I am Nothing without You
And yes, this means you are Nothing without Me
“There is a technical term for a thorough understanding of the Game of Black and White, whereby one sees that all explicit opposites are implicit allies - correlative in the sense that they “gowith” each other and cannot exist apart. […] the metaphysical unity underlying the world. For this unity is not mere one-ness as opposed to multiplicity, since these two terms are themselves polar. The unity, or inseparability, of one and many is therefore referred to in Vendanta philosophy as “non-duality” (advaita) to distinguish it from simple uniformity.” p. 148, “The Book”
What does this mean?
Originally I read this passage and was stuck in the reality that we are currently living within. The concept of ‘culture wars’ came immediately to my mind, and I dove into that conscious thought and followed it for a while. Examining the relationship between the ‘other’ that we are told to pay attention to, and the ‘other’ that we are much more quietly told to ignore.
I spent a significant amount of time working toward explaining that we are being given ‘bad direction’ that we are ‘focusing all wrong’ meanwhile, I was, myself, focusing on the wrong way to dig deeper into the true meaning of this passage.
Rather instead, let us scope back outward and see how we might be able to digest this on a more metaphysical and macro cosmic scale, and then see how it reflects inward to the physical and the micro cosmic scale.
In order to do this, though, let us take in the above quote, in conjunction with two more from Alan Watts, to begin crafting a larger understanding of the Self in relation to the Other.
“[…] nevertheless, these patterns do not come from ‘outside’ the world. They have something to do with the design of the human nervous system, which is definitely in and of the world.” p. 150 “The Book”
and
“What lies beyond opposites must be discussed, if at all, in terms of opposites, and this means using the language of analogy, metaphor, and myth.” p.151 “The Book”
What we end up noticing is that duality is made to seem an enemy, or rather, we are made to believe that natural dualities and multiplicities only exist to be weaponized rather than accepted. We thus end up falling for the microcosm of constant distraction wherein we believe that ‘Otherness’ obligates ‘right and wrong’ or ‘good and evil’ when those are merely two of the many ‘others’ that exist.
Which brings us to that macrocosm/metaphysical conversation that I mentioned above.
When we think about having to define the Self we must unerringly realize that we are using the Other to form our distinctions, our personal definitions. We then realize how we acquire the knowledge or the understanding of God or as science fiction authors write, the Alien manifestations that exist in the periphery of the planet, and the human experience that we know intimately as our reality.
Our definitions of Self come from our definitions of God, which means that our definitions of Self come from our definitions of the devil, and further our definition of Self comes from our definitions of human Others.
When we accept that we are not able to define ourselves without having a definition of others, we begin to really understand the necessary truth that we are all One.
The total oneness that comes from all things being in and of the same Source.
Then once we are at this point, of understanding the Oneness of everything, we begin to unravel the need to identify the Self. We understand that we are a thread, woven into a tapestry that isn’t possible to completely observe as we cannot ever fully step outside of ourselves. This doesn’t mean that we should not try.
However, it means that the more of the tapestry that we see, the less we identify the importance of the Self.
We then understand that God or the Supreme Other that we have manifested a Truth around, is not merely Good, They have built out of Them the fullness of All things. They have crafted the concept of Evil that we might understand the concept of Good. God is not good nor evil, They are the crafters of meta-realities and realities that we observe through the singular lens of living that we inhabit on an individual basis.
The last note that we come to is that if I am unable to be defined without the definitions of others, then I must provide the same level of understanding that this applies to ALL THINGS. (Re: they cannot define themselves without having a definition of me.) We must then either admit,
1. we are nothing without everything
(or)
2. we are the sum of everything, and therefore can not be nothing.
Either of these outcomes interestingly bring the Self to the same point, when enough introspection is accomplished.
The enemy that we identify in others, is within us. If we feel compelled to handle the ‘evil’ Other, then we must begin with handling the ‘evil’ Self.
This is all a philosophical conversation that results in the way we feel when we watch others pontificate on the ‘right’ and ‘wrong’ and ‘good’ and ‘evil’ of others while they themselves are unable or perhaps more to the point, unwilling, to change themselves.
It manifests as a lack of real internal work.
Which is why we see so many that seem to have ‘principaled’ stances, but are unwilling to stand on their own judgements.
Until we hold the Self to accountability, we will never be able to even understand or identify the Other that we are so desperately trying to define and further to expunge from the earth.
This is where some previous philosophy has failed us.
We are constantly ‘reminded’ that for instance we cannot combat climate catastrophe individually, only by holding companies to account - while we blithely ignore our relationship on the individual level that would resolve to that outcome. Re: if we as an individual stopped using the plastic and waste that companies sell to us for convenience, and fight the Demon of Convenience and Efficiency within us, thus these companies would fail.
As such, by not only being accountable to the Self, but further by acting in a way that defines the Self as part of the Other, we cleanse the Self, and collapse the Other.
Perhaps this is why so much of our discourse in the culture zeitgeist on any side of the aisle, in any country, in any people, is less concerned with genuine resolution of problems, and instead with keeping the illusion or rather, allusion of seeking resolution.
Instead, we are continually focused on defining the Other, we are worried about the race, gender, religion, ideology, education, nationality, and sexuality of the Other - rather than seeking to better understand these concepts within ourselves, and then further understanding that we are none of these things if we do not require others to be these things. Or more succinctly, if we do not believe that we should be defined by any particular aspect of these concepts, then we logically must conclude that others must not be defined by these concepts.
Lastly, once we accept that we are only ‘White’ because we have allowed for the definition of ‘Black’ to exist, then we understand that there is no such thing as ‘White’ or ‘Black’, or… and this is vital, there is no ‘White’ without ‘Black’, there is no ‘man’ without ‘woman’, there is no Self without the Other.
We have to conclude that we are either too focused on defining the Other to truly understand that we are ourselves seeking to better understand the Self, or we are too busy defining the Other because we are too scared to admit that we do not have a real understanding of the Self.
We then understand that I am nothing, without the everything. I am not good or evil, I am both the holder of good and evil within me. I am not man or woman, I am the holder of all gender within me, I am not black or white, I am the holder of all bodies within me.
Which concludes, within me, an understanding of the innate responsibility that I have, but more importantly, the obligate Truth - that I am only because You are.
xoxo- Jacks