The illusion of separation

[GliderGuider]

Our dualistic view of the universe may be inherent in the self/other distinction that arises naturally from our self-awareness.

This awareness of Separation has also made our development of technology possible (when we realize we are separate from the universe, we develop means to manipulate it). Our destruction of the world through the technological development that we tool monkeys are so good at, has therefore been inevitable ever since we became self-aware (and axiomatically other-aware). For all their seeming differences, at that level science and religion are simply alternative expressions of this self/other-awareness, more congruent than orthogonal.

The only deep healing available to the human animal is the restoration of non-dual awareness, the understanding that any separation - whether between us and the universe-as-science, beween us and the universe-as-God, or simply between us as expressions of life - is a trick of perception, an illusion of interpretation.

[freshwest]

1. Love it.

[DonCoquixote]

2. so in other words

all our selves are an illusion? that will be hard to sell.

[GliderGuider]

3. It depends on what you mean by "self".

At one level the self is an illusion, at another level it's not. The really damaging illusion, though, is that my self is separate from your self, and also separate from the universe.

[napoleon_in_rags]

4. I love it too. But if the my perception of self is an illusion, who is it fooling?

Who is experiencing that illusion? I am tempted to say "I myself am", but that only makes the illusion refer backwards to itself. To the universe/god/totality is being fooled?

I remember hearing something I liked: In the beginning God had infinite power, knowledge. But infinite power had to include the power to be powerless, infinite knowledge included the knowledge of what it is not to know things. For this reason, all the mortal things were created, to collect the experiences of powerlessness and ignorance for God, which were required by His divine nature.

So in the context of that, that which is being fooled ultimately is God, god is fooling himself with the illusion of self making him believe he's all of us, because he must include the knowledge of what its like to be fooled in his mind to actually be omniscient.

Man I love thinking about this stuff! Thanks for posting. :)

[GliderGuider]

5. "Who am I?" is a very useful question.

There is a Hindu concept called Lila that I really like:

Brahman, the divine absolute, has no need of anything, no need to do anything. Why, then, does the universe exist? Their idea is that Brahman created the universe simply for sport, or play. The word "Lila" means sport. I think of life here as "The Dance of Lila", in which each of us is dancing a role. When we are on stage we are so busy dancing that we forget it is just a role, but we can (through meditation and other practices) pull ourselves out into the audience and see the dance as an observer rather than a participant. Then, with the awareness that we are dancing a role, we can go back to the dance with renewed joy and enthusiasm.

[napoleon_in_rags]

18. I love that too.

I heard it described once as a drunk, wandering around who decides to take a bite of sour apple for no reason whatsoever. Sort of a "huh" thing.

I find it intoxicating that the absolute pinnacle of the divinity hides in the silent "huh" of the hear and now. When you close your eyes and wait long enough, its like you can feel it.

:):)

[GliderGuider]

20. You're there.

Or here. Or wherever. Very, very nice.
:toast:

[iemitsu]

6. in the sense that the author is speaking,

the self is illusory because the self cannot exist without others. we are essentially social creatures.
the frontier thesis is dead.

[GliderGuider]

7. Yes, but go a bit further.

The self, "I" cannot exist without the entirety of the universe existing just as it is.

It's not merely human society that connects you and me. We are intrinsically interlinked because I could not be what I am unless you are exactly what you are. It's the Buddhist concept of "interbeing" or "codependent arising". A sheet of paper can not exist without clouds, soil, the sun, the logger who cut the tree, the lunch packed by the logger's wife, the bricklayer who helped build the paper mill, and on and on. This interdependence spreads out in concentric rings of influence that interlock everything from the farthest star to the closest subatomic particle, from the web of human connections we make to the ideas that form our cultures.

To say the sheet of paper, or you or I, exist separate from anything is the true illusion.

[iemitsu]

8. ok,

i accept what you are saying in a general sense but i believe that in reality i could change who i am and it would not affect you in the least.

[GliderGuider]

10. Sure,

The same way we can drive a species of tree frog in Brazil into extinction and it won't affect us in the least. The interdependence might be very small, but it's never zero. So where do you draw the line and say, "This level is important, but that level is not"? What we can do is accept that everything we do causes some degree of change, and be mindful and conscious when we act.

[iemitsu]

13. you win.

i can't really argue that we are not all inter-connected since i believe that we are.
i just think that i can maintain my own character and live a good life regardless of (or despite) how others choose to live theirs.

[GliderGuider]

14. There are no winners or losers, we're just yakking on the internet.

You've got a good point - as long as I play the game on my side of the net with awareness and caring, whatever purpose I choose to give my stay here will be fulfilled. At the same time I both am and am not my brother's keeper...

[iemitsu]

15. glider, you are filled with wisdom.

i honestly mean this. i have spent much time pondering the "meaning of life". and since my conclusions seem to match yours i can also conclude that you are wise.

[GliderGuider]

16. Thank you!

Namaste

[DCKit]

9. You GO Shakespeare!

And I want some of what you're smoking this fine morning.

[EvolveOrConvolve]

11. If this "awareness of Separation" has made technological progress possible

What do you think about animals that use tools, and are able to advance their own technological knowledge, even without the ability to think abstractly about their own positions in the universe?

[GliderGuider]

12. It a matter of degree. And opposable thumbs.

I'd claim that there is a degree of self-awareness in all life -- certainly there is in all life forms that have a brain. I often see my dog reason abstractly and with self-awareness, for example, even though he can't read Plato (at least not in the original Greek). From that starting point, how far a species progresses with technology depends on how developed their brains are and whether they have enough manipulative ability to alter their environment. Dolphins (and my dog) have excellent brains but no thumbs, simians have thumbs but less-developed cortical powers.

I'd also offer that humans have done what we have done (for good and ill) without much ability or motivation "to think abstractly about their own positions in the universe". We might look up at the night sky and get a momentary flash of awe at seeing all those stars, but then we immediately turn back to building a fire to warm ourselves and roast the goat. Those who spend any significant time thinking about such abstractions as what it all means are rare birds indeed. The ability to build a fire is a survival trait, wondering "Why is there fire?" - not so much.

The important predicates for human technological progress have been: knowing that there is an "I" and a "not-I"; discovering that I can manipulate the not-I to my advantage; realizing that I can learn how to manipulate the not-I more effectively over time; and wanting to do it more effectively. When all that is in place, apotheosis and disaster walk hand in hand. Tool monkeys have the recipe!

[Festivito]

17. We shall always remain separate from the absolute.

I don't think it is necessary that we must become self-destructive because of that.

[GliderGuider]

19. It's not the actual state of separateness or union that is the issue, I think.

Rather it's our perception of that state that gives us trouble. But even so, you're right. Even our perception of separation doesn't automatically mean we must become destructive.

BTW, if one said, "We shall always remain one with the absolute," it would be as true as, "We shall always remain separate from the absolute." Each is true, each is false, both are true, and both are false. To me that paradox is the truly wonderful thing about being human. Only when we embrace paradox do we approach truth.

[Festivito]

21. Never say always, and always avoid saying never. /nt

[GliderGuider]

22. Always say never, and never avoid saying always....

;-) :thumbsup: