Reponse to comment
Comment in bold and my response in normal text
I would have thought …
Any Friction is allways between two different things.Or may be two distinct parts of the same thing.
I would say that the experience of friction always, always involves the expereince two things or two distinct parts of the same thing.
Thus if friction is real in life it implies life is not singular.
If friction is the experience of myself in conflict with something other than myself it does not imply that reality is non dual it just shows that life is experienced as dualistic. This experience of friction is not a Philosophical assertion that reality is dualistic, rather if it is seen in the objective light of Vedanta it has the possibility of being a revelation of my ignorance of the non dual nature of reality.
The clear doubt free vision of Reality, which is Vedanta, is a discovery that there is only Reality without a second. In this vision there is no such thing as my OWN existence. But this vision is not available to me when I am upset with my wife. There is the distinct experience of me and there is a distinct experience of her and there is a very convincing experience of me fighting with her. Even though from the absolute context all experiences are simply appearances coming and going in THIS present awareness in which these words are appearing, our everyday experience does not generally tend to conform to this understanding or vision. I may hold philosophically that I am the self and that reality is non dual but my everyday experiences (which are happening) of friction show me very clearly that I in fact hold other notions and do not REALLY have this vision. In terms of experience which is an appearrency, I am enclosed within a subjective vision of duality.
That there could be more than two lifes. Or may be two distinct parts of the same one life, which make the friction possible.
The fact that we talk about the experience of the name and form pot does not mean we are saying that the pot and the clay are two different things. The fact that we talk about experience does not mean that we are saying that reality and experiences are two different things. However with that said Traditional Vedanta does not deny the experience of the name and form pot or the experience of all the names and forms that ARE our experience. Rather it understands experience in the light of its vision, as mere appearances.
Every day experience is very useful in discovering what notions we REALLY hold and can become a workshop in which to make our minds pure and steady so that we can assimilate the Vedantic Vision.
However in a given moment of this apparent “friction” there can be and only is one life( or in a given moment there is only one moment and not two moments) , WHICH IN REALITY CANNOT BE CALLED AS EVEN ONE, and rather undivided and partless.
This may be the vision but it is not the vision when we are having the experience of being upset with things other than myself.
an understanding , that happens in this singular LIFE, that it is indeed so…..that life does not have parts let alone any friction bewteen them , is the solution for all or any suffering or rather this “friction”.
Expereintial life does have parts and has friction between them. This can be no other way when I am identified with one part(mind body complex) Denial of expereince will not solve the problem, only understanding the expereince in the light of the vision of Vedanta does that. However this understanding is not possible unless the mind BECOMES (some non dualists seem to hate this word) pure and steady relatively speaking. This can’t happen without the yoga of objectivity (karma yoga) that is unfolded in the Gita.
But thanks to you I harbour no more of such ideas. What a Dunce I am! Gee thanks mate
I find that I can harbour can all sorts of ideas from moment to moment. In terms of expereince I am clear and objective one moment (relatively speaking) and entirely subjective at another moment.
