The One and the Many

[Arz Sra]

Originally Posted by Maguru

But how would you KNOW?

know what?

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Arz Sra

know what?

I think I may be reading your post differently to what you intended. Now that I have looked back on it, I really don't know how it relates to the post you quoted. Sorry.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

They are not separate in that they co-exist but only the source could exist without the expression, not the other way around.

Because they are one. There's just source being and source expressing.

When you look at source and expression, they appear as two knowings that co-exist. This is the nature of duality that I believe source intended.

Knowledge is part of expression.

I meant the source could not be known by us and duality is the ingenius expression of Oneness in order that we can know Oneness as an expression of who we are.

Oneness isn't an expression of who you are, it's the truth of what you are. The individual is the expression

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by evolutionarypathways

We are the expression of source. Two separate things - living one inside the other.

The bark of a dog is the dog's expression, but it doesn't have a separate existence and it doesn't live inside the dog. It's only a 'separate thing' as a thought; an idea.

[Arcanum]

Quote:
Originally Posted by arcanum
Illusion is reality to you?

Maguru: No.

Then how can you can measure truth by reality when you don't know if what you experience is illusion or reality?

[evolutionarypathways]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

The bark of a dog is the dog's expression, but it doesn't have a separate existence and it doesn't live inside the dog. It's only a 'separate thing' as a thought; an idea.

I love this example! Very tangible. Thanks for bringing it up.

Let me ask you this...

If you kill the bark does the dog keep on living? If you kill the expression does the source die too?

[Arz Sra]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

The bark of a dog is the dog's expression, but it doesn't have a separate existence and it doesn't live inside the dog. It's only a 'separate thing' as a thought; an idea.

[Arz Sra]

Originally Posted by evolutionarypathways

I love this example! Very tangible. Thanks for bringing it up.

Let me ask you this...

If you kill the bark does the dog keep on living? If you kill the expression does the source die too?

Is it a question or an implication ?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by evolutionarypathways

I love this example! Very tangible. Thanks for bringing it up.

Let me ask you this...

If you kill the bark does the dog keep on living? If you kill the expression does the source die too?

Well, the bark was never alive to begin with, since it never became more than an expression of the dog. So it's not possible for it to die.

In the example, the dog does seem to be alive and so it can seem to die. It appears in form and then doesn't appear. In the context of source and expression, the expression appears but the source itself never appears in form. As such, it cannot be said to be born, and so it cannot die. This is what is meant by eternal, which is really the absence of the idea of the temporal self.

[evolutionarypathways]

Originally Posted by Arz Sra

Is it a question or an implication ?

A question born of reality points back to reality. When the question came to me I immediately knew that there is only one answer. Do you think otherwise?

[evolutionarypathways]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Well, the bark was never alive to begin with, since it never became more than an expression of the dog. So it's not possible for it to die.

In the example, the dog does seem to be alive and so it can seem to die. It appears in form and then doesn't appear. In the context of source and expression, the expression appears but the source itself never appears in form. As such, it cannot be said to be born, and so it cannot die. This is what is meant by eternal, which is really the absence of the idea of the temporal self.

Nice story.

[Arz Sra]

Originally Posted by evolutionarypathways

A question born of reality points back to reality. When the question came to me I immediately knew that there is only one answer. Do you think otherwise?

The meaning of reality here as you used it ?

Do you think otherwise?

Well, actually I think that the answer came to you first. The asked question was a just a cool way to convey it. isn't it so?

[evolutionarypathways]

Originally Posted by Arz Sra

Well, actually I think that the answer came to you first. The asked question was a just a cool way to convey it. isn't it so?

Yes, it's so. The first thing I realized when I read Arcanum's example was that the 'bark' and the 'dog' are separate entities. The 'bark' does live inside the dog. It just hasn't been expressed yet.

Ever hear a Zen master roar? If you have you will know what I'm talking about. It's as if the Mater and the roar have nothing to do with each other.

Then the question came to me, so I asked it.

Originally Posted by Arz Sra

The meaning of reality here as you used it ?

It just came to me. I didn't fabricate it.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by evolutionarypathways

Yes, it's so. The first thing I realized when I read Arcanum's example was that the 'bark' and the 'dog' are separate entities. The 'bark' does live inside the dog. It just hasn't been expressed yet.

The bark is an entity that lives inside the dog?.......Okay, I think I'm done here.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Then how can you can measure truth by reality when you don't know if what you experience is illusion or reality?

I'm sorry Arcanum, I can't give you the correct answer but I think you might already know it.

[spacedout]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Why is it so difficult to believe that there is an underlying truth to that creation that isn't changed by the creation?

Then that is all it would be is a belief. Truth is not a belief, it can't be.

That's like saying what's actually true is exclusive because it doesn't include what isn't true, which is mind playing games with ideas in order to believe what it wants to believe. Keep it simple. Only the Truth is true.

In the universe, there are things that are known and unkown. In between is the truth.

[Reefs]

Originally Posted by spacedout

In the universe, there are things that are known and unkown. In between is the truth.

Truth can stand for itself. No universe required.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I'm sorry Arcanum, I can't give you the correct answer but I think you might already know it.

What do you mean you can't answer?

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by spacedout

Then that is all it would be is a belief. Truth is not a belief, it can't be.



In the universe, there are things that are known and unkown. In between is the truth.

Knaw, truth isn't wedged in between anything.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

What do you mean you can't answer?

I could answer but it would be wrong in comparison to your belief of Oneness. I think we have been here before.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I could answer but it would be wrong in comparison to your belief of Oneness. I think we have been here before.

Sorry, I haven't been taking notes. The reason I did the snake/rope trick was to make the simple point that what we experience as reality may not be reality at all. If you base truth on reality, you need to know what reality actually is first. I don't know what it has to do with oneness.

[Reefs]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I could answer but it would be wrong in comparison to your belief of Oneness. I think we have been here before.

Maybe we should change the thread title from "The one and the many" to "The many Ones".

[Reefs]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Sorry, I haven't been taking notes. The reason I did the snake/rope trick was to make the simple point that what we experience as reality may not be reality at all. If you base truth on reality, you need to know what reality actually is first. I don't know what it has to do with oneness.

I think what maguru is trying to convey is that she has no clue herself and that you are not very helpful in giving clues she cannot turn into a concept and run away with.

[ChrisGinsburg]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

The bark is an entity that lives inside the dog?.......Okay, I think I'm done here.

Haha, I think we've touched on another incredible hulk subject.

[Maguru]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

Sorry, I haven't been taking notes. The reason I did the snake/rope trick was to make the simple point that what we experience as reality may not be reality at all.

I think some of our perceived realities would not be true but some would.

If you base truth on reality, you need to know what reality actually is first. I don't know what it has to do with oneness.

It's about the possible illusion of duality.

Reality is existence or creation, not a trick of the mind.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Reefs

Maybe we should change the thread title from "The one and the many" to "The many Ones".

It baffles me how oneness can be divided into so many parts, and some peeps seem to have no problem at all with multiple onenesses. They just call it a paradox or different levels or sumthin, and never skip a beat.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Reefs

I think what maguru is trying to convey is that she has no clue herself and that you are not very helpful in giving clues she cannot turn into a concept and run away with.

I have trouble following her thoughts sometimes, and I suspect she has the same difficulty with them. Hehe.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by ChrisGinsburg

Haha, I think we've touched on another incredible hulk subject.

Next thing ya know he'll be hitting me with a Zen stick cause I just can't understand the little bark critter.

[Reefs]

Originally Posted by Arcanum

It baffles me how oneness can be divided into so many parts, and some peeps seem to have no problem at all with multiple onenesses. They just call it a paradox or different levels or sumthin, and never skip a beat.

The music never stops. Except when there is a power outage like in deep dreamless sleep.

[Arcanum]

Originally Posted by Maguru

I think some of our perceived realities would not be true but some would.




It's about the possible illusion of duality.

Reality is existence or creation, not a trick of the mind.

Isn't mistaking a rope for a snake a trick of the mind? Isn't it illusion? Isn't it one of those perceived realities that would not be true?