Imagine that three friends watch their very first movie, called ‘The Diamond of Truth’. Afterwards, the third friend says that he was intrigued by the portrayal of truth as something solid, massive and dense.
The second friend had seen the beam of light, and marveled that a single abstract commodity could be responsible for all of the colors and shapes which suddenly appeared in the movie.
The first friend was also fascinated by a single element, the screen. Where the light was lively and energetic, the screen was merely solid. The light is consciousness and the screen stands for self, and no two things more opposite will ever exist.
There are two reasons why the first friend is not heard by the others. To the third friend he just sounds strange, while the second friend is convinced that they’re speaking of the same thing.
As soon as the first friend says, ‘one single thing’, but before he can add, ‘undivided like my favorite chunk of sleep’, the second friend agrees, “yes, yes, it’s great!”. The second friend no more hears him than the third because he agrees too much, and is convinced that they’re both speaking about the light.
In neither case do they hear what he has to say, which is this: “speaking of real things only, the only object which any of us actually saw before, during and after the movie, was the screen.”