Naive materialism is someones buddha

[Reciprocality]

We are the closest to nature when we are separated from an intension to be different than you we, as well as the intension to be what you we.

If the currency of culture had you conceive of the world around you as an independent existence, and you could at no point conceive a problem with this, though it may be at the detriment for your ability to discern between variables efficiently like the scientist does, would not imply that you do not live in a state of non-duality.

It is instead, ironically enough, we who had the intension of deconstructing something who lives in a state of separation, who analogously has a hole needs filling.

 

Physicalism is the closest you get to the world around you, non-dual metaphysics is a good epistemology but nothing more.

 

Realism of identity is to human intelligence what colour impression and sounds are to the animal intelligence, to question the reality of identity is creation of duality, to be situated such that your instincts can even question the independent reality of the conceivable predicates is to be destined for the most extreme psychological projection of all: that "normies" lives in a bubble of self-deceptive separation, instead it is you who does by having the instinct of idealising an alternative. 

 

The truth is that civility entails self-deception, the necessary cost for all the fruits we can not now help to take for granted, implying that our infantile nature of divide and conquer is repressed for our better interest, in relation to this repression all dualities are mere ripple effects, shame can not be escaped unless you become a tyrant.

Statements are delusions, beliefs can not be true, only tautologies are true, nothing can be stated of the universal subject necessarily. Intuitions are correct, so long as you do not allow them to pertain to the general principle you induce from them or even the principle you impose on them, for when you do you will subject your intuitions to fantastical doubts.

[Reciprocality]

There is something here, I say it is in front of me, I say it has a screen and keys, I identify it as a laptop, I partake in the universal of "laptops", the identity of laptop is independent of me, it arises out of nowhere, and the situation wants it that this in front of me is such a thing.

I do not own this duration of events, it is happening somehow on its own, the I is barely even in the situation so how could it own it?

It is nobody here to take away from the spontaneity of ineffable object turning into "laptop" unless it were forced and contrieved by theory, something simply harmonises without discernible intent.

[Reciprocality]

That it happens is unanswerable, irreducible, mystical.

My emotional reflection is that it is astounding that something mystical can happen, but how could it not?

[Reciprocality]

In almost everything I do deeper intents remain hidden, if I study my body language I find again and again that it is motivated to say something that contradicts my speak, would that contradictory subliminally ignited intension not be the kind of thing giving rise to the appearances other humans always intuits the whole of me through? The whole of which I on the other hand can not even see by adding piece by piece?

[Reciprocality]

The dialectics of our mind is a product of our incapacity to have a sense of self merely through addition of pieces, I am saying that other peoples perspective on us has a deep effect on us because they can see the whole of us through the part while we can not, humans were developed precisely in such a way that this weakness in each agent is balanced out by the strength of the emergent whole of these, that the emergent whole becomes contained in each singular agent and that they rest content with the result.

 

A spiritual path seems to me to be met with in those who refuse to accept this weakness, who would be ashamed to lay bare for everyone but oneself to witness. 

[Reciprocality]

Us and the objects, they are of something that is one and the same.

 

It is impossible to believe that this which both are made of is different than it is, because the very substance of the belief (as well as every conceivable belief) is itself identical to it.

The naive materialist can only disagree with the first assertion above if it contradicts itself, and it can only contradict itself if it is contrived in mere abstract fantasy (by making predicates out of subjects).

If then the naive materialist when out and about has no fantasy at all, as he can not have except for during his thinking, which he rarely does any of, then he relates no differently to the world than does the finest monk, they both simply are and no contradiction ensues.

[Reciprocality]

You are either gonna experience reality through concepts or you will experience yourself through reality, I would suggest minimising the latter, but due to the aforementioned weakness, were you also to lose contact with the emergent behaviour of humans, are bound to fail minimising it and repeat the cycle of self-search.

 

Your concepts are your hardfought medium into the world, wisdom is for those who knows this, everyone else are children still in their twenties.

We are here to grow by experiencing and reflecting, there are nobody for you to convince of the appearance of these, but if you pay attention to the primary human characteristic you will surely see that they have all here said backwards, and will employ the universal in each word to concealed ends, drawing thereby from you the energy they will lose by tomorrow.

Pay a little bit of attention around you and it is all a horror show, so if you have this divine power of no longer needing affirmation yet fail to recognise the rarity of it then you are likely to make it go to waste.

 

My method for sufficient distance from others is that I differentiate between the universal meaning of each word and my own analysis of its initial requirement, after time I will then spontaneously think the analysis upon hearing the word and answer instead to it than those whose intensions were concealed.

[Reciprocality]

On my better days I sit in complete silence, not moving a muscle except those behind the eyes, lowering the threshold for excitement reconfigures the  mind to be fluid (remember easily/vividly) even at the slightest movement.

Edit: it is first under these conditions that birds and insects, trees and weather, waves and ocean becomes truly meaningful, we are of course, due to the disgusting current state of affairs, with rare exceptions removed from this wealth, this divine source of energy and intrinsic meaning.

Edited February 20 by Reciprocality

[Reciprocality]

The highest freedom that I can remember to have experienced is when the physical world is a barrier between the character of me and the character of you or anyone else.

It means that I do not have to solve your problems, I do not have to figure you out if I can separate you from myself. To the extent that the normies out there on a non-spiritual path of status-search and hedonism have a concept in their mind of the independent existence of material substances they live blissfully unaware of one another's delusions and self-deceptions, breaking these boundaries of inherited wisdom makes you into a super-conductor for human bullshit, it fine tunes your instincts to hide from modern people.

Did anyone prepare you for this, did anyone prepare you for superhuman affinity for spotting the bullshit of others?

Edited February 20 by Reciprocality

[Reciprocality]

All the contrasts of shape, morhology, curves upon curves.

Take any of your concepts, ideas and abstracts, why do you have them? Do you want to know? Did you know that limits can be established under which concepts can be traced to their origins the same way limits can be established within which all objects must conform mathematically?

What do you think happens when there is no more peekaboo in any of your thoughts? And do you not think the methods above helps you with that?

 

Transparency of concept is the holiest spirituality. 

[Reciprocality]

Your eyes and ears implies the struggle of the whole history.

Something were in want without them.

 

Same is true for each variable, every thought. They all implies their need which in turn implies their insufficiency.

[Reciprocality]

Which implies higher purposes

[Razard86]

Is English your first language?

[Reciprocality]

@Razard86 To decode what is written, if ones thoughts are grounded in real events, is conditioned on establishing correspondence between the words and those events, if the text is read with the lazy attitude of only thinking in words then insight will look like poor writing.

[Reciprocality]

@Razard86 Every time I write, in other words, I am asking you to exercise your own mind in the same way it has always been exercised, by employing your faculty of recall grounded in memories to instantiate the semantics of my phrasings.

If I ask you to conceive a farm your mind will spontaneously recall an actual farm you have been to, much of what I write asks you to exercise the same faculty just to higher extents. Edit: Though some of the things I write should be simple logical connections such as in this comment

Edited February 21 by Reciprocality

[Reciprocality]

I am often reminded of death now, not in a way which makes me uneasy or sad like it sometimes did before, but in a way which makes it very clear to me what matters and what don't.

The mental gymnastics of appearances don't matter much any longer, its a weird drug during those years appearances matters most. Some days even appears as something sacred, as a surplus to what I have already had. I don't dare to expect anything, it would remove me from this very weird gift around me.

It literally will not matter how you conceptualise metaphysics, it is baboonery in comparison to living right now, unless you truly value the next generations beyond yourself.