[MD] dualism

[Dan Glover]

Hello everyone

>From: Kevin Perez <kjp_on_moq at yahoo.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
>Subject: [MD] dualism
>Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 05:30:18 -0800 (PST)
>
>Hello,
>
>I posted and participated in discussions here from mid 2005 through
>early 2006.  Since then my curiosity with things philosophical, mystical
>and scientific has lead me to Eckart Tolle, JR Searle and countless bits
>and bites on the Internet.  I traveled to Fordham University recently to
>listen to Richard Rohr speak on "Jesus as the First Non-Dual Teacher in
>the West."  And references to Ken Wilber keep cropping up.  I hope to
>read something of his one of these days.  I have also maintained a
>connection to you all, albeit one way, through http://lists.moqtalk.org/.
>
>Lately (maybe longer than I care to admit) my curiosity has been
>focused on dualism.  Dualism, or rather its resolution, is clearly, to me
>anyway, the impetus for the MOQ.  And it seems to me that dualism is
>at the root of most if not all of the big questions.  Are spirituality (or
>mysticism) and religion, wisdom and education, mind and matter,
>subject and object and being and knowing each a pair of polar opposites
>or is there a oneness to be found?

[Dan

Hi Kevin

It's good to hear from you again. I'm sure I haven't the ability to answer 
your questions properly but I thought I'd take a stab at sharing with you my 
thoughts. Mind and matter are simply two sides of a coin, as Einstein showed 
with his famous equation E=MC². The oneness is found by simply expanding 
one's point of view.

>[Kevin]
>And if oneness is not an illusion then
>how is it realized?

[Dan]
By seeing past the illusion.

>[Kevin]
>I believe that true life is realized when things that seem to be separate
>and dualistic are held together, not balanced.  And that this is difficult.
>Is this what Buddhist's mean when they say "life is suffering?"

[Dan]
Robert Pirsig recommends Steve Hagen's book "Buddhism Plain and Simple" and 
I do too. Hagen likens suffering to a wheel being out of balance so I think 
you are correct in saying that suffering occurs when we separate the self 
from all else.

>[Kevin]
>And I
>believe this is what Richard Rohr means when he says "The path of
>prayer and the path of suffering are the only paths that can break down
>dualistic thinking."

[Dan]
I've heard Rohr's name but I know far too little of his work to comment. 
Whether these are the only paths, I don't know. From what I understand, the 
Buddha tried both paths yet only came to his realization after he'd given up 
and simply sat silent. But again, I am not a Buddhist and there may be 
others here who can give you a better answer.

Thanks again for writing,

Dan