One of us

[Jan Wicherink]

personally i keep an open mind about what 2012 is really going to be
like. there are many scenarios and all of them have there own
credibility to some extent. i have some thoughts about it myself which
i would like to share.

the law of one literally teaches that all is one and that the
separation we perceive essentially is false, an illusion of the
senses. but has anyone on this group actually ever contemplated what
that actually means?

if all is one and the separation does not exist, then all that is
outside of me is actually part of me! if in reality there is only one
consciousness creating this beautiful space and time i perceive as
third dimensional reality, it would mean that i must be the one and
only one to create all of this. it would mean that i live in a
self-contained reality bubble, looking at my own creations of
consciousness projected on the canvas of my own mind? what would that
make all the other personalities that i meet and greet all through the
day? just reflections of my own mind, wouldn't it?

the other selves out there must be illusions of separate beings
keeping me imprisoned in this false reality soap bubble! tell me, how
am i to know for sure that besides my own consciousness, which is the
only certainty i know to exist, there are others out there who are
experiencing exactly like me their own self awareness? for one thing i
never experienced a single moment of being you, having your thoughts,
feeling your feelings. and even if i had abilities of clairsentience,
could those experiences not be illusions too? now think about it for a
second and let it sink in real deep, how am i to know there are others
selves out there but me? the senses can be very deceiving.

to touch the discussion about the relevance of intelligence, if the
cocoon of my body and the consciousness awareness of my ego are but
imprisoned parts of my complete consciousness me as the one, then
obviously i would be able to perceive very intelligent people out
there who seem much smarter than me. (so billy boy cheer up, you're
actually very smart!) all a low iq would do is add to the illusion of
the false conception of reality as a means to imprison me and make my
separation look real. every attempt of my ego to make myself different
from other selves, would be a confirmation of the reality of my own
ego. fostering one's ego keeps the separation alive and keeps the
awakening at bay. any attack on other selves would be an attack on the
self, re-establishing and confirming the false belief in a separate self.

i have come to believe that this is the essence of the teachings of
the law of one. basically i'm teaching it to myself. could it mean
that the 2012 ascension is actually my own awakening, a process
whereby the soap bubble will finally burst and all of the other parts
of me will collectively recognise their oneness?

i may have insulted many of you out there, for who am i to deny your
existence? but think about it for a second. let's reverse the frame of
reference for a while. how are you to be sure that my writing to you
are not illusions of your mind since you are the one? aren't you
reading your own words here?

can you be sure that i really exist as a separate entity?

if the law of one is correct and i believe it is, there can only be
one of us here.

with love,
jan

[Michael Bergman]

thank you jan, i mean me, or the one :)

>the law of one literally teaches that all is one and that the
>separation we perceive essentially is false, an illusion of the
>senses. but has anyone on this group actually ever contemplated what
>that actually means?

raising hand, it is my daily bread to contemplate oneness, to me it means
alot, to even attempt to describe what it means is futile, and to actually
live it well that is another story but hopefully i will learn and grow a
little about that next weekend :)

>if all is one and the separation does not exist, then all that is
>outside of me is actually part of me! if in reality there is only one
>consciousness creating this beautiful space and time i perceive as
>third dimensional reality, it would mean that i must be the one and
>only one to create all of this. it would mean that i live in a
>self-contained reality bubble, looking at my own creations of
>consciousness projected on the canvas of my own mind? what would that
>make all the other personalities that i meet and greet all through the
>day? just reflections of my own mind, wouldn't it?

namaste! that would make them another aspect of you just perceiving life
through a unigue angle of perception. yeah, everywhere we look we can only
see the self in its myriad play of forms...gotta love it. there truly is no
other, what could be more joyful than that and knowing that the one that is
all is infinite?

>the other selves out there must be illusions of separate beings
>keeping me imprisoned in this false reality soap bubble! tell me, how
>am i to know for sure that besides my own consciousness, which is the
>only certainty i know to exist, there are others out there who are
>experiencing exactly like me their own self awareness? for one thing i
>never experienced a single moment of being you, having your thoughts,
>feeling your feelings. and even if i had abilities of clairsentience,
>could those experiences not be illusions too? now think about it for a
>second and let it sink in real deep, how am i to know there are others
>selves out there but me? the senses can be very deceiving.

have you ever watched a bubble break up into smaller bubbles? i cannot
prove to you that i am aware of my existence but i too am only certan that i
am. i am a reflection of you mirroring back to you.

>to touch the discussion about the relevance of intelligence, if the
>cocoon of my body and the consciousness awareness of my ego are but
>imprisoned parts of my complete consciousness me as the one, then
>obviously i would be able to perceive very intelligent people out
>there who seem much smarter than me. (so billy boy cheer up, you're
>actually very smart!) all a low iq would do is add to the illusion of
>the false conception of reality as a means to imprison me and make my
>separation look real. every attempt of my ego to make myself different
>from other selves, would be a confirmation of the reality of my own
>ego. fostering one's ego keeps the separation alive and keeps the
>awakening at bay. any attack on other selves would be an attack on the
>self, re-establishing and confirming the false belief in a separate self.

we are all infinite intelligence playing with potential and there are many
possibilities to play with thanks to that gift we gave to ourselves of free
will.

>i have come to believe that this is the essence of the teachings of
>the law of one. basically i'm teaching it to myself. could it mean
>that the 2012 ascension is actually my own awakening, a process
>whereby the soap bubble will finally burst and all of the other parts
>of me will collectively recognise their oneness?

there is an idea, hopefully that one crystallizes into the collective
consciousness. i wonder if you could freeze a bubble? this creation bubble
pops everytime that i blink :)

>i may have insulted many of you out there, for who am i to deny your
>existence? but think about it for a second. let's reverse the frame of
>reference for a while. how are you to be sure that my writing to you
>are not illusions of your mind since you are the one? aren't you
>reading your own words here?

to deny my existence is to deny your own :) i like to talk to myself i
guess hehe

thanks for the reminder self

i will meet you back at the soap solution when the bubbles pop

bubbles of bursting bliss,
mikey

[lealdragon]

even ra refused to state unequivocally exactly how the harvest will
manifest.

only one thing is certain: it will be an adventure!


> personally i keep an open mind about what 2012 is really going to
be
> like. there are many scenarios and all of them have there own
> credibility to some extent.



to quote peter gabriel:

'did i dream this belief? ...or did i believe this dream?'




> ...how are you to be sure that my writing to you
> are not illusions of your mind since you are the one? aren't you
> reading your own words here?
>
> can you be sure that i really exist as a separate entity?

[pschutzy]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postid=hdr3ahrrgbfjrqetmcgvft_frjq2uyhggiqswr 5hvncmr4yhaqcrxuywobhutdb_tj2i-hvohmiwfpef0fu0iw), "jan wicherink" <jan.wicherink@x>
wrote:
> i may have insulted many of you out there, for who am i to deny
your
> existence?

you've validated it. all exists. you've generously added a new
perspective to this mind of mine (ours) who seeks
understanding. "i am me? you are you? and we are all together?"

i was thinking this morning of identity, flavor, vibration,
dimension? and oneness? the 3rd dimension and
our "illusions/perceptions"?
and i'm still thinking (smile)?
occasionally i get a glimpse or an experience of oneness and know i
am one with all. ? and then, zappo, i'm back to being that
old "familiar self" (this identity is from the limited point of view
of "i". generating identity or point of reference outside
of "i/self", enlarging comprehension or inquisitiveness to include
others is a huge step, but very intriguing. the difficulty is with
self. i tend to be too involved with me, viewing others as? well?
others, and outside as...) and i'm right back where i started again?
seeking? learning?

in this "reality" of ours, perhaps it's just the process of
experiencing or "growing". once aware we are "limited" we seek an
expansion of freedom. this movement forward balances the chaos, the
pain, the confusion with our awakening of truth, beauty, and unity.
the inner knowledge of love draws us forward seeking new footing,
greater understanding and expression of love.
we seek greater completeness and "i/we" deeply want it. the pull to
truly become one? the love? the light? together.
each with our individual note, flavor, hue adds to the beauty,
enriching the "moment" in our reality.
together we seek? together we grow? together we awaken in the light.
we are unity.

blessings and joy
patty

[Jan Wicherink]

patty wrote:
> you've validated it. all exists. you've generously added a new
> perspective to this mind of mine (ours) who seeks
> understanding. "i am me? you are you? and we are all together?"


dear patty,

you're right noticing that i have added a new perspective to the
discussion. we can talk and talk all of us about the law of one for
eons, but practicing it is really another thing.

the question really is `who's doing all this talking here on this
forum if there is only oneness'? are these the reflections of my own
mind? echo's from my future self telling me to awaken and leading me
through a gradual process of awakening rather then popping the reality
bubble with one devastating blow.

to really dive deep into this concept of oneness, drives a person
crazy, for who am i talking to if there is just a one of us here? you
perfectly expressed my own trials and tribulations over this oneness
concept.

i've been `a course in miracles' student and they literally teach you
to look to the person next to you and recognise who? yourself! there
is no other one around here. it drives a person mad. so talking about
this subject is great, but trying to really grasp it is really just
another ball game. i still go about my daily business frightened by
the spooky images of my own mind, what i'm i afraid of then?

i believe that christ just taught the same concept of the oneness:

john 17: 22 -23 i have given them the glory that you gave me, that
they may be one as we are one: i in them and you in me. may they be
brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and
have loved them even as you have loved me.

and why did christ teach me to love my brother like myself? good
question, i am my brother! not recognising this fact will make me
attack this person and keep my separation real. so in essence every
judgement passed on another person keeps oneself more imprisoned in
this illusionary 3d reality bubble.

so for all of you attacking david wilcock on this forum i would like
to say, it's keeping you from your own enlightenment and recognition
of oneness since you do not recognise your brother. judgement is an
act whereas one says that he's different and better that the other
person being judged. if all is one, what a laugh, you're just judging
yourself. that's why judgment in reality is being aimed at the
judgmental person rather than the person being judged. but heck, we're
all learning here.

after failing to reach enlightenment from the `course of miracles' i
decided to step down and take another perspective and decided upon the
reality of the existence of other selves, but the teachings of both
the `course' and the loo keeps teasing and haunting my mind.

so you see patty, your personal experiences are my personal
experiences too; so i guess we'll have to do this together. could we
schedule a date, let's say somewhere around 2012?

love,
jan

[NEIL HADDON]

great thread, jan.
wally minto used to say he was never afraid to address an audience because 'we'
(the audience) only existed in his mind.

also, gregg braden says although there are 6.4 billion souls here on earth,
there is only one of us here.

love.
neil

from: jan wicherink

patty wrote:
> you've validated it. all exists. you've generously added a new
> perspective to this mind of mine (ours) who seeks
> understanding. "i am me. you are you. and we are all together."

dear patty,

you're right noticing that i have added a new perspective to the
discussion. we can talk and talk all of us about the law of one for
eons, but practicing it is really another thing.

[jeffreykiksit]

--- in asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postid=_iuqqbw17irn2hpxaw8p9lr886mog-og3fphcbjqr4oeds0m6ganmgncp9ndiqlmk4wxurs0o-tbrpd_2q), "jan wicherink" <jan.wicherink@x> wrote:
> so for all of you attacking david wilcock on this forum i would like
> to say, it's keeping you from your own enlightenment
================
jan, i believe that in your opinion you may think that i was one of
the ones who was attacking mr. wilcock. i think i was just pointing
something out and trying to be helpful.

therefore, by saying that i was attacking him, you are judging me.
see how that works? we all get to play this little game. i am you,
and it was you who attacked david, and now it is you who is judging
yourself.

my advice is to go easier on your self, dont look for "attacks" where
none exist.

if i tell you that your shoes dont match before you go on that big
date, dont assume im picking on you or judging you. its my free-will
to step up and speak my mind every now and then in an effort to be
helpful.

i risk infringing on your free will when i offer service where none
is requested. therefore, if i learn that you believe i am being
unhelpful, i will back off. its a learning process, but i am not
ashamed for trying to get involved. its the way things happen to
work in the 3d every now and then - so just let me live my own unique
experience.

[Jan Wicherink]

neil wrote: also, gregg braden says although there are 6.4 billion
souls here on earth, there is only one of us here.


hi neil,

i've heard about greg braden's expression, it appears in his book 'the
isaiah effect'.

still the idea that there is only one of us here is awsome. how can
any one man on this living planet really understand this?

i remember another phrase from 'the disappearance of the universe' by
gary renard where he claimed that jesus had told his disciples at
least those who could really understand 'be in this world, but not of
this world'.

how can i be in this world, knowing not to be of this world? why am i
still scared of all these threathing things developing in our world
today? maybe the pressure inside the illusionary reality bubble needs
to build before it pops?

i'm wondering how many of us, really often contemplate this oneness
concept and really grasp it. if i/we really did, we/i would probably
no longer be here.

with love,
jan

[Jan Wicherink]

jeffreykiksit wrote:

jan, i believe that in your opinion you may think that i was one of
the ones who was attacking mr. wilcock.

dear jeffrey,

in any communication there is a sending part and a receiving part.
i was not addressing anyone in particular, however you chose to tune
into my communication and receive it as being addressed at you
personally, it was not!

you and only you know the intention of your communication and if it
was meant to be a positive feedback, that's what it is.

anyway you're right about my chosing the judgemental
word 'attacking' in my communication. so there's my lesson to learn.
sorry about that.


with love,
jan

[amilius2001]

group, for a couple years now, i've explained two point / one
point meditation with this question:

what if the only thing individual about any one of us, is our
individual unawareness of being one graciously organizes
design? there is the chosen imagining of unawareness as one
point, the rest is graciously organized design about that point.
might one then understand and appreciate that the experience of
individuated unawareness was chosen for the purpose of the
experience realized, and,thus, the point without and within total
awareness become one? one imagines so. we are all one
graciously organized design, the one self creator.
namaste, amilius

[E. Drake]

how poetic. beautiful and sublime. .

__________________________________________________ ______________________
amilius2001 <angelfatigues@... (/group/asc2k/post?postid=vgl35wga2khfactji2lq68d5oibjchh59dtcdg 5ltxnavsqtduwnc5nhpvtnd49p5cmnjtfyotpn20pkaz1o7xde bg)> wrote:
group, for a couple years now, i've explained two point / one
point meditation with this question:

what if the only thing individual about any one of us, is our
individual unawareness of being one graciously organizes
design? there is the chosen imagining of unawareness as one
point, the rest is graciously organized design about that point.
might one then understand and appreciate that the experience of
individuated unawareness was chosen for the purpose of the
experience realized, and,thus, the point without and within total
awareness become one? one imagines so. we are all one
graciously organized design, the one self creator.
namaste, amilius

[smileyjaiy]

>
> i'm wondering how many of us, really often contemplate this oneness
> concept and really grasp it. if i/we really did, we/i would probably
> no longer be here.
>
> with love,
> jan

yes we would still be hear, because i am...contemplating this oneness
concept and grasping it is the habit of the mind which continues in
its myrad of ways of avoiding what is already self-evident...it's not
an intellectual conclusion...it just is