What Creates Hero's

[Salaam]

13 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

@John Flores Once you glimpse the Absolute, you'll realize it's Good and Perfect in the ultimate sense, without any opposite.

How can anything be bad when there is nothing to be lost or gained, and no one to lose or gain it?

I disagree with this. Every single time you have a realization like that, you're actually out of the space of undifferentiated everything and localized back in your head differentiating and categorizing and creating separation and distance. That space, that you call nothingness is more than good and more than the limitations of absolutes and perfection. Absolutes and perfection are human concepts that imply endings and are reliant on having a contrast in order to define themselves and all of that is indistinguishable from the undifferentiated everything.

However, and this is a big thing people trip up on, there is a difference between something being indistinguishable and non-existent. All these movements and actions and physical manifestations that we then create symbols for to differentiate for ourselves, still exist, but the distinctions and separations and the conditions, don't necessarily have to be applied to constrain and contain us.

That is the point of gaining access to the space of undifferentiated everything. It's to gain the freedom to choose how much distance and conditions to apply and when you want to. You lose that freedom when you make the mistake of differentiating the undifferentiated everything after you've had a taste of it. When you do so you create binary separation with EXTREME distance and separation and EXTREME conditions that get in the way of undifferentiated everything's nature. 

A couple other points in response to your later block of text.

There is a universal "evil" by the way that is recognized by more than just humans and that "evil" is the corruption of trust. Humans, animals, plants, cells, all react in a similar fashion to corrupting forces that twist and make normally healthy connections or bonds unhealthy or unsafe to initiate. I personally find the word evil to be a an overly simplistic and primitive concept, but the above is what people were trying to describe when they came up with the etymological root of that word and of course added their connotations of human personification. 

Secondly, up and down, left and right, are indeed a differentiation, but they are nuances of distance. Distance does indeed exist if we want it to, because it is a part of everything and it occurs every time we categorize and differentiate. It's what plays a HUGE part in the kinds of emotions we feel.

You mention hot and cold and that is a perfect example of how distance works. If you go out and stick your hands in the snow for a bit and then come inside, room temperature water feels a lot hotter than it normally would. This is because the distance of contrast between your now much colder than normal hands and the room temperature water is much greater than the distance of contrast between your base level hand temperature when normally placing them under room temperature water. This is also why winning a million dollars is more exciting for a person with very little money compared to someone who is already a billionaire.  It's the distance that modulates the emotion. Going from 40 degrees to 70 degrees is a much greater distance than going from 65 to 70 degrees. Going from 0 dollars to a million dollars is a greater change to a person's life then going from 1 billion dollars to 1 billion, 1 million dollars. In economics they have a concept of marginial utility which plays off this same universal principle of contrast distance.

And finally, your last sentence makes that mistake I mentioned earlier that people constantly trip up on. It's not "the only reason you exist is because you say so" but instead, "the only reason you are distinguishable is because you say so".

Undifferentiated everything allows itself to distinguish itself in localized zones we call human beings, but these human beings don't get to choose existence. Not in the absolute sense. Why? Because nothing is ever created or destroyed in the undifferentiated everything. Everything will always be everything. We can't make the mistake of falling back into differentiation and coming up with these extreme conditions that we then try to place on the space of undifferentiated everything.  


 

Edited May 3, 2017 by Salaam

[Bodhi123]

On ‎5‎/‎2‎/‎2017 at 10:57 PM, Leo Gura said:

You understand that evil is always relative to a who, yes? Like, who is it evil for? Like who is it hot or cold for? Only for some who. For some other who, it's not evil, it's good, it's not hot, it's cold.

Yes, I understand  

Leo I know that you are very big on objectivity and demand empirical evidence to substantiate any belief.

But I have a question for you...

At what point does the need for direct empirical evidence become a limitation?

How much can a single person truly understand?

Just because you haven't personally verified a claim does that necessarily make it false?

Edited May 5, 2017 by Bodhi123