Agoy

Okay, so this is my conceptual understanding, you can tell me where you agree/disagree if you like: Infinite, Formless Consciousness is all that exists as one singularity. It happens prior to space because it has no form, and it happens prior to time because it has no beginning and end/is eternal. I'm good with this, tho maybe it's not a perfect analogy/I'm missing something. But when I say 'the Big Bang', I'm pointing to the beginning of the formless taking form, or the infinite limiting itself by becoming finite. This to me is the beginning of the relative realm, which includes space and time. So whilst from the Absolute perspective space and time is one singularity, I'm talking in dualistic notions because I'm pointing towards the period that began when Infinite Consciousness became finite, aka the big bang, which includes space and time and therefore, relatively speaking, happened 13.7 billion years ago, albeit not from the Absolute perspective. so it's from this perspective that I'm asking the above question.

Concept is by definition duality, because it's in duality with everything it's not, which is why this is pointless

I'm asking conceptually!, hence: also, you have to recognise the difference between imagining the past in the now, and what that imagination is pointing to in the relative realm. Seems like you're trying to flex a non-dual, Absolute perspective when it clearly isn't warranted or helpful, which in essence is you just doing it to satisfy your own spiritual ego. it just makes this forum tiresome because it's so unnecessary

1. With that same logic yesterday never happened. I'm not looking for riddles or wordplay 2. That wasn't my question

Think of the things you know how to do well, like making coffee you're confident doing it because you know how to do it because you have experience doing it

Rupert Spira - The Nature of Consciousness: Essays on the Unity of Mind and Matter

and I think the expectation/hope is what causes suffering, as it can cause one to feel lack or incomplete in themselves when one doesn't get what they expect/hoped for this interpretation (time-stamped) of the Prodigal son is insightful regarding suffering/hurt and consciousness/love

I'd say one's ego suffers and experiences 'hurt' when it wants reality to be different from what it is (I'm not referring to reality existentially but rather one's life circumstances)

@Leo Gura I think a podcast would work better wherein you chronologically tell your journey of understanding Truth, as it would build up naturally at a linear pace allowing the unfamiliar viewer to keep up, even if you'd have to do more than 1 episodes i'm sure it'll still be enjoyable tho

What'd you pursue if you were given £100 million tomorrow, after buying material pleasures, property, etc?

Opinions on the optimal term to describe 'this work' Self-Help? Personal Development? Self-Actualization? Self-Improvement? Any others? And why?

So in essence both are pointing towards the same thing and it doesn't matter which is used?

Is projection preferable over perception?

Very meta - takes you out of your own lens and allows you to view yourself and your life objectively. That's without going into the K-Hole which is something else entirely

an unordinary pursuit requires an emotionally compelling reason to succeed, perhaps contemplate whether you have one for continuing with this work

chances of ego death will certainly be increased, I'd say a lot depends on how ready you are for that

I wasn't referring to Actualized.org I'm not trying to define the terms either, I was asking for opinions on which is the most optimal

and yeah I agree that all terms lead to the same path providing one goes far enough down the rabbit hole

@melodydanielluna that's an interesting take

It's all comparable, it's just context dependant; the ego would have still developed in similar ways. Women's rights were debated during the romantic era, and concerns for environmentalism and anti-capitalism were expressed too, just differently. Romanticism also wasn't reflective of an entire society, so it didn't have systems to create. It was rather just a culture discussing new ideas contrary to that of mainstream society, so a counterculture-in-and-of-itself

you could say it was ahead of its time. obviously, western society hadn't exhausted orange, as technology hadn't advanced anywhere close to orange's potential. but just cos society hadn't evolved to that level doesn't mean the romantic movement, or any movement, can't think beyond where society is at the 1960's counterculture is a great example of that, which was green (with the Port Huron statement incorporating yellow) in a society that was definitely not

1. it started a little after 2. they are not the same thing, the romantic movement was not a 'recreational activity' it doesn't matter if two movements co-existed during a similar period of time, most movements did what we're talking about is what the romantic movement represented, not where it may or may not have came from

@Woke456 you're not talking about romanticism, you're talking about the industrial revolution. romanticism was a move away from the industrial revolution because it held different values.

@Woke456 you're looking at it wrong, it's about the way they perceived their own existence in the universe if you study romantic poets, they literally moved away from mainstream culture to experience the profundity of nature. this is what 'the sublime' is all about it's that feeling of being just a spec among the immeasurable beast that is existence, for lack of better words

i guess what i mean is, each awakening may be infinite in and of itself, but the understanding of that infinity can itself go on for infinity, making 'complete' understanding impossible to be sure of, at least when experienced as a human @RMQualtrough