Is non-duality same as transduality?

[Aseka]

I wondered about this because just a few minutes ago I see someone says that non-duality basically is a same like transduality. Is this true or not?

 

[Aseka]

Bump

 

[Sniper670]

The actual word is NonDuality

The word Transduality is made up by the wiki

 

[DontTalkDT]

No, transduality is non-duality + transcendence.

 

[Tatsumi504]

The actual word is NonDuality

The word Transduality is made up by the wiki

Was kinda surprised when I found out. "Transduality" ain't even an actual word.
I think the wiki needs to change it as it gets confusing

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

No, transduality is non-duality + transcendence.

Uh, what?

 

[Tatsumi504]

No, transduality is non-duality + transcendence.

What? Shouldn't being non-dual already make you transcend dualities?

 

[DontTalkDT]

No, being non-dual doesn't make you transcend things. It only make you exist outside of dual bounds. Outside, not superior.
A non-dual entity isn't necessarily unaffected by things following the duality relative to which it is non-dual. It might exist outside the distinction of getting hit by a rock or not getting hit by a rock, but all that means is that it behaves differently when a rock is thrown at it. It could still enter an altered state in response to it and said altered state could still have serious consequences to the character (e.g. it could potentially still die or do something similar to that).
A transdual entity on the other hand would be unaffected by dual things, as it necessarily transcends (i.e. is superior to) that dual state. If you throw a stone at a transdual entity it would be unaffected due to the superiority over a dual thing such as a thrown stone.

 

[Sniper670]

No, transduality is non-duality + transcendence.

Transcendence in what sense exactly??
Non-duality is already transcendent. Look no further than Advaita, where duality transcendence originates

Transduality is made up and highly inaccurate because many people don't even understand how it works

 

[Sniper670]

No, being non-dual doesn't make you transcend things

What?????????

It only make you exist outside of dual bounds. Outside, not superior.

Lol. If I exist outside of existence and Non existence that's Transduality.

Non-duality doesnt mean superiority, it means you're outside of dual systems.

A non-dual entity isn't necessarily unaffected by things following the duality relative to which it is non-dual. It might exist outside the distinction of getting hit by a rock or not getting hit by a rock, but all that means is that it behaves differently when a rock is thrown at it. It could still enter an altered state in response to it and said altered state could still have serious consequences to the character (e.g. it could potentially still die or do something similar to that).

Give me an actual character who is NonDual but doesn't fit wiki standards. I'll wait

Wuji is undifferentiation beyond Taiji, and that's Transduality Type 4. It's already beyond duality as his state of being is one without differention

Taiji is literally the first thing you see on the Transduality page and that's type 3 because it's oneness before Duality.

And nowhere in Taoism did they mention Transduality. It's Non-duality.

A transdual entity on the other hand would be unaffected by dual things, as it necessarily transcends (i.e. is superior to) that dual state. If you throw a stone at a transdual entity it would be unaffected due to the superiority over a dual thing such as a thrown stone.

That's where you're wrong. A NonDual entity is already beyond duality. Wuji and Taiji comes to mind

 

[DontTalkDT]

Lol. If I exist outside of existence and Non existence that's Transduality.

Nope. To quote the Transduality page: "Transduality is the state of being wherein an entity exists independently of, and qualitatively beyond, various dual systems, ranging from very specific, limited sets of dual distinctions to duality itself on a conceptual level."

Having qualitative superiority is a requirement, being merely independent of duality (i.e. non-dual at a basic level) alone is not enough. There are two requirements listed for that reason.
That is how it was intended when the page was made. I know, as I was involved in it. Background context is that non-duality alone would have no common effect between all users, which would disqualify it from being a power as such. That's why we demand the qualitative aspect to ensure a common effect between users exist i.e. being unaffected by attacks on the level of the respective duality.

Non-duality doesnt mean superiority, it means you're outside of dual systems.

Right. Non-duality is that and transduality involves superiority.

Give me an actual character who is NonDual but doesn't fit wiki standards. I'll wait

That's an argument from ignorance.

But sure, Noah for some time existed in nonexistence, a logical contradiction so severe that it is what created the concept of contradiction allowance in the verse. However, she has no form of qualitative relationship with the duality of existence/nonexsitence, being just as easily killed by something following such a duality as anything else. Hence she does not qualify for transduality.
Aleister is another example. He is beyond a binary classification of his own existence, but in effect it's just a cloning/teleportation technique. There is no real qualitative aspect to it.

Wuji is undifferentiation beyond Taiji, and that's Transduality Type 4. It's already beyond duality as his state of being is one without differention

Taiji is literally the first thing you see on the Transduality page and that's type 3 because it's oneness before Duality.

And nowhere in Taoism did they mention Transduality. It's Non-duality.

I don't know your Asian terms and I honestly don't care about them either. They're rather irrelevant to a debate on how we define the term that we made up.

That's where you're wrong. A NonDual entity is already beyond duality. Wuji and Taiji comes to mind

Beyond? Yes, as in outside. Not as in qualitatively beyond / superior.

 

[Sniper670]

Nope. To quote the Transduality page: "Transduality is the state of being wherein an entity exists independently of, and qualitatively beyond, various dual systems, ranging from very specific, limited sets of dual distinctions to duality itself on a conceptual level."

It's as made up as the word Transduality.

Existing in a state where you're neither existing nor not existing is Nep 2. Transdual Nonexistence

Existing in a liminal state is Duality transcendence

And so on

Having qualitative superiority is a requirement, being merely independent of duality (i.e. non-dual at a basic level) alone is not enough. There are two requirements listed for that reason.
That is how it was intended when the page was made. I know, as I was involved in it. Background context is that non-duality alone would have no common effect between all users, which would disqualify it from being a power as such. That's why we demand the qualitative aspect to ensure a common effect between users exist i.e. being unaffected by attacks on the level of the respective duality.

Qualitative is irrelevant.

How the heck do you understand what Duality Transcendence is

We literally borrowing from an origin and misinterpreting it

No surprise typing Transduality on google brings up battle boarding sites instead of what it's actual meaning

Now go take a look at NonDuality

Right. Non-duality is that and transduality involves superiority.

Non-duality is already qualitatively superior.

You're making shit up

That's an argument from ignorance.

But sure, Noah for some time existed in nonexistence, a logical contradiction so severe that it is what created the concept of contradiction allowance in the verse. However, she has no form of qualitative relationship with the duality of existence/nonexsitence, being just as easily killed by something following such a duality as anything else. Hence she does not qualify for transduality.

Existing in Nonexistence. So basically nep 1. And it qualifies for Transduality how?

I don't know your Asian terms and I honestly don't care about them either. They're rather irrelevant to a debate on how we define the term that we made up.

Then it's better for you to get an understanding of what it is instead of throwing transcendence on what you don't understand

Beyond? Yes, as in outside. Not as in qualitatively beyond / superior.

If I'm outside of existence and nonexistence it's nep 2

Yes or no?

LOL. You're confused