Wondering about oneness, again

Some days, when my inspiration and aspiration light up like barbeque flames, I catch a sense of possibility. It’s the hope for interconnectedness that is true peace, absolute renewal. Some days it flickers on, like light returning after a power outage. Other times, it’s like it was never there, like the sun in the middle of a long, cold winter.

On Sunday night last week, that glimpse appeared again, and I let my fingers fly to try and express it. It was messy, unclear, and abstract, like trying to explain a dream involving childhood homes a person who was there-but-not-there…but enough to get a first draft, drafted.

I still can’t tell if I’m deluded by this, like an earworm of a song lyric that just needs to be removed, or if it’s a melody yet to be written.

I feel about it like one might feel about anything that’s both personal but unfinished, possibly misleading and possibly healing: like I need to learn from it.

Maybe we can learn together?

* * *


The world is one. All things. Your idea of self, your idea of God, your understanding of the planets and solar systems and the universe, all of them are part of the same equation.

And it’s easy to participate in this.

The easiest participants are nature and babies. I mean infants of all stripes, from baby tigers to baby humans. To be infantile is to never second-guess one’s safety and loved-ness, one’s connectedness to Other. Even human babies take a decent while to realize they are not the same being as their mother. Their instinct, when they see their ma, is to believe: that’s me. I’m her. She is I.

All of our very being and matter is composed of interchangeable parts that were once part of others, or eventually will become part of others. We’re like a waterfall, always in motion, atoms spilled over into the global pool of shared matter, only we like to pretend we’re fixed, static, stuck, solid, permanent. We’re merely cascades.

We were never separate. We still are not. We simply occupy a series of constructs to reinforce the belief of separateness.

“That’s you,” we say, holding up a mirror or a photograph. “Your name is SEPARATE PERSON XT100359.” And reality is severed into an illusion.

The only thing keeping us separate is our own stories, but there is no separation between “us” and “them.” We are already fully functioning, flourishing members of a floor-to-ceiling civilization that includes all things.

Whenever we claim territory, nations, names, what we are doing is causing a violent separation of ourselves from other.

What we are invited into is a realization that there is no separateness. No detachment. No divide. No barrier.

You are the same as the Other; the Other you fear.

Even the Other you revere.

When we talk of the “Universe” or of “God,” it’s simply our name for that that Capital-E “Everything” we’re describing.

Not just that, but an Everything that is conscious.

Better than that, it is Love.

I think of words from the Bible where one of the last prayers of Jesus was for his followers to be “One, as the Father and I are One.”

What could that mean? Could it mean we are already connected to the very being of the universe? That we are offspring of the Everything, if only we could see it?

All of us are already connected.
Peace is already possible.
You and I (and them) are already one and the same.

Any element of war or conflict or difference or disharmony is an artifice designed to support the Ego’s war to claim it’s not the Same as Everything.

It’s not that this is certifiable, empirically proven. I don’t claim that this is theologically, philosophically vetted and approved. What I have to say is not to be guaranteed or plunged into. But what I would wonder is this: could it not be explored?

If you were a scientist, could you generate a hypothesis or two to discover if this were true?

If you were a theologian, could you not begin a process of inquiry to explore the possibility of this?

If you were a pedestrian or a plebe like me, could you not allow this to be fully imagined, a world to be mentally inhabited, to be conceptually wondered-about, to see if it bears living into?

The reason why we don’t build the impossible is not because we’ve explored it, vetted it, and rejected on the grounds of implausibility. It’s simply because we have not imagined it. Again: The reason we don’t participate in the impossible is because we have not imagined it.

If it were true that we were already One, what would be possible if we chose to act in this way?