Princess Arabia

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.

There is no 'true self'. False and true are one. Neither exist. If the Absolute is a self, then OK, and it's all the self there is.

I will continue to bask in truth while you continue to seek it.

God is not a person or human nor does it see a person or a human. It doesn't care because caring is conditional. It doesn't not care either. It's energy, and energy has no bounds. It's not seeing things in a biased form or does it even see things. IT IS ALL THINGS. So your God is not the God that is. Your God is conditional, limited, personal, bounded, biased and should and shouldn't be and do. It's energy in seeming form and is all empty. Empty of substance. God is all there is and it doesn't care about your whining and troubles about the world. It also is the whining and the troubles of the world. If you had no sense of self, you wouldn't care or not care either, there would just be WHAT IS. Take that message or leave it and continue to suffer. Keep being neurotic, biased and selfish. Life doesn't care, it'll show you this eventually. Eventually when you grow tired of yourself.

There's no need to talk about people and how they approach spirituality. I hope I catch myself doing that, if I ever do. It's a personal thing and everyone approaches it differently. It's no sacred or divine than anything else because it's ALL sacred and divine equally. The mind has made the distinction. Not saying we need to treat it as such, but to recognize it for what it really is. Treat it special, yes, but realize it's a bias. You're saying God or the Absolute is conditional and limited if you think spirituality is special and divine. That's just for human corruption and self-gratification. We don't go in the health section and say, you're acting like a health nut and that you know everything and thinking you're some kind of expert on the matter or in the dating section and say you're not a coach so you have no business giving advice or even responding or saying someone has no business talking on the matter because it's divine stuff, why do it with spirituality. It's all a matter of pov's and how we see things personally. That's what a forum is for as long as we're not crossing the guidelines. Disagreements happen and that's to be expected. Spirituality talk is just that, talk. It's to be respected, though just as anything else in life and not be singled out or else we're singling out the whole for our benefit and how we see fit. I'm guilty too, so I'm also talking and messaging myself as a reminder.

Of course, it's all genuine human connection; intimate or not. Human connection doesn't have to involve intimacy. Are you intimate with the person you walk by on the street and say hi to. That's a genuine human connection. I'm genuinely connecting on a human level with clients; doesn't need involve intimacy. Why be intimate with every human connection. They come and go. That's reserved for close family and friends where grieving their disappearance is reserved. The thing is people take intimacy lightly and it's not genuine, it's only to suit them and their need for object-based love. I'm love itself expressed and i don't need to be attached to intimacy to express it. Human love is conditional so intimacy is also conditional, it's never genuine. So when you say 'genuine human connection' it's only genuine as far as the human's level of expression goes. It's all genuine, even the lack of intimacy. All genuine on the human level. No human, it's all unconditional. Just the mere mention of the word human, made it conditional.

It says ego and attachment, maybe it's the opposite and why the two can be separated with no problem. I don't see the correlation with sex work and 'regular sex life' and I like it that way regardless of the reason. In fact, if a man was to be with me as a sex worker but him and i were on 'regular' terms, at least he wouldn't have to worry or fear of me being attached to a date intimately, Some might say, I seem numb to sex work or detached from whatever. No, I'm not numb, I'm separating the two. It's that simple. No need to try and figure it out or all those conceptual ideas. Do you consider your job to be who you are, no, it's an identity. There are different identities at play here and i can play. Are you the same way with your mother as you are with your lover, no, different identities there. Same with sex work for me. It's an identity. When it's personal, it's a different identity, I'm aware we're all playing the identity role in life and there is no authentic person alive. Fool yourselves into thinking your ego is authentic all you want, you're setting yourself up for suffering and anxiety. I'm comfortable in my own skin and have not attached to either identities. They're there to navigate this thing called life and when it's over no identity goes with me. I'm happy to separate the two. There's no it's because of that or because of this it's simply an identity issue. No stories there yet it's all stories.