Fran11

Not exactly. As in the example of the imaginary apples, we could be imagining slightly different things. We both would say "I,m imagining an apple" meaning something different, that's why it's relative. There are differences even in such a simplistic example. Extrapolate this to our much more complex use for language in everyday life.

In spanish, my mother language, apple is "manzana". Which one is the only one true? Again, the need for consensual maps shows you their relativety.

The very fact that there must necessarely be a consensus shows you the relativety of it. Exactly the point! Absolute true would be just the images themselves without labels. See how these images are impossible to convey by saying "apple"? We could be imagining the same or not and wouln't know the difference. Therefore making the statement "I'm imagining an apple" a relative truth. The attachament of the label "apple" and the judgamente of wether it describes those images or not is completely subjective. Yes, language is useful to describe truth once we gather consensus, I do not deny that, but still the map is not the territory.

I think you just need time, don't worry too much about it. I know it can be quite shocking and leave the ego mourning for a while. If you feel you need so, just take a break from spirituality. Or at least focus more on the love facet, it's love VS fear

There is an existential fear to God. Mind has to fear infinity it in order to keep you alive. It can be quite shocking for the ego, I also have had depressing thoughts after such experiences, it's normal. You will get over it, contemplate and recognize where fear is coming from. Consider that if you really dissolved you can only consider it horrible after you've come back. Because you yourself said the mind wasn't there, how would it make such judgements?

It's still relative because it's you who decides if it represents it or not. A non english speaking person would't consider the word "apple" to represent the same thing it represents for you. An even beyond language barriers, if you consider an edge example instead of fruits you will see that it's completely subjective to say wether a set of thoughts represent something or not. If I am imagining an apple (in the conventional sense of imagination), would you consider the word "apple" describes it or not? Whatever answer you give, I could have the opposite opinion. And who would arbitrate?

It's not static but a dynamic balance. In low economic developed countries, relatively free markets (without rigt-wing exaggerations) cause more business oportunity and developement. More deveilery also, but at this stage the material conditions are so poor that is worth the trade off. As a country becomes more developed, it can tax more, limit abuses better, sacrificing a little bit of business oportunities in order to prioritize focus on more subtle social aspects. This usually comes latter and it may be counter-producent trying to skip phases. Like @Leo Gura showed in the World Value Survay video, happiness of societies stops increasing with economic developement after a certein point, thd trade-off made before starts not being worthy anyomore and values change.

From my experience, I would say that all the dreams/perception that the mind thinks that exist, actually do exist. But it's not like you are being all of them at the same time like the mind thinks reality is like. They sort of exist beyond time and space as pure potentiality inside the Godhead. It seems we are "being God at the same time" but there is no time, its all total oneness.

LOL yeah At least 100 years.

A part of those binary roles are cultural constructs, many are because of tradition and are carried on just because of the status quo. Many of this things are superficial. If you are mindful about actual femenine and masculine energies in people you see a lot of people are near equlibrium or even the opposite pole without being quirky.

Humans are evolving towards equilibrating masculine and femenine enerigies regardless of bodily sex. Just compare now to primitive and physical labor times. The tendency is there. There are many man (even not-trans) that lean more towards the femenine than the masculine and viscecersa for women. In the future people need not percieve this as a "mis-match" beetween body and mind because of old stereotypes and survival needs.

Of course. This post is about understanding the fact that it is social construct born out of old survival needs like phsycial labor. These survival needs have changed and that's why the line is blurring and in the future it will completely dissapear.

The concept is pointing to your indivual bubble of perceptions, call it whatever you want, I know you get what I mean. Is the current you are experiencing the only one inside the Absolute? It's impossible to confirm by experience, but I get the sense that not, by contemplation of the potentiality of the absolute. What's your intuition about it?

God doesn't say either "the world is real" or "unreal", these are human labels, to God it is what it is. But the point is: are we experiencing the waking dream from all POVs or not? It's okay to not have decided yet, but let's say what we think without being ambiguous.

Right. It only makes a difference after you wake up. Like you said before, awakening from the waking state makes you care and love more. But when you wake up from a dream you give a fuck about people's suffering, even if there was a genocide. C'mon we all like to say mind-fucking things but be honest on this one Unless you are into the one-POV version of solipism you have to admit it's not quite the same in that regard.

I know they're very similar. But regarding this specific point: do you mean we (god) experience conventional dreams from all POVs / the waking state only from one ? Or what ?

Language is so tricky to talk about this topics that sometimes you don't even know if you are agreeing or disagreeing

Of course. But you also know you were dreaming all people in conventional dreams when you wake up, and still you don't care about their suffering because we generally don't think that that dream has been experienced by all points of view. So it does make a difference if you think you are experiencing the waking dream from all povs or not.

Oh now I got what you mean, we're on the same page then.

Do you care equally about other people in you dreams (in the conventional sense) as much as people in the waking dream? In the sense that if you dream someone you love dies then when you wake up you don't think that suffering has really been experienced by conciousness so you don't care at all. But in the waking dream we generally do.

Do you mean as a "thought in my mind" or as another bubble of "individual perception"?

I don't. I think so. It does makes a lot of difference in how you realte to others whether you think you are experiencing this dream from only one point of view or from many.

No, I'm glad there are "other" conscious beings.

Ok, change the word proof to "confirm". I know you got what I ment. Yes, the Relative and the Absolute are the superficial and the deep leyers of the same reality. Therefeore the Absolute can experience itself in many levels trough the point of view of the Relative layer. This is what the confussion about the absolute having levels or not is about. It doesnt per se. But im can experience itself in infinity levels through the relative layer.

You cannot prove or disprove "naive solipism" (the one dream version of it) by direct experience, because your own direct experience is all you'll encounter by definiton. But when contemplating Absolute Infinity it certainly seems impossible that from such endless potential your current human life, relatively minuscule, is all that ever appeared/will ever apper.