|
|
Post by Figgles on Jun 11, 2020 16:16:42 GMT
Seems odd as hell creating a thread to clear this up at this point, but conversations I've had recently with both Andrew and Muttley indicate it's necessary.
To see through 'separation,' is to realize that nothing that appears has inherent, fundamental existence in it's own right....that everything experienced arises within/to that which is fundamentally existent....it's all One.
The "Separation" in "no separation" is not a reference to the appearance of distance/space between objects. Oneness/not separate is a reference to that which is actually so....fundamentally so. I'm shocked to see some think it relates somehow to "apparent distance between objects/things," and thus, they wrongly arrive at the idea that seeing through separation involves that apparent distance changing to apparent unity.
Fundamental separation does not actually appear....it's mistakingly inferred. Thus, appearing distance between objects does not have to go away, for Oneness to be realized.
"Fundamental separation" never actually appears. It's a mistake of mind. Similarly, "Oneness" is not something that appears, is not something that you can look to the dream or dream content, to see, either as a reflection, a shadow, a hint, a glimmer. Oneness is realized 'non-conceptually' or not at all....it's a seeing that happens 'beyond' the dream.
Oneness does not appear phenomenally as unification between objects, in contrast to previously seeing distance/space between objects (Laffy...this is where you go wrong with your whole; 'Reflections to underlying formless unity', deal.
If you think you are seeing 'underlying Oneness' observing appearances....within dream-content, you are mistaken. What's most likely is that you are conflating your conceptual understanding of Oneness with 'fundamental/absolute' Oneness. A sure sign there's still an SVP involved.
Everything that is experienced is empty and devoid of Truth. Which means, you cannot look to experience to tell you what is absolutely, fundamentally so....you are not going to find the absence of separation/Oneness "IN" dream-content. Not even a reflection. What's required is a paradigm shift of a magnitude that the person has never experienced.
|
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2020 16:30:09 GMT
Seems odd as hell creating a thread to clear this up at this point, but conversations I've had recently with both Andrew and Muttley indicate it's necessary. To see through 'separation,' is to realize that nothing that appears has inherent, fundamental existence in it's own right....that everything experienced arises within/to that which is fundamentally existent....it's all One. The "Separation" in "no separation" is not a reference to the appearance of distance/space between objects. Oneness/not separate is a reference to that which is actually so....fundamentally so. I'm shocked to see some think it relates somehow to "apparent distance between objects/things," and thus, they wrongly arrive at the idea that seeing through separation involves that apparent distance changing to apparent unity. Fundamental separation does not actually appear....it's mistakingly inferred. Thus, appearing distance between objects does not have to go away, for Oneness to be realized. "Fundamental separation" never actually appears. It's a mistake of mind. Similarly, "Oneness" is not something that appears, is not something that you can look to the dream or dream content, to see, either as a reflection, a shadow, a hint, a glimmer. Oneness is realized 'non-conceptually' or not at all....it's a seeing that happens 'beyond' the dream. Oneness does not appear phenomenally as unification between objects, in contrast to previously seeing distance/space between objects (Laffy...this is where you go wrong with your whole; 'Reflections to underlying formless unity', deal. If you think you are seeing 'underlying Oneness' within the dream, you are mistaken. What's most likely is that you are conflating your conceptual understanding of Oneness with 'fundamental/absolute' Oneness. A sure sign there's still an SVP involved. Everything that is experienced is empty and devoid of Truth. Which means, you cannot look to experience to tell you what is absolutely, fundamentally so....you are not going to find the absence of separation/Oneness "IN" dream-content. Not even a reflection. What's required is a paradigm shift of a magnitude that the person has never experienced. When folks believe 'actual separation' is the case, they believe one life form begins and ends in one space, and another begins and ends in another space. And although this may appear to be (and is experienced to be) the way of it, this seemingly discreet distance between forms is actually an illusion. 'Separation' is a measurement. It's not a random concept spiritual folks use, we are collapsing what seems to be an 'actual distance between'. Hence why 'inter-being' is a good concept. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2020 16:39:06 GMT
Okay...'Oneness'...
|
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2020 16:46:15 GMT
is both a measurement and a pointer
If there's no actual distance between forms, then at the furthest point, there are no forms. There is only 'One thingless thing'...'Oneness'. Also realized to be 'No-thingness'
|
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2020 16:49:15 GMT
Oneness/No-thingness excludes nothing, it includes all apparent forms, and all apparent past, present and future.
|
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jun 11, 2020 16:55:09 GMT
When folks believe 'actual separation' is the case, they believe one life form begins and ends in one space, and another begins and ends in another space. It's so much more than that. Goes so much deeper.
The apparent 'space' issue is irrelevant to bondage/suffering. It's the 'independently existing in it's own right/being fundamentally independent/separate from all else, mistake of mind' that's the problem. The apparent space/distance between forms is not a problem. It's just another appearance among all the other appearances...and it continues to appear even after realization of 'no separation.' Seekers who are looking at that appearing space/distance and thinking it has to go, are looking in entirely the wrong direction.....they are looking 'at' what is appearing and thinking that that has to appear differently....that instead of space/distance appearing between objects, 'unification' must instead appear. Not so. No more than any other appearance is an illusion. It works far better imo just to reference it all as 'appearance only.' I reserve 'illusion' for those erroneous ideas about what's appearing, such as, the SVP. Fundamental separation/independent existence and volition don't actually appear, they are mistakingly inferred. Whereas, space,distance between things, does appear...it's an appearing facet of the phenomenal. Independent fundamental existence is not. that which is fundamental, is not an appearance only. The 'separation' being referenced in the pointer 'not separate/One,' is not a measurement.....and not a specific collapse of 'actual distance between.' rather, it's 'a collapse' of "actuality" regarding ALL appearances, straight across the board. In realizing no separation, you don't merely see the appearance of 'space/distance between' to be 'appearance only...and thus empty and devoid of inherent existence,' you see ALL experiential content as 'appearance only....empty and devoid of inherent, independent existence.' |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jun 11, 2020 16:56:54 GMT
is both a measurement and a pointer If there's no actual distance between forms, then at the furthest point, there are no forms. There is only 'One thingless thing'...'Oneness'. Also realized to be 'No-thingness' If you are going to collapse the apparent distance between forms, and call it illusion, then you also must collapse those forms...they are all appearance...all contextually the same. You don't get to just collapse one appearance and leave the other. |
|
|
|
Post by Figgles on Jun 11, 2020 16:59:11 GMT
Oneness/No-thingness excludes nothing, it includes all apparent forms, and all apparent past, present and future. Oneness is not a reference to 'the unification' of a bunch of appearing stuff....rather, it's the seeing that all appearing stuff, is appearance only, having no independent fundamental ground of it's own. You've created a Oneness blob that then includes everything. In short, you have conceptualized Oneness. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2020 17:06:22 GMT
When folks believe 'actual separation' is the case, they believe one life form begins and ends in one space, and another begins and ends in another space. It's so much more than that. Goes so much deeper.
The apparent 'space' issue is irrelevant to bondage/suffering. It's the 'independently existing in it's own right/being fundamentally independent/separate from all else, mistake of mind' that's the problem. The apparent space/distance between forms is not a problem. It's just another appearance among all the other appearances...and it continues to appear even after realization of 'no separation.' Seekers who are looking at that appearing space/distance and thinking it has to go, are looking in entirely the wrong direction.....they are looking 'at' what is appearing and thinking that that has to appear differently....that instead of space/distance appearing between objects, 'unification' must instead appear. Not so. No more than any other appearance is an illusion. It works far better imo just to reference it all as 'appearance only.' I reserve 'illusion' for those erroneous ideas about what's appearing, such as, the SVP. Fundamental separation/independent existence and volition don't actually appear, they are mistakingly inferred. Whereas, space,distance between things, does appear...it's an appearing facet of the phenomenal. Independent fundamental existence is not. that which is fundamental, is not an appearance only. The 'separation' being referenced in the pointer 'not separate/One,' is not a measurement.....and not a specific collapse of 'actual distance between.' rather, it's 'a collapse' of "actuality" regarding ALL appearances, straight across the board. In realizing no separation, you don't merely see the appearance of 'space/distance between' to be 'appearance only...and thus empty and devoid of inherent existence,' you see ALL experiential content as 'appearance only....empty and devoid of inherent, independent existence.' in the context that we say appearancs are appearing, or forms are forming, separation can be said to be 'illusion' but forms/appearances are not. Hence, the tree and moon appear, but the separation between them is not 'actual' or 'fundamental'. As we transcend this context, both appearance/form AND separation are equally 'illusion'. |
|
Andrew
Super Duper Senior Member
Posts: 8,345
|
Post by Andrew on Jun 11, 2020 17:07:49 GMT
is both a measurement and a pointer If there's no actual distance between forms, then at the furthest point, there are no forms. There is only 'One thingless thing'...'Oneness'. Also realized to be 'No-thingness' If you are going to collapse the apparent distance between forms, and call it illusion, then you also must collapse those forms...they are all appearance...all contextually the same. You don't get to just collapse one appearance and leave the other. As I said, there are no forms/appearances. Are you sure you read what's said? |
|
