A True Sense of Oneness

Written by Mathew Naismith

I had another interesting anecdote presented to me by Sreeram Manoj Kumara seen below; I also inserted my reply to this anecdote.    

"If I advice "be a witness" I am still in duality.

If I say "I am that" even if it implies duality

"I" just has to fade away."

I had to ponder on this. I thought I would give a western perspective on this.

1/ Observer - A state of consciousness that only observes void of participation. This state can be related to, if you like, a consciousness of God's/Goddesses in observation only.

2/ Observer observing one's participation - A state of consciousness that observes it's own participation. This state can be related to a consciousness of wisdom/awareness in observation and participation.

3/ Participator - A state of consciousness that only participates void of observation. This state can be related to a consciousness of ignorance/unawareness in participation only.

In observation only, the "I" does not exist, egoless.

In observation of one's own participation, the "I" fades away as if it never existed, ego.

In participation only, the "I" not only exists but also is everything. In this case, all perceptions are based on the "I", a controlling ego.

___________________________

The following goes into this a lot deeper, if you are not into deep thoughtfulness, it is advisable you stop here, however, the following explains the anecdote of Sreeram's in a more in-depth way.    

We could say that being a witness is being an observer, however, a witness is not usually in relation to observation of oneself, the witness refers to the observation of other people and/or our immediate environment. Observing your own participation isn't being a witness especially in conjunction with "If I advice" as "If I advice" relates to a wrong or right, good or bad. As soon as we become the advice, we become the participator that create wrong and rights.

If I say "I am that", in the west this is often in reference to the ego, however, the observer says I am that, meaning, I am all of that I observe, there is no ego present within this observation as all is observed as one. When I observe myself, only in relation to myself, I observe all of what is but if I observe other peoepl and/or my environment, I am only participating even in observation. In this case, observation actually becomes a witness as opposed to an observer. Remember, witness is in reference to a participator dually, observation refers to the observer non-dually.

When you learn to observe yourself, you observe all of what is. When you observe all else in advice, usually other than yourself, you observe as a witness therefore become the participator.  

So where does science fit within this as science is all about being the observer?

Good science, so to speak, is about being able to observe yourself at one time but at other times witnessing your environment other than yourself. Bad science on the other hand is about only being a witness, a participator, of the environment void of being able to, truthfully, observe oneself. Science fits within both the observer observing one's participation and participator categories as my reply to Sreeram shows; this of course depends on the kind of science applications used.

Science is incapable of being an observer without being a witness to what science observes, this like a true state of spiritual oneness is unable to be a witness while in observation, even when in duality. Once one is able to observe oneself as all of what is, void of separation, even in duality, one is able to observe oneself as if it is of everything, not a separate entirety to everything. What makes science what it is, is its inability to be just an observer void of being also a witness at the same time. It's like what makes human consciousness human. What makes human consciousness human is it's limitations, science is the same within it's own limitations of being unable to just observe void of participation/witnessing.

At no time is our own participation not being observed, in actuality, it is this observation that creates what we participate in. Basically, everything we experience is being created through observation. You could say that your higher self is observing your own or it's own participation, in doing so, creates what is being experienced.

This is difficult to accept because we often separate the observer from what the participator experiences. We are conditioned to perceive primarily through the perspectives of time, space and matter, this means we are unable to comprehend that the observer and the participator coexists in the present only. Only the participator will perceive that for there to be a participator, an observation has to be made first to create the experiences a participator experiences. Take away the perception of time, space and matter, what you have left is a perception void of a past and future, this is of course why time travel is possible.

Observation and participation simultaneously occur outside the perceptions of time, space and matter. Once we free ourselves of these perceptions, we begin to realise who we truly are, simultaneously all of what is as a whole and at the same time individualistic in nature. We are not one or the other but all of what is be it duality or non-duality.