What is written here is not logical. These words are not coming from an experience or from some kind of conceptual understanding. What is written about is neither experienced nor understood.
Spiritual types often seem to balk at the statement that what seems to be happening is “all there is (and is not)”. It’s offensive to many that I would use such an apparently meaningless label. Ultimately all labels, just like everything else, are meaningless; yet they still seem to appear.
What that statement points to is that the unicity that is appearing includes everything, including what is not. To limit the description to exclude what is not would be misleading. The experience of self automatically excludes what is not so that it can grasp onto the rung of, “I am.” This message is not pandering to the self with a promise of freedom through further inflated division.
Everything is not every thing. There are not things, not even one thing. What seems to be happening is indivisible, but not because it’s made of some kind of substance that cannot be divided. It’s simply indivisible by its nature, yet division is not excluded.
It sounds insane to the self, because the self is division. “How can this include me even though there is no place for me in it?” the self asks. There is no answer that will satisfy the self. While this is perfectly sane, it is completely incomprehensible.
Nothing is excluded, even exclusion. All-inclusiveness suggests an outer boundary inside of which everything is included, but there is no such boundary. This is boundless inclusion. What would be outside is already included inside. There is no inside nor outside, yet inside and outside are included.
No one is ever going to know this. No one is ever going to understand this.
