Inquirer: Surely you see that one’s perception of reality determines whether one experiences freedom or love. For example, if I am outside in my yard, looking at a tree, and perceive “I’m here” and the “tree is out there,” that would be an illusory experience. The reality is that there is no “me in here” looking at a “tree out there.” But realizing this non-dual perspective isn’t natural, as lifelong conditioning tells me I am a separate subject and that the tree is an object. When this illusion falls away in every sense field and with identity itself, that’s total freedom and love. Notice I didn’t include God in this comment at all. Realizing that I am not separate from everything requires no belief in the transcendental.
James: OK. But what if the “illusion that falls away in every sense” doesn’t need to fall away? Perhaps you think that the world and the tree and your apparently-existent experiencing self, are supposed to go POOF!, disappear and be replaced by the heavenly host singing Hallelujah’s at the top of its divine voice? 🙂 Apparently real means as good as non-existent, not non-existent. Non-existence doesn’t exist except as a word that has no actual referent because there is only you, unborn existence shining as whole and complete unborn awareness. From that perspective nothing ever happened or needs to happen to justify the illusion of things. Everything, just is, including all appearances, which are a source of amusement.
Yes, no need to mention God if you know that reality is non-dual unless you legitimately mean God is non-dual eternal existence shining as unborn consciousness.
