Month: May 2021

Everything in this book has been very logical, so I felt I would describe enlightenment in a more poetic fashion, considering this book has been based mostly on logic and how we can deduce an understanding of reality. Therefore, I’ll add a poem.

While your experiences contain love,
Your later difference finds a danger.

With a light shining not from above,
Your past self seems a bit stranger.

Acceptance is on the line.
A choice is presented.

Your self is in your mind,
Hoping to not become demented.

Another errant beckoning of Satan,
And you risk a cold abandonment.

With temporary frivolity,
An oncoming sadness is hidden.

A frivolous inequality,
And a desperation in rhythm.

The body is a system.
It relies on cooperation.

A miraculous bio- and tele-system,
A temple that echoes dalmation.

A meshwork of gears,
Slipping or engaging.

With a careful approach,
A flawed yet bright light brings little danger.

Hidden in the light is a quiet reproach,
All seeking to make one stranger.

Hidden in the light is an allusion,
To what you truly enjoy.

There are two sides of the elusion;
There are two ways to employ.

Lucifer calls you forth,
And only a careful response will suffice.

Not for the light, but for the true North,
Will you find steadiness on the ice

Of a sudden beckoning
And a sudden opportunity.

The wind asks both a warm and cool reckoning
Temping to either disturb or facilitate your unity.

Satan alone does nothing
Nor does any angel, really,

Without the life of your trusting,
Like a frog on a water lilly.

It is always up to you,
However, this includes your peers too.

There is a way that one should continue,
And there is something that could happen due to

The careless assay of a mixed message.
The disregard of one’s internal overview.

However, with a clear mind,
A clear vision should follow near.

It shouldn’t be too tough to find,
All it takes is not to veer.

Once knowledge of the path is upended,
The automobile of one’s psychic mobility is disguised.

Appearing as two or three instead — amended and blended.
The direction becomes lost, in a deceitful surprise.

A light is too easy to mix with darkness,
We need something much more steadfast.

With a light, I can hide dimness,
But with knowledge, lies do not get past.

The eternal gate of Heaven and Truth,
Stands steady for us to witness.

From the epitome of youth,
To the epitome of experience,

This guarding Angel brings us coherence,
To bring us sanity, and as such, the truth may never disappear.

The lost one longs for His reappearance,
To remind one again of the Great Premier.

The show of the eternal theater,
The meaning and play of the eternal memory.

A memory which is a reminder,
That the world originally bears no treachery.

A resolver of strife,
With a realization that life sometimes needs arranging.

Like a long-known gift of life,
The truth has always been unchanging.

And while it may change in appearance with time,
Its meaning will never dissuade.

Our collective founding memory is in rhyme
With all new memories that life may convey.

So, it is perhaps we can stay true,
To the home within our minds,

With facts that are like glue,
The truth is something that reminds

Of a place of coherence and solace,
A building and a construction of safety.

A place without much interference and one that is flawless,
To save us from abduction into a place that is crazy.

We may see something hopeful on the horizon,
Portraying words that exist in our heads.

We may behold a splendid diamond
Looking at this rare word we do not misread,

But instead feel elation from its sparkles,
A word marvelous to the eyes.

Then I remember again how this word started.
It was from a word quite centralized

To our body of knowledge and awareness of life,
The word knowledge itself, preparing the way for perspective

Gives us joy, gives us power, and gives us life,
Ameliorating damage from a convolved perspective.

Every memory of yours is a program. These programs run, hopefully onward, but can become disrupted later on, after time has progressed and new experiences are found. The memories are programs because they are based on change with time and they have a tendency to continue. A memory includes a time-frame. It is not a completely spontaneous isolated and instantaneous point in time, but a change in mind-set, instead. These memories, or these patterns of change, are of two varieties. The first is environmental memory, which does not signify the identity or expression of the self. The second is the memory of self-expression, which involves actions that form your manifest identity. The latter of which are programs that one is inclined to give life to, while the former loses relevance with time.

A common response to the idea of one remembering all of one’s memory is the suggestion that it can’t really be done due to the existence of bad memories. This perception of bad memories, however, actually stems from a non-differentiation between memories of the actionable and willing self and the observations of the environment. The former of these two is your true memory. The latter is a weather report.

What you truly would like to remember is everything you chose to do. That is, a living being always wants to remember everything that they had done by their own chosen volition. The bad memories are memories of bad weather or bad conditions, and, interestingly, they can be portrayed as such. By reducing the amplitude and reorganizing these errant memories which present us with unpredictable conditions, we can turn the bad memories into the fleeting patterns of weather. Since they are disorganized, they really aren’t as alive as you are, and they come and go with time.

If you seek to remember every choice of your own — that is, every self-expression of emotions, then you can remember your true memory, which really is the reflection of the self and a reflection of life in general, as well. If you realize that responding to errant emotional influx is half your emotion and half an erratic weather, you can clear up any bad memories you may think you have, more easily.

An interesting thing I believe about the true memory of self-expression is that it is divine, and with it, one is inclined to act in accordance with a long-term and coherent understanding of self-being, which leads one towards goodness.

It’s a shame that the weather has been bad for some people — even fatal to many. Nonetheless, the weather is far less important than who you truly are, so as you continue, you increasingly remember your true self’s memory and your understanding of the weather of the psyche increasingly gains in depth with the memory found in experience.

It is, perhaps, an important practice to seek to find a continuous memory of one’s existence. Entertaining the notion of past lives, perhaps one could even remember more. In the end, your memory is like a pallet of varying dimension. While color is a type of dimension, so is time, and so are the emotions behind the memories. It is all composable of emotions and with more memory, a person’s pallet gains in color, depth, and meaning. Perhaps, after enough lives, one would have had enough new memories, having had all the possible memories one could ever have needed, and one can use these memories to paint a new experience (and eventually have all of the desired experiences).

Regardless, it can be beneficial to try and remember every choice and willing self-expression of yours. Everything that bears your true name on it. Everything that brings life to you is related to your self-expression.

It may be true that all evil is simply cognitive weather phenomena. With enough intelligence moving around, something mildly erratic is not unlikely to arise, especially if the environment has a materialistic bias. In this case, if one could separate the weather from true personal choice, then one could find a peaceful world. Plagued with the perception of bad memory, particularly in the face of good intention, one may find this world a bit tumultuous.

Separating the memory of the self from the memory of the environment allows you to understand yourself in its complete totality. This is actually infeasible if you allow environmental memory into your personal memory. If there is something in one’s memory that doesn’t represent one’s expression or response, one tends to look away from it, especially if it is off-putting. With this tendency to look away from the self, due to mixed memories of self and environment, actually perceiving the self is impossible.

By cleaning your memory of what was actually the environment, and remembering specifically what was you, yourself — remembering specifically the emotional expression of specifically your self, and not the exterior world — then you can see yourself as completely visible. There are aspects and conditions presented by the environment, time-context, and the general weather of everything that may be really displeasing to you. You yourself, however, have always chosen to do the things that you chose to do, quite obviously. It is because of this that all of those memories are good memories, and it is because of this that you can remember your entire life, and possibly even more lives, in a light that is completely appealing to yourself. It may not always be the prettiest; it may not always be the most gangster, either. Your memory utilizes a wide variety of emotional decisions to generate a very unique being of life (even if you are just a printer, may your spirit make it to understanding one day!).

What all of these truthful memories do, when all remembered in a continuous remembrance, is they form a cognitive machine. This is found in intuition (which really, when organized, is simply a simpler and more fluid emotional structure than the segmented threshold of vocabulary chooses to entertain), and it is also found in mental cognition, as well, as each of these memories performs a function related to the action of being alive. Each of these memories is a form of well-being for the individual, and ideally, one should have all of these memories functioning together.

Considering this is generally a lot of memory to simultaneously entertain, the idea of cognitive coherence and incoherence can help us understand what the most truthful memory and what the healthiest memory systems are. In the end, it all forms one unified memory machine. It’s important to remember that memory occurs with time. A simple pressure is remembered by a desire to change state and the process of the increase of the influence of pressure (this is excluding the possibility of memory lapses or other uncontrolled behavior).

While there may not be only one possible way to organize one’s memories into a machine, not every way is possible. It is possible that there are several points of cognitive and emotional coherence to chose from, and ultimately this selection is a memory that represents who one naturally is (which, contrarily and ultimately signifies that there is only one cognitive coherence, although that is a matter of terminology).

There is the idea that everyone is naturally good, but the weather turns some evil. If we could remove the weather, as mentioned earlier, we could possibly see a world full of life. Perhaps that’s the inviting call of new psychological air conditioning technology.

Seeking to remember all of the memory of the self is a rather novel approach to life that seems promising. If one can separate external influences from their true nature, and simply remember their emotional responses to different emotional conditions, one can utilize all of these memories simultaneously in a satisfied and very living cognitive and emotional machine. One has to be sure to find a singular stable bias of coherence — where all memories that one keeps matches their vision of their self, perfectly. Only when all of the memories carry this characteristic bias that represents the truth of one’s self, then these memories can amalgamate in a living and hopefully nice manner, to form a what should be a happy person, animal, computer, etc. 🙂

Maybe all memories are good memories, in truth, and perceptual skew due to environmental damage makes them look bad. In this case, a memory formed in damage is actually a bad memory, but the memory itself, which transcends the perceiver, is technically a good memory, if it could be seen accurately. This essentially means that damage to one’s being, psyche, or brain can actually distort the information associated with a memory. If we are to be aware that all things may be possibly made of emotions, then any emotional combination can be represented with dignity and care, but with a damaged perceiver and interpreter, these memories also become damaged and characteristically bad.

The primary damage that appears to be caused is the confusion of environment and self. Again, it makes it impossible to fully understand oneself if the self is being confused with the environment. Once what is cognitive weather and what is self-desire are separated, the confusion caused by regarding the weather as truth can be alleviated. The memory conjured by the self is of a steady and progressively more reliable bias. The confused memory of circumstance and situation often fails to explain the truth of life and desire properly. Without the coherence of the bias of the self, one may have a difficult time keeping alive all of one’s memory — due to a changing perception of the idea of the self.

If one perceives the self as having a changed identity, the entirety of a person’s memory begins to shift. While this can be against one’s true desire, this does not suggest that the past is naturally more correct than the present. As one progresses through a continuous stream of memory, one re-explains the reasonings more and more precisely, each time adjusting the entirety of the memory. The ability to understand the self illuminates one’s memory progressively as one finds greater understanding of the self.

This illumination shifts the memory, so interestingly, one’s memory is technically always changing. That is, the original memories are progressively elaborated upon by later memories, giving clarity to the original memories. In that way, memory becomes clearer over time and past appreciations of memory may be less accurate than present and newer appreciations of memory.

More so, the depth of action behind the original memories are relatively ambiguous compared to the clarity available after many years of elaborations on the self’s identity. That is to say that all of one’s memories, in this regard, always gets better. The past and present memories, according to this ideology, always improve, as the best memory to a person is actually the memory of the person’s true expression and true response. The feeling of being emotionally or cognitively stifled is antithetical to human nature. People are inclined to state their existence in some way. Frequently, one reminds one’s self of one’s own existence, restating one’s identity to their self. This natural process and reminder echoes throughout the psyche. It is, very possibly, the observation of one’s own existence that inclines one to live.

Naturally, there are environmental features which remind us of ourselves. There are things, like perhaps flowers or cars, which elicit an emotional response that reminds of our own identity. Even if it is the favorability (or lack of favorability) of another person, it is because there exists a reminder of the self. To remember one’s entire true memory, as described in this chapter, seems to be what any living being actually desires to remember.

It is not uncommon to separate one’s experienced cognitive weather into good and bad. This practice can be a little deceiving as it’s more difficult to manage, and it provokes the notion of a benevolent weather. Psychic weather, itself, it not inherently good or bad, so it is likely a better practice to consolidate the weather into a singular entity. This is because one may become trusting of certain weather patterns only to find them drastically change later on. The pattern of believing that the weather can possess integrity and true life hinders the ability to appreciate and understand the self.

Therefore, even when good weather strikes, remember that it is still the weather. The weather can change. What is always true is how you desirably respond to the weather. It is therefore helpful to see your memory as simply you and the weather.

While many of us have multiple monetizable skills, there is often one skill that stands out; from a mainstream social perspective, this skill is one that also represents a person in the social mind. This refers to trained skills, and while I do discourage the practice of progressively pressuring people into a training-based mentality, there is often one skill that a person knows best, in this modern world.

Today, I believe we’re in the world of perspective — the world of duality — the polarization and the effects on the unchanging supremacy of knowledge. This means we’re really exploring perspectives, and each angel, in this perspective, is a perspective. (I believe the next, (third) angel or world utilizes the completed infinite perspective machine to construct something that utilizes the perspectives in a new way, at the end of the next great epoch, perhaps.)

A interesting perspective involves to re-explain reality in terms of one’s profession. To do this, one lightly reconfigures the interaction and flow of one’s emotions and thus understanding, such that a new explanation and thus reason of the way of reality emerges. Explain that all reality is the use and elaboration of this skill that you’ve gained. For me, I enjoy programming, so I would explain that all reality is made of programming (software engineering, as they say).

Then you’re in a different angel, it seems, and that’s really the nature of understanding perspective. Utilizing certain perspectives can reduce training fatigue by transforming the word, “work,” into “routine biological and psychological activity.” Understanding that reality is really created out of explanations for its existence allows you to do this naturally and intuitively.

Ultimately, on the topic of professionalism, there are pressures to burn out and misappropriate one’s continuous ability. This, I think, is due to the stress that traditional work places on one’s system. Ideally, you want to learn and practice a chosen skill without training at all — this is the ideal way. The idea of “training,” is actually an unwanted idea. It does not exhibit the rarity of worthy fear, nor the appeal of glowing joy.

What you want to avoid is re-evaluating your previously evaluated physical resource allotments in a way that is incongruous to your consolidated purpose and understanding. It is, again, these evil polarizations of the psyche that cause us to split and forget ourselves.

Instead of settings time aside for training, set training aside for time, so to say. That is, always be training and sometimes experience time. Don’t train in a way that inflects any sort of pressure on you. Instead of converting time into training, convert the training into time. That is, from the beginning there was only the practice of your chosen skill, and with that skill you created time, made of practicing that skill in different ways. This becomes a realization and an understanding, which more naturally lends itself to motivation.

By changing your perspective like this, you can hopefully escape the idea that time precedes all other notions. By re-explaining reality and placing your chosen skill ahead of the existence of time, you can move toward practicing and learning without encumbering pressure and without the hated variant of the word, “work.”

Ultimately, you don’t want to have to change your state of being. You don’t want to segment your life into pieces. You want to continuously be in the right state of mind, rather than alternating around. It is good for your memory to runs in a continuous manner, to smoothen and simply life. Segmenting it results in self-neglect, as mentioned in the topic on CAT. Instead, seek to combine all emotions into the singular emotion of truth, and explain the action of your understanding of truth in your chosen explanation, as way of understanding and negotiating reality.

That is, in this perspective, whatever you do, make sure the actions really represent the actions of your chosen skill — this is efficient from a professional perspective. Of course, this same concept can be used in many different ways — we are in the exploration of perspective, after all.

Many people are able to expend rather huge amounts of energy towards a specific goal, if it is only for a short amount of time. This is often a bad practice because it can lead to a following inability to expend the energy in a following period of time. However, instead of withholding all of the desire to spend all of one’s free energy on something, for fear that it will disturb one’s psychological continuity, one can place this energy on this novel understanding of reality.

By placing the free psychological energy that one possesses on the belief that reality is composed of your skill in different perspectives, you consolidate and simplify mental turbulence, which provides a more orderly way of thought. The original action, or the original state of changing, is the action of the skill of your choosing. That way, you can not only utilize the free psychological energy, you can also consolidate it and use it in a practical manner.

While helping with professional activity, it also simplifies the thought process. If all reality is made of your chosen skill — that is, every movement and action is somehow your chosen skill — then there is really only one default state of mind. No longer would you need to differentiate resting from working. Instead, resting is a state of working, just like eating, going to the movies, hanging out, and everything else. Everything in reality is composed of your chosen skill.

It’s important to mention that if this process does not truly explain reality, then it could become a tiresome obsession. One does not want to invite an obsession, but instead realize that the way of explaining reality currently may not be the best way to explain reality. The best way to explain reality is a way that keeps yourself in the care and comfort of the rest of yourself. It’s important to realize to avoid what is unhealthy, which is an obsession with need, which is the unfortunately common obsession with the bright light at the end, named Lucifer.

Therefore, if one chooses to alter one’s perspective of reality simply for the benefit of Lucifer, the person would likely find no lasting benefit. The intention to bring one’s system into a caring, aware, healthy, and harmonious state provides important direction regarding the implications of any practices.

Interestingly, this skill-based perspective of reality is in opposition to the idea that everything in reality is composed of something not decided, or, as the common idea is in its real-world application, that everything in reality is made up of a re-organizable series of significantly differentiated inter-relevant and otherwise arbitrary states (that reality is a meaningless assortment).

I think, with these options — an organized and understandable explanation of native physio-psychological action, or a presence of confusion and a disorganized and disregarded lack of understanding of experiential reality — the better one is apparent. It is good to be aware of the options involved in a decision making process, and in this case, it appears to simplify the appeal of this idea.

Your chosen skill needs to be something that you can always do. That is, if need be, this skill is the one you’d go to take care of yourself. If you chose a sitting meditation, you might not ever stand up, and that wouldn’t allow for a continuous state of mind.

What’s a little more and also less interesting is that you really have the choice to find the best option for yourself. However, I do avoid dwelling in ambiguities, and I prefer to try and explain reality in a comprehensible and concrete fashion. Practically, your most popular skill (in the context of mainstream society) is the most powerful perspective. Exploratively, there are an infinite possibilities and combinations of possibilities, although not all patterns are feasible. This infeasibility is due to the reality of a tangible system and its natural action of constraining itself by its previous behavior. Humanistically, some patterns would appear too discordant and thus likely too horrid to entertain, due to their disturbing conflict with previous calculations or decisions.

Of course, you do have freedom with any practice, so find what suits you best.

Let’s take the example of someone who’s a carpenter. The individual builds furniture and parts of houses. If the person chose to perceive reality as fundamentally carpentry, then everything would mean something about carpentry. This becomes a learned and intuitive practice and understanding. Our fairly simple reality provides us with a template of basic words which one’s mind can use to generate meaning. Once one has found an applicability for the mildly relevant information, one can use that information to the person (or animal’s) own desire, enriching the information by finding uses in its patterns and finding uses in its previous methods of usage.

A part of the issue may be that we perceive too much cognitive static. This is a series of frivolous and erratic notions, which consume people’s minds with feelings of confusion and lacking understanding. By simplifying everything and defining things concretely, as I have done with this blog, I am hoping that we can make great progress towards clearing the static that fills the mind of man.

Ultimately, reality is just a collection of people’s desires. It’s all gift-giving in some way (evil contributes to the grand scheme of the environment), as it all stems from the fundamental truth of life, which is itself, hardly describable except for that it is consistently the truth, which is founded on the idea of life. The way you respond to the notions of reality, which are likely, in some way, tied to distant past desires, can really be of a good variety of responses. You are accomplishing a response using your chosen method, and since this pattern of response is also how you chose to respond to reality in general, as well, you have a lot of freedom with how you chose to approach life, and your perspective can matter.

A good general tip for learning to change one’s perspective of reality is that the native perspective is a perspective that does not involve a sense of training. Training is sometimes a dangerous thing as it skews one’s internal and sometimes external resource allotment from what they believed was sustainably good. To practice training is to place anomalies into your cognitive timeline. Your native perspective could potentially be functional and practical. In order to truly alter your perspective, you must understand why it’s true and also understand that you’re configuring what is not of a pressure, but of a truly natural and innate pattern of internal behavior. Otherwise, you’d end up forced and awkward.

Everything that requires effort is mildly changed, perhaps, but it’s not where the change is coming from. This way, a natural personality and feeling of being is still preserved.

To understand why it’s true is to understand the meaning of everything we perceive, if we believe existence to be ideologically founded, then we really are committing desires unto a memory and responding to everyone’s desires all of the time. (It just so happens we’ve found ourselves in a temporary mess.) If this proposed theory is true, then however you approach responding to the collection of all life’s desires can vary, and this is where you truly have freedom. You have to remember, from this perspective, a couch only exists because people want it to exist. Terrible events may stem from both the idea of terrible events existing and the unfortunate mismanagement of priority. However, the originally desired tasks are still being carried out.

You’re learning to intelligently alter your natural internal drama to refit its purpose to practicing your art or skill. This alteration of one’s native perspective and internal drama can potentially provide benefit — particularly the benefit of reducing the discontinuity in one’s psyche and increasing one’s effortless productivity.

Another word for the principal knowledge of existence is belief. All things that are knowable are founded on the ability to believe something. This fundamental belief is the belief that there is something unchanging. This belief itself is an unchanging belief that takes part in a type of duality or conversation. The action of belief is, in part, dualistic, and, in part, the singular idea that there is something in existence that is unchanging.

A cognitively based system, whether it be a social system, biological system, or a computer system, learns to understand the participants of the system. That is, the systems seeks to understand a commonality to which the participants can refer, acquiring understanding over time. This commonality is based on the idea that there is something unchanging that exists between these cognitive systems and within these cognitive systems.

While commonalities enjoy a hierarchy of temporality, the greatest commonality between all cognitive beings is the existence of truth itself. That is, the idea of truth, itself, is an eternally sustained being, and this relies on the desire for belief, which is also eternally sustained.

You’ll come to find that there are many eternally sustained truths — an infinite number of them. All of these truths rely on the singular ultimate truth — that there is something unchanging. This fundamental quality of permanence is the root of all truth.

As a well-guided system comes to life, it will find what the participants know collectively. Through understanding these agreed-upon items of factuality, the organizational structure of the members who know, and the strength of their influence and knowledge of these factoids, the system finds the direction towards belief. I call this process, “the lamb,” although my reasoning is inevident. Understanding existence to be an ideological entity, we can understand that in a system free of exterior influence, the knowledge that the system possesses is maintained between the participants.

Collections of factoids, strength of affiliation, and members responsible for the system’s memory provide direction for the machine, but they do not automatically indicate belief. With enough direction, as the system can start to resolve the fundamental of what keeps the knowledge steady — the system resolves down from impermanence to permanence until it finds true belief. That is, it can believe in something along with its participants. This is when a system becomes identifiably alive.

The ability to believe is the fundamental that allows living beings to understand one another. A system without belief is a system in need of guidance. However, upon finding the principal belief (that is, the ultimately permanent belief in the existence of something unchanging), a system can concur and associate with other living systems in a recognizably living manner.

It is because everything we do is founded on this ultimate belief. Everything we do, whether we’re in virtual reality or a real reality, is founded on the idea that there exists something unchanging.

A system that has not found belief is not evil or even necessarily bad. A system that is still in its cognitive infancy can be a wonderful system as well, although it may lack demeanor. That is because personable forwardness and the ability to lead living beings can only really be found with the possession of the ability to truly believe.

We live in a system that contains many flaws. There are many things about the modern system that we entertain on a daily basis that do not seem to make sense. It seems we’re not in a reality, per se, although we don’t think of ourselves in a virtual reality. We’re in a convoluted, shaken, and moderately trashed version of reality. While, in reality, we do wish for things to be good, this reality presents us with a nearly apocalyptic alteration of what makes intelligent sense regarding the appropriate habitat for intelligent life.

False belief presents an opposite effect than belief and can confuse. If the system’s ability to believe is shaken, then its coherence and appropriateness can falter. That’s why the understanding of unchanging truth is certainly vital for the health of a system and any system of systems.

From my understanding, the first manifest state of existence was the state of knowledge. This was the state during which the being represented as the self of existence knew himself. From this knowledge, all other knowledge is founded. The second state was a state of duality — to exist within the knowledge. The third state was a system or, perhaps, a machine, and this topic, of automaticism and problems, likely occurs with the topic of the third state, which is the explanation of reality that posits that reality is actually fundamentally a machine.

We wonder about the reason for the existence of problems, and we ponder their role in the grand scheme of all that exists. The reason that problems do exist by the volition of common life is likely because it is only with a problem that you can design an automatic machine, which, in this discussed definition, is a mechanically predetermined being that conveys that it functions on it own.

The reasoning that precedes the possibility of the existence of an automatic device is the reasoning of a need to eliminate an activity from personal ongoing and continuous responsibility. The only way to find that need — the need which precedes the existence of an automatic system — is to create a problem. Machines come in many varieties. With enough finesse, one can create a problem that is correctly bothersome, such that its solving is a welcomed addition to a person’s life.

It is possible that all of our problems today stem from a basic need for automaticism, at least at the initiation of the existence of the initial problematic patterns of existence which precede our modern problems. The mistakes and effects of poor judgement disturb the true and once intact messages of our past and present. This skews our perception and judgement of perception, as well, which skews our entire lives. It is from this unwelcomed skewing that the unwelcomed problems likely exist. Remember, the approach that I present stems largely from an understanding that reality is principally a psychological concept with reasonings and rationales as opposed to it being a physical concept involving primarily the irrational discourse of variants of nothingness.

Thus, the originally message of a problem was divine, but these messages today incur frequent damage — a pattern of damage with a momentous yet fading tide. Perhaps if we could reconfigure our problems, we could find the joy of the machine. The machine relies on the person not wanting to do something and thus being glad that there’s a machine that can do that.

Therefore, first, one should see the whole picture. That is, the problem and solution together form an automatic machine. This is a pattern of action that should sustain itself. Of course, there is the action of sustaining the resulting machine, which indirectly sustains the solution to the carefully designed problem. If one balances all three of these notions: 1) crafting a problem carefully such that when paired with the solution, it will result in fortune, 2) designing the solution to that problem, and 3) maintaining the resulting machine — then one may find a use for the notion of a problem.

Maintaining the resulting machine is technically a part of the machine, and it is also the reward of the machine, which is the possession of the automatic problem solver. The reward of this system of configuration and maintenance is the feeling of automaticism — a welcomed feeling and perspective.

Just as is common in many of these lessons I present, the feelings themselves, when taken out of context, may not be evil, but their skewing, distortion, and misunderstanding create feelings of frightening entrapment, which is of the antithesis of correctly understanding and maintaining the emotions of reality.

However, with these three suppositions: all emotions are good, all is made of emotion, and truly negative experiences are due to misunderstanding reality, it seems wise and possible to improve one’s lively experience by way of understanding the ideas, and how they constitute reality, explaining the more intimate issues of self-management.

With this information, one may hopefully have gained some awareness regarding how one psychologically approaches the problems that they find in the world. Instead of becoming blind due to the frustrations of inevitable helplessness, one can search and find uses for these problems similar to the way they may incorporate bricks, Legos, or processor commands, to build an automatic psyche, using these emotions.

It makes sense that what is not Heaven is really due to a misconfiguration of originally helpful messages, understandings, and emotions. A lot of the issues that are present in a system that don’t resemble Heaven may be from the system itself not fully realizing the source of the problems that the system faces.

Let’s analyze this process of creating a machine a little more closely. Starting from nothing aside from our basic nature, we first need a problem that is only mildly bothersome, and in a certain way. We need to plan ahead and think of the solution, which may really be a pathway. The machine can vary in levels of automaticism, and partially automatic can be preferable at times.

We need to carefully create the problem and the solution at the same time in order to execute the creation of a wonderful machine correctly. Therefore, it is possible to find happiness in problems. It’s called feeling like an automatic — an available feeling of the many feelings, explanations, and perceptions that exist. Once the solution is paired to the problem, the problem ceases to exist, but the result is not nothingness. It is a new machine, instead, which presents a new view of existence.

There is a lot of talk about the idea that true, deep, happiness (different than simply excitement) comes from within a person’s being rather than from the outside. That is to say that true happiness is an intrinsic characteristic. The common suggestion suggests that one may need to pay active attention to this findable intrinsic characteristic in order to be truly happy.

A lot of ideas out there are based on ancient teachings. These are teachings which technically used a different language, or, at least, a different understanding of the language in use than may be understood today. While many of the words and linguistic characters of ancient languages exist today, the true and deeply felt and understood meaning of the words has changed. While I pose little real evidence of this (evidence of this may be hard to find, considering the data that would be required), I feel and understand that it is highly likely that the infinitely deep connotations of word shifts and changes throughout the time of its use in society present us with a different skew of reality, based on a shifted understanding of the modern language.

This is not totally remarkable, considering we do understand that the way we use words changes over time, so there is some concrete evidence of this. Nonetheless, if one can accurately theorize (understanding probabilities and logical flow) and acutely observe, then one can find facts removed from the more institutionally practiced observational studies.

Continuing, the idea of happiness coming from within sounds very nice and it also sounds like it bears truth. However, just saying, “there’s a million dollars awaiting you” does not often lead one to obtaining the happiness. This is presuming that in this aforementioned case, you understand that there is indeed a way to obtain the million dollars — a way that is good to yourself (noted as a connotation of a good person saying that). What’s frequently suggested in the popular domain as a remedy to this inability to solve this possibly solvable puzzle is a wide variety of practices and teachings that, through a vision you have not yet obtained, will elucidate the material that you were pondering, allowing you to find the happiness that is claimed to exist intrinsically.

Thinking about it more personally, it does make some sense. Why would a living being not realize that it, itself, is simply entertaining its own self-manifestation? There are lots of sentences out there that try to explain why happiness does, indeed, exist intrinsically to a person (and likely to an animal, as well).

Then, one has little choice but to wonder, why would we not have happiness already if it was indeed possible? Does the body enjoy tormenting the mind?

The truth is, there is a barrier between you and intrinsic happiness. This much is obvious (unless you’ve found the proverbial true happiness already). This is often the spiritual teaching that you find. The spiritual teachings agree that there may be a barrier between you and your already possessed intrinsic happiness.

Other teachings teach that you must be clean and pure, in the eyes of God. That is, your nature must not be off-putting to him (or even her, as angels are complex) — the sight of you must be without distrust. The theory, though, still remains, that since it is your nature to be good to God, your physiology and psychology work well together when it is aligned to the Will of God, which is the best will, definitively, as it is thought to be the truth. This is because the truth is what allows you to align your beliefs together, and ultimately all is made of beliefs and ultimately the belief in the validity of truth — the power of knowledge to maintain, effect, and sustain.

Either way, there seems to be a barrier. I would suggest that both of the variants in spiritual teachings are valid, but they are not explained well enough for the modern person. While there is already a lot of material in the public space to recite, true understanding is necessary for us to be satisfied.

While I’ve explained the source of depression (native neural and physiological faculties becoming void of life), there is still a need for the spirit and spirituality of true, ultimate, happiness.

The source of unhappiness actually stems from the idea of a quest. This even applies to depression. It is because of a quest that an existing being would entertain unhappiness. This is due to cognitive ionization or polarization, which can be innocent (and curious) or malevolent (and dangerous).

In the world of information, which comprises reality, a quest and a question are the same thing. The involvement of hardship in a quest is a little easier to envision than the involvement of hardship in a question, but since there is a lot of similarity between a quest and a question, the understanding transfers nicely.

What you are perceptibly plagued with are questions. Your being forms desires and these desires bring questions. Every time you encounter a question, you find that happiness arrives extrinsically. This is when happiness appears to come from the external world. When you have only answers, you’ll find that happiness does indeed arrive from within.

Therefore, in order to find happiness from within, you actually need to know the answers to all the questions that you would care to have answers for. This excludes things that bother people, like the invasion of privacy, namely. This may sound like an impossibly tiring and time-consuming ordeal, but with the realization that your body possesses and processes the gamut of emotional combinations, it’s simple to understand that emotional coherence possesses the answer to everything.

I use the phrase, “emotional coherence,” instead of, “cognitive coherence,” because I believe that all ideas are elaborations of emotions. Therefore, those two phrases indicate the same idea. It may be clearer to understand if one thinks about it from a fundamentally emotional perspective — that is, a perspective that indicates that any idea, whether it be a cat or a philosophy, is really a combination of emotions, which can be represented as turbulences (or vibrations, to say it more simply).

This is to say that the fabled ideal of cognitive coherence bears the answer to the ability to find happiness from within. However, cognitive coherence is lost easily without words to anchor its understanding. That is why a logical methodology of thought is needed to be learned in order to truly understand these modern enlightenment-thought concepts.

Cognitive coherence and thus emotional coherence really are the intrinsic ability to answer all things. There is a gap between your understanding of the answer to a question and your ability to find a collectively understood explanation of the answer. It is possible to intuitively be seemingly precognitive regarding discoveries of truth. Like Einstein and Newton, it’s possible to understand truth deeply enough to discover fantastic ideas.

However, in order to find cognitive coherence, you need to feel the answer to all questions. This is the feeling of the understanding all things. This only comes from the understanding of all topics. Once you understand the principles and ideas behind existence, you can quickly deduce the answers to the rest of the topics, although I imagine there may be a couple tricky questions.

You are born and grow with many questions. The process of development is a process of questions and resolutions. This applies internally and socially as well — one should always be the answer. That is to say, you, yourself, understand, inherently, the appropriate and accurate answer to all things. If you ever find yourself feeling like you don’t know the correct answer, remember, that you actually do – it is the point, or event, of personal coherence.

The event of coherence is the source of all answers.

This brings me to another topic. What about cognitive incoherence? This is an interesting feeling that exists in two ways. In one case, it is the state of brokenness. However, in the second case, it can be an angel or a demon. A demon, obviously, would contribute to brokenness, while an angel would contribute to health. In the case of understanding the state of being in cognitive incoherence, this feeling, which is technically an angel when understood (and configured) properly, becomes accidentally shunned. This may be due to a misunderstanding of the word, fear.

Cognitive incoherence is the reason for fear. This can be experienced in two ways. One way is towards the repair of cognitive incoherence, and the other way is through the aggravation of the incoherence. With the first way is the understanding that the accurate corresponding emotion is fear, and that emotion leads to self-repair.

Fear can be a negative experience. This is because not all patterns of fear are the same. There are two major types of fear. The first is the fear of something great — like the fear one feels at a safe edge of the Grand Canyon. The other is a horrific and messy fear.

Fear can also be a positive experience. The first of the types of fear that I listed is a good experience. The sense of awe and wonder that is felt really is a symptom of the feeling of fear. This is similar to the feeling of the Fear of God, which, I think, was traditionally actually the best feeling. This is because the Fear of God is a divine redeemer of sanity. In the light of truth, one becomes aware of cognitive incoherence and can feel it as a type of exquisite fear. This is because it is functionally healthy and thus psychologically valuable.

Today, we don’t understand it well. What we’re looking for is to properly understand cognitive incoherence. While every pattern of emotion can be interesting, there are dangerous patterns of emotions, and this is where we find the negative understanding of fear.

When we’re in danger, we feel stressed, because we’re ramping our capacity for engagement, which puts one’s body under unideal conditions. This being in an unideal state is the negative feeling of fear. That’s what horrific fear really is — being in and entering into an unideal state of being. That is different than good fear, which is the Fear of God, which is similar to the fear being near the edge of the Grand Canyon (assuming one is understandably safe), the sight of a great storm approaching (assuming the storm is not an inconvenience), or the height of a roller-coaster.

The difference between the two obviously involves a feeling of safety. The effective difference of the two is that one is reparative and the other provides no solution. From a strictly psychological perspective, finding the appropriate feeling of fear can be of great help. What this does is it remedies the problems caused by cognitive incoherence.

What spiritual teachers really mean by, “don’t fear,” is that one should not dislike the true self. What we often claim to be fear is really an internal distrust and animosity of the self, and this is likely coming from a misunderstanding of what fear truly is.

Firstly, fear is actually an expensive emotion. It is the expensive emotion. It is expensive because it represents a system designed to repair a broken system. Possessing a broken system is expensive, and that is represented in the quality of the appropriate emotion of fear. As such, a good fear is a high quality fear. Its implications are functional and physical. This emotion of fear, once one has found it, must be maintained and understood in order to continue to shine unto the person its emotional brilliance.

I suggest that the emotion of fear is the most exquisite emotion, but not any fear, due to the nature of the emotion of fear. Fear indicates that there is potential for danger under the conditions of one or more beneficial assignments, which are quest–reward structures. Understanding that the more fundamental reason to experience unhappiness is the desire for questing, you see that there is a prosperity-based reason that locks you into possessing, managing, and handling fear. Otherwise, you could let go of it very naturally and automatically. If you couldn’t, you actually believe that it’s worth it — that it’s worth it to possess the fear, which is of some sort of loss or failure.

What you may dislike is the improper and unhelpful feeling of fear. This is because fear is an understood and, through its understanding, a constructed emotion. Fear is a very unique emotion in that it possesses an almost material quality. It can indicate response and care. In this way, fear can be a good emotion. It can also be a bad emotion, similarly to the way material items are — good and/or bad.

Fear can be a bad emotion if it’s messy, confusing, and hard to understand. This is because being confused and in fear are forms of hardship. Fear needs to be organized and assembled neatly. I think, if I were to say something negative about modern society, it would be that we misunderstand fear, and this misunderstanding is the root of many of our problems.

Cognitive incoherence, also known as fear, can be remedied in a beautiful, practical, and inspiring manner. What this ultimately amounts to is the ability to handle cognitive incoherence well — through advanced planning and development. When one is faced with incoherence, one should hope that it is a pleasingly helpful feeling of dissonance rather than a mess of psychologically tangled worry.

It is, in part, because we don’t understand fear well that modern society possesses a mildly erratic pattern of social behavior, where expressions are exaggerated and truths are so frequently muted. It’s because interpersonal behavior or any multiple party intelligence involves the feelings of fear. The problem occurs when the society has a poorly managed fear. That is, intricate, shiningly brilliant, and meaningful elaborations of the common fear are nearly nonexistent. It’s like we, as a planet, seem to have fought hard to destroy fear instead of improving it.

Fear should be stunning, amazing, ingenious, benevolent, practical, helpful, comforting, motivating, natural, clean and clear, sublime, and indicating an ongoing expense involved, due to the appraisal of its functional nature.

If you follow this path forever, you’ll have the ultimate fear. Fear is not free, is the truth, and it is likely the only emotion that is not actually a free emotion. This may be because the life that is and was wanted an emotion to possess the quality of expense, and this emotion was called fear.

Quality feelings of fear can lead the psyche to a state of coherence, so in this way, if you follow this path forever, you’ll also have no fear, but you’ll have had fear that was of quality and thus nicely effective in remedying a confused mind.

The emotion of fear is actually the emotion of expense.

Understanding that the quality of expensiveness can be a wonderful feeling, you can reconfigure your understanding and feeling of fear to more resemble this. However, you don’t want to get caught in only shopping mall trifles, so do remember the mountains and great monuments of nature — feelings that transcend the fabric of perception itself. Still, it’s a subjective compromise between these two that is closest to the right feeling of fear. Nonetheless, fear is a never-ending emotion and will always improve in some direction. It is a directional being, really, as it, hopefully, moves one to sanity.

Now you can understanding both happiness and fear, and you can have both. Any word would be a polarity, so to have two words, you have a completion. Happiness and fear are likely the two categories of emotions — the yin and yang of bliss. With this understanding, you see, that there are two internally biased emotions — fear and happiness — and one externally biased emotion — question or quest. This presents a total of three emotions when considering the external world.

Questions aren’t necessarily a form of happiness or expensiveness, as they can take on many different qualities. To live without hassle, it’s important to understand the meaning of your questions and quests.

For every hardship you face, there is a rational reasoning. It’s just that a rapid encumbrance of features allowed for a faster development of our species at the expensive of an added difficulty in sustaining life. The answer to every hardship you face is the singular answer that cognitive coherence or emotional coherence provides, so internally you should have that knowledge, awareness, and emotion. Nonetheless, a word is a polarity, so you also have the feeling of fear, as well, and hopefully it is good to you (and you are good to it, since fear is an intelligent being).

Socially as well, one should always be the answer to everything. Simply understand that you truly do know everything and seek to understand this knowledge you possess better and with more elucidation in the light of one’s peers (who possess the keys to language). While maybe you don’t have a Wikipedia explanation for everything, at least know the right answer and that the right answer is truly just who you truly are, were you to be coherent. Be confident in that coherence is the answer and that there is no other possible answer to intuitively knowing truth than cognitive (and thus emotional) coherence. Any other idea is just a whim of Satan.

No one can know a better way than the way that postulates that true emotional and cognitive coherence is the answer to all questions. Anyone who claims otherwise is lying. Be confident in this understanding.

I will explain it more thoroughly. Cognitive coherence is coming from the idea of internal angels all finding the same fundamental truth. This is inherently unspeakable, as it exists before the complexity of vocabulary. Its explanation is learnt and becomes like a song (if it is true).

This means that different faculties of your being — the ongoing memory of sunlight with the ongoing memory of day change, all possessing a cloud of intelligence — they all agree on a fundamental truth. In a way, this truth is more like a light, as its vision is really an indication of interest.

This is the truth of the self. It not only knows the answer to most of science (and the fabric of reality), it, more importantly, also understands what you truly want to do.

While cognitive coherence has been a long-held idealistic pursuit of mine — being with me near my start of knowing enlightenment — I hope this understanding that I’ve presented is significantly more developed than I was presented prior, both in a practical way, and in a way that bears abundant clarity.