image description image description

Join the SAND Community

Join the SAND community and be an active and integral part of the vibrant convergence of science and spirituality!

Read articles, watch videos, build local communities, explore, share and contribute to cutting edge ideas. Join scientists, teachers, philosophers, artists and fellow explorers in (re)discovering who we are. There are two levels of participation:


1. SAND Member – A free level of participation

  • Create your own profile and become an active part of the community
  • Participate in dialogues and have access to all the blogs content
  • Receive the SAND newsletter with the latest updates, news and more
  • Join and start conversations in the community section of the site


2. SAND Supporter - Actively support the movement with a monthly (min $10) or a yearly (min $100) donation

  • Participate in dialogues and have access to all the blog content
  • Join and start conversations in the community section of the site
  • Enjoy specific content only available for our Supporters
  • Watch over 100 hours of unique video interviews
  • Start video “meet up” groups on specific topics
  • Obtain discounted rates on webinars, live streaming events and the SAND conferences


Science and Nonduality is a not-for-profit organization and your support will be FULLY devoted to our scope and mission: “To heal the schism between science and spirituality while forging a new understanding of what it means to be human – inspired by the mystics and grounded in modern science – while celebrating the mystery of life and the love that emanates from it!Welcome home!

+ START A conversation


Started by Chip

Complex Gifts

Complex Gifts

’tis a sin to be simple, a sheep that only bleats
’tis a sin to stay down where we are not free
and when we rise together into the light
we will all be on the mountain top of love and delight

With rich complexity sustained
standing firm for all human rights maintained
to learn, learn will be our delight
’til by learning, learning we come ’round right.

’tis our duty to love which brings love in return
our duty to teach by showing how to learn
when we respect all by how we live every day
then we will live together as we all learn to say

With rich complexity sustained
standing firm for all human rights maintained
to learn, learn will be our delight
’til by learning, learning we come ’round right.

’tis a sin to surround ourselves with friends that only tweet
’tis a sin to think “us verses them,” not all, only “we”
when we open to hear what we all think and feel
we will find a love for all our planet’s life congeal

With rich complexity sustained
standing firm for all human rights maintained
to learn, learn will be our delight
’til by learning, learning we come ’round right.


Started by Oscillate

Empiric vs. Noetic

The combination of Science and Nondualism is somewhat misleading, because it implies the meeting of two apparently opposite positions. It’s promise being that if polarities make contact, then there is creation of new knowledge. That is how I have read it, but I’m maybe missing a point there.
If so, take no note of the following.

If I’m reading it right-ish, I would like to tweak that Science – Nondualism relation a bit. The idea that polarities must contact to make progress is without exception spot on. I have made a previous post about why it is so and why there is no way out of that. But the opposite poles are, in this case, not Science and Nondualism.
The one opposite is Empirical Science, the other is Noetic Science.
The quality of ES being; body, observable, objective, hard, absolute, male, positive, linear, yang, form, induction and future (and more).
The quality of NS being; mind, invisible, subjective, soft, relative, female, negative, circular, yin, formless, deduction and history (and more).

So where does Nondualism show up? I have only been here for a little while, but I get the impression that a lot of energy is wasted on this very question – Is Nondualism about this or that? Is it in favour of ES or NS, physical or mental and which scientists are the most nondualistic, and what scientist is completely missing the point. Is it just me or do you recognize similar debates here in this community? I would like to make this visible in a picture, but words will have to do for now. My lunch break is soon over anyway, so here’s the quick and dirty Nondualism 101.

Nondualism (ND) has no position on the scales of polarity. As soon as you try to pin it down, it disappears. It is the oscillating between the poles that is ND. It is neither this, nor that. It has no preferences because it knows fully the consequences of solidifying a particular position. It knows the particle/particular will dissolve into wavelike nothingness and disappear. It knows that wavelike nothingness is always there when you are not looking for it. ND knows the absolute worth of the relative as well as the relative absence of worth in the absolute. Therefore, it has no place on either side. ND taking one side or the other is not possible because that position is already, per definition, occupied by a positive or a negative. ND is the moving between polarities and it is done by everything all the time.
This linear moving between poles create excitement (from Latin excitare “rouse, call out, summon forth, produce,” frequentative of exciere “call forth, instigate,” from ex- “out” (see ex-) + ciere “set in motion), and that which is called forth/produced is something non-linear. It becomes the next generation, the evolutionary stepping up from the previous position. The line between what was opposite polarities is no longer there, but a new point is appearing above and thus we’re up one level. In that way, existence expands in all directions and becomes spheric and unbreakable. For that we only need one dimension which is Space. Energy goes horizontally, vertically and from here to there, and that’s it. Every linearity has two poles, oscillation between them creates surplus energy for the creation of something new, and when that happens, the old polarized end positions are gone. The new creation starts as one point, as IT. Having the inherent property of its parents, it expands in a linear fashion and by doing so it develops new polarized end positions.
Oscillate, generate and dissolve ad infinitum.

ND is the wisdom in knowing the importance and irrelevance of not-knowing.
ND is the wisdom in knowing that empty ignorance and forms of knowledge are equally important.
ND is knowing that the knower of Nonduality knows nothing.
(and more)

I my self cannot be a “Nondualist” because I can only be my self, which of course is also no-self. But hopefully being wise, I can let my own opinions guide me to this or that position, and then let go of My subjective “truth” and be attracted by the opposite. In such a way, my holding on and letting go will be oscillation (non-dual motion) itself, and I can generate new knowledge.
I will argue, as subjective self, just to build up tension enough. You know the sense of contracting when sticking to a one-sided position, don’t you? When rigid and exhausted enough, I let go and gravity will do the rest. There is a closing that opens up, and a surge of surplus energy. It will create.
To me, ND is that event of oscillation, the linear becoming the circular point of progress, becoming a new linear and thus being part of spheric expansion/progress.

If we think of ND as a position, our ideas will in time become dead currency and there will be tension and conflict within the community. Every idea firmly held in place will produce this tension. It just happens that way because we are basically derivate of light, and that is the functional property of light. That is how it moves about, in linear fashion without particular location. It is nowhere and everywhere. Only a greater density can stop it, and if we’re dense enough we end up in a black hole. That is probably where our fear of black holes comes from. We fear our enlightenment, our light form, will be swallowed by dense stupidity.
If you have followed my short ToE as presented above, you will have a pretty good idea of concepts like singularity, Big Bang and Infinity, so fear not the Black Holes. Everything starts at a single point and time goes back and forth.

My mistake (this time) might be that Science should be understood as knowledge and Nonduality as ignorance/not-knowing. That is indeed an interesting polarity between “thinking one knows” and “knowing one thinks”. In either case, my ramblings above re-presents my absolute position of being relatively free.

With that said, none of this is absolute truth, none of it is relatively true. It is just what happened to this Me right here, and it will inevitably dissolve in all directions.
It is already gone.
It is everywhere.

May we allow ourselves to be attracted by what we fear.

Andrew Brodis:ES - Limited to "interpretatio

Mit Jones:Your answer to my question cou

Oscillate:and whatever you say, I say to

Oscillate:Knowing without knowing knowin

Mit Jones:So tell me, why did Bodhidharm

Oscillate:So tell me, why did Bodhidharm

Mit Jones:If we are still involved in th

Oscillate:So I'm having an opinion again

Mit Jones:IMHO, There are times when yo

Oscillate:So I'm trying to stop my Self


Started by Sharissa22

Looking for a roommate

I have a room booked at the Hayes & would like someone to share the expense. I’m quiet, don’t snore, and a female. Looking for same 🙂

David:Just to let you both know, SAN

cedric:Hey, I am looking for a room a


Started by Aditi

Unifying Polarizing Opposites in Nondual Wholeness

To celebrate the sacred marriage of science and Nonduality, we first need to be liberated from a major inhibitor to its consummation, which we have inherited from Aristotle.

In ‘Metaphysics’, Aristotle said, “It is impossible for the same attribute at once to belong and not to belong to the same thing and in the same relation … as some imagine Heraclitus says.” This either-or proposition, which is the basic axiom of linear mathematical logic and hence Western thought, led to the invention of the computer, as a tool of thought, in the middle of the last century.

In contrast, Heraclitus, a consummate both-and thinker, said, “The Hidden Harmony is better than the obvious” and “Opposition brings concord; out of discord comes the fairest harmony,” a universal principle that also forms the basis of Lao Tzu’s ‘Tao The Ching’. In modern language, we can call the Hidden Harmony the Principle of Unity, which states “Wholeness is the union of all opposites.”

This simple statement is an irrefutable truth, for any denial affirms its veracity in a primary-secondary relationship. For instance, using Hegelian logic, if Nonduality is the thesis and duality is the antithesis, then Wholeness is the synthesis.

By accepting that paradoxes and self-contradictions are ubiquitous, we realize that Consciousness is all there is, encapsulated in the Sanskrit words ‘Satchidananda’ and ‘Aditi’. The physical universe, and hence the brain, is an epiphenomenon, not the other way round.

This fundamental design principle of the Universe thus enables us to view the Cosmos holographically, a viewpoint that enabled David Bohm to unify the incompatibilities between quantum and relativity theories in his epoch-making book ‘Wholeness and the Implicate Order’ in 1980.

The Principle of Unity is all we need to unify polarizing opposites in Nondual Wholeness, enabling us to rebuild the whole of science and business on the union of mystical psychology and holographic mathematical logic, as sciences of the mind.

As evolution thus becomes fully conscious of itself within us human beings, we could collectively rise above the level of machines with so-called artificial intelligence, realizing our fullest potential as superintelligent, superconscious beings, living in Love, Peace, and harmony with each other in the eschatological Age of Light.

Nothing could be simpler, once we realize “I Am That,” the title of Nisargadatta Maharaj’s spiritual classic. For then we are free of the sense of a separate self, living in eternal union with the Divine, overcoming the Great Taboo in Western civilization, which denies any such possibility.


Started by lloydarmogan2

Cosmic Consciousness or Cosmic Force

That which creates the Universe (the creation is still on-going) is within the Universe and within each of us and every living life-form. I am able to experience that Presence within, and everyone else can learn to do so. It is the same Force Einstein and Tagore were trying to discuss at their meeting in 1930 in Berlin. It is the same Force (or God Force) Mother Teresa longed to experience but could not.

lloydarmogan2:Carl Sagan, Albert Einstein, R

Lloyd Armogan:Roysingh Seubarran commented o

Oscillate:We're in the oscillations betw

Lloyd Armogan:Thank you!!

Oscillate:We make the belief that we "ma

Lloyd Armogan:It really is a very beautiful

Oscillate:What happens is this: "The sa

Lloyd Armogan:Hello Felicia, Nothing to worr

Felicia Mareels:Your most welcome although upo

Lloyd Armogan:Thank you, Felicia for your wo


Started by Blossom

Fundamental Questions

Fundamental Questions
For a number of years long before I got into yoga and the notion of science and non-duality I felt uncomfortable with the idea of God. By the same token I also had trouble with evolution wrap up in the view that we are just far to complicated just to have happened by chance. To me it was a kin to throwing a tonne of bricks into the air and having them fall back down again into the shape of a house rather than a pile of rubble.

My understanding
The universe is borne out of consciousness rather than the other way around.
Consciousness is absolute.
We are all inextricably linked through the conscious mind.
Space is inward looking through our own perception.

My uncertainty
Where is reality? I do hatha yoga, and self realisation is sought through meditation as you journey to ultimate consciousness. Unlike the Buddhist that say life is an illusion. In hatha yoga we have place of reality and absolute.
In non-duality how is the real, real. My wife sits in a room with me, how should I conceive her reality. Likewise with the world outside, rather than it be a virtual reality played out in my mind

Is consciousness non personal? Like moulding a pot from clay, you have one monotheistic material but many different pots.

My final points:
If consciousness gave rise to the universe, does this do away the big band, and string theory?
What would constitute the initial observer?
How did life begin and continue to evolve? Was it by continual observation? Since life would appear to be a product of design rather than accident.

immaterialgrrrl:Gnostic Christians would refer

RoyDopson:Focusing on the physical is st

Larry G. Maguire:"To me it was a kin to throwin

Dyre42:Try this: Consciousness is a m

Chip:My thought is that each of us

Peter Jones:Hi John. Your views seem to be

Page 10 of 12« First...89101112
VIEW all conversations
image description image description

Thanks To Our Sponsors