______

[rva_jeremy]

So, are you implying that to love another is real and to love self is not real?  (I'll just assume "not.")  To love another is to assume duality which is also "not," no?  In other words, both loves are distortions of unity, just different flavors of such.  (Not sure how you can "learn from" a flavor, but that's another question.  Maybe, it's best simply experienced?)

The philosophical point I'm exploring can be described as the teleology of spiritual evolution, the "why" of this illusion of separation. Infinity being infinite, nothing can exist that is not contained within that infinity. So the issue is what it is about experience of separation in some of the forms you describe -- both positive and negative -- that makes's the Creator's foray into separateness valuable or necessary in some way that wasn't already part of that infinity?

In many cases the Confederation have described the Creator's ultimate goal as "knowing itself" or learning about itself in some way. The mystery, to me, is how something that is already infinite could have more of anything, whether that be knowledge, understanding, appreciation, etc. A goal implies a lack to be filled, and infinity cannot lack anything by definition.

I think the reason I think about this question in particular is that it exposes a difference between A Course in Miracles and Confederation philosophy. ACIM tends to paint a lot of the illusion of separation as objectionable precisely because it is not part of "what is real", in other words "that which is not". It literally says that any sort of negativity is not real and that we must wake up from the dream in which we believe it's real. However, the Confederation paints a picture where the illusion of separation somehow teaches or augments the Creator through some sort of evolutionary sequence of distilled experiences.

I'm not losing any sleep over any of this, Peregrine.