I'm glad we're talking about non-duality, though I think that term easily mystifies many people, if not outright scares them away.
Beyond poets, who of course I'm fond of, the philosopher Freya Mathews (For Love of Matter) has for me done a remarkable job of articulating into this subtle area. She refers at times to Taoism, and its use of the terms the "One" and the "Many". We find this also in Emerson (the "One" and the "All"). In both cases, the "One" is not necessarily privileged over the "Many/All". I think there can be an assumption that a non-dual moment must be an experience of the "One", that as subject/object duality is transcended, we enter some kind of fusion state. But obviously, the Buddha did not bump into trees as he walked around. He still knew the boundaries of his "self', but felt that self to be included within a larger "Self". I remember a curious moment with a spider, in which I felt in an intuitive and overwhelming way, that what I had in common with that spider was far greater than our differences. Rational science (ecology) of course would make that same argument very persuasively, but in this moment, it was more of a felt experience, not a deductive one. I think Freya Mathews would be a strong proponent of the "I-Thou" realization you bring up, as opposed to the strictly unitive one. In the non-dual moment, we can still be in relationship to something(s), though that relationship is now felt as immense, profound, sacred, and other such descriptive terms. I think one of the greatest gifts of the wilderness experience is the feeling that we are part of something much bigger. Though this experience is certainly possible anywhere, I do think that it is harder to grasp when one lives completely in an environment of human fabrication. A child raised entirely among buildings, roads, and sidewalks, will inevitably come to see that context as the world. Though larger principles like Time, Space, Consciousness, Nature, Tao, God, Goddess, etc. are certainly fully present in that human-fabricated world, I think it is harder to intuit them, whereas in the wilderness, I think it is hard not to intuit them. It becomes almost self-evident that there is some vast process happening here, and the human is but a small piece therein, and furthermore, a piece like all pieces that is very much sustained by the larger whole. So I want to suggest that a non-dual moment can be as simple as this felt sense that we are part of a bigger whole, and furthermore I'll suggest that most people can feel this relatively easily. One doesn't have to "become" that bigger whole in some kind of massive samadhi unitive state, though I think certain intensive practitioners of meditation may achieve exactly that. But even the everyday feeling of love marks some measure of the non-dual, because it carries connection with it, as opposed to separation. So I can summarize by saying that for me the non-dual implies feeling "what I have in common" as opposed to "what I have exclusive". It implies feeling I am "part of" as opposed to "separate from". I think I look to the ecofeminists and their recurring emphasis on feeling ourselves as members in the "family" that is the living earth. Certainly, the Native American rejoinder "We are all relatives" comes into play here. I guess what I'm saying is that if we assume a non-dual moment requires the feeling/realization "I am everything", then it is going to seem very rare and elusive. But if we reframe it "I am not-other than everything", it becomes more approachable. For example, a single epidermis cell in my left pinky is not "me" but it also is not "other than me". It gets a little trickier if we ask about a single carbon molecule in my left pinky. Well, that's "not me" either, but it also is not "definitively other than me". But since carbon molecules are constantly coming and going between "me" and "the world", it becomes harder to say that even a carbon molecule outside my body is "other then me". So there are levels and levels of this. Turtles all the way down, right? But I'd like to see our ecopsychology be generous in our understanding of non-duality and encourage people to see that when in their everyday lives they feel love, connection, belonging, "part of", and "not-other-than", then they are indeed experiencing some level of non-duality and are already transcending some of the harsh dualistic assumptions of our culture. I want to end with another plug for the wilderness moment. I am remembering Marshall McLuhan: "the medium is the message". In the medium of an entirely human fabricated world, the message is "we are in charge here; we have the right to be in charge here". You can read as many ethical texts ("messages") to the contrary as you want, but it won't make much difference, because the medium is really controlling the dialog. Correspondingly, in a wilderness moment, the medium says "we are not in charge here; Vast Cycles are happening, and we are part". I think this is why so many indigenous cultures couldn't quite buy into the Western worldview. As long as they are still living within the "medium" of wild earth, any "message" condoning human domination and exploitation just won't make sense.
0 Comments
Let's take for a moment the function of Greenway Ecopsychology. What is its purpose? Clearly it is more than just idle or self-referential theorizing. It wants to accomplish a goal, be a contribution to human culture and thereby perhaps be a benefit to all beings (by supporting a more harmonious human interconnection with the whole). You wrote: "So we're working on a map that might at least participate and enhance a very subtle, often hidden, but huge worldwide effort -- to overcome dualistic modes of thought....."
But we also have your example of Antoinette (from "Robert 4"), in which we saw the rigorous and carefully choreographed two-year program that guided her through the study and practices necessary to build up to the potential transformative realizations. So we have a possible challenge of implementation: how to reconcile "worldwide" with the simultaneous recognition that apparently to reap the benefits of the "map", one must apply oneself in a very focused and particular way. It is also a fairly scholarly path, as Antoinette's reading list is extensive and demanding, and of course, it is almost all in Western material, which will impede "worldwide". But I am very struck by your beautiful description of a transformative moment, in which one has "overcome dualistic modes of thought": in every situation (not obsessively, but as often as is comfortable) the "psychology" and the "ecology" are considered as constant guides for processing experience. ("I am now ....." '' it is now....") and, in time there is a "we" that emerges, even an "I-Thou" emerges, and the experience begins to transcend the separate self walking into those mighty "resources" over there. "We" are in each other's presence. For me, this is getting to the heart of the matter. Perhaps we can expand it. Though the map is huge and vast and requires an abundance of words to adequately express itself, when we start getting into the territory of a non-dualistic moment, the words thin out. But I suspect you can say more. So perhaps for a moment let's leave the "how to" aside, and just try to explore the moment itself. What is it? What does it feel like? How might it change our relationship with the world? |
AuthorDiscussion between Walker Abel and Robert Greenway. Archives
January 2015
Categories |