Blog

Ultimately, all things real are tangible. Considering existence to be originated from intelligence, we can understand that all tangibility is made of reasoning that one agrees with. It makes sense that over time, as more memories are created, the world develops more aspects of tangibility. Thusly, the tangibility we perceive today stems from a very long history of memories, which form reasons for behavior. A person cannot disagree with a past memory if that past memory is from the true self, as the true self is eternally the way of self (it does differ with time). Therefore, as we develop more memories, we create more situations of tangibility.

Every thought you have is represented by mechanical actions. Everything that is real is mechanical. Even ideas like justice and freedom are mechanical. Words are mechanical — they create a tangible effect on the listener and even the speaker, hearing him or herself.

There is a state of awareness in which one perceives all things as tangible. Ideas and thoughts seem intangible when something gets mixed up in one’s understanding. When the mind is not seen as fully tangible, confusion results. Understanding the mind to be completely tangible makes it comprehensible, learnable, and resolvable. If one perceives thoughts as separated from tangibility, then information cannot be fully assembled, logically leading to an inability for the mind to resolve and make sure decisions.

This state of awareness is transcendent of temporality. It’s a realization of the real nature of all things. For all existence, the mind is tangible. It is rational and can be understood. Being able to understand the mind is to be without confusion as to what the mind is. Understanding that all things, including all thoughts, are tangible, allows one to witness the mind without confusion. As long as everything is observed to be tangible, the logic behind everything will stay intact. Once something loses its connection with physics, the logic behind it becomes ambiguous.

The reason something can become disconnected from its tangibility is that if something is misunderstood. In the chain of logic which precedes an event, then everything from that misunderstanding takes on multiple possibilities, as the truth as to what was misunderstood has multiple possibilities. What this results in is a consistent confusion and inability to surely resolve. If the misunderstanding is not corrected with accurate observation and awareness, then all of the subsequent notions after the misunderstanding will not be able to fully resolve and find logical and valid coherence throughout the system. The point at which misunderstanding occurs prevents that from happening, and in order for the mind to resolve on coherent truth, the mechanics that were missed during the misunderstanding need to be deduced.

This transcendent state is of the ultimate state of enlightenment, which is just the realization of inherent divinity. With this state, everything can be realized in a completely logical fashion. The physical interaction of neural signals form a strong logic that occurs without ambiguity or confusion (in the material sense). If thought is strictly based on the material logic that is truly occurring chemically and neurologically, which we perceive as thought, then the logic behind all thoughts can be understood with assuredness. It is only when thoughts become immaterial do we lose the strong and material connections that signify to us concrete logic.

It is the understanding that all things are concrete, although perception can be illusive. If things are perceived to be immaterial, then they have no secure logical connection to the rest of the body. If things, including thoughts, are understood, with acute accuracy, to be material and tangible, then a sure logic can be deduced through understanding the mechanical notions that compose the entity.

Always remember that everything, truthfully, is mechanical.

Interestingly, understanding that thoughts are mechanical helps us understand how mechanical and physical things can be thoughts. As explained earlier, if existence is ideologically founded, then tangibility arises from an agreement with a reasoning. Due to a certain reasoning, certain actions are modified in different ways, which leads to an inability of action in certain ways.

As an example, suppose a long time ago, you had an amazing and memorable experience. It lasted many many years and was totally out of this world. A stunning and captivating tale in and of itself, beautiful, emotional, meaningful, enlightening, and splendid. This memory was a tale of self-definition, unforgettable. The notions that preclude this self-defining memory — which are actionable emotions which form the memory — are like angels, that you would never want to die. Understanding existence to be ideological and thus not surprising to a living being, it makes sense that these memories technically never actually die, as they form a part of one’s self definition — they are sustained by God and good nature, for eternity.

Now imagine you have a trillion years of various memories, during which you had a variety of experiences, learned, played, observed, grew, and much more. These new memories that represent new discoveries of who you truly are are memories that you want to never die. If it represents your true self, then it is desirably eternally sustained. Now we have a future, a trillion years of memory into existing, and these memories are to never die. That means that actions that you perform now must not destroy these living and sometimes ancient emotions. This pattern of restrictions forms the physical world.

I think freedom from some of the more disagreeable aspects of the world should be able to be found, and certainly can be found if the universe is ideologically founded. There is no reason a sentient being would desire to create a place that is unsatisfying. The only logical undertaking would be to provide satisfaction (assuming dissatisfaction was previously desired). Additionally, it is logical to conclude that the initial state, which bears no quality, as it has no comparison, was a state of no dissatisfaction (it was living by default).

Being able to understand that all of the things in life are coming from reasons which were originally benevolent may help us be able to see past the burdens, and to resolve them, understanding that they were never the real reason for our existence, just a predicament formed from a confusing of motives and a lot of emotions to sustain (and never kill).

If one could see from the very beginning, where there was only life, then logically it would eventually become apparent that all things are ultimately of benevolence, and there is no true power that wants to harm or burden anyone, as there is no joy in that. It’s also important to remember that the world was created for the joy of God, and we were made to appear like God (in the image of him). In this case, what God wants to do makes sense to a sentient person, and that is the purpose of the world. I do believe the hardships we face in this era are unusual with regard to eternity, and are just due to a difficult exploration of the true reaches of existence — the rewards of which will be eternal, and the difficulty in life should subside, understandably as quickly as possible (I do wonder if people are almost unnoticeably growing more restless as we approach the future).

Understanding that all things are composed of tangible logic will logically provide the clarity needed to be able to discern whether or not a psychic network exists. Quantum experiments have demonstrated psychic control of remote quantum states, and the body bears a sensitivity to atoms, and possibly their quantum states. Additionally, it is widely known that the body emits electromagnetic (radio) energy, and it is certainly affected by it, as well (noting the effects of sunlight).

All religions (except perhaps atheism, if it is to be considered a religion) believe in a psychic connection to a deity. What’s often ignored is the ascertainment of the exact nature of the psychic system being used. Understanding all things to be mechanical, tangible, and thus comprehensible, we would understand this psychic connection to be similar.

Likely, if there is a psychic network that people seemingly magically follow, it would primarily manifest as subtle inflections in one’s thoughts. People may enjoy thinking together, and perhaps even singing songs they’ve heard together. Many people note a great amount of unspoken information that is found upon interacting with someone, and while it may not be accurately assessed, it may be, in part, psychic influence (the perception of which may be hindered by flaws in interpretation due to deviant understandings of truth).

The only way to be sure if there is a psychic network (although praying to God almost suggests there certainly must be one), is to be completely aware of the mechanics of one’s mind. It is otherwise essentially impossible, with confusions present, to distinguish a psychic influence from one’s own nature. I think, as long as there is a confusion present, it is difficult to be completely certain that there is a psychic network, although I personally find it very logical — it would be nice, however, to be more certain. Nonetheless, this requirement for certainly technically applies to any information. Understanding the mechanical nature of the mind allows for such certainty.

Let’s think for a moment of how many things are mechanical, physical, and tangible. Thoughts, words, writing, books, movies, stories, advertisements, perfumes, styles, music, the smell of fresh food, the smell of garbage, sunlight, colors, sounds, and paintings. These things exhibit real, mechanical and physical effects onto the observer. Let us be aware of these things, and even go as far as to exercise responsibility over what we do, which should come naturally with acute awareness.

One interesting thing that is also mechanical is the miracle. Before the beginning of time, rested life. Then, there was an inclination to see the miracle. It is with this inclination that time began — all thanks to the miracle. Still, even the miracle is a real facet of existence with real, physical properties that has real physical effects. Even though the miracle is a miracle and is definitively outside of the realm of (impractical) modern science, a miracle still possesses real scientific properties, even though it is impossible by ways of the more common logic. Still, it is technically an element of science as anything real is an element of science, and likely deserves a field of its own (the science of a miracle, and I imagine the math would be a bit clever or tricky, although I think it may be based on the idea of a repeatedly refuted formula, due to a flaw of imprecise definition).

The miracle is an initial kind of being, for in the beginning there was no imposition, and thus the miracle was easy. The meaning of the word miracle has evolved since its inception, but Creation is, among other ideas, still founded on the idea of a miracle.

On the path of enlightenment is the search for perfect, sentient awareness. Generally today people casually think that people are simply “sentient,” and don’t think that maybe people are really only sometimes sentient, perhaps similar to animals, as well.

There are a lot of blind automatisms in human behavior, and each of these automatisms, or actions that occur without desire, are instances during which sentience was missed. These are the machinery of the mind, but without sentience, the actions find an obscure and dissonant direction.

A lot of the problem occurs in the separation of consciousness from the subconscious. It seems we do this in order to protect processes of our minds and bodies. What it implies is that there’s a type of misunderstanding or disagreement within the self. If the conscious mind cannot be trusted, then what is the reason?

For many people, the conscious mind is erratic and largely unpredictable, while the subconscious mind is orderly and loyal. The conscious mind hears people more pronouncedly than the subconscious mind, which pays less attention to the externally present role of the person.

The mind is built on a collection of yes’s, no’s, and maybe’s. Technically, it is all either an affirmation or a position of not knowing. That is the decision structure of the mind (and body). Tension and turmoil ensue if previous affirmations are violated by later affirmations. If someone wants a process to continue on, one simply does not present a counter-affirmation to that process, which is a manifestation of an affirmation. That is, one always desires that process to continue. Without any conflicting process or counter-affirmation, the process continues on without interruption.

The subconscious mind, being the predecessor to the conscious mind, is built of deeper affirmations, which are affirmations that are nearer to the origin of one’s psyche. These are the more important building blocks of the psyche.

What occurs, however, is by way of learning, people separate their subconscious and their conscious. A disparity in direction is created between the two parts of the psyche, leading one to believe that their subconscious is “automatic” and their conscious is not automatic. In this case, it’s important to realize that any psychological process will continue on as long as the desire is not changed. That is, there is a type of inertia in the psyche. Being powered by unchanging desire, the subconscious mind feels automatic, at least in comparison to the conscious mind.

The reason the conscious mind does not feel automatic, or easy, is because there are often conflicts in the psyche that are manifest in the conscious mind. While the subconscious mind follows the conscious mind, the subconscious mind has more fundamental desires which change less frequently.

These conflicts in the psyche stem from what we learn in the world. It is not natural to deviate from the original coherent mind into two minds, I believe. Instead, we learn this deviation through advice and pressures from society. The act of separating the conscious mind from the subconscious mind involves adhering to a lie of some sort. This lie enables the conscious mind to reach further and to gain a greater type of control over the body. People believe that this ability to extend the truth beyond what was intuitively known enables them to “be happier,” and to perform better in society.

This segmentation of the mind results in a loss of confidence regarding intuition. While the mind is initially built on unchanging truths, the segmentation of the mind to form a new and different conscious mind allows the mind to start building itself on changing truths, which are inherently dishonest.

Just because someone goes through this process doesn’t mean that the immense pressure to segment oneself is due to that same person. Bad advice, even when only communicated in subjective connotation, are like tiny machines that may nest themselves in the psyche, offering small rewards for what is a type of self-sacrifice. Subjective inclination is a language near subconscious, and what it really expresses are the machines that one cultivates in the psyche. These machines could be angels or demons. The demons are machines that use dishonesty to achieve a goal. It’s important to remember that these machines may be so subtle as to be made only of subtle emotions. These emotions affect the logic that one performs in their mind, however, and are often easily ignored. Nonetheless, they do create suffering as with these machines, the mind cannot then find coherence. The evil machines are contagious as well, and the pressures of society can be difficult to negate, leading to a world of unfortunately corrupt and misperceiving minds.

The goal is to found oneself coherently, from the physical aspects of themselves, like DNA, all the way through the entire expression of the machine, into a fully living being, thus connecting the whole through a hopefully eternally consistent set of desires.

To find eternally consistent desires, one should focus on what the person’s desires are for eternity. Enumerating desires based on examples which only exist in today’s time will make one’s consistent desires more difficult to see. By finding persistent greater understandings of one’s desires, one can find the consistency required to be ultimately true, to oneself, and naturally, to all things.

That is, instead of liking a certain kind of food, think about the context in which one resides, the world, the economy, the government, the people, the design of the body, the traditions, the weather, etc., and how that all plays a role in whether you enjoy that certain kind of food or not. Then put the entire thing together, context and object, to truly understand one’s transcendent desire. These desires, as opposed to simply liking a food, build a stronger psyche in that they are non-transient — they don’t change with time. They allow one to nicely and with organization, consistency, and clarity, build one’s psyche out of long-lasting affirmations and ambivalences.

Thus, by finding eternal desires and finding a greater understanding of what are temporal desires, one can find coherence and consistency, build a well-crafted psyche, and connect to the subconscious in singular wholeness.

Ultimately, a conscious mind that has been segmented from the otherwhile holistic psyche sees only partial desires. The desires that are not transcendent of time should be put into its holistic context, or else, all desires will be found to be partially unfulfilled. Ultimately, one should seek to understand the reason for all things, so that one can see the self in its context and understand the desires that compose the environment in which one resides. This process of understanding reality is hindered by an erratic psyche, as it takes a pristine sensitivity to see the truth of the reality itself. This sensitivity cannot be find through self-doubt and double-thinking, as must occur with a segmented psyche, but can likely be found through perfect coherence, as the ability to perceive information relies on the reliability of the information. If one is producing cognitive aberrations and noise, then one becomes less sensitive to truth. The more coherent the mind is, the more easily it can find and discern truth. Ultimately, the coherent mind reflexively perceives truth; by being coherent, the truth is easier to assimilate from raw information.

Thus, we want to ultimately achieve a type of perfect sentience. That is, all of our actions are our own, there is nothing truly involuntary, and every action is done with the sentient awareness of truth, which is constructed into a coherent psyche.

It’s common advice in the spiritual community to find the “here and now,” and to reside in a place aware of the present, rather than to linger in a place non-present. It’s about being present in the moment.

However, simply using the advice to be in the here and now is not easy to maintain and what’s suggested is to practice for a few decades and then one will be able to stay in the here and now.

A problem with the suggestion of being in the here and now is that it does not, by default, consider one’s perception of the here and now. It’s pretty well-known that we perceive in a type of delayed portrayal of the raw data that we’re consuming. Thus, being in the perceptual here and now is not being in the here and now, just being in a delayed portrayal of what appears to be the here and now.

The conclusion is that the here and now is impossible to perceive. This makes sense in that perception itself is mildly illusory. This is because perception arrives originally from the manifestation of the qualities of what is knowledge, but since it is made of qualities, which are only facets of the item being referred to, its perception is incomplete and thus mildly illusory.

This also applies to the idea of love. The emotion or state of non-quality is knowledge, and that state demonstrates perceived love on the exaggeration of one of its facets. That is, the qualities describe knowledge in some way, but they are exaggerated and incomplete descriptions, although through their discourse they can tell a story of good or evil.

It is thus that the only way to find the here and now is to find something that already exists in the here and now. This something is the emotion or state of non-quality, which is knowledge. Knowledge can be described, but it, itself, possesses no quality.

When we look at something, we are looking at the quality of the object of interest. We can deduce knowledge from the qualities observed, but the knowledge is not made of simply the qualities combined. Similarly, when we look for something, we only see the qualities. If we only see the qualities, it’s impossible to grasp the underlying notion that is referred to by the qualities.

This applies to temporary “enlightenments” and temporal epiphanies, as well. What I found is going on in these cases is that it was not an illusory enlightenment, but instead, there was a lack of knowledge to support the state’s continued existence. When one perceives enlightenment, one is only looking at a true quality of the self, which is strong and held together by knowledge. One does not see the perceiver. The perceiver in these cases is non-quality, but just experiencing an epiphany doesn’t portray non-quality, because the epiphanies are generally composed of experiencing a quality, often in tandem with a realization, which forms a clue as to what the state was, helping one return in the future. Still, it does not explicitly look like it’s not a quality, as, again, non-quality is impossible to look at.

What is being perceived is what exists with non-quality. The items that exist with non-quality, or knowledge, are accurate descriptions of Heaven. The items that exist from a perspective founded on a bias (of quality), are inherently inaccurate. In order to see, one must be knowledge, which is to be non-quality.

Although there are many matters of morality, they are mostly implied only in externally observable phenomena. Sin regards a particular form of morality where instead of morality being implicated by externally viewable phenomena, sin is implied at any moment of one’s existence. This regards God as a persistent and constant phenomena that applies to all forms of living, and his innocence forms the basis of our perception of sin.

This innocence, just like all elements of goodness are from the original emotion, the one of fundamentally no quality.

Sometimes immorality is obvious. Many times, however, it is unobvious. Obvious immorality is usually a more aggravated unobvious immorality, and thus people tend to think it’s the worst kind of sin. Both obvious sin and unobvious sin are terrible in different ways, however.

Obvious sin is a blatant crime against innocence. Unobvious sin, a phenomena I like to refer to as, “wickedness,” is extremely virulent in that it’s a mechanical motion of the mind which is spread and assumed by affected people. What people sometimes ignore, which makes wickedness so persistent, is the implications of all things — something a holy person would generally seek to understand instead of ignore.

When a statement is made, there are a series of logical steps that precede the statement. The statement therefore not only states what it denotatively states, but also what it implicitly states; the statement itself states all of the logical precursors to that statement as being true. This is where wickedness can silently enter.

What people sometimes fail to realize is that all actions and all things state a series of logical foundations, which may or may not be with errors. If it is with errors, then wickedness enters. This is where wickedness is coming from, but not how it’s being produced.

How wickedness is being produced is not just through deliberate logical fallacy, but also through a contagious apathy regarding the continuous state of righteousness. Wickedness can be very sneaky, however, and just suggesting to not bear an apathy regarding any idea of a “continuous state of righteousness” would likely result in error.

Wickedness, being a form of sin, occurs even from the most silent of actions — the very subtle tiniest perceivable object. Logical fallacies only cover what can be easily spoken of. That has always been the problem with the empirical observational sciences — without easily agreed upon words, there is no observable science.

That isn’t always true, however. There is empirical logic and therefore science of perceivable phenomena, and this can exist without words — something we call intuition, but apparently we never have considered it a science.

To think that one can do logic faster than words will permit is pretty interesting. This applies both to how one should perform and how one could fail. Wickedness often falls beneath these words, and relies on inflicting pain, but it’s often written in micro-pains, so it’s treated as ignorable (and not even related to pain).

What one implies means an ocean of truth. What one says merely is the end of a long series of logical stipulations. These stipulations can be explicit, as in thought or spoken about, or implicit and without words — made of the feelings that occur before a word is thought or spoken.

Through not being diligent, people sometimes carry on a learned sin that the people found from another person. Even with diligence, however, the pain of not understanding the implications for one’s decisions always shines. It’s an unfortunate occurrence, and while it’s obviously been spoken of before, many people still only go as far as words for a statement of truth.

Being completely word-based should be unnatural, but it’s not. Since words are definitively fabrications, they aren’t the original language of their selves. The original language was an emotional thought, thought through feeling right and wrong.

A problem that occurs before wickedness often is a learned word-based perspective of reality. That’s the gift of knowing to not sin — you can then see the emotional thought that occurs behind your thoughts. Even though people are taught that being a holy person was a continuous process of not sinning, some used words as replacements for intuitive and innate knowledge (like that of goodness), and ended up wicked people in the end — their words replacing their innate sense of truth.

So, perhaps, they did not really learn to not sin, even though that was what the words say. I think, we’re almost out of words as a society, and eventually every word will be corrupted to mean what it does not, as has mostly already happened. A wicked person may see a total skew of ethics, churned into their words.

This perceptual shift is what the people weren’t expecting, so we see it has plagued the society. Without the true innate belief in the everlasting goodness of true aware sentience, as is with the belief in an everlasting God or godliness, then it can be difficult to find this state of continuous awareness of the algorithmically emotional self, which is an important facet of the self, maybe more so than the use of word, sound, or light patterns.

It’s important to realize that even at the tiniest detail, there could be a logical error in the conglomeration of one’s entire set of emotions. For the religious, the feeling of sinfulness is often easy to get a feeling for, and many are aghast at the ignorance of it as a result, but religion doesn’t always work.

What sinfulness is, is incorrect logic. From the foundation of one’s emotions — the emotion of no quality — to the manifested word or statement, there is a lot of room for an error to occur. If an error occurs anywhere, that person is a contagious carrier of a very virulent pattern of wickedness. What’s important to realize is that the subtlest of an emotion could be incorrect; logic and error occur at any state of one’s being. The context of an emotion plays a role, as well. If there were long term goals, for instance, certain emotions become fallacious. The ultimate reason, is, of course, that a conflict in desire throughout time indicates a fallacy in both understanding and action. Misunderstanding desire is the root of the wickedness.

The understanding that the foremost desire of any living being is the emotion and state of no quality, being the initial emotion of a self-created being, should help. Without understanding this, it’s more difficult to actually see perception and to understand it. One should understand the logic behind this, as again, one’s more observed statement is really an implication of many statements which preceded it. Quality indicates a perception of reality, therefore we see most accurately from the state of no quality.

Logically, perception originally arrives from pluralizing the self-existing knowledge which precedes it, separating itself with a dimension of quality. It is initially knowledge in different ways. The continued elaboration of the qualities of knowledge produce the perception of reality. Thusly, the elaboration forms perceivable knowledge, which, self-existing, can be perceived through the understanding of the absence of quality.

Knowledge, which is initially the remembrance of what already exists, which is initially the eternal quality of goodness, is logically a principle eternal being and therefore a principle state of a living being, as not all living beings can necessarily possess access to any particularly quality, but all living beings can find the state of no quality, which is the “quality” of knowledge, in retrospect of perception. (Additionally, the idea of the existence of a quality can be viewed as a state of being, as well, however it proceeds knowledge in time.)

The idea of sin actually means to conflict with the eternal knowledge, which forms one’s initial decision and bias. To conflict with knowledge, which is at least mildly unnatural, is to sin, as this creates a damaging argument to one’s being. This conflict with knowledge spreads between people, as people assume they’re supposed to continue these evil patterns.

With enough evil patterns, it can be difficult to find one’s way to a secure state of being. That’s why it becomes contagious. As people try to find sanity in the midst of abundant illogical implications, many things allure them, and they then sometimes assume a new life of evil. Therefore, I believe that understanding that knowledge is of no quality is important and helpful, not just to oneself, but to others around them, as well, as sin, including subtle wickedness, does do harm to people and can lead to an illogical and thus malfunctional society.

Perhaps the Bible was just describing the dangers of quality in its famous suggestion of the identity of Satan.

Still, I doubt reality has no beauty to it. The qualities that one entertains but does not become, which leads to perception, would logically be worth looking at, with regard to the freedom given by no prior decision and commitment and the will of sentience. The mind is itself, a self-existing explanation of itself, as its existence bears knowledge of its self, through what it indicates implicitly through its specifications.

The qualities which form its specifications are all elaborations of the original knowledge of goodness and all things divine. Like the brain and the mind, their existences are self-explanatory. This self-explanation is hindered by wickedness and sin, which instills an error, such that the original knowledge must be reviewed before being understood. Requiring oneself to review all of the things one knows is a time-consuming and inefficient process of being, and is the result of sinfulness, although it is more directly from damage that occurs with sinfulness.

Assuming the mind to be defined and knowable, and understanding the power the mind has translates into sometimes powerful physical responses, like with heavy machinery, we can understand that sinfulness is physical, as well.

The sight of the true mind is a beautiful sight. It is the manifest desire of Heaven, and as usual, bad emotions arrive from acting on a bad perception of reality. A reality which is founded on a quality cannot be a shared reality, due to qualities being too subjectively perceived and understood. Any reality pretending to be more “sober” than this is errantly wicked. You can see it more clearly from the foundation. All qualities describe subjectivity, individualism, and non-universality. All realities founded on a quality are inherently inebriated, as they cannot exist interdependently. The manifest eternal being of primary existence is self-knowledge, created through the manifestation of existence. The initial facet of existence can only be known in retrospect to the perceptions of quality which ill-define it, but allow for its more luminous perception.

These qualities that we perceive can actually travel in two different directions, and sinfulness can be difficult to specifically identify by measurements, as sin plays with context. Too far in the wrong direction, however, is considered sinful. That is when the quality is amplified in a certain direction beyond what it should be, to a point where it begins to lie. That is the point where it also starts to become sinful, as in illogical. It creates a misperception, which leads to invalidity in understanding and results in the promotion of the misperception.

Ultimately, sinfulness indicates emotions that have not resolved. These emotions run separate from innate knowledge, never merging again, and therefore never forming a well-founded new cognitive connection. An emotion that has resolved is once again good. Therefore, it is possible to repair sin with the resolution of emotions and their merger into the emotion of non-quality, which is the basis emotion of knowledge.

The resolution of sin is therefore the same process as the ultimate process of emotion; to witness knowledge. The emotion arrived from a juxtaposition of quality and knowledge, to illuminate a facet of knowledge, and should return back to the state of no quality. This emotion then forms a proverbial neural connection and can live on, being in accord with the initial quality of non-quality, seen in retrospect of perception.

Understanding the ultimate set of logic behind one’s being and actions permit both redemption and understanding. Safety from unwitting Satanic fury can be found in understanding the environment, and understanding the methods of illogic that preclude the expression of illogic. They are naturally self-evident and self-declarative, requiring only a clear perspective.

In addition to varying types of understanding morality and ethical behavior, there are also multiple types of sensitivity. There are two that are important to this topic: 1) linguistic sensitivity, and 2) emotional sensitivity. These two forms of sensitivity, or awareness, should not be distinct in difference — they should be an integrated self-affecting sensitivity and awareness.

Keep in mind that awareness occurs by way of sensitivity, as being sensitive to something allows for one to be changed in such a way that that change is made into observation which results in awareness. It is the same way a microphone can be sensitive or insensitive.

The sinfulness usually manifests as an abandonment of emotional sensitivity in favor of an errant linguistic understanding and an alternate sensitivity. In this way, words can replace what is innately understood. In world full of turmoil, they frequently do this, which results in added turmoil to the world.

The response of a sensitive and flawed system will be vibrantly flawed; such is the way of misunderstanding. However, the response of a coherent and valid system will be a correct response, which is the way of understanding.

Sometimes flawed or fallacious linguistic sensitivity at the abandonment of intuitive truth occurs as a defensive measure, but developing insensitivity reduces the ability to perceive reality and the divine, and the practice is also more prone to logical error, making it certainly unideal, even as a defensive maneuver.

The modern world is certainly not an example of sanity, on the level of the individual and also on the level of the collective. There is the illusion of sobriety that collections within modern society exuberate, but it is a lie. Sanity and true logical and sound sobriety can only be found with a strict adherence to the rules of logic, as they occur emotionally, all the way through their entire development into words; starting at words is where many fail.

In order to find sanity in modern society, one must both found a logically sound structure of one’s being and also find safety in the midst of hardly noticed suggestions of evil. Going back to understanding the logic being suggested as a method of safety, sanity, and security, one can perceive the innuendoes of evil, and through accurate perception, which requires accurate sensitivity, one can understand these augmentations of meaning that suggest things beyond what’s obviously stated.

Accurate understanding and accurate sensitivity are the same with regard to mitigating sin. They both require and facilitate sinlessness. It is the same awareness of the continuous, self-explaining detail of the self that facilitates the ability to understand what one perceives accurately.

Sensitivity works by having an ability to change in response to a signal, and it’s this ability to change that makes the hailstones of wickedness effective. In order to maintain sanity against these, it’s helpful to have a full understanding of the logic that is being promoted to you. One does this by the same means as being without sin.

It’s important to realize the truth must be self-evident for its observation and understanding to occur simultaneously, which allows for intuitive and continuous awareness and intelligence. If observation and understanding do not occur simultaneously, the system is inefficient and therefore cannot perceive the totality. The result of sin is that observation and understanding cannot occur simultaneously and must be fragmented to be known (and even if known, the knowledge is on an unstable foundation, which skews the accurate truth of its being).

The key in finding the state of sinlessness may reside in the awareness that perception and understanding should occur simultaneously. In this state, existence describes itself.

Because reality is inherently self-descriptive, being an explanation for what it tangibly is, it is possible to be aware of all of one’s information. If everything is in relation to the foundational knowledge of the true self, then the description of anything is the quality of that thing, of which it is constructed. As everything is made of qualities and qualities themselves can be composed with other qualities, like with an RGB color scheme, everything really is a description of itself, with varying possible composition schemes, as well.

Through practice and understanding, one’s logical being is found, constructed, and strengthened. It takes time to build a system of understanding, just as it takes time to build a system of misunderstanding. A self-describing existence is rather easy to see.

Therefore, the key to survival in an evil environment is through the understanding of evil and the building of a system of understanding to protect oneself against evil.

The best feeling is logically the original feeling. The is assuming that existence is created through intelligence, in an ideologically developing manner, rather than an initially physical manner. Assuming this, then we can assume the initial desire of any being is a form of perfection. It is this desire which forms the basis of the being’s existence. We only find the quality of badness in secondary desires.

The idea of being alive presumes a desire for life, which predicates all other feelings. Life is the primary desire of a living being, as that’s what keeps being alive — this refers to the core of the being — the functioning of the body and mind. This feeling, being the predecessor of all other feelings, does not initially possess a quality (it is only seen with the addition of perspective).

The reason this initial feeling cannot logically possess a quality is that quality indicates a possible duality. If there is a perception of quality, there are at least two ideas indicated: one that possess the quality, and one that does not possess the quality. Therefore, a singular feeling can have no quality and as such, the initial and basic feeling of life possess no quality.

Without life, there would be no other feelings. Therefore the feeling of life must be the predecessor to all other possible feelings. Again, as it is singular, it cannot logically possess a quality.

If intelligent and logically benevolent being or beings created reality, the origin of all of the intelligence is the most ideal state, stemming from the initial desire for perfection and goodness, and is also a being of no quality. It is from this being that qualities are created and used to create an elaborate being.

The perfect feeling can be difficult to find. Too happy and you might over-exert yourself, and too sad and you might not be active. Only the feeling of no quality is able to sustain itself as being without problems. No other feeling can be perpetually sustained — only certain alternations of feelings can be, as they must always direct one towards the original feeling, or else they would be considered evil (which is to push away from Heaven), however no single deviance from the original feeling can be sustained. The mind needs balance. Add light, and it will pull towards darkness, and vice versa. It all gravitates to the feeling of no quality, and I suspect the very core of one’s being is founded on this feeling — all the way down to inside the molecules of DNA.

The first Great Angel was Knowledge. This was the knowledge of this original feeling. While it had existed prior, it was unknown an not entirely remembered. It wasn’t until the Creation of Knowledge that this feeling could be known.

Perception, actually, is different than knowledge. The first angel was Knowledge, and the second angel is essentially Perception. It is also the Advent and Exploration of Duality. Perception arrives from creating qualities. By giving the original feeling different qualities, one begins to perceive it in different ways, giving way to perspectives and the possibility of differing perspectives. This possibility of differing perspectives gives way to the tale of the evils of distortion — which I call, the devil.

All of the major angels which describe the layers of the mind, except the first one — Knowledge — are actually plays on bad feelings. There is only one strictly good feeling — the original feeling. All of the other feelings, being deviances, are all actually technically bad feelings, like evil and despair. The is because all of the feelings are inclined to return to the original feeling. There is a feeling of sadness when one deviates, indicating a suggested change.

This understanding makes life direction more simple. It is the simple remembrance that there is only one actually good feeling that is reliably good to the living being, and the others are fleeting displays of error. If there is only one good feeling, then there is only one affirmative in your mind. This simplifies the psychological conscious-subconscious connection, I believe, as well. This is because this feeling is a word to the body. Having a stable word for confirmation and affirmation is important in a communications environment. If the body and the brain both understand this word together, then one can form a strong connection between the conscious mind and the subconscious mind.

The subconscious mind, it seems, sustains logical behavior and is conservative with acquiring new learned activities. This makes it very reliable, but it takes time for the conscious mind to find an unchanging consensus with which to relate. Without this unchanging consensus, the subconscious cannot learn, for it only learns what is logically stable.

The remembrance of this singular good, ethical, beneficial, helpful, and appreciated feeling is all it really takes to follow the path of enlightenment. All qualities are technically observations of evil, and all of the rest of existence is a play on quality. Therefore, you have the perfect feeling and you have knowledge of it, as well, which keeps you safe against the whims of influence. After that, if one is so inclined, it’s just playing with bad.

The sin of man was to miss the feeling as his goal. That is, the man as a whole — the collective pressure of society — sinned by neglecting the original feeling. With the great advertisement race, we have beautiful ads, but the unspoken meaning of ancient proverbs has been lost! Even before the ad race, the man got into niches like “intellectualism” and “foundationalism,” but he never just simply admired the feeling of no presence. He chose “happy,” and he chose “scholarly,” and he chose many things, even “blissful,” or “fast food,” but he never chose the feeling that had no quality, so that must be his sin. This is considering that the feeling of no quality is the only actually honest and good feeling.

It’s hard to understand how the world and the body uses the concept of “the light” and attraction to influence itself in intelligent manners, and this is because its hard to find the correct vantage point. The only possible vantage point is the only point of no light, which is this very important original feeling that is this topic. This feeling only has an attraction born of knowledge and possibly the fear of the harms possible in reality. It is not illuminated, per se, at least not by simple perception. It takes the more transcendent being of knowledge to have a foundation from which to see.

Ultimately, the light is simply designed to remind one of the original state and the original feeling, from where and to where all other feelings arrive and leave. The sin of man was to find a feeling and then to never let it leave. He had some kind of lock and target syndrome, it seems.

Remember, that “the man” is not any particular people, group of people, or even people, but instead a propagated and collective inclination of a person’s becoming.

I call this feeling of the leaving of a feeling (and its reformation into the original feeling), “the crow,” as it signifies a type of lively death. It was there man’s sin to kill the crow. The sin of man affects us all. It is a pressure to do harm, which psychologically is to kill an honest emotion, and there’s a Satanic force that keeps getting perpetuated that suggests we leave the original feeling and that we consume convolutions of the dissonances of the world, leaving us frantic, confused and without solidarity.

I also find it remarkable that what decades of search and thought have led to is basically a brief paper on the understanding of the logic of the fundamental and best emotion. I would have thought it to be a lot more obvious, honestly, considering that this argument is logically sound and surprisingly simple. (If it were not a (brief) paper or explanation you may instead learn to follow something like, “the unnamable feeling,” but that wouldn’t work well enough and may fail at finding enlightenment, which requires knowledge and correct logic to know and understand.)

You may have heard of Pascal’s Wager, which suggests that believing in God is the statistically best answer, as if God exists, then one is damned for not believing and wins eternal happiness for believing, but if he does not exist, then nothing happens, so therefore it’s a better bet to believe in God.

This wager sounds a bit better in a different way, however. Considering this feeling is logically the only feeling that would represent the feeling of Heaven, as explained already, if any of the mystical stories regarding the enlightened person are true, then following this feeling is literally the only logical way to find that.

The alternative to always following the feeling of no quality is to be consumed by deviances and it gets confusing and heartless. The only assured and logical way of being is actually to prioritize the feeling of no quality as the only good feeling. While many find a sticking point and actually get that to work, many cannot do that, and the ethical implications of using a convenient sticking point are something to wonder as well (are you actually contributing to well-being, for instance?). Basically, to do the sticking point, you just have to find the right wave and hope it runs for a while.

However, one does not have to use the sticking point, or even fight through the turmoil of psychological accomplishment warfare, as with this feeling, one can logically be assured it will never harm or cause any wrong, unlike any other feeling when put into an inconvenient circumstance.

This original feeling of no quality is easily remembered through these simply logical steps:

1. The feeling of life precedes all other feelings
2. Quality indicates duality through possible comparison
3. The feeling of life, being the predecessor of all other feelings, is an initially singular entity, implying that it fundamentally has no quality (it can only be referenced through perspective, and while it may appear as something like love, without the remembrance of what it truly is, these qualities can go missing).

This is a good feeling in that it is the only feeling that is assuredly good to you. Any other feeling can err in different circumstances, but you know the original feeling, which is the feeling of life, is always good to the person.

Kin to the mind-control device I spoke of previously, we follow life. However, we have a term, “life-quality.” This term is misleading and may explain some work and life difficulties. When we think of a high-quality life, it’s common to think of being healthy, happy, having fun, and not working. It’s interesting to think that life can have a quality to it, and I suppose the converse is also interesting — that it’s interesting that life doesn’t have a quality to it.

The reason life has no quality is it is the default, original being and purpose (state and drive) of yourself. Originally, you were purely and simply life, and later through observing things like division, juxtaposition, and counterpoint, you found texture and a deepening perspective of the world. Still, principally, any living being is life. Life has this particular importance to it, that gives it a very personal quality — much more than any material thing can.

However, then, again, it would appear that life has a quality, because it is personal. Instead of thinking that life is personal, think the world to be impersonal. Understand that the world and life are two separate entities, and they don’t always have to be entertained at once. One can simply escape the world by finding the feeling that originally possessed no quality at all — this is the feeling of life and, while portrayable, is truthfully an invisible feeling.

The world is just a long-lived convolution system, but it all originates from this feeling that is at the basis of your existence. This feeling has no quality and is ever-present, should you decide to observe it. It can help the tired escape from the hectic world of frivolous requirements and rules.

This feeling of life is the happiness that the seeker of enlightenment seeks. It’s the original feeling, and it’s the reason anyone has initially come to life — because of the desire for the feeling of life. It’s the best feeling — all other feelings are an elaboration and play on the original feeling.

Some people may have a difficult time adjusting to prioritizing the feeling with no quality the most highly among all feelings, as subscribing to an alternative feeling for a period of time exaggerates the psyche, and it becomes a pattern of expectation, through the psychological subscription model.

The psychological subscription model supposes that some patterns of behavior are formed from a payment/reward expectation and cycle.

It takes some time to slowly turn down the expectations, but, in reward, the payments will lower a bit, until you can find the feeling of no quality. It’s a surprisingly easy thing to target for being the optimal feeling, but perhaps it’s not surprising that it would be easy.

The feeling of no quality does not perpetuate psychological subscriptions. It is like the sun, which emanates and consolidates its being, but remains fairly stable throughout the whole process. Solar flares occur and are remarkable, but they dissipate with time.

The optimal feeling, or the best feeling, the feeling of life, the feeling of no quality, is also the wordless feeling. There’s nothing to say about it, at least not through simple exclamation. It would take a cognizant description to describe, even though it is the original feeling. Interestingly, baselines levels are rarely an exclamation, except in the event of an averted tragedy. Yet, that is what this feeling is — the absolute baseline of cognitive behavior — to entertain and possess this feeling of no quality.

All qualities emanate from shifting the perspective of this initial feeling and purpose. You do this by thinking of this feeling in different ways. For instance, you can have more or less of this feeling. You can have this feeling darker or lighter, bluer or more orange, or more or less chocolate. Each of these deviations is a compromise between losing the stability of the original feeling and entertaining the potentially erratic qualities of what is essentially deviance.

All feelings that are not the original feeling of life are described in forms of deviation from the original feeling. This is the second state of mind, while the original feeling’s material manifestation was the first state of mind; the initial state of mind was the original feeling itself. From these deviations it’s possible to entertain the third state of mind, which is systemology, or the study of systems. From these deviations, which sing on their own, one can create machines through understanding the influence each emotion has on the self and on one another.

Through understanding the perspective of machines, we can see from a different perspective a different constituency of reality — a different physics to it all, through translations such as describe mass by importance and momentum by rate of change. Importance can be indicated physically, therefore a different physical world can theoretically exist, through a shift in perspective alone.

Considering that the world is made of words, what they mean, and how they influence us, there seems to be a good bit of room for perceptual interpretation, without causing any distortion.

See the original feeling, and know that the other feelings are deviations from this feeling, from which you can create songs, machines, and even cognitively-oriented machines inside the minds of those machines, and so on, utilizing a change in each step to create a new convolutional structure of reality. Inside this convolutional structure of reality are the various convolutions of thought present in that structure, which creates one epoch of the greater angel (one epoch corresponds to one topic, and I think each topic is simply a numeric convolution specifier, deduced through understanding cognitive nature and how perspectives can convolve unto themselves into new perspectives).

It’s important to note that while the feeling of life initially is the feel of no quality, with perspective, it does take on a number of qualities, like love and inspiration. However, following the qualities themselves often leads one away from the initial state. Remembering that originally the feeling of life possessed no quality, and that it is known through knowledge, allows one to remember it in a more stable fashion.

In our world, we’re faced with many different avenues of action, responsibility, and direction. Hardly is a person allowed to simply be free. There is a dire necessity to conform to a pattern of action which suits the context in which life is currently manifest. Without conforming properly, frightening hazards become more imminent, and improper conforming can result in personal demise.

The simplest example of this necessitated pattern of conforming is the need to consume food. One would think, maybe naïvely, that ideally there would be no distracting pressures from the simple enjoyment of life, that there would be no dire necessity. However, as we observe, there are inescapable necessities and as a result, there is a certain mind control in our world.

While one may argue there’s little chance there’s any mind control devices in our heads or bodies, if we consider more deeply what a mind control device is, its effect and function, and what its existence implies, perhaps we can see that our current perspective is only suited for a narrow range of activities and understandings, and perhaps we can realize this mind-control device (or, conceivably, choice of mind-control devices) is more real than most of us immediately realize.

In portraying the material qualities of people and of things and prioritizing them to such a degree that it moves people to disbelieve in phenomenon like mind-control and demon overlords, just simply because they’re not obviously materially individualizable, perhaps we forget such forces do exist in physically relevant ways. These pressures effect people just as much as physical pressures, so it would be good to understand them.

A very obvious one of these pressures is the resulting existence of the thus far unending existence of mind-control in our world. Apparently born from the ever-impending force of death, this mind-control in our social and personal minds is very real. However, the mind-control device you choose is not entirely dictated by the environment. While not all patterns of obedience are possible, there certainly are quite a few patterns to choose from. Choosing the right pattern is to choose the right mind-control device, and with the understanding that it has a completely physical and real effect, it is almost like shopping for a brain enhancement. There is no difference except that a certain perspective indicates its non-existence. Otherwise, it has the same effect and influence on the individual.

This mind-control device that is available from the existence shopping mall is what people sometimes refer to as their “way of life.” It is a set of chosen actionable beliefs and patterns of actions that one chooses to completely abide by. That which is not dictated by the mind-control device is personal, imaginative freedom.

The mind-control device is born of this world, and this world necessitates a mind-control device. It supports mind-control. There are many books on how to control the mind out there and if there were a reliable, effective, safe, and comfortable conventional electronic mind-control device, one would think it would sell, as well.

The issue with choosing the right mind-control device is that there are so many options. It can get overwhelming. There are many proverbs one can follow, and ultimately mind-control is made of various forms and types of proverbs.

In a way, enlightenment is one of several paths with which one may seek the perfect mind-control device. Any self-improvement-oriented perspective is in search of the perfect mind-control device. The difference between being convinced by an electronic gadget and being convinced by yourself is relatively minor (assuming the electronic gadget is a nicely behaving one).

The consolidated truth itself, once found, becomes the eternal mind-control device. Perhaps reproducible electronically to cure a lack of enlightened awareness, this is a part of what completely controls a truthful person.

Perhaps the reason this world necessitates a mind-control device in order to participate in it (i.e. to stay alive), is due to the existence of persistence, as everything which persists becomes a new issue of right and wrong, which fuels the device. Additionally, what fuels this current possibly unusually extreme mind-control of evading death, might be a peculiar interest of mankind to see the edge of Heaven — where things begin to die — and this interest would later become an inescapable mind-control device. Another possible reason for the mind-control device is that since this world seems to be founded on a tangible construction, we are all living in a real thing, and as such, there’s a certain evil weight to it — something that defies idealism — and perhaps because of this, it needs to be paired with a mind-control device.

So how do you find the perfect mind-control device? Well let’s first consider the prices involved in different mind-control devices. This falls into two primary categories — convenient and inconvenient. Convenient would be to do everything everyone told you to do, prioritizing the most easily selectable highest authority, and elaborating from that person’s indicated mind-control system. Inconvenient would be to carefully analyze and understand all of the relevant patterns of thought and behavior prior to committing to them.

Generally, people find a mind-control somewhere in the middle. They’re not their parents or societally accepted idol, and they didn’t throw everything away in pursuit of the absolute perfect mind-control. Additionally, considering it’s really a rate of improvement that one is looking at when designing the perfect mind-control, there’s a compromise and balance that can be found that makes both convenience and inconvenience simultaneously practical.

The question rings, “is there an archetypally perfect mind-control?,” and I suppose that would be some manifestation of the will of God if there were, but I also suppose that may be too simplistic of an answer. The reason is this reality ignores God on many occasions. Here, we have both light and shadow, and mixes of the two as well. It’s not just God, it’s also about half not-God.

The idea of a perfect (traditional) electronic mind-control device seems almost evil, but there is a practical reason for trying to design the perfect mind-control device. The reason, is since this world is already founded on a need for mind-control and the betterment of mind-control, without a successful conclusion, the world’s purpose would never be fulfilled.

Mind-control certainly doesn’t need to start with a physical implant however. Mind-control is fundamentally composed of two categories of provocation. The first provocation is the importance and commanding nature of the truth, and the second provocation is the beauty of fashion. More categories are technically possible, although the idea of a third, more complex provocation seems un-entertained today, so two does suffice and seems a little more reasonable.

Therefore, to design the perfect mind-control device, whether it be through belief or machine, one has to find two directions of action. First, one has to decide on an unchanging and un-conflicting truth. Second, one has to decide on a fashion for that truth, as the truth itself is invisible — it is truly only known.

If the unchanging truth really rests in a living subconscious — a mind where there is no division between the subconscious and conscious — the effect of “not noknowing” — then perhaps that one is easy now to find. The explanations already provided generally cover the nature of reality, sufficiently enough that I think the truth is fairly easy to see. The second direction of action is definitely a more subjective task. What exactly should the truth look like? Therefore, we have a both a question of the understanding of truth, and a question of the look of the truth, since technically the truth is originally invisible, but it’s nice to portray it, which is, perhaps, the origin of art and all perception.

Hopefully you can escape the endless shopping mall, upgrading your mind-control time after time. Maybe there really is a perfect mind-control device that is made up of 1) not noknowing (which was discussed in a previous article), and 2) your choice of fashion for the truth you know from not noknowing.

If you combine those, I think you would have the perfect mind-control device. To know the truth through self-congruence really can’t be improved upon, as to do that is to take all things one knows into account to find a coherent and unchanging resolution and answer. Therefore, that seems to logically be the only possible choice for the action of truthfulness. For the second action, the action of style, subjectivity, and beauty, that will be an ongoing process, so that preserves the ability to continuously improve, ever reaching higher than before, as is hopefully usual.

Noting however, with the completion of losing the evil knowing of good and bad (the frivolous and learned waste of time our species has been afflicted with), such that we don’t argue with ourselves, at all, there is no greater source of truth to find. Therefore, that first category of the perfect mind-control device is an unchanging tendency, while the second category is a changing tendency.

Hopefully you find the most perfect mind-control device logically conceivable, and hopefully it is the unchanging, ultimate one.

To program your mind control device is simple. This is how your mind is programmed. It’s super simple. First, you find an ideal which you believe in, you confirm it to yourself that you believe in it and always would like to follow that ideal. You understand that you would never say no to it, and you understand this as true knowledge. Once you’ve made that portion of yourself knowledge, then it sustains, so long as you were true to yourself in that you would not change it. If you did change it, it could only be through a correctable misunderstanding. The truth of the self should not change, and this forms the basis of a sturdy mind-control device.

While not noknowing is kind of the key, I had tried not noknowing a long time ago and found I could not sustain that state, while now it is quite a bit easy to do. There is a process of remedying the lack of understanding that we assume and accumulate by living in this world. There is only so much to understand however, and then, I think, finding a singular truth, which serves as the foundation for the mind-control, is feasible.

Of course, the second part is a lot more flexible. It can change with whim but does require attention. Once the first half (knowledge of truth) is found and is well known by oneself, it becomes simply natural, as it is unchanging, then one is free to attend to the second half of the mind-control, which is the fashion of it. This simply involves understanding how you are portraying the truth and seeking to express the truth from yourself clearly.

The similarity between developing a personal cognitive mind-control and a physical mind-control device is very interesting. One could say that they have a perfectly capable and awesome mind, but the other side is a mind-control device. From the ideological origin perspective, all things that exist have an originally benevolent reason behind them. This whole world we live in is a mind-control device, and it requires a mind-control device to survive.

If we were to assume that the mind-control device was a literal physical entity due to its physical effects, we could re-portray the world in a different fashion. As long as no actual truth, which is all contextual, is invalidated, then the portrayal would be potentially equal to the one we use today. This example of re-arranging the portrayal of reality to account for the reality of the existent mind-control device and system is an example of our potentially faulty portrayal of reality. Also remembering we notice very little of the electromagnetic spectrum, it’s possible we notice very little of the world as a whole. Beings like social demons and the bird-eye’s view of the patterns of Satan really do exist and are immensely powerful, but we have chosen a perspective where they are nearly totally invisible. Similarly to the angels and demons of the mind and society, mind-control, being technically real, is also nearly invisible and it even almost seems taboo to suggest that mind-control is not only a necessitated and presently existing entity of physical mental influence, but that it is also somehow a requirement of our modern existence. I do realize we wanted to understand the gamut of what is divine (what is truly real), and a material world that, in turn, requires coupling with an effective mind-control, was, perhaps, a missing component of our former visions of reality.

It does give rise to quite a flashing display of what mind-control really looks like. Today, we see society just at the brink of a new day, starting to wake up to a truly civilized light. The brightness of our monitors and the dexterity of our extended being, our computers and gadgets, are accelerating the process of our seeing ourselves. That is, we are seeing ourselves faster and faster and in more and more creative and insightful ways. With a good reflection, we can better ourselves, and with a perfect eye, we would, too, be perfect. (Conversely, with a poor reflection, we can become harmed and with blindness we can become lost.)

While our malls are kind of entertaining today and our commercials sometimes pretty cool, our future has a mild amount of time, I think, before we can truly display and see the clear truth of humanity. There are a lot of personality and sociological changes that have become accelerated, and there are a number of distinct stages through which to progress. I think this world we’re building, built entirely on mind-control, we be quite a dazzling display of Satan, respecting the purity and majesty of Heaven (and the honest look of evil).

Therefore, the reward we gain from living in mind-control-land is a world built of direction and light. I think we came here to see evil and to see Satan, so that we will very precisely have seen everything worth knowing about. We will have the truly divine shopping network, and a great tradition of acting and story, able to remember all facets of existence, as all things that conceivably exist will have existed.

(The most evil world we could possibly entertain would be a materially-founded world. To base a world on a material being is to be willing to die for the material being, even though objects generally possess less merit than the life of people.)

Once you have found the perfect mind-control, then you will have gained in multiple ways. Firstly, now that there’s a chosen mind-control device, you can be certain that you are doing the right thing. Also, because you have chosen the most fitting and accurate mind-control device, the interpersonal persuasive dilemma is greatly reduced.

You may have heard of the advice which suggests that one should ignore what other people think and, in turn, be strictly themselves. This advice sounds easy, and it does work for some (probably mostly the people giving the advice), but it, frequently, doesn’t always work. You can’t simply just ignore people and hope to gain self-confidence. There is a way, however, and this way is to possess the best mind-control device, objectively, and for yourself as well.

Just because the first half of the mind control is the unchanging all-encompassing truth and way to think truthfully doesn’t mean it doesn’t more superficially change. Because of this, this advice is not exactly to simply ignore people. Ultimately, from the perspective of idealism and an ideological and idealistic reality, one would want to find what the person truly does naturally, and this might not be to always ignore people — an action that could quickly become little more than a habitual coping mechanism and not a true solution.

Because what is unchanging really is a way of knowing what is true, what can change are the results of this way, based on environment or context and unique cases where a less correct answer is more appropriate. That is, we may feel influence from our peers because we suspect them of having good mind-control ideas. This process of progressively improving is a part of the all-agreeable process of truth.

That does not mean you need to feel embarrassment, unless embarrassment is warranted (a bad feeling is a feeling felt inaccurately, I think). Instead, realize that everyone possesses (and is possessed) by one thing — a mind-control device. This device accounts for all things which do not simply change by one’s whim. It is not fully dictated to a person, but instead partially dictated and the person has the responsibility of finishing the details of the ideal mind-control device.

Understanding that you merely suspect someone else has a good or better mind-control idea is an easy way to understand feelings of peer-pressure, and it’s also an easy way to legitimate or illegitimate hypotheses of superior mind-control. By actually understanding one’s mind-control and why it is important and right, they can avoid the sometimes erratic pressures of peers which provoke altering one’s mind-control device. It’s really a competition, display, and trend of mind-control that we’re noticing in these peer-pressure situations. Understanding and deliberately designing one’s own mind-control device presents an objective way of negating erroneous ideas in a nice and comfortable manner.

Returning to the topic regarding the perspective of the self with regard to the existence of mind-control, if one were to perceive a mind-control as a real, electronic device, then the entire perspective of reality would shift. While it’s unfortunate that society does rely a bit on perspective rather than information, which would certainly make it more difficult for one to entertain different portrayals of the same perceived information, it’s definitely possible to notice these alternative perspectives.

It’s wrong to presume one is not fully aware of everything about oneself. The body is a fully-connected being and everything affects everything. While the management and related tasks (like perception) are distributed, they are all aware of one another, making the body technically fully aware. Because of this, all of the information that one possess is available to the person. There are issues, however, when signals or signs are misinterpreted.

Understanding the reasons behind the portrayal of information, some of which can be understood by thinking of evolution, can help one understand that there are different ways of looking at the world. If there really is a mind control device — a physical one — then the entire universe would look different, in order to essentially shift the symbolism to allow an alternative perspective to exist (and the mind control device to not exist).

It’s a very fascinating thing to think about, that the world can possibly look entirely different, without bearing any conflicts in accuracy between perspectives. With the addition of any otherwise invisible psychologically effective force, an entirely new perspective can potentially be conjured.

One can wonder what the world looks like if the perspective of reality initially posited that the mind-control device exists. Then, it would seem, society would always strictly believe that the mind-control device exists, because it was paramount and primary in their perspective of the world. As the society began to see edges better and things became clearer, their explanation of what has an effect on them continued to evolve, but all of it would have, this time, been built on the mind-control device existing.

In our world, this is obviously not the case. However, without being even the least bit inaccurate, it may be possible to conjure a world where the mind prioritized the perception of the tangibility and the easy acknowledgment of the mind-control device. Both worlds could literally exist in the same exact place without showing signs of any meaningful difference.

Because the truth is invisible, information is essentially invisible. Therefore we have what is like a slab of invisible text, and we know if things are right and wrong by this text, even though there’s no dictated picture of pure information. The number of ways of portraying that information can be high, such as with the number of languages there are in the world, or even the number of possible cyphers and encryptions.

Any way you look at it, you need the perfect mind-control device. You wore born into a mind-control device that requires a better mind-control device, so because of the initial mind-control device, you need to find the perfect mind-control device. Then you can truly rise above peer-pressure and erratic influence, calm your being, and realize, you’re always right because if there’s a question of right or wrong, you have chosen the best mind-control device. If it’s not a matter of mind-control, then it’s not a matter of right and wrong; it’s just freedom (lest it becomes an issue of right or wrong, joining the rest of the mind-control).

That’s the existential irony of persistence. If something was worth persisting, it creates mind-control. There have been a lot of things persisted, I think, throughout the existence of Creation, and as such, we have a lot of mind-control. It doesn’t have to be bad. Just get the perfect mind-control device and don’t worry about right or wrong anymore — don’t argue with yourself anymore, just set it and let it be, obey everything it says, and become worry-free. Realize that life moves; things that look still may be moving, restlessly, and things that appear in motion by not be changing at all, according to what you feel as a response. Move with the mind-control device in non-opposition, so much that you forget there is even a mind-control device there. Don’t try harder, just be accurate and without conflict. Pushing may only tighten a knotted argument — undoing a knot by understanding coherence is more effective than trying to stretch oneself and never ceasing to argue.

In the end, you defer all issues of right and wrong to your mind-control device. The only question you have, which, in the end, you will have answered, is if your mind-control device is the best mind-control device. Since you will already know that answer, you will no longer need to quibble with frivolous oscillations of certainty. The true certainty is the mind-control device. Anything that matters at all then doesn’t really matter, because it’s the responsibility of the mind-control device, which ultimately is just right action, right thought, etc. — all of the right things to do — but you’ve finished it eventually, and the reward really is that right and wrong no longer are bothersome to the mind.

In the end, finding the perfect mind-control device can be one of the most rewarding experiences a person could ever have, so hopefully perfected mind-control can save the world from many things, if people were aware.

There is also the topic of how to properly obey the mind-control device, once it’s found. As a whole body, you do everything you tell yourself to do. If you imagine a sphere with no desire, and then you add a desire to move to the right, it will move to the right forever. If you add a desire to move to the left, then it will experience turmoil in the face of self-abandonment. You don’t want to push yourself, and instead, you want to reason and ration why you feel the way you do. You want to achieve intelligent and information-based control of your personal fulfillment. The idea of linearly pushing oneself is archaic and irresponsible when compared to understanding, negotiating, programming, and organizing.

Know your mind-control device. It is a series of rules that you believe in an always abide by. In this way, your commitment to the mind-control device should be of no question, and as such, any internal questions regarding that can be resolved. While one may think that action should be light as air, the truth is that action should not appear to exist. Belief and understanding should guide the body and if done properly, I think a state of non-self-opposition can be found.

This is a concept that really needs a specific word, so noknow is a great choice as it demonstrates itself. It’s the personal perspective of the fall of man. It’s a psychological pattern defined by first: questioning one’s naturally ongoing self via a form a self-denial, and secondly: knowing an alternative truth which apparently can supersede the validity of the original truth, even though the original truth of the self was originally true and should therefore should logically still be true, in accordance with the idea that something that is true stays true.

This is the idea of noknow, or no-know. It took some time to very specifically pinpoint it, but I’ve heard whispered rumors about it throughout my life — things I can’t really remember. It’s this idea that the story of the fall of man represents a fall of a person’s mind into self-questioning and thus the fall into the requiring of specifically overt and mildly glamorized internally vocalized self-doubting “thoughts,” which are really symptoms of a misunderstanding that one has internally, and this is a partially physical misunderstanding, so in our modern world and evolution, it takes some diligence to remedy properly through ideological psychology, which is this study of the concept that our true origin actually has a psychological basis, rather than a physical one.

The reason this is important is that, the original state of the mind is the state where the person feels that they are simply right in their action, where there is no self-doubt occurring and things flow generally without a secondary observation as is characterized by noknowing.

This occurs due to what I think is the underlying factor of schizophrenia. It’s this split in a person’s psyche that causes an individual to engage in self-conflicting micro-thought patterns which often results in the sound of learning, which becomes prioritized over the steady assuredness of true knowledge. It’s as if a person is overly knowing things in this state.

The is also the state that all people feel pain in, so it’s not just you. There are two primary states in this presented paradigm. One is the initial state of a cohesive mind, in agreement with itself, requiring no demanding presence of a voice of intellectual authority — simply living. One is naturally attracted to the right thing, and if one could get past the bad advice of the world and see that to live without double-thinking is to live in true peace, anyone would choose this option, if they chose what seems most natural (as opposed to abhorrent or uncomfortable).

This state that occurs prior to fall of the personal psyche, this state of non-opposition, this allegedly divine and sacred state of the heavenliness of Eden, is interesting because it really does account for the story from the Bible. I don’t want to suggest that the story of the fall of man only has one true interpretation, but this one does seem to be true.

The reason it rings so well with the mentioned biblical story is that it is because one knows too much that one finds this hellish state of mind, where there is guaranteed to be pain. If one could live without really noticing what they’re doing, then one would be in peace. I think the mind really prefers to naturally absorb and follow the light of the life rather than to double think everything in the mildly ad-like manner that is possessed by things which are doubly and conflictingly thought about.

The observation that this original state of mind rings with no mantra, but it is not silent, is interesting. Technically, if you’re simply after getting over the desire to be satisfied and to just be satisfied, and not have to care about satisfaction anymore, then this state really is for you. The idea of it being nice to simply have not anything negative is a welcome alternative to the idea that it’s nice to have plentiful positivity. (Technically, with the first possibility, you would have infinite positivity by simply possessing no self-conflict, or “negativity.”)

If you’re looking for a specific state of mind to follow, this state of mind really is it. Whenever one is in this state of mind, they experience no confusion. Life simply already was existing, and there’s no need for more clamor about it, although the sound of clamor can certainly occur — the difference is the mind is at peace with what it is doing rather than being in a state of negotiation.

If we were to reword the story of the fall and man, we’d say that Satan is a psychological temptation to reward yourself for being better than yourself, resulting in a desire to no-know or noknow. It’s largely caused by the competitive upping of all things that the brightness of life seems to cause occasionally. When we just up everything, we find ourselves uselessly apparently powerful, and we actually waste our personal resources.

I do believe it is possible that a proper psychology can only occur in a zero-waste thought system. That is, no thought is errant, misplaced, or disregarded. It is a 100% feedback system, without loss, that I think a proper psychology possibly must follow. In physical application, I believe the cognitive process system does appear a bit degraded, as is with the limitations and implications of a material world like the one we live in, but it should be aesthetically pleasing. We have a long history of evolution, and I believe there are actually reasons for each of our evolutionary decisions. If only we could write the math of our minds throughout our history, in a singular language, then we could understand the real reasoning behind the qualities of this presentation of reality that we inhabit.

Considering this, the entirety of society should ultimately be a zero-waste system, just as the entirety of reality should be. The universe appears to have an abundance of energy, seemingly producing it from nothing, and does generally organize it in cool ways. It’s when things get specific that we find wasted intentions, again, considering the idea that reality is really just a lot of people talking and discussing elements of reality (discussing the perspective of the foundation of reality).

It’s true that meaninglessness can be intentional, but it’s also not true. Anything intentional is meaningful, even if a culture of meaningful meaninglessness hadn’t been formerly realized. In this way, a society can organize the thoughts it possesses into a machine, as we naturally do anyway, and the resulting quality depends on the quality of the guidance which preceded the formation of the societal machine.

Any injuries that our psyche’s sustain stem from a greater tendency to fall for sin, as the Bible says, as this is the story of the fall of man. While our bodies were not designed perfectly, neither were our psyches. Initially, however, you can always find peace in this one often hard to find state. But if you’ve gotten rid of enough distractions, and this book covers enough topics to un-answer many questions and also to add some new answers, then perhaps you finally can see simply this one state.

The reason this state (the state before the personal story of the fall of man) is perfect is because it completely satisfies the psyche to a point where the psyche doesn’t notice right and wrong anymore. Without this dreadfully annoying dilemma of what is right and wrong, the mind really can just live. Whenever it gets attached to something, it starts to pretend to like it, even though the mind was really moving to think about something else. The ultimate point of sustaining this proverbial state of mind is that you cannot have two minds. You really need to have one.

That one mind can experience all of reality, but a true mechanical and psychological coherence of truth should be found. Finding a way to stay in this state is really psychological engineering, and is largely mechanical, as much of the larger subconscious emotions are. Knowing that you truly chose to commit to this state is also a psychological state and requires first: accurately identifying the state of not noknowing, and two: remember that it is, logically, the state in which the psyche finds full satisfaction.

The issue really is a societally habitual internal and psychologically produced fissure of logic. It seems to stem from an obsession with betterment, at the cost of accuracy. This does, indeed, follow the pattern that suggests that Satan is alluring, in an evil way. The reason is that the lie is louder and brighter, although it is more confusing and of a lower total quality, although something usually sticks out in it, and that is because the undesired state is really a confusion of things that were good, but the confusion illudes one’s comprehension, so you see what’s good, but it’s not always easy to realize that things shouldn’t be organized and prioritized in the way they sometimes are.

Really the key is having an accurate target on this ideal state of mind. It really takes answering all of the old questions, so that one is freed of the distractions of these questions haven never been answered by anyone before. (This book has, hopefully, already quite comprehensively answered these questions — but if there is something missing, let me know.)

Once one is free of these questions which have been around for maybe too long, this state of mind is a whole lot easier to comprehend clearly. Once one has attained enough clarity, then one can remember to always bias towards this state and that final focus will have found rest.

Sometimes you hear this state called, “thoughtlessness,” but to truly be thoughtless would be to not exist, so it’s really satisfaction, or, even more technically, the absence of dissatisfaction, and it is a state of mind, personally and societally as well. It’s often noted by a remarkable quietness of the mind, however, which is where the idea of “thoughtlessness” comes from.

This state can aptly be termed, “state 0,” but for a real descriptive word for it, you’ll only find words for unfulfilled dissatisfactions. This is the initial state of mind, where life just was, without the need for explanation nor an absence of explanation, and there was no question that life was the archetypal “it” of all beings’ desire.

Then, Satan tempted man to distrust himself. To fight with and argue with himself, to create a tumultuous inhabitance, filled with questions the lost ask. This new place, whether it be societally, with our remarkably distinctly wrong and popular ways of guessing at everything, or personally, with our anguish of the trauma that life can present.

I don’t want to say that Covid-19 is good, but its response did finally cover these two long-awaited topics. It took a strong media system, however, which we didn’t possess before (without the hopefully natural psychic powers of a well developed mind). In its response, society felt both care and a need for accuracy, powered by Donald Trump and Covid-19, and I don’t want to say that Donald Trump is an alien incursion, but I don’t want to guess, either.

That response was long awaited however, and while we never condone infectious diseases and the true rules of alien espionage are a hot topic, society has improved substantially from this event, which was like a dam ready to explode at the right time. We were missing the discussion of poverty, rent, income, care, help, and all of the other things that we created as a response to what probably was just a manifestation for the feelings we all were having but no one ever said.

With a closer attitude towards care and understanding the plight that can hopefully be solved, we can hopefully tune and turn our minds in a right direction. Ultimately, since every neural network is just a tunable, meaning it’s an object with a state that can be progressively mutated, there is a corresponding area of final resolution for the brain, and I believe that resolution is very likely this state, as every description and understanding of this final state is true for this original and natural state of mind that is being described, even to the point where it is certainly possible you can light up like a magnesium lamp, at least from a purely ideological and simultaneously practical understanding of reality.

Relating back to the final state of a neural network — you brain isn’t designed to forever change more and more, but instead, to change less over time. It steadies as it finds more savable preferences of the past. Ultimately it falls into a small range of possibilities, simply functioning as it should.

It is this initial state of non-dissatisfaction that the mind should tune to and find as its resting resolution. Anything else, I believe, is technically psychological injury, and perception from that vantage point is incorrect in some way, making injurious memories difficult (or sometimes technically nearly impossible) to (accurately) remember. Following, advice that stems from an injured memory may provoke and propagate the injury, and make this initial state of being harder to clearly identify and adhere to. Luckily, I believe the belief in God helps us remember innate truth that is present in the way reality exists, and that there are angels, too (and aliens, too, although they’re likely a lot more like us than the movies would have one think, being hardly different, aside from the context of inhabitance, and a stronger knowledge of who we are — I do believe, though, that the angels are the truly astonishing beings).

I think, once this state is found, the most important facet of enlightenment has been found — the natural existence of truth. However, the mind is composed of many systems, so it still takes care and awareness to bring the entire system into an enlightened state. This state of inherent divinity is also not the only facet of enlightenment and the mind, although it seems to precede other facets. There are others, as well, and ultimately enlightenment is about enjoying life, so the understanding of this state is really a facet of one’s more holistic incorporation of the ways of understanding and peace.

Understanding this state, which can be referred to as state 0, as it regards the characteristics of one’s existence as it is initially, also allows one to trace the source of all sadness. With such a simple binary perspective, it is simple to see that sadness is intended to be the cure to falling from this heavenly state.

With properly calibrated sadness, once can move closer to a fully efficient and clean psyche. By re-designing your own sadness, using your ability to subtly alter yourself, you can instead purposefully express sadness as a remedy of the loss of the ideal state. That is, instead of sadness being a mysterious emotion, one can purposefully feel sad whenever state 0 has been lost, which is when self-admonishment begins to occur.

I think it’s nice to do things on purpose in a neat and understandable fashion. It’s plausible most of our problems stem from the inability to perceive reality correctly, which stems from an inability to live properly, which would be to live without the logically useless internal argument.

What is really the difference between simply agreeing with oneself and arguing with oneself until one hopefully reaches the same logically inevitable conclusion? One intuitively understands, based on a tree of knowledge deeply rooted in the often dimly lit, yet largely powerful, emotional machinery. This intuitive understanding is more trustworthy than we are led to believe.

I think, even perhaps, this idealistic supposedly initial state of being may be even the key to everything. That is to say that all answers really stem from the finding of this state of being. They can be confused through routes, and one doesn’t have to know this state of being to find an answer, but the original source of any answer may actually stem from this state of being, and if one can respond to life, then the person is likely aware of this state, in some way.

The way I figure these things out though is very interesting. I am actually participating with my mind in a kind of unknowable language, and I am trying to solve certain equation-like riddles that involve issues that I am interested in solving. After thinking about these questions and riddles in this silent language, usually for some weeks, I find diagrammable mathematical answers for some of these, in a logic code that’s hard to convey to anyone else. Through careful analysis, wording, and explication I hope to find a way to convey these solutions to the reader and the listener.

I think one of the more difficult things about finding the state of not noknowing, is that this state is a single continuous answer and possesses no point of illumination aside from what it already is. As such, it seems, at least initially, that this state has no response. I think that after becoming more accustomed to this state, its possessed qualities should shine more clearly.

In our modern society and perhaps this trend is evident in some way throughout existence, we find ourselves out-knowing the truth and expecting bits of rather bright light intermittently, rather than a more non-assuming state of stateful continuity (essentially a restful and resolute psychological homeostasis, even though it is a bit difficult to find initially).

This reminds me of endorphins, which play a role in psychological direction and the path of transition that a person chooses. I think they’re likely prevalent when one feels strongly directed through a personal transition.

Considering the manifestation of state 0 in this reality that we inhabit is related to the idea of endorphin, perhaps an alternative name for the angel of our inhabitance could be, “Endorphin.” At a glance, it would seem that society is both fueled by and saved by promoting endorphins. Without a strong sense of direction and progress, an individual’s strength begins to fall and more pain is noticed.

Endorphins, as chemicals released by the pituitary gland and CNS, are known for damping pain, often to promote an activity, indicating that the mind actually dampens pain when it perceives proper patterns of change and strong directionality. This possibly results in a better sustaining of momentum in a perceivably beneficial direction. Considering the body first entertains internal behavior over external behavior, endorphins may be primarily responsible for re-enforcing self-directed and observantly prosperous internal behavior, which fuels similar external behavior.

Society, the world, and development in general is powered by a propagated, taught, encouraged, and sustained endorphin-guided behavioral system. It would make sense, with the observation, that we are living in a system of Endorphin, since it describes the indicator of motivation of the currently manifest world. Nonetheless, there is the consideration that the name, “Endorphin,” is too resembling of Lucifer, making it an evil title for a reality (although this reality is largely concerned with finding a complete understanding of evil).

This differs from the idea of a divine garden, from which many fruits of life can be found, in that instead of being in a simple garden of great luxury and diversity, we are in a system founded on changing, in difference to the fire of Satan. This entails a more systemic process of navigating and surviving. In this system, Lucifer is more pronounced, as this system travels territory of consciousness that is very close to Satan and Lucifer.

We hope endorphins lead us to a healthy state. The modern mind is complicated and subject to possible corruption, so the integrity of the messages we send to ourselves is dependent on the person. Ideally, a person would want to experience intrinsic reward in response to finding the initial divinity of life, which exists in every living being. In this way, perhaps endorphins can be tuned.

Perhaps the fall from the intended state of the reality is always similar, in that one first disagrees with the self and then attempts to correct the self (resulting in two argumentative minds, essentially), and because of this, one misses the sight of Heaven and the witnessing of divine majesty.

Recently the United States Government released some interesting UFO files, or UAP (unidentified aerial phenomena), as people were saying. I saw some of them, and I heard commentaries on them. What’s being suggested is that it’s one of the four: 1) a foreign government, 2) a local government, 3) aliens, or 4) illusions.

It looks a lot like aliens to me, but I think we could be looking at it wrong. If we entertain that reality functions more like a computer than a singular cohesive 3D universe, then it makes more sense to think that one could possibly perceive the existence of aliens if one is in contact with the aliens. That is, maybe it’s simply just difficult for aliens to contact us through what reality really is, and the results of both of our desires for communication is displayed in some or all of these UAP videos.

If reality were based on tunings and our desire to stay within awareness of one another, then we’re floating somewhere in the infinite number of possible tunings. I imagine we have a natural ability to recognize life and as such, we inherently stay near one another, although in clusters.

Beings from a distinctly different tuning would be beings from a different universe. It is perhaps in a different universe that the aliens we are seeking to communicate with reside.

The theory applies to UFO sightings in general. If one has been communicating with aliens, then the person is more likely to witness UFO’s as the mind’s way of portraying what has been going on inside the mind.

Perhaps during our evolution we were a bit hasty, and because of this, we don’t see where all of our beliefs are coming from. Perhaps if we could see this, we could potentially see why everything in reality exists, as they would exist by the nature of our agreement, so perhaps deep-down subconsciously we are actually simply conversing and this conversation is what is responsible for our experience and portrayal of reality.

Following this idea, then if one were communicating with an angel, they may later witness an angel, visually or as a feeling as seems to be common, but it was because they were initially psychically communicating that they witness the one with which they were communicating, instead of the other way around.

This theory has a few interesting implications and questions. If we are to believe this theory, then reality is founded on and modulated by subtle psychic activity. This leads to the dilemma of the identity of people one speaks with.

There is another theory. This theory is that the original man was actually a manifestation of ideologies and ways of life. Originally there was the man, who was the original ideology — simply of God. Then, that man was split into two, a masculine variant and a feminine variant. These different directions of thought gave way to many different directions of thought. Each one of these beings was a voice and potentially a person (were the being to be portrayed).

Following that, in a system of living ideologies and ways of life, one can be born if a resulting ideology matches the individual’s identity closely enough — after that, the person gains control over that identity.

This means that over time, we identify more people, but some of them are simply living ideas. You, too, are a living idea, however, you are less easily worded than ideas like good, masculine-good, and feminine-good. When an identity matches you, then you are created.

Then there is the question of whether or not you could exist in multiple places simultaneously, if you are found this way. All of these ideas can work together, however.

If what we perceive is based on the information we’re receiving, and the stability we witness is simply due to a long list of prior commitments, then you can perceive a world in which one is born in the midst of a conversation, with certain ideas, both simpler and more complex, closer and further.

All of these ideas, simple or complex, general or unique, reflect an invisible psychic conversation in some way. Interestingly, this also means that some ideas can shift, depending on what conversations you’re having. Since distance indicates connection, these conversational shifts would likely occur societally, in waves.

Some ideas don’t shift as much as others. If you were talking to the idea of cooking, the idea of cooking would reflect the background (subtle) conversation you’re psychically having internally — the same conversation that contains the possibly subtle agreements that keep the world physically stable.

Whatever you say to this being, is commuted on the network perceived by the deep subconscious (near initial or principle desire), and these messages are conveyed to others in a similar fashion. In this way, the idea of cooking in the morning, were this to be an identified person, could reflect the simultaneous conversation that he or she is having with hundreds or googols of people.

The idea is that, within the context of your history and the obligations implied, your mind generates an explanation for the conversation you are subconsciously having. While you can be identified multiple times in multiple places in the system, it seems likely that the system re-organizes and consolidates one’s identity. This is because a part of one’s identity is a coherent memory of living life. In the case where you are identified in multiple places, the identity would shift such that it was only seeming to be you, as to preserve the singularity of your identity. However, through reflecting off of ideas, your presence can be echoed, and can echo as well.

The system is really just a very ancient and still ongoing conversation between people, and there exists no principal (or most fundamental) desire any greater or less great than another desire — this sameness of all initial and principal desire prevents the reversal of decisions, which means that the constructed reality does not digress, but instead, decisions are only added.

Interestingly, because life may really be a portrayal of a conversation, age may be possibly attributable to the shifting demands of one’s memory as one progresses steadily through the conversation with others — that is also to say that it’s possible that aging is partially associative, as is possibly the way with many conditions and facets of our manifestation.

The prior argument also suggests that one dies when their memory has skewed their identity so much that they no longer identify with that memory of the self. The skewing of the memory occurs because of the need to associate with others, so everyone becomes skewed, together. The need to associate, in this case, is also fueled by the notion that if your identity gets lost — the system of life cannot find you anymore — then you could risk dying, as well. This is because, according to this perspective, your life is determined by the existence of your known identity. All of this makes dying seem mostly inevitable (although we are hopeful for a resolved future, as it’s unwanted). Also, the phenomenon of associative identity skew would indicate that beings psychically close to each other share more features with one another than beings further away from another.

Returning to the topic of the videos of possible alien activity, it could be possible that there have been decades of understanding growing between people and aliens and of their technology, resulting in an ability to see these kinds of spacecraft or aircraft. It may be a modern variant of the historic sighting of an angel.

The idea of communicating with aliens through an analog computer system that is the manifestation of reality would suggest that we would first have to become psychically closer to them, and only then our collective mind could portray these ideas that the local people and the aliens have been entertaining together. This is also saying that we cannot perceive things that we don’t understand, so as we understand something better, we become more likely to witness it, and this pattern occurs in multiple different ways.

Again, I re-iterate, the lack of freedom to simply alter reality can potentially be attributed to a series of prior commitments and affiliations that one has. These manifest as a series of feelings. At the most primitive level of human desire, the object of desire is irresistible. That is because one has no alternative desire. The singular initial or most primitive desire is a completely irresistible desire. Because of this, it’s not far-fetched to say that, in this case, the deepest and most irresistible commitments and mantra-like conversations of our collective psyche go unnoticed and categorized into what people simply refer to as “the subconscious,” and, depending on the quality of possible influence over the perceived world, people use to word, “God,” to explain this conversation. However, I think it can be possibly understood more lucidly and with more discernment and description.

Considering everything one doesn’t understand to be “the subconscious” may be a way to ignore the truth of what is going on. Instead of the idea that there is necessarily a separation between consciousness and the subconscious, a good idea would be to understand that it may be possible to see oneself in one’s totality, without a true separation between consciousness and what is considered subconscious.

People are very good at identifying cognitive phenomena when there are clear descriptors and conversations about them. However, things that are far more subtle are often thrown into the category of “unknowable.” I think, perhaps, we are a bit misguided in that we may accidentally presume that the subconscious is supposed to become brighter for us to consider it knowable, rather than for us to become more comfortable with our dimmer psycho-physiological systems.

I see benefit in the practice of believing that one can perceive the dimness, knowing there is only so much total information present. I think it may also be for the seeming overwhelming amount of subconscious activity that people have become accustomed to habitually ignoring it. I think if one always understands that things are comprehensible, it may make it easier to practice perceiving the subconscious in a manner like what I have described.

In the context of communicating with beings from another universe, we are perhaps becoming more familiar with the subconscious, and as we do this, we perceive more, understand more, and that information becomes conscious. Eventually, perhaps, there will be no distinction between subconsciousness and consciousness — they are of the same, only separated by a gap in understanding, just as we made be separated from the aliens by a gap in perceptibility and thus understanding.

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.