Transduality Should be Nonduality

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

I dislike the way we treat transduality now. Evidently, I'm not the only one, since nobody, not even the staff, seem to abide by the rules we have set in place for the power. This is because of the requirement that any prospective user should have "qualitative superiority" over the dualities they are unbound from, and merely being absent of duality doesn't qualify. This is ******* insane for several reasons, so here we go.

We Made Transduality Up

Look up the word 'transduality' and what will you find? Various VS debating pages and that's it. It is not a real term that exists, and the fact that only battleboarders know what the hell it means is a red flag. Of course, duality (and by extension, nonduality) is a very real thing that has been documented across history; Countless religions, most notably eastern religions such as Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism, make use of nondualism in their belief systems. The Yin-Yang, arguably the most important symbol related to duality, is in fact a representation of everything acting as a part of a nondual whole. The Taiji, which we currently use as the defining symbol on the transduality page, is a similar symbol, one representing the oneness before duality and giving birth to the Yin-Yang. The problem? Despite literal centuries of dualism being discussed in theology and philosophy, none of this shit comes even close to qualitative superiority. This means the real world basis for the power itself uses nonduality and not transduality, something that we even directly acknowledge on the page itself by choosing to use Taiji as the symbol.

Transduality Rejects the Most Archetypal Users of the Power

Imagine if someone changed the time stop qualifications so characters like Dio Brando would no longer qualify. That'd be absurd, right? Because Dio's time stop is, of course, a thing he is very well known for, to the point where he is THE character many people associate with stopping time. So why do we allow the same for transduality? We can look at every example given on the transduality page, and see just how silly this is. To be clear, I'm not denying or attempting to debunk any character on this list, merely showing how overly strict transduality's standards are.

-Kamen Rider Gaim: Said to have 'transcended' life and death, which contextually refers to escaping the cycle of life/death or destruction/creation. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Rimuru Tempest: Said to have become a 'transcendent god' over Veldanava, who is a being predating the duality of light and darkness, or yin and yang. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Lucifer Morningstar: Exists outside of God's plans, which include the duality of life and death. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Sun Wukong via Buddhism Physiology: Transcendent Monks are free from attachment to all universes, containing countless phenomena governed by the yin and yang. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Dragon Talisman characters: Exists outside the Empyrean Dao, which created duality, and therefore exist outside duality itself. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Khorne: The Aethyric Void is a place where all concepts, normally separate in higher realms, break down and combine into a single, universal abstract. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Oblivion: Unbound by the laws of everything that is and isn't, and is stated to be similar to the taoist concept of wuji. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.
-Swirl of the Root: Exists beyond and encompasses all duality, including the taiji, a nondual state of oneness. Does not qualify for qualitative superiority.

From this, we can see that every single character listed on the transduality page - characters who are supposed to have the most clear cut, well known, and well explained examples of transduality on the wiki - does not even qualify for transduality. Now, some of these characters are said to 'transcend' duality, but we explicitly do not allow qualitative superiority to be given on the basis of transcendence without context, so not even that qualifies. Some of you may recall the changes made to type 5 acausality, where the standards became so overly strict that no character on the wiki qualified. What we see now is the exact same, and just like type 5 acausality, it's a sign that something needs to change.

Requiring Qualitative Superiority Makes No Sense

Qualitative superiority is, as we consider it, a state wherein everything beneath you is seen as uncountably infinitely small. This can be achieved merely through infinite differences in spatial dimensions, or by seeing lower planes as something akin to fiction. As of now, we also consider qualitative superiority over duality as a requirement for transduality, disallowing the mere absence of duality, a standard which, as shown above, is ridiculous. However, there are two other reasons why qualitative superiority should not be the benchmark for nonduality.

Logically, non-duality can and should do everything that transduality does. If someone transcends life and death, they'd of course be in a state of deathless immortality, neither alive nor dead, and therefore immune to the manipulation of life and death. But the exact same goes for non-duality. If you exist absent of life and death, then you'd still have deathless immortality, you'd still be neither alive nor dead, and you'd still be immune to life or death manipulation. The same goes for any other duality there is, so why do we insist on requiring transcendence?

But worse than all that, we don't even consider what it actually means to be qualitatively superior in this context. It's fairly easy to apply QS to a physical structure like a universe, but concepts are a different ball game entirely; Can you really be 'infinitely larger than' life and death? What does it mean to be uncountably infinitely greater than existence and non-existence? Or, to give a more specific example, does it make any sense at all for a character to transcend the duality of reality and fiction by viewing it as fiction? As a consequence of this QS requirement, anybody with low 1-C tiering or 5D HDE would just, have transduality by default because they are technically transcending the dualities present in lower dimensions. Zero thought was put into how and why 'qualitative superiority' would even work in this context; Ostensibly, it was only added in order to make transduality harder to get and therefore more "special", or the inclusion of QS could ironically make transduality something that every tier 1 character gets.

TL;DR: Transduality's standards are nonsensical, overly strict, and quite literally everybody on this site ignores them anyways. Transduality should be changed to non-duality.

 

[Fixxed]

Yeah DT is already explain about nondual and transdual in here

https://vsbattles.com/threads/the-remains-of-the-tiering-revision-part-3.126818/page-6

Requiring Qualitative Superiority Makes No Sense

As for this, it mean transduality is completely superior to the duality it self. So even if that duality is infinitely powerfull it cannot affect the being who is in the state of transduality

And qualitative superior not always make you higher tier, as for that qualitative superiority is not mean for the size or the existence, but for the transcendence over the abstraction

Qualitative superiority is mean you completely above the thing in question, no matter how powerfull or even if you add more and more level of power in that thing it still cannot affect you

characters who are supposed to have the most clear cut, well known, and well explained examples of transduality on the wiki - does not even qualify for transduality.

And who that character??? If that character is clearly have TD in the standard then he have it

 

[Mad_Dog_of_Fujiwara]

Yeah DT is already explain about nondual and transdual in here

https://vsbattles.com/threads/the-remains-of-the-tiering-revision-part-3.126818/page-6

Well DT has bad opinions and I disagree with them. I won't respond to any particular post in that thread, but the reasons given were ******* abysmal.

As for this, it mean transduality is completely superior to the duality it self. So even if that duality is infinitely powerfull it cannot affect the being who is in the state of transduality

And qualitative superior not always make you higher tier, as for that qualitative superiority is not mean for the size or the existence, but for the transcendence over the abstraction

Qualitative superiority is mean you completely above the thing in question, no matter how powerfull or even if you add more and more level of power in that thing it still cannot affect you

Even if that were true (it's certainly not how QS is treated on the wiki), nonduality would still be applicable. If you are neither A nor B, then anything falling under A or B cannot affect you. That's simply how immunity works, and transduality is, well, immunity to that which falls under duality. A character doesn't need to "transcend souls" to be immune to soul manipulation, so why does a character need to "transcend duality" to be immune to effects of duality?

And who that character??? If that character is clearly have TD in the standard then he have it

My brother in Christ I literally listed 8 of them

 

[Sisyphusx]

As for this, it mean transduality is completely superior to the duality it self. So even if that duality is infinitely powerfull it cannot affect the being who is in the state of transduality

Can you practically explain how concepts likes, for eg, the dualities life and death 'A' be infinitely stronger (or even just stronger) than life and death 'B' like how tf does that even working?

How is a character qualitatively superior to a duality?
As the OP mentioned that would only work when the character in question is higher dimensional which would equate to him being qualitatively superior to the lower dimensional dualities resulting in every higher dimensional character having TD by default.

 

[Muchacho_mrm]

For Transduality I agree with OP if qualitive superiority is referring to r>f or something on the same scale. There is no need for it. Also in regards to Dragon Talisman, they are immune to it as per the first quote and they surpass/transcend it with the following quotes, which I suppose would be in a literal tier 1 sense if the latest CRT were to be applied.

As for Acausality, yes it was made harder to attain but some verses qualified, for example Dragon Talisman qualified and was even approved by the architect of the new system (Everything12).

 

[ShivaShakti]

I agree with the OP, and I have had a revision of my own in development for some time now.

Transduality should indeed be renamed to Nonduality. "Transduality" is just something Sera fabricated for no reason.

 

[ShivaShakti]

Can you practically explain how concepts likes, for eg, the dualities life and death 'A' be infinitely stronger (or even just stronger) than life and death 'B' like how tf does that even working?

How is a character qualitatively superior to a duality?
As the OP mentioned that would only work when the character in question is higher dimensional which would equate to him being qualitatively superior to the lower dimensional dualities resulting in every higher dimensional character having TD by default.

You'll often see in actual theology (Hinduism being chief among them) that it isn't a literal "transcendence" of duality typically, but that the absolute in a particular system (Brahman, The Ineffable Tao, etc.) is the "True Reality" where everything is non-distinct and beyond division, because the idea of duality, distinction, and distinctive qualities, are all illusions which only "exist" in the material world.

It's more so that duality obscures the true nondual state.

 

[Deagonx]

We Made Transduality Up

I don't disagree with your point, but we also kind of made up "outerversal" and "qualitative superiority"

TL;DR: Transduality's standards are nonsensical, overly strict, and quite literally everybody on this site ignores them anyways. Transduality should be changed to non-duality.

Overall, I agree with this.

 

[ImmortalDread]

I disagree for simple reason that you created and not Kira.

 

[BestMGQScalerEver]

I agree because Dread is being a contrarian.

 

[Sisyphusx]

You'll often see in actual theology (Hinduism being chief among them) that it isn't a literal "transcendence" of duality typically, but that the absolute in a particular system (Brahman, The Ineffable Tao, etc.) is the "True Reality" where everything is non-distinct and beyond division, because the idea of duality, distinction, and distinctive qualities, are all illusions which only "exist" in the material world.

It isn't necessary that the theological qualitative superiority and what the wiki means by qualitative superiority on the TD section are implying the same thing

I understand what you're saying, being a hindu, though this actually doesn't substantiate two of the same dualities being stronger or weaker than each other as the case you mentioned is just an example of r>f (brahman & material world)

 

[Dragonite007]

I disagree for simple reason that you created and not Kira.

Who is Kira?

 

[ImmortalDread]

Who is Kira?

I agree with the OP, and I have had a revision of my own in development for some time now.

Transduality should indeed be renamed to Nonduality. "Transduality" is just something Sera fabricated for no reason.

 

[ImmortalDread]

Although I have an actual different opinion regarding this topic, but not sure if I can address them. (I need my main PC and I only have access to it at the weekend)

 

[HalilAssassino]

or completely remove the nonsense of transduality

 

[Georredannea15]

It's already been written on the Transduality page that "no duality" isn't enough for Transduality, both different. But the point I agree with the OP is that many characters have Transduality nonsense just because they're "non-duality" and independent, but they're basically not enough.

This is because the page is not well explained and leads to some misunderstandings.

I agree that it needs to be updated and that Transduality should be more rigorously studied, just like Acausality Type 5, and that Transduality revisions should not be accepted right away.

But the point I disagree with is changing it to "non-duality". Instead, Transduality standards should be rigid, just like Type 5 Acausality.

 

[ShivaShakti]

It's already been written on the Transduality page that "no duality" isn't enough for Transduality, both different. But the point I agree with the OP is that many characters have Transduality nonsense just because they're "non-duality" and independent, but they're basically not enough.

This is because the page is not well explained and leads to some misunderstandings.

I agree that it needs to be updated and that Transduality should be more rigorously studied, just like Acausality Type 5, and that Transduality revisions should not be accepted right away.

But the point I disagree with is changing it to "non-duality". Instead, Transduality standards should be rigid, just like Type 5 Acausality.

Transduality isn't a real word.

And saying "No duality isn't enough" isn't really valid in my opinion. The standards need to change. That is what this thread is about.

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

I completely agree.

Also, the idea of a duality being A and not A is odd. Such as fire, and not fire, which is mentioned in the page. The absence of light is darkness, the absence of sound is silence, but suggesting the absence of fire as a duality in conjunction with fire doesn’t make sense.

 

[Georredannea15]

Transduality isn't a real word.

And saying "No duality isn't enough" isn't really valid in my opinion. The standards need to change. That is what this thread is about.

Transduality standards should change yes, but the name "Transduality" should not.

Because "non-duality" and Transduality are not fundamentally the same thing. Rather than renaming Transduality, only those who qualify for Transduality through "non-duality" should be changed.

I completely agree.

Also, the idea of a duality being A and not A is odd. Such as fire, and not fire, which is mentioned in the page. The absence of light is darkness, the absence of sound is silence, but suggesting the absence of fire as a duality in conjunction with fire doesn’t make sense.

Fire has no opposite. Also, what you're saying already goes into a "non-duality", and if you transcend them, you should take Transduality.

So the issue is not the name, it's just that Transduality needs to be more rigorous and only the characters who get Transduality through "non-duality" should have their Transduality reviewed and those that are not sufficient should be removed.

 

[Reiner04]

I agree.

 

[ShivaShakti]

I completely agree.

Also, the idea of a duality being A and not A is odd. Such as fire, and not fire, which is mentioned in the page. The absence of light is darkness, the absence of sound is silence, but suggesting the absence of fire as a duality in conjunction with fire doesn’t make sense.

I agree with this sentiment as well.

I also can't help but feel as though whomever wrote the current transduality descriptions isn't very read on the subject, because they mention Fire and Water (A common duality represented in philosophy and theology) as an "Invalid duality", when in actuality Fire and Water are typically far more all encompassing than that. They can represent Masculine and Feminine, Active and Passive, Energy and Matter, etc.

Instead of saying what dualities are "Valid" or "not Valid" with severe restrictions, we should allow the fiction in question to speak for itself on its conception of dual distinctions.

 

[ShivaShakti]

Transduality standards should change yes, but the name "Transduality" should not.

Because "non-duality" and Transduality are not fundamentally the same thing. Rather than renaming Transduality, only those who qualify for Transduality through "non-duality" should be changed.


Fire has no opposite. Also, what you're saying already goes into a "non-duality", and if you transcend them, it's a Transduality.

So the issue is not the name, it's just that Transduality needs to be more rigorous and only the characters who get Transduality through "non-duality" should have their Transduality reviewed and those that are not sufficient should be removed.

Saying "Fire has no opposite" isn't really relevant. As I said in response to Milly, a work is what determines how dualities function, because dualities aren't often as literal as you would imagine. "Fire and Water" can be quite all encompassing depending on the book you are reading.

And, again I disagree. Essentially minimal if not none of the fictions in question talk about duality and transcending dual concepts in the way that the Transduality page does. Not even the philosophical systems which the page is founded upon acknowledges it in this way.

 

[Scathan_The_Celestial]

I think transduality and nonduality are virtually the same thing tbh, but I understand the idea of renaming it to something more universal

 

[Fixxed]

Even if that were true (it's certainly not how QS is treated on the wiki), nonduality would still be applicable. If you are neither A nor B, then anything falling under A or B cannot affect you. That's simply how immunity works, and transduality is, well, immunity to that which falls under duality. A character doesn't need to "transcend souls" to be immune to soul manipulation, so why does a character need to "transcend duality" to be immune to effects of duality?

Yeah thats what DT explain about transduality and nonduality. I just explain explain about qualitative superiority in transduality

My brother in Christ I literally listed 8 of them

Ohh i just realize, i think you mean there are character that qualify for standard but rejeted for have TD

 

[ShivaShakti]

Another alteration I would also propose is that Type 3 Transduality (Plurality as it is called) should probably be separated into its own category regardless. It's not really transcending or being without dualism in the conventional manner. It's essentially just the Schrodinger's cat concept of Quantum Mechanics. It probably warrants being given its own page, and there are a fair number of characters who possess the ability to justify its existence (Alucard from Hellsing).

 

[Milly_Rocking_Bandit]

Fire has no opposite. Also, what you're saying already goes into a "non-duality", and if you transcend them, you should take Transduality.

So the issue is not the name, it's just that Transduality needs to be more rigorous and only the characters who get Transduality through "non-duality" should have their Transduality reviewed and those that are not sufficient should be removed.

It does, water. Fire and Water is arguably the most thematic duality, outside of light and dark, and is referred to as such in dozens upon dozens of mediums across time. How do you even transcend this alleged “not fire”? This isn’t even something that’s intangible, but still understandable, like characters transcending existing or not existing, but it provides nothing to transcend if it doesn’t even metaphorically exist.

Instead of saying what dualities are "Valid" or "not Valid" with severe restrictions, we should allow the fiction in question to speak for itself on its conception of dual distinctions.

The core issue is that people have propagated the idea that certain abilities are so complex, and should be treated as such, conservatively adding a new bar to climb whenever said standards that were implemented are met. This is obviously a problem, because it’s just going to get to a point where you’re questioning author knowledge and intent, and the passage in question. No power nor tier is necessarily even hard to get, if it passes a description fitting of the general synopsis with sufficient context, there shouldn’t be any reason it isn’t given, irregardless of how many verses would gain it.

 

[Fixxed]

Can you practically explain how concepts likes, for eg, the dualities life and death 'A' be infinitely stronger (or even just stronger) than life and death 'B' like how tf does that even working?

How is a character qualitatively superior to a duality?
As the OP mentioned that would only work when the character in question is higher dimensional which would equate to him being qualitatively superior to the lower dimensional dualities resulting in every higher dimensional character having TD by default.

Something can be stronger than something if there are proof for that, thats why we have term of "higher degree"

Qualitative superiority will gave you higher dimensional if you qualitative superior in size meaning or existence. Qualitative superior from some abstraction by default not give you higher dimension

 

[Georredannea15]

Saying "Fire has no opposite" isn't really relevant. As I said in response to Milly, a work is what determines how dualities function, because dualities aren't often as literal as you would imagine. "Fire and Water" can be quite all encompassing depending on the book you are reading.

Let's look at the "past and future" duality;

For example, you have 2 roads in front of you, past and future and you have a guide, and when your guide tells you to go "without a past", you will go from the future in his absence. That is, in the absence of one, the other will exist.


On this way you will go to the future in the absence of the past, or there will be darkness in the absence of light etc... These are dualities


However, such a situation is basically not in question in Fire and Water. We cannot say that there is water where there is no fire, or we cannot say that there is fire where there is no water. But in dualities, we can say that in the absence of one, the other will exist.

 

[ShivaShakti]

Let's look at the "past and future" duality;

For example, you have 2 roads in front of you, past and future and you have a guide, and when your guide tells you to go "without a past", you will go from the future in his absence. That is, in the absence of one, the other will exist.


On this way you will go to the future in the absence of the past, or there will be darkness in the absence of light etc... These are dualities


However, such a situation is basically not in question in Fire and Water. We cannot say that there is water where there is no fire, or we cannot say that there is fire where there is no water. But in dualities, we can say that in the absence of one, the other will exist.

I feel like you didn't really comprehend my post.

"Fire and Water" are truthfully not nearly as simple as you describe them to be. It's common in many spiritual and philosophical systems for "Fire and Water" to represent the primordial forces of creation. Masculine (Active) and Feminine (Passive). Just let the fictional work decide what its dualities are.

 

[Georredannea15]

I feel like you didn't really comprehend my post.

"Fire and Water" are truthfully not nearly as simple as you describe them to be. It's common in many spiritual and philosophical systems for "Fire and Water" to represent the primordial forces of creation. Masculine (Active) and Feminine (Passive). Just let the fictional work decide what its dualities are.

That was a basic point of view. But to return to the main topic, Transduality is actually a non-duality in itself and at the same time transcending it. So I disagree that it should be non-duality.

Because Transduality is not something simple like "non-duality". It's about transcending the duality you have inside you at the same time. Because it will indirectly contain a non-duality within a duality, But that still doesn't mean you've transcend it or become independent of it. I hope you understand what I mean.

 

[Phsccarvalho]

When I think of the name "transduality" and "non-duality" they don't sound like the same thing. But it's kind of weird, for example in an example someone gave above, of someone transcending life and death and someone who is not part of and doesn't even have his existence included in life and death. What exactly is the difference? Seeing it a bit from the outside and looking at the examples given by the OP, I think transdualities are one of those things that should be more rigid and explanatory, but I don't understand much of it.

Masculine (Active) and Feminine (Passive)

So that's why in that Flash Puzzle game the fire character is a man and the water character is a woman?

 

[Fixxed]

Instead of saying what dualities are "Valid" or "not Valid" with severe restrictions, we should allow the fiction in question to speak for itself on its conception of dual distinctions.

Bruh the standard accept them being duality if the verse it self it consider them as duality

If the verse just say fire and water or light and dark or life and death without any context or any implification if they are duality it cannot be duality in current standard

The A and not-A thing is simply for make the arbitary statement without context like that not being a duality

 

[ShivaShakti]

That was a basic point of view. But to return to the main topic, Transduality is actually a non-duality in itself and at the same time transcending it. So I disagree that it should be non-duality.

Because Transduality is not something simple like "non-duality". It's about transcending the duality you have inside you at the same time. Because it will indirectly contain a non-duality within a duality, But that still doesn't mean you've transcend it or become independent of it. I hope you understand what I mean.

Being without duality is the same in consequence, because you are still beyond the reach and limits of those dual properties, and they will thus have no effect on you.

 

[Sniper670]

Stuff like this should automatically be a staff thread.

Anyway I agree with OP. I mentioned this in one of the staff threads months ago.

It just doesn't make sense that we apply qualitative superiority to it. Ie. Infinitely superior to light and darkness? Wut?

Non Duality is basically existing in a state not bound by duality, qualitative superiority has nothing to do with it. It's Independence, that's it. Existing in a state independent of
Life and death = Immortality type 5
Existence and Nonexistence = Nep 2

Etc

 

[Bobsican]

Uh... the page currently doesn't require qualitative superiority on a given "duality" to qualify, merely also being immune to stuff within the duality in question also qualifies.

However, I don't think we should grant this ability by being qualitatively superior to a duality, as that'd just be an inherent attribute of being qualitatively superior at all, as much being qualitatively superior grants a immunity to lower-d hax, and so it's misleading and redundant.

 

[Sisyphusx]

Something can be stronger than something if there are proof for that, thats why we have term of "higher degree"

We are talking about two of the same dualities being stronger or weaker than each other not just anything, I asked for a practical example of...how is duality of life & death > duality of life & death, in what degree are we measuring this, range & dimensionality? Then that would simply imply that the "qualitative superiority" in TD is meant for being higher dimensional than the duality in question...and

Qualitative superiority will gave you higher dimensional if you qualitative superior in size meaning or existence. Qualitative superior from some abstraction by default not give you higher dimension

I think you did not understand my point
I'll give an example
There's this 5D being (suppose he lacks every duality but isn't shown or stated to be qualitatively superior to them in any ways which would make him not qualify for TD); he is qualitatively superior to any 4D conceptualization (because of being higher dimensional than it) which would make him qualitatively superior to every duality too thus making him qualified for TD.

The point is the use and mention of "qualitative superiority" in the TD section is nonsensical and irrelevant because of the reasons being discussed currently and mentioned in the OP

 

[Sisyphusx]

Transduality is actually a non-duality in itself and at the same time transcending it. So I disagree that it should be non-duality.

Because Transduality is not something simple like "non-duality". It's about transcending the duality you have inside you at the same time. Because it will indirectly contain a non-duality within a duality, But that still doesn't mean you've transcend it or become independent of it. I hope you understand what I mean.

"Logically, non-duality can and should do everything that transduality does. If someone transcends life and death, they'd of course be in a state of deathless immortality, neither alive nor dead, and therefore immune to the manipulation of life and death. But the exact same goes for non-duality. If you exist absent of life and death, then you'd still have deathless immortality, you'd still be neither alive nor dead, and you'd still be immune to life or death manipulation. The same goes for any other duality there is, so why do we insist on requiring transcendence?"

 

[Georredannea15]

And saying "No duality isn't enough" isn't really valid in my opinion. The standards need to change. That is what this thread is about.

I already agree with this. Transduality needs to be more rigorous, and a simple "non-duality" or be indepent shouldn't be enough for Transduality.

It is also necessary a transcendence.

My advice is to revisit the Transduality of characters who qualify for Transduality only with non-duality and independence, and make Transduality more rigorous.

 

[Reiner04]

Non duality already provides everything transduality does and transduality and Qualitative superiority is just all made up stuff that doesn't really exist in fiction neither has been mentioned in any of our historical books, myths, religious text, etc. So I don't know why transcending stuff or qualitative superiority stuff or transduality is different from nonduality is being argued.

 

[Georredannea15]

Non duality already provides everything transduality does and transduality and Qualitative superiority is just all made up stuff that doesn't really exist in fiction neither has been mentioned in any of our historical books, myths, religious text, etc. So I don't know why transcending stuff or qualitative superiority stuff or transduality is different from nonduality is being argued.

Transduality is not simply nonduality, but additionally requires something like qualitative superiority or immunity to attacks bound to the duality in question.

Transduality must already have the properties of "non-duality" because Transduality already contains "non-duality" within itself. But, this does not mean that a simple "non-duality" will suffice for Transduality.

"non-duality" does not provide everything that Transduality provides, Transduality provides every feature that "non-duality" has. There is a difference between them.

And for non-duality to be Transduality, you need a transcendence.