Mystical Non-duality Tom Digby* In two recent articles I L.Stafford Betty has carried the banner of dualism in a valiant effort to show that no other interpretation of mystical experience will work. At the outset of the more recent, and broader, article, 'Towards a Reconcilia- tion of Mysticism and Dualism ~, Betty sets as his task the criticisms of 'any interpretation which claims that the mystic meets, becomes, or realizes God or ~Reality' but disallows a dualistic interpretation of that experience. ,2 'That the essence of the mystic's experience is an ~undifferentiated unity' (W.T.Stace's term)' he readily asknowledges. What he objects to is any suggestion that this experiential unity implies what he calls an 'ontological identity'. 4 In support of his position he cites the fact that ~even though theistic mystics everywhere use the language of unity, even occasionally identity, they in general support dualism. '5 As Betty admits, this is not strong evidence, especially in view of (i) the pressures that have sometimes been exerted against mystics on behalf of dualism by religious authorities, and (ii) the theistic mystics' own sincere theological prejudices in favor of dualism. Thus he rests his argument on other grounds. ~First,' says Betty, 'there is no good reason that there should not be two beings ultimately involved. '6 Even though the mystic's experience is one of undifferentiated unity, Betty thinks that it is 'obvious '7 that two entities are involved. He says that 'it is one thing to describe an experience and quite another to analyse the factors underlying the experience. '8 Meister Eckhart, whom Betty takes to be a monist opponent, 'fails to distinguish what seems from what could plausibly be. He fails to distinguish the experience itself from the -- how shall I put it? -- ontological scaffolding of the experience. '9 There are two points that have been made here, both of which are problematic. First, that the mystical experience of unity it * University of Colorado at Boulder, USA. 17