absolute versus relative answers

[AdamR95]

I noticed sometimes there is a question on this forum about something practical or something relative and half the answers to that question here is something along those lines: There is no you, meditation doesnt exist, everything is you etc.. Wich is true in absolute sence but it doesnt answer the question. We are here to live a human life for now and we need duality and relative sence of reality too because otherwise we cant survive.

I think we should pay more attetion to whats the question about. Do you also sometimes want relative answers and keep getting answers to a different question? 

[Leo Gura]

Who wants relative answers?

[sustainably]

22 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Who wants relative answers?

Stage Yellow people 

[AdamR95]

54 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Who wants relative answers?

ego

Edited March 1, 2021 by AdamR95

[allislove]

@AdamR95

In most of the cases there is a strong tendency to believe that you a separate entity, then it's enlightening to push to absolute view.
In rare cases there is clinging to absolute view & dismissing relative view which is a duality by itself. In that case it's enlightening to show that relative view has the same "validity" as absolute view.
In all the cases the words are just pointers, so it's more important to have fun, rather than one "right" approach. "right" view is a lie by itself.  

 

 

[AdamR95]

23 minutes ago, allislove said:

@AdamR95

In most of the cases there is a strong tendency to believe that you a separate entity, then it's enlightening to push to absolute view.
In rare cases there is clinging to absolute view & dismissing relative view which is a duality by itself. In that case it's enlightening to show that relative view has the same "validity" as absolute view.
In all the cases the words are just pointers, so it's more important to have fun, rather than one "right" approach. "right" view is a lie by itself.  

 

 

exactly my thoughts:)

[allislove]

@AdamR95

[Gesundheit]

There is no such a thing as relative answers.

[Rilles]

4 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

There is no such a thing as relative answers.

Thats a relative answer.

[James123]

4 hours ago, AdamR95 said:

I noticed sometimes there is a question on this forum about something practical or something relative and half the answers to that question here is something along those lines: There is no you, meditation doesnt exist, everything is you etc.. Wich is true in absolute sence but it doesnt answer the question. We are here to live a human life for now and we need duality and relative sence of reality too because otherwise we cant survive.

I think we should pay more attetion to whats the question about. Do you also sometimes want relative answers and keep getting answers to a different question? 

There is no question. Thats the absolute answer. 

[Gesundheit]

5 minutes ago, Rilles said:

Thats a relative answer.

Whoever told you that was lying to you.

[Rilles]

2 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Whoever told you that was lying to you.

Are you saying relativity doesnt exist?

[Gesundheit]

4 minutes ago, Rilles said:

Are you saying relativity doesnt exist?

I'm saying relative = Absolute.

What some people call relativity as opposed to Absolute is pure BS. There's no such a distinction.

[AdamR95]

18 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

I'm saying relative = Absolute.

Youre ofcourse right but i think you missed the point

distictions are imaginary but they exist in form of imagination  and you can still use them and pretend as they are real.

[Gesundheit]

1 minute ago, AdamR95 said:

distictions are imaginary but they exist in form of imagination  and you can still use them and pretend as they are real.

Not quite, actually.

Distictions are not only imaginary, they're also projections onto the absolute. This "distinction" here is "very important" because it shows how all distinctions are a subjective interpretation of the absolute, which makes all distinctions arbitrary.

It's one thing to say that distinctions are imaginary but still maintain an absolutist relationship with them, and it's another thing entirely to say that distinctions are imaginary projections and have a fluid relationship with them.

When you say "they exist in form of imagination  and you can still use them and pretend as they are real.", it sounds like you actually believe that they are real without pretending (which is completely fine btw, I believe that some distinctions are fine, and others believe other distinctions are fine except mine). But the realness of distinctions is subjective. You can't make me see a distinction that you're imagining unless I want to see it. If I don't see it, it literally doesn't exist for me, and you really can't do anything about it. You can't make a donkey to sing, because singing is a distinction imagined by you, and the donkey simply doesn't share your imagination.

When you get answers like: "There is no you, meditation doesnt exist, everything is you etc..", they're actually completely valid regardless of context. The thing with your thread here is that you are asking people to follow the context of the question, but those people are actually telling you that the context is irrelevant in the first place and that you should rise above it. In my view, that is a valid perspective, and it has value, yet still limited because it does not work well for the context you're using. Then again, what if the context itself is unnecessary? What if you don't actually need to work within that context? What if you will benefit more from letting go and rising above the context? What if it's possible to take both contexts (the no-context context, and the context context) as valid?

[AdamR95]

15 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

Distictions are not only imaginary, they're also projections onto the absolute.

You are saying exactly the same thing only using your own words.

You can always catch me on some words and turn it around and say that i dont get it but thats the limitation of language and your own projection on my words.

21 minutes ago, Gesundheit said:

"There is no you, meditation doesnt exist, everything is you etc..", they're actually completely valid regardless of context.

They are true but not answer to my question. Lets say i want to play some videogame and ask some question on some specific goal in that game and then everyone just start telling me the game isnt real. But i already knew that, i just want to explore the game, why always assume that the player is delluded and think the game is real?

[freejoy]

@Leo Gura Relative answers are important for the ego sometimes, don't you think?

 

 

[Mason Riggle]

23 minutes ago, AdamR95 said:

Lets say i want to play some videogame and ask some question on some specific goal in that game and then everyone just start telling me the game isnt real. But i already knew that, i just want to explore the game, why always assume that the player is delluded and think the game is real?

To get a better grasp of the problem with understanding what's going on here, let's change your analogy a bit..

Let's say you are dreaming that you are playing a video game and asking the characters in your dream some question on some specific goal in that game... if you are asking the characters in your dream about how your dream world functions, it might not be too far fetched for those dream characters to assume you're still asleep. 

Edited March 1, 2021 by Mason Riggle

[Gesundheit]

35 minutes ago, AdamR95 said:

You are saying exactly the same thing only using your own words.

Not really. I am saying that there are two contexts that are equally valid and that both of them answer the question fully, and you are rather taking only one context of them while ignoring the other context entirely and saying that you aren't.

It seems you aren't seeing the value in answering questions from the other context possibly because you're identified with the original context, which you call "relative" as opposed to the other context (the absolute). So you want answers only from the same context, but not from the other.

In other words, you're asking for stage Orange/Achiever answers, and rejecting stage Green/Pluralist answers. And I am giving you a stage Yellow/Context-Aware estimation for what I perceive to be the case in this thread.

It may be pointless to try to point that out though, because I'm imagining these distinctions and it doesn't seem that you are. Or maybe you're imagining them as well but there's attachment in your relationship with certain contexts.

Edited March 1, 2021 by Gesundheit

[AdamR95]

@Gesundheit I think we complicate that too much at this point.

There is ofcourse value in the big picture but sometimes question isnt about that and the structure of that question can imply that. You can still assume he needs a big picture answer i can agree with that.

I think sometimes it goes to an extreme and we just play wordgames and say nothing in the end. You cant go too deep with words anyway.