What is Your Understanding of Oneness?

[metis]

but, this is not a belief I would have ever have thought up myself......I also believe there are those incarnations that perceive and understand beyond the senses and can tell us about the ultimate nature of reality.....incarnations of highly advanced souls (this is probably the key difference between us seen over several threads; my belief in such incarnations). My detailed knowledge of one such incarnation has removed doubts for me.

Fine, but that really doesn't do me much good in accepting such a concept, largely because a supposed incarnation is not the same concept as universal consciousness or any proof of the existence of atman. In Buddhist dharma, for example, there's no atman that is involved in rebirth, except for bodhissatvas (arguably), nor is speculation encouraged about those items which may seem nice but which may not have any significant evidence (experience, observation, etc.) behind them. However, with that being said, a great many Buddhists still do speculate-- human nature, I guess.

 

[metis]

Yes, get you could be expanding on my view point, which hasn't been discussed in depth on this forum yet.....Which is why i was asking the question, 'what is your understanding of Oneness?'

Like just in general, what do you think of Oneness?

Your own understanding, it's not in the debate section, so wasn't asking can you show why you think other peoples ideas of Oneness are flawed.

So from a Jewish perspective, isn't there a Oneness among the community?

First of all, the concepts of "oneness" and being "Jewish" ain't too compatible as we almost have a monopoly on disagreeing.

As far as "Oneness" is concerned, you'll have to be the one doing the defining as how you meant that because I'm not going to just try to speculate on different hypothetical uses of the term.

 

[LuisDantas]

What is your understanding of Oneness?

From past interactions, it seems to me to be your proposal that all significant (as in, not quite insane) beliefs are ultimately specific if perhaps incomplete or otherwise lacking manifestations of a certain core of metaphysical truths that you believe in.

I don't so much disagree with that as fail to see why it would be worthwhile to promote such a view. It is exceedingly difficult to teach new tricks to an old believer, and it seems to me that the main merits pursued by Oneness are attained not so much by agreement as by mutual understanding.

 

[George-ananda]

Fine, but that really doesn't do me much good in accepting such a concept, largely because a supposed incarnation is not the same concept as universal consciousness or any proof of the existence of atman.

The belief is we can all attain direct atma-realization dispelling all doubts but the process is anything but quick and easy. The teacher tells us to prove the reality for ourselves and not to even take his word for it. Before we experience this is as true, we to some extent have to take what the masters say only as a hypothesis to explore.

So after objective consideration of all thinkings from western religions to atheism and materialism to my paranormal/occult studies, I know of no other philosophy that makes the best sense of all that I have learned. As I said earlier my detailed study of one master has left no reasonable doubt in my mind that this is the highest of mankind's understandings.

In Buddhist dharma, for example, there's no atman that is involved in rebirth, except for bodhissatvas (arguably), nor is speculation encouraged about those items which may seem nice but which may not have any significant evidence (experience, observation, etc.) behind them. However, with that being said, a great many Buddhists still do speculate-- human nature, I guess.

Yes, I know from RF Buddhists have different understandings of Nirvana, etc.. Some Buddhists are much like Advaita.

 

[Covellite]

I am you - you are me.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

I actually only relate it to the idea that we are all made of the same stuff. We are all just the bits of the universe assembled in different configurations. Therefore we all come from the same "place"/material, and we all return to it. In this way, we are all part of the "one" universe. For this reason, to try any harder to achieve "oneness" with the universe is basically wasted effort in my opinion. You already are "at one" - we all are. The only thing that truly makes a difference is coming to greater understanding of what it means to be a part of that universe.

 

[wizanda]

From past interactions

Wasn't asking what i believe, was asking what your understanding is about the word 'Oneness'?

 

[Covellite]

To be more specific: to have fundamental and strong personal experience of : I am you-you are me, that is always present and affects everything in your life.

 

[wizanda]

As far as "Oneness" is concerned, you'll have to be the one doing the defining as how you meant that because I'm not going to just try to speculate on different hypothetical uses of the term.

So you don't have any form of Oneness you accept or believe in?

 

[LuisDantas]

Wasn't asking what i believe, was asking what your understanding is about the word 'Oneness'?

So I am supposed to pretend I do not know the context? Doesn't that strike you as defeating the purpose?

 

[Covellite]

Sorry, me again
If I want to be even more specific I see it's not what I feel. So, it is an experience beyond any explanation. So, I will stick to:
I am you - you are me.

 

[wizanda]

So I am supposed to pretend I do not know the context?

There isn't a context, it is a word mentioned in multiple religions.....So if you present a context, then I'd hope you can explain it.

I'll start a thread on my own beliefs about Oneness in a debate section.

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

Full oneness would be Advaita or a similar nondualist pantheism. idk if I believe in that, tho I find the concept very intriguing. My worldview is more focused on pluralism than oneness, but there is a certain oneness in that I believe that matter and spirit are basically a spectrum as opposed to a hard and fast distinction.

 

[Pudding]

What is your understanding of Oneness?

Oneness means i'm you, you're me; the good person is the bad person, the bad person is the good person; the
greater good is the great evil, the great evil is the greater good.
Everything is the same one thing - Oneness.
One day in the future, everything including you, me, good people, bad people, greater good, great evil, will be merge together to become the Oneness which leads itself to self destruction because of the contradiction inside the Oneness, then Oneness becomes Nothingness.
This is a possible situation base on a arbitrary made up interpretation/imagination by me which i don't believe in.

 

[LuisDantas]

There isn't a context, it is a word mentioned in multiple religions.....So if you present a context, then I'd hope you can explain it.

I'll start a thread on my own beliefs about Oneness in a debate section.

Not interested then. I am not a believer in a divine source.

 

[wizanda]

Not interested then. I am not a believer in a divine source.

Right, so you believe Oneness implies only a divine source, and not the Oneness among people?

 

[LuisDantas]

Right, so you believe Oneness implies only a divine source, and not the Oneness among people?

No.

I think taking that specific word as lynchpin for finding a common core among religions is going a bit too far.

If I am not allowed to work with previous knowledge either, then it amounts to a bet that there is a common divine origin to "all" religions and that it chose to express itself in relation to that word.

That is two unrealistic bets too far for me to feel motivated, sorry.

 

[Covellite]

Oneness means i'm you, you're me; the good person is the bad person, the bad person is the good person; the
greater good is the great evil, the great evil is the greater good.
Everything is the same one thing - Oneness.
One day in the future, everything including you, me, good people, bad people, greater good, great evil, will be merge together to become the Oneness which leads itself to self destruction because of the contradiction inside the Oneness, then Oneness becomes Nothingness.
This is a possible situation base on a arbitrary made up interpretation/imagination by me which i don't believe in.

I'm so sorry, but for me it's a state of mind. It doesn't mean to be blind, irrational, immoral, inactive, to have lack of judgment, not criticizing, etc. On the contrary, it's alerted state of being, even more selective then should be.

 

[Pudding]

I'm so sorry, but for me it's a state of mind.

Don't be sorry, my made up interpretation have nothing to do with your interpretation.

It doesn't mean to be blind, irrational, immoral, inactive, to have lack of judgment, not criticizing, etc. On the contrary, it's alerted state of being, even more selective then should be.

I've no idea what you wish to convey.

 

[metis]

So you don't have any form of Oneness you accept or believe in?

Not unless I use "Oneness" to refer to singularity prior to the BB. However, I really don't consider even that to likely be "Oneness" because chances are there were different components that formed the tiny speck that eventually expanded to become our universe.

Anyhow, as a scientist, I really don't speculate on such matters as it runs counter to what we have been taught to mostly rely on-- objectively-derived evidence.