tsuki

There is one missing element: nothing accounts for consistency. I'll have to look into that. This is basically what I take myself to be. The possibility to recognize objects as present. There is no reason to think that it is 'my' property. Objects in the external world are consistent as well. I'm not entirely sure that it is a sense yet. I'm not going to argue taxonomies because they are basically lines drawn in the sand with a stick. There are no clear boundaries between senses and I think that it is irrelevant how we describe them. For me, movement has in 'inner' and 'outer' component. Inner movement seems to be what you call 'basic chacra combination'. For me, emotions always arise with the inner movement, so I'm suspecting that they are somehow connected.

You said that you know (my) inner movement as energy fields/emotions. I took notice of that here: That is why I put that name on the list. Sorry if I'm disturbing you.

Let's have a taxonomy of senses: Vision Touch Hearing Smell Taste Inner movement (= @now is forever's energy fields = emotions?) Voice These appear to be disjoint dimensions of my experience. In reality however, they are not separate, as they intersect in short-circuiting. It is strange that some of these seem to have inner and outer expressions. There is no inner and outer expression of touch. There seems to be a conflation between hearing and voice. Voice seems to be a special subset hearing. Maybe I should classify inner movement as inner touch? Or rather: touch as the inability to move and have motion as a sense? I like that idea. Let's redo the list: Vision Movement Hearing Smell Taste Each of those have further inner and outer expressions in the social perspective.

No problem. I just went to the workshop and a big piece of metal fell on the floor, making a huge noise. Like usual, I instantaneously tensed up on the inside 'in response' to the sudden sound. This time however, It reminded me of pain. It was as if I felt the pain of the part that fell. I purposefully put the 'in response' in quotation marks, as I now perceive it as a short-circuit between the sound-space and emotion-space. These sensations were not caused by each other, but inter-existed. They were simultaneous and intertwined.

Oh, now I get it. In the original gif the person is pressing on the blade and it seems like he is doing during the 'away' motion. He may be doing it during the 'towards' motion as well. There is a technique when you simply vary the pressure and use both motions to sharpen the blade. But enough with distractions! Do you want to continue the knife talk in your journal?

@now is forever You would be surprised. Have you ever sharpened a knife on a whetstone? I think I'm getting disturbed ❤️.

I should rename the journal to:

I'd very much appreciate if people stopped posting sexual content in my journal. Now, I want to practice calligraphy!

Let's synthesize: What is the conceptual framework of separate senses? The experience that reality is partitioned into dimensions of perception such as senses (aristotelian and other). It refers to the first-person perspective of the world and my everyday understanding of reality. What is the short-circuit of senses? The recognition that several dimensions of perception interact (even though I assume them to be separate). It is the experience of falsehood/paradox of the conceptual framework of separate senses. What is obviousness? Look at the monitor. Even if you have doubts about its existence - you still know what to look at. That is what it means for something to be obvious. What are you doing here? There are questions that seem unanswerable. Questions such as: "What am I?", "What is time?", "What is direction?", "What is change?". The standard philosophical way of looking at them is to explain them in terms of something else. What I'm doing here is explaining them away by revealing the underlying paradoxes. What is the point? That is a good question that I intuit to point towards a paradox as well. What is the point of life? What is a paradox? Logical impossibility.

No, not really uncomfortable. It's very refreshing. Makes me feel alive. Creativity is through the roof. I can see clearly and everything feels vibrant. Not at all like my ordinary self. Usually I adopt the stoic attitude between peak experiences. What do you mean that it 'makes me understand'?

@now is forever That was very poignant, thank you. Women are scary . It's gotten much better at work lately. I deconstructed the idea of work, but do not see clearly what we actually do here yet. This hierarchical order is maddening because people actually believe it and I don't. I don't know what to do about it yet. You have no idea how psychic it is.

@now is forever Come on, don't be shy .

Now I'm curious. Tell me! Not deliberately. I took journaling because I got a beautiful pen and wanted to write with it. I also studied Japanese for half year and remember having half of my notebook covered in hiragana characters when I practiced. My signature was also something that I put my heart into.

You're very young and you are probably still struggling with establishing your personality. Fighting with others for its independence may seem like inevitable, but I assure you that it's not. It is perfectly fine to just go through the motions if you feel coerced into practicing religion against your will. Your parents are what your life is still revolving around and hurting them is not a good idea (for your own safety). I suggest that you take this opportunity to contemplate what religion is about, if god does not exist. Also, here is a helpful fragment from /r/atheism's FAQ:

That is insane. You are out of your mind and I love you .

You aren't disturbing me (yet ). Lately, I've become passionate about knife sharpening and bought a waterstone. Paper was my victim . Hey @now is forever, do you feel the pressure in the temples when you stop by to visit my journal? My energy is going off the charts lately.

@now is forever Yes, why? I'm supposed to sleep, but came here to write this: Change is when something is itself, even if it isn't. <~ that is the perfect way to explicitly write the obfuscated paradox.

Today, I was contemplating what is motion in relation to the conceptual framework of separate senses. My method was quite unorthodox, as I was walking around my house and observing how a blanked moved as I kicked it. I brought the sensation of short-circuiting to my direct experience by touching my fingers and looking at them. It reminded me of the illusion of separation of senses. It the struck me, that motion is nothing else than the recognition that a blanket remains a blanket - even if it is completely different after I kick it. In other words - motion is the possibility of recognizing something to be itself, even if the experience of it had changed. The blanket keeps being a blanket even if it looks like something different (after I kicked it). A song keeps being a song, even if it keeps sounding nothing like itself. Something keeps being itself even if it is something different. Motion/change is a paradox in the conceptual framework of separate senses. Yet another obvious thing turns out to be a misconception.

I've been observing this inner movement of mine and its relationship to emotions. I'm starting to observe that there is, in fact, a correlation between the two. Today, I was having a shower and remembering a situation, where a guy from work said something along the lines of 'taking me along to some clients' and I was getting angry for being treated like some sort of a briefcase to be taken. Immediately, I noticed the boiling sensation in the area of my chest and tried to move it down along the spine. It calmed me down immediately. Yesterday in the evening I had a headache and noticed that it is a good opportunity to experiment with pain. I sat down to meditate and tried to evenly distribute the movement along the spine and widen it as much as possible. Then, I tried to transfer the headache down the spine and move it towards my left arm. I was successful to some degree, but it stopped in the area of my left shoulder and started radiating along the whole of my arm. Then, I centered it in the heart area and again, tried to overwhelm this sensation by creating as much movement as possible, but the pain remained centered after I got exhausted. I could not feel the pain during the stirring, however. I tried to move it down along the spine to the base and it seemed like the pain had stopped, but as soon as I lied down on the floor - it was back to the head. When I was running some errands yesterday, two relevant thing happened. First, when I was going down to the garage in the elevator, some sort of alarm went off as if the elevator was broken. It triggered an emotional response in my chest. Second situation was when I was parking near the grocery store - a car honked at another to stop him from driving back. I also observed the inner motion in the chest area and recognized to be fear. Interesting that I automatically started looking around whether it was me that caused the trouble or not. It seems like the area of occurrence of emotions does not correspond to their 'flavor'. I can feel anger and fear in the chest, and in the area of my navel.

So, It had occurred to me that normally - I think that this intersection of the disjoint spaces of senses is understanding. I 'understand' the text. I 'understand' where I touch. I 'understand' that the dinner smells delicious. I can correlate the sight of the meal with its smell. I can do this, because: yadda yadda yadda... Sense-spaces appear to be separate, but they aren't. The everyday name for short-circuiting is 'understanding'. Understanding is seeing through the illusion of separation of senses. The other thing is that I recognized direction to be short-circuiting of sight and touch. Direction is the answer to "Where?". I wonder whether the other pronouns are also short-circuits? Like "When?" and "Who?".

@now is forever If you find my insights useful somehow, then I'm glad that I could be of any help to you. However, if they create confusion, then you must understand that they are contextual to what I experience. There is no way to translate them for you and I'm not going to attempt to. I write this journal for myself as a way of extending the lifespan of my insights and integrating them into my everyday life. Explaining them to others (even if I find them to be wonderful people) is not my priority if it doesn't serve the above purpose.

@now is forever Nothing. It just is. I suppose that I've chosen sensations as a framework to describe myself with. Touch is one aspect of 'me'. In this perspective, everything is reduced to one from of sensation or another and I establish relationships between them. I have already convinced myself that short-circuiting is the experience of falsehood of this perspective, a paradox. Senses are not disjoint like this perspective assumes. Short circuiting is a form of obviousness and in this particular instance - obviousness masks a paradox. If I am the obviousness of things, then am I a paradox? A false assumption? Do I feel this? Kind of... It is mostly a logical reasoning for now.

@Zweistein I can't really say that I am nothing, because I cannot locate it in my direct experience for now. Anyways, thank you for reading my journal @Zweistein and @now is forever. It is a pleasant feeling to know that some people find my thoughts interesting.

Close your eyes. Touch your index finger to your thumb and start moving them in circular motions. Concentrate on the feeling of touch. Stop touching your fingers and listen to your thoughts. Concentrate on them and notice the chatter. Open your eyes. Look around. Notice that you are seeing. For me, these are three distinct areas of senses. Normally, I think of them as separate spaces that are disjoint. Sight does not appear in the space of touch. Thoughts do not appear in the space of sight. Etc. Now, start touching your fingers again, but with your eyes open. Look around. Can you see where your fingers touch? The assumption that senses are disjoint is false. You can clearly see where the sensation of touch occurs. This knowledge is not 'visible' and you cannot 'touch it'. It is simply obvious where your fingers touch. The intersection between the sight-space and touch-space is what I call a short-circuit. This particular sight-touch short-circuit is what I recognized to be direction. There are other short-circuits, such as sight-voice. There are sights that you can witness that will trigger an inner dialog. This very text is a sight-voice short-circuit because (at least for me) it triggers an inner dialog that I recognize to be this text. You can start touching around things and seeing where they are in the touch-space. This is how you can know the extents of 'your' body. Touch is only associated with a certain shape in your sight-space. It is a sensation. I cannot explain it in terms of anything else.

@Nahm Beautiful. Thank you ?