Neurotic tendencies and biotic inclinations: is there ever freedom?

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Dawn_is_a_play

Now, one belives non-separation is the fantasy. It is still a fantastic belief! One must be thirsty for the actual not fantasies.

Who is the one, who says "non separation is the fantasy"?

I'm afraid that for me it is not a very relevant question. That which asks is a collection of verbs: thoughts, memories, emotions, awareness, reason. What you communicate with right now is a temporary, organized order of this. :-) There is no fixed identity, no ''the one'', no noun, that asks this question. The stereotypical ''Who am I?'' question that is supposed to be ''THE question'' in modern spirituality is not a question that concerns me a lot.

[Dawn_is_a_play]

[quote=Altair]I'm afraid that for me it is not a very relevant question.

One is afraid! And the "me" that one refers to is the very movement of fear. When one is afraid, there can be no light. One is asleep in the depth of darkness.

Do not be afraid. Be courageous and embrace fear. awaken out of it

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Dawn_is_a_play

One is afraid! And the "me" that one refers to is the very movement of fear. When one is afraid, there can be no light. One is asleep in the depth of darkness.

Do not be afraid. Be courageous and embrace fear. awaken out of it

None of that applies.
This is how I meant ''afraid'': https://www.phrasemix.com/phrases/im-afraid-clause

[Dawn_is_a_play]

Originally Posted by Altair

I'm afraid that for me it is not a very relevant question. That which asks is a collection of verbs: thoughts, memories, emotions, awareness, reason. What you communicate with right now is a temporary, organized order of this. :-) There is no fixed identity, no ''the one'', no noun, that asks this question. The stereotypical ''Who am I?'' question that is supposed to be ''THE question'' in modern spirituality is not a question that concerns me a lot.

That which is of fear is never able to love. Separating/dividing is the action of fear.
Love is of unity. And that which is of unity is always one!

One must be of love and not of killing.

[Dawn_is_a_play]

Originally Posted by Altair

None of that applies.
This is how I meant ''afraid'': https://www.phrasemix.com/phrases/im-afraid-clause

Thanks for sharing information about clause.
The "I" that one refers to is of separation. One is conditioned from childhood to separate. Constantly made to think separate, and to feel separate. To repeat at every stage of the game!

Is it not so?


Example: can a character in a video game ever step out of that which is beyond its programming?

Certainly not!
But one is not just a program. One can certainly step out of the illusion of the "I".

If one wants to, or keep playing the game. There is no loss or gain!

[inavalan]

One may have adhered to a system of beliefs based on limiting root assumptions. That's okay, as long as one doesn't pontificate, and remains open to widening one's perception of the wider reality.

As for example, the "oneness" and "love" one pontificates (I use this verb not in a derogatory way, just stating the obvious) are (mis)interpretations based on one's beliefs. One needs to drop them if one desires to evolve.

One believes that one's awake reality is more "real" than other realities, which is one's primary limiting belief.

--- Another one :)))

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Dawn_is_a_play

Thanks for sharing information about clause.
The "I" that one refers to is of separation. One is conditioned from childhood to separate. Constantly made to think separate, and to feel separate. To repeat at every stage of the game!

Is it not so?


Example: can a character in a video game ever step out of that which is beyond its programming?

Certainly not!
But one is not just a program. One can certainly step out of the illusion of the "I".

If one wants to, or keep playing the game. There is no loss or gain!

One is the character in the video game. The inner player is so engrossed in the game that he believes he is "one"

[Altair]

Originally Posted by Dawn_is_a_play

Thanks for sharing information about clause.
The "I" that one refers to is of separation. One is conditioned from childhood to separate. Constantly made to think separate, and to feel separate. To repeat at every stage of the game!

Is it not so?

Yes, because they are a separate, unique individual. Or are we all clones??

Something else; maybe you'd be interested in ''feral children'': https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child
A feral child is not fed with any concepts or identities. Can they believe in ''separation''?

[Dawn_is_a_play]

Originally Posted by inavalan

One may have adhered to a system of beliefs based on limiting root assumptions. That's okay, as long as one doesn't pontificate, and remains open to widening one's perception of the wider reality.

As for example, the "oneness" and "love" one pontificates (I use this verb not in a derogatory way, just stating the obvious) are (mis)interpretations based on one's beliefs. One needs to drop them if one desires to evolve.

One believes that one's awake reality is more "real" than other realities, which is one's primary limiting belief.

--- Another one :)))

One can be awoken out of sleep but one cannot be awoken when one pretends to be asleep.

Light is light! There is no otherness in light!

Example: when one stands in front of the mirror, the mirror does not lie, it shows all of that is in front of it. It does not separate. It shows the entirety. Only the "I" sees separation.

The one who writes here in this forum is a mirror that shows that there is no separation. That is all.

[inavalan]

Originally Posted by Dawn_is_a_play

One can be awoken out of sleep but one cannot be awoken when one pretends to be asleep.

Light is light! There is no otherness in light!

Example: when one stands in front of the mirror, the mirror does not lie, it shows all of that is in front of it. It does not separate. It shows the entirety. Only the "I" sees separation.

The one who writes here in this forum is a mirror that shows that there is no separation. That is all.

One doesn't make sense, but if one is happy with that, one should discount another one's well-intended observations.