How to dissolve distinctions? (How do I begin the non dual path?)?

[Alfonsoo]

This probably is breaking the materialistic paradigm 101, however I'm having real trouble with this:

Is there any difference between dreams, imagination and physical material "reality"? I'm guessing the answer is no. Which would mean that what we ordinarily know to be different things are actually a unified infinity broken apart by the imagined distinctions, right? Again, everything seems to point towards the answer being yes.

However I'm having a really hard time integrating it into my perception. When I look somewhere I automatically see "different" things. I don't see a chair and think of it as me, let alone feel like it as me (here we can see it in action, me making distinctions between a chair and not a chair, me and not me). How can I dissolve these distinctions? Perhaps all boils down to meditating and questioning more and eventually it'll happen naturally, but it really feels like I've hit a wall here.

Leo says that my brain, my dick, my hands are all my imagination, but he also says that things really do exist (i'm guessing he means that they're not a matrix simulation) and its got my mind spinning. When "I" see my "hand" there is something that exist however it is not a hand. The "hand" (the distinction that lets something be a hand) part of existence is the imagined thing. I think I got this right... now all im missing is to integrate it, but I don't even know what that looks/feels like. What is supposed to happen? What am I supposed to do?

(As a result of these distinctions having a very strong presence, allows for all sorts of prejudices, fears, assumptions, etc to exist and its really bugging me)

[Leo Gura]

That's what psychedelics are for. They dissolve distinctions which you cannot normally do in your default state.

If you could dissolve material distinctions at will, physical reality would melt away and you would think you've lost your mind. This is what people call insanity. So there's a good reason why you cannot do it. You are treating this stuff as if it's a game when it is as serious as losing your mind and your life. People who do this wrong end up jumping out of a window because of course there is no difference between life and death other than what you're imagining.

[tsuki]

@Alfonsoo Instead of trying to approach this issue with the mindset of "how do I dissolve distinctions?", I would rather suggest to look into the nature of what is distinction itself. Look at one object, look at another object, and then, try to locate the distinction.

After you are clear on what distinction is, try poking at "what is existence?".

[tsuki]

Also, distinctions can be approached in the context of space, or in the context of time.

In the context of space, there is a distinction between two distinct objects that exist simultaneously, in two different locations. Like your one hand, and your other hand. Try to locate the distinction between them while perceiving both of them.

Then, there is temporal distinction, where there is one object that changes, but is still recognized as one object. Like when you observe your hand, and you move it, so it changes, and yet it is still a hand. This one was more subtle for me. How is it possible for a hand to change (be different), and yet still be a hand (be the same)? Again, try to locate this distinction.

Edited December 2, 2021 by tsuki

[tsuki]

Yet another one: composition, when one thing appears to be superimposed with another thing.

Look at your hand and start moving it. Observe the shadows and lighting on your hand. How is it possible that there is a shadow, and that there is your hand, and that there isn't anything "between" them? Is there a difference between them? How do you perceive them if there isn't one? How can something be two things?

Or another one: abstraction, when one thing can be multiple things at the same time.

Take a pen. Ask yourself what is it and give your most honest and straightforward answer. Then take another thing that is the same. How can something be precisely a pen, and yet, there are two "pens"? What is >>the<< pen? What is it? Pinpoint >>the<< pen, the thing that made you pick the second pen that looked like the first one.

Edited December 2, 2021 by tsuki

[tsuki]

There is more fun in the domain of touch. Touch a wall with your hand. Close your eyes. Focus on the sensation of the wall and try to find the difference between you and the wall. Where do you end, and where does the wall start? How is it possible that a wall "limits" you? What is "limit"?

Also, other senses are interesting for this contemplation. Focus your attention within the domain of sight, vision. Look around. Now, focus on your hearing, listen. Go back and forth between these two domains. When you do this, try to pinpoint the exact moment when you transition from one to another. Where does sight "go" when you are attentively listening? Where does hearing "go" when you are watching with focus?

[Alfonsoo]

7 hours ago, tsuki said:

@Alfonsoo Look at one object, look at another object, and then, try to locate the distinction.

So a gave it a try. I tried to discover what makes a pen a pen and when is a pen not a pen. What I found out is that there’s not a single distinction  that fully defines a pen . Then I though that maybe it’s the sum of its parts but not a single combination of distinctions seemed to be what absolutely defines a pen. I was left with a bad after taste there, I’m not fully sold on the results but I just couldn’t prove what made a pen. So maybe it’s just some very deep unconscious attachment that remains. Me not wanting to accept deep down that there’s nothing that makes a pen, that the pen is imagined.

then I came to the idea that, just like machine learning, we learn to differentiate things by swallowing example after example of whatever the teacher thought of as pen. Until it became an unquestioned mechanism to call whatever resembles the source material, a pen (whether it’s an object or the idea of). That’s kind of how it works right?

 

What I couldn’t break down was the difference between two presently existing objects. “Perhaps the distinctions of a pen are all made up, whoever that object over there is definitely not this one over here“ that’s how my mind went. What two objects are is not the problem. Now is the physical separation that I couldn’t dissolve. Is that imagined too?

 

on a side note: I would love to have this kind of investigation during psychedelics but I just get drowned in all the stimuli and anxiety that I forget to do the work or just can’t concentrate. I’ve just done a couple of trips at low dosage, but not in a single one have I gotten even close to achieving this. Does the concentration come with practice (taking many more trips until I get more comfortable and used to it) ?

[tsuki]

You are trying to relate the investigation of difference with knowledge that you already have. First, you must see for yourself that you don't know what difference is. You can see that things are different, but you don't know what is difference.

You are not looking to explain what is difference. You want to find it, like you find your hand when you to scratch your head. You want to witness difference directly.

Book of not knowing by Peter Ralston may be of help.

[Mason Riggle]

@Alfonsoo perhaps begin to notice the arbitrary/relative/dual nature of distinctions.. 

For examples... (arbitrariness)- at what point does a knife become a sword? isn't the distinction between the two arbitrary? isn't it whatever point we decide it is?  
(relativity/duality)- where is the distinction between the inside of a cup, and the outside of a cup? Isn't the outside relative to the inside, and the inside relative to the outside? You can't have 'just the inside' of a cup, or 'just the outside of a cup', you just have 'the whole cup', where 'inside/outside' are only relative distinctions.  Inside is just 'not the outside' and Outside is just 'not the inside'. 

Then do this with your 'self'.  Where is the line between 'you' and 'that which is not you'?  isn't it arbitrary?  Am I 'inside my body somewhere', and my body belongs 'to me'? Am I just my brain? I could cut off my arms and 'I' would remain... Am I just a thought an organism is having? Am I identical to 'my body'?  Am I 'my hair'? When my skin cells flake off.. is that dandruff on my coat still 'me'? Am I the same me I was when I was 6? Where is the me from 5 minutes ago? 1 second ago? Am I 'the totality of my experience?'  Why is it so hard to 'locate' my 'self'? 

You may begin to feel that 'you' do not exist 'separate' from everything that is 'not you', but rather, 'you' are defined relative to what you arbitrarily decide is 'not you', the same way that a whirlpool does not exist 'separate' from the river that contains it, but rather, the whirlpools is arbitrarily defined by (is a function of) the river (everything which isn't the whirlpool)... but you can't show me the edges of the whirlpool.. where does the river end and the whirlpool begin?  Can you take a whirlpool out of a river and show it to me?  Similarly, you can't really find (show yourself) the boundary of 'yourself', because it's only an arbitrary distinction.  

When I am sitting here at my desk, looking at a monitor, reading this forum.. I feel like all of that is 'what I am' in this moment.  I am literally 'the experience of a body sitting at a desk, looking at a monitor, reading this forum' and NOT something separate from all that who is somewhere 'within' all of that, experiencing all of that.. it's all me.  'experiencing my desk' is no different than 'experiencing my hand', in that both are 'my experience', which is all I ever really am. 

[Nahm]

@Alfonsoo

 A new seeing, appreciation & respect for the ‘space’ ‘between you & thoughts’ could arise, which is to say a new appreciation for daily meditation. It is likely impossible to recognize ‘pen’ is a thought, and not perception or sensation, while ‘attached’ to thoughts. 

Have a quick read of the ten ox pics, for a bird’s eye view of aversion, the emotional rollercoaster therein, and the adoption of the practice, and the equanimity & other fruits of doing so. 

[WelcometoReality]

@Alfonsoo There are many ways to break down distinctions. You could do it experientially by breaking down your experience into sight, sound, feeling, smelling, tasting and thought.

You could also do spiritual autolysis where you try to write down a true statement and then boil it down to something you know is true. It's a way to unlearn your beliefs which is unconsciously makes up the way you perceive reality.

You'll come a long way just by questioning things. Is this really true? What is true? 

Just by posting these questions on this forum you've started your journey. Have fun and explore. 

[VeganAwake]

This seems to be a common misunderstanding with seeking non-dual perception or what not.

Non-dual awareness isn't an attempt to metaphorically smash everything together as one non-dual soup or something. (a tree will always appear different than a bear for example)

The end of the experience of separation is the recognition that the ME within the body is an illusion.

An internal recognition instead of an external experience so to speak.

No real separate individuals = No real separation. 

❤ 

 

[tsuki]

Another misunderstanding is that you are supposed to manipulate your perception of reality to be in accord with a description that you read somewhere.

Meditation, contemplation, and spirituality are about recognizing what is already true, and already the case. You are not supposed to manipulate, alter, or otherwise modify yourself, or the world. This is not the goal. This pursuit is irrelevant. If you can manipulate your experience and see something differently, then it is not the truth of the matter, but a facet of your experience. So, reading something, relating to it, bringing it into the context of the investigation is completely irrelevant to contemplation. What is true is already true, regardless of what you know, or don't. When you recognize something true, your relationship to it may or may not change, but >>change is not the method<<. It may sometimes be helpful to remove things that distract you, such as TV, loud music, or your beliefs about the matter, but these things are not the truth.

For example, when you investigate yourself, then you are present in your experience regardless of whether you are sitting, standing, doing yoga, or sleeping. It is not about an emotional state either, because you are yourself regardless of whether you are angry, blissful or fearful. There are states that are helpful towards this investigation, for example, it may be beneficial to develop focus so that you can stay longer with the task without being distracted. It may be beneficial to develop good posture so that you don't hurt yourself while investigating. But investigation, in of itself, is itself. It is not thinking, it is not wrinkling your eyebrows and looking serious, it is not sitting peacefully, it is itself. It is irreducible to anything else.

So stop thinking about distinctions, or removing them, but investigate what they are.