Just a construct in my consciousness is illustrated so appropriately by hearing the message from a computer generated image that represents another transcending space and time. I know that isn't the point, completely, but I had to smile at the thought.
That bell sound dissolved into consciousness like salt crystal in water and can't separate it. Non duality. So when Jiddu Krishnamurty said -You are the world, this must be it. He also said that we are all responsible for the evil in the world. Very profound indeed.
I've been trying to really understand this for a while. Thank you so much for the explanation. I finally think I can grasp the concept now! Thank you! It helps me a lot!
Lots of opportunities for understanding in this talk. That there are endless definitions, un-definitions, non-definitions, and anti-definitions of nonduality make-up a kind of grand meta-definition and a pointing to the nature of truth or reality. A person can build their spiritual journey on the inquiry, "What is nonduality?"
Non-duality is when we unravel the gross samskaras which create our sense of self and become pure consciousness, without the filter of our personality.
Profound yet so simple as explained. I would love to see you share your teachings of Trika on the "buddha at the Gas Pump" podcast. What a treat that would be. 🙏🏽❤💫
It's interesting that Awareness seems to "like" duality though, considering that in order to perpetuate life we usually need to combine two. Though asexual reproduction exists and is more effective, it's still vastly rarer than sexual reproduction ( perhaps Awareness is like a mushroom and we are all mycelium, after all we aren't "children" of Awareness... ). Considering an ever oscillating/vibrating Awareness ( a space infinitely expanding in a finite space ), I wonder if sexual reproduction is an expansion event or a contraction event. Is asexual reproduction a simulation of reality. Is Awareness perpetually cloning itself, and dying. In what point of the lifecycle of Awareness are we. Is introducing sexual reproduction an attempt of Awareness to find a way to have more LIKE it, instead of just more OF it. Awareness is bored after all ( The Dream Machine ). Well it's unknowable so I suppose it doesn't matter. Mushrooms are cool.
It's strange looking in the mirror after talks like this. So many questions. Who is looking? what is being looked at? When is this looking happening? Where is this looking happening?
no. The fact that there seem to be three is merely a construct language, that is to say, a function of how your brain has been conditioned by language.
@@SidneyBloom well, maybe if you are mentally *trying* to reach it, yes -- but the actual real experience of first-order reality (i.e. The total collapse into unity of knower, knowing, and known) is by definition the ultimate deconditioned state. the state in which one exists prior to language, as babies do, but retaining full awareness with all one's faculties actively in play.
@@christopherwallis751 Isn't that preconditioned state just the "I" (or the entity we call "I"), and the unity one experience just the unity of this "I"? Because I don't see how one can interpret that experience as "the unity of knower, knowledge and known" without first constructing it as such (all nouns in that sentence being mental constructs) , and the interpretation of that experience being just the awareness of your "I" makes more sense to me. Sorry to bother you with this questions, I'm trying to undertand better what you have explained.
@@SidneyBloom , to understand this better, see the video on the blossoming of awareness verses two and three on this channel. there's a precise explanation of exactly what you're asking about.
Nice exposition... Just one question or critical note: You say (in line with tradition) that the field of awareness is one seamless whole. But isn't it more accurate to say that the field or sphere of consciousness is somehow composed of sub-fields, such as the auditory field, the visual field, the tactile field, etc.? Of course, these sub-fields somehow and quite mysteriously cohere in one total field of consciousness. But still, they are distinct fields that function more or less independently of each other (as the phenomena of blindness, deafness etc. demonstrate). Coming from Western philosophy, I am reminded here of Spinoza's view that the one Substance can be 'accessed' through different, mutually independent attributes... Doesn't this division of the total field of awareness into sub-fields relativize the 'seamless unity' of the total field?
these words (in the video) are just consciousness reflecting on itself; consciousness talking to itself. words like 'I' and 'you' are just figures of speech. there's no teacher and no student. those are just thoughts.
@@christopherwallis751 I suspect that words inherently nullify or muddy up what is being said here, that being that consciousness reflects on its self…Something one might experience but could never express. Hence the use of koans in Buddhism to lead the practitioner away from language and logic into direct unreflective awareness. It seems like none-dual teaching introduces a great many names, ideas and concepts as tools for cultivating understanding. I suppose those details, and the teachings themselves, are the equivalent of the Buddhist teachings that must be abandoned when one enters nirvana…the boat (teachings) that must be let go of once one crosses the river and enters the state of nirvana.
simple. what we call 'sound' is just a vibration within consciousness. likewise with sensation, color, etc. colors are just seeing, and seeing is just a specific modality of consciousness. sounds are just hearing, and hearing is another modality of consciousness, a way that consciousness vibrates. it's not so much something to understand as something to simply notice and wordlessly contemplate.
I too have some difficulty with the notion of ‘vibration within consciousness’. Is this a ‘physical’ vibration which conjures up these apparent objects and sensations? And does consciousness have intention that these objects should appear? Or is consciousness unaware of what object / thought might be about to arise? And why does consciousness bother to have things arise and dissipate? Having written that, I feel that words and thought constructs only serve to take me away from the simple experience of being aware. Thank you Christopher
A critical appraisal of Mr. Wallis' short talk - my comments in lower case: "NONDUALITY IS NOTHING BUT THE WHOLE OF REALITY AS YOU EXPERIENCE IT MINUS THE MENTAL DIVISIONS (~5.23)" the implication is that phenomena remains, experience remains and you remain thus division remains. Mr. Wallis errs in maintaining the existence of phenomena in nonduality "SIMPLY REMOVE ALL MIND CREATED DIVISIONS AND YOU AUTOMATICALLY EXPERIENCE WHOLENESS, ONENESS, UNITY , NO SEPARATION, NO SEPARATE SELF (~7.19) ... EVEN FOR A MOMENT. (~8.55)" division remains and is not non-duality when we mention a moment of experience. time is division. The idea of experience is itself faulty because it entails subject and object. The only comparable example of nondual experience is deep sleep wherein there is no division including subject/object, time or moments. "YOU TASTE NONDUALITY DIRECTLY THEN THE CHALLENGE BECOMES ABIDING IN NONDUALITY - THAT'S THE HARD PART (9.34)" No one needs to abide in their body because we ignorantly accept body as self. So too when Consciousness is Self beyond doubt there is no question of abiding. Until then duality remains real. "AS A VIBRATION OF YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS ~(13.06)" "Vibration" and "your" are still divisions. These conceptions reify phenomena as vibration and consciousness as individual. "EVERYTHING ARISING IS A DIRECT EXPRESSION OF YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS MOMENT TO MOMENT AND EVERYTHING THAT SUBSIDES DISSOLVES WITHIN AND INTO THE CONSCIOUSNESS THAT YOU ARE (15.33)" Again reifying phenomena in transition as "expression" defies nonduality. The idea of arising, subsiding and dissolving in time is illusion.
Mr Cohen seems to be espousing the Vedantic version of non-duality, which is *not* the same as the Tantrik version in which phenomena are real. of course, The important thing is that these different views correspond to different ways of experiencing nonduality. nothing in Mr Cohen's comment suggests to me that he has direct experience of what he is talking about.
'The absolute autonomy of a nonindividual Consciousness which alone exists, containing the whole of reality within the bliss of a dynamic “I”-nature, projects space, time, and the interrelating fluxes of subjective and objective phenomena as its content and form, manifesting itself in this spontaneous ‘extroversion’ through Impulse (icchā), Insight (jñāna), and Activity (kriyā) as the three radical modes of an infinite power.' ~ Tantric scholar Alexis Sanderson, paraphrasing Mahāsiddha Abhinava Gupta
@@christopherwallis751 -If phenomena are indeed real as you suggest, nonduality is violated. -"Experiencing nonduality" is an oxymoron. Who exactly "experiences" deep sleep? Certainly it is not the "I" who brashly makes the claim while awake. -Reason takes a subsidiary position as soon as experience becomes the valid means of argument. -I appreciate your indulgence in this conversation but recognize the intransigence of views. pranams, dear sir.
"if phenomena are indeed real as you suggest, non-duality is violated." -- this is simply untrue, and there is a substantial textual corpus in the Tantrik tradition dedicated to exploring this very topic, and showing that the existence of phenomena and dynamic transformations within Awareness no more violates the principle of non-duality than having a bunch of gold ornaments, different than name form and function, violates the fundamental principle that they are all made of pure gold. or, if you prefer this analogy, how does a diversity of phenomena in the dream state violate the fundamental principle that everything in the dream state belongs to and is an expression of the consciousness of the dreamer?
Just finished iteration 1 listening to entire "Recognition Sutras' from Audible. buying book next. Query: what about those for whom LIFE has not provided a teacher? sometimes wish sooo much for someone to talk with, who wants to grow/evolve etc
This man is such a good teacher. He explains things so darn well!!
Just a construct in my consciousness is illustrated so appropriately by hearing the message from a computer generated image that represents another transcending space and time. I know that isn't the point, completely, but I had to smile at the thought.
What an excellent explanation!!!
So fascinating.., thank u for laying it out so well🙏🙏🙏
The best explanation I've ever heard. Thank you.
This is an extraordinari inspired and inspiring video. 🙏🙏🙏
That bell sound dissolved into consciousness like salt crystal in water and can't separate it. Non duality. So when Jiddu Krishnamurty said -You are the world, this must be it. He also said that we are all responsible for the evil in the world. Very profound indeed.
This is the best and clearest explanation of non-dualism I've heard yet. I really resonate with your teachings, Chris
This has to be one of the most appreciated uploads. 💜🙏
I shared this with a group I am in, and it seems to have resonated well.
Thank you Christopher! It's priceless!
I've been trying to really understand this for a while. Thank you so much for the explanation. I finally think I can grasp the concept now! Thank you! It helps me a lot!
thank you! feel free to share the video!
Thank you so much, that was perfect!! Om🙏🌠
When I was watching the video it brought a smile to my face! Thank you for sharing.
Thank you. I liked what you said about us living in a Mind world. I wonder how it must be like, to live in cultures that are not dominated by mind.
Beautifully explained Chris. Nonduality is to be felt and lived , defining and explaining is not that easy. Thanks .
Lots of opportunities for understanding in this talk. That there are endless definitions, un-definitions, non-definitions, and anti-definitions of nonduality make-up a kind of grand meta-definition and a pointing to the nature of truth or reality. A person can build their spiritual journey on the inquiry, "What is nonduality?"
Powerful indeed!
I love this. Thank you 🙏
Non-duality is when we unravel the gross samskaras which create our sense of self and become pure consciousness, without the filter of our personality.
Profound yet so simple as explained. I would love to see you share your teachings of Trika on the "buddha at the Gas Pump" podcast. What a treat that would be. 🙏🏽❤💫
Sweet scarf.
❤❤
👍🏼👍🏼
It's interesting that Awareness seems to "like" duality though, considering that in order to perpetuate life we usually need to combine two. Though asexual reproduction exists and is more effective, it's still vastly rarer than sexual reproduction ( perhaps Awareness is like a mushroom and we are all mycelium, after all we aren't "children" of Awareness... ).
Considering an ever oscillating/vibrating Awareness ( a space infinitely expanding in a finite space ), I wonder if sexual reproduction is an expansion event or a contraction event. Is asexual reproduction a simulation of reality. Is Awareness perpetually cloning itself, and dying. In what point of the lifecycle of Awareness are we. Is introducing sexual reproduction an attempt of Awareness to find a way to have more LIKE it, instead of just more OF it. Awareness is bored after all ( The Dream Machine ). Well it's unknowable so I suppose it doesn't matter.
Mushrooms are cool.
It's strange looking in the mirror after talks like this. So many questions. Who is looking? what is being looked at? When is this looking happening? Where is this looking happening?
Thank you❤
✌🏽& ❤️
❤❤❤
This is really clear and helpful. Thanks so much❤❤
Direct experience. Does that also require three things? The experiencer, the experience and the experienced?
no. The fact that there seem to be three is merely a construct language, that is to say, a function of how your brain has been conditioned by language.
Christopher Wallis Isn't trying to reach that experience a form of brain conditioning also?
@@SidneyBloom well, maybe if you are mentally *trying* to reach it, yes -- but the actual real experience of first-order reality (i.e. The total collapse into unity of knower, knowing, and known) is by definition the ultimate deconditioned state. the state in which one exists prior to language, as babies do, but retaining full awareness with all one's faculties actively in play.
@@christopherwallis751 Isn't that preconditioned state just the "I" (or the entity we call "I"), and the unity one experience just the unity of this "I"? Because I don't see how one can interpret that experience as "the unity of knower, knowledge and known" without first constructing it as such (all nouns in that sentence being mental constructs) , and the interpretation of that experience being just the awareness of your "I" makes more sense to me. Sorry to bother you with this questions, I'm trying to undertand better what you have explained.
@@SidneyBloom , to understand this better, see the video on the blossoming of awareness verses two and three on this channel. there's a precise explanation of exactly what you're asking about.
Nice exposition... Just one question or critical note: You say (in line with tradition) that the field of awareness is one seamless whole. But isn't it more accurate to say that the field or sphere of consciousness is somehow composed of sub-fields, such as the auditory field, the visual field, the tactile field, etc.? Of course, these sub-fields somehow and quite mysteriously cohere in one total field of consciousness. But still, they are distinct fields that function more or less independently of each other (as the phenomena of blindness, deafness etc. demonstrate). Coming from Western philosophy, I am reminded here of Spinoza's view that the one Substance can be 'accessed' through different, mutually independent attributes... Doesn't this division of the total field of awareness into sub-fields relativize the 'seamless unity' of the total field?
Who are you teaching?
these words (in the video) are just consciousness reflecting on itself; consciousness talking to itself. words like 'I' and 'you' are just figures of speech. there's no teacher and no student. those are just thoughts.
@@christopherwallis751
I suspect that words inherently nullify or muddy up what is being said here, that being that consciousness reflects on its self…Something one might experience but could never express. Hence the use of koans in Buddhism to lead the practitioner away from language and logic into direct unreflective awareness. It seems like none-dual teaching introduces a great many names, ideas and concepts as tools for cultivating understanding. I suppose those details, and the teachings themselves, are the equivalent of the Buddhist teachings that must be abandoned when one enters nirvana…the boat (teachings) that must be let go of once one crosses the river and enters the state of nirvana.
I don't understand what you mean by "vibration within consciousness"
simple. what we call 'sound' is just a vibration within consciousness. likewise with sensation, color, etc. colors are just seeing, and seeing is just a specific modality of consciousness. sounds are just hearing, and hearing is another modality of consciousness, a way that consciousness vibrates.
it's not so much something to understand as something to simply notice and wordlessly contemplate.
Can i say everything that appear in my consciousness is me
you certainly can.
A current in the ocean is still just ocean, though it might convince itself otherwise.
I too have some difficulty with the notion of ‘vibration within consciousness’. Is this a ‘physical’ vibration which conjures up these apparent objects and sensations? And does consciousness have intention that these objects should appear? Or is consciousness unaware of what object / thought might be about to arise? And why does consciousness bother to have things arise and dissipate? Having written that, I feel that words and thought constructs only serve to take me away from the simple experience of being aware. Thank you Christopher
A critical appraisal of Mr. Wallis' short talk - my comments in lower case:
"NONDUALITY IS NOTHING BUT THE WHOLE OF REALITY AS YOU EXPERIENCE IT MINUS THE MENTAL DIVISIONS (~5.23)"
the implication is that phenomena remains, experience remains and you remain thus division remains. Mr. Wallis errs in maintaining the existence of phenomena in nonduality
"SIMPLY REMOVE ALL MIND CREATED DIVISIONS AND YOU AUTOMATICALLY EXPERIENCE WHOLENESS, ONENESS, UNITY , NO SEPARATION, NO SEPARATE SELF (~7.19) ... EVEN FOR A MOMENT. (~8.55)"
division remains and is not non-duality when we mention a moment of experience. time is division. The idea of experience is itself faulty because it entails subject and object. The only comparable example of nondual experience is deep sleep wherein there is no division including subject/object, time or moments.
"YOU TASTE NONDUALITY DIRECTLY THEN THE CHALLENGE BECOMES ABIDING IN NONDUALITY - THAT'S THE HARD PART (9.34)"
No one needs to abide in their body because we ignorantly accept body as self. So too when Consciousness is Self beyond doubt there is no question of abiding. Until then duality remains real.
"AS A VIBRATION OF YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS ~(13.06)"
"Vibration" and "your" are still divisions. These conceptions reify phenomena as vibration and consciousness as individual.
"EVERYTHING ARISING IS A DIRECT EXPRESSION OF YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS MOMENT TO MOMENT AND EVERYTHING THAT SUBSIDES DISSOLVES WITHIN AND INTO THE CONSCIOUSNESS THAT YOU ARE (15.33)"
Again reifying phenomena in transition as "expression" defies nonduality. The idea of arising, subsiding and dissolving in time is illusion.
Mr Cohen seems to be espousing the Vedantic version of non-duality, which is *not* the same as the Tantrik version in which phenomena are real. of course, The important thing is that these different views correspond to different ways of experiencing nonduality. nothing in Mr Cohen's comment suggests to me that he has direct experience of what he is talking about.
'The absolute autonomy of a nonindividual Consciousness which alone exists, containing the whole of reality within the bliss of a dynamic “I”-nature, projects space, time, and the interrelating fluxes of subjective and objective phenomena as its content and form, manifesting itself in this spontaneous ‘extroversion’ through Impulse (icchā), Insight (jñāna), and Activity (kriyā) as the three radical modes of an infinite power.'
~ Tantric scholar Alexis Sanderson, paraphrasing Mahāsiddha Abhinava Gupta
note the *verbs* in the above quote. which, btw, describes my direct experience and that of many other experienced Tāntrikas.
@@christopherwallis751
-If phenomena are indeed real as you suggest, nonduality is violated.
-"Experiencing nonduality" is an oxymoron. Who exactly "experiences" deep sleep? Certainly it is not the "I" who brashly makes the claim while awake.
-Reason takes a subsidiary position as soon as experience becomes the valid means of argument.
-I appreciate your indulgence in this conversation but recognize the intransigence of views.
pranams, dear sir.
"if phenomena are indeed real as you suggest, non-duality is violated." -- this is simply untrue, and there is a substantial textual corpus in the Tantrik tradition dedicated to exploring this very topic, and showing that the existence of phenomena and dynamic transformations within Awareness no more violates the principle of non-duality than having a bunch of gold ornaments, different than name form and function, violates the fundamental principle that they are all made of pure gold. or, if you prefer this analogy, how does a diversity of phenomena in the dream state violate the fundamental principle that everything in the dream state belongs to and is an expression of the consciousness of the dreamer?
Just finished iteration 1 listening to entire "Recognition Sutras' from Audible. buying book next.
Query: what about those for whom LIFE has not provided a teacher? sometimes wish sooo much for someone to talk with, who wants to grow/evolve etc
Life will provide a teacher at the right time (already has, in the form of the RS book!), and perhaps a kalyānamitra (spiritual friend) too.