Non-Dual Christianity

[Akita Suggagaki]

Anyone else lean this way?

My interest started about 1976 with my interest in meditation and feeling a sense of connection. Then I discovered Thomas Merton, Pierre Teilhard De Chardin and Bede Griffiths and realized that such a view is not necessarily incompatible with Christianity.


"In Eastern Orthodox Christianity, it’s carried principally in the tradition of hesychasm, a prayer with unflagging emphasis on “putting the mind in the heart.” In the Western tradition, Meister Eckhart, the Rhineland mystics, and, in our own times, Bernadette Roberts come immediately to mind. I also see it strongly in the 14th century classic The Cloud of Unknowing."

"Richard Rohr talks about nonduality being at the center of the Christian tradition, as articulated through the belief that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine."
Cynthia Bourgeault on Christian Nonduality | The Garrison Institute.

[the WWMC sub-forum is for liberal Christians and non-liberal Christian members are not allowed to debate in this forum.]

 

[athenken]

In true Christianity, there is no room for that kind of meditation. The only kind of meditation that is useful in Christianity is to study the bible and be in prayer, which is to ask the Holy Spirit to fill you with His influence.

The kind of meditation being spoken of here would be to attempt to serve two masters.

 

[SkyWriting]

In true Christianity, there is no room for that kind of meditation. The only kind of meditation that is useful in Christianity is to study the bible and be in prayer, which is to ask the Holy Spirit to fill you with His influence.

The kind of meditation being spoken of here would be to attempt to serve two masters.

Unless there was no other master, like in this case.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Thanks for your opinions.

How do you interpret:
John 17:20-23

I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

 

[zippy2006]

Anyone else lean this way?

My interest started about 1976 with my interest in meditation and feeling a sense of connection. Then I discovered Thomas Merton, Pierre Teilhard De Chardin and Bede Griffiths and realized that such a view is not necessarily incompatible with Christianity.


"In Eastern Orthodox Christianity, it’s carried principally in the tradition of hesychasm, a prayer with unflagging emphasis on “putting the mind in the heart.” In the Western tradition, Meister Eckhart, the Rhineland mystics, and, in our own times, Bernadette Roberts come immediately to mind. I also see it strongly in the 14th century classic The Cloud of Unknowing."

"Richard Rohr talks about nonduality being at the center of the Christian tradition, as articulated through the belief that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine."
Cynthia Bourgeault on Christian Nonduality | The Garrison Institute.

I don't find much of this accurate. I've read hesychasts, Eckhart, The Cloud of Unknowing, Merton, and Rohr. The only source from this article I haven't read is Bernadette Roberts.

Nonduality means, of course, that there is some lack of duality in reality. In religious contexts it usually means there is no duality between self and world, or else between self and God. This isn't part of the Christian tradition, and the only author above who would tempt it is Rohr (who is not a scholar). The other four authors can be taken out of context to imply non-dualism, but if you read them more fully they clearly do not believe it.

Bourgeault's claim of nonduality is rather different. To quote the article:

"Centering Prayer is probably the most effective direct trajectory to laying the neurological foundations for the stabilization of nondual teaching. It’s early patterning in “objectless awareness”—which is being able to hold attention in a state of alert but diffuse awareness, rather than focused on an object like the breath or a mantra—and the action itself of letting go of objects of attention tends to drop the mind deeper down in the body, into the region of the chest or heart."
​

This is all true, and perceptual depth is a general consequence of practices like contemplation, hesychasm, or eastern meditation. Perceptual depth or these altered states of consciousness aren't actually the goal of Christian prayer, but they are certainly present in Christianity. But perceptual depth or unification of perception isn't nonduality, despite the fact that eastern meditators often seem to have drawn the metaphysical conclusion of nondualism from these experiences. That's understandable, for these experiences often bring with them a temporary loss of sense of self, or else a sense that one "merges" with another reality such as a person, nature, or God.

Obviously deep prayer experiences in which we draw closer to God are unifying in all sorts of ways. They can more closely unify us with God, each other, creation, or ourselves, and that is a valuable and beautiful experience. But nondualism isn't a conclusion that one who has these experiences needs to draw. For Christianity nondualism is an error. There can be deep unification without nondualism.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

For Christianity nondualism is an error. There can be deep unification without nondualism.

Error is a matter of opinion. How many Christians are in error according to other Christians. How can there be "deep unification without non-dualism"? Other than a figure of speech? Non-Dualism simply meaning "Not Two". That does not deny the reality of our relative independence and individuality. It does recognize the deeper reality of all things held together in Christ.

 

[Greengardener]

I'm pretty simple, and I've always realized that whenever man speaks, the content is necessarily limited or possibly corrupted -in comparison to when God speaks. Jesus said He desired that we be one with Him as He is one with His Father. I don't know about all the writers referenced, but I trust Jesus. He not only spoke the truth, He IS the Truth.

 

[zippy2006]

How can there be "deep unification without non-dualism"? Other than a figure of speech? Non-Dualism simply meaning "Not Two". That does not deny the reality of our relative independence and individuality.

There can be deep unification without nondualism when there remain two. For example, in marriage the two become one flesh but they are still two. Nondualism is incompatible with independence and individuality. The author of this article is just using "nondualism" to describe perceptual states of experience. That's not what the word means.

 

[Silmarien]

Error is a matter of opinion. How many Christians are in error according to other Christians. How can there be "deep unification without non-dualism"? Other than a figure of speech? Non-Dualism simply meaning "Not Two". That does not deny the reality of our relative independence and individuality. It does recognize the deeper reality of all things held together in Christ.

Are you familiar with nondualism in its native context? I associate it most strongly with the Advaita Vedanta branch of Hinduism, where it really does ultimately deny the reality of independence and individuality. Nondualism entails that there is only one thing in reality, God, and that you are therefore in a very real sense God yourself.

Nondualism is very much not at the heart of the Christian tradition, since the idea that everything is God is in direct conflict with the idea that one and only one particular person was simultaneously fully human and fully divine. I'm not sure it's compatible with any of the Abrahamic traditions (though Sufi Islam certainly tries), but it really torpedos the most basic claim of Christianity.

I'm fond of nondualism as a metaphysical position, even if I don't think it's correct, but I wouldn't conflate it with mystical experiences more broadly.

 

[GACfan]

Anyone else lean this way?

My interest started about 1976 with my interest in meditation and feeling a sense of connection. Then I discovered Thomas Merton, Pierre Teilhard De Chardin and Bede Griffiths and realized that such a view is not necessarily incompatible with Christianity.


"In Eastern Orthodox Christianity, it’s carried principally in the tradition of hesychasm, a prayer with unflagging emphasis on “putting the mind in the heart.” In the Western tradition, Meister Eckhart, the Rhineland mystics, and, in our own times, Bernadette Roberts come immediately to mind. I also see it strongly in the 14th century classic The Cloud of Unknowing."

"Richard Rohr talks about nonduality being at the center of the Christian tradition, as articulated through the belief that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine."
Cynthia Bourgeault on Christian Nonduality | The Garrison Institute.

If I may, I would like to suggest that you include a reminder in your OP that the WWMC sub-forum is for liberal Christians and non-liberal Christian members are not allowed to debate in this forum.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

It does not have to deny the existence of independence. It is not an either/ or " case but "both/ and". I am thinking more the qualified. Nondualism of Ramanuja.

Christians do not seem to have a problem with God as both three and one. Just extend the thinking. How does the Holy Spirit dwell within? Ina body part? No. In our thoughts, mind? Yes but also more. In our spirit, soul? Yes, but what do we mean by that?

Colossians 1:15 The Son is the image of the invisible God, the first born over all creation. 16 For in him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through him and for him. 17 He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Nondualism is very much not at the heart of the Christian tradition, since the idea that everything is God is in direct conflict with the idea that one and only one particular person was simultaneously fully human and fully divine. I'm not sure it's compatible with any of the Abrahamic traditions (though Sufi Islam certainly tries), but it really torpedos the most basic claim of Christianity.

Jesus fully realized and understood his divine nature. The rest of us are still enmeshed in an egoistic delusion and do not realize our true nature. And yes, most in the Abrahamic traditions hold fast to the permanence of the egoistic delusion.

That is not to say our individuality is a delusion; only the importance we place on it.

 

[Silmarien]

Jesus was a unique case in that he fully realized and understood his divine nature. The rest of us are still enmeshed in en egoisticd elusion and do not realize our true nature. And yes, most in the Abrahamic traditions hold fast to the permanence of the egoistic delusion.

Alright. There are versions of progressive Christianity that take this approach--Marcus Borg's panentheism comes to mind, but Jesus would not really be a unique case if he merely fully realized and understood his divine nature. Any number of Hindu gurus could be said to have reached the same state and not still be enmeshed in an egoistic delusion.

You're also going to have trouble getting around the fact that Jesus doesn't really teach nondualism. There are hints of having a divine understanding of his own mission (though even there, he distinguishes between himself and the Father in a way that would be very odd for a nondualist), but there's nowhere in his teachings where he's telling people that they have to just recognize their own divine nature and realize that they too are God. That's pure Hinduism.

And Hinduism is great. If you think nondualism is true, then Hinduism is really the closest thing you're going to get to a true religion, but I don't think you can import it back into Christianity without going full deconstructionist and making the texts say a bunch of stuff that they really don't.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Alright. There are versions of progressive Christianity that take this approach--Marcus Borg's panentheism comes to mind, but Jesus would not really be a unique case if he merely fully realized and understood his divine nature. Any number of Hindu gurus could be said to have reached the same state and not still be enmeshed in an egoistic delusion.

We can always be skeptical about Hindu gurus and avatars seem to be mostly mythological.

You're also going to have trouble getting around the fact that Jesus doesn't really teach nondualism. There are hints of having a divine understanding of his own mission (though even there, he distinguishes between himself and the Father in a way that would be very odd for a nondualist), but there's nowhere in his teachings where he's telling people that they have to just recognize their own divine nature and realize that they too are God. That's pure Hinduism.

The Gospel of John can be quite Non-Dual and though Jesus may not explicitly state human nature is also divine he does speak of invitation to (realize our) divine sonship for all of us.

And Hinduism is great. If you think nondualism is true, then Hinduism is really the closest thing you're going to get to a true religion, but I don't think you can import it back into Christianity without going full deconstructionist and making the texts say a bunch of stuff that they really don't.

But Hinduism tends to deny the reality of our separate identity entirely, our phenomenal world as illusion. Non-dualism does not. It does call for more, as I said, " both and". So scripture can speak in some places to the practical, functional pluralism or duality and in other places to the deeper unity. At least the New Testament does that more than the Old. And yet the Jewish Kabbalah tradition leans this mystical way.

 

[Silmarien]

We can always be skeptical about Hindu gurus and avatars seem to be mostly mythological.

Why should we be skeptical of Hindu gurus? More importantly, why should we not be skeptical of Jesus if we think nondualism is true? He is quite explicitly teaching dualism in things like the Lord's Prayer, and there's no indication that this is just another path towards self-realization like there is in some versions of Hinduism.

The Gospel of John can be quite Non-Dual and though Jesus may not explicitly state human nature is also divine he does speak of invitation to (realize our) divine sonship for all of us.

I would consider the Gospel of John very mystical, but I don't see it as particularly nondualistic. The exclusiveness of his claim to divinity there really strikes me as pretty incompatible with the idea that he's simply fully realized something that is technically possible for anyone. (I also don't really think much of it goes back to Jesus himself, but that's beside the point.)

Now, there is obviously a whole theme in Christian theology concerning sanctification/theosis. God became man so that man might become God, etc., but that doesn't really eliminate the Creator/creature distinction in the way that nondualism would.

But Hinduism tends to deny the reality of our separate identity entirely, our phenomenal world as illusion. Non-dualism does not. It does call for more, as I said, " both and". So scripture can speak in some places to the practical, functional pluralism or duality and in other places to the deeper unity. At least the New Testament does that more than the Old. And yet the Jewish Kabbalah tradition leans this mystical way.

I'm not sure we're using "nondualism" to mean the same thing, since the word is explicitly associated with the Hindu tradition of Advaita Vedanta. It's a translation of Advaita, which literally means "not-duality." The whole idea of nondualism comes out of Vedanta philosophy, so you can't define it to mean something distinct from Advaita Vedanta without confusing anyone familiar with Vedanta in the process.

I don't know how you're using the word "nondualism" if you don't mean to actually invoke Advaita Vedanta, and using Vedic rather than Christian terminology unfortunately conceals much more than it clarifies. If you have in mind a sort of Eastern Orthodox weak panentheism + theosis, then I'd agree that it's perfectly compatible with Christianity. If you're eliminating the distinction between Creator and Creation and rationalizing away the Incarnation, then you've moved into very different territory.

I should probably specify: I obviously don't lean towards non-dual Christianity (unless you count Christian Platonism), but I did spend about a year debating between Western theism and Vedic nondualism. Theism won out, but I'm still fond of Advaita. It's my pet crazy metaphysical theory I think is false. I'm not at all convinced that qualified forms of nondualism are coherent, though. It's like the type of materialist who hints towards eliminativism and then draws short at the last minute and insists that they don't really mean that the mind is an illusion. There are consequences to a truly monistic ontology--either individuality is an illusion or not, but I don't think it can be sort of an illusion but actually real. (Unless you're working with a qualified dualism.)

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Yes, qualified. Ramanuja was the main proponent of Vishishtadvaita. In more recent times. Henri Le Saul (Abhishiktananda), Bede Griffiths, Raimundo Panikkar come ot mind.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

Hindu gurus have been tarnished. But all this does indeed seem to undermine the exclusive claims about Jesus. But those claims of his sonship and divinity take us into mystery anyway. What does it mean to be the Son of God when being the son is usually the result of a begottening process in time? Since you are familiar with Eastern thinking it seems comparable to Parusha, a primordial Person. But all this, Christian or nonChristian, is attempt to talk about something ineffable.

The special appeal for me is that I beleive we in the west are imbalances with far too much emphasis on or individuality that out right denies our connection with each other as well as God. We are stuck in "we/they" and do not see ourselves in others, not Christ in others. Instead we see enemies, evils (other than "us" of course), only the transcendence of God. How about the immanence?

 

[bekkilyn]

At the same time though, Christianity isn't actually Dualism either. People think in terms of God vs. Satan, Good vs. Evil, etc. as if they are two opposing unique forces, but evil isn't so much a force in itself, but is instead a corruption of good, and Satan as such would be a corruption of what was once good. God's victory is not so much in vanquishing evil, but rather in healing that which has become corrupt and restoring creation.

But humans tend to think in terms of duality, and Christianity has also been very heavily influenced by Hellenistic philosophy, which has then influenced our own assumptions concerning Christianity in our times.

 

[Akita Suggagaki]

At the same time though, Christianity isn't actually Dualism either. People think in terms of God vs. Satan, Good vs. Evil, etc. as if they are two opposing unique forces, but evil isn't so much a force in itself, but is instead a corruption of good, and Satan as such would be a corruption of what was once good. God's victory is not so much in vanquishing evil, but rather in healing that which has become corrupt and restoring creation.

But humans tend to think in terms of duality, and Christianity has also been very heavily influenced by Hellenistic philosophy, which has then influenced our own assumptions concerning Christianity in our times.

And another crucial duality is the Creator/creature duality, the God way up there and us way down here duality. But the duality that bothers me the must is the us/them duality. We have a hard time seeing ourselves in others and a very easy time projecting our own faults on to others.

 

[JM]

Anyone else lean this way?

My interest started about 1976 with my interest in meditation and feeling a sense of connection. Then I discovered Thomas Merton, Pierre Teilhard De Chardin and Bede Griffiths and realized that such a view is not necessarily incompatible with Christianity.


"In Eastern Orthodox Christianity, it’s carried principally in the tradition of hesychasm, a prayer with unflagging emphasis on “putting the mind in the heart.” In the Western tradition, Meister Eckhart, the Rhineland mystics, and, in our own times, Bernadette Roberts come immediately to mind. I also see it strongly in the 14th century classic The Cloud of Unknowing."

"Richard Rohr talks about nonduality being at the center of the Christian tradition, as articulated through the belief that Jesus was both fully human and fully divine."
Cynthia Bourgeault on Christian Nonduality | The Garrison Institute.

[the WWMC sub-forum is for liberal Christians and non-liberal Christian members are not allowed to debate in this forum.]

How do you define nondual?

There is a difference between partaking of the divine activity of God and being one with the divine substance which I think you are getting around to. No form of Christianity teaches that through theosis (Christification) we become of one substance (ousia), only with God's energies or activity (energeia).

“I confess that we are deprived of this utterly incomparable good until Christ is made ours. Therefore, that joining of Head and members, that indwelling of Christ in our hearts—in short, that mystical union—are accorded by us the highest degree of importance, so that Christ, having been made ours, makes us sharers with him in the gifts with which he has been endowed. We do not, therefore, contemplate him outside ourselves from afar in order that his righteousness may be imputed to us but because we put on Christ and are engrafted into his body—in short, because he deigns to make us one with him. For this reason, we glory that we have fellowship of righteousness with him” (Inst. 3.11.10, pp. 736-37).

Believers can partake of God's energeia and be transformed but never one with God's substance. I have read and own copies of the Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, Shobogenzo, etc. read Rohr and listened to his podcast, read and own the Cloud of Unknowing and on and on. There is no connection between Christianity and Eastern nondaulity and to clear up any misunderstandings a survey of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity should clear it up.

Yours in the Lord,

jm

Further Reading:
The Holy Trinity by Robert Letham
Gregory Palamas: The Triads trans Meyendorff
St. Thomas Aquinas' on the Trinity found in Summa Theologia
Christification by Jordan B. Cooper

Key Terms:
indwelling righteousness
adoption
imputed righteousness
mystical/divine union
theosis
sanctification
meditation