is really gender just a relative stuff?

[Forestluv]

On 1/25/2020 at 8:16 AM, Moreira said:

Why these LGTB binary nonsense people

It seems like nonsense within a construct of a binary "masculine" and "feminine". For those that have expanded beyond that binary construct it is not nonsense at all. . . Imagine a two-sided coin. From this perspective, "nonbinary" is nonsense. There is only heads (masculine) or tails (feminine). Yet for those that can see six-sided dice, "nonbinary" is not nonsense - its common sense. 

22 hours ago, Emerald said:

On the relative level it is an empirically observable energetic phenomenon for those sensitive enough to pick up on the subtle energies. So, you didn't put it there.

There are many dimensions of relativity. You are describing one aspect of relativity. Masculine and Feminine are relative to each other. Yet there is another aspect of relativity: The existence of masculine/feminine is relative to the nonexistence of masculine/feminine. Claiming that the existence of masculine/feminine is empirically demonstrable is saying masculine/feminine objectively exists. This misses existence relative to nonexistence. 

This is not the absolute level, this is various planes of relativity. . . I agree with you that in certain contexts when trying to explain phenomena of masculine and feminine, it can be wise to leave out underlying relativity, such as existence vs. nonexistence. If I was trying to describe masculine relative to feminine to someone, I would not bring up masculine/feminine existence relative to nonexistence - this would create groundlessness that would destabilize the explanation and cause confusion. However, not addressing a plane of relativity for the sake of simplicity and clarity does not nullify that plane of relativity. 

[remember]

On 27.1.2020 at 4:57 AM, Leo Gura said:

To be clear, a rock does not have gender unless you project it there.

In truth nothing has gender. Gender is an imaginary category, as all categories are.

If you find gender in a rock, you put it there.

If you find gender in a human, you put it there.

You put everything everywhere. Otherwise it couldn't exist. Because you are God.

But this takes some SERIOUS consciousness to grasp. Nothing short of awakening will do.

if you find a rock, you put it there if you find a human you put it there.

[Emerald]

6 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Emerald Consciousness is Infinite and can experience Divine anything.

I am not denying that you can experience the masculine or feminine, but all of that is relative.

Yes, this is the Absolute perspective, but that is what's missing here.

You are still subtly trying to ground reality in that duality, which keeps you from going as deep as you could.

There is a deeper level of understanding by transcending that.

I do understand what you're saying. Mostly, what I've been doing in terms of practice has to do with experiencing the sensory field and the emotions that play out upon it in their full depth and breadth. So, I don't use the labels then, I just feel into my emotions and other bodily sensations. Just like, when I'm going to draw something realistically I detach from labels in order to see what's actually going on in front of me. Otherwise my depiction will be distorted by the ideas within the mind.

So, my personal practice is about allowing and observation. Mind you, I'm no longer looking for the absolute because the attachment to that will keep me from it. Perhaps it will or won't happen in this lifetime, and that's okay. I am just seeking to cultivate deeper and more subtle levels of awareness, nothing more. Also, I figured that from the perspective of 'that which is', everything is perfect. So, accepting that permanent awakening may not be in the cards and seeing it as equally valid, puts me more into alignment with how 'that which is' orients toward everything. 

But in terms of how I teach, I try to give people the next right thing that they need to get out of certain traps or mindsets. And most people's next right thing is related to Masculine and Feminine integration as society is really at a crossroads in relation to these energies. Just like you might use the framework of Spiral Dynamics to give people the next right thing, I do the same with these insights. 

Basically, what I share in this moment is not necessarily what I'm focused on in particular as my form of inner work. 

[Leo Gura]

@Emerald Good, that's fine.

The context of this thread was asking about how gender can be relative. So my response is to point people to the fact that absolutely everything is relative. That's what everything is, pure relativity.

A deep contemplation of what relativity is, is crucial in this work. Maybe give that a try some day. You might be amazed at what you find

The difference between a kangaroo and a BMW is relative. Can you get a hit on that?

[Emerald]

9 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@Emerald Good, that's fine.

The context of this thread was asking about how gender can be relative. So my response is to point people to the fact that absolutely everything is relative. That's what everything is, pure relativity.

A deep contemplation of what relativity is, is crucial in this work. Maybe give that a try some day. You might be amazed at what you find

The difference between a kangaroo and a BMW is relative. Can you get a hit on that?

I have contemplated quite a lot on the topic actually since I was a little kid. The human mind creates a lot of false dichotomies, which includes the masculine and feminine dichotomy in terms of label and even firsthand perception.

So, if you take a Yin and Yang sign for what it stands for metaphorically. You can basically keep zooming in and and in and in and out and out and out.

And if, for example, you Zoom into the Yin of the the Yin and Yang sign (or vice versa)... you will find still more Yin and Yang signs. And you can keep zooming in (and out) forever.

So, there is a broad strokes layer to which you can say some things are masculine and some things are feminine. But if you zoom in, you realize that there's ever more of those polar energies. So, you could say that everything is infinitely masculine and infinitely feminine OR infinitely Yang and infinitely Yin. Or you could say that because of this, there is not true Yin and Yang at all. The mind can't get it right because the mind doesn't work that way.

It is similar to the concepts of Big and Small. Once you zoom in and continue zooming in, you pick up on different levels of bigness and smallness... until you realize that the idea is just a relative truth of the human perspective. And it's not that everything is infinitely big or everything is infinitely small. But that bigness and smallness is a false dichotomy that only exists for practical purposes to be used by the limited human mind. Big and small is only a lens for describing the practical human experience of the relative phenomena that that some objects are 'bigger' than others. But in the absolute no such distinction exists.

It is the same way with any false dichotomy... masculine/feminine, big/small, up/down, internal/external, beginning/end, finite/infinite, free will/determinism, etc. etc. There are a zillion of these false dichotomies.

Now, false dichotomies exist for a reason. And that's that it makes thing comprehensible to the human mind... which is inherently limited. And this is why paradox happens... because false dichotomies are false. But damn if they aren't useful in the practical arena.

It's useful in the sense that you literally can't go through life in a functional way without adopting the perspective that big/small, up/down... and even masculine/feminine are relatively true. Life won't function well without the ability to adopt the lenses of certain false dichotomies. Reality become an abstraction and a wash without these relative truths but absolute falsehoods.

And my primary goal in communicating with people is to meet them where they are, and give them new tools in their arsenal to deal with the challenges of life... specifically challenges of the psyche. 

 

Edit: Also, relative to the differences between a Kangaroo and a BMW... that exists on the relative level in terms of practical differences. But there are many other relative perspectives (and the absolute perspective) where there is no such distinction.

So, in terms of raw perception of the visuals that are interpreted as Kangaroo and BMW... from the more scientific and materialistic level of truth, it's all just different frequencies that the eye picks up on because of light reflecting upon form. So, it's all just pixels on a screen. There is no separation or true distinction. 

If you take the absolute perspective, and you remove the assumption that there are eyeballs and brains and perceptions from sensory organs. And you remove the assumption that there is light and form and a phenomenal world that is separate from the individual you think of yourself as... it's all just experience. Experience playing out within consciousness. Just like everything within a dream is just dream-stuff. Everything within our reality is just God-stuff.

If you could experience the Kangaroo and BMW in terms of sensation only and we had no inherent capacity for sight or sound, then we would recognize that within the sensory field the experience of the Kangaroo and BMW are just pure sensation.

So, as somatic experience everything is the prima materia.

 

Edited January 28, 2020 by Emerald

[mandyjw]

@Emerald I wonder if when we awaken or experience wholeness if when the mind comes in to interpret after the fact, that it points to the thing that we were repressing previous to the experience. It points to the piece that wasn't seen or accepted before and says that specific part is what I experienced. I recently would have said that I had an experience of the Divine Feminine too, but now I'm interpreting the experience differently. An awakening after the fact is always still a story open for interpretation. 

 

 

[Emerald]

18 minutes ago, CamisaDoGremio said:

How do you know you will find more Yin And Yang signs? Where can you show that this is the case?

How do you know that? What is your evidence?

Huh? How do you get from "you can zoom into the Ying Yang to "everything is infinitely masculine"? What does "infinitely masculine" even means? How do you know that?

Yin and Yang as subtle polar qualities/energies that can be observed when you’re in a state of sensitivity to them.

As far as evidence, I can’t provide you any. It’s something you can discover in your own subjective experience. The closest thing to evidence I can give you is the similarities across cultures and eras in naming things in relation to one phenomenon or another.

For example, there are typically Sky Gods and Earth Goddesses. The elements of air and fire are associated with masculinity and Yang while the elements of Earth and water are associated with feminine... hence Mother Earth and why the word matter is rooted in the latin word for mother.

But these things can be directly experienced, and certain insights arise from those experiences.

And one such insight is that while these qualities can be observed as distinct dichotomies, from a certain vantage point they can be recognized as two sides to the same coin. 

The way I speak about them are metaphorical for the sake of understanding. So, the Zooming in and finding more and more Yin and Yang symbols is a metaphor that these subtle polar energies are Always interplaying no matter how microcosmic or macrocosmic the scale becomes.

So, every atom has an interplay between Yin and Yang. So, because you can always go smaller and more Zoomed in and because you can always go bigger and more Zoomed out... the scale is is infinitely big and infinitely small.

And so, we are all infinitely masculine and infinitely feminine in that regard. But from the human perspective, you can notice a propensity to skew more in one direction or another.

So, it’s a bit of a paradox.

Just like how the number 10 is bigger than the number 1... but they are both the same distance away from being infinite.

 

Edited March 13, 2021 by Emerald

[Elevated]

I think the issue with many of these gender debates is the rigid structure rather than the categories themselves. Many people who agree with Postmodernist and above revelations about the nature of conceptual reality lack the sufficient ego and cognitive development to understand the ramifications enough to adequately embody them. As such, they place the fluidity of gender for example into a rigid structure that is then used as a bludgeon. It shouldn't matter if you view gender as binary or not, what matters is how you treat people who disagree with you. If you treat people who disagree with you about the nature of gender as evil, you are operating in a rigid structure in regard to gender, however fluid the content may be. 

Edited March 13, 2021 by Elevated

[blackchair]

i only see souls.....