When does Absolute truth stop being practical?

[YIDIRYIDIR]

There’s a point in personal development where you run into a strange problem: the deeper your understanding becomes, the less practical it seems to be.

You start to understand ideas like “there is no self,” “there is no free will,” or “reality is an illusion.” At first, these feel profound. They expand your perspective, reduce your ego, and help you detach from unnecessary suffering. but i believe it is a mistake to try make them practical, by using them to improve life in a practical way.

So i have a question:  At what point does Absolute Truth stop being 'practically' useful and become purely contemplative and for understanding only?

Why do certain “ultimate truths” (like no-self, no free will, reality as imaginary) fail as 'practical' frameworks for living, even if they’re valid at a deeper level?

[YIDIRYIDIR]

here's my attempt at answering that.

The key distinction is this: not all truths operate at the same level.

There are two layers we're dealing with:

At the relative level, cause and effect are real. Effort matters. Habits matter. Identity matters. If you want to build muscle, you train. If you want to make money, you create value. This is the level where self-help, psychology, and skill-building actually work.

At the absolute level, everything collapses. There is no separate self, no control, no inherent meaning. From this perspective, nothing is truly happening in the way you think it is.

Both are true. But they serve completely different functions.

Absolute truth is not meant to tell you what to do.

It’s meant to change how you relate to what you do.

For example, you still go to the gym, push hard, and track your progress. But at the same time, you’re less attached to the outcome. Failure doesn’t crush you as much. Success doesn’t inflate you as much. There’s a kind of lightness behind the effort.

Another example: you still work on your business, improve your skills, and make strategic decisions. But you’re not psychologically dependent on it for your sense of self.

That’s the real role of deep truth: orientation, not execution.

Execution comes from the relative level.

Freedom comes from the absolute level.

If you ignore the relative, you become passive and ineffective.

If you ignore the absolute, you become tense and overly attached.

The goal is not to choose one.

It’s to operate in both, acting fully, while understanding that, at the deepest level, there’s nothing to hold onto.

[Eskilon]

19 minutes ago, YIDIRYIDIR said:

Why do certain “ultimate truths” (like no-self, no free will, reality as imaginary) fail as 'practical' frameworks for living, even if they’re valid at a deeper level?

They do not fail in my perspective.

Think about it, if you really groked that your life is a dream like really, exactly like a lucid dream moment, would you feel shame? Would you care about being rejected by a girl? Would you care so much about money or bullshit like that? You will probably not care so much, and would laught like crazy(as other mystics have done it) into why other people are so serious.

Profound insights can rewire and reprogram your entire identity, view of the world and your relationship to it. So yeah, it's extremely practical too but should be pursued for the "gains" but for understanding sake is what I would say.

Edited 7 hours ago by Eskilon

[gettoefl]

Stop being what you are not. So do you be what you are. What you are not can still do its thing. You are the whole not the part. You come here to learn that before the body breathes its last. You have nothing to do here. Except that.

[YIDIRYIDIR]

@Eskilon that's what i said, it doesn't help you execute, but it helps with how you relate to how you execute and your results.

16 minutes ago, Eskilon said:

They do not fail in my perspective.

Think about it, if you really groked that your life is a dream like really, exactly like a lucid dream moment, would you feel shame? Would you care about being rejected by a girl? Would you care so much about money or bullshit like that? You will probably not care so much, and would laught like crazy(as other mystics have done it) into why other people are so serious.

Profound insights can rewire and reprogram your entire identity, view of the world and your relationship to it. So yeah, it's extremely practical too but should be pursued for the "gains" but for understanding sake is what I would say.

 

[YIDIRYIDIR]

@gettoefl This is poetic, this is what I'm talking about. an insight like this won't help you practically with anything, it'll just help with understanding and how you relate to things.

19 minutes ago, gettoefl said:

Stop being what you are not. So do you be what you are. What you are not can still do its thing. You are the whole not the part. You come here to learn that before the body breathes its last. You have nothing to do here. Except that.

 

[gettoefl]

9 minutes ago, YIDIRYIDIR said:

@gettoefl This is poetic, this is what I'm talking about. an insight like this won't help you practically with anything, it'll just help with understanding and how you relate to things.

 

It will show that everything that happens is for the best. Yes you can't change anything. The dye is cast. But you delight in watching the unfolding. You watch the movie not get involved in it. You will change your perspective not what is playing out. That's liberation and that's happiness.

[Joseph Maynor]

I call bridging this gap conscious creation.  Awareness of consciously creating.  This links enlightenment with the practical.  

[YIDIRYIDIR]

@Joseph Maynor can you explain more? do you have any youtube videos or posts about this?

35 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I call bridging this gap conscious creation.  Awareness of consciously creating.  This links enlightenment with the practical.  

 

[Joseph Maynor]

11 minutes ago, YIDIRYIDIR said:

@Joseph Maynor can you explain more? do you have any youtube videos or posts about this?

 

It's pretty simple.  It gets into what I call creator recontextualization.  The finite (the practical) is the canvas of creation in space and time.  You're not just a passenger sitting back and observing, that's a limiting belief.  You can open to realizing you're an artist in reality shaping form and content.  This gets deep, but this is a good starting point.  

Edited 5 hours ago by Joseph Maynor

[YIDIRYIDIR]

15 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

It's pretty simple.  It gets into what I call creator recontextualization.  The finite (the practical) is the canvas of creation in space and time.  You're not just a passenger sitting back and observing, that's a limiting belief.  You can open to realizing you're an artist in reality shaping form and content.  This gets deep, but this is a good starting point.  

aww now it's clear, i get it. another framework in the bag for me. i will think about this. great one

Edited 4 hours ago by YIDIRYIDIR

[Joseph Maynor]

41 minutes ago, YIDIRYIDIR said:

aww now it's clear, i get it. another framework in the bag for me. i will think about this. great one

It's more of a realization than a framework.  It's something I share from my own experience, but it may not land with others.  

[YIDIRYIDIR]

 

47 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

It's more of a realization than a framework.  It's something I share from my own experience, but it may not land with others.  

yeah true my bad, i meant "mental model" not framework.  i consider anything that is true (realization, law, theory...) and can be considered a lense in which to view something a mental model.

for example, "everything is a skill". it is a realization that everything in the finite is a skill, but also one lense in which i view things.

[Joseph Maynor]

17 minutes ago, YIDIRYIDIR said:

 

yeah true my bad, i meant "mental model" not framework.  i consider anything that is true (realization, law, theory...) and can be considered a lense in which to view something a mental model.

for example, "everything is a skill". it is a realization that everything in the finite is a skill, but also one lense in which i view things.

I would be a little bit leery of the understanding is a skill mentality.  

[YIDIRYIDIR]

18 minutes ago, Joseph Maynor said:

I would be a little bit leery of the understanding is a skill mentality.  

Why what's wrong with it, I'm curious

[Joseph Maynor]

3 minutes ago, YIDIRYIDIR said:

Why what's wrong with it, I'm curious

What we're looking for is a bridge between the Absolute and relative.  It's too reductionistic to pragmatism.  

[YIDIRYIDIR]

@Joseph Maynor i was just giving that as an example of a mental model. it is a lense and it is limited and used for contexts where it fits. 

[Willy Phallicus]

Short answer: It's not practical to begin with.