Dr. Jeff Eisen, the author of Oneness Perceived, A Window Into Enlightenment, recently said the following in an interview:
“Traditionally philosophers have espoused philosophies that basically consist of words. But I feel that we are part of a small generation of people whose work is ourselves. It is, however, very philosophical work, in that it deals with the nature of consciousness, with the definition of God, with the difference between perception and nondual reality, with evolution, with the development of what you know and what you are thinking of and what you are. To me, and to a lot of us, our work is always a realization and an embodiment: How can I live this? How can I make it a living reality in myself? It has the spirit of veritas, truth-seeking, and universitas, going-towards-the-One, but the whole thrust of it is not towards producing a treatise but towards becoming.”
Well put. It’s about going beyond ideas and intellectual positions and into being. Dr. Eisen is a Psychologist and self-described “enlightenment therapist” who has been working to integrate eastern ideas of enlightenment with western therapeutic applications.
WIE magazine presents the interview poorly however, saying things like: “In his book, Oneness Perceived, Eisen describes a unified field of existence where the realization of ultimate oneness remains firmly rooted in the reality—and complexity—of time and space, cause and effect.” Clearly this was not written by someone who understands Oneness.
To illustrate, a quick review of Dr. Eisen’s web site finds a couple of articles to note:
An interesting discussion of the issue of perception and Oneness. In essence:
Oneness is reality.
Oneness perceived is duality.
Duality is illusion.
Oneness perceived is illusion.
Another talks about the post awakening struggle with the mind. Inner Oneness while experiencing the duality of mind.
These 2 articles are discussing different perspectives or places on the journey. I’ve not read the book nor read anything else, so cannot comment further.
NOTE: see comments for further clarity