Doing and Happening

[God-Like]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Hehe! I like to say, "Who are you talking to? I don't exist! Remember?"

There is of course a certain truth to this idea, but when taken far enough, it doesn't make any cognitive sense, any any attempt to assert it ends up contradicting itself... which is when the fun begins. LOL

It becomes mighty confusing doesn't it .

I have always maintained that these hardcore non dualists don't actually live by their theories and it's that straightforward .

There isn't a realisation for such a theory and it makes no sense to me to argue a theory when it's not actually lived .

Real people believe that there really are individuals that exist, they do so because their behaviour mirrors their belief .

If you really didn't believe in that other's existed you wouldn't bother arguing your beliefs about non duality with them . lol .



x daz x

Originally Posted by God-Like

It becomes mighty confusing doesn't it .

I have always maintained that these hardcore non dualists don't actually live by their theories and it's that straightforward .

There isn't a realisation for such a theory and it makes no sense to me to argue a theory when it's not actually lived .

Real people believe that there really are individuals that exist, they do so because their behaviour mirrors their belief .

If you really didn't believe in that other's existed you wouldn't bother arguing your beliefs about non duality with them . lol .

x daz x

Yes, can be very confusing. A lot like one of dem dare Zen Koans. One can think themselves to exhaustion on it.

But eventually one gives up and turns on the old boob tube, and if lucky, gets a nice respite from their own existence for a bit....but the buttered popcorn does exist and don't try to tell me different.

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by God-Like

It becomes mighty confusing doesn't it .

I have always maintained that these hardcore non dualists don't actually live by their theories and it's that straightforward .

There isn't a realisation for such a theory and it makes no sense to me to argue a theory when it's not actually lived .

Real people believe that there really are individuals that exist, they do so because their behaviour mirrors their belief .

If you really didn't believe in that other's existed you wouldn't bother arguing your beliefs about non duality with them . lol x daz x

Repeating that stuff confirms that you dont get it. What you are missing has already been stated, repeating that wont help so lets leave it at that. Be well and good luck

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by Iamit

It really is not that difficult to see the nondual point that all is Oneness manifest. So all conversation is Oneness talking to itself, and resonating with itself, whilst looking like separate persons. Why Oneness manifests and masquerades as such seems to be because it can :)

"What niz refers to is simply more dreams beyond the dreams and there is no comparison for what isn't a dream".

This is not a difficult idea. It is quite clear. There is no comparison because what is being said is that there is nothing but the dream, including that statement:) Difficult for some to get your head around, but there is a space being pointed to if you can. Good luck.

Originally Posted by Iamit

"What niz refers to is simply more dreams beyond the dreams and there is no comparison for what isn't a dream".

This is not a difficult idea. It is quite clear. There is no comparison because what is being said is that there is nothing but the dream, including that statement:) Difficult for some to get your head around, but there is a space being pointed to if you can. Good luck.

Whose head?
Is it the same head having a dream?

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Whose head?
Is it the same head having a dream?

The Neo Advaita answer to such questions is always the same, It is Oneness whilst looking like the illusion of separate persons. Yet each is the other and the One Love (Oneness) in action, doing all by and to itself, whilst dreaming difference where there is no difference whatsoever.

Originally Posted by Iamit

The Neo Advaita answer to such questions is always the same, It is Oneness whilst looking like the illusion of separate persons. Yet each is the other and the One Love (Oneness) in action, doing all by and to itself, whilst dreaming difference where there is no difference whatsoever.

Yes, I believe I have heard that said before, if not in exactly those words. And while I do not dispute this to be a valid point of view, I don't find it to be the only valid one. One might say there is difference, even if that difference is within the one, and even if the difference owes its existence to the dream. While the dreamer dreams, there is difference between the ten thousand things in the dream.

The problem with talking or thinking about oneness, is that one creates with the dialogue or thought, the concept of not oneness. Perhaps, there is no other way to discuss it and the only solution, if there is one, is not to discuss or think about it at all, and then only the one mystery remains.

Tao Te Ching - Lao Tzu - chapter 1

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
The named is the mother of ten thousand things.
Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations.
These two spring from the same source but differ in name;
this appears as darkness.
Darkness within darkness.
The gate to all mystery.

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Yes, I believe I have heard that said before, if not in exactly those words. And while I do not dispute this to be a valid point of view, I don't find it to be the only valid one. One might say there is difference, even if that difference is within the one, and even if the difference owes its existence to the dream. While the dreamer dreams, there is difference between the ten thousand things in the dream.

The problem with talking or thinking about oneness, is that one creates with the dialogue or thought, the concept of not oneness. Perhaps, there is no other way to discuss it and the only solution, if there is one, is not to discuss or think about it at all, and then only the one mystery remains.

Tao Te Ching - Lao Tzu - chapter 1

The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
The named is the mother of ten thousand things.
Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations.
These two spring from the same source but differ in name;
this appears as darkness.
Darkness within darkness.
The gate to all mystery.

That differences appear in the manifestation is acknowledged but only as an illusion of difference where there is no difference at all. So the idea of 'not Oneness' is not created because it is Oneness appearing as that illusion of difference.

Originally Posted by Iamit

That differences appear in the manifestation is acknowledged but only as an illusion of difference where there is no difference at all. So the idea of 'not Oneness' is not created because it is Oneness appearing as that illusion of difference.

Oneness appearing as.

[Iamit]

Originally Posted by ketzer

Oneness appearing as.

Still no 'not Oneness' created unless I am missing something, which would not be the first time:)