Everything in the world is relative: we play as an observer. Everything regarding who said

Our planet is huge. Regarding the person. More than 7 billion people live on Earth, and at the same time, we can safely leave the city and find a quiet secluded place. No problem. If we talk about the Universe, then it will be impossible to explain and find a suitable comparison, especially to understand and realize its immensity. Everything in the world is relative.

The man is very small. Aerial view, we are already becoming difficult to distinguish. Do you know that during rescue operations in the open ocean from a helicopter it is almost impossible to see a person on the surface of the water?

Why am I talking about this?

Not in order to somehow point out that we are only small ants in a vast world and we are not capable of anything great. Absolute no! He can do anything he dares to think about. And here it is not a matter of size.

Spring Meditation Marathon: participate and win the “reboot” in Bali!

This is your best opportunity to learn how to meditate, “freshen” your head, and plus to this win the main prize:

Participation in the May "Reloaded" in Bali "turnkey": including the program itself, airline tickets and a week of stay in a design hotel!

Everything in the world is relative. How do we look at the world?

I want to reveal a slightly different aspect of our being. We look at the world with our own eyes from our body and see only a very small part of it, everything else is hidden from us. Roughly speaking, the planet for the Universe is the same grain of sand as we are for the planet. And we see only a very tiny part of this tiny grain of sand.

A very insignificant share and purely on the one hand.

We people can see and perceive life with our own eyes, ears, hands. Just as we were taught, just as we learned in the short time that we live.

If someone hurts us, we don’t even think about what is possible for this person even more painfully than us. Our mind and our feelings are filled with grief. And no matter what happens in our lives, we see everything from the perspective of of their suffering and of their problems.

We see them as the most difficult and insurmountable. We suffer and hold a grudge against everyone and everything for our sufferings, but very close to us live people who are even harder than us, but we do not see this, do not want to see and do not even think about it.

To each his own. Everyone has their own destiny, their own karma. And everything that happens happens because it could not be otherwise. Everything that happens is all right. Each has its own correctness and its own path. And this is normal.

But awareness of someone else's painAwareness of the hardships, sufferings, deprivations that people living next to us (not only in the same apartment, district or city, but on the same planet with us) may experience, makes us more human, teaches us to make the right decisions in difficult situations , expands our angle of perception of the world. We learn to see everything not only from the position of an egoist-self, but also to understand the true motives of other people's actions.

The realization that the other person is also a MAN teaches us to value life.

We love to whine and cry, as if someone owes us something, although in fact we already have everything that most of the world's population can dream of. And these people do not live on your TV, they live exactly like you this moment, this second. Awareness of the scale, severity of great suffering and great joys grows our soul and forms wisdom.

But first of all it makes us human.

We hold grudges against people. And we like to be offended. We are always constantly offended by someone. We are offended and embittered by people for the suffering, for the pain, for the problems that they supposedly created for us. After all, we live in a world of people and if it hurts us, then it is most likely that this pain was caused by a person.

But there is always a reason for everything, and each has its own reason. And a look at the same life situation of two different people can vary diametrically. Life has brought up each person in his own way, and we must learn to understand this.

We are very different, but at the same time we are all very similar. We all want one thing - happiness, but here the concept of happiness is different for everyone, but again it is subject to general laws - good, all the best to ourselves and our loved ones.

People are different. There are people who can go over their heads in a career, through life. They are not tormented by conscience when they hurt others. But they see this as their point. They do it for a reason. They probably had a lot to go through in life, they suffered a lot, and they lacked the vital wisdom and strength to understand and accept that past pain. And all they could do was give others what they had in excess. And they do not think that they could have acted otherwise.

And it is not known what we would do if they were in their place. We live life walking with our own feet. But what would happen if we walked her under the feet of such a person? We cannot know the answer. And you should never answer an unequivocal and categorical "no." Everything in the world is relative.

We can only be responsible for ourselves..

But for some reason, we believe that we can do this for other people. This is not true. Perhaps a person sees in this the possibility of at least some satisfaction from life, otherwise he will simply lose the meaning of living. Or maybe such a person is even more painful than those who suffer from him. Or he may feel sick, but he cannot live differently, he simply cannot. Who knows…

People are different. Give everyone a chance, and you will discover new facets of your soul.

A very deep and broad concept. Man cannot be judged unambiguously. We are so diverse, so different that we cannot even imagine.

Now, while you are reading this article, there’s a war going on somewhere and just someone saved someone’s life. And at that moment someone betrayed a best friend. In the slums of India, a man prays that Lord Krishna will not allow him to starve to death. For the fifth consecutive hour in the Mountains of Nepal, a Buddhist monk meditates. And someone took up arms and went to kill because of the war, and he sees his point in taking the life of other people, because people took the life of his loved one. He takes revenge. And someone lost the closest person and just forgave. Just now. While you are chewing a sandwich.

And at that moment, a man in a distant tribe somewhere in New Guinea is sharpening a spear to go to the beast and feed his family. He knows nothing about television, nor about the Internet, nor about fashion. He generally does not know anything that you know. But he wants to make himself and his family happy, he wants the very best for them, just like you.

As much as we are different people, we are just as much alike. We have one soul, one spirit of God.

I can not help but tell you about one film that impressed me to the core. This is the movie "Man". About love, about happiness, about suffering, about pain, revenge and forgiveness, about simple human desires. You will see the Man as he is. You will really see the Man. The whole movie will be spoken by people. The same as we are.

You cannot overestimate the ability to value life, know the value of suffering, and give thanks for what you have. Look at life through the eyes of the people of this world, then your life will seem a little different to you, a little more conscious and real.

The film "Man." Required to view!

Take the time to take 5 minutes of your time to familiarize yourself. Perhaps these 5 minutes will change your whole life.

If you liked my article, please share it on social networks. You can use the buttons below for this.

To the question, A. Einstein said: Everything is relative, M. Plank corrected: And the relative is relative ... So what happens is Absolute? set by the author Evgeniy ########## the best answer is I quote the lines of Bernard Verber:
"Everything is in one (Abraham).
Everything is love (Jesus Christ).
Everything is sex (Sigmund Freud).
Everything is economics (Karl Marx).
Everything is relative (Albert Einstein).
So what is next? "
And then ... that's it, every time we ask such a question, it is absolute.))
Source: Hello, Eugene!

Answer from 22 answers[guru]

Hello! Here is a selection of topics with the answers to your question: A. Einstein said: Everything is relative, M. Plank corrected: And the relative is relative ... So what happens is Absolute?

Answer from European[guru]
Absolute zero is an absolute concept ..

Answer from Petitioner[guru]
The speed of light in a vacuum.

Answer from Apricot[guru]
in a world where everything is relative, there is no absolute.
God Himself is the Absolute.
i also think that nature itself is absolute, but man makes it relative.

Answer from Bee[guru]
Human idiocy))

Answer from Elena Vladimirovna[guru]
Yes, the speed of light is absolute. Einshane never said "everything is relative." He introduced an absolute constant in physics - the speed of light.

Answer from Cerdalik ??[guru]
Absolute relativity ... in development, cognition and determination ....

Answer from Ё OTHER[guru]
Max Planck, Albert Einstein ... The greatest minds.
I have no reason not to believe them.

Answer from Yury[guru]
When they say that EVERYTHING is relative, it follows from this that not all
relative, and relativity itself is then absolute, and if it is
absolute, then not everything is relative.
It’s better to consider that everything in the world is relative and absolutely
at the same time, depending on what relation we are considering
one phenomenon to another.

Answer from Yolnyshkova_Ya.[guru]
As an option, for everything EVERYTHING in question is EVERYTHING exists in the world through symmetry, and it is precisely the interaction of the antipodes that is the condition for the existence of everything.
This implies, firstly, that relative and absolute are a kind of antipodes, and secondly, that symmetry itself is an example of the absolute.

Answer from MARINA \u003d ballerina \u003d MARUSICHKA-OLD[guru]
I think - ZERO!

Answer from Atmanam viddhi[guru]
The question, of course, is interesting.))
First, with your permission, I will quote Wikipedia.))
Absolute - in religion and idealistic philosophy - God or the original cause of all phenomena, the unconditional perfect beginning of being, which lies at the heart of the world, free from any relations and conditions.
Naturally, this refers more to metaphysics than to physics.
But after all, it is just philosophy, not natural sciences, that is engaged in the search for answers to such questions.))
So it turns out that the Absolute is either an immutable Object, not limited by any framework and categories, like Shiva in the philosophy of advaita-vedanta, or just an abstract concept that operates with our consciousness.

"Question mark"5/91

How is a time machine arranged?

ZIGUNENKO Stanislav Nikolaevich

Spiral or straight?

Everything in the world is relative

"Happy Newton, the happy childhood of science ... Nature was an open book for him, which he read effortlessly. The concepts that he used to organize the data of experience seem to arise spontaneously from the experience itself, from wonderful experiments ... In one person, he combined an experimenter, theorist, master ... He appeared before us strong, confident and lonely; his joy of creation and jewelry accuracy are shown in every word and every drawing. "

Having given these words credit to his predecessor, "this brilliant genius," A. Einstein nevertheless began to redraw the Universe according to his own understanding. They say that he surprised his interlocutors, admitting once that he never understood the concept of "absolute time." Of course, it was a joke in the style of Einstein - he knew about absolute time and about the absolute space of classical physics a lot. So much, "to understand the imperfection of the mechanics of Newton - Galileo.

Why does time flow everywhere the same? What sets this pace and what (or who) controls it? These "damned" questions haunted him. And he finally resolved them by creating the theory of relativity.

Behind this theory, completed by the author in 1916, the fame of the incomprehensible was established from the very beginning. At first it was said that only three people, including the author himself, understood it all over the world. Then the number of initiates increased to twelve, but the author himself, oddly enough, fell out of that dozen. Einstein joked about this: "Since mathematicians poured on the theory of relativity, I myself have ceased to understand it."

Indeed, the mathematical side of the theory is very difficult. But you can, after all, talk about the most complex things simply, explaining, as they say, on the fingers. Einstein himself, by the way, knew this way of expressing his thoughts quite well.

“Imagine two physicists,” he said. “Both have a physical laboratory equipped with every imaginable physical device. The laboratory of one of the physicists is in an open field, and the laboratory of the other is in a train carriage, rushing rapidly in a certain direction. The principle of relativity states : two physicists, using all the instruments to study the laws existing in nature - one in a stationary laboratory, the other in a car - will find that these laws are the same if the car moves uniformly and without shaking. abstract form, it looks like this: the principle of relativity the laws of nature do not depend on the translational (uniform) motion of reference systems. " Thus, Einstein in his own words retold the parable of the traveler in a locked cabin, thereby agreeing with the correctness in certain cases of the Galileo-Newton theory. Indeed, for about two hundred years this theory served faithfully to humanity, and no one complained about it. So what made Albert Einstein reconsider established positions? All the same practical necessity.

Over two centuries, much has changed in the world around us. The speeds existing in it have increased markedly. New branches of knowledge appeared - physicists, in particular, were closely engaged in the phenomena of electromagnetism. And therefore, the principle of relativity lasted should have been replaced by the principle of relativity of Einstein. He added one important axiom to the theory: the speed of light propagation (in void) is the same in all inertial reference frames.

For a long time, it was believed that the speed of light is generally equal to infinity. For example, Heron of Alexandria reasoned as follows: "Raise your head to the sky at night. You will see the stars. Close your eyes - the stars will disappear. Open them again - the stars will appear immediately. Since there is no gap between the moment of opening your eyes and seeing the stars, the light spreads instantly."

But Galileo, already known to us, had a different opinion about this. He suggested doing an experiment to measure the speed of light. Let two people, equipped with signal lights, get farther apart, he reasoned. One of them opens his lantern. The second does the same as soon as it sees the light of the first lamp. And let the observer, standing next to the first lantern, measure the period of time that elapses between the moment when the first lantern opens the light of his lantern and the instant that the observer sees the light of the second lantern.

Galileo even tried to conduct such an experiment in practice, but he soon became convinced that the speed of light was too high to be measured manually.

The experiments according to the Galileo scheme were carried out in the XVII and XIX centuries. First, in 1675, the Danish astronomer Olaf Christensen Roemer made observations during an eclipse of the moons of Jupiter discovered by Galileo. It was first confirmed that the speed of light has a finite value. And then the experiment of Galileo was carried out in laboratory conditions by the French experimenter Hippolytus Fizeau in 1849 using the simple mechanical device constructed by him.

A beam of light, passing through the gap between the gear teeth, spread over a certain distance (in his experiments, Fizeau reached a distance of 9 km). At this distance, there is a mirror, reflected. From which the light beam goes back. If the gear is motionless, this beam will reach the observer’s eye through the same gap between the teeth. But if the wheel rotates, then depending on the speed of rotation, the light beam will either hit the tooth, or - with a further increase in speed - in the next interval

Knowing the distance to the mirror and the speed of rotation of the wheel, you can calculate the speed of light propagation. Fizeau received in his experiments the value of the speed of light, equal to 313 thousand km / s. (For comparison, we note that in modern experiments carried out using an atomic clock, this value is 299 799 456 m / s with an error of * + 0.2 m / s.)

So, developing his theory of relativity, Einstein came to the conclusion that the speed of light in vacuum, vacuum is absolute. It is approximately 300 thousand km / s, and nothing can move faster than light.

Einstein came to this conclusion on the basis of logical reasoning, 4 based on experiments known to him related to the study of electromagnetic processes. The great theoretician particularly appreciated the experiment of the Dutch astronomer de Sitter, based on observations of binary stars. His studies showed that the speed of light does not depend on the speed of movement of the star emitting this light. Then the same fact was repeatedly confirmed in other experiments.

So, the speed of light is constant. So what is changing in this changing world? A lot of things, including speed ... the passage of time!

To understand how this can be, let's follow Einstein with a thought experiment. Let's go back to the two laboratories? one of which is located in a clean field, and the other in a carriage of a moving train.

Let the front and rear walls of the car have a light bulb. A physicist-observer of a moving laboratory is located in the middle of the car, just between the bulbs, at an equal distance from each light source.

The experiment is designed so that the flashes of light from these bulbs reach the “train” and “field” physicists strictly at the same time, namely at the moment when they equal each other. What conclusions should each of the experimenters draw from this observation?

A physicist in a carriage can reason like this: "" Since the signals were sent by sources that were at equal distances from me and came at the same time, it means that they were emitted strictly simultaneously. "

The physicist in the field laboratory has every right to comment on the described event in a slightly different way: “When the middle of the car came up to me, both bulbs were at the same distance from me. But the light was emitted a little earlier than when it reached me - after all

“As light beams have a huge, but finite-speed. Hence it is logical to assume that at the time of the light's kaniya the front wall of the car was closer to me, the back. And since the light from both sources propagates at the same speed, it turns out that the bulb on the back wall flashed earlier than on the front ... "

As a result, after our physicists, we will have to come to the conclusion: a certain event happened simultaneously or non-simultaneously, depends on what point of view we will consider them. If from the point of view of a moving physicist, then the bulbs flashed at the same time; if from the point of view of a physicist who was motionless, then no.

And this, in turn, inexorably leads us to a certain logical paradox (at least it seems to be at first glance): time in different "reference frames does not flow differently. Time turns out to depend on speed! It is not absolute, but relative ... From the point of view of the theory of relativity, one cannot simply say “now is that much time.” It is necessary to add in which particular coordinate system.

In my opinion, this is one of the most significant statements in the world. Few people think about the meaning of this ingenious phrase. The maximum, as a person sees it, for the most part, is related to physics. But it is deeply connected with all life.
Movement, time, perception ... Everything is considered in relation to something. And conclusions are drawn based on this consideration. But are the conclusions right? I noticed a long time ago that here lies that something much more, at first glance everything seems so complicated, but when you realize the essence, everything becomes ridiculously simple. And why do people not notice this? It's that simple! Such thoughts come to me more and more often.
I do not pretend to Truth in the final instance, I will give only my thoughts and conclusions made on the basis of these thoughts. Maybe somewhere I make a mistake, in other matters, like any other person. Everyone brings to this World a piece of His understanding.

Time and motion

I'll start with the simplest - movements . We get all our knowledge about the movement back in school. Formulas, calculations ... The movement (movement) of one object is possible only relative to another. I am standing on the sidewalk, a car is moving past. He is moving relative to me. Two cars move parallel to each other at the same speed, they do not move relative to each other, they are immovable. This is all clear and simple. But if we consider movement along with such a concept as time? Very carefully and consciously consider?
What is time? Does it exist? Here is what the encyclopedia tells us briefly:
« Time is one of the basic concepts of philosophy and physics, a conditional comparative measure of the motion of matter, as well as one of the coordinates of space-time along which the world lines of physical bodies are stretched.
In philosophy, this is an irreversible current (flowing in only one direction - from the past, through the present to the future), inside which all existing processes in being, which are facts, occur.»
A conditional comparative measure of the motion of matter, that is, a conditional measure, and comparative, means it is determined by the relationship.
Man created periods regarding observation of the "sunrise" and "sunset" of the Sun, the "appearance" and "waning" of the Moon, that is, the "movement" of these objects relative to the Earth. These periods are day, night, week, month, year ... The day was divided into an equal number of units - hours, those, in turn, into an equal number - minutes, and so on. That is, time is a product of the human mind and is an illusion.
Let's look at an example of how a person perceives time. I am at point “A”, in city “A”, I need to get to another point, city “B”. For me, "B" is the future, as if not yet existing. I am starting my movement. As you move away from "A", "A" moves into the past, in the temporal and spatial concept of "A" moves away from me. “B”, as it approaches, it’s as if getting closer to my present. I arrived in "B", it became the present, "A" became the past. Now consider this movement in space and time relatively larger, for example, from a height such that both points are visible to us at the same time.
"A" and "B" exist simultaneously, nothing disappears, nothing appears. Everything happens at that very moment - here and now. Only my movement occurs, relative to these points and relative to those objects that I go through as I move. I observe the passage of time only with the help of a chronometer and noticing the change of day and night - the movement of the Earth around its axis. We rise above to a level where our planet is visible as a ball in the infinity of space. I, “A”, “B” and everything that is on the planet, from this angle, is perceived as existing simultaneously, here and now!
And so on, as the song says: "Higher and higher, and higher ...". So does time exist? Or does it exist only in our minds? I propose to draw conclusions ourselves.

Do not go to extremes.

With the concept of relativity, much can be comprehended.
But what does all of the above have to do with Spiritual Search, you ask? I will answer - direct! And not only to the spiritual side of life, but also to the whole, holistic life. People basically go two ways:
The first - life "out of habit", according to the "instructions", conditionality, concepts received from the moment of birth. With this approach, a person is inclined to blame anyone but all of himself for all his problems! I think this is what Buddha meant by saying that life is suffering.
Second - the path of spiritual development, when everything worldly is rejected. Hence the departure from life in monasteries, caves, and so on. Only God, Soul, Existing is valued ... everything else is not considered significant at all, it is suppressed. Including the body.
But there is also a third way - the Path of harmonious development. Where a person sees himself as not a divided, harmonious whole - body, mind, spirit. And he uses all these components correctly, understanding what is what.
I examined in detail the first two ways, the first I walked for a long time, without thinking about what else might be. This path did not bring much good, or rather, the good was implied, as a matter of course, but the bad was rejected, not accepted, it was not seen why it was happening.
Many come to the second path from the unbearable suffering that life “presents”. People begin to seek solace in religions, to seek answers there. And there they are already waiting! The client has matured, so to speak, you can use it. At the same time, the person is completely cut off the ability to think independently. Everything is ready, all answers are already written. In general, this is better than the first path, but here you go to the other extreme. From hoarding to rejecting life itself. You are running from worldly concepts to “spiritual” ones.
This bowl has passed me. Maybe because in life there was nothing beyond the “bad”, I was not driven into the hopelessness of existence. I had an interest in knowing life. As I wrote earlier, one of Master Osho’s books became the catalyst. She gave the impetus that began my movement in search of Truth.
Now we can talk about the theory of relativity in Spiritual, Holistic, Harmonious development.
As I said, we come to this World as a whole Being. Spirit comes through the body, then the Person is formed. Having traced the whole path of the formation of a person as a person, one can understand that the Personality itself is a gainful thing, it is changeable, one might even say - it is inconsistent. It can be called illusory.
Man is born a clean slate. The environment "makes" him a personality. Name, habits, knowledge ... That is, whether you are a representative of the Negroid race, the Mongoloid, or some other, that is, the Spirit manifested in one of these bodies, born, even in Ukraine, having received all the knowledge, concepts and conditioning of this country, you you will differ from the indigenous people only in appearance. You will speak the language of this country, you will think in the same way as the other inhabitants of this country. In the same way, a Ukrainian born in Japan who grew up there will differ from the Japanese only in appearance.
Take more. If a person lived for some time in Ukraine, and, say, about 20 years old, came to Japan, and casting aside his past, studied language, traditions, received a different name ... That is, he completely identified himself with representatives of this country, then after some time, he can be said to have acquired a different personality.
Realizing all of the above, you can understand further. There is such an understanding, Only that which is manifested in this world through the body, the rest is an illusion, is true. That is, everything that changes and constantly is an illusion. For now, I take into account only a person, without affecting the rest of the world. I do not fully agree with this. Existence manifests itself through the body, the body changes constantly, and disappears with its death - yes. Personality is being formed, is changeable - yes. Existence (spirit) is constant - yes. But one should not distinguish the Being, casting aside the body and personality. You just need to understand where, what has its place.
“The body is the temple of God” - gold words! Why neglect the body? Why mock this temple, destroy it, not maintain it in order? Why all these austerities, mortifications of the flesh ... Likewise, unacceptable increased attention to the "building", and the desolation of the "interior". The facade is beautiful, but inside ... you look and become disgusting! Man, as a building, must be beautiful both inside and out.
And to maintain order there must be a "manager", an "observer". This is the spirit, the Being, That ... It is necessary to control and observe not only the body, but also the emotions, thoughts.
Mind - should be an instrument in the hands of the spirit, wandering thoughts should be dispelled. This can be done, but not by effort, but by understanding. The manifestation of the observer who controls is possible only through meditation. When you observe the mind, the flow of thoughts, the emergence of emotions, without getting involved, then comes the awareness of the presence of the observer. And you understand all of the above. And if you act with respect to the observer, then everything falls into place in life. You understand that emotions can be, there is nothing wrong with them, they should not be suppressed, driven into the "depth". You understand how they are formed, from what and for what reasons, you trace all the way from the beginning to complete dissolution. So it is with thoughts - a constant "bazaar", dialogues with oneself. With tracking and understanding, the "bazaar" ceases by itself. The mind becomes a tool, an assistant.

Is the world illusory?

There is such an opinion of respected Masters respected by me. I do not agree with them, if you understand this expression directly. I don’t know how enlightened people see the world, I can’t judge how much I’m right about their vision. I speak for myself.
In short, I understand it this way - the world is illusory with respect to our perception. It does not disappear anywhere when we fall asleep in a deep sleep, everything that surrounds us exists, it does not appear with our awakening. We manifest with awakening, or rather awareness appears, the body is in place, it lies peacefully on the bed.
Awareness begins to perceive the surrounding world. And here is how it perceives - and there is an illusion. Perception occurs through the senses, is processed by the mind and presented to the perceiver. The purity of perception is the envy of the purity of the mind. The mind reflects like a mirror, a contaminated mirror reflects distorted, defective, illusory. Zen masters say, "Keep your mirror clean." This applies to both visible (material) objects and objects of feelings. Let's look at two examples:
1. Material objects. Here, the purity of perception depends on the "setting, quality" of the perception organs. That is, for one the object may appear blue, for the other - green. The color of the perceived object depends on the organ of vision. With a disturbed color perception, a person will see differently. That is, the same object is perceived by different people differently. The object is present, but not the same. And if you compare how it is perceived by humans and other creatures ... The spider, salamanders, dogs ... a completely different perception. We can only guess how they see the same object.
In the same way with the sense of smell, touch and so on. What for one stink, for another divine aroma. What is cold for one, for another heat.
Conclusion - perception is inconsistent, not the same. So you can attribute it to the illusory.
2. Objects of feelings. Emotions, thoughts ... In order not to argue for a long time, I will give such an example - Two acquaintances meet, one of them passes by, with a sullen look, not noticing and not greeting the second. The first, not knowing the true reasons for this behavior of his acquaintance, begins to draw far-fetched conclusions: “He is offended by me for something, he did not want to say hello, what did I do to him?” This thought process can stretch for hours. A person will win more and more of himself, asking himself questions and answering them himself. As a result, he may come to the conclusion that his acquaintance has become his worst enemy and is preparing some kind of dirty trick against him, and so they will be imbued with it, that in addition to hatred, rejection, he will not feel anything for this friend of his. And the true state of affairs is such that his friend simply felt unwell, and besides, he struck a wheel in his car and he had to go to the service, be late for a meeting ... But you never know what else. Here you have the final illusory vision of the situation.
That's how a person all the time lives in these illusions, with a clouded, sleeping consciousness. He conducts constant dialogues with himself in his head, completely obeying their conclusions, following their instructions, immersed in elevated emotions, acting from such a state. And this state in no way reflects the true state of things.
Hence the lack of understanding of what and how is happening, why is happening, psychosis, dissatisfaction with oneself and others, suffering.

The world is what it is

The world is what it is, no more and no less. He is not dualistic. Duality is created by the mind.

Good and evil.

Good, evil ... Evil does not exist, just as darkness does not exist. There is only a lack of good and light. Khalil Gibran, through the mouth of his Prophet, said:
“And one of the oldest cities said: Tell us about Good and Evil.
And he replied: I can speak of good in you, and not of evil. After all, what is evil, if not good, tormented by your own hunger and thirst? Truly, when good is hungry, it seeks food even in dark caves, and when it craves it drinks even dead water. ”
If you think very deeply about this issue, you can understand that a person comes to this world with good. As he grows up, he may lose it, depending on his environment, relationship, and so on. With a complete loss of good, a monster grows. So who is to blame for his appearance? Who is to blame for the fact that Hitler killed so many people? I'm not trying to justify it, I'm trying to show the essence of things. Initially, Hitler wanted to become an artist, he was rejected, not accepted into the Academy of Arts, they said that he had no talent. Even if he could not draw such paintings as Van Gogh, Leonardo da Vinci, Michelangelo ... But it was his passion, his desire. He could draw mediocre paintings, but put his soul into them. I think they would be much more beautiful than some paintings by contemporary, fashionable artists exhibited in contemporary art galleries. Then he decided to try himself in architecture, he wanted to turn his energy into a creative channel. They refused him there ... And he was forced to go into politics. And politics has nothing to do with creation. This is the most deceitful and dirty occupation created by mankind. As a result - one of the bloodiest wars in the history of mankind. Millions of dead, crippled ...
What to do with all this? There is a solution, it is simple in description, but difficult to understand and implement. Description? Please clear your mind, make it a servant. When the mind becomes completely calm, a clear, not illusory vision will come. To achieve this, become an observer and act as a master, that is, live from the True Self. From I Am. Become Light to yourself, as Krishnamurti said.

***
“Be who you are. There is nothing to condescend or manifest. It is only necessary to lose the ego. That which IS is always here. Even now you are NOT separated from Him. The void is visible to you, and you are here to see it. Why wait? The thought “I have not yet seen”, the hope of seeing and the thirst to find something - all this is the work of the ego. You are caught in the power of the ego. The ego says it all, not you. Be yourself - and more! ”

“Reality is simply the loss of the ego. Destroy the ego by seeking its authenticity. Since the ego does not have a real being, then it will involuntarily disappear, and the Reality will then shine upon Itself. This is a direct method, while all other methods are performed only with the help of the ego. ”

“There is no greater mystery than this: by the being of Reality, we strive to achieve Reality. We think that there is something that hides our Reality, and that it must be destroyed before the conquest of Reality. This is a ridiculous fallacy. Dawn will come when you yourself will laugh at your past efforts. The one that will arise on that day of your laughter is already here and now. ”

What modern science does not know

Is everything in the world relative?

I recall an old joke about a man crawling at night under a lantern in search of a lost wallet, and the question of where he dropped it, waving his hand in the dark. Laughter provokes the victim’s explanation: “I am looking for him here because it is brighter here!”

Despite such repeatedly ridiculed behavior, we still very rarely dare to look where it is dark, although it is obvious that “in the light” we do not need. Not everyone dares to step into the darkness from the illuminated circle of understandable ideas, but without this there will be no discoveries ...

Among those who crossed this line is Albert Einstein. To someone, he appears in the form of a faddish “Albert Germanovich,” who, only thanks to the prompting of a well-known beer lover, realizes that “E \u003d mc 2”. The more enlightened ones know him as a great physicist who linked two familiar concepts into a single space-time and saw his curvature. But most seriously believe that the phrase "everything in the world is relative" belongs to him. And they calmly declare: “Well, since Einstein himself thinks so, that means, for sure. There is nothing absolute in the world. So, there are no ideals or moral values, and it all depends on what point of view to look at. "

And meanwhile, his theory no less deserves the name "Theory of Absolutes" ...

... Until his worldwide fame, A. Einstein was known, to put it mildly, as an eccentric and a loser. He was kicked out of the gymnasium a year before its graduation. Having brilliantly passed the entrance exams to the Zurich Polytechnic, the then-famous European Center for Scientific Knowledge, it was accepted there only a year later due to the lack of a matriculation certificate. After his graduation, for two years he could not find a permanent job, and then he served in the patent office for several years as an “expert of the 3rd rank”. His unwillingness to “look where it is light” annoyed his colleagues, colleagues, and members of his family. But the darkness of uncertainty beckoned him, despite the need and even hunger that haunted him in the period after the Polytechnic.

The first article, containing the results of studies that were later called the theory of relativity, was published in 1905 in the leading physics journal of the time, “Annals of Physics”. Its author was 26 years old. The theory of relativity was born from the consideration of the paradox that physics encountered at the turn of the 19th – 20th centuries and was associated with the analysis of the propagation of light in the medium.

At first glance, the problem of movement does not seem very interesting to us, and it is even strange that many serious scientists have spent their time and energy studying it. Indeed, we all see around us a certain space in which bodies move or rest. But the trouble is that for different observers moving one relative to another, different objects will be motionless. For example, if we are traveling in a train, then the objects lying in the compartment are motionless for us, while they move for a person standing on the platform, past which the train sweeps. For most people, in a worldly sense, what is not moving relative to the Earth is motionless. But what about a hypothetical observer on the sun? And in general, is it possible to find something “absolutely motionless” in the universe with which one could relate the movement of any object?

At one time, it seemed that the answer to this question was positive. On the basis of a number of experiments (in particular, based on observing the displacement of the apparent position of the stars as the Earth moves), a hypothesis was formulated that light represents waves propagating in an “absolutely motionless” medium called ether. To understand the speed with which we rush into the still space occupied by ether, the American physicist Albert Michelson, and later his compatriot Edward Morley, carried out very accurate experiments, which, to the greatest surprise of scientists, did not find the ether!

Scientists have put forward a series of witty explanations of the results of the experiments of Michelson and Morley. It became clear that our ideas about many familiar things, to put it mildly, are inaccurate. To understand the situation of physicists, we can say that the simplest and at the same time absurd for the turn of the XIX – XX centuries. the explanation of the experiments of Michelson and Morley was that the Earth is absolutely motionless! An attempt to save the “ethereal hypothesis” by the assumption that the Earth carries away a part of the ether that “stuck” to its surface turned out to be unsuccessful, since this assumption contradicted another series of experiments. Irish scientist George Fitzgerald suggested that the ether “presses” on bodies moving through it, causing them to contract, and calculations for bodies moving at the speed of light, led to the fact that their length in the direction of motion should be zero. The same explanation was even more generally proposed by the Dutchman Hendrik Lorenz; in particular, in his opinion, when moving through the “ether wind”, the clock slows down.

These explanations now remind us of attempts to “search where it is light”: they could not tear themselves away from the notions of the ether and were props for this hypothesis. Einstein, however, dared to “step into the dark” and do what later became almost the norm for all physics of the 20th century: to discard what contradicts the observations, and what remains to be considered physical reality, despite all the apparent absurdity.

Einstein rejected the existence of the ether, rejected the concept of absolute peace, the uniform time that flows everywhere and for everyone at the same pace, the concept of absolute size, which equally characterizes the length of an object for all observers. I rejected such an obvious rule of speed addition: for everyone who sailed a boat on a river, shot from the bow or walked on a racing carriage, it is clear that the speed of the boat is the sum of the speed of the water and the speed of the boat relative to the water, etc. However, this was not the case for high speeds close to the speed of light. So, all the usual properties of movement and rest collapsed. And what in return?

First, Einstein introduced two main postulates. The first of them sounds more like a philosophical rather than a physical law: "There is no way to establish whether the body is at rest or in uniform motion." This postulate, in fact, argues that absolute peace does not exist. The second postulate is more physical: "Regardless of the movement of its source, light moves through empty space at the same speed." Its consequence is that the speed of light is the same for any observer in the universe.

And secondly, instead of the former, new absolutes appeared, not so obvious in everyday life, but the only ones that could create a consistent picture of the world. One of them was discussed in the previous paragraph - the speed of light is absolute! The second absolute links space and time together: if each event is described by four numbers - three spatial coordinates (x, y, z) and fourth time t events, then for any observer the same is the space-time interval between two events, the value of which is given by the formula

s \u003d (x 2 + y 2 + z 2 - c 2 t 2) / 2,

where c Is the speed of light. Many of the consequences of the above postulates are very exotic, it is difficult to accept them with ordinary consciousness (this is confirmed by many discussions that are conducted on the Internet by those who have not given themselves the trouble to study the theory of relativity sufficiently deeply). Nevertheless, not only experimental evidence, but also of amazing beauty, the principles of symmetry of nature that follow it convince of the fidelity of this theory. For example, the theory of relativity claims that in a physical system all laws act regardless of whether it moves or rests. The theory asserts the equality of all points of space and time, all directions in space, asserts a new physical reality - space-time with its symmetry, establishes the relationship between gravity and inertia, between mass and energy.

Many concepts that were previously considered independent and in no way related to each other, in the theory of relativity are presented as different facets of a single reality. Thanks to her, the world is now seen by us as much more “unified” than in classical physics, thereby reviving the ideas of ancient cultures on the universal interconnection of all things at a new level.

Alexey Chulichkov, Doctor of Physical Sciences - mat. Sciences, Moscow State University

From the book September 11, 2001 by Meissan Thierry

Note by the US Department of State regarding Osama bin Ladin To justify the bombing on August 28, 1998 in Afghanistan and Sudan, the Department of State issued a documentary note outlining bin Ladin's legend. August 20 United States Army

From the book Broken Wills author Kundera Milan

ONE OTHER REMARK ON THE NEED TO RELEASE REPEATS And a little further on the same page of the Castle: “... Stimme nach Frieda gerafen wurde. “Frieda,” sagte K. in Friedas Ohr und gab so den Ruf weiter. ”That literally means:“ ... some voice called Frida. ”Frida,” K. said in Frida’s ear, passing

From the book Theater and its Double [collection] by Arto Antonen

1. Regarding the content, that is, the selected topics and plots: The Theater of Cruelty will select plots and topics that meet the anxiety and anxiety of our time. He is not going to give the cinema questions of the interpretation of Myths about man and modern life. He will do

From the Treaty on the Reduction of Arms the author Barabanov Mikhail Sergeevich

2. Regarding form. Since the theater’s need to fall back to the sources of eternally passionate poetry, accessible to the feelings of the most backward and scattered part of the public, can be satisfied through a return to the old primitive Myths, we will demand from

From the book, Horus gave birth to a mouse. Bandera author Polishchuk Victor

P.S. Russia has issued a unilateral statement on US missile defense The Strategic Offensive Arms Reduction Treaty, signed on Thursday in Prague by Dmitry Medvedev and Barack Obama, will remain in force until the missile defense builds up

From the book Hamburg Account: Articles - Memoirs - Essays (1914–1933) the author Shklovsky Victor Borisovich

II. 5. A. Hitler's plans for Ukraine and the OUN Both OUN, Melnik and Bandera, joined the German attack on the Soviet Union, both of them sought to create at least an ersatz of the Ukrainian state and in this counted on Germany, which allowed Slovaks and

From the book Other colors author Pamuk Orhan

Regarding Pushkin, we relate to Pushkin as a technician. As a technician, as a technician. If he lived, we would (he would be different) vote whether to accept him in New Lef. Then we would try to get him a representation in the Writers Federation. would be asked: "How many

From the book Literary Newspaper 6334 (No. 30 2011) the author Literary Newspaper

Chapter 32 NINE REMARKS REGARDING BOOK COVERS If a writer does not imagine the cover of his future book, it means that he has already taken place as a mature, comprehensively educated person, he has formed as a person, but has lost simplicity and naivety,

From the book Newspaper Tomorrow 981 (38 2012) author's tomorrow newspaper

Regarding contemporary art Club 12 chairs Regarding contemporary art MOSCOW NEWSLETTER The Moscow Museum of Modern Art and the Free Workshops School of Contemporary Art present the annual international exhibition of young

From the book Perestroika: from Gorbachev to Chubais the author Boyarintsev Vladimir Ivanovich

From the book Capitalism: An Unfamiliar Ideal by Rand Ain

“BE SAME VIGILANT - EVERYTHING IS RELATIVE! Vysotsky once sang this way, but here we are not talking about the theory of relativity, appropriated by the genius of all time and one people by Einstein (which can be read in the book "Jewish and Russian scientists. Myths and reality, M." FERI-V ", 2001 ), but