"non-dual"?

I used to categorize my spirituality and associated beliefs as "non-dual" without hesitation, and that has changed. It's a tricky toss up these days to know what someone is pointing to when they use that term....

When non-dual is stated as an answer to a question of whether reality is dual or non-dual, I'll agree to disagree, because my answer is both/and. When it points to the simultaneous reality of oneness and twoness, and that the spiritual and the material are inseparable, I'll be smiling from my heart. When it points to balance and reconciling division, I'm totally in. When it's a rally cry for a war against the ego, I'm running.  When it points to inter-connection, balance, and self-compassion, I'll stand for that. When it supports greater intimacy, personal responsibility, and a deeper sense of meaning, amen.  When it encourages and celebrates self-expression, human potential and  societal repair, hallelujah. If it signals pitting god against its' humanity, or the ego against itself, I ask you to reconsider. When it incites disdain, apathy or nihilism, I'll pass. When it's renunciate, hollow, sterile, and cold, I'll pass too.  When it points to everything as a unique expression of the One in relationship with itself, I'm right there with you, seeing the extraordinary in the ordinary, jumping for joy and sorrow, and everything precious in between.