Nondualism
Template:Short description Template:About Template:Multiple issues Template:EngvarB Template:Use dmy dates
Nondualism includes a number of philosophical and spiritual traditions that emphasize the absence of fundamental duality or separation in existence.Template:Sfn This viewpoint questions the boundaries conventionally imposed between self and other, mind and body, observer and observed,Template:Sfn and other dichotomies that shape our perception of reality. As a field of study, nondualism delves into the concept of nondualityTemplate:Sfn and the state of nondual awareness,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn encompassing a diverse array of interpretations, not limited to a particular cultural or religious context; instead, nondualism emerges as a central teaching across various belief systems, inviting individuals to examine reality beyond the confines of dualistic thinking.
Nondualism emphasizes direct experience as a path to understanding. While intellectual comprehension has its place, nondualism emphasizes the transformative power of firsthand encounters with the underlying unity of existence. Through practices like meditation and self-inquiry, practitioners aim to bypass the limitations of conceptual understanding and directly apprehend the interconnectedness that transcends superficial distinctions.Template:Sfn This experiential aspect of nondualism challenges the limitations of language and rational thought, aiming for a more immediate, intuitive form of knowledge.
Nondualism is distinct from monism,<ref>Roberts, M. V. (2010). Dualities: A Theology of Difference. Presbyterian Publishing Corporation. Template:Isbn. p. 21. Discusses why Advaita Vedanta is nondual while Kashmir Shaivism is monist.</ref> another philosophical concept that deals with the nature of reality. While both philosophies challenge the conventional understanding of dualism, they approach it differently. Nondualism emphasizes unity amid diversity. In contrast, monism posits that reality is ultimately grounded in a singular substance or principle, reducing the multiplicity of existence to a singular foundation. The distinction lies in their approach to the relationship between the many and the one.<ref>Bowes, P. (2021). The Hindu Religious Tradition: A Philosophical Approach. Taylor & Francis. Template:ISBN "There is a subtle difference in philosophical implications of these two terms 'monism' and 'non-dualism'. 'Monism' may be thought to have a numerical implication, one as against the many, and here unity may appear to be numerical. 'Non-dualism' has no numerical implication, things are not different from one another, or not two, from the point of view of seeing the divine essence present in all things, but their numerical manyness need not be in question in any way. The Upanisads concern themselves with the non-dual divine essence of the universe, but they in no way reject the numerical manyness in order to preach non-dualism."</ref>
Each nondual tradition presents unique interpretations of nonduality. Advaita Vedanta, a school of thought within Hindu philosophy, focuses on the realization of the unity between the individual self (Ātman) and the ultimate reality (Brahman).Template:Sfn In Zen Buddhism, the emphasis is on the direct experience of interconnectedness that goes beyond conventional thought constructs. Dzogchen, found in Tibetan Buddhism, highlights the recognition of an innate nature free from dualistic limitations.Template:Sfnp Taoism embodies nondualism by emphasizing the harmony and interconnectedness of all phenomena, transcending dualistic distinctions,<ref>Jin, Guo Yong (2018). Mysteries of Dao De Jing (Tao Te Ching) Revealed. United States: Balboa Press AU.</ref><ref>Kohn, Livia (2009). Introducing Daoism. United States: Journal of Buddhist Ethics, 39-40.</ref> towards a pure state of awareness free of conceptualizations.<ref>Eppert, Claudia, et al. (2015). "Intercultural philosophy and the nondual wisdom of ‘basic goodness’: Implications for contemplative and transformative education". Journal of Philosophy of Education, 49(2), 276.</ref>
EtymologyEdit
"Dual" comes from Latin "duo", two, prefixed with "non-" meaning "not"; "non-dual" means "not-two". When referring to nonduality, Hinduism generally uses the Sanskrit term Advaita, while Buddhism uses Advaya (Tibetan: gNis-med, Chinese: pu-erh, Japanese: fu-ni).Template:Sfn
"Advaita" (अद्वैत) is from Sanskrit roots a, not; dvaita, dual. As Advaita, it means "not-two"Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn or "one without a second",Template:Sfn and is usually translated as "nondualism", "nonduality" or "nondual". The term "nondualism" and the term "advaita" from which it originates are polyvalent terms.Template:Refn
"Advaya" (अद्वय) is also a Sanskrit word that means "identity, unique, not two, without a second", and typically refers to the two truths doctrine of Mahayana Buddhism, especially Madhyamaka.
The English term "nondual" was informed by early translations of the Upanishads in Western languages other than English from 1775. These terms have entered the English language from literal English renderings of "advaita" subsequent to the first wave of English translations of the Upanishads. These translations commenced with the work of Müller (1823–1900), in the monumental Sacred Books of the East (1879). He rendered "advaita" as "Monism", as have many recent scholars.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>S Menon (2011), Advaita Vedanta, IEP, Quote: "The essential philosophy of Advaita is an idealist monism, and is considered to be presented first in the Upaniṣads and consolidated in the Brahma Sūtra by this tradition."</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> However, some scholars state that "advaita" is not really monism.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
DefinitionsEdit
The term nonduality is used across various spiritual and philosophical traditions but lacks a single, universally accepted definition.Template:Sfn It broadly refers to the rejection of fundamental distinctions between concepts such as self and other, subject and object, or absolute and relative. Scholars often discuss multiple forms of nonduality, each emphasizing different aspects of metaphysics, epistemology, and mystical experience.Template:Sfn
Conceptualizing nondualityEdit
David Loy argues that rather than a singular concept, nonduality should be understood as a family of related ideas, varying across traditions such as Advaita Vedanta, Mahayana Buddhism, and Taoism.Template:Sfn He proposes five major perspectives:
- Nondual awareness – The nondifference of subject and object, where the observer and the observed are ultimately inseparable.Template:Sfn This idea is central to Buddhist Zen, Advaita Vedanta, and Taoism, which describe reality as a unified field of experience beyond conceptual thought.Template:Sfn
- The nonplurality of the world – Although reality appears as a multiplicity of distinct entities, some traditions describe it as fundamentally one essence.Template:Sfn This is seen in Advaita Vedanta's assertion that Brahman alone is real, with the world appearing as an illusory manifestation.Template:Sfn
- The negation of dualistic thinking – Some nondual traditions reject binary oppositions such as self/other, good/evil, or existence/non-existence. The yin-yang symbol of Taoism reflects this transcendence of opposites.Template:Sfn
- The identity of phenomena and the absolute – Nonduality in Madhyamaka Buddhism and the two truths doctrine asserts that phenomena (relative truth) and emptiness (ultimate truth) are inseparable.Template:Sfn This differs from monistic nonduality, as it denies a singular, unchanging essence.Template:Sfn
- Mysticism and divine unity – Some mystical traditions describe a direct experience of unity between the individual and the divine, such as Sufism’s fana (self-annihilation), Christian mystical union, and Kabbalistic Ein Sof.Template:Sfn However, this perspective differs from nondual frameworks that reject theism altogether.Template:Sfn
While Loy suggests that these perspectives stem from a shared experience of reality, other scholars challenge this claim, arguing that nondualism takes different forms in different traditions.Template:Sfn
Nondual awarenessEdit
"Nondual awareness" refers to a state of consciousness described in contemplative traditions as a background field of unified, immutable awareness that exists prior to conceptual thought.Template:Sfn This state is described in various ways across different traditions:
- In Advaita Vedanta, nondual awareness is pure consciousness (Atman), which is identical to Brahman.Template:Sfn
- In Mahayana Buddhism, it is rigpa (Tibetan Dzogchen) or shunyata (emptiness), where awareness remains but is empty of intrinsic identity.Template:Sfn
- In Samkhya philosophy, it is Purusha, the eternal witness-consciousness that observes the fluctuations of Prakriti (the material world).Template:Sfn
Scientific perspectivesEdit
Recent neuroscientific and phenomenological studies have examined nondual awareness as a distinct cognitive and experiential state. Josipovic describes it as a non-representational mode of consciousness, distinct from other mental states.Template:Sfn Gamma & Metzinger (2021) propose that nondual awareness can be mapped phenomenologically, identifying factors such as luminosity, absence of egoic boundaries, and self-reflexivity.Template:Sfn
However, scholars such as Robert Sharf argue that scientific studies risk reifying nonduality as a purely neurocognitive phenomenon, stripping it of its cultural and soteriological contexts.Template:Sfn
HinduismEdit
According to Signe Cohen, the notion of the highest truth lying beyond all dualistic constructs of reality finds its origins in ancient Indian philosophical thought. One of the earliest articulations of this concept is evident in the renowned Nasadiya ("Non-Being") hymn of the Ṛigveda, which contemplates a primordial state of undifferentiated existence, devoid of both being and non-being.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> The Mahāvākyas, as documented in the Upanishads, explain the unity of Brahman and Atman and form the basis of the Advaita Vedanta tradition.Template:Sfn<ref>MAHAVAKYAS, Ayam Atma Brahma: Self is Absolute Entity, www.classicyoga.co.in (ইংরেজি ভাষায়)</ref>
VedantaEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Several schools of Vedanta are informed by Samkhya, the earliest Indian school of dualism, but teach a form of nondualism. The best-known is Advaita Vedanta, but other nondual Vedanta schools also have a significant influence and following, such as Vishishtadvaita Vedanta and Dvaitadvaita,Template:Sfn both of which are bhedabheda.Template:Clarify
Template:Advaita "Advaita" refers to Atman-Brahman as the single universal existence beyond the plurality of the world, recognized as pure awareness or the witness-consciousness, as in Vedanta, Shaktism and Shaivism.Template:Sfn Although the term is best known from the Advaita Vedanta school of Adi Shankara, "advaita" is used in treatises by numerous medieval era Indian scholars, as well as modern schools and teachers.
The Hindu concept of Advaita refers to the idea that all of the universe is one essential reality, and that all facets and aspects of the universe is ultimately an expression or appearance of that one reality.Template:Sfn According to Dasgupta and Mohanta, non-dualism developed in various strands of Indian thought, both Vedic and Buddhist, from the Upanishadic period onward.Template:Sfn The oldest traces of nondualism in Indian thought may be found in the Chandogya Upanishad, which pre-dates the earliest Buddhism. Pre-sectarian Buddhism may also have been responding to the teachings of the Chandogya Upanishad, rejecting some of its Atman-Brahman related metaphysics.Template:SfnTemplate:Refn
Advaita appears in different shades in various schools of Hinduism such as in Advaita Vedanta, Vishishtadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), Suddhadvaita Vedanta (Vaishnavism), non-dual Shaivism and Shaktism.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref>[a] Template:Cite book;
[b] Jean Filliozat (1991), Religion, Philosophy, Yoga: A Selection of Articles, Motilal Banarsidass, Template:ISBN, pp. 68–69;
[c] Richard Davis (2014), Ritual in an Oscillating Universe: Worshipping Siva in Medieval India, Princeton University Press, Template:ISBN, p. 167 note 21, Quote (p. 13): "Some agamas argue a monist metaphysics, while others are decidedly dualist."</ref> In the Advaita Vedanta of Adi Shankara, advaita implies that all of reality is one with Brahman,Template:Sfn that the Atman (self) and Brahman (ultimate unchanging reality) are one.<ref>Joseph Milne (1997), "Advaita Vedanta and typologies of multiplicity and unity: An interpretation of nondual knowledge", International Journal of Hindu Studies, Volume 1, Issue 1, pp. 165-188</ref>Template:Sfn The advaita ideas of some Hindu traditions contrasts with the schools that defend dualism or Dvaita, such as that of Madhvacharya who stated that the experienced reality and God are two (dual) and distinct.<ref>Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref><ref>Betty Stafford (2010), Dvaita, Advaita, and Viśiṣṭādvaita. "Contrasting Views of Mokṣa, Asian Philosophy". An International Journal of the Philosophical Traditions of the East, Volume 20, Issue 2, pp. 215–224</ref>
Advaita VedantaEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
The nonduality of the Advaita Vedanta is of the identity of Brahman and the Atman.<ref>Craig, Edward (general editor) (1998). Routledge encyclopedia of philosophy: Luther to Nifo, Volume 6. Taylor & Francis. Template:ISBN, Template:ISBN. Source: [1] (accessed: Thursday 22 April 2010), p.476</ref> As in Samkhya, Atman is awareness, the witness-consciousness. Advaita has become a broad current in Indian culture and religions, influencing subsequent traditions like Kashmir Shaivism.
The oldest surviving manuscript on Advaita Vedanta is by Gauḍapāda (6th century CE),Template:Sfn who has traditionally been regarded as the teacher of Govinda bhagavatpāda and the grandteacher of Adi Shankara. Advaita is best known from the Advaita Vedanta tradition of Adi Shankara (788-820 CE), who states that Brahman, the single unified eternal truth, is pure Being, Consciousness and Bliss (Sat-cit-ananda).Template:Sfn
Advaita, states Murti, is the knowledge of Brahman and self-consciousness (Vijnana) without differences.Template:Sfn The goal of Vedanta is to know the "truly real" and thus become one with it.Template:Sfn According to Advaita Vedanta, Brahman is the highest Reality,Template:Sfn<ref name="Lochtefeld-2002">Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref><ref>PT Raju (2006), Idealistic Thought of India, Routledge, Template:ISBN, p. 426 and Conclusion chapter part XII</ref> The universe, according to Advaita philosophy, does not simply come from Brahman, it is Brahman. Brahman is the single binding unity behind the diversity in all that exists in the universe.<ref name="Lochtefeld-2002" /> Brahman is also that which is the cause of all changes.<ref name="Lochtefeld-2002" /><ref>Jeffrey Brodd (2009), World Religions: A Voyage of Discovery, Saint Mary's Press, Template:ISBN, pp. 43–47</ref><ref>Mariasusai Dhavamony (2002), Hindu-Christian Dialogue: Theological Soundings and Perspectives, Rodopi Press, Template:ISBN, pp. 43–44</ref> Brahman is the "creative principle which lies realized in the whole world".<ref>Paul Deussen, Sixty Upanishads of the Veda, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, Template:ISBN, p. 91</ref>
The nondualism of Advaita, relies on the Hindu concept of Ātman which is a Sanskrit word that means "essence"<ref>Sanskrit Dictionary, Atman</ref> or "real self" of the individual;<ref name=oxfordatmandef /><ref>R Dalal (2011), The Religions of India: A Concise Guide to Nine Major Faiths, Penguin, Template:ISBN, p. 38</ref> it is also appropriated as "soul".<ref name=oxfordatmandef>[a] Atman, Oxford Dictionaries, Oxford University Press (2012), Quote: "1. real self of the individual; 2. a person's soul";
[b] John Bowker (2000), The Concise Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, Oxford University Press, Template:ISBN, See entry for Atman;
[c] WJ Johnson (2009), A Dictionary of Hinduism, Oxford University Press, Template:ISBN, See entry for Atman (self).</ref><ref>[a] David Lorenzen (2004), The Hindu World (Editors: Sushil Mittal and Gene Thursby), Routledge, Template:ISBN, pp. 208–209, Quote: "Advaita and nirguni movements, on the other hand, stress an interior mysticism in which the devotee seeks to discover the identity of individual soul (atman) with the universal ground of being (brahman) or to find god within himself".;
[b] Richard King (1995), Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism, State University of New York Press, Template:ISBN, p. 64, Quote: "Atman as the innermost essence or soul of man, and Brahman as the innermost essence and support of the universe. (...) Thus we can see in the Upanishads, a tendency towards a convergence of microcosm and macrocosm, culminating in the equating of atman with Brahman".
[c] Chad Meister (2010), The Oxford Handbook of Religious Diversity, Oxford University Press, Template:ISBN, p. 63; Quote: "Even though Buddhism explicitly rejected the Hindu ideas of Atman (soul) and Brahman, Hinduism treats Sakyamuni Buddha as one of the ten avatars of Vishnu."</ref> Ātman is the first principle,<ref>Deussen, Paul and Geden, A. S. The Philosophy of the Upanishads. Cosimo Classics (1 June 2010). P. 86. Template:ISBN.</ref> the true self of an individual beyond identification with phenomena, the essence of an individual. Atman is the Universal Principle, one eternal undifferentiated self-luminous consciousness, asserts Advaita Vedanta school of Hinduism.<ref>S Timalsina (2014), Consciousness in Indian Philosophy: The Advaita Doctrine of ‘Awareness Only’, Routledge, Template:ISBN, pp. 3–23</ref><ref>Eliot Deutsch (1980), Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction, University of Hawaii Press, Template:ISBN, pp. 48-53</ref> Advaita Vedanta philosophy considers Atman as self-existent awareness, limitless, non-dual and same as Brahman.<ref>A Rambachan (2006), The Advaita Worldview: God, World, and Humanity, State University of New York Press, Template:ISBN, pp. 47, 99–103</ref> Advaita school asserts that there is "soul, self" within each living entity which is fully identical with Brahman.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Edward Roer (Translator), Template:Google books to Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, pp. 2–4</ref> The nondualism concept of Advaita Vedanta asserts that each soul is non-different from the infinite Brahman.Template:Sfn
Three levels of realityEdit
Advaita Vedanta adopts sublation as the criterion to postulate three levels of ontological reality:Template:Sfn<ref name="Sharma-1995">Template:Cite book</ref>
- Template:IAST (paramartha, absolute), the Reality that is metaphysically true and ontologically accurate. It is the state of experiencing that "which is absolutely real and into which both other reality levels can be resolved". This experience can't be sublated (exceeded) by any other experience.Template:Sfn<ref name="Sharma-1995"/>
- Template:IAST (vyavahara), or samvriti-saya,Template:Sfn consisting of the empirical or pragmatic reality. It is ever-changing over time, thus empirically true at a given time and context but not metaphysically true. It is "our world of experience, the phenomenal world that we handle every day when we are awake". It is the level in which both jiva (living creatures or individual souls) and Iswara are true; here, the material world is also true.<ref name="Sharma-1995"/>
- Template:IAST (pratibhasika, apparent reality, unreality), "reality based on imagination alone". It is the level of experience in which the mind constructs its own reality. A well-known example is the perception of a rope in the dark as being a snake.<ref name="Sharma-1995"/>
Similarities and differences with BuddhismEdit
Scholars state that Advaita Vedanta was influenced by Mahayana Buddhism, given the common terminology and methodology and some common doctrines.<ref>John Grimes, Review of Richard King's Early Advaita Vedanta and Buddhism, Journal of the American Academy of Religion Vol. 66, No. 3 (Autumn, 1998), pp. 684–686</ref><ref>S. Mudgal, Advaita of Sankara, A Reappraisal, Impact of Buddhism and Samkhya on Sankara's thought, Delhi 1975, p.187"</ref> Eliot Deutsch and Rohit Dalvi state:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
In any event a close relationship between the Mahayana schools and Vedanta did exist, with the latter borrowing some of the dialectical techniques, if not the specific doctrines, of the former.<ref>Eliot Deutsch (1980), Advaita Vedanta: A Philosophical Reconstruction, University of Hawaii Press, Template:ISBN, pp. 126, 157</ref>{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
Advaita Vedanta is related to Buddhist philosophy, which promotes ideas like the two truths doctrine and the doctrine that there is only consciousness (vijñapti-mātra). It is possible that the Advaita philosopher Gaudapada was influenced by Buddhist ideas.Template:Sfn Shankara harmonised Gaudapada's ideas with the Upanishadic texts, and developed a very influential school of orthodox Hinduism.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn
The Buddhist term vijñapti-mātra is often used interchangeably with the term citta-mātra, but they have different meanings. The standard translation of both terms is "consciousness-only" or "mind-only". Advaita Vedanta has been called "idealistic monism" by scholars, but some disagree with this label.<ref>JN Mohanty (1980), Understanding some Ontological Differences in Indian Philosophy, Journal of Indian Philosophy, Volume 8, Issue 3, p. 205; Quote: "Nyaya-Vaiseshika is realistic; Advaita Vedanta is idealistic. The former is pluralistic, the latter monistic."</ref>Template:Sfn Another concept found in both Madhyamaka Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta is Ajativada ("ajāta"), which Gaudapada adopted from Nagarjuna's philosophy.Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Refn Gaudapada "wove [both doctrines] into a philosophy of the Mandukaya Upanisad, which was further developed by Shankara.Template:SfnTemplate:Refn
Michael Comans states there is a fundamental difference between Buddhist thought and that of Gaudapada, in that Buddhism has as its philosophical basis the doctrine of Dependent Origination according to which "everything is without an essential nature (nihsvabhāva), and everything is empty of essential nature (svabhava-shunya)", while Gaudapada does not rely on this principle at all. Gaudapada's Ajativada is an outcome of reasoning applied to an unchanging nondual reality according to which "there exists a Reality (sat) that is unborn (aja)" that has essential nature (svabhava), and this is the "eternal, fearless, undecaying Self (Atman) and Brahman".Template:Sfn Thus, Gaudapada differs from Buddhist scholars such as Nagarjuna, states Comans, by accepting the premises and relying on the fundamental teaching of the Upanishads.Template:Sfn Among other things, Vedanta school of Hinduism holds the premise, "Atman exists, as self evident truth", a concept it uses in its theory of nondualism. Buddhism, in contrast, holds the premise, "Atman does not exist (or, An-atman) as self evident".<ref>Dae-Sook Suh (1994), Korean Studies: New Pacific Currents, University of Hawaii Press, Template:ISBN, pp. 171</ref><ref>John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, Template:ISBN, p. 63, Quote: "The Buddhist schools reject any Ātman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism".</ref><ref>[a] KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, Template:ISBN, pp. 246–249, from note 385 onwards;
[b] Steven Collins (1994), Religion and Practical Reason (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, Template:ISBN, p. 64; "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman, the opposed doctrine of ātman is central to Brahmanical thought). Put very briefly, this is the [Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, no unchanging essence.";
[c] Edward Roer (Translator), Template:Google books to Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, pp. 2–4;
[d] Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist ‘No-Self’ Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana?, Philosophy Now</ref>
Mahadevan suggests that Gaudapada adopted Buddhist terminology and adapted its doctrines to his Vedantic goals, much like early Buddhism adopted Upanishadic terminology and adapted its doctrines to Buddhist goals; both used pre-existing concepts and ideas to convey new meanings.<ref>John Plott (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Patristic-Sutra period (325 – 800 AD), Volume 3, Motilal Banarsidass, Template:ISBN, pp. 285-288</ref> Dasgupta and Mohanta note that Buddhism and Shankara's Advaita Vedanta are not opposing systems, but "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Sankara".Template:Sfn
Vishishtadvaita VedantaEdit
Template:See also Vishishtadvaita Vedanta is another main school of Vedanta and teaches the nonduality of the qualified whole, in which Brahman alone exists, but is characterized by multiplicity. It can be described as "qualified monism", or "qualified non-dualism", or "attributive monism".
According to this school, the world is real, yet underlying all the differences is an all-embracing unity, of which all "things" are an "attribute". Ramanuja, the main proponent of Vishishtadvaita philosophy contends that the Prasthanatrayi ("The three courses") – namely the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Brahma Sutras – are to be interpreted in a way that shows this unity in diversity, for any other way would violate their consistency.
Vedanta Desika defines Vishishtadvaita using the statement: Asesha Chit-Achit Prakaaram Brahmaikameva Tatvam – "Brahman, as qualified by the sentient and insentient modes (or attributes), is the only reality."
Neo-VedantaEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Neo-Vedanta, also called "neo-Hinduism"Template:Sfn is a modern interpretation of Hinduism which developed in response to western colonialism and orientalism, and aims to present Hinduism as a "homogenized ideal of Hinduism"Template:Sfn with Advaita Vedanta as its central doctrine.Template:Sfn
Unitarian Universalism had a strong impact on Ram Mohan Roy and the Brahmo Samaj, and subsequently on Swami Vivekananda. Vivekananda was one of the main representatives of Neo-Vedanta, a modern interpretation of Hinduism in line with western esoteric traditions, especially Transcendentalism, New Thought and Theosophy.Template:Sfn His reinterpretation was, and is, very successful, creating a new understanding and appreciation of Hinduism within and outside India,Template:Sfn and was the principal reason for the enthusiastic reception of yoga, transcendental meditation and other forms of Indian spiritual self-improvement in the West.Template:Sfn
Narendranath Datta (Swami Vivekananda) became a member of a Freemasonry lodge "at some point before 1884"Template:Sfn and of the Sadharan Brahmo Samaj in his twenties, a breakaway faction of the Brahmo Samaj led by Keshab Chandra Sen and Debendranath Tagore.Template:Sfn Ram Mohan Roy (1772–1833), the founder of the Brahmo Samaj, had a strong sympathy for the Unitarians,Template:Sfn who were closely connected to the Transcendentalists, who in turn were interested in and influenced by Indian religions early on.Template:Sfn It was in this culticTemplate:Sfn milieu that Narendra became acquainted with Western esotericism.Template:Sfn Debendranath Tagore brought this "neo-Hinduism" closer in line with western esotericism, a development which was furthered by Keshab Chandra Sen,Template:Sfn who was also influenced by transcendentalism, which emphasised personal religious experience over mere reasoning and theology.Template:Sfn Sen's influence brought Vivekananda fully into contact with western esotericism, and it was also via Sen that he met Ramakrishna.Template:Sfn
Vivekananda's acquaintance with western esotericism made him very successful in western esoteric circles, beginning with his speech in 1893 at the Parliament of Religions. Vivekananda adapted traditional Hindu ideas and religiosity to suit the needs and understandings of his western audiences, who were especially attracted by and familiar with western esoteric traditions and movements like Transcendentalism and New thought.Template:Sfn
In 1897 he founded the Ramakrishna Mission, which was instrumental in the spread of Neo-Vedanta in the west, and attracted people like Alan Watts. Aldous Huxley, author of The Perennial Philosophy, was associated with another neo-Vedanta organisation, the Vedanta Society of Southern California, founded and headed by Swami Prabhavananda. Together with Gerald Heard, Christopher Isherwood, and other followers he was initiated by the Swami and was taught meditation and spiritual practices.Template:Sfn
Neo-Vedanta, as represented by Vivekananda and Radhakrishnan, is indebted to Advaita vedanta, but also reflects Advaya-philosophy. A main influence on neo-Advaita was Ramakrishna, himself a bhakta and tantrika, and the guru of Vivekananda. According to Michael Taft, Ramakrishna reconciled the dualism of formlessness and form.Template:Sfn Ramakrishna regarded the Supreme Being to be both Personal and Impersonal, active and inactive:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
When I think of the Supreme Being as inactive – neither creating nor preserving nor destroying – I call Him Brahman or Purusha, the Impersonal God. When I think of Him as active – creating, preserving and destroying – I call Him Sakti or Maya or Prakriti, the Personal God. But the distinction between them does not mean a difference. The Personal and Impersonal are the same thing, like milk and its whiteness, the diamond and its lustre, the snake and its wriggling motion. It is impossible to conceive of the one without the other. The Divine Mother and Brahman are one.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation
|CitationClass=web }}</ref>{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
Radhakrishnan acknowledged the reality and diversity of the world of experience, which he saw as grounded in and supported by the absolute or Brahman.<ref name="IEP">Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref>Template:Refn According to Anil Sooklal, Vivekananda's neo-Advaita "reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism":Template:Sfn
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
The Neo-Vedanta is also Advaitic inasmuch as it holds that Brahman, the Ultimate Reality, is one without a second, ekamevadvitiyam. But as distinguished from the traditional Advaita of Sankara, it is a synthetic Vedanta which reconciles Dvaita or dualism and Advaita or non-dualism and also other theories of reality. In this sense it may also be called concrete monism in so far as it holds that Brahman is both qualified, saguna, and qualityless, nirguna.Template:Sfn{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
Radhakrishnan also reinterpreted Shankara's notion of maya. According to Radhakrishnan, maya is not a strict absolute idealism, but "a subjective misperception of the world as ultimately real".<ref name="IEP"/> According to Sarma, standing in the tradition of Nisargadatta Maharaj, Advaitavāda means "spiritual non-dualism or absolutism",Template:Sfn in which opposites are manifestations of the Absolute, which itself is immanent and transcendent:Template:Sfn
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
All opposites like being and non-being, life and death, good and evil, light and darkness, gods and men, soul and nature are viewed as manifestations of the Absolute which is immanent in the universe and yet transcends it.Template:Sfn{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
Neo-Vedanta was well-received among Theosophists, Christian Science, and the New Thought movement;Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Christian Science in turn influenced the self-study teaching A Course in Miracles.Template:Sfn
Kashmir ShaivismEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} Template:Saivism
Advaita is also a central concept in various schools of Shaivism, such as Kashmir ShaivismTemplate:Sfn and Shiva Advaita which is generally known as Veerashaivism.
Kashmir Shaivism is a school of Śaivism, described by AbhinavaguptaTemplate:Refn as "paradvaita", meaning "the supreme and absolute non-dualism".<ref name="Raina-2002">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> It is categorized by various scholars as monistic<ref>Kashmir Shaivism: The Secret Supreme, Swami Lakshman Jee, pp. 103</ref> idealism (absolute idealism, theistic monism,<ref>The Trika Śaivism of Kashmir, Moti Lal Pandit</ref> realistic idealism,<ref name="Dyczkowski-1987">Template:Cite book</ref> transcendental physicalism or concrete monism<ref name="Dyczkowski-1987"/>).Template:Inconsistent
Kashmir Saivism is based on a strong monistic interpretation of the Bhairava Tantras and its subcategory the Kaula Tantras, which were tantras written by the Kapalikas.<ref name="Flood-1996">Template:Cite bookTemplate:Full citation needed</ref> There was additionally a revelation of the Siva Sutras to Vasugupta.<ref name="Flood-1996"/> Kashmir Saivism claimed to supersede the dualistic Shaiva Siddhanta.Template:Sfn Somananda, the first theologian of monistic Saivism, was the teacher of Utpaladeva, who was the grand-teacher of Abhinavagupta, who in turn was the teacher of Ksemaraja.<ref name="Flood-1996"/>Template:Sfn
The philosophy of Kashmir Shaivism can be seen in contrast to Shankara's Advaita.Template:Sfn Advaita Vedanta holds that Brahman is inactive (niṣkriya) and the phenomenal world is a false appearance (māyā) of Brahman, like snake seen in semi-darkness is a false appearance of Rope lying there. In Kashmir Shavisim, all things are a manifestation of the Universal Consciousness, Chit or Brahman.<ref>Pratyãbhijñahṛdayam, Jaideva Singh, Moltilal Banarsidass, 2008 p.24-26</ref><ref>The Doctrine of Vibration: An Analysis of Doctrines and Practices of Kashmir Shaivism, By Mark S. G. Dyczkowski, p.44</ref> Kashmir Shavisim sees the phenomenal world (Śakti) as real: it exists, and has its being in Consciousness (Chit).<ref>Ksemaraja, trans. by Jaidev Singh, Spanda Karikas: The Divine Creative Pulsation, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p. 119</ref>
Kashmir Shaivism was influenced by, and took over doctrines from, several orthodox and heterodox Indian religious and philosophical traditions.Template:Sfn These include Vedanta, Samkhya, Patanjali Yoga and Nyayas, and various Buddhist schools, including Yogacara and Madhyamika,Template:Sfn but also Tantra and the Nath-tradition.Template:Sfn
Contemporary Indian traditionsEdit
Primal awareness is also part of other Indian traditions, which are less strongly, or not all, organised in monastic and institutional organisations. Although often called "Advaita Vedanta", these traditions have their origins in vernacular movements and "householder" traditions, and have close ties to the Nath, Nayanars and Sant Mat traditions.Template:Citation needed
Natha SampradayaEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
The Natha Sampradaya, with Nath yogis such as Gorakhnath, introduced Sahaja, the concept of a spontaneous spirituality. According to Ken Wilber, this state reflects nonduality.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Neo-AdvaitaEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Neo-Advaita is a new religious movement based on a modern Western interpretation of Advaita Vedanta, especially the teachings of Ramana Maharshi.Template:Sfn According to Arthur Versluis, neo-Advaita is part of a larger religious current which he calls immediatism.Template:Sfn Neo-Advaita has been criticized for this immediatism and its lack of preparatory practices.Template:SfnTemplate:RefnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Refn Notable neo-advaita teachers are H. W. L. PoonjaTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn and his students Gangaji,Template:Sfn Andrew Cohen,Template:Refn and Eckhart Tolle.Template:Sfn
BuddhismEdit
There are different Buddhist views which resonate with the concepts and experiences of primordial awareness and non-duality or "not two" (advaya). The Buddha does not use the term advaya in the earliest Buddhist texts, but it does appear in some of the Mahayana sutras, such as the Vimalakīrti.<ref>Watson, Burton, The Vimalakirti Sutra, Columbia University Press, 1997, p. 104.</ref> The Buddha taught meditative inquiry (dhyana) and nondiscursive attention (samadhi).
Indian BuddhismEdit
NirvanaEdit
In archaic Buddhism, Nirvana may have been a kind of transformed and transcendent consciousness or discernment (viññana) that has "stopped" (nirodhena).Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref>Johansson, Rune, The Psychology of Nirvana, 1969, p. 111.</ref> According to Harvey this nirvanic consciousness is said to be "objectless", "infinite" (anantam), "unsupported" (appatiṭṭhita) and "non-manifestive" (anidassana) as well as "beyond time and spatial location".Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn
Stanislaw Schayer, a Polish scholar, argued in the 1930s that the Nikayas preserve elements of an archaic form of Buddhism which is close to Brahmanical beliefs,Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn and survived in the Mahayana tradition.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Schayer's view, possibly referring to texts where "'consciousness' (vinnana) seems to be the ultimate reality or substratum" as well as to luminous mind,Template:Sfn saw nirvana as an immortal, deathless sphere, a transmundane reality or state.Template:SfnTemplate:Refn A similar view is also defended by C. Lindtner, who argues that in precanonical Buddhism nirvana is an actual existent.Template:SfnTemplate:Refn The original and early Buddhist concepts of nirvana may have been similar to those found in competing Śramaṇa (strivers/ascetics) traditions such as Jainism and Upanishadic Vedism.Template:Sfn Similar ideas were proposed by Edward ConzeTemplate:Sfn and M. Falk,Template:Sfn citing sources which speak of an eternal and "invisible infinite consciousness, which shines everywhere" as point to the view that nirvana is a kind of Absolute,Template:Sfn and arguing that the nirvanic element, as an "essence" or pure consciousness, is immanent within samsara,Template:Sfn an "abode" or "place" of prajña, which is gained by the enlightened.<ref>M. Falk (1943), Nama-rupa and Dharma-rupa</ref>Template:SfnTemplate:Refn
In the Theravada tradition, nibbāna is regarded as an uncompounded or unconditioned (asankhata) dhamma (phenomenon, event) which is "transmundane",Template:SfnTemplate:Refn and which is beyond our normal dualistic conceptions.Template:Refn
Luminous mindEdit
Another influential concept in Indian Buddhism is the idea of luminous mind which became associated with Buddha-nature. In the Early Buddhist Texts there are various mentions of luminosity or radiance which refer to the development of the mind in meditation. In the Saṅgīti-sutta for example, it relates to the attainment of samadhi, where the perception of light (āloka sañña) leads to a mind endowed with luminescence (sappabhāsa).<ref name="Anālayo-2017">Template:Cite journal</ref> According to Analayo, the Upakkilesa-sutta and its parallels mention that the presence of defilements "results in a loss of whatever inner light or luminescence (obhāsa) had been experienced during meditation".<ref name="Anālayo-2017" /> The Pali Dhātuvibhaṅga-sutta uses the metaphor of refining gold to describe equanimity reached through meditation, which is said to be "pure, bright, soft, workable, and luminous".Template:Sfn The Pali Anguttara Nikaya (A.I.8-10) states:<ref>Harvey, page 94. The reference is at A I, 8-10.</ref>
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
Luminous, monks, is the mind. And it is freed from incoming defilements. The well-instructed disciple of the noble ones discerns that as it actually is present, which is why I tell you that — for the well-instructed disciple of the noble ones — there is development of the mind.<ref>Translated by Thanissaro Bhikkhu, [2].</ref>{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
The term is given no direct doctrinal explanation in the Pali discourses, but later Buddhist schools explained it using various concepts developed by them.<ref name="Harvey, page 99">Harvey, page 99.</ref> The Theravada school identifies the "luminous mind" with the bhavanga, a concept first proposed in the Theravāda Abhidhamma.<ref>Collins, page 238.</ref> The later schools of the Mahayana identify it with both the Mahayana concepts of bodhicitta and tathagatagarbha.<ref name="Harvey, page 99"/> The notion is of central importance in the philosophy and practice of Dzogchen.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Buddha-natureEdit
Buddha nature or tathagata-garbha (literally "Buddha womb") is that which allows sentient beings to become Buddhas.Template:Sfn Various Mahayana texts such as the Tathāgatagarbha sūtras focus on this idea and over time it became a very influential doctrine in Indian Buddhism, as well in East Asian and Tibetan Buddhism. The Buddha nature teachings may be regarded as a form of nondualism. According to Sally B King, all beings are said to be or possess tathagata-garbha, which is nondual Thusness or Dharmakaya. This reality, states King, transcends the "duality of self and not-self", the "duality of form and emptiness" and the "two poles of being and non being".<ref>King, Sally (1991), Buddha Nature, SUNY Press, pp. 99, 106, 111.</ref>
There various interpretations and views on Buddha-nature and the concept became very influential in India, China and Tibet, where it also became a source of much debate. In later Indian Yogācāra, a new sub-school developed which adopted the doctrine of tathagata-garbha into the Yogācāra system.<ref name="Lusthaus-2018" /> The influence of this hybrid school can be seen in texts like the Lankavatara Sutra and the Ratnagotravibhaga. This synthesis of Yogācāra tathagata-garbha became very influential in later Buddhist traditions, such as Indian Vajrayana, Chinese Buddhism and Tibetan Buddhism.<ref>Brunnholzl, Karl, When the Clouds Part: The Uttaratantra and Its Meditative Tradition as a Bridge between Sutra and Tantra, Shambhala Publications, 2015, p. 118.</ref><ref name="Lusthaus-2018" />
AdvayaEdit
According to Kameshwar Nath Mishra, one connotation of advaya in Indic Sanskrit Buddhist texts is that it refers to the middle way between two opposite extremes (such as eternalism and annihilationism), and thus it is "not two".<ref>Kameshwar Nath Mishra, Advaya (= Non-Dual) in Buddhist Sanskrit, Vol. 13, No. 2 (Summer 1988), pp. 3-11 (9 pages).</ref>
One of these Sanskrit Mahayana sutras, the Vimalakīrti Nirdeśa Sūtra contains a chapter on the "Dharma gate of non-duality" (advaya dharma dvara pravesa) which is said to be entered once one understands how numerous pairs of opposite extremes are to be rejected as forms of grasping. These extremes which must be avoided in order to understand ultimate reality are described by various characters in the text, and include: Birth and extinction, 'I' and 'Mine', Perception and non-perception, defilement and purity, good and not-good, created and uncreated, worldly and unworldly, samsara and nirvana, enlightenment and ignorance, form and emptiness and so on.<ref>Watson, Burton, The Vimalakirti Sutra, Columbia University Press, 1997, pp. 104–106.</ref> The final character to attempt to describe ultimate reality is the bodhisattva Manjushri, who states:
It is in all beings wordless, speechless, shows no signs, is not possible of cognizance, and is above all questioning and answering.<ref name="Nagao-1991">Template:Cite bookTemplate:ISBN?</ref>
Vimalakīrti responds to this statement by maintaining completely silent, therefore expressing that the nature of ultimate reality is ineffable (anabhilāpyatva) and inconceivable (acintyatā), beyond verbal designation (prapañca) or thought constructs (vikalpa).<ref name="Nagao-1991" /> The Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, a text associated with Yogācāra Buddhism, also uses the term "advaya" extensively.<ref>McCagney, Nancy, Nāgārjuna and the Philosophy of Openness, Rowman & Littlefield, 1 January 1997, p. 129.</ref>
In the Mahayana Buddhist philosophy of Madhyamaka, the two truths or ways of understanding reality, are said to be advaya (not two). As explained by the Indian philosopher Nagarjuna, there is a non-dual relationship, that is, there is no absolute separation, between conventional and ultimate truth, as well as between samsara and nirvana.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfnp
The concept of nonduality is also important in the other major Indian Mahayana tradition, the Yogacara school, where it is seen as the absence of duality between the perceiving subject (or "grasper") and the object (or "grasped"). It is also seen as an explanation of emptiness and as an explanation of the content of the awakened mind which sees through the illusion of subject-object duality. However, in this conception of non-dualism, there are still a multiplicity of individual mind streams (citta santana) and thus Yogacara does not teach an idealistic monism.<ref>Kochumuttom, Thomas A. (1999), A buddhist Doctrine of Experience. A New Translation and Interpretation of the Works of Vasubandhu the Yogacarin, Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass, p. 1.</ref>
These basic ideas have continued to influence Mahayana Buddhist doctrinal interpretations of Buddhist traditions such as Dzogchen, Mahamudra, Zen, Huayan and Tiantai as well as concepts such as Buddha-nature, luminous mind, Indra's net, rigpa and shentong.
MadhyamakaEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Madhyamaka, also known as Śūnyavāda (the emptiness teaching), refers primarily to a Mahāyāna Buddhist school of philosophyTemplate:Sfn founded by Nāgārjuna. In Madhyamaka, Advaya refers to the fact that the two truths are not separate or different.,Template:Sfn as well as the non-dual relationship of saṃsāra (the round of rebirth and suffering) and nirvāṇa (cessation of suffering, liberation).Template:Sfn According to Murti, in Madhyamaka, Advaya is an epistemological theory, unlike the metaphysical view of Hindu Advaita.Template:Sfn Madhyamaka advaya is closely related to the classical Buddhist understanding that all things are impermanent (anicca) and devoid of self (anatta) or essenceless (niḥsvabhāva),Template:Sfn<ref>Template:Cite book, Quote: "All phenomenal existence [in Buddhism] is said to have three interlocking characteristics: impermanence, suffering and lack of soul or essence."</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> and that this emptiness does not constitute an absolute reality in itself.Template:Refn
In Madhyamaka, the two truths doctrine refer to conventional (saṃvṛti) and ultimate (paramārtha) truth.Template:Sfn The ultimate truth is emptiness, or non-existence of inherently existing things,Template:Sfn and the "emptiness of emptiness": emptiness does not in itself constitute an absolute reality. Conventionally, things exist, but ultimately, they are empty of any existence on their own, as described in Nagarjuna's magnum opus, the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā (MMK).Template:Sfn
As Jay Garfield notes, for Nagarjuna, to understand the two truths as totally different from each other is to reify and confuse the purpose of this doctrine, since it would either destroy conventional realities such as the Buddha's teachings and the empirical reality of the world (making Madhyamaka a form of nihilism) or deny the dependent origination of phenomena (by positing eternal essences). Thus the non-dual doctrine of the middle way lies beyond these two extremes.Template:Sfn
Emptiness is a consequence of pratītyasamutpāda (dependent arising),Template:Sfn the teaching that no dharma ("thing", "phenomena") has an existence of its own, but always comes into existence in dependence on other dharmas. According to Madhyamaka all phenomena are empty of substance or essence (Template:Langx) because they are dependently co-arisen. Likewise it is because they are dependently co-arisen that they have no intrinsic, independent reality of their own. Madhyamaka also rejects the existence of absolute realities or beings such as Brahman or Self.Template:Sfn In the highest sense, "ultimate reality" is not an ontological Absolute reality that lies beneath an unreal world, nor is it the non-duality of a personal self (atman) and an absolute Self (cf. Purusha). Instead, it is the knowledge which is based on a deconstruction of such reifications and Conceptual proliferations.<ref>Abruzzi; McGandy et al., Encyclopedia of Science and Religion, Thomson-Gale, 2003, p. 515.</ref> However, according to Nagarjuna, even the very schema of ultimate and conventional, samsara and nirvana, is not a final reality, and he thus famously deconstructs even these teachings as being empty and not different from each other in the MMK where he writes:Template:Sfnp
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
The limit (koti) of nirvāṇa is that of saṃsāra
The subtlest difference is not found between the two.{{#if:|{{#if:|}}— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
According to Nancy McCagney, what this refers to is that the two truths depend on each other; without emptiness, conventional reality cannot work, and vice versa. It does not mean that samsara and nirvana are the same, or that they are one single thing, as in Advaita Vedanta, but rather that they are both empty, open, without limits, and merely exist for the conventional purpose of teaching the Buddha Dharma.Template:Sfnp
The later Madhyamikas, states Yuichi Kajiyama, developed the Advaya definition as a means to Nirvikalpa-Samadhi by suggesting that "things arise neither from their own selves nor from other things, and that when subject and object are unreal, the mind, being not different, cannot be true either; thereby one must abandon attachment to cognition of nonduality as well, and understand the lack of intrinsic nature of everything".<ref name="Kajiyama-1991" /> Thus, the Buddhist nondualism or Advaya concept became a means to realizing absolute emptiness.<ref name="Kajiyama-1991" />
Yogācāra traditionEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} Template:See also
In the Mahayana tradition of Yogācāra (Skt; "yoga practice"), adyava (Tibetan: gnyis med) refers to overcoming the conceptual and perceptual dichotomies of cognizer and cognized, or subject and object.Template:Sfn<ref name="Gold-2015">Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref><ref>Dreyfus, Georges B. J. Recognizing Reality: Dharmakirti's Philosophy and Its Tibetan Interpretations, SUNY Press, p. 438.</ref><ref>Williams, Paul (editor), Buddhism: Yogācāra, the epistemological tradition and Tathāgatagarbha, Taylor & Francis, 2005, p. 138.</ref> The concept of adyava in Yogācāra is an epistemological stance on the nature of experience and knowledge, as well as a phenomenological exposition of yogic cognitive transformation. Early Buddhism schools such as Sarvastivada and Sautrāntika, that thrived through the early centuries of the common era, postulated a dualism (dvaya) between the mental activity of grasping (grāhaka, "cognition", "subjectivity") and that which is grasped (grāhya, "cognitum", intentional object).Template:Sfn<ref name="Kajiyama-1991">Template:Cite book</ref>Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Yogacara postulates that this dualistic relationship is a false illusion or superimposition (samaropa).<ref name="Kajiyama-1991" />
Yogācāra also taught the doctrine which held that only mental cognitions really exist (vijñapti-mātra),Template:SfnTemplate:Refn instead of the mind-body dualism of other Indian Buddhist schools.<ref name="Kajiyama-1991" />Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn This is another sense in which reality can be said to be non-dual, because it is "consciousness-only".<ref>Raymond E. Robertson, Zhongguo ren min da xue. Guo xue yuan, A Study of the Dharmadharmatavibhanga: Vasubandhu's commentary and three critical editions of the root texts, with a modern commentary from the perspective of the rNying ma tradition by Master Tam Shek-wing. Sino-Tibetan Buddhist Studies Association in North America, China Tibetology Publishing House, 2008, p. 218.</ref> There are several interpretations of this main theory, which has been widely translated as representation-only, ideation-only, impressions-only and perception-only.<ref>Cameron Hall, Bruce, The Meaning of Vijnapti in Vasubandhu's Concept of Mind, JIABS Vol 9, 1986, Number 1, p. 7.</ref>Template:Sfn<ref name="Wayman-1996">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Siderits, Mark, Buddhism as philosophy, 2017, p. 146.</ref> Some scholars see it as a kind of subjective or epistemic Idealism (similar to Kant's theory) while others argue that it is closer to a kind of phenomenology or representationalism. According to Mark Siderits the main idea of this doctrine is that we are only ever aware of mental images or impressions which manifest themselves as external objects, but "there is actually no such thing outside the mind."<ref>Siderits, Mark, Buddhism as philosophy, 2017, p. 149.</ref> For Alex Wayman, this doctrine means that "the mind has only a report or representation of what the sense organ had sensed."<ref name="Wayman-1996"/> Jay Garfield and Paul Williams both see the doctrine as a kind of Idealism in which only mentality exists.<ref>Garfield, Jay L. Vasubandhu's treatise on the three natures translated from the Tibetan edition with a commentary, Asian Philosophy, Volume 7, 1997, Issue 2, pp. 133-154.</ref>Template:Sfn
However, even the idealistic interpretation of Yogācāra is not an absolute monistic idealism like Advaita Vedanta or Hegelianism, since in Yogācāra, even consciousness "enjoys no transcendent status" and is just a conventional reality.<ref name="Lusthaus-2018">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Indeed, according to Jonathan Gold, for Yogācāra, the ultimate truth is not consciousness, but an ineffable and inconceivable "thusness" or "thatness" (tathatā).<ref name="Gold-2015" /> Also, Yogācāra affirms the existence of individual mindstreams, and thus Kochumuttom also calls it a realistic pluralism.Template:Sfn
The Yogācārins defined three basic modes by which we perceive our world. These are referred to in Yogācāra as the three natures (trisvabhāva) of experience. They are:<ref>Siderits, Mark, Buddhism as philosophy, 2017, pp. 177-178.</ref><ref name="Gold-2015"/>
- Parikalpita (literally, "fully conceptualized"): "imaginary nature", wherein things are incorrectly comprehended based on conceptual and linguistic construction, attachment and the subject object duality. It is thus equivalent to samsara.
- Paratantra (literally, "other dependent"): "dependent nature", by which the dependently originated nature of things, their causal relatedness or flow of conditionality. It is the basis which gets erroneously conceptualized,
- Pariniṣpanna (literally, "fully accomplished"): "absolute nature", through which one comprehends things as they are in themselves, that is, empty of subject-object and thus is a type of non-dual cognition. This experience of "thatness" (tathatā) is uninfluenced by any conceptualization at all.
To move from the duality of the Parikalpita to the non-dual consciousness of the Pariniṣpanna, Yogācāra teaches that there must be a transformation of consciousness, which is called the "revolution of the basis" (parāvṛtty-āśraya). According to Dan Lusthaus, this transformation which characterizes awakening is a "radical psycho-cognitive change" and a removal of false "interpretive projections" on reality (such as ideas of a self, external objects, etc.).<ref>Lusthaus, Dan, Buddhist Phenomenology: A Philosophical Investigation of Yogacara Buddhism and the Ch'eng Wei-shih Lun, Routledge, 2014, p. 327.</ref>
The Mahāyānasūtrālamkāra, a Yogācāra text, also associates this transformation with the concept of non-abiding nirvana and the non-duality of samsara and nirvana. Regarding this state of Buddhahood, it states:
Its operation is nondual (advaya vrtti) because of its abiding neither in samsara nor in nirvana (samsaranirvana-apratisthitatvat), through its being both conditioned and unconditioned (samskrta-asamskrtatvena).<ref name="Makransky-1997">Template:Cite bookTemplate:ISBN?</ref>
This refers to the Yogācāra teaching that even though a Buddha has entered nirvana, they do no "abide" in some quiescent state separate from the world but continue to give rise to extensive activity on behalf of others.<ref name="Makransky-1997" /> This is also called the non-duality between the compounded (samskrta, referring to samsaric existence) and the uncompounded (asamskrta, referring to nirvana). It is also described as a "not turning back" from both samsara and nirvana.<ref>Nagao, Gadjin M. Madhyamika and Yogacara: A Study of Mahayana Philosophies, SUNY Press, 1991, p. 28.</ref>
For the later thinker Dignaga, non-dual knowledge or advayajñāna is also a synonym for prajñaparamita (transcendent wisdom) which liberates one from samsara.<ref>Harris, Ian Charles, The Continuity of Madhyamaka and Yogācāra in Indian Mahāyāna Buddhism, BRILL, 1991, p. 52.</ref>
Tantric BuddhismEdit
Buddhist Tantra, also known as Vajrayana, Mantrayana or Esoteric Buddhism, drew upon all these previous Indian Buddhist ideas and nondual philosophies to develop innovative new traditions of Buddhist practice and new religious texts called the Buddhist tantras (from the 6th century onwards).<ref>Williams, Wynne, Tribe; Buddhist Thought: A Complete Introduction to the Indian Tradition, pp. 205-206.</ref> Tantric Buddhism was influential in China and is the main form of Buddhism in the Himalayan regions, especially Tibetan Buddhism.
The concept of advaya has various meanings in Buddhist Tantra. According to Tantric commentator Lilavajra, Buddhist Tantra's "utmost secret and aim" is Buddha nature. This is seen as a "non-dual, self-originated Wisdom (jnana), an effortless fount of good qualities".<ref>Wayman, Alex; Yoga of the Guhyasamajatantra: The arcane lore of forty verses : a Buddhist Tantra commentary, 1977, p. 56.</ref> In Buddhist Tantra, there is no strict separation between the sacred (nirvana) and the profane (samsara), and all beings are seen as containing an immanent seed of awakening or Buddhahood.<ref>Duckworth, Douglas; Tibetan Mahāyāna and Vajrayāna in "A companion to Buddhist philosophy", p. 100.</ref> The Buddhist Tantras also teach that there is a non-dual relationship between emptiness and compassion (karuna), this unity is called bodhicitta.<ref>Lalan Prasad Singh, Buddhist Tantra: A Philosophical Reflection and Religious Investigation, Concept Publishing Company, 2010, pp. 40-41.</ref> They also teach a "nondual pristine wisdom of bliss and emptiness".<ref>Rinpoche Kirti Tsenshap, Principles of Buddhist Tantra, Simon and Schuster, 2011, p. 127.</ref> Advaya is also said to be the co-existence of Prajña (wisdom) and Upaya (skill in means).<ref>Lalan Prasad Singh, Buddhist Tantra: A Philosophical Reflection and Religious Investigation, Concept Publishing Company, 2010, p. ix.</ref> These nondualities are also related to the idea of yuganaddha, or "union" in the Tantras. This is said to be the "indivisible merging of innate great bliss (the means) and clear light (emptiness)" as well as the merging of relative and ultimate truths and the knower and the known, during Tantric practice.<ref>Jamgon Kongtrul, The Treasury of Knowledge: Book Five: Buddhist Ethics, Shambhala Publications, 5 June 2003, p. 345.</ref>
Buddhist Tantras also promote certain practices which are antinomian, such as sexual rites or the consumption of disgusting or repulsive substances (the "five ambrosias", feces, urine, blood, semen, and marrow.). These are said to allow one to cultivate nondual perception of the pure and impure (and similar conceptual dualities) and thus it allows one to prove one's attainment of nondual gnosis (advaya jñana).<ref>Wedemeyer, Christian K. Making Sense of Tantric Buddhism: History, Semiology, and Transgression in the Indian Traditions, Columbia University Press, 6 May 2014, p. 145.</ref>
Indian Buddhist Tantra also views humans as a microcosmos which mirrors the macrocosmos.Template:Sfn Its aim is to gain access to the awakened energy or consciousness of Buddhahood, which is nondual, through various practices.Template:Sfn
East-Asian BuddhismEdit
ChineseEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Chinese Buddhism was influenced by the philosophical strains of Indian Buddhist nondualism such as the Madhymaka doctrines of emptiness and the two truths as well as Yogacara and tathagata-garbha. For example, Chinese Madhyamaka philosophers like Jizang, discussed the nonduality of the two truths.<ref>Chang-Qing Shih, The Two Truths in Chinese Buddhism Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 2004, p. 153.</ref> Chinese Yogacara also upheld the Indian Yogacara views on nondualism. One influential text in Chinese Buddhism which synthesizes Tathagata-garbha and Yogacara views is the Awakening of Faith in the Mahayana, which may be a Chinese composition.
In Chinese Buddhism, the polarity of absolute and relative realities is also expressed as "essence-function". This was a result of an ontological interpretation of the two truths as well as influences from native Taoist and Confucian metaphysics.Template:Sfn In this theory, the absolute is essence, the relative is function. They can't be seen as separate realities, but interpenetrate each other.<ref name="Park-1983">Template:Cite book</ref> This interpretation of the two truths as two ontological realities would go on to influence later forms of East Asian metaphysics.
As Chinese Buddhism continued to develop in new innovative directions, it gave rise to new traditions like Tiantai and Chan (Zen), which also upheld their own unique teachings on non-duality.Template:Sfn
The Tiantai school for example, taught a threefold truth, instead of the classic "two truths" of Indian Madhyamaka. Its "third truth" was seen as the nondual union of the two truths which transcends both.<ref name="Ziporyn-2014">Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref> Tiantai metaphysics is an immanent holism, which sees every phenomenon, moment or event as conditioned and manifested by the whole of reality. Every instant of experience is a reflection of every other, and hence, suffering and nirvana, good and bad, Buddhahood and evildoing, are all "inherently entailed" within each other.<ref name="Ziporyn-2014" /> Each moment of consciousness is simply the Absolute itself, infinitely immanent and self reflecting.
Two doctrines of the Huayan school (Flower Garland), which flourished in China during the Tang period, are considered nondual by some scholars. King writes that the Fourfold Dharmadhatu and the doctrine of the mutual containment and interpenetration of all phenomena (dharmas) or "perfect interfusion" (yuanrong, 圓融) are classic nondual doctrines.Template:Sfn This can be described as the idea that all phenomena "are representations of the wisdom of Buddha without exception" and that "they exist in a state of mutual dependence, interfusion and balance without any contradiction or conflict."<ref name="Hamar-2007">Template:Cite book</ref> According to this theory, any phenomenon exists only as part of the total nexus of reality, its existence depends on the total network of all other things, which are all equally connected to each other and contained in each other.<ref name="Hamar-2007"/> Another Huayan metaphor used to express this view, called Indra's net, is also considered nondual by some.Template:Citation needed
ZenEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} Template:See also
The Buddha-nature and Yogacara philosophies have had a strong influence on Chán and Zen. The teachings of Zen are expressed by a set of polarities: Buddha-nature – sunyata;Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn absolute-relative;Template:Sfn sudden and gradual enlightenment.Template:Sfn
The Lankavatara-sutra, a popular sutra in Zen, endorses the Buddha-nature and emphasizes purity of mind, which can be attained in gradations. The Diamond-sutra, another popular sutra, emphasizes sunyata, which "must be realized totally or not at all".Template:Sfn The Prajnaparamita Sutras emphasize the non-duality of form and emptiness: form is emptiness, emptiness is form, as the Heart Sutra says.Template:Sfn According to Chinul, Zen points not to mere emptiness, but to suchness or the dharmadhatu.Template:Sfn
The idea that the ultimate reality is present in the daily world of relative reality fitted into the Chinese culture which emphasized the mundane world and society. But this does not explain how the absolute is present in the relative world. This question is answered in such schemata as the Five Ranks of TozanTemplate:Sfn and the Oxherding Pictures.
The continuous pondering of the break-through kōan (shokanTemplate:Sfn) or Hua Tou, "word head",Template:Sfn leads to kensho, an initial insight into "seeing the (Buddha-)nature".Template:Sfn According to Victor Sogen Hori, a central theme of many koans is the "identity of opposites", and point to the original nonduality.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Hori describes kensho, when attained through koan-study, as the absence of subject–object duality.Template:Sfn The aim of the so-called break-through koan is to see the "nonduality of subject and object",Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn in which "subject and object are no longer separate and distinct".Template:Sfn
Zen Buddhist training does not end with kenshō. Practice is to be continued to deepen the insight and to express it in daily life,Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn to fully manifest the nonduality of absolute and relative.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn To deepen the initial insight of kensho, shikantaza and kōan-study are necessary. This trajectory of initial insight followed by a gradual deepening and ripening is expressed by Linji Yixuan in his Three Mysterious Gates, the Four Ways of Knowing of Hakuin,Template:Sfn the Five Ranks, and the Ten Ox-Herding PicturesTemplate:Sfn which detail the steps on the Path.
KoreanEdit
Template:See also The polarity of absolute and relative is also expressed as "essence-function". The absolute is essence, the relative is function. They can't be seen as separate realities, but interpenetrate each other. The distinction does not "exclude any other frameworks such as neng-so or 'subject-object' constructions", though the two "are completely different from each other in terms of their way of thinking".<ref name="Park-1983"/> In Korean Buddhism, essence-function is also expressed as "body" and "the body's functions".<ref>Park, Sung-bae (2009). One Korean's approach to Buddhism: the mom/momjit paradigm. SUNY series in Korean studies: SUNY Press. Template:ISBN, Template:ISBN. Source: [3] (accessed: Saturday 8 May 2010), p. 11</ref> A metaphor for essence-function is "a lamp and its light", a phrase from the Platform Sutra, where Essence is lamp and Function is light.<ref>Lai, Whalen (1979). "Ch'an Metaphors: waves, water, mirror, lamp". Philosophy East & West; Vol. 29, no.3, July, 1979, pp. 245–253. Source: [4] (accessed: Saturday 8 May 2010)</ref>
Tibetan BuddhismEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Prasangika MadhyamakaEdit
The Gelugpa school, following Tsongkhapa, adheres to the adyava Prasaṅgika Mādhyamaka view, which states that all phenomena are sunyata, empty of self-nature, and that this "emptiness" is itself only a qualification, not a concretely existing "absolute" reality.Template:Sfn
ShentongEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
In Tibetan Buddhism, the essentialist position is represented by shentong, while the nominalist, or non-essentialist position, is represented by rangtong.
Shentong is a philosophical sub-school found in Tibetan Buddhism. Its adherents generally hold that the nature of mind (svasaṃvedana), the substratum of the mindstream, is "empty" (Template:Bo) of "other" (Template:Bo), i.e., empty of all qualities other than an inherently existing, ineffable nature. Shentong has often been incorrectly associated with the Cittamātra (Yogacara) position, but is in fact also Madhyamaka,Template:Sfn and is present primarily as the main philosophical theory of the Jonang school, although it is also taught by the SakyaTemplate:Sfn and Kagyu schools.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> According to Shentongpa (proponents of shentong), the emptiness of ultimate reality should not be characterized in the same way as the emptiness of apparent phenomena because it is prabhāśvara-saṃtāna, or "luminous mindstream" endowed with limitless Buddha qualities.<ref>Lama Shenpen, Emptiness Teachings. Buddhism Connect Template:Webarchive (accessed March, 2010)</ref> It is empty of all that is false, not empty of the limitless Buddha qualities that are its innate nature.
The contrasting Prasaṅgika view that all phenomena are sunyata, empty of self-nature, and that this "emptiness" is not a concretely existing "absolute" reality, is labeled rangtong, "empty of self-nature".Template:Sfn
The shentong-view is related to the Ratnagotravibhāga sutra and the Yogacara-Madhyamaka synthesis of Śāntarakṣita. The truth of sunyata is acknowledged, but not considered to be the highest truth, which is the empty nature of mind. Insight into sunyata is preparatory for the recognition of the nature of mind.
DzogchenEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}} Dzogchen is concerned with the "natural state" and emphasizes direct experience. The state of nondual awareness is called rigpa.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> This primordial nature is clear light, unproduced and unchanging, free from all defilements. Through meditation, the Dzogchen practitioner experiences that thoughts have no substance. Mental phenomena arise and fall in the mind, but fundamentally they are empty. The practitioner then considers where the mind itself resides. Through careful examination one realizes that the mind is emptiness.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Karma Lingpa (1326–1386) revealed "Self-Liberation through seeing with naked awareness" (rigpa ngo-sprod,Template:Refn) which is attributed to Padmasambhava.Template:SfnTemplate:Refn The text gives an introduction, or pointing-out instruction (ngo-spro), into rigpa, the state of presence and awareness.Template:Sfn In this text, Karma Lingpa writes the following regarding the unity of various terms for nonduality:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
With respect to its having a name, the various names that are applied to it are inconceivable (in their numbers).
Some call it "the nature of the mind" or "mind itself".
Some Tirthikas call it by the name Atman or "the Self".
The Sravakas call it the doctrine of Anatman or "the absence of a self".
The Chittamatrins call it by the name Chitta or "the Mind".
Some call it the Prajnaparamita or "the Perfection of Wisdom".
Some call it the name Tathagata-garbha or "the embryo of Buddhahood".
Some call it by the name Mahamudra or "the Great Symbol".
Some call it by the name "the Unique Sphere".
Some call it by the name Dharmadhatu or "the dimension of Reality".
Some call it by the name Alaya or "the basis of everything".
And some simply call it by the name "ordinary awareness".Template:Sfn{{#if:|{{#if:|}}— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
Garab Dorje's three statementsEdit
Garab Dorje (c. 665) epitomized the Dzogchen teaching in three principles, known as "Striking the Vital Point in Three Statements" (Tsik Sum Né Dek), said to be his last words. These three statements are believed to convey the heart of his teachings and serve as a concise and profound encapsulation of Dzogchen's view, its practice of contemplation, and the role of conduct. They give in short the development a student has to undergo:Template:SfnpTemplate:Sfnp
Garab Dorje's three statements were integrated into the Nyingthig traditions, the most popular of which in the Longchen Nyingthig by Jigme Lingpa (1730–1798).Template:Sfnp The statements are:Template:Sfnp
- Introducing directly the face of rigpa itself (ngo rang tok tu tré). Dudjom Rinpoche states this refers to: "Introducing directly the face of the naked mind as the rigpa itself, the innate primordial wisdom."
- Deciding upon one thing and one thing only (tak chik tok tu ché). Dudjom states: "Because all phenomena, whatever manifests, whether saṃsāra or nirvāṇa, are none other than the rigpa’s own play, there is complete and direct decision that there is nothing other than the abiding of the continual flow of rigpa."
- Confidence directly in the liberation of rising thoughts (deng drol tok tu cha). Dudjom comments: "In the recognition of namtok [arising thoughts], whatever arises, whether gross or subtle, there is direct confidence in the simultaneity of the arising and dissolution in the expanse of dharmakāya, which is the unity of rigpa and śūnyatā."
Other eastern religionsEdit
SikhismEdit
Many newer, contemporary Sikhs have suggested that human souls and the monotheistic God are two different realities (dualism),<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> distinguishing it from the monistic and various shades of nondualistic philosophies of other Indian religions.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> However, some Sikh scholars have attempted to explore nondualism exegesis of Sikh scriptures,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> such as during the neocolonial reformist movement by Bhai Vir Singh. According to Mandair, Singh interprets the Sikh scriptures as teaching nonduality.Template:Sfn Sikh scholar Bhai Mani Singh is quoted as saying that Sikhism has all the essence of Vedanta philosophy. Historically, the Sikh symbol of Ik Oankaar has had a monistic meaning, and has been reduced to simply meaning, "There is but One God", which is incorrect.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Older exegesis of Sikh scripture, such as the Faridkot Teeka, has always described Sikh metaphysics as a non-dual, panentheistic universe.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
TaoismEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
Taoism's wu wei (Chinese wu, not; wei, doing) is a term with various translationsTemplate:Refn and interpretations designed to distinguish it from passivity. Commonly understood as "effortless action", this concept intersects with the core notions of nondualism. Wu wei encourages individuals to flow with the natural rhythms of existence, moving beyond dualistic perspectives and embracing a harmonious unity with the universe. This holistic approach to life, characterized by spontaneous and unforced action, aligns with the essence of nondualism, emphasizing interconnectedness, oneness, and the dissolution of dualistic boundaries. By seamlessly integrating effortless action in both physical deeds and mental states, wu wei embodies the nondual philosophy's essence.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
The concept of Yin and Yang, often mistakenly conceived of as a symbol of dualism, is actually meant to convey the notion that all apparent opposites are complementary parts of a non-dual whole.<ref>Paul A. Erickson, Liam D. Murphy. A History of Anthropological Theory. 2013. p. 486</ref>
Western traditionsEdit
Template:See also Template:Universalism A modern strand of thought sees "nondual consciousness" as a universal psychological state, which is a common stratum and of the same essence in different spiritual traditions.Template:Sfn It is derived from Neo-Vedanta and neo-Advaita, but has historical roots in neo-Platonism, Western esotericism, and Perennialism. The idea of nondual consciousness as "the central essence"Template:Sfn is a universalistic and perennialist idea, which is part of a modern mutual exchange and synthesis of ideas between western spiritual and esoteric traditions and Asian religious revival and reform movements.Template:Refn
Central elements in the western traditions are Neo-Platonism, which had a strong influence on Christian contemplation or mysticism, and its accompanying apophatic theology.Template:Sfn
Medieval Abrahamic religionsEdit
Christian contemplation and mysticismEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
In Christian mysticism, contemplative prayer and Apophatic theology are central elements. In contemplative prayer, the mind is focused by constant repetition a phrase or word. Saint John Cassian recommended use of the phrase "O God, make speed to save me: O Lord, make haste to help me".<ref>John Cassian, Conferences, 10, chapters 10-11</ref><ref name="Freeman-2005">{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> Another formula for repetition is the name of Jesus<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>James W. Skehan, Place Me with Your Son (Georgetown University Press 1991 Template:ISBN), p. 89</ref> or the Jesus Prayer, which has been called "the mantra of the Orthodox Church",<ref name="Freeman-2005"/> although the term "Jesus Prayer" is not found in the Fathers of the Church.<ref>{{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation |CitationClass=web }}</ref> The author of The Cloud of Unknowing recommended use of a monosyllabic word, such as "God" or "Love".<ref>The Cloud of Unknowing (Wordsworth Classics of World Literature 2005 Template:ISBN), p. 18</ref>
Apophatic theology is derived from Neo-Platonism via Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite. In this approach, the notion of God is stripped from all positive qualifications, leaving a "darkness" or "unground", it had a strong influence on western mysticism. A notable example is Meister Eckhart, who also attracted attention from Zen-Buddhists like D.T. Suzuki in modern times, due to the similarities between Buddhist thought and Neo-Platonism.
The Cloud of Unknowing – an anonymous work of Christian mysticism written in Middle English in the latter half of the 14th century – advocates a mystic relationship with God. The text describes a spiritual union with God through the heart. The author of the text advocates centering prayer, a form of inner silence. According to the text, God can not be known through knowledge or from intellection. It is only by emptying the mind of all created images and thoughts that we can arrive to experience God. Continuing on this line of thought, God is completely unknowable by the mind. God is not known through the intellect but through intense contemplation, motivated by love, and stripped of all thought.<ref>Paul de Jaegher Christian Mystics of the Middle Ages: An Anthology of Writings, translated by Donald Attwater 2004, p. 86</ref>
Thomism, though not non-dual in the ordinary sense, considers the unity of God so absolute that even the duality of subject and predicate, to describe him, can be true only by analogy. In Thomist thought, even the Tetragrammaton is only an approximate name, since "I am" involves a predicate whose own essence is its subject.<ref>Koren, Henry J (1955). An Introduction to the Science of Metaphysics. B. Herder Book Co. Template:ISBN, Template:ISBN</ref>
The former nun and contemplative Bernadette Roberts is considered a nondualist by Jerry Katz.Template:Sfn
Hypostatic-union is an incomplete form of non-duality applied to a tertiary entity, neglecting the subjective self.
Jewish Hasidism and KabbalismEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
According to Jay Michaelson, nonduality begins to appear in the medieval Jewish textual tradition which peaked in Hasidism:Template:Sfn
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
Template:ErrorTemplate:Main other{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
One of the most striking contributions of the Kabbalah, which became a central idea in Chasidic thought, was a highly innovative reading of the monotheistic idea. The belief in one God is no longer perceived as the mere rejection of other deities or intermediaries, but a denial of any existence outside of God.Template:Refn
Western philosophyEdit
Baruch Spinoza's formulation of pantheism in the 17th century constitutes a seminal European manifestation of nondualism. His philosophical work, especially expounded in Ethics posits a radical idea that fuses divinity with the material world, suggesting that God and the universe are not separate entities but different facets of a single underlying substance. In his worldview, the finite and the infinite are harmoniously interwoven, challenging René Descartes' dualistic perspective.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
One of Friedrich Nietzsche's philosophical insights also resonates with nondualism. Nietzsche wrote that "We cease to think when we refuse to do so under the constraint of language."Template:Efn This idea is explored in his book On Truth and Lies in a Nonmoral Sense. His scrutiny of conventional thought and language urges a departure from linguistic boundaries.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> This perspective aligns with the nondual notion of transcending dualistic concepts and engaging with reality in a more immediate, intuitive manner.
Academic viewsEdit
OrientalismEdit
{{#invoke:Labelled list hatnote|labelledList|Main article|Main articles|Main page|Main pages}}
The western world has been exposed to Indian religions since the late 18th century.Template:Sfn The first western translation of a Sanskrit text was made in 1785.Template:Sfn It marked a growing interest in Indian culture and languages.Template:Sfn The first translation of the dualism and nondualism discussing Upanishads appeared in two parts in 1801 and 1802Template:Sfn and influenced Arthur Schopenhauer, who called them "the consolation of my life".Template:Sfn Early translations also appeared in other European languages.Template:Sfn
Common-core thesisEdit
The common-core thesis suggests that different mystical traditions may describe similar, if not identical, experiences, despite using different conceptual frameworks and terminologies.Template:Sfn Proponents of Perennialism, such as Aldous Huxley, argue that a universal mystical core underlies all religious traditions. Huxley, influenced by Vivekananda's Neo-Vedanta and Universalism, promoted this idea in his book The Perennial Philosophy.Template:Sfn However, scholarly critiques of this thesis argue that religious experiences are often culturally and doctrinally mediated, rather than pointing to a single, universal experience.Template:Sfn
Elias Amidon describes this common essence as an "indescribable but definitely recognizable reality"Template:Sfn that serves as the ground of all being. He suggests that various spiritual traditions refer to this reality by different names, including:Template:Sfn
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />
[N]ondual awareness, pure awareness, open awareness, presence-awareness, unconditioned mind, rigpa, primordial experience, This, the basic state, the sublime, buddhanature, original nature, spontaneous presence, the oneness of being, the ground of being, the Real, clarity, God-consciousness, divine light, the clear light, illumination, realization and enlightenment.{{#if:|{{#if:|}}
— {{#if:|, in }}Template:Comma separated entries}}
{{#invoke:Check for unknown parameters|check|unknown=Template:Main other|preview=Page using Template:Blockquote with unknown parameter "_VALUE_"|ignoreblank=y| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | author | by | char | character | cite | class | content | multiline | personquoted | publication | quote | quotesource | quotetext | sign | source | style | text | title | ts }}
While some scholars, such as Jean-Marc Renard, argue that nondual awareness is rooted in direct experience or intuition of "the Real", they also emphasize that nondualism differs from monism.Template:Sfn Unlike monism, which may conceptualize reality as a unified whole, nondualism is understood as fundamentally "nonconceptual" and "not graspable in an idea".Template:Sfn
Alan Watts is credited with popularizing this distinction between nondualism and monism, particularly in The Supreme Identity (1950) and The Way of Zen (1957).Template:Sfn He explained that monism often leads to conceptualizing reality as a single entity, whereas nondualism points beyond conceptual frameworks entirely.Template:Sfn
Critiques of the common-core thesisEdit
Critics of the common-core thesis, often referred to as diversity theorists, argue that mystical experiences are not universal but instead culturally and doctrinally shaped. Scholars such as S. T. Katz and Wayne Proudfoot assert that all religious experiences are mediated by language, tradition, and conceptual frameworks rather than reflecting an unconditioned, universal mystical reality.Template:Sfn Katz, in particular, writes that "[N]o unmediated experience is possible, and that in the extreme, language is not simply used to interpret experience but in fact constitutes experience."Template:Sfn This position challenges the idea that nondual awareness is a common mystical essence, arguing instead that what one experiences in religious practice is shaped by their specific cultural and doctrinal background.
Philosopher Keith Yandell further critiques the common-core thesis by distinguishing five distinct categories of religious experiences, each tied to a specific doctrinal framework:Template:Sfn
- Numinous experiences – Found in monotheistic traditions such as Judaism, Christianity, and Vedantic Hinduism.
- Nirvanic experiences – Found in Buddhism, where one perceives the self as a bundle of fleeting states rather than a fixed entity.
- Kevala experiences – Found in Jainism, where the self is understood as an indestructible subject of experience.
- Moksha experiences – Found in Hinduism, with Brahman conceptualized either as a cosmic person or as an impersonal, qualityless absolute.
- Nature mystical experiences – Found in traditions emphasizing union with nature rather than a transcendental or metaphysical realization.
This classification suggests that religious experiences vary significantly across traditions, contradicting the claim that all mystical experiences point to the same nondual essence.
Further criticism comes from Richard King and Robert Sharf, who argue that what one experiences in meditation or mystical practice is largely shaped by pre-existing doctrinal expectations.Template:Sfn In this view, mystical experiences are not independent proofs of a given tradition's truth but are instead a result of the teachings and practices within that tradition.Template:Sfn
For example, Bronkhorst traces the historical development of "liberating insight" in Buddhism, demonstrating that the concept evolved significantly over time. Early Buddhist texts did not provide a clear definition of what constituted enlightenment. Later, the Four Noble Truths became the dominant framework for understanding liberation. Over time, this emphasis shifted again; in some Hinayana schools, liberation was increasingly understood through the doctrine of no-self (anatta) as a fundamental realization. Schmithausen further observes that Buddhist scriptures contain multiple interpretations of enlightenment, suggesting that even within a single tradition, the nature of ultimate realization was not fixed but subject to doctrinal development and reinterpretation.Template:Sfn
These variations challenge the idea that nondual awareness is a universal and timeless mystical experience, instead suggesting that different traditions construct different understandings of what constitutes ultimate reality.
PhenomenologyEdit
Nondual awareness, also called pure consciousness or awareness,Template:Sfn contentless consciousness,Template:Sfn consciousness-as-such,Template:Sfn and Minimal Phenomenal Experience,Template:Sfn is a topic of phenomenological research. As described in Samkhya-Yoga and other systems of meditation, and referred to as, for example, Turya and Atman,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn pure awareness manifests in advanced states of meditation.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Pure consciousness is distinguished from the workings of the mind, and "consists in nothing but the being seen of what is seen".Template:Sfn Template:Harvp present twelve factors in their phenomenological analysis of pure awareness experienced by meditators, including luminosity; emptiness and non-egoic self-awareness; and witness-consciousness.Template:Sfn
See alsoEdit
ReferencesEdit
NotesEdit
CitationsEdit
Works citedEdit
Template:Full citations needed
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation
|CitationClass=web }}
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- {{#invoke:citation/CS1|citation
|CitationClass=web }}
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
Further readingEdit
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
- Template:Citation
External linksEdit
Template:Philosophy of religion Template:Belief systems Template:Universalism footer