You are hereForums / Non-Duality / We Are Not Here to Be One: We Are Here to Be Many
We Are Not Here to Be One: We Are Here to Be Many
We are not here to be One: We are here to be many. This quote be Story Waters really made an impression on me. It seems that in nonduality circles there is always an emphasis placed on Oneness (of course thats why its called nonduality) but what I am getting at is that often Oneness can be turned into a philosphy be which to live by. In other words, we are all One so I should operate from this premis. But a true realization of Oneness does not dictate a code or procedural lifestyle. It is the freedom to be the Many. We were intended to come to find the truth of our true nature than live it individually. We need to celebrate our uniqueness and embrace our desires and goals so that the One that is temporarily manifesting as the many is able to experience the exhultation of knowing itself as many. Why would we deprieve ourselves as Oneness of that experience? The ignorance of our true nature is expressed as desires; following these desires can often lead us to our true nature either by realizing them or failing to. So I say Seek and celebrate the seeking for it is the quiet whisper of your True Nature calling you home, but not to stay there but to go back out and play.
"Pity the warrior who slays all his foes.
tlhIngan Hol: Hoch jaghpu'Daj HoHbogh SuvwI' yIvup
Literal translation: Pity the warrior that kills all his enemies!
Klingon Honor Guard manual, page 39"
Apologies for the source of this, but it
seems apt. It puts another spin on It,
;-)
ed
My Klingon is a bit rusty, but as usual, Star Trek is full of wisdom. I especially like the idea of the Hallodeck as a metaphor for any reality we choose for ourselves.
Lucy ... feel free to come out and play anytime!
Playing conceptual "let's pretend" and "hide and seek" is what we are meant to do. Oneness can be bliss, but not necessarily a lot of fun.
It takes two to Tango, as they say ;-)
of all the dirty and morbid definitions of "living" danny this ranks the most dirty .....
we are here to live , accomplish, achieve attempt, celebrate.....look fearlessly into the eyes of even death, share....and not to be cowards like you insist...
if you were my kid brother I would have kicked you so hard o your bottom that your teeth would have flown out.
Again, 'Who' is making up these labels? 'Who' makes a judgment about the words/thoughts 'coward' 'dirty' 'morbid' 'fearless?'
'Who' is judging? You 'the fearless one?' 'Who' are you without the label 'fearless?' Or 'coward?'
Consciousness/Awareness is that which precedes and manifests them all. Indiscriminately.
>>>>>>>'Who' are you without the label 'fearless?' Or 'coward?'
it is impossible for me to be without fearlessness.
it is also impossible for me to be with a label..because what ever I am with , is allways more than a reality.
-----------------------------------------------------------
>>>>Consciousness/Awareness is that which precedes and manifests them all. Indiscriminately.
Could be if you are talking about labels....
BUT IT IS ME WHO PRECEDES CONSCIOUSNESS.I IMPART REALITY TO CONSCIOUSNESS.
'Who' is conscious of the 'one' that precedes Consciousness?
I precede and am the lord of all consiousness...including
the one who is consious of me ...thinking that there is such a thing (which you call a GOD , Divine Consciousness etc )
and / also ...self consciousness...or in other words my own self..
because i have no fear of /for them
This is beginning to sound like a broken record ... 'Who' is aware of this 'Me,' the Lord of consciousness (Yet another label btw) that precedes consciousness? Sleep on it.
>>>>>This is beginning to sound like a broken record ...
It is meant to be exactly that.The seeker is expected to realise exactly that and dismiss that stupid question from his/her presence.
who sees "me"? is a point that every seeker comes....
2 routes are wrongly taken...
1. that it is the divine consciousness...if it is the divine consciousness , how do you define the "divine" consciousness? however and what ever you define it will only be a "consciousness" and not divine....that is back to the "person" that you want so desperalately to be free from as he/she is to you a label.
2. SO "me" is an illusion...which is running away from the "me" in cowardice.
and on the othr hand , if me is an illusion what is real? if everything else is real ...like "reading of this post is real...a happenning and not "someone reading this post"!....one can question...if "reading" can happen why not "being?"...which is true.
if everything including me is an illusion....why call it an illusion , everything is real.
if something else is real then it is only as good as "divine consciousness" in route 1.
------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>>'Who' is aware of this 'Me,' the Lord of consciousness (Yet another label btw) that precedes consciousness?
Who is getting the knowledge of "me" ? does your dog say "I AM danalomos"?....
10 people cross a river. ANd each one take turn counting, to check if everyone has safely arrived or not.
however everytime, each one gets only the count of 9.
WHO SEES ME?
then a traveller goes by and remnds them...YOU ARE FORGETTING TO COUNT YOURSELF......
meaning....in the fear of the past, present and the future....the seeker runs away from his self, from his sense of being !
SO LET US SEE THAT QUESTION AGAIN....
>>>>>'Who' is aware of this 'Me,' the Lord of consciousness (Yet another label btw) that precedes consciousness
who is getting the knowledge of "me?" .....ME! What/who is me? the lord of such consciousness! why am I the lord ofconsiousness? AND .... AM I DIVINE and IMMORTAL?
I do not have any fear...(in terms of consciousness) for any content/no content of consciousness...for that... I AM the Lord of consciousness.....and divine and immortal are also contents of consciousness...But mind you saying them contents of consciousness is not calling them labels...
because I do not fear them...illusonary or real...and on the other hand say,,,my contents of consciousness...because of being "mine" are a zillion times more than "real"...even if they include pain...loss so on so forth
------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>sleep on it....
the sun might rise in the west...there is nothing in this world that has the potential to make me sleep on it.
THAT is what every one is...and that is why you canadian old d g.....you go off and dont "sleep on to this and that" from 12 to 6 at night.
I think most nondualist teachings would agree that that it "takes two to tango", but it seems to me it gets a little murky when we talk about our ability to "manifest the tango" Then there seems to be a slight uneasiness in the nondualist circles, because after all, if you are not the doer, how can you manifest? And their is in my opinon a belief that the desire to change what is must be originating at the level of ego. And thoughts are often relegated to incidental arising phenomena instead of potential energy that can be played with.
It's the both/and paradox yet again. Why make a distinction between the doer and the doing, between the manifester and the manifesting? One is a noun and one is a verb. Together they create one sentence. They are one and the same process. That is what consciousness does. It plays "let's pretend" "hide and seek." One just has to be comfortable with paradox of being two seemingly contradictory realities, or truths, existing simultaneously. Many have a hard time with paradox, including some hardcore, fundamentalist Advaitists, because it somehow upsets concepts or beliefs in certainty.
Consciousness exists to create and play in a make believe world. Relax and enjoy it. Non-duality is just another word game to play. If it doesn't work for you, play a different game. They are all equally valid and true.
Danalomas said: "Consciousness exists to create and play in a make believe world. Relax and enjoy it. Non-duality is just another word game to play. If it doesn't work for you, play a different game. They are all equally valid and true.
I agree that they are equally valid and true. I guess I did not express what I was trying to convey clearly enough. I will try again: To me Manifesting one's reality and nonduality are not mutally exclusive, and yet, they seem to be "taught" or "understood" that way. Once we truly feel and know ourselves as source energy we can manifest our "tango". Most nodual teachings shy away from that aspect or at least I have not come across any that give a nod to conscious manifesting. Even though there is a lot of talk about it being not separate, there is often an undercurrent in nonduality that the Unmanifest is superior to the manifest.
As one fellow NNH poster puts it: "When the quote ends the interpretation begins."
I'm with you. Unmanifest or manifest ... 'Who' cares? 'Who' is it that makes a distinction or discriminates between superior and inferior? Just another separate dualistic point of view.
Pure Consciousness couldn't care less
because there is no such thing as pure consciousness in the first place....
that there is a pure consciousness is simply cowardice and running away from what was , is and will be and what we have interpreted to be not pure.
be yourself...damn the fear for both puity and non purity
'Pure' is not necessary.
Consciousness/Awareness is that which precedes/transcends, and manifests pure/not-pure, without judgment.
Thanks for the reminder.
we are not here to be 'one' and we are also not here to be many. we are here to be ourselves.why?...
because if one agrees that there is validity to "being", one should fearlessly admit ,one is here to "be" how and what he wants to be and not any other wise.....
only that "being" in terms of being is being free...
one , many , 6 , 7 , 8 , so on.....is simply a fear of accepting it ...
"ourselves" does not have a fear if it is one or a hundred.