Well, I do not understand except to say that you have proven the point, so thank you.
Later edit...
You gave me cause to consider Pickle, so I thought a considered response would not be amiss.
My original answer could be taken as sardonic, though it was not meant that way. By 'ego' I mean that part of us which sees everything as separate. Nothing wrong with that as it is a necessary part of us, but ego cannot understand oneness. If as Ra and others say all is one, then paying the rent and bills, having a job, etc., are all by definition part of oneness. There is no separation, only that which is perceived as separation, yes?
I would suggest that Ra and others have had to tailor their language and terminology to fit minds who's ego is more in control than not. Thus, the concept of oneness is simplified and considered by the ego, but not necessarily experienced by the being considering the concept. Thus oneness is not seen and felt, but conceived of in the mind via the filter of ego which sees only separation. In order for ego to feel comfortable, it says, "Ah yes, I see!" when in fact it does not. This is why so many people claim to have had inspiration or enlightenment when in fact they have nothing more than a flash of ego trying to grasp something it never will.
(Apologies; I was editing when I saw your additional post).
Yes, there can be many descriptions of ego, so I can only clarify that my intended meaning is that part of us which of necessity sees separation in all things. When we disagree, it is only because two little egos see things differently, whereas as enlightened beings we would merely smile and know that in The One as Ra would say, there can be no disagreement. Disagreement and confusion are just perceived distortions.
And in the distortions we perceive, I appreciate your points!
Later edit...
Pickle Wrote:So while you may want to feel one-ness you have yet to pay your rent/mortgage, pay other bills, most likely have to go to work, and pretty much have to DO in order to exist in a position to BE, just one of those many reasons for the choice to be made to come here and experience catalyst.
You gave me cause to consider Pickle, so I thought a considered response would not be amiss.
My original answer could be taken as sardonic, though it was not meant that way. By 'ego' I mean that part of us which sees everything as separate. Nothing wrong with that as it is a necessary part of us, but ego cannot understand oneness. If as Ra and others say all is one, then paying the rent and bills, having a job, etc., are all by definition part of oneness. There is no separation, only that which is perceived as separation, yes?
I would suggest that Ra and others have had to tailor their language and terminology to fit minds who's ego is more in control than not. Thus, the concept of oneness is simplified and considered by the ego, but not necessarily experienced by the being considering the concept. Thus oneness is not seen and felt, but conceived of in the mind via the filter of ego which sees only separation. In order for ego to feel comfortable, it says, "Ah yes, I see!" when in fact it does not. This is why so many people claim to have had inspiration or enlightenment when in fact they have nothing more than a flash of ego trying to grasp something it never will.
(Apologies; I was editing when I saw your additional post).
Yes, there can be many descriptions of ego, so I can only clarify that my intended meaning is that part of us which of necessity sees separation in all things. When we disagree, it is only because two little egos see things differently, whereas as enlightened beings we would merely smile and know that in The One as Ra would say, there can be no disagreement. Disagreement and confusion are just perceived distortions.
And in the distortions we perceive, I appreciate your points!