The event not as a transcendental moment of maybe - but a moment of simultaneous violation and recreation. Agamben's Coming Community loses this as violation - the core narrative event is a breakthrough for some, a tragedy for others (As is the French Revolution's deprivation of those dependent and thriving in monarchy, or less able to compete in the republic that follows). Yet in the balance of privilege and exclusion, the pragmatic processes of a system tend towards one solution, whereas writing as a practice can form favouring another - writing inverts (at best) in symbols - whatever the event supposedly refers to, the more incognizant it is of what it could destroy the more impractical it is, or the more unpredictive it is in its practical application.
Monism is found in the Nasadiya Sukta of the Rigveda, which speaks of the One being-non-being that 'breathed without breath'.
shankara's absolute monism: It is part of the six Hindu systems of philosophy, based on the Upanishads, and posits that the ultimate monad is a formless, ineffable divine ground of all being.
Buddhist philosophy is generally suspicious of ontology. The Buddha himself, and some of his prominent disciples such as Nagarjuna, discouraged ontological theorizing for its own sake.
According to the Pali Canon, both pluralism (naanatta) and monism (ekatta) are speculative views. A Theravada commentary notes that the former is similar to or associated with nihilism (ucchedavada), and the latter is similar to or associated with eternalism (sassatavada).[1] See middle way.
Among the Madhyamaka school of Mahayana Buddhist philosophy, the ultimate nature of the world is described as emptiness, which is indistinguishable from material form. That appears to be a monist position, but the Madhyamaka views - including variations like Prasangika and Yogacara and the more modern shentong Tibetan position - will fail to assert in the ultimate nature any particular point of view. They instead deconstruct any assertions about ultimate existence as resulting in absurd consequences. The doctrine of emptiness is also found in earlier Theravada Buddhist literature.[citation needed]
In Soto Zen teaching, it is said that "All is One and All is Different." Since non-dualism does not recognize a dualism between Oneness and Difference, or even between dualism and non-dualism, it is difficult to state the meaning of this doctrine. All discussion of this teaching by Soto Zen masters falls under the Buddhist concept of skill in means, which is to say, not literally correct, but suitable for leading others to the Truth. Chinese Soto (Cao-Dong) master Tozan (Tung Shan, Dongshan) wrote the Verses of the Five Ranks (of the Ideal and the Actual), which is also important as a set of koans in the Rinzai school. Dongshan describes the Fifth Rank in part thus:
Unity Attained:
Who dares to equal him
Who falls into neither being nor non-being!
Shih-t'ou Hsi-ch'ien's poem "The Harmony of Difference and Sameness" Sandokai is an important early expression of Zen Buddhism and is chanted in S?t? temples to this day. Another poem of Tung-shan Liang-chieh on these and related themes, "The Song of the Jewel Mirror Awareness", is also chanted in S?t? temples daily.
Other expressions of this teaching include the koan:
A disciple asked, "What is the difference between the enlightened and the unenlightened man?"
The Master replied, "The unenlightened man sees a difference, but the enlightened man does not."
and Dogen Zenji's personal koan, "Why are training and enlightenment differentiated, since the Truth is universal?" (Fukanzazengi, Instructions for Meditation)
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
dialectical monism...
Numerical construction of the universe: "From the Dao comes one, from one comes two, from two comes three, and from three comes the ten thousand things."
arising from the logic of singularity - the singular expression that corresponds to that singularity (avicenna's necessary existence - which is always essential to *not* translate as "God", as that immediately reduces our potential for the absurd)
the singular inevitably gives birth to the dual (bey's sinuous dialectic
for Nagarjuna, this is expressed in the form of the oblivion of everything; with singularity there is what is not that singularity (we can also assert a singularity which encompasses everything, but this idea will potentially die as soon as someone else rejects it):
By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
"By cosmic rule, as day yields night, so winter summer, war peace, plenty famine. All things change. Fire penetrates the lump of myrrh, until the joining bodies die and rise again in smoke called incense." (fragment 36)
It is wise, not listening to me but to the report (?????), to agree that all things are one.
-- Cited by Hippolytus, Refutatio IX.9.1 (Diels-Kranz fragment 50)
logos is the singular expression - arising singularly - yet heraclitus errs here - as soon as there is one there is two;
Although essentially processive and devoid of any permanent order, the ceaseless becoming of the cosmos is nevertheless characterized by an overarching balance, rhythm, and regularity: one provided by and constituted by teotl... Dialectical polar monism holds that: (1) the cosmos and its contents are substantively and formally identical with teotl; and (2) teotl presents itself primarily as the ceaseless, cyclical oscillation of polar yet complementary opposites.
the bio-monad;
teotl;