Some teachings invite us to investigate the nature of reality. Another teaching suggests meditation or being in the now. A third approach says none of this is necessary, we are already there. Why do these approaches differ? Which one is correct?
The essence of nonduality is non-separation - the revelation that reality is a singular (or non-numerical) happening. Separation or duality is fundamentally a persistent delusional idea or belief. All teachings are essentially about the seeing through of this delusion.
The first approach you mention is about the contemplation of reality. From this contemplation an understanding can arise that a world of multiple fragmentary first causes is incoherent. No entities or agents can be found that are separate from the movement of Life itself. From a deep realization of this, the default energetic sense of Life simply happening arises.
Meditation or 'being in the Now' is a non-conceptual approach in which discursive thought eases and the idea of separation dissolves. This involves a 'prior' state where the idea of separation simply does not arise or occur - similar to the perspective of a tiny child. Here the visceral suchness of the seamless current of existence happening as it happens is revealed.
The approach (and you are correct to call it an approach) that points out that 'nothing is necessary' is essentially correct but contains a hidden confusion. Nothing is required for nondual reality to be the case - this is absolutely true - nonduality is always already the case. But is something required for the delusion of separation/duality to be seen through? The clue is in the question; in order for the delusion of separation to be seen through, the er... seeing through of the delusion of separation is required*. This may prompt the question 'who would investigate or who would meditate?' The response to this is the same response as to who would breathe? Or who would drink tea? Meditation, as with breathing and drinking tea, simply happens - or we might say that drinking tea, breathing and meditation are the play of a Universal event - Life happening of its own accord.
Let's be clear, nothing can violate this momentum - whatever happens, however it appears is already the perfect expression of nondual Source.
* U P D A T E
Someone wrote: "seeing is not required since seeing or not seeing is also THAT."
This may be true but it leaves something out.
Nonduality is always the case. But the knowing that 'nonduality is always the case' is not always the case.
Failing to appreciate this distinction can lead to some very muddled thinking. The distinction can be said to be between nondual truth and nondual insight.
Nondual truth is the truth that whatever is happening, however it appears is the play of nondual Source or THAT.
Nondual insight is the deep recognition of this truth.
So it's true that we don't need to meditate, self inquire, be still or even sober (or conscious for that matter) for nonduality to be the case.
But a recognition of this is required (and this is an inescapable tautology) for nondual insight to be the case.
