We've all heard the phrases like, "From where I sit...", or "Walk a mile in my shoes...", These are common references to the significance of having seperate and different points of view.
A person's "point of view" can mean two things: A) It can mean what it literally says-"the "point" from which a person "sees" things. B)It can mean a person's opinion. A person's opinion is based on a combination of "A", and the person's programmed beliefs.
Let's first look closer at "A", the point aspect.
Most individuals have a limited point of view dictated by the very fact that they are seperate individuals. They are each seeing things from a different place, a different point, literally. And they see only from their seperate individual "place". There are as many "places" that a person will see from as there are persons. And the trouble is, seeing from only one "place" doesn't allow seeing a "whole picture" or a "big picture".
Here's a mediocre allegory that will help illustrate the point, using a modern frame of reference I'm sure you're all familier with. Let's say there is a classic car in a parking lot. The car is badly damaged on one side, but looks like new on the other. Two people going through the parking lot, walk by the car, one on each side. One person's point of view is from the bad side, one from the good. As they walk by, they each see the car, make a judgement, and form "clear" solid beliefs about the condition of the car. Because of their limited viewpoints, they are each left with totally different beliefs about the car. And each person's belief opposes and contradicts the other's. One believes that car is an impeccable classic condition, and very valuable. To the other person, the car is in such bad shape they couldn't even tell it was a classic-it just looks like an old junker to them. And that's what the person believes the car is- a piece of crap. They are both right, from their point of view. Yet if you could see the entire car from above, from a "Universal" point of view, they are both totally right AND both toally wrong. How can they both be right, when each viewpoint would seem to make the other wrong,or impossible to be true? How can they both be wrong, when they are obviously both right from their point of view? The fact is that when you simultaneously grasp the two contradictory, yet true, beliefs, you actually have the greater truth about the car. This predicament of having two truths, each of which seem to make it impossible for the other to be true, is a crude sort of paradox. And a paradox is the closest thing you can get to real truth, or whole truth, on the earth plane. This example shows us how we can see the whole truth is we get above and beyond each individual's point of view. ONLY then can we see the "whole" picture.
From our lofty point of view about the "car" we can see that while the car IS a classic, it would need a lot of work to put it in show condition. And while we see the damage, we also see that it is a classic, and not just some piec of junk to have hauled away. This example, of course, is not one of even seeing things with "Universal Consciousness" Or "Oneness with the Force"- seeing things from a "Universally broad" point of view. But as the damaged car allegory demonstrates in a small way, having a point of view that is as broad as possible allows us to better percieve reality, to see more truth. A braod point of view can help us better understand others, better understand the world, and ultimately the entire Universe around us. If our point of view is braod enough, it lets us better understand other points of view- then we can more easily communicate or interact with others, and they can more easily communicate with us. For instance, just like the people viewing the car, the point of view of each individual reading this post, or any other post in this forum, is going to be different, thus they will percieve it many different ways, thus it will be percieved differently than it really is, and differently than it was intended to be percieved. That is all.
