kavaris

Theres a romanticism to that to me, the notion of like \*First came the dinosaurs, then came Adam & Eve typeve thing. Or the premise of \*Adam's dream, before Eve exists, when he has a dream — he sees a vision of all of humanity that will come after him, the endless procession of people, generations and generations flowing out across time. And when he wakes, there is Eve. It also reminds me of "i carry your heart with me" -e.e. cummings, or The Song of Solomon's, "you and I against the ancient world" typeve things. *p.s. one of my fav quotes atm - "Philosophy and Poetry are regarded as two different but integrally related forms of Divinely-inspired τρέλα, tréla; μανία, manía" - Plato's expression of Socrates speaking in the Phaedrus

I always think bout how to bridge the language they are speaking from, to the one, solely good place leo is speaking from, but hey, theres nothin that would say there needs to be a communicative bridge between. It just presents so much potential, especially as its like, so many ppl are in fact coming from a different place where its like "Well i, me, find morality to be... this..." Without that psychedelic exp., the whole reasoning for where we're comin from, it seems unusual nd confusing to them, probably. Or they see it, and arent sure how to make that bridge in trying theirselves to connect those two~call em archetypes. p.s. its dam snowy outside. shite. its good

Avanzata vs. ritirata, thats maybe terms i shouldve used: that is, one energy rushes forward, one energy rushes back or *retreats (arabic or hindi sanskit lineage prolly has terms for that, like that seems like its up their alley). But, to really envelope oneself in it it starts w that initial avanzata, just goin all in, seein wat happens. Then theres a second part... After that. I dont know what its called, but def a second "Part 2" maybe lol X|"the continuation", "Everything that proceeds"

Like the first thing the mind wants to do is contend w everything right, so i can see how its like, they arent tryina enter into an unknown situation, like they are tryna play defense. Like i guess what it is, is a form of offense thqts required, that is, sortve like that thing in Assassins creed right: "Leap of faith", psychedelic trip is a leap of faith. Its one part in journey that could make all the diff~i mean, life is a leap of faith

Sell these folk some psychedelics.. lol.. like i hope this inspired them to go on a trip right after, i mean hey, they will likely be a very responsible pair. like i feel like i can imagine them right now, being very overly safe lol.

@Leo Gura @46:00 Im at the part where hes jus now pushin back on survival And thats one of the longest and hardest points to realize in the journey, cause i personally didnt understand it by looking at survival directly, like that was one that was sortve jostled loose by accident, though i can see how anyone going at survival head on is gonna be like, trying to get around it. Survival in it self sounds bad. But survival can just mean breathing, it could just be a base level of a good thing to have to have identity or to be starting, ending, starting, if not being like, contended w/. Like LsD was effectively, in the beginning it was like a "hard..." wall or something. A hard road block on what Not to do, or feelings around what wouldve been like, the rules and laws of a world w/ rules and laws. Or like, it was sortvr showing the flow of direction, and where the pool sortve wants to push if that makes sense (the serene river, though, where the prickly timber around it is at~or something like that)

Theres a good moment @ around 39:00 (im only half way thru) Yous are talkin bout something that lead to where she says "I have a feelin that ppl do realize these things but then they... ignore or forget/move on..", and thats what happens a lot. You take mushrooms, lsd, or go through some exp., and then you in a round about way, forget everything that wouldve been the impetus towards everything you could have learned, Nd are instead left at the beginning by virtue of having never investigated "what that was". Cause now, everything afterwards is being staggered (in the best case situations) between "hm, that was interesting, i wonder..." in contrast w/ "Let me concern myself w/ this next thing, and this next thing" or in other words, the routines involved in remembering, and the essential seerds of doubt and wonder~required to do this work are never let to blossom by any of the edges where said flowers blossoming may happen. So anyway,thats just to say then that that was a good part cause it shows ppl from the early beginning/onset like, look at the world—they who are getting a small, concentrated vers., of it, possibly, but are also too lost in a routine where said substances arent in the recipe. Like their recipe for \*cake is missing crucial ingredients for now~until forever, indefinitely.

Hey yous may or may not know, or maybe theres already a thread on this (delete this if there is) But leo did a thing on DemystifySci recently. it was approx 7 hours ago, And im jus now watching. And the funny thing is, yous were jus talkin bout havin Leo do somethin or somethin w someone, so hey, here yas go, ha. So anyway, im jus acknowledging that i saw it, or rather im watchin it now. Feel free to discuss it here, or jus tell me if anyone else watched it yet.

Heres a blindman doin sungura, and you can tell, this is prolly a well known rendition. Alot of times, the songs are so completely diff from eachother. Alot of them dont have vocals, nd instead they are like instrumentals~w/ ppl dancing. So, jus to give you a sense of how broad it is—I jus happened to find lyric

A couple weeks ago I had brought up Greek music (arabic music, but that was under a diff discussion/topic of threads) And i had said that there was a lot of different traditional Spanish, Italian and Greek related rhythms, dances and songs that I was startin to look into, but that i hadnt yet learned the actual names of So now if we put that aside, today, i found myself looking for a very specific typve guitar jangle~tropical, almost Caribbean sounding music (that is, those who are familiar with "Under the sea" from the little mermaid). Though the term \*Caribbean would be way off at least~from what the actual music style is, as you would need to be looking for "African music" genres, either through the terms "Juju" or "Sungura" style music: Dendera specifically had been what lead me to then finding the broader category of Sungura. Theres a video that gives a little on the history of Sungura -if you search "Sungura Music of Zimbabwe ...", though i dont know if Sungura is a more specific term for an even broader term. So not only do i hope to show yous somethin new, im basically seeing if any of yous happen to know more about Dendera OR Sungura, or Juju or any of this style of music, and would like to drop some knowledge, like on what its about... But anyway, heres one of many interpretations of the music (i was lookin for one of the more catchy 'r sounding ones, so it might be a little too bassy, but theres plenty of non-bassy recordings you can find) *p.s. you might also recognize that term dendera as its the name of an Egyptian temple complex, though im not sure where they got the terms sungura/dendera*

Off topic, but still on the subject of Egypt, i feel like, you know you are gettin closer to the origin of mankind when everyones arguing bout what culture or people the people of a culture were, like Egyptians, altho they do have a specific Egyptian look, thats only the Royal lineage. Like, the actual ppl of Egypt were black, white, indian, chinese, greek, et caetera. I feel like, where did Ancient Egypt go? Where did any advanced people across the Mediterranean go? They came everywhere that we are now, like they didnt get wiped out. Even in a flood situation, you just float away, unless you are like, right undearneath a comet or somethin, you float away to wherever the water takes you, nd w rapid enough waters itll take u there even Faster/rapido p.s. we are mistaken bout like, the resiliancy of ppl, nd the soul is no different, its just shrouded in misunderstood things that look like real v. imaginary, but its more like a neverending layer like, real, imag., real., imag., real., imag., And our interface into our own interpretation of wat we *think is there, is a way of putting it in a seq., that makes sense, which would be a long story, or rather part of a complex one.

Religion = Egyptian language = Early computer (What a computer really is?) We preface w/ a story. In the early onset of the Chinese culture and writing system, the king of that early Chinese dynasty would ask \*questions, and he would have the royal aide, chamberlain or king's scholars write out the kings requests~What they thought his questions were onto fossils or bones (within a crude form of early Chinese) and then they would then \*burn the fossil, which would lead to these \*cracks in the bone, ultimately leading to "Oracle bone script", or what consider a kind of "Bone divination", as they would then interpret these cracks as being "nature's answer" (or an answer from either the primordials or an exalted form of the King's spirit, of which they assoc. w/ nature and other things like this). This is similar to the Egyptian's use of language. That is, they were using early forms of pictures (hieroglyphs) to mimic what they had/were experiencing in nature. Then they would perform a kind of \*Pictographic divination through the interaction w/ nature and writing out what the sequences would be, and over time their beliefs (\*believing in (verb) aka \*predicting in) changed and evolved, and were subsequently subsumed by these early pictographic letters or what we sometimes think of as a *stream-of-consciousness* language. Thats not to say then that there wasnt critical thinking involved. But anyway, at this point for the Egyptians, it was no longer based on "nature informing them and their beliefs/language", so much that it had become a kind of \*interactive divination, where theyd then take it one step further to try to \*predict what was happening in nature and around them, referencing early pictographs~or simply, "communicating through language" (albeit, they wouldnt have had fancy kinds of words to describe what they were doing, but thats what they were doing). This is whats called a "belief", however its an *advanced form* of it (today we call it a "program", though some people who are a little behind are still thinking of it as a religion). That is something that has both "input" and "output" is a belief/religion. Think of an **Abacus**: You have the beads (memory), and a user moves the beads (processing/input), then you have the visual count/content (output). Thats a computer. Thats a belief. Its a *system* that you use to evoke (or invoke) output to the screen (to your senses) only to *feed back into the system* your own input. Its also called a language. Language underlies belief. It underlies religion, and god, and all things holy on earth. Are there more things that underlie this whole programming thing? Absolutely. We havent even gotten started, put it that way. To be cont. p.s. the title of this meant to be "Egyptian language (and what a computer really is)" but it got caught up in a bunch of exp., and it came out like that

"It is extraordinarily rare to reach the highest states of consciousness" I want to preface w/ something slightly off topic, but itll help yous see where im comin from (since this is more considering those who are exp, as opposed to the opposite, like those trying to go through said exp, and somehow not being able to arrive)... Like, before i consider ever replying to like the spiritual/philosophical things of this nature~I have to actually start at the Ousia, of like... Well you wouldnt call it traversing to the spectrum of light, as its like just a deepened *being* of sorts. The word ive invented for it, like .. the ladder that leads to.., is called "-istemi", like when you drop down into that thing where like you are having flashbacks/PTSD lolol, like im giving a very bad description of it now that ive described it negative, nevertheless you either know what i mean or you dont. And in dropping down to~What really is a positive (once you are use to) I see things maybe a little more clearly than wed normally be accustomed to; And im not really doing anything different or like, im not going very far out or anything, as its just one simple notch turned to the left or right, making all the difference. But anyway, i personally dont see the "states of consciousness" thing as like, "that which we all aspire to". Granted, it is very like, mind altering, and it can jump start you towards what im bout to describe. The thing im describing is literally like, *Yous are present within said states all the time* though the difference is just, relaxing into it~If you truly want it. To me, thats infinity. Its here and now. And its also why the Liminal threshold illustration is a pain in the ass, cause i cannot possibly illustrate how you go from a spectrum of *being—Infinity*, suddenly to "You are infinity"~Other than the fact that infinity directly stems from this thing called experience (hence, ousia—exp.—light) (note: i started calling it light, and thats a long story). But i mean, bottomline, im not saying you can logic your way to everything, but i am saying you can have had the exp., that everything is directly accessible, and from that point you can logic your way towards it~Towards that which is on the radar. That is all im saying in this post. Thank you. Hermes Trismegistus bless you.

Like in other words, even just knowing how something is gonna be difficult to define, is itself very helpful to ppl in defining As it sortve gives every1 now an idea of whats gonna be our weakest strength in the whole rigamarol

This is another thing we wont be able to fully describe until we make that \*God swap in our head (that is, until its more aligned w/ that sequence in the liminal threshold of \*being, then other things) Also this idea isnt authentically mine, so yous can try to find who phrased it like this originally. "We \*identify w/ the Broadcast and Not the Signal" (its important to separate those two, otherwise we are saying that we ARE the signal, but the signal is NOT the broadcast) Even in dream, where we are like pure imagination, we are identifying w/ the broadcast. We take the shape of all things, concurrently (or, we do this in some dreams~And some dreams we are just one thing the whole time, like this one, or so it appears to be). The moment you try describing this, it starts giving people different ideas about what the signal is, as its only the broadcast part being defined (weve made that clear). It makes total sense when you go to sleep and realize it, though it sounds erroneous to try describing the signal part, given the clarity of the broadcast part. In order to describe things like God, the signal, the light, etc., we ALSO need a new way to think about it (hence the rest of this thread which turned into this like, protest of sorts to get everyone thinkin diff about \*it), as God could imply infinite potential, or it could mean "the source, the beginning" or both, or neither. Its a long story, but itll essentially help us in defining the signal part, as well as all these things we consider Divine X or Y

No thats not true, but i didnt know what to title this: Like i thought of this time, back when i was doin alot of guitar and stuff like this, and i was approached by an older gentlemen, who sat down next to me, or nearby me rather, in the guitar store... Where all the acoustic guitars are sold?(they didnt hav any of them fancy old Lute or Oud-style guitars, not at the time, otherwise i woulda been tryina play them there) The point being, i tell this story of like, the time the older gentlemen sat down next to me, utterly fascinated by my style of playing, such that he was like, askin me questions bout how i got into it and stuff. And seeing as i dont play traditionally, nor had i been necessarily ever taught anything, let alone traditionally, i had him fixated w/ this, very strange sound, like i have a long list of originals (and this was like 10+ years ago, so i was really playing extra funky stuff that i dont even remember) and so like, it was like he just walked into a land of pure imagination, cause you could see how inspiring it was to him. And compounded w the fact that, he looked around 70 or so, so he was really cmin from a diff world entirely, and it was like, a revelation of sorts. He was involving himself—or really, he was throwing himself into this musical stuff. Like he kept grabbing guitars off the wall and plucking around. And he was just like, trying to figure out like, "What IS this MUSIC?" Like in other words, because it wasnt classical, it wasnt jazz, it wasnt country, blues, soul, funk or rock , he didnt have a reference point for what i was playing. So i can see now that, although to me i was just tryina figure out watever goofy piece i was figuring out, for him it was like a small introduction into a world of the arts, musicianship, where you are just explorin for the sake of just—painting shapes, repetitively, that which dont necessarily have or conform to any known medium. And so, i find this story to be true in other areas. That is, its not just music that has missing genres, but painting, art, and writing, and other things like this likely have small groups of individuals working on a whole genre of their craft that hath not been contemplated or experienced b4~Like its only by introduction that we can get a sense for what all these other genres are, and through further investigation find out why someone is so interested in something. Iuno if the story makes sense, as its hard to express the point of it, but thats it.

New word idea In my ritualistic way of going way off topic in my own thread, i have this question (posited to everyone) regarding what to call this thing that lives underneath a word akin to say *morality (or words that denote something familiar, similar to), but a word or synonym that blends between this morality word, and survival (a kindve word that feels like its a survivalish word) in a seemless/confusing way. Of course, how can that makes sense is the question you might have in response. I dont care if it makes sense or not, i just want a word for it: That is, its a thing you might consider oscillating towards~wat we could say is surreal source point, but it leads out from [insert morality word] point. Im gonna invent a word if no one else has a word for it, and then that way, we got a cool word to use on this rare occasion. Im thinking like, -istomi (the link to ~), which has an Uzbeky/Sciency flavor to it, cause its entering into a realm that on the surface seems like its pointing towards a familiar place, but it feels foreign in the moment. Uzbekistans pretty far from where i live, but iuno bout yous. Maybe thats the headquarters for actualized dot org, who knows. Well never know. Im being funny. but anyway, you could use this word maybe even as a way to describe a bridge or link between, like "its the istomi between X and Y" is the idea.

Post scriptum ~ None of us have the same Idea when channeling or communicating God --------------------- We keep trying to point to \*The Inexorable One, but the Inexorable one is *he (\*it) who pervades all human thought. Like humankind are the "right hand" of a **left handed being**, ergo the left handed one is only *one* if you include humankind within it. So in including humankind, we mine as well talk as if its humankind first and foremost. That doesnt mean you cant (or shouldnt) evoke the presence of god(s) or religion in a way that makes sense. But we bring to the forefront so much the existence of religion-esque and God-esque, and it straddles what we're really even able to say, Like, i cant speak on what Gods thinking. Like if this was a chain of command and God was at the top of the chain, i would say, "Hes fine", right. Like, what do you want to know besides that? My point to this is, we are trying to get to the bottom of what "self" is, but that doesnt mean to imply that there isnt like an All Pervading Soul to all of this, its just that that (\*it) at the top of a chain of command thats like, i mean, you have to be some sortve angelic being to see into what thats all about or something, or you have to be communicating to the plants, like The Secret Life of Plants, and creating this whole persona around plants and describing the Universe in terms of "how on earth you can take (A) *a piece of our language,* and associate it w/ (B, \*it) to describe (B, \*it)" Like some sortve abstract yet, incomprehensible way to link together nature and all these things... And in looking at it like this, we can then sortve mute that whole religion connotation to get to what im trying to say here, which is that: We are on a journey thats like, stunted by seeing God(s) as the utmost important part, and when there isnt any gods or goddess, atleast, not in the way we usually think of them, it leads to the next obvious chapter in our current story. In any case, we're learning (now) about how to think of these things. Now~or more soon than later~we'll be learning Not to be "thinking/interpreting them as powerful humans" ~Not that anyone was doing that explicitly... however, WE automatically apply FORM to a God(s), but virtue of not having a form to apply it to (if that makes sense). Afterwards, once we have gotten things straight to each other~Once we've shed ourselves of the numerous descriptions and versions on what god or religion is, we can then go on to tell each other (in a more agnostic and neutral way) how, *"I feel the light of Muhammad coursing through my veins. Or Jesus is here w/ me"*. Like we can use these things as a way to demonstrate what we mean when we say things, if we can, and then, we'll better describe "what it is we mean" when we even talk about God. Cause none of us have the same idea about God. So we need a way to better describe to each other what it means. Thats all iwa tryin to say. *P.s. Of course, theres something else i was thinking of~And when i remember it i might add it here, or post it later.

I guess 'control' is a funny one. When we interact with words we are also willingly investing/investigating into the meaning of the words spoken or received. What *control could (and may) mean takes on differing shapes+meanings. Like i would try to propose what it means, but we are also giving examples of what we are experiencing all the time, and in giving an example, i dont actually know what to make of it. "Fear" on the other hand is very poignant. Like, i try to get people to investigate romance languages, Greek, Latin, Italian, etc., because the way we use English is suppose to be like "using words to make distinctions" but when you start looking at something like Italian, like Greek, you realize they are using words in a totally different way. They are trying to "point to the essence/idea of something", which is different from just describing what something is... So in that way, "Fear" occupies a poignant spectrum or perspective they we've all been acclimated to in some respect, like... p.s. Im sure theres more to say but ill stop ther

Yeah its near impossible to stay on any sortve idealized, holy, path-like living typeve thing. Like its not even really pointing to anything concrete when we say things like, a holy path (i dont think u called it that, as im finding synonyms for your thoughts) like a straightened path. Like it enters into an experimental idea of *what the right path is*, but for each person, staying authentically true to yourself is all thats necessary. The Morality Play sortve makes it feel like theres a clearer right and wrong than there is, but this morality play changes, it evolves, and is evolving constantly, like, reality is being created because morality is fluid (soo in between reality — dream), like its only through our ability to use morality that we turn it into it. We cast a shadow of morality outward from the center of morality, and we define what it means.

Like when im working on self/being or exp., i do so sortve like, intending to view it from the beingness ousia point., BUT i also find things of history important or intriguing, and worth including. When ppl program you see this to, instead of getting rid of the code for some ancient thing, you can jus comment it~Leave a comment that explains like, "... historically we had this thing way back when, when so nd so arch., and compiler was big, nd we sortve we seen less nd less of it, nd its near impossible to find emulation for, let alone actual systems running, but i think it could inform us about systems later on" -typeve thing, like iuno i see it all useful to a degree. But it first has to *be* a program, like if its just this like loose abstraction over things in history, then its not really authentically true, and so that jus means it requires more work, cause everything starts from a place thats sortve pulling from multiple directions, multiple historical pts.

Religion (and God) is a backwards perspective on the morality play, like, Religion is to assume that one should "take that whole area of god nd stuff seriously" — When really its more the opposite in that, "The morality play gives rise to the opportunity to take things seriously in the first place".

yous are always talkin bout this peter ralston guy. who is he?

The following blends between like~being a philosphical thing v. an intellect thing, but i think it works here in this case — You can do this thing like, if you take Physics for instance, yous can draw a line of that which underlies to get at the heart of something. Like if we start w/ Physics, its really just defined by Math, So Mathematics Underlies Physics, in that its a more fundamental thing that describes Physics. But Language itself Underlies Math. So you then put Language in the front, and look at what language is (this is going somewhere diff i promise). What is language? Language is a Map. And Maps are a way of saying like, "This point lives here, and this point lives here". Its about making connections. So now, what underlies a Map? Well you could say, "direction". You need to be moving in a *direction in order to make heads or tales of where you are, and/or where that point (call it a totem) is... To take what's called a \*bearing, we measure the azimuth from our pos., to the totem using a compass (pretend we jus found a compass somewhere for a moment). And lets say that we sight the totem and read 145° on the compass dial. This means the totem is at azimuth 145° from our position. This is to be a horizontal angle clockwise from the truest north. True north is the direction to the geographic North Pole (or Earth's rotational axis). Magnetic north is the direction to Earth's magnetic pole (where a compass needle points) And these are not in the same place, so there's an angular difference between them called "declination". It varies depending on where you are on Earth. You can establish where true north is however relative to magnetic north (via declination), then all subsequent azimuth readings are automatically referenced to true north (essentially calibrating the compass to "speak in true north" rather than constantly converting to it each time) If we didn't have a compass, we could still derive approximate azimuths by first establishing cardinal direction using the sun's or moon's position, then estimating the angle to the totem relative to north. To triangulate your own position, its similar to *finding a bearing, w/ some caveats, though we have gone a bit off topic seeing as it wasnt thing main idea. Lol, i think the point was, we were sayin whats lower level than direction, though finding directions and working around them practically gets pretty convoluted real quick, so im not sure there is anything lower, practically speaking of course... Standing still? Maybe?... Its a philosophical ques., or like, a \*decision typeve question at that point, like, do you want to stand still or continue forward, left or right, red or blue sortve questions. Neither right or wrong.

Oh hey. Yeah thats good then. Hey atleast that got stuff like that goin out there in the aether then. And ya ill look up that book by Rob bubea to see what its about, as it might even help me to remember this thing that im saying i acciedentally forgot! Like, there was this whole other point i was tryina to get out onto the page. AND, would you believe it, right as i was organizing those separate parts &ideas, i accidentally made a boo-boo and deleted the wrong thing, the thing i was tryina save, dangit (i didnt realize it til i have moved and deleted some older things, and then came back to it to discover i did delete it); As its like, one of those things i had written in this small, little brief stem~stream / window of thoughts n stuff~that came to me so quickly. Alas, oh weeeeelll. We'll have to remember later on. It wasnt like it wasnt already baked into everything we were all saying, but it existed between the lines. Its gonna drive me nutty mad crzy tryina bring it back to mind, but ill get back to it eventually. oh my days.