Reconciling non duality with retaining individuality in spirit

[Emmalevine]

This is something that has always confused me. I know I'm trying to understand it logically which may be part of the problem but regardless of that I'm hoping someone with good spiritual awareness may be able to explain it.

If each of us are part of the Whole and we are essentially One then persumably after death we go back to that experience of Oneness. How then can we reconcile this with the belief that our loved ones and other spiritual beings retain their individuality? In fact how do we explain individuality at all since we didn't exist in the same form prior to carnation.

I feel really stupid writing this out as people on this forum appear to have such an advanced understanding of such matters, but hey ho I'm putting this out there because I really want to understand the bigger picture.

[wolfgaze]

Emma don't feel 'stupid', this is a valid & good question...

[TarunP]

Originally Posted by Emmalevine

If each of us are part of the Whole and we are essentially One then persumably after death we go back to that experience of Oneness. How then can we reconcile this with the belief that our loved ones and other spiritual beings retain their individuality? In fact how do we explain individuality at all since we didn't exist in the same form prior to carnation.

An uneducated guess is as follows -

We can go back to Oneness even now, while in the physical body. There should not be any doubt about it. There is oneness (non-duality) and the illusion (duality) of a separate individual is created by the Mind. An "individual" is only an experience, nothing more, and it happens in oneness. The oneness does not become two when perceiving the individual, it remains one. That perception of the individual happens in oneness.

We can have the same oneness experience without a body (try it while oob or Samadhi, if you can, you will find the very same awareness, the Self, behind all mental states). So assuming that there is some non-physical structure that remains after death, there can remain an illusion of separateness.

Death is also an experience, a change. Just like all other things, bodies come and go. The screen remains one and whole, the scene changes on it. The Self, the witness, simply witnesses this play. All experiences of oneness or of separateness occur in the Self.

[DreamKey]

Originally Posted by Emmalevine

This is something that has always confused me. I know I'm trying to understand it logically which may be part of the problem but regardless of that I'm hoping someone with good spiritual awareness may be able to explain it.

If each of us are part of the Whole and we are essentially One then persumably after death we go back to that experience of Oneness. How then can we reconcile this with the belief that our loved ones and other spiritual beings retain their individuality? In fact how do we explain individuality at all since we didn't exist in the same form prior to carnation.

I feel really stupid writing this out as people on this forum appear to have such an advanced understanding of such matters, but hey ho I'm putting this out there because I really want to understand the bigger picture.

You're cutting to the idea of a personal experience of oneness. This isn't actually the way it works. In the same way your dream character in your nightly dreams is not having oneness experiences of the person in bed dreaming the whole thing up, the human body doesn't have a oneness experience. The body appears to the same consciousness that permeates the creation appearing, and so it would point closer to say consciousness or oneness itself is in a simulation of separation.

As far as the beliefs of loved ones retaining their individuality, that retaining happens in the human experiential framework. The framework is composed of two ideas, time and space. 'You', as consciousness, are not in those ideas.

[Emmalevine]

Originally Posted by wolfgaze

Emma don't feel 'stupid', this is a valid & good question...

Thank you

[Emmalevine]

Originally Posted by TarunP

An uneducated guess is as follows -

We can go back to Oneness even now, while in the physical body. There should not be any doubt about it. There is oneness (non-duality) and the illusion (duality) of a separate individual is created by the Mind. An "individual" is only an experience, nothing more, and it happens in oneness. The oneness does not become two when perceiving the individual, it remains one. That perception of the individual happens in oneness.

We can have the same oneness experience without a body (try it while oob or Samadhi, if you can, you will find the very same awareness, the Self, behind all mental states). So assuming that there is some non-physical structure that remains after death, there can remain an illusion of separateness.

Death is also an experience, a change. Just like all other things, bodies come and go. The screen remains one and whole, the scene changes on it. The Self, the witness, simply witnesses this play. All experiences of oneness or of separateness occur in the Self.

Okay so we can experience Oneness while in the physical world so that essentially doesn't change while in the spirit world because individuality remains just an experience...oneness experiencing itself as a person/spiritual being and with persumably different degrees of awareness of that awareness.

This makes sense I think. Thank you for sharing your thoughts!

[Emmalevine]

Originally Posted by DreamKey

You're cutting to the idea of a personal experience of oneness. This isn't actually the way it works. In the same way your dream character in your nightly dreams is not having oneness experiences of the person in bed dreaming the whole thing up, the human body doesn't have a oneness experience. The body appears to the same consciousness that permeates the creation appearing, and so it would point closer to say consciousness or oneness itself is in a simulation of separation.

As far as the beliefs of loved ones retaining their individuality, that retaining happens in the human experiential framework. The framework is composed of two ideas, time and space. 'You', as consciousness, are not in those ideas.

Your first paragraph reminds me of a dream that Carl Jung once had; he dreamed he entered a church where he found a yogi meditating. As he walked closer, he realised with some discomfort that the yogi had his face and was in fact him and the self he knew about was being dreamed, not the other way around. Once the yogi awakened, he knew his personal experience of self would no longer be.

Not sure if this is relevant, but is it more or less what you are saying?

I can understand what you mean about time and space being in a human domain. However, I'm still struggling with your second paragraph. As time and space do not exist in a non human domain, what can we say about the spirit world (if there is one) and individuality? Do you mind elaborating a bit? Many thanks.

[DreamKey]

Originally Posted by Emmalevine

Your first paragraph reminds me of a dream that Carl Jung once had; he dreamed he entered a church where he found a yogi meditating. As he walked closer, he realised with some discomfort that the yogi had his face and was in fact him and the self he knew about was being dreamed, not the other way around. Once the yogi awakened, he knew his personal experience of self would no longer be.

Not sure if this is relevant, but is it more or less what you are saying?

I can understand what you mean about time and space being in a human domain. However, I'm still struggling with your second paragraph. As time and space do not exist in a non human domain, what can we say about the spirit world (if there is one) and individuality? Do you mind elaborating a bit? Many thanks.

Time is a linear framework we create mentally to provide context to change. This framework is an idea. You see evidence of time everywhere, but you never experience time directly.

Space is the framework that gives meaning to the appearance of objects. Things appear to be separated by this thing we call space but this thing we call space is not other than an idea. If there were no objects in space the idea of space would have no meaning whatsoever, because everything would be space or more pointedly nothingness.

Out of nothingness comes the world of appearance. Time and space are the experiential frameworks within which nothingness experiences this world. At no point do time and space become more than ideas, and at no point are these ideas necessary for spaciousness or nothingness to be infinitely and eternally itself.

As such, we could say the human experiential framework is completely imaginary, like a dream of nothingness being something. The human body possesses the unique gift of conditioned thinking. Nothingness is unconditioned, but as change apparently happens through time, one object in apparent space (the person) becomes capable of thinking and emoting according to how it changes in relation to how change is already happening.

Within this dynamic nothingness loses itself in its own apparent world, an impersonal creation morphing into a personal dream. Most folks are unconscious of the consciousness prior to conditioning, the unconditioned nothingness, not just that this nothingness 'exists', but that it is all that exists, and within a certain context, the only no-thing in existence.

So in a way, this is like Jung's dream realization. When you fall asleep at night, your thinking mind creates a dream world and populates it with characters and features. The mind is not localized in the dream, but rather, is everything in the dream itself. While you are free to play your role as the dream character, at no point is the person in bed sleeping 'actually' the character.

In the same way, nothingness is not limited to something, but here in form we appear that way and also possess the ability to transcend the 'idea' of being just something. Seeing through the 'ideas' of time and space as an overlay to 'your' (impersonally your) human creation is what some point to as the way. The seeing itself is seen from nothingness, and not through the eyes of something, like something in time and space.

[Dan_SF]

I would not use nothingness to describe the unseen. Because it isnt nothing that is doing something. it is notseen (by human eyes) that is existing.
I would rather describe this nothingness as an Idea. So as you can't see the idea, you can know it, and so you can see it is there.

Everything is an idea.

God Created his Son, in his mind, as an idea of a Son. God Creates the Eternal and Unchangeable.
Son had an idea, where he could create the opposites to what God creates.Son gets confused in this creation and thinks he is the Creation which he Crated instead of Creator of them.
Son is using the power of God to create this. God is honoring the miscreation of Son, by holding them alive.

Now in this Confusion the Body and other things appear to be. Beeing part of Son, they are God like, at least the part which is holding them alive (which is the idea of Son).

But Son is splitting himself into parts and pieces. Now, every part and piece can grow, have its own experience, and the body does appear to have an End.

So while you can think that you are Body,what makes you able to think is still an idea of Son. And as Son is one with God (One means not beeing different) So are his Ideas one with him.

As the Body is the Idea of beeing different, the bodies will never be one. But the Minds can choose not to see them (other minds) as different. Only in this way is onenes meaningful and healing (because the son is made whole).

[firstandlast]

Unity is first and goes onto be duality which is still unity; and such is realized by trinity, because the two are one-- If our oneness is something to be recognized, than it is something that exists already.. and we cannot act in any other way besides this unity-- But through trinity can duality exist as recognized one--

But I go further-- I mean I say it in sort of an absolute manner that in our condition, that if more than one model is applicable, or that neither model such as unity or duality, and maybe even trinity is capable of covering all aspects of existence, because each one is so tied into the other; that unless we reconcile these into one view.. arguing for each one as above the other is to not realize that I could stand far above you in cruel tyranny and that I am nothing any different than you are, but that I am me and you are you--

------------------

Lets put it this way, you were born only one; the past lives you experience are not a matter of being born in the past, but that by being born you arose in each place that birth took place-- If you look at it as one long linear story, surely it looks dreadful; and that you have been here for so long repeatedly experiencing the tragedy of unstable joy, that if you think you came from your mom, you would not be relating to that true mother which exists as an enclosure around you, a womb you thought you escaped the first time you leapt out--

If you treat your mother as your mother, because this appears to be the true relationship between you as you were born into form.. but that mother is countless mothers and has countless roles within her that would appear as her daughter, which is like honoring your heart or other vital organs as a child of yours.. and in such, we are such a thing to all else--

--------------------------------

Why do we retain our individuality even in reconciliation with the unity of spirit? because the unity of spirit already exists simple as that.. there's no conflict except in our ability to decide how to treat reality and realities choice in response--

Becoming one, could not mean anything but becoming two as well.. because 2 is simply 2 1's grouped together as separate.. and thus the 2 act as 1must learn to work together.. to see each other.. so that when they recognize themselves the 1 can act as 2--

This is tricky math, because you can't count such things.. trying to quantify us, is like trying to count what there is to count in all the ways there are to count it; and that I might count one several times thinking it is 3 or 7.. not realizing one is in one, one is in two, and one is in 7, and it is in 7 seven times and that 7 is one in it of itself--

What is a number? well if you are counting things you will only distort reality by counting it without knowing what counts--

1.. never becomes 2-- one becomes one, but that one is twice what it was before.. so that 2 is actually only one, but that one is counting itself twice to relate to itself-- So we are really dealing with ratios.. if we can't come up with a solid object to be counted, than let us count on the unsolid relationships that appear to be more than it is, which is also just misunderstanding how it appears to be less than it is--

10 cannot be ten things, but ten occurrences of a repeated relationship that is easier to be dealt with as 10 things instead of one.. especially since undifferentiated existence has nothing to count on; and only itself to relate to-- but this experience of oneness or any mystical experience, is nothing to aim for in it of itself as what is to be attained in life (but maybe in our death that we call life now); because unity is here.. you can deal with anything in any way, but what decides how it deals with you?

------

I look upon you from over here in a manner that recognizes your view as the same as mine-- There is no difference in my perspective than any other perspective someone else has, or different from any perspective I have ever had-- That I am one thing with one will, and that will is already all our will; which means.. drumroll.. identity, was, created, with, purpose, and that we, with, such, purpose, had reason to deny ourselves understanding of our own self--

Your will is mine, and my will is yours; but that I should appear to be another will and another way; is a great gift and a life of suffering and hardship to which our identity was forged through--