Hi Chris,
Nice post! It is well said!
There is nothing wrong with separation, there is nothing wrong with direct experience, there is nothing wrong with philosophizing, etc. they are all merely different aspects of life. We train because it is fun, we live because it is fun, or because it just IS and there is nothing else we can do.
The quality of our experiences is affected by the perspective we have. The question is, are we consciously choosing our perspective or are we slaves to our conditioning? When we are slaves to our perspective our choices are artificially limited and we have no control over our experiences or at the very least, limited control. The quality of our experiences is affected by the principles we adhere to or do not adhere too. When we have a clearer or more complete perception our choices increase and thus our freedom. When we have clearer perception and more choices we may artificially impose limitations upon our perception as a matter of choice rather than as a consequence of conditioning over which we have no control. Under this condition, when we choose limitation, we are not limited to that limitation because we have made a free choice to do so and may thus freely choose not to do so at a later date. This occurs because we are not attached (not clinging) to our chosen limitation.
So, while we may say that to discuss these concepts is to artificially dissect existence into components that are arbitrary and are inherently non-existent, to do so provides a benefit that may enhance our overall experience. It is not the dissection of Tao that creates limitation of experience, it is clinging that limits experience. So clinging to the concept of separation by those who think separation limits experience, limits experience and actually creates as much separation or more than the original act of separating does. This is because we are separating without actually recognizing that we are separating. In this situation, the act of criticizing separation by separating separation from direct experience, IS the act of separation. The separation of phenomena is just as much a part of direct experience as the "direct experience" that is preferred. So, in this circumstance, the criticizer is guilty of behaving in the exact manner as that which he criticizes! The consequence is, he becomes a slave to his narrow perspective!
Clinging to "direct experience" is just as limiting as clinging to "separation of phenomena". It is the unrecognized clinging that creates the overall limitation, NOT the acts of "separating phenomena" or "direct experiencing".
At any rate it is doubtful that one may actually "directly experience" anything, because in order to have a "direct experience" there must be "the experiencer" on the one hand and "the experience" on the other which IS an act of separation! Therefore I contend that separation is inherent to reality from the beginning and is the natural state of Tao. Tao is both one and many, at once, at the same time, from eternity. This is so because without an experience and an experiencer there is nothing to experience and nothing to experience the experience. Without an experiencer and an experience nothing can be demonstrated to exist. Under this condition there is no experience and therefore no existence. So, it is through the act of separation that we can say, "we exist" and "have experiences"!