Proper Non-Dualist speech

[Inliytened1]

Duality - separation - is included and within non-duality.

Language is dualistic.  It is itself separation. 

So you can use any wording you want to, you just have to clarify whether you are speaking of I as pure Infinity (God) , or a finitude of infinity, the small I (part of God).  You don't have to use we to refer to that which is non-dual.   You can if you want but it seems to make it more confusing to me.  Right now when i say you i mean the part of God.  Duality within non-duality.

And still language can only point to the Absolute because it is separate from the Absolute in itself.  Trying to make it the Absolute by having perfect wording is a lost cause.  Its like using something dualistic and then saying you can't say certain things because they are dualistic, when the mechanism you are using is dualistic.

 

[Nak Khid]

8 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Duality - separation - is included and within non-duality.

No that is nonsensical

 

8 minutes ago, Inliytened1 said:

Duality - separation - is included and within non-duality.

Language is dualistic.  It is itself separation. 

So you can use any wording you want to, you just have to clarify whether you are speaking of I as pure Infinity (God) , or a finitude of infinity, the small I (part of God).  You don't have to use we to refer to that which is non-dual.   You can if you want but it seems to make it more confusing to me.  Right now when i say you i mean the part of God.  Duality within non-duality.

And still language can only point to the Absolute because it is separate from the Absolute in itself.  Trying to make it the Absolute by having perfect wording is a lost cause.

 

Because language is imperfect
But still here writing words here, commenting on videos, etc, speaking

should not be a an excuse to use the poorest of poorly conceived word-concepts

- words most inconsistent with statements made.   Obviously "we" is less separate than "I" or "you"

So let us not abandon progress and abandon improved speech .

We go out to a week long retreat asking "Who I am "

and  have a breakthrough , there is no "I"

Then you returning home  only to reconstruct "I" and "you" all over again ???   

 

[Inliytened1]

33 minutes ago, Nak Khid said:

No that is nonsensical

 

 

Think about it - go back to your principals of mentalism.

If reality is one mind - then reality comes to be via the mind thinking or imagining.  As soon as it has an idea - let's say the idea of a human.  The idea becomes separate from the mind itself,  but it is still within the mind.  And it's made of the mind stuff.  The human is just a section of this mind.  The human then has an idea - to create language.   See how language is also separate now and also within?

If the human somehow could realize it was the mind stuff it could realize there is nothing separating it from being the whole mind.  It just has to imagine itself out of existence and unite back with the mind..?

[Nak Khid]

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

Think about it - go back to your principals of mentalism

 

That is not mine that is from the Kybalion, aka  Solipsism, aka Leoism  "Everything is Imagination"

I posted that for reference

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

Think about it - go back to your principals of mentalism.If reality is one mind - then reality comes to be via the mind thinking or imagining. 

According to Leoism Everything is imaginary so reality doesn't exist. There is only imagination

1 hour ago, Inliytened1 said:

 The human then has an idea - to create language. 

No the language structures of the brain are innate.  "Thoughts" (tools)  are constructed out of those language structures.
The particular language of course is all learned, a consistent catalog of words laid over those structures that innately comprehend certain base grammatical things and certain logic.  

[Inliytened1]

52 minutes ago, Nak Khid said:

That is not mine that is from the Kybalion, aka  Solipsism, aka Leoism  "Everything is Imagination" 

- where did you gather that it was Solipsism? From what i read i didn't come to that conclusion.   But i may have missed something.

I posted that for reference

According to Leoism Everything is imaginary so reality doesn't exist. There is only imagination

Whats Leosim?  Again if reality is consciousness than all there is imagination (thought) thought is reality. 

No the language structures of the brain are innate.  "Thoughts" (tools)  are constructed out of those language structures.
The particular language of course is all learned, a consistent catalog of words laid over those structures that innately comprehend certain base grammatical things and certain logic.

Ok - it was just an example to show that language is dualistic within non-duality - yes language evolved through sounds and gestures initially and then people agree on something as a word.  But this is still thought and thought is dualistic.   Writing came later.  Innate structure in the brain is still dualistic - a brain is dualistic.

Any "thing" is dualistic because it is a distinction.

 

[Aaron p]

Don't change anything. Find the one who wishes to change, and also find the one who sees him. This will change how you act and speak effortlessly, and more effectively

[outlandish]

Any use of language is inherently dualistic. You can't get out of it by changing some pronouns. You literally can't communicate without making differentiation.

Dualism isn't a sin we need to avoid, it's an aspect or a perspective of reality. 

The trick is to also see things also from the unconditioned nondual perspective.