Are we separate or one?

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Redchic12

Re INALALAN #12
... I’ve been a teacher of two different subjects for many years and have found that a using a simple analogy to understand something has been extremely helpful.

In my view, and in my experience, a teacher should focus more on teaching his pupils "how to learn", how to use their intellect and intuition, and should minimize teaching "how things are".

When using analogies, you tell people "how things are" as seen by the teacher, who might be wrong.

A teacher should educate people so they could exceed the teacher's level of knowledge and understanding, and by teaching "how things are", he sets detrimental limitations from the beginning.

Coming back to the subject of this thread, we are interconnected identities, on widely different levels of evolvement. This means that we are't "one" (we are infinitely many identities), but also that we aren't "separated" (we are all interconnected at consciousness level, and not only as humans).

The alternative "one vs. separated", from the start misleads into looking for an answer inside a limited space of sub-optimal options.

Obviously, these are my beliefs (as stated in my signature), and I express them for communication purposes, not to convince anybody, not to argue for mine, nor against others'.

[Maisy]

The way I currently see it is "God" or "the source" or whatever we call this thing we can experience in a lot of ways, the source of conscious awareness, of us basically as a perceiver, this source has attributes.

Some attributes would be awareness and intelligence. Now these things can increase or decrease or be high or low, someone can have a very high IQ for example, a very high intelligence or a very low IQ or intelligence. The same with awareness, it can be vastly high or vastly low. And everything in between.

So the way I see it, our source, from our perspective, has such a high intelligence and awareness we cannot even imagine it. That's how far it is from our own. One can get experiences of this mind blowing "source" by letting go of oneself in various ways.

But my point was this is included in the common drops in the ocean analogy. A drop of water has the same attributes as the entire ocean. Just how we have the same attributes as the source or God. We cover up these attributes as a consciousness, or mask them, by focusing on other stuff. By directing our attention into delusion or on the lower physical vibrational forms around us.

So as a "drop" we have "soul" or source or god attributes of love, intelligence, awareness, exactly like our source does but of course these things are off any scale we have or can imagine at the levels of these things in our source.

Touching or experiencing God or the source is often described as "expanding the mind" or an expansive experience and that is what it is like, when one touches that higher being. Our attributes expand and it's a mind blowing experiece.

"In Louisville, at the corner of Fourth and Walnut, in the center of the shopping district, I was suddenly overwhelmed with the realization that I loved all those people, that they were mine and I theirs, that we could not be alien to one another even though we were total strangers. It was like waking from a dream of separateness,..." Thomas Merton - Trappist Monk

[charly233]

Originally Posted by inavalan

Coming back to the subject of this thread, we are interconnected identities, on widely different levels of evolvement. This means that we are't "one" (we are infinitely many identities), but also that we aren't "separated" (we are all interconnected at consciousness level, and not only as humans).

This is an interesting and original perspective. It is encouraging me to re-examine and re-evaluate my feeling that we are all one Being.

Thanks.

[Busby]

Originally Posted by lemex

Now when I say we know other consciousness, I'm merely stating what we talk about much of the time, others beings such as God(s), Demons, Angels, Spirits, Souls, and other non physical beings.

Was talking about using the Askishic Records as evidence saying there is nothing else, please say it. You didn't say. Can you go a little deeper.


I

I have, after decades of searching, never have had one moment when I have had reason to believe that Gods, demons, angels, spirits or souls exist. Believe you me I have searched long and hard.
I don't (as far as I know) have a soul nor is there a part of me that I can recognise as spirit. Nor am I alone here - there are billions of people who lead good lives without believing things for which there is no evidence.

I have elsewhere on SFs told about seeing my father and seeing my wife after their deaths - they didn't appear to me a ghosts or spirits (whatever they may be) but as people.

I introduced the Akaschic records as a mention, then went on to talk about the Collective Unconscious - suggesting that this is the more comprehensive explanation - one which delves deeper into the world of sentient beings and one which verges constantly on being accepted by scientists as an explanation of many hidden puzzles.

I suggest that you, in your search, turn to Jung's CU to discover just what it offers in clarifying some of our many questions - you'll probably be surprised.

[Redchic12]

INVALAN

YOU STATE………”The way I understand reality, growing is about getting deeper, perceiving finer and finer details ad infinitum, and not about muddling the details. It is about the developing, multiplying, perfecting identities, and not about the loss of identity”

Actually I have to disagree as I DONT see it as a loss of identity.

[Redchic12]

INVALAN you state……”When using analogies, you tell people "how things are" as seen by the teacher, who might be wrong.”

I feel an analogy ISNT telling people how things are IMO it is just another simple way of looking at something and trying to help them understand a difficult concept.

Didn’t Jesus use parables (which weren’t meant to be taken literally) to help people understand something? If he told people in those days what he really wanted to say (as you suggest) then they would have looked at him totally confused and wouldn’t have a clue what he was on about. Same in this day and age.

In a group of people you will find all different levels of intelligence and awareness. Some are simple and uneducated and some are middle range and some are really smart.

A good teacher will need an analogy for the average person or uneducated and perhaps use another method for the ones who are further along on the path.

What you state above is correct, but only when it comes to the intelligent/highly educated people but for the average person out there it does not work. They will NOT be able to understand your concept and also will NOT understand the meaning of the words that you use to describe it either, as their vocabulary is extremely limited. And that is my experience of teaching.

The old saying “one size fits all”. Doesn’t apply to teaching a skill or concept.

INVALAN your comments
….”teacher should educate people so they could exceed the teacher's level of knowledge and understanding, and by teaching "how things are", he sets detrimental limitations from the beginning”

Yes a good teacher will ALWAYS want the student to excel, even beyond their own understanding and would NEVER tell a student “how things are” but instead find a way to help them find their own answers in a way that is easy and simple especially if they have a low IQ or little education.

I feel an analogy does NOT teach people “how things are” and in 20 years of teaching various skills, I have never seen it be detrimental”. In fact quite the opposite.

So let me ask you a question. Have you ever taught people a skill or a concept?
And if so, what subject and what kinds of people.








However when it comes

[lemex]

I think we can't get over the hurtle of the beingness paradox, the concept of being both being one (separate) and oneness (not separate). There are a couple of posts in Esoteric Whisperings that touch on the states and explains how they relate. It may be worth reading if you haven't. Manifested and unmanifested states coexisting.

Imagine how difficult it was to have started the first system/religion. Having a new idea. I think new ideas are like that to, the starting and how incredibly incredibly difficult it is. For me, I always imagine how different information would change every system that our ancestors started with having no concept of the information we know today and argue. We probably think we'd have to start a new system because of new information. You gotta love knowledge. Anyone else feel this way, just wondering that it to always been the same, a before.

[lostsoul13]

I think we are one but separated from our higher self- our heart and mind is separate… separation teaches us we are all one in the long term of things…

I think mind and heart are joined by the oneness of the self so is higher self… but there’s degrees of separation- reincarnation is there to close the gap

[lemex]

Originally Posted by lostsoul13

I think we are one but separated from our higher self- our heart and mind is separate… separation teaches us we are all one in the long term of things…

Wow, I was just writing about heart in my journal since I didn't mention it and was thinking I should have. Very nice inclusion as I use it in my questions.

[hazada guess]

Are we separate or one?

IMO,we all came from the source and we are all learning lessons, aiding others etc through every vibration until we eventually rejoin the Source.