Question on “The One”/”Unity” etc.

I fully understand the taoist idea of unity as ‘continuous becoming’; what I’m saying is this does not in the least contradict the ideas of Bagua or of Buddhists that ‘it is already there you just have to realize it’.

If it is continuous becoming it’s *infinite* continuous becoming, because *all* becomings are occurring within it. That includes all the becoming that it is possible to have, all the becomingss anyone or anything is aware of right this second and for all the other seconds! So if so, you can indeed say the unity ‘already exists’. All things are in it all the time so when could it not exist?

And if it does ‘already exist’ that means that indeed you ‘just have to realize it’, this does not mean at all that it loses any of its ‘continuous simultaneous becoming’, so I do not understand how the views of ‘continuous becoming’ and ‘already exists complete’ are in conflict.

One person with direct experience of this is Rawn Clark. He is a magician so he is not part of the debate on his board. He is describing, I must emphasize, the experience at the end of the FIRST step of initiation – after this there is alot more for anyone to do, but the experience of being able to merge with unity whenever desired is a magical goal at the start – of course it may take a long time, decades or lifetimes etc – but it is not considered a ‘final goal’.

All I want to point out for those who stagger to the end of this quote (I’m sorry for its length but I hope it’s interesting) is that his description of the Unity itself does not belie any other description I’ve heard on here, or elsewhere, and indeed confirms them all. It does not seem to me that there is any difference between ‘the unities’ experienced by all the paths since there can by definition only be one unity! They word it differently this is what I believe, I have not heard anyone convincingly say otherwise.

Rawn’s notes for the reader of Step 10 of Bardon’s ‘Initiation’:

———————————————————————-

>>I must caution you at this point that due to the finite nature of words, it is impossible for me to accurately describe either the Unity or the experience of merging with the Unity. Non-sequential experiences simply don’t fit into such sequentialized things as words! Consequently, each thing I say in this regard will be only partially true and will convey things in a sequential manner that belies the essential non-sequentialized reality of the Unity.

But even in saying this I have implied things that are inaccurate. Case in point is when I say that the Unity is non-sequential. The deeper mystery is that the Unity encompasses both the sequential and the non-sequential realms, simultaneously. When I say it is non-sequential, I am referring more to how the Unity appears to our sequentialized human consciousness and not to its essential nature. Often, how we attempt to describe the indescribable involves pointing more to the differences between these things and “normal” things, than it does to their similarities. The greatest problem with this is that pointing out only differences seems to limit our understanding of the essential Unity of Being. In the hopes of avoiding that obfuscation, I will try to point out as many similarities as I can in what follows.

The first thing I should say in terms of describing the merging with the Unity, pertains to the sense of self that the magician experiences. The self-awareness of the Unity is often described as an “I am” state, but what is often overlooked is the fact that this deific sense of self-identity is of the same quality as that experienced by a normal human being. The only difference is in quantity as the Unity encompasses every thing that has existence and the individual human encompasses only a minute portion of that infinite expanse. It is, in fact, this continuum of alikeness that the magician follows in the ascent or expansion of the quantity of consciousness. In simplistic terms, the magician stands firmly rooted in the quality of self-awareness and expands the quantity of that awareness until it encompasses the Unity of All Being.

The implications of this in practice are that the magician, once merged with the Unity, experiences the entire universe as if it were in fact a part of their own self. There is no part of the infinite universe of which the Unity is not aware.

This brings us to the four attributes of deity, which I think will serve as a good foundation for further describing the ramifications of merging with the Unity. Please note that the four attributes listed in Step Ten vary slightly from those listed in Step Nine. It is the Step Ten list that I will concern myself with here, though it pays to compare the two on your own.

The four attributes are —

1) Omnipotence (All powerfulness): This is associated with the Element Fire. The sort of omnipotence experienced by the Unity, and by one merged with the Unity, is not akin to the popular conceptualization of a god “up there” who points down at us mere mortals and, poof!, things change according to “his” will. The Unity’s omnipotence works from the inside-out of EVERY thing, all at once. There is no splitting of consciousness at the level of the Unity proper — the splitting of consciousness is only a manifestation of the Unity.

Within the Unity, there is also no willing akin to human willing. Instead, the Unity exists all at once, as a unified whole, and what we think of as divine will is merely the Unity being what it naturally is. When initiates speak about merging with the divine will and say things like “let Thy will be my will”, an incorrect impression is given that the individual will is somehow transplanted by a higher will. This is not the case. The individual will is transformed by the experience of merging, not replaced. Again, an initiate follows the continuum of similarity as they rise to the divine. The thread of similarity here has to do with the fact that the human will is an aspect or manifestation of the divine will. And once again, the difference is a matter of quantity not of quality.

The omnipotence of the lesser gods is more limited that of the Unity. Because they exist below the Abyss, they are finite, sequentialized creatures. Thus they are of limited, specific use to the magician. For example, in modern ceremonial magic, one must carefully choose the appropriate “god form” for the task at hand. But if one can merge with the Unity, then nothing is impossible.

But having said that, I should note that the magician capable of merging with the Unity will not be willing petty things nor things that violate the universal lawfulness. You must keep in mind that this transformation touches the individual adept at EVERY level of his or her being.

2) Omniscience (All knowing): This is associated with the Element Air. The root essence of the Unity — the stuff of which it is composed — is consciousness. Every thing that exists (mentally, astrally and physically) is a manifestation of this consciousness. The consciousness of the Unity is self-aware within all of its parts or manifestations, simultaneously and fully. In other words, the Unity knows EVERY thing, from the inside-out. This is not just the knowing of an external observer; rather, it is the knowing of a participant.

I wish for you to carefully consider the implications of this for the magician who merges with the Unity. Truly, any thing the magician wishes to know or explore is made instantly available. But this knowing will be from the inside-out in a most intimate manner. It is similar in quality to the sort of knowing we experience in our daily lives as we pass through a specific event. The difference is, as usual, in the quantity of the knowing. For example, we all know how to tie our shoes because we have experienced it numerous time, but in relation to the Unity we are like a small child who has never tied a shoe and our understanding of this mysterious art comes from the descriptions of our parents. In other words, the Unity knows EVERY thing from the inside-out and the normal human knows only a relatively few things from this perspective.

I must say that the conceptualization of this sort of all knowing is quite different from the actual experience. The magician who merges with the Unity is not only ABLE to know everything, she/he DOES know everything *while in the merged state*. Few magicians, however, choose to bring this knowledge back into their normal consciousness used for daily life. Knowing too much tends to take all the fun out of life — there is no longer any surprise.

3) All-Love or Mercifulness (Divine benevolence): This is associated with the Element Water. Please note that in Step Nine, Bardon associates Immortality with Water.

The divine Mercy is similar in quality to human love, except that in the human manifestation of love we tend to direct it at specific persons, ideas and things. Thus our human love is more limited than the divine love and it is a projection from ourselves to something external (self-love aside). The deific love of the Unity comes from a broader perspective that includes EVERY thing and it works from within each thing. It is without bias and is shared equally with All that exists.

It is common for us to wonder how the unpleasant aspects and events of life can exist in a universe permeated by a Benevolent deity. The answer to this lies within the quantity aspect of the divine benevolence or Mercy. The Unity permeates the whole of the infinite universe all at once and completely, thus it has an eternal perspective from which every event is seen as conforming to the universal lawfulness of things. In other words, from the eternal perspective of the Unity, benevolence is an undercurrent in All events, even the most unpleasant ones.

Suffering exists for a reason. It teaches us lessons that we have not been able to otherwise learn through more pleasant means. So at the core of each unpleasant situation lies the divine benevolence that knows this is the way in which we must learn — it is the root lesson that holds the benevolence, the manifestation of events is itself secondary. The only way sometimes, to perceive the divine benevolence behind unsavory events is to broaden one’s perspective to include lifetimes instead of single moments.

An adept who has merged with this divine Mercifulness may at times seem very stern, but this should not be mistaken for a lack of caring. At its root is the awareness of a much broader perspective on things than the ordinary human consciousness is able to achieve.

Such an adept will feel a deep love and concern for all creatures and will manifest their loving kindness willfully and in the most appropriate manner befitting the occasion.

4) Immortality (The same as Omnipresence in this case): This is associated with the Element Earth. In Step Nine, Bardon lists Omnipresence here, but if you think about it, this is essentially the same as Immortality in that the Unity is an immanent thing and thus it exists throughout the whole of space-time. The divine Immortality is not the same thing as what we consider when we think about the immortality of a human form. Theoretically, human immortality (if such a thing were to exist) is strictly a moment-to-moment matter of prolonged duration. In other words, the immortal human would pass through time moment-by-moment. While the quality of this is similar to divine Immortality, the quantity is quite different. The Immortality of the Unity occurs at an eternal level — the moment-by-moment duration is only a manifestation of the eternal Immortality.

But, and here’s a big but, nothing that is either astral or physical in its nature is eternal or immortal. True Immortality exists only at the level of the eternal, non-sequential realm.

I compare the Immortality of the Unity with its Immanence and say that they are the same thing because the Unity’s Immortality is eternal. It has no beginning and no ending and there is no ‘who’, ‘what’, ‘why’, ‘where’ or ‘when’ that does not partake of the Unity. The connection between these two may be easiest to perceive when you consider the space-time continuum. From the eternal perspective, the whole infinite span of space-time is perceived as one single present moment or as a grand, infinite “Now”. But, since the Unity is Immortal and eternal, this perspective is not just a from-afar sort of experience; instead, it is experienced simultaneously from the inside-out — from the perspective of each thing involved with the minute details of the physical manifestation of space-time to the most ephemeral and comprehensive experience of space-time.

While the feeling or quality of Immanence is similar to what the student experienced in Step Six with the practice of being aware of their mental body within their astral and physical bodies, there is a difference in terms of quantity. For the Unity, there is no separateness — there is no immediate sense of being WITHIN a body. Instead, the Unity completely fills the embodiments of its Immanence. The entire infinity of the manifest universe IS the Unity — it is not the mere shell which houses the Unity. There is no separation between the “body” of the Unity and the Unity itself. When we look at a rock or a leaf or through an electron microscope at a single molecule, we are looking directly at the Unity. When we look at each other or within our own selves, we are looking at the Unity.

… Rawn’s description is not a ‘concept’ but a ‘description’ since he has indeed achieved the ‘unity merging’ himself, and even he says it is not that accurate a description, since it can’t be!

But what I am really trying to say is that in actual practice there is no real difference in what people say about this unity whether east or west. So I’m glad you agree with that! From how some people talk one imagines this huge chasm between the traditions on this subject which is not in fact there.

Several times this whole question of Buddhist ‘rejection of life philosophy’, which appears in Christianity and Hinduism of course too, as well as elswhere, has tripped people up into thinking there is a difference. This philosophy of the essentially negative aspect of material life is (as Michael says too) not borne out in terms of how Buddhists actually are and behave, I presonally don’t understand why they say it, so I ignore it! 🙂 🙂 🙂 j

>>I think this is a case of the blind men and the elaphant. Its a story of blind men experiencing different parts of an elephant and assuming its is the whole thing. One feels the trunk and says its a spear the other its leg and says its a tree. Only when we come together with our experiences do we get a better picture of the elephant<<

… I'm not completely sure you're right there. To me the situation is that everyone who has experienced the elephant has had a very similar experience, which is what I was trying to get across with that Rawn Clark quote. There does not seem to be much variation in terms of what people say about the unity itself. There does seem to be considerable debate in terms of what its relationship is to practicing though. Perhaps I could say the situation is more like one where everyone has the same elephant but is describing it in a different language, and possibly, assuming (wrongly) that everyone else has seen a different elephant!

I just wanted to maintain that there can be no sense in which 'unity' differs from 'unity'. The 'one thing' is only one, it is beyond the bounds of possibility to suppose that one person or tradition *really* found the 'one thing' and the others are just faking it! The reason they all blabber on about the Unity is because there really is a Unity and it really is One Thing, and they found it, so ipso facto they all found the same thing. How they found it and what they did with it 'afterwards' is another story, but if Tsongkhapa made the same relationship with it as Michael is planning to make, clearly the differences between Buddhism and Taoism can't be *that* huge. So the rest is down to language.

Bagua, I grant you that the method of 'gradually seeing through the false' is a viable method, but I don't quite feel that spiritual science is the ego-crutch you feel it is, designed for those too falsely proud to simply sit! When one finds work with the four directions, the channels, whatever, in so many places, one can assume people who wrote about these things considered them important enough to write about.

But then, having heard what you've said so many times about original self being present in all of us when we wake up to it, I'm not getting anything from you yet on the question of transforming jing and/or 'uniting the two opposing halves of soul' as Michael would say. Do you feel – as Nan does – that simple sitting is the method there too? – if so that is just as the Cleary translations would have it, and I would not disagree myself necessarily. Or does this question simply not arise in your practice? Does sexual polarity play any role in what you do at all? Does the uniting of opposites happen in your practice, or does one merely continue to notice that opposites are false without any attempt to reconcile them?

j