Me and you, and you and me

See what happens when you blink? A week and more passes with no writing. Oh well, here I am again, with another topic to make you think but hopefully not make your head hurt.

There are two basic ways to look at the world. The first one is where I make a distinction between myself and everything else I see around me. There is me and there is not-me. In the second one, there is no distinction and I just feel the continuum between myself and all I see outside of me.

In metaphysical circles, these two positions are known as duality and non-duality. There are all kinds of possible ramifications for believing in one or the other. For example, responsibility takes on a different hue depending on whether you feel that everything that goes wrong in the world touches you or not.

In the west, most of us are diehard dualists. We recognize that part of attaining maturity is learning to distinguish between what battles are worth fighting, and when to leave things alone and walk away. We pick those people we are going to care about, and care for, our relatives and a handful of close friends. Maybe we have a few causes that we get involved in, like feeding the homeless or protecting national forests. But we draw a line as to how far we are going to go, and that is a healthy thing, because at the end of the day we have to take care of ourselves.

Psychologists tell us though that when we are very young, we are closer to having a non-dualist view of the world. We don't see any distinction between ourselves and what we see. We feel very powerful - we cry, and our mothers come running to take care of us. If something goes wrong, we hold ourselves responsible for making it happen, like children who are sure that their parents splitting up must be a result of something they, the child, did.

Being a pure non-dualist must be very hard - not because it means feeling responsible for everything necessarily, but it really means disbelieving the messages our senses are giving to us. If someone else is hurt, we don't literally feel their pain. If a friend is happy, we may brighten up in their presence, but we don't feel exactly what they feel. So non-duality is more of a philosophical concept, something, it seems to me, one may cultivate through a lifetime of meditation and spiritual work. Whether anyone ever completely, truly attains it is a good question.

However, the trend nowadays is towards expanding our personal universes. Facebook and other social media allow us to make meaningful connections on whatever level with people we would otherwise not even know exist. And some people share all kinds of personal information, including personal achievements and tragedies. In addition, we see the interconnectedness of world economies and political movements. We may have previously given lip service to there being domino effects or chain reactions to forces beyond our immediate control, but now, for better or for worse, it is easy to see that anyone and everyone can be touched by something happening on the other side of the globe.

At its base, at its heart, non-duality is about relinquishing control. In that sense it is the exact opposite to what we sense as a baby. We strive to let go of the impression that we are at the center of it all. Shifting from a dualist to non-dualist position is like admitting that the earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around. It is admitting that the most important thing to me may be happening at a great distance from the body I call my home.

The impulse to be charitable is a non-dualistic one, but when we are cynical about it, it is possible in many if not most instances to ascribe personal agenda to giving of oneself to another. Altruism has followed chivalry onto the endangered species list. For example, corporations and wealthy individuals endow sports arenas and performing arts venues in exchange for getting their names pasted on these same places. It's all part of good business practices.

The way I look at it is that what we really experience is a combination of duality and non-duality. In effect, there is a duality between the two - the two paradigms exist in a dynamic interplay between the two. We each maintain a healthy focus on taking care of number one, while also enlarging our purview to include people and places we previously would not have bothered with. In order to feel comfortable within myself, I have to be comfortable with my surroundings, my surroundings - my apartment, the neighborhood I live in, the places I buy my groceries, etc. - have to reflect me. I don't think I am alone in having these new demands on my world - that disharmony without is going to lead to disharmony within, and therefore, the outside has to be in synch with the inside.

But it does all come back to me. As I deepen my appreciation for what my life is all about, and gain greater confidence that I will give myself everything I need, I can let most people off the hook for providing those things for me. I can allow for greater divergence from my comfort zone, without perceiving disharmony, without being knocked off my center. Growing that security within myself, gaining that confidence, may be a life's work as well. But it has many rewards in the here and now.