Acts 17:28 says, “For in him we live, and move, and have our being.” What are the implications of assigning gender to the absolute, according to the nondual framework?

The verse from Acts 17:28 points toward an omnipresent, foundational reality in which all existence occurs. Applying a pronoun to this absolute reality carries specific philosophical implications when examined through a nondual framework.

Within nonduality, the absolute is unconditioned awareness or pure existence, entirely devoid of attributes, form, or division. Assigning gender imposes a dualistic attribute on a nondual reality. Gender inherently requires a counterpart, as the concept of masculine exists only in contrast to feminine. Applying this contrast to the absolute divides the indivisible into categories. Such categorization reduces the infinite to a human-like entity, imposing the boundaries of human experience onto a boundless state.

Using a gendered pronoun creates an implicit separation between the observer and the absolute. A personified entity is typically conceived as a discrete being, existing apart from other beings. Nonduality asserts that there is no fundamental separation between the observer and the observed reality. Characterizing the ultimate truth as a specific entity fosters a relational dynamic, such as a subject interacting with an external object or creator. This externalization extracts an individual’s essential nature and casts it across a conceptual divide. Once the absolute is established as a separate, supreme object, a hierarchical structure naturally forms to bridge the newly created gap between the mundane subject and the divine object. The absolute ceases to be recognized as an ever-present reality and is instead transformed into a distant destination, accessible only through moral righteousness, intermediary authorities, or adherence to specific doctrines.

Language inherently relies on dualities to function, necessitating nouns, verbs, and pronouns to communicate concepts. Scriptural texts frequently employ anthropomorphic language as a conceptual bridge to make the infinite comprehensible to the human mind. Furthermore, the original Greek pronoun used in Acts 17:28 can function grammatically as either masculine or neuter. The distinctly gendered phrasing found in many modern translations is a byproduct of human interpretation and linguistic structure rather than a literal assertion of divine gender within the source text. A philosophical issue arises only when the linguistic pointer is mistaken for the absolute reality. Reifying the pronoun traps the understanding of the absolute within a conceptual boundary.

True nondual realization involves seeing beyond all conceptual overlays. The absolute cannot be male, female, or even neutral in a conventional sense, because all such designations belong to the realm of phenomena and form. To state that the absolute is masculine implies that the absolute is not feminine, which contradicts the premise that the absolute is the substance of all things, including all genders, forms, and expressions. The ultimate reality encompasses all dualities while remaining entirely untouched by them. ●