Separation is an illusion, yet, man live separated from nature, the world.

When it rains, it rains on all but man. When it is dark, it is dark for all but man. When it is cold, it is cold for all but man. When the wind swirls and drifts, it whispers on all skins but that of man.

Man is out of touch. Denying himself from the pleasures and pains of the skin. He lives near by, but not quite in the world anymore.

But he comes to realize that there is no separation, and it comforts him to know this. In truth comfort is that separation and is that illusion. And it is from those thought, tiny and dismissive, that he built his castles of illusions. That he made a reality for himself and created that illusion. And that realization is pretty but petty if it does not lead to a way of life: to being non separated from the world.

Both cannot exist together. Either you are separated from the world, or you aren't. Day and night cannot coexist in the same place at the same time, however how many light bulbs you hang above your head ...

The truth is out there.

...

But in all seriousness, I think the separation is like an optical illusion. True, but only in a shallow sense. Adjust the 'lens' of perception and its all encompassing. The physics tells us we grew from within this universe and are seamlessly enmeshed in it like waves forgetting they are part of the ocean, just a temporary waveform that takes shape and flows on.

Some of these deeper experiences the sense of oneness doesn't immediately go away after 10 minutes, and walking around in nature and among people in that state gives me a real appreciation for what the ancients were talking about when they said stuff not unfortunately nowadays almost sounds cliche, like 'the self in man and the sun are one. They meant this on a visceral, experiential level that is way beyond what we can imagine in our (imo) degenerated state of mind we call normal.

<3

It was also betterly expressed in poetry. The symbolical language is more universal, as would be music, and more grounded in human experience. Rationalism, especially in its excessive forms, is cut from the felt experience - and that is from the senses and the body (including the mind-body relationship).

When rationalism, that is cut from felt experience and more a product of the ego - that which is separated from the world, takes over felt experience, it creates unbalance. The natural order is that the body is submitted to nature, and the mind is submitted to the body. Even in all the wise tradition of the past, they knew how to keep perfect balance between mind and body, it was even the key as to control it. If the mind seeks to take over the body, and then the world, in an illusory attempt of control, it result in degeneration, literally.

It shouldn't be surprising that every old mythology and folk tales had that quirk and humor to it (I do not remember what philosopher said that the lack of humor in the Bible was the most singular even in Occidental's Antique's literature), they were playful and supple. Our world is so very rigid. So, Tao me this, Tao me that: the way of life is the supple one.

Written language is not supple and create imbalance between the visible (symbolical thought) and the invisible (sound) that saw the birth of language. If vision is Yang, and the invisible is Yin, creating a visual form for language is creating an unbalance, an excess of Yang. It is a trespassing from what was ephemeral and bounded to the mind, that the mind was contained in the body, to a desire to bring the mind out of the body. Aaaannnnnndddd ... that is how you get the internet and tall dick buildings everywhere lads



When you are saying this, you are utilizing some extremely rational information, obtained through "rationalist" means, and going back to symbolical thoughts, to a form of poetic expression. There is a return to a form of thought that translate betterly a sensitive experience. We could very well call it "integration" and "grounding" of scientific data, which is obtained in "non human" state of consciousness. It's an awful detour but the important is to get back to the symbol, the more vast language of the imagination. It could even be that the latter could not be understood without the former, or should always be understood through the former, as to not cut the roots of the tree ...

lol word.