Existential Transcendence (Important Questions)

[Origins]

What are the ramifications of there never being any destinations, only continuous patterns that fall and collapse relative to some arbitrary assignment of a goal?

Analogously - Subjectivity:

1. Who am I?

- I am not human, this is a transitory state from what came before and what will move beyond, there's just a poor internet connection with change [lag time]

2. The journey or the destination?

- The journey obviously, destinations are just those fixation points but once we reach them or don't, that elation to devastation, what happens? There's always some unsatisfactory curve that drives us up and down for a ride we haven't fully expressed and communicated within the confines of the subtle pond and caves of self awareness. Life follows a continuous pattern don't you see, there's no completion here, just "completion patterns" relative to some fixation point, the fixity of attention should be on to embrace the enormity of the ever changing nature of life's patterns and grow in the sum rather than the minute whole occupied by finite attention within a finite self. Lock-in A, journey. Amen.

3. The fixity of reality conception through our present means and structure (i.e. physical body) or fluidity in our say biological constraints, even too, a change in the preference to continue extending?

- The latter of course. What if your fingers that you use to type onto the screen that you're reading from suddenly began to stick together enough that your arms formed something that resembled a fin? How about if your head began to expand to the size of an entire planet without any added brain power but still with an ozone layer to protect yourself? This goes to number 4 in relation to attachment, for attachment doesn't occupy reality so much, just the fixity of attention in a mind that cannot fathom the fluidity and dynamism of reality through the lens of it being reimagined in its multiplicity through the imagination. What if your tongue suddenly enlarged enough to prevent you from breathing? Or your arm suddenly weigh 5000 kilograms? These changes, the absence of which you become attached to, falsely equating the frame of your body as the phantom reference frame by which you existentially articulate the definitions of reality to provide you with a false sense of security and safety. The greater we expand our reference frame for existence, in its actuality, naturally the greater fluidity we previously had for everything else prior to said expansion, the boundaries of said expansion being your new reference frame for safety. So why are you so attached to how reality is now? What is the object permanence you're unable to release yourself from? What if you could squash all impulse to extend your fluid form to whatever arbitrary state you could? Purposeless existence you say? But why do you need it in the first place? What program has been installed in your system to prioritise that as a need? The opposite to the fluidity of design concerning reality is the very reason why people have such an attachment to life and death, they cannot fathom its magnitude, its permutations in the context of their own consciousness and physical body, the various ways it could manifest and therefore the alternate realities and structures within those realities in which they may or could exist in had this reality different underlying "programming" for lack of a better way of saying it. More interesting ones: What if your consciousness was reflected in the sum of more than 1 person, how about 10, how about 7.7 billion people or trillions of beings (including the whole known/unknown animal kingdom) on planet Earth (even many trillions of sets of species presently scattered across trillions of galaxies we've never heard of yet)? This fixity is all nonsense you see. Embrace fluidity, the fluidity as opposed to the fixity of patterns. 

 

Analogously - Intersubjectivity:

4. What is more important, love or attachment?

- love of course, attachment is predicated on love but is not a necessary ingredient for love, love is love as and by itself, enough to sustain and manage any system and generate any creative system. Attachment isn't worth all the hype we try to impose on it, love is. People breakup because there isn't enough love, often confusing a lack of attachment for a lack of love or a lack of love for a lack of attachment. People are highly confused on subjects relating to relationships, their confusion of course should come as no surprise, its why we have standard measures of intelligence that most people perform poorly on, not from a relative sense just an absolute sense. These are just facts, not judgements. How do you love so deeply then that attachment doesn't matter? That's an important question to me. More and more tonight I'm equating attachment more with insecurity than the love that it supposedly represents, the reflections of true love being the antithesis of the negatives of attachment and the benefits of attachment not necessarily resembling any kind of genuine love at all. Love is the curve and therefore the whole, attachment is broken pieces of patterns stuck together by that limited perception confined to the ego that's breaking its true self to make itself, if not done with the latter move relentlessly as truly as possible to the former.

5. I suppose I'll continue this.... Typical genius work. 

Edited April 3, 2021 by Origins