This is really a nice one Richard, and so true. When Hubby and I are on the road, he will point to something he wants me to see, and I always think about what you are saying here. Sometimes I completely miss what he wanted me to see, simply because
Everything I see Is a Relative State of My own Consciousness.
Just for fun, here's a metaphysical metaphor (an expansion on an Alan Watts pointer) used to introduce Chapter 4 (If Thine Eye Be Single) of OOMM that presents the same insight in a more technical and detailed manner:
"What's going on within the geographic confines of your skull, behind your eyes, right now? Is it not everything you see before your eyes, and is this not actually composed of patterns of mental energy arising within your own head? Is it not also true that the patterns which you presently identify as yourself are composed of the exact same mental material you identify as other? This being true, how is it possible to be so intimately identified with one portion of your awareness, and so self-alienated from the other? Perhaps because the preponderance of your attention is habitually focused on the former, while you are proportional less sensitive and aware of the latter."
This comment is to let you know that this content has reached at least ten comments, and as such has been removed from Comment Speedway! Congratulations!
That's a very interesting concept Stanley -- a Gestalt Philosophy. -- sort of a "Conceptual Big Picture" that automatically integrates "otherwise seemingly disparate parts." I like it.
In this regard, if one sees the Whole or Big Picture, the re-integration of apparent parts (which are only relative, mental concepts anyway) is always already accomplished. With the only requirement to see the Whole completely being a dropping of the relative and partial way we are conditioned and/or programmed to see or think about Reality.
In other words, it is the "partial perceptual mechanism" we call "relative thought, mind and sense" that projects its perceptual limitations on an otherwise Seamless Reality (the Reality that I Am and All Necessarily Are). Sort of like the "binocular metaphor" I am so fond of:
"What I see through binoculars is real, but the "two apparent circles conjoined at the center" are projections of the limits of the perceptual mechanism through which one is looking and thus unreal.
In this regard, it's really a Top Down version similar to Vedic Philosophy: We start from an Absolute Field of Infinite Potential to Be Any and All (which is by definition is Infinite, Eternal, One, Still and Silent), posit a Primal Vibration or Movement in the Field (and so create a pseudo or apparent Zero and One) and attendant Self-Awareness on the part of the Absolute One that begets a declaration I AM (the Original Word that was with God and was God) and a Big Bang in which Latent Infinite Potential to Be becomes Actual, All at One Time (or in No/Real Time), and the Rest is History (His or the Ones Story of Being).
Please provide details below to help Gather review this content. If it is found to be inappropriate and in violation of the Gather Terms of Service, action will be taken.
Please select the part of the post you are reporting.
Please select why you are reporting this content.
Please enter a description.
You have successfully submitted a report for this post.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 16
Everything I see
Is a Relative State of
My own Consciousness.
So this one really touched home for me.
Thanks for sharing. That is great.
The group: We Comment Back
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top. (unknown)
I, of course, love this.
Blessings ~
Rene
"What's going on within the geographic confines of your skull, behind your eyes, right now? Is it not everything you see before your eyes, and is this not actually composed of patterns of mental energy arising within your own head? Is it not also true that the patterns which you presently identify as yourself are composed of the exact same mental material you identify as other? This being true, how is it possible to be so intimately identified with one portion of your awareness, and so self-alienated from the other? Perhaps because the preponderance of your attention is habitually focused on the former, while you are proportional less sensitive and aware of the latter."
"The world I see is an outward picturing of an inner state of mind.
Love and gratitude, Benny"
That's a very interesting concept Stanley -- a Gestalt Philosophy. -- sort of a "Conceptual Big Picture" that automatically integrates "otherwise seemingly disparate parts." I like it.
In this regard, if one sees the Whole or Big Picture, the re-integration of apparent parts (which are only relative, mental concepts anyway) is always already accomplished. With the only requirement to see the Whole completely being a dropping of the relative and partial way we are conditioned and/or programmed to see or think about Reality.
In other words, it is the "partial perceptual mechanism" we call "relative thought, mind and sense" that projects its perceptual limitations on an otherwise Seamless Reality (the Reality that I Am and All Necessarily Are). Sort of like the "binocular metaphor" I am so fond of:
"What I see through binoculars is real, but the "two apparent circles conjoined at the center" are projections of the limits of the perceptual mechanism through which one is looking and thus unreal.
In this regard, it's really a Top Down version similar to Vedic Philosophy: We start from an Absolute Field of Infinite Potential to Be Any and All (which is by definition is Infinite, Eternal, One, Still and Silent), posit a Primal Vibration or Movement in the Field (and so create a pseudo or apparent Zero and One) and attendant Self-Awareness on the part of the Absolute One that begets a declaration I AM (the Original Word that was with God and was God) and a Big Bang in which Latent Infinite Potential to Be becomes Actual, All at One Time (or in No/Real Time), and the Rest is History (His or the Ones Story of Being).