But I want to make a clear case for nondual ethics 🪷

But I want to make a clear case for nondual ethics: I like good dreams and plays with happy endings. If we’re truly all one, your suffering is mine, so wouldn’t I want to ease all the world’s suffering the same way I would want to resettle my body in an uncomfortable posture? And if I’m totally free as in a simulation but I’m still here experiencing it, wouldn’t I freely aim toward the highest good possible, acting from a deep sense of unity and compassion? Aren't motivations for almost anything other than the world of form reflecting our deepest understanding of love and interconnectedness, shadowy upon close inspection?

This seems to go against my first point—suggesting that in the absence of perceived separation, ethical action becomes a natural extension of the realization of oneness. I don’t have great answers here. The nature of pointing is separate from that which is pointed to. These kinds of questions are about the world of form, which is a world of separation. Still, seems to me the process of awakening can loosen identification or strengthen it (because people experience their finding as THE truth and all relative distinctions pale in comparison); so you can find teachers who are extraordinarily ethical and mature, but you can find others who DGaF.

It’s complicated. This is an email. My tone may say otherwise, but I’m always writing in discovery, trying to find out what I seem to know and don’t, reminding myself of what I want to learn, further integrate, explore, appreciate.

With love, Jordan