NONDUALITY AND THE INITIAL REVERSAL OF FORTUNE OR YOU GOTTA BREAK A FEW EGGS TO MAKE AN OMELETTE

But not the way you think. Perhaps we shall lose everything. Perhaps at the moment of apparent physical death, or before- what works through the body, even as the body- will cease to be. But, because it is a single reality, scientifically, the thing that is working (and this is hard to perceive for who would perceive it), - the thing that is working, under the mind, which is nothing less than everything- is what remains. It’s non-linear, so in fact it can’t be perceived. So, you are dead, physically, and there is no soul in this case, - but ‘you’ since there were no you, just an idea created by the physical brain, - are now nothing less that everything and nothing. The fortune is that you lost yourself, and gained infinity. This is the highest reversal of fortune existentially and cosmically possible. But the rub is that you did not get to perceive gaining it. It is just what is. And isn’t. But for conversation’s sake we shall say what ‘is’. 
 

Here it is in a micro example. This is something many people have experienced. The above statement is trying to say in essence: You are fukced, because you die, so you won’t get to continue, - not the ‘you’ you know, but you will continue on as worm food, or part of the air, - of everything, because it is scientifically impossible to be apart from the universe. That is not metaphysics, - that is simple reality. Okay. So it’s obviously not great news to the ego. The micro example? - Here is it: You are at a party, but you are new, and there is nobody you know. Things are not clicking in; - there is not flow, or a connective feeling. You would rather be at home. But for some reason, personal or professional, you are obliged to attend longer. There is a person you spot, and this person you do know, or have been acquainted with anyhow. You definitely did not have chemistry with them, an affinity, of any sort. In fact you found something abrasive in them, and made the old ‘mental note’ to politely avoid them. But now you are in a jam. You are not ‘using’ them, for you have nothing outwardly to gain. But they approach you and you are brought down to actual reality moreso. 

Why?

Because you were living in your head previously. Or, everything is relative in a way. That can be said also. You learn that. The ‘you’ in time is happy to see the person, and tries harder, and does, connect on some level. You were not in the present previously. 

Then you see the person is just a human, completely the same as yourself- maybe they didn’t like you either! So there is, amid there somewhere, because the context was present, a unitive or connective moment, - if even for a split second. You were out of your head, - in a good way!

You were seeing though new eyes, - and it wasn’t you. It was the all and nothing seeing through the eyes. Something like that. There was just seeing.

Previously, you were in your head.

And even so, - you did not have eyes.

Someone asks Jesus, - What is the Kingdom of Heaven like?

Jesus says, - The Kingdom of Heaven is spread out upon the earth but you do not have eyes to see.

The point is that you were at the party but identified as yourself. So you had a dualistic view- You and Other. But then you got desperate, and were pushed by circumstance into the present, and somehow saw, not intellectually or emotionally, but existentially, the other as you- you lost yourself. 

The self comes back as a tool to navigate and negotiate reality. You have to be home by a decent hour. You have to do normal things. You can’t be all of reality all the time. Until it integrates, and becomes seamless. 

Which is always happening anyhow.

This is the reversal of fortune. You lost the worldly world and gained the Kingdom. The Kingdom is really only the world, not its riches, just reality, though riches can appear. That the Kingdom is simply the world, reality, existence, would appear highly comical to someone not interested in this. But to anyone who knows, well, they know, or as the nondualists’ nomenclature would put it- there is knowing,- or rather an intimate ‘not knowing’. A gnostic knowing, and a factual not knowing.



-------------------------------------------