↖ Homepage of the site 'What to do with your life?'
      

What is Buddhist non-duality?

It is a concept that is quite difficult to grasp, because we Westerners, heirs of a Judeo-Christian culture, tend to interpret non-duality as the end of Manichaeism, that is, to interpret it in terms of good and evil.
I propose that we interpret the notion of non-duality not as opposing what is to what should be, or more precisely, what we would like to be.

The biased Judeo-Christian interpretation of non-duality

In the Judeo-Christian system, humans are often seen as torn between two forces: good and evil. Hence the term duality (1). Good is associated with the search for God, evil with the uncontrolled gratification of passions. The predominance of this representation in Judeo-Christian culture probably stems from the great influence of Saint Augustine and his Manichaean culture. Let us simply note here the near semantic equivalence between: 1. Opposition of good and evil. 2. Manichaeism. 3. Duality.

This dualistic representation of the world leads rather virtuous individuals to live in a predominance of guilt related to their frequent failures to contain their impulses. This is what was at the source of the enthusiasm for Eastern Buddhist wisdom, widely disseminated through the books and films of Arnaud Desjardin, which seemed capable of liberating the individual from this guilt. For individuals from a Judeo-Christian culture who discover Eastern culture, non-duality is therefore initially perceived as the end of confinement in guilt related to duality seen as the opposition of good and evil. The awakening of Eastern spirituality is the promise of happiness accessible in this world.

What is duality?

However, his Indian master, who was not caught in a Judeo-Christian culture centered on the opposition of good and evil, did not tell Desjardin 'Don't be Manichaean' or 'Don't bother if it's good or bad'. According to Desjardin himself, he told him: 'Be one with' which I translate very freely as 'Do not dissociate yourself from the facts' to make the phrase clearer for those without Buddhist culture.

We come to the interpretation I propose for non-duality, which is: do not interpose between yourself and the facts, a representation of what should be.
Here is an illustration of such mental interposition: 'People should be less materialistic' is dual because it consists of mentally creating a second world in which people are less materialistic.

Let us begin by explaining why the individual is tempted to do this. For this, let us return to the basis of philosophy, namely the doctrine of Epictetus: facing a problem, separate what depends on you from what does not depend on you. Fight with all your strength, determination, and intelligence on the part that depends on you, and do not worry unnecessarily about the part that does not depend on you.
As soon as one moves to a dualistic interpretation of the world, that is, one mentally creates what should be, one automatically places the gap between what is and what should be in what does not depend on us, thus we absolve ourselves at will.

The problem with this trick is that it neglects the pernicious aspect of resolving cognitive dissonance. Indeed, when we interpose between ourselves and factual reality what should be, instead of actively opposing, cognitive dissonance often ends up turning against us in the long run and making us more or less agree with what we yet rejected internally, and rightly so, at the starting point. This is illustrated by Stockholm syndrome.

Let us note finally that most of the time, the dilemma of not agreeing presents itself in the form: in a meeting, a person presents a fact you know to be inaccurate. Will you publicly contest it or not?

The Buddhist vision and its limits

In Buddhist tradition, non-duality is explained as being one with the whole. In particular, the creator and the created are one. However, such a definition opens a major difficulty regarding the individual's capacity to oppose tyranny. Such problems arise whenever we privilege a unitive explanation of the world (non-duality), binary (Manichaeism or Yin and Yang), or trinitarian (the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit of Catholicism). This results in infinite debates, such as during the Middle Ages between the unity or the divine trinity.
That is why we retained a definition of non-duality slightly shifted from Buddhist tradition.

Buddhism also contains a major contradiction:
1. The path of wisdom consists of freeing oneself from beliefs.
2. Buddhists believe in reincarnation, in complete contradiction with 1.
Once our definition of non-duality is adopted, we are led to conclude that Buddhism is dual, because it interposes between the world of facts and oneself an imaginary world where reincarnation would be an objective reality.

Buddhism as a doctrine is dual, with the same motivation as the individual: the absolution of responsibility. Indeed, the notion of reincarnation allows dispensing the masses from fighting injustices, and therefore among other things, the privileges of a theocracy, on the grounds that the privileged will be condemned to reincarnate until they resolve the problem on their own.
Here we find the parallel with Catholicism, which by creating the notion of life after death, heaven and hell, invites the masses not to fight social injustices in this world.
That is why Krishnamurti rejects all religions, Buddhism included.

Deepening

See the question 'Not judging'

Consult the chapter 'Effects of Forced Submission: Theory' in the book A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance by Leon Festinger. Basically, the weaker the constraint is but sufficient to obtain the subject's compliance against their inner conviction, the more the inner conviction will be questioned under the effect of cognitive dissonance.

Read Eichmann in Jerusalem by Hannah Arendt:
''The inner emigrant' saves their conscience by not agreeing internally, but without changing their action... so as not to be exposed!''

For a more detailed description of non-duality (Buddhist) resulting from a unitive representation of the world, see the introduction of the book The Sense of Things: Conversations on Non-Duality by Francis Lucille.

Concerning the limits of Buddhism, refer to the documentary Buddhism, the Law of Silence by Elodie Emery and Windrille Lanos, broadcast by Arte, and probably available on Youtube. It shows the inability of high Buddhist dignitaries to take responsibility in the face of an abuse problem.

(1) See the show 'Rencontres' on CBC/Radio-Canada in 1972, at 15:00 (available on Youtube under the title 'Interview with Arnaud Desjardin in 1972')