There is a difference between a ‘natural’ law and a connived one. The natural laws arise even without human doing but include us, and they are a part of our natures. Contrived rules tend to create resistances. They rely on denial of select elements of reality.

We know instinctively? Yes we do, and the natural rules have no dependency on denial of anything.

Like a tree falling in a forest, it still makes noise even though we are not there. That is natural law? Yes.

How do we know about that noise? If you seek to know about falling tree noise, you can make a tree fall, and the deaf still know about falling trees.

Natural laws are there whether you believe in them or not? Truth doesn’t require belief, and belief doesn’t require knowing.

Natural laws have nothing to do with our senses? They have everything to do with our senses, but natural laws are organic. Our senses work on light and sound, and a sensitivity to kinetic energy. Parts of a whole, but each limited. Eyes work like eyes.  A transplanted eye still works like an eye. Freedom is in awareness and choosing in context. Our perception is part of natures way.  We didn’t create our own eyes or our brains. Any who feel the content of this discussion is not for them are welcome to free themselves.  But freedom is not external. If you decide to leave your home and all you know, have you freed yourself?

Freedom = exchange or deal? Freedom is an exchange, yes. Exchange and acceptance.

I’ve often thought of freedom as the path to joy? It is, and there is no freedom in defiance. But freedom of choice is not ignorance of the elements of choice.  It isn’t ignorance of self or denial of self knowledge. The defiant teen isn’t free. They are reactionary and most often motivate any insecurities. Many adults don’t move much beyond this. They obey or resist. There are other views, other choices, and in that is freedom.

What about kids then? Children are often very free. My little boy when an infant was often very free in his car seat, fully accepting of what he saw and where he was.

You are free if you don’t have any actions on you? No. You are free if you are knowing of the action on you, and knowingly choose your actions even in that context.

Kids have no values. That is why they are free? I would disagree. A kid wants a hug, a kid wants to see you smile, a kid wants company of friends, and to feel safe. They value many things. They value real things, and they don’t have the set rules, habits, ideas of self, that we do. They are free. A nurturing parent gives the lattice by which they can grow.

Desire is not entanglement. Addictions tend to be an adult thing, and desire is natural. It’s when “want” becomes slave to “have” that freedom is lost. It’s when “I want a beer” becomes “I can’t relax without beer”, that you have no freedom. That is addiction and desire isn’t addiction.

Practise anything and you will get any addiction of your desire? Well, I will relent. I am familiar with the schools of thought these arguments come from and the burn out rate is high in my experience. If a path has heart, it’s energizing.  If not it’s a way to stay in a paradigm which you are certain all makes sense and is true. Freedom is not being in no relation and even the Buddha was moved, powerfully moved, and the Buddha spoke on attachment. The Christ had his passion as did Mother Teresa.

I will exercise my freedom.

Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.

Travis Saunders
Dragon Intuitive
~science,mysticism,spirituality~