On page 33 of DTS, in italics, there’s a phrase that I don’t understand:\u00c2\u00a0 “Since appearance never takes form, each appearance–inseparable from space–fills the whole of space.”\u00c2\u00a0 It’s\u00c2\u00a0filling all of space that I don’t understand.\u00c2\u00a0 Is this pointing to the span of my attention: that every experience, while I am having it, fill’s the frame of my attention?\u00c2\u00a0 And if I can widen my perspective to include more than one narrow thing, then this wider experience also fills my attention?\u00c2\u00a0 This is a theme that comes up other places in TSK–the idea that without distance and separation there is no extention to space or what appears in space.\u00c2\u00a0 It seems paradoxical that at the same time as space is everything, there is this image of it being no larger than the smallest thing that appears in it.\u00c2\u00a0 — Michael<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
On page 33 of DTS, in italics, there’s a phrase that I don’t understand:\u00c2\u00a0 “Since appearance never takes form, each appearance–inseparable from space–fills the whole of space.”\u00c2\u00a0 It’s\u00c2\u00a0filling all of space that I don’t understand.\u00c2\u00a0 Is this pointing to the … Continue reading