Where does contrast come from?

[Lord_Viskey]

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

...As long as I am a human being, there will simply always be atleast some confusion about this... Not to mention, many beings who have communicated from those Greater Expanded Consciousness', that even tho it is known from those "places" or "non-places" (depending on what your perspective is), that from that "place/nonplace" it is also known how unimportant it is. And that makes me wonder... Then why do I have such a profound curiosity and intention and desire to know? What is the beginning... What is that which all things come from? That even the idea of going back, I am still going forward to what is back. That even going inward, the expansion of my realisation of what is inward is simultaneously going outward...

I believe that you are definately on to it, Ewwerrin.

The "curiosity", "intention", and "desire" (of which you speak) that we exhibit is most certainly an operation of the "linearity of our soul" being compelled towards its "concentric inclusion" within the "spiral-cyclic motivations" for returning to our Creator.

The "Infinite-Absolute", as self contained as it naturally is, includes you and me and all other sentient creatures, large and small. In some obscure and practically irrelevant moment in history where coincidence crossed paths in time and space, the Absolute has projected you into reality from all the "bits and pieces" that you are constructed of - your matter and your mind.

We are "smeared out" into this temporal expression, with perhaps our consciousness, as the only "permanent thread" linking us to our origins within the Creator. While the flesh and matter transform and reinvigorate the physical plane (on terms specific to its own laws), the energy of our consciousness - the "prima ingenium" is innate and sacrosanct to our connection with the Infinite-Absolute.

It persists because of its connection.

It animates because of its connection.

(And thank you for the compliment on my avatar. It is the name of my spirit. You might also be from my galaxy Keymo)

[Ewwerrin]

Originally Posted by Lord_Viskey

The "curiosity", "intention", and "desire" (of which you speak) that we exhibit is most certainly an operation of the "linearity of our soul" being compelled towards its "concentric inclusion" within the "spiral-cyclic motivations" for returning to our Creator.

This is just so mindblowing. From this very place, of desiring to return to the true self/existence, the entire universe is born. From my experience. The very desire of "returning to Source" or "reaching the end" is simultaneously the very beginning of everything.

And this duality(non-duality) of beginning and end, being the same thing... It also proofs that they also both don't exist. That's it's a relativity. And if the Source relativity/duality of beginning&end, don't exist. Then we have never begun and we will never end. And so, all beginnings and ends must thus not exist and must not be who we are.

And this then proofs that time does not exist...

However, this is not to negate time as a concept that exists. And exists to the very believe in it. And that believe exists... And yet... It is relative. It is not an absolute believe, just relative. The believe exists as long as we believe it.

If I take this further than I can say that even contrast doesn't exist. For we can never define it. We can never say, this darkness is absolute, oh but it does contain "that" light. And it is absolute light, but, oh, it does contain "that" darkness...
Then literally nothing is what it is. Only existence is... And it is the deepest most pure most unbounded consciousness. Uncontained.

[Lord_Viskey]

Originally Posted by Ewwerrin

This is just so mindblowing….We can never say, this darkness is absolute, oh but it does contain "that" light. And it is absolute light, but, oh, it does contain "that" darkness...

you might or might not realize it - but that part of what you said is the complete reasoning behind why there is a “dot” of the opposite color within each side of the tai-chi ; the “yin-yang” symbol.

might be easier tor you to meditate on that than to be “mindblown” by what i just mentioned.🙂

[Miss Hepburn]

Hi, my Non-dualist friends---I don't usually like coming here...and I don't think anyone likes what I say!

Why do we have a built in curiosity to know? Well, it's been answered many times here and ignored...
and so keeps being asked.
Why? Cuz people often do not do what it takes to find out.
They become a broken record of the Professional Questioner.

What does it take?
Hours and hours and many years (maybe)* of deep introspection ...I don't want to say meditation ...as many don't like to say 'God'...
but sitting in stillness, in silence, eyes closed, no disturbances for many, many, many hours a sitting.

* Why maybe? because if you are ready you can have a sudden moment or hours of Cosmic Consciousness,
(aka, an altered state of Grace), where you ''See and Understand'';
where the Doors of Perception are opened.

Who says The Absolute does not produce anything? (RE to the first post here).
The Absolute, the One is the Cosmic Eternal Producer, Creator of everything.

Ok, as someone aptly said here ...and now you probably wanna push me off a bridge.

[Lord_Viskey]

Why do we have a built in curiosity to know?

my personal curiosity has more to do with a spiritual “community” - looking for other’s descriptions so as to “vicariously” “commune” through the magic of their words… everything else i do is being done “alone” already anyway.

Who says The Absolute does not produce anything? (RE to the first post here).
The Absolute, the One is the Cosmic Eternal Producer, Creator of everything.

… hence alternative terminologies : “Infinite Potential” & “Adi” plane, (among others)

i wouldn’t want to push anyone off a bridge … that would make one less person i could commune with, wouldn’t it?🙂

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by Miss Hepburn

Hi, my Non-dualist friends---I don't usually like coming here...and I don't think anyone likes what I say! ...and now you probably wanna push me off a bridge.

Actually I agree with you.

We can ask all these questions. How does contrast come from unity? How does movement come from stillness? How does form come from formlessness? How does the many come from the One? They are all variations of the same question and the mind will always struggle to understand it.

In the end we can only go within and find that unity and stillness and formlessness within ourselves. The mind does not need to understand it.

And in the non-dual world the bridge is just another illusory manifestation within Reality and there is no-one present to be pushed off it.

Peace

[Starman]

Non-duality is the foundation of duality. They are not separate nor are they linear. The Absolute non-duality
is the fabric of duality and it also permeates duality. The Absolute non-duality is infinite, there is nowhere
where it is not. It projects duality as duality is but a reflection.

Duality is a reflection and it is the nature of reflections to give an opposite, or contrasting, image. Look in
a mirror and you will see your image in reverse. The physical universe, and all that is within it, is an image
projected by light. One might say it is star stuff.

Images are unstable, they constantly have rays of reflection coming and going in and out of being. A still
shot can be taken but animation requires motion, as does time. There would be no movement without
change. In non-duality there is no movement, except to project duality.

The whole thing is about self expression, reflecting itself to itself. We are centers of expression for the
primal will. The primal will is absolute non-duality and in my opinion we are one with that absolute non-duality
while we partake in this transitory illusive ride through duality.

[Lord_Viskey]

In reference to iamthat's post #16 & Starman's post #17...

Whether metaphorically or metaphysically, the method in which we relate to such questions is a matter of duality & linearity - for we are all objects in reality ("dream state" or "non-dream state" irrelevant). And all objects have set paths (some we set ourselves & others are set for us) that fill out their existence - so long as we remain as "objects".

However, if one can so choose to pronounce oneself, in no uncertain terms, that "I am One with Non-Duality," then it is true to accept - that for as far as the "mind-body relationship" goes - the mind half, at least, can, or has up to & from that point, transcended duality. Stay there for as long as you like (if you can), but your body will begin to deteriorate as time progresses. The eventual shedding and ultimate moment of leaving it behind withstanding, those whom have spoken here and have found their intimacy with "non-duality" still remain within time's dualistic clutches.

While I can agree with half of Starman's statement : "Non-duality is the foundation of duality," I cannot agree with the second half, that : "They are not seperate nor are they linear". Virtually every comment made by Starman thereafter, becomes an arrangement of "fohatic spin" in the mental ability to comprehend nature from the perspective of "mere mortals". Words seem to become almost like "static electricity" as individual interpretations rub up against each other in our various pursuits for wisdom. Yet here, all following words become the substance for this understanding.

To speak of reflections, mirrors, projected light, or expression - has everything to do with an entrappment within duality - and its obvious linearity. All things seen are seen in "lines of sight" - hence the linearity of lines. The "line" remains - it is always there - whether you look at the projection, the visualizer, or to what projected it - It will always be a case of "thee and me". The most significant difference being that one may look forward or backwards in the spiral-cyclic or linear landmarks that persist.

However, to persist in the "self expression of primal will" in and of itself, is an entirely different matter.

Suddenly, the "self" becomes an expression of concentric inclusions. To persist in such a manner is indeed a form of "holding still"; of being both a "centricity" and a "concentricity", for we have frozen in time (if you will) under particular mental exercise, and all motion and animation subsides. Is this the point where we must release self ? Then if so, it is also the place where communication must be left behind - for everything expressed is merely the "signature flavor" that our soul tries to impart upon personal experiences.

Somewhere within this duration, I believe that "self expression" must simply fall off into "self awareness". This stabilized state can seem to make us "god" for accomplishing such a feat. Yet we remain as "god within God" - the shadow of dualism all over again. How can it not be ? God is omniscient. Feeling as if we are god is only a tiny fragment within Infinite Possibilities - all of which, we are still only one miniscule aspect, but none of which is truelly omniscience.

To some, this is a satisfactory sensation.

In my "Origins of the First Entities" (part 3; "Tangled Heirarchies") https://heaventology.weebly.com/my-o...-entities.html, I present my visualization of the dynamic relationship between the soul of man and the Infinite, as the manor in which contrasts exist. To quickly summarize it, I'd just like to say: that "While all subtleties begin and end in the Absolute, all conspicuous things begin and end in God." This is the intrinsic function (between light and dark). This writing had become my own answer to what iamthat had alluded to : "... we can ask all these questions..."

It still seems fundamental to me: Can we reconcile non-duality with love ? Love seems dependent on the ability to both give and receive to/from another. Does the concept of no self have application here ?

[iamthat]

Originally Posted by Molearner

Can we reconcile non-duality with love ? Love seems dependent on the ability to both give and receive to/from another. Does the concept of no self have application here ?

The non-duality of Being is beyond all qualities, including love. But out of Being comes Consciousness, and love arises naturally as a quality of Consciousness. Such love does not require any ability to give or receive, it simply arises. Hence it is called unconditional. It is not dependent on anything.

The ability to give and receive love seems to refer to the state of conditional love, which is a more limited state. Love only arises under certain conditions.

Unconditional love is more likely in the state of no-self. It is the identification with self and all the demands and requirements of self which stands in the way of love.

Peace