Separation

Today I heard a comment like, "Separation causes suffering." Many in the room were quite quick to agree and there was much nodding of heads and murmured yeses. Separation is looked at as something to overcome; an undesirable, unrealized state of being. While it is so that "separation causes suffering," it seems that a vital understanding of what separation really "causes" is often overlooked.

What is experienced here, these days, is that separation causes everything. Without separation, nothing would appear to exist. Separation causes all phenomena to appear, so, yes, separation causes suffering; and it also causes joy, happiness, sorrow, me, you, rocks, trees, other, birds, love, hate...all apparent objects, feelings, thoughts, etc. exist, because of the apparently separated "I". In short, separation causes life.

It is because of this idea of separation that "I" experience beautiful sunsets, birds singing, the embrace of another, the sting of rejection, the pain of acid reflux, aging in the body, a solar eclipse, being flipped off by another driver, and on and on and on.

Separation is not a "state of being" to be overcome. It's not a feeling that needs to be conquered. It's what allows It/Me/One to experience Itself/Myself/InfiniteForms.

With separation: life, existence, phenomena. Without separation--the undifferentiated void.

Death?

Q: Do you have any sense or knowing of what happens when we die; when the form dies?

A: The answer to your question lies in the answer to this question: “When we die, who or what is it that has died?” In the relative world, the world of duality, we are taught to see ourselves as “me”, and we are taught that anything that is not “me” is “you”. Therefore, we experience separation. We literally experience a feeling of being separate from everything around us. We experience this separateness in the form of thoughts of separation, like “I am this.” “He is that.” Or, as you state: “I am a mother, those are my children.” Or “He is my son.” Or “She is my daughter.”  

I believe the way we are taught to see ourselves as a separate being is the mechanism that allows us to experience life and the so-called world. The pain happens when we forget that we were taught to view the world this way, but what we were taught is not the truth.

Can you remember the first time that you believed that you were a separate self? Can you remember what life was like before you believed in “I”? My experience is that “Natalie” was born the moment the “I” thought was first believed. Before that, “I” did not exist. I cannot find “me” before that. As far as I can tell, I did not exist until the first moment I believed in “I”. Until that moment, no one was identifying itself as “Natalie”, a separate being, so there was no sense of separation, no sense of pain, no sense of happiness, no sense at all.

Then, for whatever reason, the sense of “Natalie” as a separate person was born. As soon as that happened, so did all the rest of the world (e.g., mother, father, sister, brother, happiness, sadness, dogs, kittens, school, etc.). And in that moment, “Natalie” became someone who had been born, who was living, and would therefore, subsequently die. However, what is it that really dies? If “Natalie” is nothing more than a concept of a separate being, then the only thing that dies is a concept. “Natalie” as a person can never die, because “Natalie” as a separate person only ever existed as a concept in my head.

In other words, “I” have never been separate from the original source, except in my own mind. That belief that “I” am separate no longer exists, therefore, “Natalie” no longer exists. She has died.

Your son existed for you as something separate from “you” (and from all others). What if your son has never been separate from you, because “you” have never been anything but an idea, born from your conditioning? Without your idea that “you” are a separate entity, and “you” gave birth to another separate entity called “John”, what is it that has died? Without the separating belief of “you” and “John”, aren’t you simply source? Aren’t you and John simply different names for the same thing? Isn’t John simply a name given to source? As your name was given to you, which “you” believe is separate, but which is just a name?

What if “Mary” and “John” and “Ginny” are all just names that stand for the different forms of Source? If “John” is a name for Source, and Source is what you also are, what, really has been lost? How could anything or anyone die?

My heart is with you. Peace to you, Mary.

Real Intimacy

There's something happening lately that just totally blows me away. I'm beginning to experience what true intimacy feels like, and it's NOTHING like what was ever experienced within this organism before. In fact, what was experienced before is so far different from what is being experienced now that it seems ludicrous to use the same word for such disparate states.

I remember striving and striving to have intimate moments with people. To experience the connectedness that so many of us desire and long for. I'd heard how it was possible. I'd gone to workshops looking for it. I'd tried so many things to feel connected to and intimate with my friends, my family, my boyfriends, my husband and most importantly myself.

I tried physical contact--sex, hugging, massages, touching, holding hands. I tried mental contact--exchanging ideas, listening, trying to understand another's point of view. I tried emotional contact--opening up, sharing secrets, baring my soul, total emotional honesty. But even in the most intensely emotional or physically orgasmic moments, it still felt like something was missing. The barrier to intimacy wasn't that something was missing, though. It's that something was present that needed to go.

The "thing" that needed to go was the belief that "I" could experience intimacy. Identity needed to disappear. What needed to leave was the sense of "me-ness," me experiencing intimacy. Because, that's not possible. It was not possible for "me" to experience true intimacy, because when I believed there was a "me" there was automatically separation. "Me" implies "you" and once that happens, there's no way for true intimacy to occur.

Without "me" however, there is absolutely no barrier to intimacy. Can you imagine it? Imagine not having any sense that "you" are involved, that there is a "you." There is just All That Is/the Absolute/God, and the Absolute is experiencing Itself through the multitude of forms that It appears as.

So now, intimacy is more like this: a woman named Natalie--which is the Absolute, experiencing Itself hold Itself--in the form of coffee in a cup, converse with Itself--in the form of a friend, listen to Itself--in the form of music, breathing Itself through the form of lungs and air, think Itself through the form of thoughts, feel Itself through the form of emotions, and on and on and on.

It appears now that intimacy is all that's happening here; the Absolute exploring and experiencing every aspect of Itself. No separation. True intimacy.