Fran11

Debating wether apparences are "absolute" or "relative" is word game IMO. They are what they are. We could say they are relative because they are changeful in our direct experience. Or that they are absolute because they are by extension a part of the absolute and exist beyond time within it. It's not of much use getting lost on these labels.

LOL Harsh

Funny how not even being God makes you special, because everyone else also is All love

It means you must give up the reasons for not loving anything that you don't love.

He is not saying the price is to stop loving. He's saying the price are the reasons to stop loving. Give up your excuses not to love. Awakening is love.

They are and they also aren't, both must be realised. Atman is the way Brahman has to experience itslef as form. Of course you know not even the term "non-duality" can do justice to reality. This is one of these subtleties that being so strict with collapsing dualities (even before you drew them in the first place) doesn't help people to get.

I find qualia to be the most simple clue against reductionist materialist. It takes extremely complicated mental gimnastics ir order to try to equal a color to neurons/fotons/wave-frecuencies/whatever. Still people manage.

Both poles are important for both sexes now, that's why I say modern societies call for equilibrium. I'm not saying we should swing to the other side and neglect the prior. But this is a problem that might have increased with the blurring of these roles though. So it's a good point. Yes I agree. But notice you say "still" and I was considering a long time horizon, a couple generations at least.

Yes I acknowledge this. But I think in the case of strict gender roles its utility is greatly outdated. There's not much reason why a man should be hyper-masculine for the survival requierements of a decent country in XXI century. Actually modern conditions require a more balanced energetical equilibrium. I'm not proposing that we "do it" or saying that I want it. I just see the tendency is that the line is blurring more and more and in a future it will dissapear just because of evolution. Probaly not in our lifetimes though. I could be wrong about this, I know it can seem like I'm a stage green hippie wanting to deconstruct things for the sake of it but I'm not attached to this perspective, I'm just throwing it out there to share ideas with you guys.

Yes, I did not touch much upon that. It's true these constructs don't developed just because. Like I said I think the main reason is that in the past survival was a lot more bodily-dependent and men and women were very polarized in the femenine-masculine spectrum. Technology played a major role in changing this. About archetypes, I'm not deconstructing them. That's one example in which one should not appy decontruction lightly like you pointed. But I think if you pay atenttion beyond the superficial gender stuff, actually many man and women already energetically embody archetypes that society may say don't "match" their bodily identity. There are byological factors like brain chemistry one cannot or should try to deconstruct as well of course. Always good to read toughtful replies

LOL you can't be perfect with language, that's precisely the point you don't get You fail to understand the difference beetween usefulness and absoluteness. Many people are trying to explain it to you, seems you just dont want to get it. So bye, good luck

Yes, it is what it is. Even to say the form is "unreal" is just a human label. The void itself doesn't say its creation is real or unreal.

What would it mean to escape the void? To "return" to the world of form? You are the void right now! The ego has an existential terror for the ultimate reality and may create negative picures about it, like being nothing for eternity (meaning unlimited time), but actually the Absolute is beyond time, that's just a fear based picture of the mind.

Fortunately you are all the form as well Does having realised the void ended relative reality for you? No. It's the change of context thats painful for the ego.

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.