“The aspect of God that is beyond ‘being’ is the aspect of God that we should not speak of. Because that’s what it is, that’s what it is not.”~Jonathan Pageau ☕️

I am so glad to see this video. I talked about this with my friend a few days ago. Ever since I first heard about the communal ontology from you, I thought, if all of creation is interdependent and dependent on God, then it is functionally One, so perhaps this could demonstrate some sort of underlying unity which transcends dualism precisely through the dualism of distinction. However, I was hesitant to share this idea because of the associations non-dualism has with eastern mysticism. I am glad to hear people like you and Pageau agree

"the nondual looks like a king on a cross" that's extremely profound. wow.

"Keep My Wife's Name Out Of Your Fking Mouth!"

“What we talk about” is another way of saying ‘doctrine’. The Easterners have been saying all along that all doctrine, even doctrine which claims to be exclusive, such as normative Christianity, as Pageau demonstrates here, is just fingers pointing at the moon, and to say that there can only be ‘one finger’ pointing at the moon, is to confuse the finger with the moon. To say that the Absolute and the Infinite can only be symbolized by one symbol or form, is to limit the Absolute and Infinite. It’s a metaphysical impossibility.

Might i dare to say that while Christ is the only one who managed to join the two together, we can also participate in that very same mystery through the sacraments of baptism and the holy eucharist. "I live, yet not I, but Christ liveth in me."

Duality - a single thing processing its own division.

Never heard it expressed so clearly. Thank you.

Does the divine manifest itself through mystery?

Wow.This is great.As a ex bhuddist coming to catholic can I bring up my idea of non dual marian.I always thought there was a meeting ground.Ive found some stuff on non dual christianity but its rare.Im seeking a confluence of beleifs.

9:08 “As soon as people try to make [the duality of being and nothingness] too manifest, try to declare it too strongly, then you get- (groans), then you get some ridiculous tantric figure eating rotten fish.” I hear you Pageau, I hear you. But *on the other hand,* when you get spiritual authorities trying to hide and suppress the non-dual aspects of spirituality, behaving as if it wasn’t there while acknowledging it for themselves, we can become obliged to believe absurdities like, idk… an ontologically fundamental soteriological predestination of a tragically small group of people? When becoming complacent with an attitude of ‘non-duality for me but not for thee,’ people easily get to justify whatever the hell they want with the aphorism that even duality (for your mandatory beliefs) has its place in the potentiality of non-dual “reality” (where I’m allowed to be more flexible). Which I guess gets back to his original point anyway, we should be careful when we talk about it, explicitly or implicitly.

Thanks for posting this thoughtful discussion. After many years I have come to see non-dualism as a view, or doctrine, that doesn't really fit Western approaches very well. Indian Non-Dualism has centuries of thought and practice behind it and I think this context matters. This context is not shared in the West. And I think that because of this adopting doctrines like Non-Dualism leads to confusion and the kind of misunderstandings that Pageau refers to. For example, Shankara was an ascetic and set up locations for ascetic practice that survive today. But I don't see any Western Non-Dualists arguing for ascetic practice as a necessary component of the Non-Dual approach. // Non-Dualism has a certain status in the West these days and it is rarely questioned. But perhaps it is possible to see Non-Dualism as a way of talking, and therefore simply a tool that can be effectively used in certain contexts rather than the pinnacle of the spiritual ascent. Non-Dualism has its inherent weaknesses, which Pageau touches on, but it seems difficult to highlight those shortcomings. // Thanks again for the video.

0 to 1 to 2 -----> 10000 things. well said Jonathan.

It's very interesting to hear what he's trying to communicate because if he knew at the time that nonduality is beyond good and evil then he would understand that duality cannot "create" nonduality. Also what is evil is only described as such by the traditions, culture, and language that makes that classifications of "evil" evil and "good" good. The positive and negative. The yin and yang. As long as whatever it is comes from love and is pure without distortions or illusions it is "good". Nature is amoral and shows no mercy. There's no good in a tornado or earthquake, but there's no evil either. Nature takes no pleasure out of the suffering of it's children. It does so because of it's purpose. To be strong and beyond all animals and humans living. With hopes that we may be humbled and listen and learn from it and the effects it brings.

Absolutely agree with Johnathan. But....In eastern thought, we live quite happily with the paradox because we talk about it all time, because we know wecare living it out, non duality has been taught for centuries, andcl we have some very rare examples of non duality manifesting itself in human form, just like Jesus did. This discussion has to be seen rightfully in its western context only and not as a fixed position...although Johnsthans warnings about the possibility of crazy spinoffs is universal, that doesnt mean we should turn away from the GOOD when it comes to us. Youvwill know it always by its sacrifice and absolute compassion foe all creatures.

❤

Whatever people want to think about the exclusivism of Christianity when it comes to non-dualism, I implore you to think of it this way instead: While there may be other eastern religions that share a non-dual ontology, the journey of actually living into that truth with those religions typically involves the self-annihilation of subject and identity. In contrast, Christianity has an ethos of preserving and embracing the particular despite one’s surrender to the universal. Forget for a moment about convincing someone that Christianity is more foundational in regards to the ever nebulous ultimate and universal truth. (And heavens, don’t guilt trip them for an ontology they probably took reluctantly) Instead, just ask them if they’d like to transform or annihilate their personality, because that essentially is the difference between the Christian and Buddhist esoteric paths.

If god was unifying in a an all encompassing type way where love and hate bottom and low we’re equal under his love then the apple would have been a paradox. Unity creates non dualism in humans so to tell them no is the same as he’s making the apple inevitable

Potential is not nothing, it's being.

even the way he talks about one interpretation being the light way and one interpretation being a "monster eating the world" is dualistic. which is it? non dual or dual? lol.

Idk why, but this trying of non-dualism manifest seems similar to when Jews wanted Jesus to prophesy, when he was put on trial with Barabbas

Jonathan 'pseudo dionysius' Pageau

The Aghoris?

I don't know how to be comfortable with the unknown.

nothing is evil is simply the quote from god itself in genesis so to say, everything he created was good, end. MAN fall into dual thinking so to say in partacing of the knowldge of right and wrong(hebrew knows no word evil there..), so only because man expiriences life in a dual way doesnt mean it is this way, so how can one say there is evil and on the other hand say everything goes according to gods plan??? This would include that god creates evil which is not comparible with genesis again. All we do and all what god gives us is to free us from the illusion of seperatness and dual expirience, which is only possible in a renewle of the mind(in hebrew the heart) what jesus calls to be born again(right here and now), which is only possible in following gods will not "our" will which is simply the forces of nature/body, we have gods spirit within already from birth, but its completely veiled through biology and wrong society behaviour, the whole story of the tanach is the story of the evolution(internal) of the human being which without god is only an intelectual animal lead by its lusts, this is the symbol of being a slave in egypt, moses is the moral nature of man deliver us out of pure carnal minds(still way away from being a son of god, guess why moses never saw the promised land, which is no literal place, because a miserable animal isnt in peace anywhere)

How can Christianity be non-dual when it's taught that there's an infinite gap between God and the cosmos? That's duality, plain and simple. Non-dual Christianity says that there is no separation between God and the cosmos - between the immanent and the transcendent, the finite and the infinite, the temporal and the eternal, the manifest and the unmanifest, etc.

Non Duality and Creatio Ex Deo is Hinduism. Christianity is duality and Creatio Ex Nihilo. God created the cosmos seperate from him , there is a creator/creature distinction.

Was that Keiji Nishitani mentioned by Orthobros? 🫨 I read his Self Overcoming of Nihilism like a year or two ago.