It isn't ONE Self it is Self that is all there is ..

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Moonglow

Hello,

Adding my thoughts.

I think non-duel gets misunderstood or some may be too strict in aplplying the meaning/concept. Just my opinion.

Non-duel, to me, is non-opposing. The day does not oppose the night, the various colors do not oppose each other. Opposing in the sense that one is trying to overtake the other.

All these variants and differences are only what is being observed, experienced, and perceived. According to what one is able to observe, experience, and perceive. Also, to what and/or how it (whatever it may be) is understood, known, and aware of.

So, how this existance is experienced includes the individual/self. The self is inclusive with in thie experience/life here. The self creates his/her own understandings, knowings, thoughts, beliefs, way of living. This is unique unto the self, but adds and blends with in the self and that which the self interacts with.

Much like all the other elements, organisms, particles, ect, interact and influence each.

With in this dance/interaction one can notice the connections and with in these connections one can notice a wholeness. The wholeness creating a sense of oneness.

Oneness does not negate the wonderful diversities of, but embraces it. Diversities do not negate the influences it may have upon each, but is of the whole.

Similar to your Absolute Truth tread MG if my memory serves me well here from a while back, there is only relative truths in effect .

Similar to non duality there is only a relative understanding had and this is why there are many variants of non duality in effect .

The fact that this is the case in my eyes emphasises individuality although for some this individual expression is simply an illusion but nevertheless this would just point to there being only one entity that can be the cause for all these vantage points disguised as many .

For some reason when this stance is attained it becomes impossible for peeps to entertain that there was the creation of individual souls at some point in time or has always been . It's perhaps difficult to have an answer for when there was the actual birthing of individuality .

I agree with what you have said that I have bolded .

The funny thing about 'One' or oneness is that there is never the awareness of 'one' or oneness while being an individual .

The individual must be an individual otherwise there would be 'one' being aware of 'one' .

The illusion of separation isn't a given for reasons why 'one' cannot be aware of 'one'

It's simply just impossible for the individual to be aware of all there is or Self or the Ocean while experiencing individuality .



x daz x

[Anala]

Thank you for sharing, Moonglow,

Adding my thoughts.

I think non-duel gets misunderstood or some may be too strict in aplplying the meaning/concept. Just my opinion.

Non-duel, to me, is non-opposing. The day does not oppose the night, the various colors do not oppose each other. Opposing in the sense that one is trying to overtake the other.

I see this

All these variants and differences are only what is being observed, experienced, and perceived. According to what one is able to observe, experience, and perceive. Also, to what and/or how it (whatever it may be) is understood, known, and aware of.

Do you mean, “whatever We believe is true, is true for us.” Individual perspective.

So, how this existance is experienced includes the individual/self. The self is inclusive with in thie experience/life here. The self creates his/her own understandings, knowings, thoughts, beliefs, way of living. This is unique unto the self, but adds and blends with in the self and that which the self interacts with.

Like walking in two worlds?

Much like all the other elements, organisms, particles, ect, interact and influence each.

Perhaps our rules dictate our interactions, our beliefs and perspectives.

With in this dance/interaction one can notice the connections and with in these connections one can notice a wholeness. The wholeness creating a sense of oneness.

Is there a point in which noticing no longer matters? Like a rainbow working in concert unknowingly, light and water particles. It has an affect on those who see it, without knowing the response, the response does not matter to the water particles. It simply is.

Oneness does not negate the wonderful diversities of, but embraces it. Diversities do not negate the influences it may have upon each, but is of the whole.

You have all given me a lot to think about.

[loopylucid]

Everythings duplicated, where everything else occurs seems futile, quantum mechanics taught us about perceptions, as much as is possible for us to understand anyway, between them, is where most of us find ourselves

"It isn't ONE Self it is Self that is all there is .."

Well now, sounds like the youniverse is a bit narcissistic to me.
"I'm all that, and all that there is!" Okye dokey then.

[Moonglow]

Originally Posted by God-Like

Similar to your Absolute Truth tread MG if my memory serves me well here from a while back, there is only relative truths in effect .

Similar to non duality there is only a relative understanding had and this is why there are many variants of non duality in effect .

The fact that this is the case in my eyes emphasises individuality although for some this individual expression is simply an illusion but nevertheless this would just point to there being only one entity that can be the cause for all these vantage points disguised as many .

For some reason when this stance is attained it becomes impossible for peeps to entertain that there was the creation of individual souls at some point in time or has always been . It's perhaps difficult to have an answer for when there was the actual birthing of individuality .

I agree with what you have said that I have bolded .

The funny thing about 'One' or oneness is that there is never the awareness of 'one' or oneness while being an individual .

The individual must be an individual otherwise there would be 'one' being aware of 'one' .

The illusion of separation isn't a given for reasons why 'one' cannot be aware of 'one'

It's simply just impossible for the individual to be aware of all there is or Self or the Ocean while experiencing individuality .



x daz x

Hi daz,

These sort of discussion seem to go over the same ground as others in some ways, IMO.

Agree the individual can be aware of him/her self. Can also broaden ones perspectives and become aware of things not of him/herself, per se, but has thier influences upon the self just the same.

Yes, feel an individual may not be able to grasp everything. May not be aware of everything. May only care about what affect him/her, without realizing all the other factors at play that may influence the self.

I know I most certainly don't know or aware of everything or everyone. Can be aware of some of the effects nature and this world may have upon the self. It is very broad and entwined.

Observe at times how things and others interact and through this observe and feel connections. This indicates that there is a wholeness of sorts. which perhaps some interpret of define as One. Just a thought.

Don't know when there was a birthing of the individual. Perhaps when one became aware of being such. Which in some ways lead some to be seperated from the wholeness, nature, atleast in what the individual thought and desired, IMO. Others may feel there is no individual in a way because we are all a part of the wholeness, nature. There is the person, but he/she is not seperate from the rest.

[Moonglow]

Originally Posted by Anala

Thank you for sharing, Moonglow,


I see this


Do you mean, “whatever We believe is true, is true for us.” Individual perspective.
Like walking in two worlds?

Perhaps our rules dictate our interactions, our beliefs and perspectives.



Is there a point in which noticing no longer matters? Like a rainbow working in concert unknowingly, light and water particles. It has an affect on those who see it, without knowing the response, the response does not matter to the water particles. It simply is.



You have all given me a lot to think about.

Hi Anala,

Thank you.

I have come across the individual creates his/her own reality. I can relate to this in a way because what I think can create a reality of sorts for me, but may not hold true for anther. My perspective of things also influence what I may feel and think is real.

So, looking at it this way, can agree that what one may believe to be "true", can be true for that person. Yes, can go along whith it is a matter of perspective and what one may believe. Atleast some of this find to be true in myself.

Rules can influence what I believe, can also have me question the rules at times. Depends upon how I may perceive it and what I may believe is necessary, I suppose.

Yes, nature will do what it will, whether I take notice/observe it or not, IMO.
May have it effects upon me in ways I am not fully aware of.

Originally Posted by Moonglow

Hello,

Adding my thoughts.

I think non-duel gets misunderstood or some may be too strict in aplplying the meaning/concept. Just my opinion.

Non-duel, to me, is non-opposing. The day does not oppose the night, the various colors do not oppose each other. Opposing in the sense that one is trying to overtake the other.

All these variants and differences are only what is being observed, experienced, and perceived. According to what one is able to observe, experience, and perceive. Also, to what and/or how it (whatever it may be) is understood, known, and aware of.

So, how this existance is experienced includes the individual/self. The self is inclusive with in thie experience/life here. The self creates his/her own understandings, knowings, thoughts, beliefs, way of living. This is unique unto the self, but adds and blends with in the self and that which the self interacts with.

Much like all the other elements, organisms, particles, ect, interact and influence each.

With in this dance/interaction one can notice the connections and with in these connections one can notice a wholeness. The wholeness creating a sense of oneness.

Oneness does not negate the wonderful diversities of, but embraces it. Diversities do not negate the influences it may have upon each, but is of the whole.

Perhaps not opposing in the sense of trying to overtake each other, but opposing in the sense that they are opposites of each other in terms of the quality in question, and dual in that way. Yet, non-dual in the sense that they depend on each other for their existence as one implies the other, and cannot have meaning without the other, so they always occur together and are one thing, though with two opposite faces...so to speak. Perhaps not so much color though, I don't see that working that way....well black and white perhaps if we call those colors. But I don'k know that there are other colors that tend to cancel each other....could be, IDK.

The other interesting thing that I am not sure if you were getting at is the implications of the double slit experiment. Here we see particles that are only occurring as a distinct something when a conscious observer could potentially figure out where that something would be, even if in the past. But if the conscious observer could not become aware of where it was, then it behaves as a wave of probabilities of where it could be, or could have been, until such time when again that conscious observer could know where it is. So it would seem perhaps that the universe of the forms does not exist as such, but only the potentiality of what it might become, until such time as the conscious observer wants to observe it and/or could observe it. Or even more startling, a particle will be observed, even if there is anyway for that observer to know where it was at some point in the future. In other words it knows you are going to peek at some point so it will appear as a particle now. A universe that perhaps really does lack object permanence, playing peekaboo with the observer by only appearing as an object when they look through there fingers to see it. Or in other words it would seem perhaps that the observation and what is observed, the knowing and what is known arise together simultaneously, depending on one another to create experience. The source of what is observed, it would seem is perhaps the observer, and so the apparent duality of the knower and the known, the subject and the object, are also a non-dual and one(ness?).

[Moonglow]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Perhaps not opposing in the sense of trying to overtake each other, but opposing in the sense that they are opposites of each other in terms of the quality in question, and dual in that way. Yet, non-dual in the sense that they depend on each other for their existence as one implies the other, and cannot have meaning without the other, so they always occur together and are one thing, though with two opposite faces...so to speak. Perhaps not so much color though, I don't see that working that way....well black and white perhaps if we call those colors. But I don'k know that there are other colors that tend to cancel each other....could be, IDK.

The other interesting thing that I am not sure if you were getting at is the implications of the double slit experiment. Here we see particles that are only occurring as a distinct something when a conscious observer could potentially figure out where that something would be, even if in the past. But if the conscious observer could not become aware of where it was, then it behaves as a wave of probabilities of where it could be, or could have been, until such time when again that conscious observer could know where it is. So it would seem perhaps that the universe of the forms does not exist as such, but only the potentiality of what it might become, until such time as the conscious observer wants to observe it and/or could observe it. Or even more startling, a particle will be observed, even if there is anyway for that observer to know where it was at some point in the future. In other words it knows you are going to peek at some point so it will appear as a particle now. A universe that perhaps really does lack object permanence, playing peekaboo with the observer by only appearing as an object when they look through there fingers to see it. Or in other words it would seem perhaps that the observation and what is observed, the knowing and what is known arise together simultaneously, depending on one another to create experience. The source of what is observed, it would seem is perhaps the observer, and so the apparent duality of the knower and the known, the subject and the object, are also a non-dual and one(ness?).

Hi ketzer,

You bring up some very interesting thoughts.

Can relate that duel as referring to opposite. How with out the one the other would not exist, or atleast be aware it does. Does the night reflect upon the day or visa versa? No, they just so happen to be perspectives observed here. In the vastness of space would venture to say light and dark. Yes both occurring at once. Creating a sense of oneness in its wholeness, IMO.

For the self/individual I find it is where focus is placed or observance, that may create a sense of reality for the self. Even the stuff I am not aware or notice is also happening. It can be a real mind bender. If thought about too much. I think my mind would explode.

Interesting just the same. Had thoughts in the past of all the potential paths I could have followed and where some would have lead. But here I am and where I placed my focus, actions, and observances all brought me to this spot. Which is different then the spot you are at. Yet this internet and forum created and brought us to become aware of each here.

All the while all the other threads and web sights go buzzing along.

Yeah, makes ya feel quite smal amidst all of it. So, it seems some puff themselves up to be of great importance so not to feel so small. Not being negative, just find it for myself quite humbling.

This does not mean the self has no importance or influence, but mostly through living this life it seems involved with being this self and doing what am able and willing to get through it.

All along the potentials lay out there for one to notice and grasp and possibly creating new potentials for another to grasp and so on. Connecting and intertwining in its own way.

Little ol' self noticing bits and pieces and strives to place them together. The Universe is not stagnant, nor all the particles and such that dance with it.

All creating what seems a vast array of forms noticed. Form, energy felt, waves, and such all flying about, creating potentials for new creations and things to explore and wonder about.

What a work of wonderment. One in the movements and connections, creating the wide range of diversities which brings about the potential for the self to notice and possibly be inspired.

May even venture to say for Spirit to explore as well.

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by ketzer

"It isn't ONE Self it is Self that is all there is .."

Well now, sounds like the youniverse is a bit narcissistic to me.
"I'm all that, and all that there is!" Okye dokey then.

I am all that is a different concept to Self is all there is .

I am is individualised and Self is not .

So we have a mixed platform here ..

It would be true enough to say that I AM not all that but fundamentally I AM all that because there is only what you are present .

This is why also I AM is not the entirety or the absolute or the infinite but fundamentally there is no separation between finite and infinite, wave and the ocean.


x daz x

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by Moonglow

Hi daz,

These sort of discussion seem to go over the same ground as others in some ways, IMO.

Hey Moonie,

For sure these type of convo's go on and on and have done so for thousands of years

Originally Posted by Moonglow

the individual can be aware of him/her self. Can also broaden ones perspectives and become aware of things not of him/herself, per se, but has thier influences upon the self just the same.

Yes, feel an individual may not be able to grasp everything. May not be aware of everything. May only care about what affect him/her, without realizing all the other factors at play that may influence the self.

Individuality is expressed through this not knowing . Putting it crudely the Borg on start trek voyager illustrates what the differences are between the collective and the individual .To be at one with ones own self and ones own thoughts and feelings reflect individuality, the only defence of non duality is that this sense of oneself is false or dreamy or illusory or not real .

Originally Posted by Moonglow

know I most certainly don't know or aware of everything or everyone. Can be aware of some of the effects nature and this world may have upon the self. It is very broad and entwined.

Observe at times how things and others interact and through this observe and feel connections. This indicates that there is a wholeness of sorts. which perhaps some interpret of define as One. Just a thought.

Don't know when there was a birthing of the individual. Perhaps when one became aware of being such. Which in some ways lead some to be seperated from the wholeness, nature, atleast in what the individual thought and desired, IMO. Others may feel there is no individual in a way because we are all a part of the wholeness, nature. There is the person, but he/she is not seperate from the rest.

As some have already said there cannot be the hub without the spokes or there cannot be individuality without oneness because one wouldn't know the difference otherwise, there wouldn't be one without the other so to speak .

This is why there are individual / ordinary mind experiences and universal cosmic experiences . To have the transcendence to the universal oneness doesn't mean that the individual / ordinary mind experience was false .

There are simply different ways and means to experience and be aware of what we are .. and certain conditions and laws dictate what one is aware of or what one experiences .

I see traditions and practices and beliefs that seem to divide and try and nullify and negate another self aspect (like non duality)and the neti neti approach ...

All this negation and renouncing doesn't seem like unified Self - Oneness to to me .. it's seems to be the opposite in many instances . lol .


x daz x