Princess Arabia

Anything can appear.

Lmfao. Now I'm laughing at you. Have to admit, that vodka joke was funny.

It's fun to see the Absolute at it with itself on the forum. This is the ultimate magic. I know I wasn't saying that when I was pissed yesterday. This is why I just can't hold grudges for too long or at all. Never was like that even from I was a child. Half of the time I'll even forget what I was pissed or arguing about. Something really bad like if I got raped or something or someone tries to kill me, sure, but for normal interactions and disagreements and arguing, I can't stay mad at the person for too long. Not in me. If I ever argue with someone and only interacted with them once, I'll be forgetting who it was and probably say something nice to them on the next interaction while they'd still be fuming from the last one. Remind me please, because I'll forget.

Lmao

"Normal people", as you put it, are probably less neurotic than spiritualists and something in their sense of self probably realizes there's no one there that needs fixing, but they can't put a handle on it. They don't know this. The sense intuits it on it's own. Since spiritualist and self-help junkies have a bit of neurosis in that sense of self, they call people normies and the rest high conscious, spiritual and knows better because they work on themselves. Another form of delusion. Nothing wrong with it, but there's nothing to fix or work on because this is already perfection. Even the fixin' and the improvements is perfection. Either way, it's perfection.

High conscious VS low conscious in spiritual circles is equivalent to sin and morals in religion. They judge by sin and morality and spiritualists judge by low and high conscious. Both are guilty of all by their terms, meaning they both do and say things that breaches what they've categorized the terms to mean or stand for. For example, a religious person who preaches against sin and immorality engages in sin and immoral behavior by the standards they use to represent these terms. A spiritualist that calls people out for being low conscious, also engages in low conscious behavior. Can't help it because no one is doing either. If you can't see the inconsistencies in life, I don't know what to tell ya. This is free flowing and does and says whatever the hell it wants. Go ahead and do your high-consciousness behavior but when you cheat on your gf, tell a lie, drink to get drunk, smoke that cigarette, curse that person out, fornicate in your mind, think ill of someone,,,,,I could write a book here, don't judge yourself or be shocked and disappointed in yourself. That's what happens to the me, it wants to be and become, wants people to be and become, then whenever the Absolute appears however the fuck it wants, neurosis kicks in, guilt, kicks in, shame kicks in, regret, envy, all sorts of emotions and feelings arises. So we go meditate even harder to try and become something that's not appearing in hopes the Absolute appears as that holy person one day and we'll be saved and liberated from our sins and low conscious behaviors. The Absolute is also being that. Can't escape itself. Neurosis galore.

There's no 'other side'. This is it. No one dies and reincarnates or end up on the other side. THIS IS IT. Stories galore.

I'm still trying to wrap my head around this Truth thing. For me Truth is simply what is. From reading Leo's new blog post, I see his version of Truth seems more nuanced. More involved, More relative, though, and not Absolute. I think what he means by Truth and Truth seeking is on the relative domain. The Truth about the world; how to live in truth and not be self-deceived. Truth of how life should be lived, how to reach certain states of consciousness by seeking truth. If that's the case, then it's different from what I viewed truth to be. First of all. I say there's no truth, just what is. It's all the same on the Absolute sense but the relative is also Absolute so truth is relative in terms of the human and sense of separation. I'll further contemplate this a bit to see where it leads. I cannot just blindly follow if I'm genuinely curious and love this path for it's own sake. I don't consider myself seeking for spiritual gain but out of love and passion. That's the serious part for me, not whether I gain something from it or not but how seriously passionate I am about it but not in a neurotic way and more for the enjoyment of it. There's always room for growth and change on the relative domain even though it's all encompassing and there's no real separation. Cannot live from the Absolute level because that's death.

"God is pure power". That explains the power dynamic in humans. Why it's so essential to obtain it for some. Energy is power. When we're separate and seeking, we seek for things we deem we're lacking in. It's very painful - separation that is. If we have no power over something, we feel worthless and useless and lacking purpose and value. Power gives a kind of control over things and that's where the ego gets it's strength and motivation from. Without it (power), it weakens it. I'm just writing out my contemplations and having new insights from what Razaard just wrote on Squaad's post about God not caring about people's struggles. New way of seeing things and I'll try to fit it into my existing views to see if it fits. If there's a missing link, that's OK too because it will just open the doorway for more curiosity and musings. I never have a closed book. It's always open.

Those statements, when I read them in terms of energy, it made a lot of sense and put a new meaning on energy for me. It really did. Especially when you said God is pure power. Wow! That hit a spot. You know, I'm stubborn and will call out something i don't see to be the case even though they are only my personal pov's, but these statements really hit a nerve and made me see things in a way I've never did before. Something to contemplate on and put into new perspectives. Even the suffering part, I never really saw it that way, but from now on, I'll try to see where that fits in the picture for myself - the way you put it and why we suffer.

Lol

Children are so loveable and great to observe. They don't have a care in the world and they're not trying to impress or be a particular way. They just act. They do without thinking and are spontaneous and free. They always put a smile on my face. They have temper tantrums because, instinctively, they just want what they want, no excuses. They need to be trained and disciplined and told what to do and not do because they are raw and direct. They are without filters and a sense of identity. The very young ones. Both children and animals put a smile on my face except for barking dogs. I grew up with barking dogs and open gates and I developed a small tiny phobia surrounding that. Jamaica didn't have dog rules and laws and they would just roam freely around the neighborhood. Mongrel dogs. Most were tame and of no threat and the ones that were, were usually behind a gate, but sometimes you'd get a couple that were not and started barking at you. Never run from a barking dog, just act normal. I was a kid then and never got bit by a dog, but just the sound of one barking gives me the creeps. I'll pet a dog now especially over here in the states where most are just house pets, but I'll ask first if it's ok. Little chihuahuas don't scare me but the Rottweilers do. I've never petted a Rottweiler. I love service dogs, so quiet and loveable and smart. I just love animals. My fav, of course, are cats but I like them all. I love going to the zoo. Some people don't like the zoo because they see them as caged animals that need to be in the wild. They don't understand that most of those animals wouldn't survive in the wild as they were born in a zoo and that's all they know. My favs at the zoo are the monkeys, tigers, apes and dolphins. I like the elephants too. So intelligent.

No, that's how women fall in love, not men. Men will fall out of....if the woman loses her attractiveness. A woman can fall madly for an unattractive man who cares for her and he becomes to her the most attractive man in the room.

Not to keep breaking your ball's but I counted 19 threads that were started by you, all on the first page on the list and all just in June. Stroll down the pages and all i see is Santiago Ram. Don't you think that's a bit much and most of the comments are all made by you in most. Looks like you need a journal. No judgement, just observation. Are you drinking while posting? I only ask because you keep mentioning AA.

Funny how OP says men are more into truth seeking than women then goes on to speak about his gf's experience with 5meo. @OBEler Explain this please. Just asking out of curiosity and trying to understand why you say what you say.

I see.

No, I get that. In that way, yes I agree. Women have it easier in that way. Lots of men willing to take care of women financially and it's more socially acceptable while the opposite is not. If you had put it this way from the beginning, I would have agreed right off the bat. I thought you were only referring to relationships on a whole where women find it easier to get.

That was my only comment in this thread. Why argue over which gender is more spiritually inclined or who seeks truth more. Each one of us is only 1/8billion and most truth seekers aren't probably on social media advertising their quest for truth so no one really knows.

Women also work on their personal development. A man can also pay a coach on how to be more masculine. You're underestimating what it takes to be a woman. I don't down-play what men have to go through at times to get the women they want but for both, it's of a different kind of work and one is not more hard-working than the other. It's just in different ways. The same as how men can thrive in competitive roles and women might not do as good and women can thrive in unity-based and having great female role models, while men might not need that as much and strive to be more independent based. It's different for both genders. Women are constantly on the watch for predators also, it's a lot of mental work to vet a guy for safety. How many men have to worry about being raped or taken advantaged of sexually. Not too often. Women don't necessarily get the better end of the stick. There's a lot at stake there for us. Men too, but like I said it's in a different way. Neither has to put in any work, but men aren't necessarily putting in more. Just to get laid, yes some and maybe most, but that's just because all he wants initially is sex. Speaking on those who say they have to work to get laid. Women put in a lot of self-development work to get the guy that will provide and protect her and take her off the market meaning marriage. Most men will not just marry any woman. There are plenty of coaches out there teaching women how to get high-value men. Those men are not your every-day run of the mill and a woman has to know and understand how these men roll. They're not looking for sex, but a lifestyle which takes work and dedication no matter how you look at it if you weren't born into it. That's work.

Another women are the prize comment. Men don't usually need to be invested in to get sex from them. Neither one is a requisite for sex but you just made women's sex a prize or not by rating how it's gotten. I made a pact to point out how men automatically make women the prize without even noticing it. It's so natural that it's in the language and expectations. Your words says men should invest in a woman before sex is expected, if not it's called 'low investment', meaning easy prize.

I think you missed my point. The last sentence of your statements said what I meant by men a needing to work on their personality. As far as women need to just be, how many men would go for very unattractive women who hasn't put themselves together in some way or fashion, especially on a night on the town. They can just be after that, but I'm saying the work is done beforehand to attract.

Neither one constitutes what a prize is on it's own.

This is a misconception. Women or men don't get the better end of the deal simply because of gender. Not even looks for women or status for men. People carry a type of energy that attracts a certain type of energy. It all depends on the energy and not what the person has or doesn't have. This is why we see 'odd' couples all the time. Meaning an attractive woman with a very ordinary looking or ugly man or even poor or a man of status with ugly women or mean and nasty women or whatever the 'odd' in society's eyes is. Women put in work too, it's just they put in the work undercover to get baited. Men also put in the work but it's to catch the bait. Both put in work. Most women aren't that beautiful without make up or exercise or eating healthy, etc, that's work to a woman; men it's personality wise because that's what attracts women mostly while for men it's looks. Women work on their looks or try to maintain what they have which takes work, especially if they're older. Not sure about the Charles Manson story; not familiar.

Wouldn't you try to get all the prizes you can get. I'm not saying women are the prize all on their own but to men they are. Still not saying that without men they aren't but no one is anything without a relation. The dynamic leaves women to be the prize, Score? Isn't that a prize.

Another 'woman are the prize' comment.