The view of Oneness, mentioned in The Tao of Jesus, is at the core of most religions, even though it may be expressed very differently. That we have difficulty approaching daily life with that perspective is not surprising. Heck, considering how the nervous system works - on / off - (yang / yin), it stands to reason we would view life through that two sided lens, e.g., good, bad, light, dark, hard, soft, etc. And so the question, when carrying on your head your perplexed bodily soul can you embrace in your arms the One and not let go?

What surprises me is that we can sense an overarching Oneness at all, given how the sensory system’s organs function. Although, a meta view would suggest that this is also just an emergent property of the ‘on’ ‘off’ neurological response. In other words, Oneness is the ‘off’; duality (on versus off) is the ‘on’.

In this same vein, I’d have to say that a meta view of balance must include unbalance as a key aspect of balance. Unbalance ‘balances’ balance. Seen together, balance and unbalance compose an all inclusive whole. Thus, whether I’m balanced or unbalanced makes no difference for I will need the other to counterbalance the situation. I suppose that explains why nothing ever resolves itself. If it did, the universe would end. Poof!

I don't know what it means either. Andy is always using the word so I thought I'd try it out. Luke, the intellect that he is, said my post made sense to him.

Anyway, I take 'meta view' to mean the farthest most outside the box, big picture, overarching view of the view. The analysis of the analysis or the analysis of the...

"Referring to itself" sounds kind of right. But it's more than that as well. Still, "referring to itself" kind of hits the nail on the head concerning the 'intuitive sense' I have when thinking, writing or speaking, that I'm always simply beating around the bush.

Let me go see if Andy will elaborate...