--- In [email protected], "endlessrainintoapapercup" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Technically, I didn't say "all is one". > I said that there is one reality. How > can you argue against the existence > of reality?
Easy. Who is the *perceiver* of reality? If you're claiming that transcendence is "the reality," who is the *perceiver* while you are transcending? If there is one, you aren't transcending. > As I am using the word, > it includes everything in the > phenomenological world and everything > outside of it, all that exists, everything > that doesn't. And again, who is the *perceiver* of this so-called "reality?" Are you claiming that "you" can perceive all of the things you listed above?
