Post by Figgles on Aug 17, 2018 17:02:06 GMT
Pulled from a thread on ST:
Very much agree with what both Wren and E are saying there.
Indeed, an apple and an orange are both the same in that they are both appearances within Consciousness but it's simply wrong to say that an apple IS an Orange....from any context.
Not separate does not mean the same. Difference/distinction/sameness are of the realm of appearance...an arising within consciousness. If an apple is what's appearing, it's not an orange. To say they somehow become the same in the absolute context, is to try to drag 'thingness/that which appears' where it has no place.
wrenling said:
It's not that they are the same, they are one, (in and) as Tao. That doesn't make them the same.
It's not that they are the same, they are one, (in and) as Tao. That doesn't make them the same.
Andrew: No, they are the same, and they are also different. This contradiction could perhaps be expressed as'not-different', but it doesn't change the correctness of the two contradicting statements.
This applies to any concepts (and any differences). Everyone knows an apple is different to an orange, but not everyone also knows an apple is an orange (i.e they are the same). Everyone knows that 'I' am different to 'you', but not everyone also knows that 'I' am 'you' (i.e they are the same).
This applies to any concepts (and any differences). Everyone knows an apple is different to an orange, but not everyone also knows an apple is an orange (i.e they are the same). Everyone knows that 'I' am different to 'you', but not everyone also knows that 'I' am 'you' (i.e they are the same).
Enigma:Once you invoke the same/different dichotomy, you're making use of the dualistic context of distinction, and there is only one correct answer to the question of same/different when applied to appearances in any context because distinction is not part of the content of the context of oneness. An apple is not an orange in any context. Besides, distinctions don't contradict oneness, which is done by falsely placing them in opposition. Distinctions occurring within oneness is the actual case, and there is no contradiction.
Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/5158/quick-reminder?page=2#ixzz5OSHCUMAw
Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/5158/quick-reminder?page=2#ixzz5OSHCUMAw
Very much agree with what both Wren and E are saying there.
Indeed, an apple and an orange are both the same in that they are both appearances within Consciousness but it's simply wrong to say that an apple IS an Orange....from any context.
Not separate does not mean the same. Difference/distinction/sameness are of the realm of appearance...an arising within consciousness. If an apple is what's appearing, it's not an orange. To say they somehow become the same in the absolute context, is to try to drag 'thingness/that which appears' where it has no place.
You must be under 30. 
