Spirituality Pop Quiz

Originally posted by vistesd
a) Nondualist non-supernaturalist.

I disagree with the current idea that non-dualism is the seemingly preferred concept. I would offer that dualism is the entire point of the Bible, and even the Koran... that there is a choice to be made. In this vein, I fail to see how any follower of any Abrahamic religion can be a non-dualist. I do not, however, wish to assume anything of your beliefs, or the lack thereof.

Originally posted by Suzianne
I disagree with the current idea that non-dualism is the seemingly preferred concept. I would offer that dualism is the entire point of the Bible, and even the Koran... that there is a choice to be made. In this vein, I fail to see how any follower of any Abrahamic religion can be a non-dualist. I do not, however, wish to assume anything of your beliefs, or the lack thereof.

Understood, and I appreciate the thoughtful post. I diasgree, obviously—and respectfully. I have posted on non-dualism many times on here over the years, especially in the context of Judaism (and the traditional Jewish understanding of Torah generally), in which the non-dualist stream is neither new nor marginal. To shortcut, because I don’t have much time, here is what I recently wrote to jaywill—

Nondualism: Reality is one inseparable whole, in which and of which everything is. It can be synonymous with pantheism or monism, but those terms are sometimes also used with different shades of meaning, and I take nondualism as the more neutral term.


Nondualism versus dualism seems to be the great divide of religious philosophy, to which other divides such as exclusivism/inclusivism and naturalism/supernaturalism might often be related. Zen Buddhism and Taoism are generally nondualist, as is a large portion of “Hinduism”; Christianity is mostly dualist (though there are exceptions, such as Meister Eckhart); Judaism is a mixed bag, but nondualism is a main (if not the main) stream, and is considered “orthodox” a small “o” there).

___________________________________________

Clearly, we are on opposite sides of the divide—and, in my experience, that divide results in a (hopefully cordial) impasse. I’ll just copy/paste the following from another thread, for a bit of flavor (and not to be argumentative)—

“Every definition of God leads to heresy; definition is spiritual idolatry. Even attributing mind and will to God, even attributing divinity itself, and the name ‘God’—these, too, are definitions. Were it not for the subtle awareness that all these are just sparkling flashes of that which transcends definition—these, too, would engender heresy. ...

“The greatest impediment to the human spirit results from the fact that the conception of God is fixed in a particular form, due to childish habit and imagination. This is a spark of the defect of idolatry, of which we must always be aware. ...

“The infinite transcends every particular content of faith.”

—Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook (former Ashkenazic Chief Rabbi of Palestine)


“The primary preoccupation of biblical teaching is not the existence of God, theism as contrasted with atheism, but the fight against idolatry. In all theism there is the danger of idolatry. All theism is idolatry, since expression signifies it, thereby freezing it; except if, somehow, its discourse refutes itself and so becomes atheistic. In other words, the paradoxes of language and its meanings are such that the only discourse possible about God which is not idolatrous is an atheistic discourse. Or: in any discourse the only God that is not an idol is a God who is not ‘God’.”

—H. Atlan, quoted by rabbi and scholar Marc-Alain Ouaknin in his The Burnt Book: Reading the Talmud.

Ouaknin adds: “All the masters of Jewish thought, from the prophets to the contemporary masters, have understood that….”

____________________________________________

Now, I have some appetizers in the oven, and then my wife and do a little (quite unorthodox) Sabbath meal; and I stay off the computer during Sabbath, as one of my small (self-nurturing) disciplines.

Be well, and may life for you be blessing.

Originally posted by vistesd
Understood, and I appreciate the thoughtful post. I diasgree, obviously—and respectfully. I have posted on non-dualism many times on here over the years, especially in the context of Judaism (and the traditional Jewish understanding of Torah generally), in which the non-dualist stream is neither new nor marginal. To shortcut, because I don’t have much tim ...[text shortened]... as one of my small (self-nurturing) disciplines.

Be well, and may life for you be blessing.

I'll keep my answer then, until Sunday or Monday. Thanks for the reply.

And I hope you enjoyed your Sabbath meal. 🙂