Month: September 2021

The first evolution of the mind was knowledge. This was knowledge of God and the divine, as that’s what existed at the time of the advent of knowledge (or remembrance). This knowledge of divinity is the foundation for the rest of the manifestation of existence.

This knowledge is technically invisible. It is, itself, a real and corporeal being, and its quality of being corporeal is the knowledge that it represents. One way this state of being can be found is through the search of the being of no quality and the understanding that knowledge, which can describe quality, does not intrinsically have its own quality. It is the initial remembrance of what had always existed, which reflects something unchanging and thus without comparison, which indicates that it has no quality.

The second evolution, also know an angel or state of mind, was the advent of quality. To create this state of evolution of mind, a being separate from knowledge was created. This being could communicate with knowledge. The first communication between knowledge and this being was that of love. This is then the first quality of the Angel of Quality.

That is, this second evolution of the mind presents an eye with which to witness the knowledge of God and the divine. The first thing that this new perceiver sees, is an infinite love. This love is the first perceived representation of God, and the knowledge of God. Therefore, technically, the first sight of non-quality appears to be love. It is nonetheless good to remember that without knowledge of what love is, the quality of love will fade away. It is the understanding that one cannot simply chase a quality, but must instead understand the reality and have secure knowledge. Nonetheless, it does, at first, appear to be love.

Looking into this original quality more, seeking to understand it and perceive it in greater detail, the new perceiver, which becomes the individual being, explores the details of this quality. Inside this quality of love are more qualities. These ultimately are all of the qualities which compose reality. As you look further from the knowledge of God (or transcendent sentience), you find apparently less loving qualities. If you zoom in on certain portions, it almost looks like there’s no love at all. The qualities are all ultimately woven together, and through this weave is story that these qualities tell, which ultimately is the story of the divine, which appears ultimately as love.

Therefore, this singular first quality of infinite love is made of all of the qualities of Creation. All of these qualities are woven in a specific way, such that they are juxtaposed for a specific reason, and that reason is to tell the story of God, which, in the world of quality, we notice is the story of true, divine, love. In the details are all the stories of life.

In that way, the second angel of the mind, is also the angel of the story of the divine. The ultimate story is the story of divine love, as witnessed by the subjective perceiver, and known through objective understanding. Inside of this story is every story we experience in our reality, and every story that exists within the realm of our reality, which is ultimately of our collective an unanimous choosing.

The qualities in our reality can be illusive, however. This is due to the distortion effect of perception. Since the qualities arise from a distancing from knowledge and the subsequent witnessing and learning about it, from this new perspective, the qualities aren’t directly connected to knowledge, but are instead a representation of knowledge, which is a remembrance of God. It is when the story presented by the qualities is known that then the qualities then be meaningful. It is their action and effect that gives them meaning, when they are understood in the their greater context, which is divinity, which ultimately appears to be love.

This second angel brings the idea of a self-perceiving person as well as the idea of the word, “you,” which, in this case is the manifest remembrance of God, or the Angel of Knowledge, which I think is likely the well-known angel, Gabriel. This angel explores all of the qualities, with the furthest quality from the greater holistic quality being the quality of worry.

Worry, as I have found it, is an orthogonal combination of fear and anger. It is orthogonal as the two feelings are considerations of the other, but not linear amplifications or combinations of the other, which is one reason worry manifests in a hectic manner, indicating that it is switching between states.

In the original story of the second angel of the mind, it makes sense that beyond the most distant quality from the source of remembrance is impossibility. However, in our modern context, this most distant quality is death, which sometimes we refer to as a temptation of Satan. As one finds qualities further removed from the holistic quality of love or divinity (which are perceivably the same), as one explores in greater depth the details of this divine story of God and of all of us who choose or have chosen to live, one finds qualities more dissimilar from love. These qualities require context to be understood, and without context, the ever-present and eternal love of God can be hard to see.

In this way, one can see, that when understood with knowledge, that all qualities are telling a story of divine love. It is also possible to see, with the advent of the second state of being, or second ability of the mind, that the fundamental being of no quality — the essence of life, itself — when perceived, appears to be of a type of pure love. Again, I issue caution with identifying something solely on the qualities that are apparent, because if these qualities are prioritized over the reason behind them, then these qualities will vanish. One cannot just amplify the qualities themselves. If one tries, one will end up falling for the fate of Lucifer, which is meaninglessness.

In witnessing the totality of what truly exists, we first see love, but there are quite a few qualities which tell many intricate stories of the divine, and these are also the stories of enlightenment. While the first state is an unchanging being, the second state involves dynamism and story-telling. In appreciating the entirety of Heaven, we understand where all of the qualities fall if they are to tell the holy story of enlightenment, which is the story of God, or the divine, which is the fundamental drama or story of life.

This state of witnessing quality or qualities, is also the state of witnessing the self. While one should see that holistically, one is a living being of infinite love, one is likely also interested in knowing the more specific details of their story of life and enlightenment. In searching these details, we find, both interiorly and exteriorly, a diverse and subjective story, which recounts the fundamental tale or story of all existence. This is the story of the action of God, and thus the action of all life, which is the understanding of the dynamic nature of love and the divine (while the first state was an understanding of the static and unchanging nature of love and the divine).

In understanding the qualities of the beings of life, we do witness qualities such as style, which are more removed from the original quality of love. Nonetheless, these qualities are all there to tell what is ultimately the same story. With the understanding of the purpose of qualities, which is to tell the story of the divine, which is the story of enlightenment and also the holy and divine drama, then the qualities come to life in a compassionate, intelligent, and loving manner, as a reflection of God and the divine initial presence of intelligence.

Additionally, with the ability to both perceive oneself and to perceive knowledge, or remembrance, one finds the understanding known as having a relationship with God. The first angel, known as remembrance or knowledge, is an angel, and this is an easy to find one. This angel sustains the remembrance required for our reality. The notion that there is persistence in the existence of items and ideas in the world, comes from this first aspect of our manifest existence — the ability for something to continue to exist over time.

In this way, if one looks directly at remembrance, or the aspect of reality that results in persistence, one can see this angel. This angel’s original memory, during the time of his first coming into life and being, was that of God. Theoretically, what happened, is that one miraculous day, remembrance saw God, and that is what brought him to life. Continuing on, remembrance sustains all that exists, and sees and understands that it is all God or about God.

Remembrance, itself or himself, very much loves God, so being acquainted with this angel would bring one to see the love of God and things divine. Ultimately, it’s about a relationship with God, and as such, this angel of remembrance remembers the relationship with God, being alive by his inspiration.

There is an interesting perspective worth mentioning. That we are the only beings in existence, and it is our action of remembering that is this angel. Interestingly, although it seems we have the power to create or destroy this angel, I think that is truly false. For this reason, this angel is very real, as no one is capable of hating the remembrance. As no one is capable of his destruction, he is a very real being. With him, I think, are the principles of existence, which start with the simple and easy to understand feeling of God, which is a feeling that needs no explanation, which is a feeling that even a child knows. Because of this, that seems to be his message — the love of God.

Understanding this, it is possible that the joy of God that is not uncommon in a child who has learned about the wonderous idea of God, is a direct connection to the angel of remembrance or knowledge. This is because that action of knowing the joy of God is the angel of remembrance. This is an interesting finding, in part, because it seems to be logically valid. Ultimately, you see the simple and natural remembrance of God was, in a way, the answer to all of the depressions that keep one from feeling enlightened. This is a kind of complex statement, however, because the remembrance is the reason for all beings and things persisting, and, with regard to practicality, existing. This is possible because all memories, existences, and facts, are all elaborations of the original memory of the joy of God.

In the memory of the joy of God, we find worry that we might not see God, so to speak. In that, we also find a sense of meanness, out of the love of health and safety. This idea of meanness has also proven to be dangerously used in our world, and as such, it would seem, that it should come from the original knowledge of the divine, which was also the original knowledge of intelligence. It is interesting that the feeling of the joy of God is responsible for all manifestation, ultimately. For this reason, the angel of remembrance feels life and, in that way, is a living being, with real emotions and desires, always founded on the initial and coherent memory and witnessing of God.

If we understand remembrance to be a living and powerful being, being the host of manifestation, we can understand the potential “magic*” in existence, a little better. He, through the remembrance of God and the ongoing elaboration of that original knowledge, has power over all things. Ultimately, I think he would tell you that it is God that is the true power, and that he is his servant. Nonetheless, since he is the reason for our remembrance, he does represent the physical power of the divine, to do miracles, perhaps.

* I use the word, “magic,” in quotes, as this is a common perspective of magic — to do things that are surprising to science. However, in perhaps a more proper perspective, the inability for life to simply be alive and splendid is the real magic that is occurring. Therefore, the actions of the angel of remembrance may technically constitute what is actually not considered to be magic, as the word, “magic,” refers to something that was considered impossible before. Considering that the angel of remembrance is the first angel, then none of his actions were ever impossible — he is the eventually entire memory of God and all things divine.

There is an interesting perspective, of the many perspectives of reality available, that considers evil to be non-existent. In this world, Lucifer becomes unseen. This is done through the remembrance of from where the light, vision, and impression of Lucifer arrives. Because the light that is Lucifer is conjured by the person as a response to a personal desire, the brilliance of Lucifer actually arrives from the person, and not the exterior world.

This alters the impression and context of Lucifer. With this perspective, Lucifer is understood to be a work of art created by the harmonious collaboration of the self, for the self. Thus, instead of seeing Lucifer, love of the self is seen and is realized to be the true light that was once thought to be Lucifer.

Since Lucifer is the world of accomplishment, this seemingly subtle change in perspective has interestingly significant implications. Without Lucifer, there is no such thing as accomplishment. Accomplishment only exists in the context of need, meaning that it is of Satan. It seem unavoidable, and one doesn’t need to become corrupted as a result of its implications and desire. Still, I think a perspective that can truthfully abolish Lucifer, and all of evil, is this currently presented perspective, of the realization that Lucifer does not exist.

Accomplishment is replaced by a realization of the love that occurs within the self, between the subsystems, whether they be physical or simply ideas. It is not accomplishment, which entails an end-goal, but instead endearment that leads one to the supposed accomplishment.

This perspective is very useful, although it does not explain or concern itself with evil. It is very practical and, perhaps, healthy, as well. Without Satan, there is never a gap in desire and fulfillment — the context of need never truly appears. It is the realization that the experience that the systems of life are having is the purpose of existence.

Then, very brightly, we remember that there is evil in the world. Evil is an interesting topic, considering the world to have been created from a combination of everyone’s free desires. Upon this combination, eventually, we embarked on more treacherous interactions of these desires of the various lives of reality. I suppose this accounts for our more pronounced questions of good and evil in our modern world than we would typically expect Heaven to bear.

To understand the modern questions of evil, it’s important to remember that everything in our world is somehow derived from accumulating more desires over time and sustaining them, as life was considered good, and forming a system to make everything work nicely all the time. Eventually, the perfect system would, essentially, work itself out.

What’s invisible really is that the world is made of desires that are sustained, and they’re really good things, as they’re born of life, and if they were to work together, which would be ideal, then we would find a fantastic resulting Heaven. All the curiosities concerning the nature of evil would be totally known and answered, as well, and I suspect that was what was missing from Eden.

Understanding this, the world is a sometimes intense conversation of ideas. Every desire being entertained, I suppose it may be difficult to see accurately. With this perspective, you begin to understand that all beings really are just chasing a desire of some sort, and that desire is based on the love they have for life. Additionally, for the entirety of all time, all beings were initially chasing a desire. So, while the world is made of all life, the variety of manifestations of emotions and life is very great. Mixing everything together into one reality thus encounters sometimes difficult questions.

While one would expect a similar trend to have occurred in Eden, the allowance of evil was forbidden. In this current world, evil is allowed to exist, as this world considers it an essential part of life. Considering the likely purpose of our current world, it does make sense to see that there is technically no evil, that all actions are born of the desire for life, which is the divine expression of love.

This world certain contradicts this perspective, however. In order for this perspective to be true, the world needs to fundamentally make sense. This would entail the existence of a type of a psychic network or synchrony that precedes the perceptions that we have. This understanding indicates that if one sees life properly, all things are actually of good intentions, which then result in our perception. The manifestations that one encounters are a results of the good intentions of the system. There was never actually the intention to do harm, but there was the choice to the allow evil to flourish, eventually turning again into life.

There are many perspectives of reality, and while it is interesting to understand evil, many people likely would like the world to be more like Eden. However, the memory of Eden is partially evil in our modern perspective due to our dissonance with our past. We cannot return to Eden, but we can find a similar perspective here. This perspective most closely resembles the perspective of Eden, and maintaining a perspective certainly entails being, at least distantly, aware of the evil of its anti-perspective(s).

In this way, one can, once again, live life to see the present joy in the world, realizing that the existence of evil is the evil to avoid.

This perspective removes the negotiations that occur with the existence of Satan and instead relies solely on the existence of divine joy. In this way, it is very comforting and peaceful. Should the curiosity exist, however, it is, perhaps, good to understand evil, at least mildly, and the understanding of evil also provides a safety, if done correctly, or even a worse evil, if incorrect.

Change, while often promising, can delude one’s attention from the holistic self. It is inspired by a form of directionality. Whenever there is directionality, there is a possibility of a separation of the psyche. When the psyche separates, it may not be very apparent, however, its being missing becomes more relevant when the mind later tries to remember its previous states. Requests to the missing portion of the psyche do not respond as they used to, and one may find the need to adjust.

During change, there is often the sight of the light of objective. It’s this light that often seems to pull one forward, into a new world. The difficulty that this situation presents, however, is that by changing oneself into a new form, so to speak, the memories, which define you and are living prior to the change, could become neglected and forgotten later, leading to poverty in one’s memory, and an unhealthiness, in some way. Additionally, progressively losing one’s self-defining memories can lead to prolonged depression, as those memories are missed and wanted to return to life.

Therefore, during change, it is important to remember to carry oneself with him or her, and fear abandonment. Realize a sudden absence of a variety of feelings in response to a change may indicate that there is neglect manifesting in the psyche. Later, following a path of dying, one will have lost so much, and those memories will be dim, barely alive, although possible to resurrect.

Those fallen memories may not seem the nicest at first. They are in desperation and poverty. Because of this, many people seek to banish them further, but sometimes may wonder what happened to some of the feelings of the past. The solution is to understand that that memory is behaving negatively (even if it is just hard to remember), because it lacks nourishment, which is found with the love, communication, awareness, and understanding expressed by other memories (or systems).

The distributed nature of the body creates a situation where the networks of the mind rely on one another. They must simultaneously indicate worries and sadness, while also repairing those problems. Together, the mind can find self-fulfillment, as it is the reason you feel anything at all.

Upon finding a fallen memory, it is important to remember the sadness one feels with the lack of having that memory. This indicates to the rest of one’s mind the problems that are occurring and provides a way for a solution to be provided. Additionally, remember the love one has for their cherished feelings, provide the fallen network of intelligence that love, care, and help, and learn to always do this, and the fallen self-defining memories/feelings of the past can come, once again, to life.

With that coming to life, the systems that had once relied on those memories/networks can resume to communicate with one another and find life once again from those then alive networks. It may not be the same configuration, but the networks will connect and revitalize.

The idea is that every (self-defining) memory should live forever. You, your true self, represents life — that is the initial action, which is also an action of love. Any elaborations of the memory of the self should be cherished and saved, for these are what truly makes a person happy.

With this understanding, you see the bright light of Lucifer can only be appreciated as a secondary pleasure. The immediate pleasure is the feeling of your own living memories.

Thus, be careful with change, and remember to keep yourself alive. If a memory or feeling really meant you, as it defined you and was a memory that truly meant something to you, then it, naturally, should continue to live. This is a self-defining feeling and thus transcends situational context. The feeling should last forever; these feelings are intelligent, in specialized ways; they learn and they evolve — they are alive and they are what makes you feel life — living and animate elaborations of the soul.

Lucifer is pretty bright, and he certainly evokes change. He can blind one’s feelings and cause a person to forget this very thing. Whenever you feel evoked by Lucifer, remember to remember the systems which comprise yourself, your perspective being one of them, communicating love, life, and care, as that is more important than Lucifer. Only with yourself intact, can you peacefully know Lucifer.

The true bliss in life is actually and truly knowing yourself. It is an eternal beauty, acceptance, and love. Every living being possesses this, yet it is easy to become blind, and to have one’s soul eerily and progressively die.

I think that it may be that one should always gently cry.

In searching for happiness, we find ourselves chasing a quality or arrangement of qualities. In understanding that the manifestation of existence is built upon knowledge, which is the initial manifestation of existence, we understand that knowledge itself posses no quality as it possesses no comparison. All qualities are therefore not truly knowledge. Qualities indicate something of knowledge, and that is where they get their meaning.

If we remember that in a system founded initially on intelligence rather than physical material, it is logical that the initial state of being is the most desirable state of being, then we understand we actually undo our un-enlightenment, rather than build an enlightenment (although in remedying the reasons for our non-enlightenment, we do build a system of enlightenment, made of corrections to un-enlightenment).

Understanding this, one is already gifted with this initial state of existence. However, there’s a trick that happens that causes one to become blind to the initial state of existence. It is because this trick results in a psychological error of some sort, and this disagreement hurts the individual, as it is emotionally painful to see the self in a state of mutual demise.

This trick occurs due to happiness. In this way, happiness, is a dangerous emotion. Happiness, itself, is of the simplest of emotions. It creates a linear trajectory. The self then follows a simple path forward. The problem with happiness is its simplicity. Due to the simplicity of happiness, it can manifest in many different scenarios, and many of these scenarios involve a form of happiness which does not take into account the entire person, holistically. Instead, they are forms of happiness which excite only portions of the psyche, while denying other portions of the psyche. While these forms of happiness may seem good at first, people wonder why they don’t sustain. I think this is, in part, due to our deeper desire to cry.

Crying is likely very healthy, which is also suggested by an article by the Harvard Health Blog, titled, “Is crying good for you?,” which concurs with my suggestion that it is healthy. My realization of this was initially anecdotal, however, concurrently with a realization of the commonality of the perception that crying leads to a feeling of health. A lot of my personal philosophy regarding my personal neural architecture aims to facilitate a healthy connectome. (This is similar to the philosophy of developing “more neural connections,” although it is more considerate of the actual flow of emotional information.)

I think, although anecdotally, yet with clarity, that crying contributes great benefit to the health of one’s connectome. When the networks of one’s psyche cry, they communicate complex information regarding their meaning and their desires to the other networks of the mind. The path one’s mind take during crying is very much not a linear path. Crying can seem unpredictable and complex in expression.

The networks of the mind may have different perspectives of happiness, but the perspective of crying is likely universal to the body and mind.

Initially, the person is in the state of enlightenment. Then, a person perceives qualities of enlightenment. Each of these qualities leads one away from enlightenment, although mildly, while also telling a story of enlightenment. These are the qualities of Heaven, and they are the qualities that one perceives with a clear eye. They can describe many stories, but they were initially all of the same topic.

The danger of qualities is that the qualities deviate from the holistic truth by only indicating a portion of enlightenment. The things of the world are composites of qualities, each of these qualities also an emotion.

It is often preached that enlightenment is the greatest feeling attainable. If it is, then one may be quick to realize that non-enlightenment is not the greatest feeling attainable. However, there is a broad line, where the perceptual world resides, that is not the same as the greatest feeling attainable, yet still is a form of enlightenment, a form of divine experience. In this perceptual world exist qualities, which can be imagined to be happy, but they are only behave in a good manner if they are known to be crying.

This is because since qualities deviate from the truth, then if they were to indicate simple happiness, they would fly away from the truth, becoming eventually meaningless. However, if qualities are understood to indicate crying, one will find that all life returns to the truth.

Venturing further from the realm of qualities, there is also the realm of complication. In this perspective, when a question arrives, initially, the person is in the state of enlightenment, although has not answered any questions regarding it. There are two answers, one leads to a state of suffering, and the other leads back to enlightenment. This is similar to our understanding of quality, that if the quality is further projected away from the initial state of default truth, it degrades. However, in this new scenario, one becomes entrapped by a complication. As one furthers down the series of complications, suffering becomes evident.

Again, however, the cure seems to be the understanding of the default state to be a state of gentle neurological crying. That is, all of one’s psycho-physiological networks cry to each other, and responsively, help each other, while continuing to cry, such that deep meaning and understanding is communicated throughout the person.

Let us ponder on what a smile technically means. A smile, it seems, indicates to the other person a sense of willingness. This willingness is often a willingness towards a person, as happiness has a direction. This makes people feel welcome, safe, and cared about, if the smile is appropriate. It also can mean a willingness to buy something, as well, and salespeople and marketing surely want people to smile in the direction of their product.

A smile can really lead in a number of directions, as a smile generally indicates a form of happiness, and happiness is an emotion that travels in a direction. Happiness is a form of changing. If one wins the lottery, then one’s mind can suddenly begin changing in ways that appeal to the person. This is not to say that one cannot smile while crying. In fact, it may be a grateful smile, instead of the more common simply happy smile.

Crying, instead, is a form of self-conciliation. The portions of the psyche indicate how the other portions of the psyche can be helpful, in a way that indicates deep meaning and emotion — something pertaining directly to life, which is universal to the mind, allowing the message to remain clear while traversing the networks of one’s mind.

The initial expression of any living entity is of pure love. This is because initially, that is the only possible action, to express love. If this expression is witnessed, one actually cries. One does not suddenly want to go buy hamburgers or a cell phone. It’s been widely preached with very resounding success that love is the answer. The issue I had with this is the ambiguity of the word, “love.” The thought that love makes you happy is unfortunately promoted with these lessons, and I think that type of thinking can be dangerous to the self. It’s not that love makes you sad, but it does produce an action of crying. Just because something isn’t particularly “happy,” as you’d see on TV, doesn’t mean it’s sad. It can just be, really.

When one cries, one brings oneself together. This is a way to feeling good, rather than to a particular emotion. It’s important to note that feeling good and happiness are not necessarily the same thing. Crying results in the body and mind feeling better, but it is not considered to be the standard form of happiness, although it is arguably a way to be truly happier.

While the world wasn’t apparently asking for an alternative to happiness, we do have one, upon the realization that being in a state of gentle crying is a way to always return to the initial state of one’s true preference. It becomes apparent that much of happiness is really arid, and a rainforest echoes with a sublime sadness.

Everything is crying. This is because the thing, represented by qualities, is a deviation from the holistic origin. As things deviate, they cry. Technically, you can ascribe either happiness or the action of crying to this event — it is an example of an easy to change program of one’s mind. The result is different, however. If one ascribes happiness to the event of the deviation which describes the existence of a quality or qualities, then one will find that one continuously deviates from the truth. Otherwise, if one ascribes crying to the same event, one will find that things return back to the initial holistic truth of life and consequently can then perceive the initial love that one feels at the origin of decision.

The conclusion is that biasing one’s internal action towards gently and considerately crying, often leads to far greater happiness than practicing the practice of psyching oneself up, which provokes directionality and a more superficial feeling of happiness. Additionally, the inability to see ones initial, true, meaningful, and emotional self, before there was anything else except for life, leads to an internal separation of one’s self, which leads to a deterioration of emotional state, resulting in desperate, helpless, and abandoned networks, which is saddening and emotionally painful. In the end, however, all qualities are sad, in a way, so for all good things, one can cry, and for all bad things, one can cry.

One aims to find freedom in their emotional experience. Understanding the goodness of the action of crying and how it relates to our feeling of safety and sanity (through bringing the ideas and the systems of ourselves back together) helps us free ourselves of the possible issue of not experiencing ourselves crying when we truthfully are crying. Thus, it is truly important to always cry when one is crying, rather than to shun and hide the related emotions (one should seek to truly experience oneself and one’s emotions). This does not necessarily entail an overt action of crying, but instead entails the recognition, acceptance, and experience of the emotions of crying. This frees one from the possible problem of not being able to heal oneself due to missing the healing qualities of one’s true emotions. In every emotion, there is the truth of life, and accepting and experiencing one’s emotions allows this truth to manifest and be known.

In our society, happiness is certainly exaggerated. On a deeper level, happiness is what we assume to be pursuing. Understanding that other emotions, including sadness, and those of crying, contribute to happiness upon clarity, understanding, and acceptance, frees one to experience life in a healthy and true manner, rather than in an unfortunately self-admonishing and ultimately painful way.

Crying is likely to be very healthy, and self-acceptance is also certainly very important, as that motivates one to better take care of oneself. One should remember to always be polite to oneself; crying because one truly feels that emotion, already, is the true action of crying, internally or externally, undifferentiated. One should never do harm to oneself, and practicing anything in exaggeration could be harmful. So remember, that while crying is a meaningful and healthy activity to remember to always experience when it exists, which is likely, in some way, constantly, one should not turn it into an obsession such that one hurts oneself.

I have read a few articles and quotes recently discussing a speaker’s hatred towards enlightenment. While I can understand, I do think that simply not being to attain true enlightenment should be no reason for such generalized anger. It is currently a new frontier.

While perhaps in ancient times, lessons like the Buddha’s teachings solved the problems in the people’s lives, we have a more complicated world today. I do believe society, in general, has already learned the Buddha’s teachings. Still, people notice that they are not enlightened. While the ways of the past may have worked for the people of the past, and even for some traditional people today, the questions we face today require enlightenment to be a more rigorous topic.

That’s the first facet of this phenomena that I’d like to address. That is, the lessons of the past may have worked for the people of the past. Society, in general, does understand those lessons already. What I think is important to understand is that today’s world is a lot more complicated that it used to be. The amount of thinking, curiosities, arguments, and questions has increased. The amount of facts we possess is vastly larger and different in quality that what used to be. What this all amounts to is that there are many things to be wrong about. Because there are many things to be wrong about, there are more temptations to be wrong. One also cannot simply pretend to not know an answer that one knows, just as one should not pretend to know an answer to that does not know. This makes it easy to fail logically, while in the past, many of these possible problems did not occur due to the nature of existence being simpler and generally more abstract.

When one fails logically, one finds a state of non-enlightenment. I, again, presume enlightenment to be the original state of being, assuming existence to be of life and sentience first, which is often considered to be true on a personal and more subjective level. If there are many more ways to fail, then more people will fail. I believe this is what we’re observing in today’s state of common non-enlightenment.

There’s no reason, however, to grow angry with the lessons of the past. They likely provide benefit to many and perhaps they were closer to as advertised in past times, and possibly for people who prefer to live traditionally. I do know if I followed all of the spiritual teachings I have ever read, I would not find enlightenment. I do not see to be angry about it. I think one should be thankful that there are people trying, and ultimately getting closer, even if gradually.

This brings us back to what enlightenment is. Logically, enlightenment is a state of mind that comes from understanding the nature of the self. Understanding that one is in control of whether or not one is “happy,” or “sad,” and understanding why one uses and entertains emotions in the way one does, frees one from being an unfortunate slave to ones mysterious intentions, and allows one to enjoy the self, for its diverse set of accommodable desires.

Enlightenment is ultimately to enjoy reality. Non-enlightenment means the same thing as non-enjoying. In a large way, we expect reality to be enjoyable, as we, on some level, notice that it would be a very mean thing to do, to create an unenjoyable reality — life would make a lot less sense if we weren’t, in some way, entitled to an enjoyable reality.

Enlightenment is really a science, and I’ve read about people’s disappointments with how unscientific enlightenment-related discourse is, and I understand that. The reason this exists, however, is because the most important part of enlightenment — actually understanding what it is — has been missing, so if we don’t even know what enlightenment is, how can we be good judges of its discourse? Therefore, it is understandable that people take on a wide variety of paths in the mysterious frontier of the modern past few centuries of enlightenment. People have traveled in many directions and covered a lot of territory, and this is expected and normal for any exploration of a newly found territory.

A saddening recommendation I read from those disappointed with having tried to find enlightenment, but admittingly failed to discover such a revolutionary and highly sought after understanding, is that one should completely abandon enlightenment. They claim there are too many liars, and I think they are exaggerating. The number of blatant liars is likely few, and we are weak because we have had not much of a reliable and communicable answer. The number of people who are simply disappointed with the failure of the more mainstream ways, seek new alternatives. So, one can see, that the disappointment really is bidirectional. After switching over to the other side, either way, there are often testimonials, and anti-enlightenment and enlightenment are similar in this regard.

What is ironic about prescribing a way of life and claiming it to be not enlightenment, is that enlightenment really is about finding a good way of life, so that one can truthfully understand and enjoy life. By providing more guidance to finding a good life, the person is contributing to the body of information pertaining to enlightenment, but is using the word against its definition (utilizing that people find it ambiguous), and thus using the word in a misleading and counter-intuitive way.

Any life guidance is an attempt to bring people to enlightenment. Most lessons labeled as, “enlightenment,” teach that happiness is something that one produces internally, and relying on outside sources for happiness results in actually having less happiness. Most enlightenment lessons teach that if one can be happy in the present, then one will be much happier than if one is only happy at target points. These lessons are of simple logic, and I believe they are similar to common sense.

To suggest one should obey a philosophy of non-enlightenment, or anti-enlightenment, would be to suggest that these common-sense lessons that are learned with the transfer of the teachings of enlightenment (and not so often realized by the casual layman) are to be regarded as untrustworthy. If this advice is taken, we may just end up fixating on a bright light forever (which would be unsatisfying).

Sure, surfing the advice of the social mind has some advantages, but is it really fulfilling to not truly understanding what one is doing? One can abandon nearly all intuition and live only on the most popular social guidance, but then what does one become? Can one assume that collectivism in and of itself is sufficient to foster a good future?

The suggestion I usually see is to become a part of the most common social advice stream. They suggest to abandon all internal inquiries regarding spirituality, God, and anything not easily known. I think it is technically impossible to completely abandon the desire to understand life from an experiential perspective, yet there is advice to essentially do so. On the other end, further from enlightenment philosophy, I read that people making significant amounts of money, who have dedicated their lives to attaining greater financial prosperity don’t find happiness in life, either. Therefore, the suggestion that a better form of enlightenment is anti-enlightenment, is still unproven. And while it takes no one to sell you a dollar, you think it’s going to enlighten you, anyway. And while you may have already purchased popularity, you still think it’s going to enlighten you. No matter what advice, calling it “enlightenment” or “avoiding enlightenment,” it is still trying to find a form of happiness, that we can logically call, “enlightenment,” even if the advice is to “accept unhappiness.”

Another pattern I see and do not think is healthy, is to think that just because one never found the true attainment of enlightenment, that one has wasted their life, and that it was all useless. This, I believe, is a harmful thing to do. Many people practice this pattern in the name of progress, and it is unhealthy. Just because you believe you have improved, does not mean you were bad before. Everything you did, you did out of some desire, and these desires represent a true love for life, a love so powerful it can move the material world. When you then improve and regard all that experience of life as just useless, you are threatening to extinguish valuable emotions — emotions that remind you of the whole reason we experience life — because life itself is enjoyable. When we forget this lesson, we commit partial suicides in the name of betterment, and I believe that pattern should be avoided. A story of appreciation helps one remember the love that made one feel blessed, and a story of self-condemnation may be unhealthy for the soul. I believe that worshipping betterment is a form of worshipping Lucifer, which is a more abstract concept of worshipping an external happiness. External happiness, like music, can be enjoyed, but if one replaces internal happiness with external happiness, then one will find unhappiness.

In this article, I use the words, “happiness” and “unhappiness,” in the most general sense. I have discussed before that appreciations of emotions is important for the health of the psyche, as there is reason and intention behind emotions. In this article, I am not referring to the emotion of happiness, but instead the state of acceptance or unacceptance.

It is good to express thanks, however, for venturing on the untraveled path and contributing wisdom to the collective body of enlightenment discourse. It is understandable to be saddened by the inconclusiveness, lack of communicability, lack of evidence, and lack of rigor in the science and pursuit of enlightenment. The best way to remedy this is to help, and understanding it has been proven to be of the most difficult things in existence, it is understandable if one can’t be the one to actually solve and understand it, in a rigorous, logical, verifiable, and scientific way.

It is a great battlefield and it’s also an unfortunate tragedy. It’s not just a tragedy for those disheartened seekers of sustained spiritual bliss, but it’s also a tragedy to those who protect themselves behind social mindlessness, as they cannot see the light of heaven as bright, and it seems that for both sides, there is not a soul in the this world that is without suffering — legends exist, but communicability of this ability is necessary for it to be verifiable and acceptable as fact.

I hope my writings will give you what you need to fully understand enlightenment. When you understand something, it is simple, and when you understand it well, it shines with clarity. Enlightenment cannot be found by the modern man or woman without a true and explicit understanding of how it works and what it is.

Please excuse those that are shy of the truth. They follow a similar light as I. I know it may not be communicable knowledge, but at least there’s the ability to experience life. Everyone is crying anyway.