Is Source Dualistic?
Duality Versus Non-Duality
Apparently, to be or not to be is not the question. It’s more like, is Source dualistic or non-dualistic? So let’s unpack this. Our resources seem to agree that non-dualism emphasizes unity or a false sense of separation. For example, non-dualism is described as a relationship where Source and souls are ultimately the same. The idea is that the separation is an illusion (maya). This seems to be consistent with certain schools of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Taoism. Ergo, the goal isn’t to achieve union with Source, but to dissolve the illusion of separateness — realizing through experience the eternal unity that already exists between us and Source.
Dualism, on the other hand, seems to emphasize actual, distinct separation between us and Source. It’s often described as a relationship where Source and souls are seen as separate, distinct entities. In religions adhering to duality — like many forms of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam — Source is the transcendent creator and souls are created entities, separate from the creator. Dualism has also been described as the separation between two distinct, opposing forces, like God and Satan. This coincides with The Kybalion’s principle of polarity (C2:32-35, C10:149-158) which suggests that everything is dual, and everything has its pair of opposites. Opposites are often seen as different degrees on the same spectrum or different manifestations of the same principle.
Consider this fellow souls. What if both duality and non-duality are true? Perhaps the relative universe of matter is dualistic, while the absolute nature of reality isn’t. Could this explain why Source can possess contradictory attributes (Bhagavad Gita: 4:6, 12:1-4) at the same time, like being formless and with a personal form? Could this also explain why Source can be untainted and separate from dualistic material nature (maya) yet be the origin of everything, including material nature (Bhagavad Gita, 13:15-17)? Perhaps Source’s dual attributes exist to complement and enrich each other, according to Gabriel Soca (Gaia Author). Ultimately this is all semantics if all is considered one (Law of One, 1:7), but certainly interesting.
Unity in Diversity
In the World But Not of the World
Fellow souls, how do we reconcile the concept that everything originates from a loving, gracious, all-knowing Source (All is One) even though qualities exist like greed, ignorance, anger, pride, cruelty, and hate (Bhagavad Gita, 16:3-21)? Or a better question is, how can that which is infinite be many, as many-ness is a finite concept, according to the Law of One (13:12)? Perhaps Source can be many or diverse through unity (Law of One, 1:7). Unity in diversity is a keynote principle in Hinduism and definitely one of the core spiritual principles that resonate with us.
The concept of unity could explain why Source can be unaffected by the material universe and material attributes like hatred, yet be the creator and sustainer of everything (Bhagavad Gita, 13:15-17). What if Source can hold everything within it, but being subtle, doesn’t get tainted by what it holds (Bhagavad Gita, 13:31-33)? Perhaps it’s like the lotus flower that grows its roots deep in murky waters, yet rises to the surface to blossom in pristine beauty.
This raises an interesting question. With a high enough vibrational frequency or consciousness level, can we remain unaffected by lower vibrational frequencies, as is the case with Source? As above, so below; as below, so above (The Kybalion: C2:28, C8:113-136). The idea that Source can be detached from its creation, while also having a connection to it isn’t all that far-fetched.
Energies Can Exist Concurrently
Consider this fellow souls. Swami Mukundananda (Bhakti Yog Saint & Yoga Teacher) explains that energies can exist concurrently within the same energetic (Bhagavad Gita, 7:5). For example, fire contains both heat and light, which are different entities and have different properties — but they’re part of the same fire that emits them. And water, steam, and ice are all forms of H2O molecules, just with different physical states (liquid, gas, and solid). The mainstream scientific community even confirms that subatomic particles can have spooky behaviors — including existing in multiple states simultaneously. Wave particle duality, demonstrated by the famous double-slit experiment, is a great example.
Is it possible that duality, polarity, and separation are necessary aspects of creating our interconnected material reality? Perhaps they serve a greater purpose in the material universe. Duality seems to be a beneficial facet of our spiritual lessons, meaning we can learn balance, unity, and harmony through duality. After all, what better way to understand a concept than to experience its opposite. This is said to be demonstrated in both the macrocosm (large scale) and microcosm (small scale) in the material universe. Once again, this connection coincides with The Kybalion’s principle of correspondence (C2:28-30, C8:113-136) which states as above, so below; as below, so above.
Perhaps human beings can be seen as a microcosm of the material universe, as suggested by Plato, and souls as a microcosm of Source. Could this explain why Jesus was often referred to as both the Son of man (The Bible: Matthew, 9:4) and the Son of God (The Bible: Mark, 1:1). Perhaps those distinctions represented his dual nature, emphasizing both his humanity and divinity. Once again, we’ve touched on some rather fascinating semantics, right?