Should you judge people on appearance?

[StarStruck]

Judgements are just thoughts. It is ok to have them as long as you are not identified by them and create an ideology/complex out of it. This is such basic stuff. 

Edited December 6, 2023 by StarStruck

[Carl-Richard]

4 hours ago, Salvijus said:

Dicernment is a useful skill for survival. But condemnation is not a mental skill. It's just a desire to kill what we believe has no right to exist. One who has come to terms with the entire creation doesn't lose dicernment skills of the mind. But such one will lose all desire to condemn any part of existence. 

Like we agreed on earlier, the desire to kill what we believe has no right to exist is what morality is. I think having a sense of morality is a useful skill of the separate self. An enlightened being may talk about how God is fully accepting whatever God is, and that you should aim to identify with God in this way. But the person that the enlightened being can still be said to be does most likely prefer things like not killing innocent people over killing them. Hence, they still have a sense of morality, and again, it's therefore necessary to distinguish between the separate self (the person) and the Absolute Self (God) in this case, and to recognize that they do co-exist with each other in an understandable way. The enlightened "person" recognizes that they're not the person in the most ultimate sense, yet the person keeps existing just like it has existed up to that point, and a person makes moral judgements (or at least what can be perceived as moral judgements).

Edited December 6, 2023 by Carl-Richard

[An young being]

9 hours ago, Salvijus said:

Dicernment is a useful skill for survival. But condemnation is not a mental skill. It's just a desire to kill what we believe has no right to exist.

Making a condemnation based on a judgement mostly induces suffering, and reflection of a closed or selfish mind, especially if the desire is to hurt, tease, provoke, offend etc. An example could be calling someone fat with a desire to tease them, but what about condemnation based on a judgement with a desire to improve them?. For example, I could condemn someone as being fat who has a poor lifestyle repeatedly with an intention to hurt their feelings and hence force them to take steps to reduce their bad habits. The right word may not be condemnation for this case, but still I feel there are a few exceptions.

When it comes to discernment, I think it is possible to transcend it to some extent. It's about having the least judgement possible, even if it is concerned with our needs except the most important ones for survival. It is being indifferent to choices, not using discernment consciously to choose between the left or right path, leaving it to intuition or just taking a random one with the least necessity for thinking. This is possible especially when you reach a stage where you are so open to the universe, that you don't care about the resulting experiences of your choices being good or bad.

[Salvijus]

9 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

it's therefore necessary to distinguish between the separate self (the person) and the Absolute Self (God) in this case, and to recognize that they do co-exist with each other in an understandable way

They don't coexist in any way. They are in total contradiction to each other. They cancel each other out. There's either acceptence or rejection. Love or fear. God or ego. Truth or falsity. Light or darkness. Knowledge or ignorance. Joy or suffering. Forgiveness or resentment. And the more you have of one the less you will have of the other. You can't have them both at the same time. 

That's why the ultimate conclusion is. Once full acceptence has come, ego(resistance) is no more. It's 1+1=2 logic. Mind cannot be in full acceptance and full resistance at the same time. Because they cancel each other out. 

What you're describing is not a enlightened fully liberated mind. You're describing someone who has had an experience when some part of the mind became free of judgements, free of resistance. But mind has many layers and other layers can still be full of judgement. Full of ego. Hence such a one cannot be called fully enlightened yet. Maybe partialy enlightened. Just a glimpse of enlightenment is nothing. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Salvijus

[Salvijus]

2 hours ago, An young being said:

but what about condemnation based on a judgement with a desire to improve them?. For example, I could condemn someone as being fat who has a poor lifestyle repeatedly with an intention to hurt their feelings and hence force them to take steps to reduce their bad habits. The right word may not be condemnation for this case, but still I feel there are a few exceptions.

Yea. I hear what you're saying. I think it depends. As an example. 

Are you trying to help someone to lose weight because you can't stand that your kid is overweight and you force him to do sports. Or are you genuinely want your kids to be healthy. And to use insults as a means to inspire your kids to be healthy... Mm.... Smells sketchy. I mean in theory such approach is possible. But I find it hard to imagine. Those who use insults to inspire others to become healthy usually have a disdain for unhealthyness. But in theory it's possible. Just unlikely I think. Someone who wants to help someone to lose weight out of love would not use such insult based approach imo. Unless it's a very very conscious being. Like a zen master. 

2 hours ago, An young being said:

When it comes to discernment, I think it is possible to transcend it to some extent. It's about having the least judgement possible, even if it is concerned with our needs except the most important ones for survival. It is being indifferent to choices, not using discernment consciously to choose between the left or right path, leaving it to intuition or just taking a random one with the least necessity for thinking. This is possible especially when you reach a stage where you are so open to the universe, that you don't care about the resulting experiences of your choices being good or bad.

When I used the word discernment I meant like. Discerning a table from a cup. Without discernment skills of the mind. One wouldn't even know what's food, what's dirt. Survival would be impossible. Discernment skills should not be transcended. These should be sharpened as much as possible. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Salvijus

[Princess Arabia]

6 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

When I used the word discernment I meant like. Discerning a table from a cup. Without discernment skills of the mind. One wouldn't even know what's food, what's dirt. Survival would be impossible. 

I would say that's a distinction. I would say discernment is having the qualifications to understand or comprehend something previously unknown.

Edited December 7, 2023 by Princess Arabia

[Salvijus]

4 minutes ago, Princess Arabia said:

I would say that's a distinction. I would say discernment is having the qualifications to understand or comprehend something unknown.

It's the same thing in my dictionary.

To make a distinction one has to dicern the difference between two objects. 

And to comprehend a concept means to make it distinct from other concepts. 

Idk. For me these twe two words are the same. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Salvijus

[An young being]

26 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

Those who use insults to inspire others to become healthy usually have a disdain for unhealthyness. But in theory it's possible. Just unlikely I think. Someone who wants to help someone to lose weight out of love would not use such insult based approach imo. 

That's a form of judgement as well, although a more concrete one based on experiences. I am just pointing out to the possibility of such a character, though maybe less people can be capable of doing it. An example would be a father slapping and scolding his son for visiting shady places, with the intention to stop him from visiting those places. He had already tried love based approaches and judges that those approaches can't solve the problem, and chooses condemnation.

38 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

When I used the word discernment I meant like. Discerning a table from a cup. Without discernment skills of the mind. One wouldn't even know what's food, what's dirt. Survival would be impossible. Discernment skills should not be transcended. These should be sharpened as much as possible. 

I understand your definition of discernment, even intuition uses discernment to differentiate things, and it may never be possible for a human being to exist without it, but discernment done using conscious logical thinking that involves positive and negative thoughts can be transcended in my opinion. You know it's dirt when you see dirt based on intuition, but you have to use logical thinking to discern whether to step on it or move past it or clean it. Or you can do simply any of them without worrying about the consequences. Or you can use intuition to do what comes in your mind as the good choice rather than thinking deep about the consequences. Another example would be seeing fire, you know it's dangerous by intuition, and decide to step away from it. You don't have to do much logical thinking here, as your intuition does the calculations for your survival.

But there exists a few who can step into the fire as well.

 

[Salvijus]

3 hours ago, An young being said:

When it comes to discernment, I think it is possible to transcend it to some extent. It's about having the least judgement possible, even if it is concerned with our needs except the most important ones for survival. It is being indifferent to choices, not using discernment consciously to choose between the left or right path, leaving it to intuition or just taking a random one with the least necessity for thinking. This is possible especially when you reach a stage where you are so open to the universe, that you don't care about the resulting experiences of your choices being good or bad.

I realized now you probably meant transcending preferences. Preferences are impossible to transcend. A human soul has a preference for truth, love and God. And it cannot be transcended or altered. Do what you want. A soul will eternally is going to long for freedom. For infinity. A human soul longs to be as it was created to be. An extension of God's love. An extention of God's will. And therefor an enlightened mind's behavior is 100% biased to be a servent of God's will. A servant of Love. And it is so by the Law. Nothing can be done about it. 

Have to go now. Will reply later. 

Edited December 7, 2023 by Salvijus

[An young being]

26 minutes ago, Salvijus said:

I realized now you probably meant transcending preferences. Preferences are impossible to transcend. 

Not necessarily preferences, but the process which leads to the preferences. Intuition can also lead to preferences, and it's subconscious discernment, involving forces beyond what our conscious logical discernment is capable of. I am just talking about the conscious discernment we do everyday, that can be transcended, but not without the proper food that has to be fed to intuition before doing so. You cannot leave discernment when you have a closed or selfish mind or at lower levels of consciousness, for example.