The Distinction Principle

Separation and differentiation are not the same.

Unfortunately, too many people espousing modern spirituality synonomize the two - and therefore confuse being separate with being different. Worse, the consider oneness as some kind of totalitarian sameness were no differences can exist!

The moment one simply accepts that separation and differentiation are not the same, then one can recognize oneness - union - without erroneously attempting to annihilate (or foolishly disregard) differences.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by dreamt

Couldn't the same be said of a lot of words though...
This is not a reason for me not using them.
What I meant simply was, to me, they're relatively new, so I'd use other words instead that are more 'established' or more clear to my mind.
I usually understand what is meant by the words when they're used.
Basically, the words are secondary (which maybe you're saying also but in a different way).
However, if people who do prefer these terms would discuss it more, it would mean that the terms will become more defined over time.
So even though 'secondary', the words are still important.

It's not that you use them, merely a generic thing, it's like I don't like the bulk of popular music, but I still know the lyrics, and the ditties get stuck in my head. The thing I notice, not just on a forum, but also in my real life spiritual social activity, is that people have things that they can use as answers, but song birds have tunes in their heads and aren't really listening.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Absonite

Separation and differentiation are not the same.

Well said.

Unfortunately, too many people espousing modern spirituality synonomize the two - and therefore confuse being separate with being different. Worse, the consider oneness as some kind of totalitarian sameness were no differences can exist!

That's why Shakespeare says, to be or not to be... one can make that distinction, but not separate the contrasting principle.

The moment one simply accepts that separation and differentiation are not the same, then one can recognize oneness - union - without erroneously attempting to annihilate (or foolishly disregard) differences.

Notice how it's fashionable for many to proclaim that human bodies necessarily make events occurring in this world seem separate, merely because such bodies differentiate experience as a five-fold perceptual environment.

Just because my human body differentiates sights, sounds, textures, scents, and favors does not mean that I discern those precepts as separate from each other. After all, on the most basic level the union of those five-fold precepts is the very environment I experience as this world! And the intimate interconnectivity of sensually discerned entities and environment (the intense interaction of organisms and habitat) is the basic foundational unity of this world!

Whenever someone goes on about how everything seems separate just because our human bodies differentiate experience as different precepts (sense data) they completely lose me - both because I recognize that they make the common mistake of confusing differentiation with separation, and because the inexorable consequence of such confusion is that their perspective union tends to be totalitarian sameness without differences.

Originally Posted by Gem

It's not that you use them, merely a generic thing, it's like I don't like the bulk of popular music, but I still know the lyrics, and the ditties get stuck in my head. The thing I notice, not just on a forum, but also in my real life spiritual social activity, is that people have things that they can use as answers, but song birds have tunes in their heads and aren't really listening.

It's kind of natural sometimes maybe, as in children learn how to speak in this way.
When it's adults though and it happens a lot, I don't know what it is. Maybe it's a variety of things. It is at least some non-interest in communication and which defeats the purpose of communication.
It is all around in society though - politicians, advertising etc.

Originally Posted by Absonite

Whenever someone goes on about how everything seems separate just because our human bodies differentiate experience as different precepts (sense data) they completely lose me - both because I recognize that they make the common mistake of confusing differentiation with separation, and because the inexorable consequence of such confusion is that their perspective union tends to be totalitarian sameness without differences.

I don't know but I get the feeling sometimes that the 'all is one' or a similar slogan could be used(or abused) in this way. Obviously it tends to be used mostly by people coming from a spiritual background. But it could also be used by atheists and people who have this more social-political idea in mind.
I could foresee some phrase like this becoming used universally, but with different groups of people having some very different ideas of what it means.
In the same way that the word God has been used by politicians going to war etc. So not a new thing, but maybe with more potential to unite, since it doesn't have a historical baggage such as the word God would.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by dreamt

It's kind of natural sometimes maybe, as in children learn how to speak in this way.
When it's adults though and it happens a lot, I don't know what it is. Maybe it's a variety of things. It is at least some non-interest in communication and which defeats the purpose of communication.
It is all around in society though - politicians, advertising etc.

I don't know but I get the feeling sometimes that the 'all is one' or a similar slogan could be used(or abused) in this way. Obviously it tends to be used mostly by people coming from a spiritual background. But it could also be used by atheists and people who have this more social-political idea in mind.
I could foresee some phrase like this becoming used universally, but with different groups of people having some very different ideas of what it means.
In the same way that the word God has been used by politicians going to war etc. So not a new thing, but maybe with more potential to unite, since it doesn't have a historical baggage such as the word God would.

Communicating is an art and it doesn't really have pretexts, it's just that one person means something by what they are communicating and another person has to understand it.

The understanding part is a bit hard, because the tendency is to interpret it within one's own mental framework, and these frameworks can become rigid with personal dogmas and personal value and moral systems.

They say things like 'your projection' but it isn't like that really, there is no your and your no mine; communitation is between people. One communication, two (or more) people.

Originally Posted by Gem

Communicating is an art and it doesn't really have pretexts, it's just that one person means something by what they are communicating and another person has to understand it.

The understanding part is a bit hard, because the tendency is to interpret it within one's own mental framework, and these frameworks can become rigid with personal dogmas and personal value and moral systems.

They say things like 'your projection' but it isn't like that really, there is no your and your no mine; communitation is between people. One communication, two (or more) people.

Maybe this is why some tend towards more local or narrow-focused groups for their socialising, as this would cut down on some of these things, such as understanding another’s beliefs etc. It’s not as interesting that way though I think. It’s good to have a group with one basic interest, such as spirituality, and obviously then there’s room for variety within that.

Yeah, mental frameworks etc can become overly rigid, but not irreversible I don't think, unless the person wants it to be. Communication itself would be a good way to address this, although that’s assuming it’s not too late and the person hasn’t been offended or something.

I think communication is wonderful when it actually happens. As you say, it is one movement, a kind of flow. When it doesn't happen then, it can feel wrong. Sometimes people persist anyway. Sometimes persistence pays off, sometimes it doesn't. It's kind of fascinating the different styles and ways there are.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by dreamt

Maybe this is why some tend towards more local or narrow-focused groups for their socialising, as this would cut down on some of these things, such as understanding another’s beliefs etc. It’s not as interesting that way though I think. It’s good to have a group with one basic interest, such as spirituality, and obviously then there’s room for variety within that.

I do that too, go into narrow focused groups and it becomes a social scene, I was in the drug scene for a while and now i'm in the Buddha style clique, and their mannerisms irritate me... but not because they're prats... it's because I'm male and over 40, so griping is an inherent need.

Yeah, mental frameworks etc can become overly rigid, but not irreversible I don't think, unless the person wants it to be. Communication itself would be a good way to address this, although that’s assuming it’s not too late and the person hasn’t been offended or something.

I think communication is wonderful when it actually happens. As you say, it is one movement, a kind of flow. When it doesn't happen then, it can feel wrong. Sometimes people persist anyway. Sometimes persistence pays off, sometimes it doesn't. It's kind of fascinating the different styles and ways there are.

Fascinating... it sure is...

[Touched]

It is true we are all One, but it is also true we are all individual.

This is the nature of the universe. :)

[the_crow]

Originally Posted by Gem

If, as they say, 'it's all one', how can we tell things apart?

All one, does not mean the same.
All are part of the whole. But the whole is the sum of all things.
You, by yourself, are a sorry thing, lacking context.
But in the context of The Whole, you become something fine.