What is the connection between the advice to avoid 'dualistic explanations' and the upcoming story about the name 'Hemadpant'?

The author explicitly creates a connection between these two elements in Chapter 2. After receiving the instruction to "not engage in dualistic explanations," the author says this very phrase reminds him of a promise to tell the story of how he was named "Hemadpant." He presents this story as a practical illustration of the teaching against argumentation. By first describing his own past self as cynical, critical, and logic-driven, he sets up the naming story as a transformative event. Therefore, the sub-story about his name is not a random tangent but is intended to satisfy the reader's curiosity while also demonstrating the value of moving beyond a dualistic, argumentative mindset, as detailed in Chapter 2.