and they will stand alone." which might explain why Yin and Yang is one circle split into two. Love all, regardless of their sins, so you can step forward.

I like to read others' mind explorations. It is stimulating.

I don't believe in a static universal good or bad.

I perceive that these judgements are born according to our intents for experience

That is, relative to specific goals, things can be good or bad. Some will lead towards it, some will lead away from it.
If you are driving somewhere in particular, some roads are good to take, some are bad.

This is a judgement we make as individuals.

I perceive that groupings of people come together with goals in common,
So thus is born collective good/bad judgements, that they share and they support each other in determining and following.

I perceive that there are even goals that the most part of humanity has in common, which gives birth to good/bad judgements that seem universal by sheer numbers ..... but that a small minority might not share.

(the goal of survival of the physical body, for example- thus "not killing" becomes a largely held collective ethic).

But even in those you get the souls who might not have that intent for themselves, so that ethic does not apply to them.

The only real complication arises in the respect of others different intents, which come with different ethics, and the interaction is more complex then. Part of the reason it is sometimes much easier to move and interact within groups of people who have the same intents and goals.

a reply to: glend

Do you think he meant the 3 body/mind/soul able to exist because the neutral charge broke the dual existence of + and - . Then we had to defeat duality above as so below in the form of dualism in our perception of reality.So, that is the 3(us) that was attacked on two fronts by 2. The Father against son and son against father is also the same sandwich where we are the middle of 3 generations.Finally, they each stand alone as 11 eleven which is our first two digit number to evolve to as consciousness.

From my point of view you can break down any action/behavior to fit in 2 categories:
"Service and good/neutral for all by all who are effected by the action/behavior" versus the "Service and good for one/lesser than all by all who are effected by the action/behavior".

So from my point of view good and bad exists it is just people who are bad at logically calculating good and bad and saying thing are good and bad when they clearly are not if you choose to calculate it.

This kind of thinking is like math. There is only the right answer, no real ambiguity when you really calculate the action/behavior. But from my point of view this is how karma is calculated.

a reply to: andrewadkison

Yeshua has said "Where there are three deities, they are divine. Where there are two or one, I am with that one." So its important to realize that the holy Ghost (Shakti) always stands alone. So my understanding is that Father and Son will also exist in reverse roles to test us. The five are Father, Son, and Holy Ghost (Brahman, Atman and Shakti) + Father and Son (Brahman, Atman).