Non Dualism

I recently watched a video interview with Peter Fenwick talking about his research into the nature of the dying process and at one point in the interview he makes a claim about non-dualism. Perhaps it is best to hear his words rather than me summarising. His comments start at 43m 50s into this video:



So I have a question for you all - at least those who have some idea of what non-duality means. When Fenwick talks about non duality he uses the word "merge" and this is what raises the question. What does he mean by merge? Does he mean losing any sense of personal identity? Fenwick talks about the "narrative self" and the ego but I wonder whether this extends to the essential self? The "me" I would identify as my "self". Does merge mean disperse, like dropping an ice cube into tepid water? Or does it mean recognition that there are no boundaries, no separation, while maintaining a sense of selfhood and memories of a lifetime?

I have to say that I thought I had all of this figured out and I have been one to propound the view of no separation. I took this view from the Seth Material although that was only a confirmation of what I'd already tried to comprehend throughout my early adulthood. But I also had the view that no separation was not the same as loss of individuality. Somehow I imagined that both were possible at once - something like wave-particle duality. So I searched the the internet for non duality and came up with this blog post which seems to be expressing my dilemma although I have a little trouble following the philosophical implications.

https://processandspirituality.wordpress...en-wilber/

Eastern mystics tend to teach about reality by negation or “neti neti” (no this, not that), because the only way ultimate reality can be described is by removing any positive idea of what it is (something bound to be limited by human concepts). The idea of an undifferentiated oneness is just as much a limiting human concept as is our idea of a bunch of separated “things”. The “one” of which the non-dualist sages speak then, is not a unity or a diversity, but rather something that isn’t really either but manifests as both. Science has discovered entities the behave like this in the form of subatomic structures that manifest as both waves and particles (things thought to be mutually exclusive opposites before the advent of Quantum Mechanics).

The greatest mystics speak of “non-duality” instead of “no duality.” Non-duality does NOT mean that opposites don’t exist. What it means instead is that apparent opposites are actually deeply united on a level we might not be able to immediately perceive. 

Still, I am no closer to understanding what is meant by "merge". What happens to our sense of self after we die? What happens to our reincarnational personalities? Harking back to Seth, the sub-title of Seth Speaks is: "The Eternal Validity of the Soul". I'm pretty sure that means that the soul identifies as itself and is therefore eternally "valid" as an entity, thus is not subsumed or dispersed. Speaking of reincarnation, the same blog has the following post making some more interesting points.

https://processandspirituality.wordpress...ayahuasca/

The following is from a National Geographic Traveler article about an atheistic writer’s experience with the potent Amazonian psychedelic brew Ayahuasca. Its name means “the vine of souls,” and its active ingredient is the extremely potent psychedelic compound DMT, which is also naturally produced and used by the human body. Here she describes meeting her reincarnational selves:

Now I’m traveling to a realm where I meet my various incarnations from past lives. We are connected to a large wheel; whenever fear energy leaves the top of my head in puffs of dark smoke, it leaves their heads at the same time. Our lives, I am made to understand, are interconnected and dependent. “Past life” is really a misnomer: Outside of linear time, all our lifetimes, all our many incarnations, occur simultaneously. “Other life” seems a more accurate way of describing it.

With some of the individuals, I can guess their historical period from their clothing. With others, I can’t place them at all. There is a balding, overweight, monk-looking guy. The big, muscular warrior with the pointed helmet (who, he says, gives me my present interest in sword fighting and martial arts). The black woman who is a slave in North Carolina. Interestingly, there are only about 15 or so individuals; a spirit tells me that many people average less than 30 total Earth incarnations and that their souls commonly skip centuries, reincarnating only in spirit realms.

And what of the two women who aren’t wearing historically identifiable clothing?

“We are your future incarnations,” one of them explains, lovingly.

I have no reason to believe this writer is familiar with the Seth Material, but these two sources have an identical view on reincarnation. 

I did follow the link to the page in which the "atheistic writer" describes the experience. I was interested to note the following comment:

I’ve told no one this time—especially not my family. I grew up among fundamentalist atheists who taught me that we’re all alone in the universe, the fleeting dramas of our lives culminating in a final, ignoble end: death. Nothing beyond that. It was not a prescription for happiness, yet, for the first couple decades of my life, I became prideful and arrogant about my atheism, believing that I was one of the rare few who had the courage to face life without the “crutches” of religion or, worse, such outrageous notions as shamanism. But for all of my overweening rationality, my world remained a dark, forbidding place beyond my ability to control. And my mortality gaped at me mercilessly.

The author goes on to recount several more experiences with ayahuasca before this passage near the end which is, to say the least, surprising coming from a life-long and committed atheist.

And before me this enormous image of God! He takes me in his arms and coddles me like a child. I know, unequivocally, that I am loved and have always been loved. That I matter and have always mattered. That I’m safe and—no matter what happens—will always be safe. I will never allow myself to become separated from Him again.

As the visions fade and the ceremony closes, I find myself back in the dark hut. But in my mind’s eye I’m still sitting in God’s enormous lap. Don Julio nods and silently smokes his mapacho. The others whisper about their experiences. Winston still didn’t find a way out of his darkness and will extend his time in Peru to do more ceremonies. Katherine sighs luxuriously: She’s been bathing in the heavenly astral realms, having broken through her own issues. Lisa’s darkness hasn’t let up and it’s still my fault; she, too, will be staying in Peru for more shamanistic work.

Me, I’m ready to go home. I sit up with difficulty, as if waking from decades of sleep. It would be easier for me to call it all a dream, a grand hallucination. Then I could have my old world back, in which I thought I knew what was real and unreal, true and untrue. Now—the problem is—I don’t know anything anymore.

[Ninshub]

I have no idea what will happen, and maybe different things happen (different types of merging), at different points of "time" (?) or simultaneously at different levels-dimensions. I tend to think like you that at one level merging does not mean loss of individuality.

What Dr Fenwick is saying is not backed up by the data. I've read thousands of accounts and spoken to several people who've had NDE's during cardiac arrest. They retained (or said they did) all their individuality...it was them in their entirety without a physical body.

My instinct is that he's (publicly) trying to stay within terminology that doesn't upset his peers or make them think he's
lost the plot. Dualism is considered to be absurd. Hindu philosophy, not so much.  

Personally, I think dualism is exactly right, I think there is a subtle body of some type, but I'm just a bloke. I do know Fenwick once told Melvin Morse that he believed in a "gaseous soul" but that was in relative private. Just my thoughts.

What Dr Fenwick is saying is not backed up by the data. I've read thousands of accounts and spoken to several people who've had NDE's during cardiac arrest. They retained (or said they did) all their individuality...it was them in their entirety without a physical body.

My instinct is that he's (publicly) trying to stay within terminology that doesn't upset his peers or make them think he's
lost the plot. Dualism is considered to be absurd. Hindu philosophy, not so much.  

Personally, I think dualism is exactly right, I think there is a subtle body of some type, but I'm just a bloke. I do know Fenwick once told Melvin Morse that he believed in a "gaseous soul" but that was in relative private. Just my thoughts.

AFAIK this question of the subtle bodies is debated among the ancient Hindu philosophers as well, with some even stating the subtle body has gendered characteristics.

In talking to practicing Hindus, I am not sure I ever met one who believed they merge back into the Brahman. Rather Brahman was seen as synonymous with a Godhead (who is usually Vishnu/Krsna). Even the liberation from the cycle of birth & death is often seen as entry into some kind of Heaven.

I do suspect, as you note, that part of the emphasis on this concept of Non-dual consciousness is that an "impersonal" survival is more palatable in academia than the idea of individuals continuing on as actual individuated selves.

AFAIK this question of the subtle bodies is debated among the ancient Hindu philosophers as well, with some even stating the subtle body has gendered characteristics.

In talking to practicing Hindus, I am not sure I ever met one who believed they merge back into the Brahman. Rather Brahman was seen as synonymous with a Godhead (who is usually Vishnu/Krsna). Even the liberation from the cycle of birth & death is often seen as entry into some kind of Heaven.

I do suspect, as you note, that part of the emphasis on this concept of Non-dual consciousness is that an "impersonal" survival is more palatable in academia than the idea of individuals continuing on as actual individuated selves.

Thanks, Sci, interesting !

What Dr Fenwick is saying is not backed up by the data. I've read thousands of accounts and spoken to several people who've had NDE's during cardiac arrest. They retained (or said they did) all their individuality...it was them in their entirety without a physical body.

Evidence from mental mediumship and reincarnation research also support this view. Furthermore, out of body explorers' and shared death experiencers' accounts support dualism as well.

Thanks for the comments. I think that the blog post I linked in my OP had some inkling of what I was getting at. I am not a dualist and by that I do believe there is only one - well - anything. There was no separation to start with and none now. But, as the blog author points out, that doesn't mean that reality is just some homogeneous, undifferentiated blend but rather an infinitely varied expression of creativity within the whole. In the One exists the many. Diversity and non-dualism are both true at the same time. Just as we have sub-atomic structures which are both waves and particles at the same time. That is the real nature of reality.

So when it comes to my problem with what Fenwick is saying, it is a problem of interpretation: is he describing the undifferentiated singularity or is he talking about the soul becoming part of the diverse multitude of souls that are all within and part of the whole? Either way, to my mind, he is wrong. I think the idea of that undifferentiated blend is clearly a mis-statement of the principle of non-duality and I think that the idea of "becoming" non-dual is a nonsense because we are and always have been non-dual. There is no separation, right here and right now.

I look at Reality like I do the Tao ~ Yin and Yang are twins, two aspects of the Tao. They cycle endlessly, giving each other their existence.

Reality is the same ~ the One and the Many exist in perfect harmony. Brahman wears the mask of the individual, enjoying the feeling of distinct individuality.

Oneness is the canvas ~ Duality is the painting on the canvas.

Just to give a few examples of me trying to understand how Oneness and Duality exist at the same time, which I still constantly struggle to comprehend.

I look at Reality like I do the Tao ~ Yin and Yang are twins, two aspects of the Tao. They cycle endlessly, giving each other their existence.

As indeed does the blogger in my OP. Here's what he says:

This is expressed by the yin yang symbol of Taoism. There are two apparently opposing forces united as one, and each contains the seed of the other. Unity implies diversity, and diversity implies unity. Good Implies evil, and vice versa. All supposed distinctions are ultimately the same “force” behaving differently.