Little water molecule...

A water molecule living in the ocean. Seeking a god called 'Ocean'. Has been told that the Ocean is always there yet she can never seem to find or understand him. She's been told that she IS the ocean itself, yet this does not connect with her nor satisfy her soul. She continues moving through the Ocean...searching.

She, at times, feels tremendously separate from the Ocean and thus grows anxious, doubtful and fearful. Desperate to know the truth (the secret). She would INDEED be relieved and in eternal celebration, peace and joy if she discovered beyond the shadow of a doubt, that the 'Ocean' could never be separate from her. Knowing and surrendering to that truth, that secret, she gives up the search because she knows once and for all....that she IS and ALWAYS has been what she's searching for. And that 'She' and 'it' are never separate. She lets go, abides in peace and joy (even a chuckle or two) and allows the ocean to be the ocean...end of search....Liberation.

a reply to: Visitor2012

Wonderful story! It's funny to think those molecules in a bottle of water might once have been hailstones, spindrift in a hurricane or snow on a mountain.

Question, what does "surrendering to the truth" entail? What does that mean? And what does "allowing the Ocean to be the Ocean" mean? How can the water molecule 'allow' the Ocean to be anything? The water molecule can't control the Ocean - right??

This was a great analogy. I too need more precision. I eagerly await.

originally posted by: MidNight sun
Question, what does "surrendering to the truth" entail? What does that mean? And what does "allowing the Ocean to be the Ocean" mean? How can the water molecule 'allow' the Ocean to be anything? The water molecule can't control the Ocean - right??

Precisely the questions that should be asked. And, within the frame work of this story, anyone would know the answer to those questions you asked.

Other questions can also be...Can it go to the Ocean? Where is the ocean in relation to it? How does it get to it, and how does it remain there? And with such a recognition, why would it even attempt to do so?

a reply to: Visitor2012

I think a better analogy would be a fish. Saying that the water of the ocean is the water of the ocean seems a little too obvious.

Its all water. See.

It is what it is.

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Visitor2012

I think a better analogy would be a fish. Saying that the water of the ocean is the water of the ocean seems a little too obvious.

Not at all. The fish IS separate from the Ocean. The water ISNT separated from the Ocean. This story is about a water molecule searching for evidence of the concept called Ocean. However you could tell of a fish searching for water. And however equally silly that sounds, it would simply reduce the story to a dualistic expression. Not only that, but it would contain two concepts that are not as close to each other. In terms of the relationship between the two concepts 'fish' and 'water' as opposed to 'water' and 'body of water' ' this would not satisfy the perspective being offered by the story. And obviousness is the intent of the story. So no Thankyou.

So, if anyone has the answer to the questions I asked - can you tell me your answer, or anyone else in this thread, please?

And for your questions I'll give it a try, cause I've been thinking A LOT about this.
So, "Can the water molecule go to the Ocean?" Yes, I believe it can, but it's not away from the Ocean physically, so it can't actually go to the Ocean since it's already there. Now if the water molecule can ''go to the Ocean'' that would imply that it can be away from it; to me that means a state of mind. The water molecule has to make it's way back to the Ocean mentally.
"Where is the Ocean in relation to it'' The Ocean is all around it, but if you are away from something mentally you can be very VERY far from it even if it's all around you and staring you in the face.
"How does the water molecule get to it" That's a bit more difficult; and I guess somehow, some way the water molecule would have to realize or find out that the Ocean is all around it and always has been and always will be. "How does it remain there?" I think, it would remain there by not forgetting that information.
"With such a recognition, why would it even attempt to do so?" Maybe even with this knowledge the water molecule does not FEEL IT, maybe it still feels alone, and maybe more than anything it wants to FEEL THE OCEAN.

a reply to: MidNight sun


I really like your answers. Most certainly an interesting and entertaining subject.

"Can the water molecule go to the Ocean?" . Yes, I believe it can, but it's not away from the Ocean physically, so it can't actually go to the Ocean since it's already there

If it IS what makes up the Ocean, and it recognized such, where would it then be trying to going to?

"How does the water molecule get to it". That's a bit more difficult; and I guess somehow, some way the water molecule would have to realize or find out that the Ocean is all around it and always has been and always will be.

If it recognized that it is what makes up the Ocean, that which allows the concept to exist in the first place, why would it then go back to believing it was separate and refer to the ocean as that which is 'around it'?

"How does it remain there?" I think, it would remain there by not forgetting that information.

It has no other way but to remain there.

"With such a recognition, why would it even attempt to do so?" Maybe even with this knowledge the water molecule does not FEEL IT, maybe it still feels alone, and maybe more than anything it wants to FEEL THE OCEAN.

I said recognition...not knowledge. There are things you recognize..but don't yet have knowledge about, or feeling of, like you're own conscious awareness or the blood flowing through your heart. No knowledge or Lack of information can eclipse, hide or invalidate the recognition that it is still so. Lack of all the five senses still would not rid us of the perception of time. Some things can not be hidden away once they are already exposed or percieved.

a reply to: Visitor2012

Not at all. The fish IS separate from the Ocean. The water ISNT separated from the Ocean. This story is about a water molecule searching for evidence of the concept called Ocean. However you could tell of a fish searching for water. And however equally silly that sounds, it would simply reduce the story to a dualistic expression. Not only that, but it would contain two concepts that are not as close to each other. In terms of the relationship between the two concepts 'fish' and 'water' as opposed to 'water' and 'body of water' ' this would not satisfy the perspective being offered by the story. And obviousness is the intent of the story. So no Thankyou.

Until the water molecule evaporates and is separate from the ocean, and lives in the sky instead. From that viewpoint she could see the ocean and deduce quite reasonably that she is separate from it, being that she is floating somewhere above it. Maybe she'll find herself in a lake or a river or in some fetid pool near a desert—all separated from and thus longing for the ocean forever. Doesn't sound like she'll be abiding any time soon.

a reply to: Aphorism

Until the water molecule evaporates and is separate from the ocean, and lives in the sky instead. From that viewpoint she could see the ocean and deduce quite reasonably that she is separate from it, being that she is floating somewhere above it. Maybe she'll find herself in a lake or a river or in some fetid pool near a desert—all separated from and thus longing for the ocean forever. Doesn't sound like she'll be abiding any time soon.

Perhaps in your version of the story. In this one, She is indeed a non-evaporated water molecule floating in the ocean. She is indeed IN the ocean, and has indeed discovered she IS not separate from it. Abiding wherever she is in it, and no longer trying to look for it. If she is evaporated, she no longer exists in the Ocean. Perhaps still discovering the same truth, but it's much more pleasant to discover it while still floating in the Ocean. The story, as it is, is really quite simple.

The ocean sees the waves moving and gets scared because it thinks there is something other than itself. It is only when the ocean realizes that it is moving that it stops being frightened.

The waves are not made of anything other than the ocean.
The ocean is always the ocean but the apparent waves constantly move and change the appearance of the ocean.

a reply to: Aphorism

In that same moment, she sees that she is a part of a different kind of ocean, the sky. After some time, she realizes a feeling of movement. She is about to hit the ground. As she seeps through the soil, she find that, yet again, she is part of yet another type of "ocean." After a journey downward, she drips into an aquifer.

"This must be it!" She exclaims. "It feels the same, I am finally home!"

After more movement, she realizes that this place only feels like the ocean. It was all just in her mind. But, this realization had only arisen when she had actually become reunited with the ocean after more movement through other oceans.

She had never realized that she was home all along, regardless of what type of system she was in. She was so focused on getting home, a place residing only in her mind, that she forgot to spread life along her journey.

The water molecule never was a part of growth, because she was only focused on the playground of her mind. She left no trace, no plants in her wake.

No nourishment for a thirsty being.

Only cracked, barren soil.

a reply to: Serdgiam

I thoroughly enjoyed that addition to the story. We can draw so many profound parallels from it.

a reply to: Visitor2012
A fish could work to I think, it can't be separated from the ocean too well. Just as much as the water molecule could but the fish wouldn't turn out so well if it say was picked up and dropped on land like water would, it wouldn't stay a fish for long. Can be thrown all up in a fish bowl or somethin and be fine but not everywhere, but through this the fish could learn bout like things relyin on eachother for bein existent, no water (among other things like food but quickest kill by lack) = no fish, and think on if everything else is dependent and therefore inseperable. Whereas the water molecule can be in the sky or on the ground or in the ocean or somewhere out and space and have nothing similar around it, it wouldn't as easily wither away and disperse into other things, & seems that also can show it dependence. either is good but think the fish example would actually boil down less dualistic much quicker. i really like your sig also it gave me a good perspective lol