04-25-2014, 04:08 PM
Everything is an embodiment of the One Infinite Creator, so the point is moot. I have many guides and teachers I learn/teach with, but how can I embody fully the self that I am if I let them speak for me or teach everything I am to teach? I see "oneness" as meaning an awareness of "being one". The One that I am is One and if I let the Creator speak from within me then it is I who speaks and no other.
There is nothing wrong with your method, by all means that is not what I am trying to express, but rather that I think the exact wisdom of your self would more concisely express itself if it was you, as ONE, speaking for yourself.
I see myself as composed of many parts, different souls even, and indeed we sit as a group of one, as one mind and we collaborate. However, when I speak I speak as the Creator, the unique self that I am that is singular, and One. The other selves which I collaborate also do the same, they each know that they themselves are One and so we do not need to speak for eachother. The purpose of my voice, the voice of the Creator, is to actualize and express the thoughts of the group, but this is all done through the discernment of my own "I". Thus, I speak not the thoughts of others, or of the group, but rather my own, individual view that is experienced as One experiencing a self of many-ness.
Basically, in short, the self that is One, in my experience, is something which is not touched by any other personality and is my own pure, undistorted core. I know I am speaking from this core because I am consciously and intentionally creating my thoughts without recourse to any other source. That being said, yes, my intelligence is 'informed' by many, many sources, but I would no more deny those other sources the fact of their own Oneness as myself.
The ultimatum, "All is One" can be read in multiple ways. First we can view it as "one" being applied to the concept of "all", in that "all" is actually "one". This is the usual interpretation of this statement. However, I have also interpreted it the other way with the "all" being applied to the "one" to suggest that each individual part of the all, is One. That is, I am One, you are One, my cat is One, etc. Multiplicity is the cross-reference between the All being One, and the One that each of the All is, in my mind.
That being said, to me, for one to "be one" then that requires a recognition of the Self as One, as well as All as the One.
My point here being that you are not expressing a viewpoint from the self as one, but are only touching the all as the one, at least that is what I perceive. By all means, this is an external observation and is completely privy to my own biases, but perhaps it is something to chew on for some.
There is nothing wrong with your method, by all means that is not what I am trying to express, but rather that I think the exact wisdom of your self would more concisely express itself if it was you, as ONE, speaking for yourself.
I see myself as composed of many parts, different souls even, and indeed we sit as a group of one, as one mind and we collaborate. However, when I speak I speak as the Creator, the unique self that I am that is singular, and One. The other selves which I collaborate also do the same, they each know that they themselves are One and so we do not need to speak for eachother. The purpose of my voice, the voice of the Creator, is to actualize and express the thoughts of the group, but this is all done through the discernment of my own "I". Thus, I speak not the thoughts of others, or of the group, but rather my own, individual view that is experienced as One experiencing a self of many-ness.
Basically, in short, the self that is One, in my experience, is something which is not touched by any other personality and is my own pure, undistorted core. I know I am speaking from this core because I am consciously and intentionally creating my thoughts without recourse to any other source. That being said, yes, my intelligence is 'informed' by many, many sources, but I would no more deny those other sources the fact of their own Oneness as myself.
The ultimatum, "All is One" can be read in multiple ways. First we can view it as "one" being applied to the concept of "all", in that "all" is actually "one". This is the usual interpretation of this statement. However, I have also interpreted it the other way with the "all" being applied to the "one" to suggest that each individual part of the all, is One. That is, I am One, you are One, my cat is One, etc. Multiplicity is the cross-reference between the All being One, and the One that each of the All is, in my mind.
That being said, to me, for one to "be one" then that requires a recognition of the Self as One, as well as All as the One.
My point here being that you are not expressing a viewpoint from the self as one, but are only touching the all as the one, at least that is what I perceive. By all means, this is an external observation and is completely privy to my own biases, but perhaps it is something to chew on for some.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)