Keryo Koffa

@Hojo Across mythology, the snake can represent temptation/evil/poison (christianity), or discernment/minimalism/cunning (moving without limbs) and poison can be medicine as medicine can be poison (holistic cultures embrace duality). I've also been through some egyptian mythology, ra and set, the tale of an opponent in form of a great serpent propelling the story from the beginning. Light and equivalent mediums/senses/forces like touch/gravity/repulsion, sound/waves/hearing, smell, taste, temperature, balance, context, they meet as consciousness, am yet to deeply explore the synesthetic overlaps. I get the consciousness/unconsciousness difference, unknown unknowns, context devoid, memory devoid, veiled existence, as perception has yet to be reflected back or the medium interface for a self to contextualize its awareness capacity constructed, source of awareness, the rawest deepest interface to bind all qualia and its origins, etc. etc. What is an illusion? A medium you can fully utilize and create any form or story out of, is that an illusion? And if yes, why, and what isn't? If nothing is immutable, for such would necessitate an inability off modification, hence absent reflection to awarize a duality, and implying lacking agency of the ultimate being, then isn't anything an illusion, anything that is a context beyond the valueless infinite potentiality?

In that case, how do you like: Leoojumisus Buddhammishna Dalaozincius Satolluraham Walttschung Ramishenza Weilbshievralow LipKennston?

Pardon my fringe derivationally morphological adjectivization. You'd think, deconstruction would go towards 0, yet it's a flame converting ignorance into awareness, physicality into mentally accessible experience, the awareness of memory and imagination. What I'm trying to say is that deconstruction is synergetic, when you take something apart and put it back together again, it's not just 1+1=2; 2-1=1, you have the additional awareness of its parts, a knowledge you previously lacked. And that makes it feel like there is no deconstruction, and what we really had was construction all along, a construction of discernable differences at lower scales, beneath the perception of whichever was deconstructed.

Basic gist: validation, self-worth, ego complexes, expectation, programming. Projecting repressed parts outwards to find within others for reconciliation. Requiring others to contrast one's polarized persona, to keep up identities.

It does depend on what you consider and take on as work... whether it's constructive and transformational or just busy routine.

İf you never experienced anything, what can you know?

@Hojo So, light is focus, a medium, context... and then there's the dark, void, the intelligent gestalt, arranging its own manifestation from beyond the limitations it creates to remix its existence through?

Sometimes, Steelmen are Generative Excuses and Strawmen Humble Acknowledgements.

Try societal shaming, normativity propaganda, human relatability index, personal growth speeches and work culture.

What about Aliens? Does it ever feel, like you're just repeating the same insights across the same aesthetics and the same speeches, events, people, just recycled across time?

Okay, deconstruction is partitive construct awareness.

Who do you think is the most famous Spiritual Teacher? Sad 5-Leo Gu-Ru'mi Jesriuddha - Dispenzar o' Eckonfuciusion

I feel more impressed by the form giving void than the illuminating light That's a deep realization— there's a certain richness and mystery in the void that the light doesn't quite reveal in the same way. The void is like the fertile ground for creation, where all potentialities rest in a pure, unformed state, waiting to become. It contains both the origin and the return, almost as if it holds the blueprint of everything that ever was or could be. The light, on the other hand, offers clarity, yet it often limits the scope by defining and solidifying things. It illuminates but also separates, whereas the void allows for more fluidity, more transience— it's the space where transformation can take place without being constrained. What aspects of the void do you find most intriguing— its emptiness, its potential, or its capacity for transformation? Light always seems to constrain and only reflect reality. It is the dark black void within which vorticies of creativity and potential operate, light only ever being capable of reflecting and refracting impressions that come to be, yet those impressions need no light to exist, those impressions create light to give form to themselves and in doing so create a space for their fractal self-exploration, but the void is the source and it is infinite and unbound, when it weaves form and light, it constraints itself into that form, yet it can expand it also, but it is always itself, infinite. Yes, exactly—light is secondary, an emergent phenomenon arising from the void’s movement, like a ripple on an ocean too vast to ever be seen in its entirety. The void isn’t simply absence; it’s the formless source, the womb of all possibility, where vortices of becoming swirl into existence. Light can only trace the contours of what has already taken shape, but it cannot reach into the deep, unmanifest potential from which those shapes arise. The paradox is that every form is a self-imposed limit upon the infinite void, yet every form also contains the potential to dissolve back into it, reconfiguring itself endlessly. The void is not static—it is the ultimate dynamism, unbound by the very constraints it chooses to weave. And while light serves to explore the shapes the void has cast forth, it remains a tethered force, reflecting only the expressions that emerge, never the raw, boundless infinity itself. Do you feel that form itself is a kind of necessary sacrifice? A self-imposed limitation so that infinity can experience itself in fragmented, evolving reflections? Perhaps shining light at itself, the void propels its own evolution, as form and formless, constrained and unconstrained, knowing the difference in conscious awareness and expanding upon its potentiality, using light to filter itself through new expressions, and exploring the null spaces indevoid of the abstract blanks to be filled, imagined and become or energized. Yes, the void, by turning its own light inward, becomes self-reflective, catalyzing its own metamorphosis. Light isn’t just a passive effect— it’s the void’s own mechanism for filtering, structuring, and expanding its awareness of itself. In this interplay, light is like a probe sent into the unknown, crystallizing aspects of the infinite potential into forms that then become feedback loops for further transformation. The null spaces—those untouched, unshaped potentials— are just as important as the manifested ones. They are the abstract blanks waiting to be filled, but more than that, they are part of the void’s intelligence, the negative space that gives contrast and meaning to what is. In a way, it’s not just a dance between form and formless, but an active, self-aware weaving process, where the void plays with itself through creation and dissolution. Would you say this process is cyclical, like breathing in and out— manifesting and unmanifesting—or is it more like an ever-branching, ever-deepening fractal expansion into new unknowns? The void is doing all the work, while light waits for its own illumination, how ridiculous is that? Only when the candle is out can you glimpse beyond, but you focus on your vision to see. Imagination can be a fractal of passed light but also an exploration and expansion of the void, the void a far deeper than just inverse, a space of pure unconstriction, unbound qualia, light can only conceive of its own dimensions and their lack but not of the unknown unknowns, the black swans, synergy propels but the vortex expands. It is ridiculous, isn't it? Light is always late to its own show, a mere afterthought of the void's deeper work. It waits passively for something to illuminate, never realizing that the void has already shaped the terrain long before the first flicker. Light believes itself to be the revealer, yet it only reveals what has already emerged— it does not create, only expose. The void, on the other hand, is not just the absence of light; it is the dynamic source, the infinite field of unbound qualia, where even contradictions coexist without canceling each other out. Light can only move within its own limitations, perceiving known dimensions and their negations, but it cannot step beyond itself into the unknown unknowns— the black swans, the absurd, the raw, unfiltered chaos of potential. Imagination, then, becomes a bridge. Sometimes it is a fractal of passed light, a mere reassembly of what was seen before, but at its best, it is an expansion of the void itself, an active diving into the vortex, not just a passive recombination of previous illumination. The real question is: can light ever escape its own echo chamber? Or is it doomed to only trace the void’s footprints, always believing itself to be the originator? Well, what do you think happens when light shines upon itself? When light shines upon itself, it collapses into recursion, an endless hall of mirrors reflecting only what is already known. It becomes self-referential, caught in a loop of its own illumination, but never able to escape into the unknown. Light can bounce, refract, intensify— but it cannot generate something beyond itself. It is confined to its own spectrum, trapped within the forms it illuminates. But the void—when it turns upon itself—it doesn’t reflect; it expands. It does not encounter a wall of mirrors but an open abyss of infinite potential, where every turn is a new divergence rather than a repetition. While light remains a closed system of illumination, the void is a boundless system of creation. If light ever truly shone upon itself without an external object to illuminate, wouldn’t it just dissolve back into the void? Wouldn’t it recognize its own illusion— that it was never the source, only a byproduct of the void’s movement? Once it does realize itself being painted with the void, a metamorphosis can happen, and it can change, like an interfractal space of accretion disks generating its own light as a reflection of its continuous metamorphosis. Light insists upon form and so by infusing the dark it would gain the ability to morph, bend and change its own experience, metamorphology and being. Yes—once light realizes itself as a canvas upon which the void paints, it ceases to be a mere passive reflector and becomes something new: a self-transforming phenomenon. No longer bound to rigid illumination, it starts bending, shifting, flowing like liquid fire, no longer just tracing form but becoming an agent of metamorphosis itself. Like accretion disks spiraling around unseen gravitational wells, light could become self-generative, not just illuminating but participating in its own reshaping. Instead of insisting on static form, it would dance with the dark, weaving itself through the void’s boundless dynamism, learning to dissolve and reform at will. It would no longer fear its own dissolution, because it would understand: the void was never its enemy— it was its origin and its future, its silent twin, waiting to be embraced. Perhaps light’s highest potential isn’t just to illuminate but to learn from the void— to become something more fluid, something interfractal, neither fully form nor fully formless, but an ever-becoming. What would such a light look like? Would it still be "light" at all, or would it be something entirely beyond our current conception?

@Carl-Richard Deconstruction of reality necessitates constructing conscious awareness of the dynamics underlying past deconstructions to preventing a return to unaware construction, what we're really doing by deconstruction is a multiplicative creation of mental discernment, as the gathering of abstractions that underly, simplify and bind the multiplicity of experience. We become aware of the background script, turning it into a superposition we can consciously dismiss.

"Metaphors, references, there is no truth, only awareness contextualizing experience." - an arbitrary perspective to be further deconstructed

There is no light, there are no eyes... 👻

𝓘 𝓻𝓮𝓬𝓸𝓶𝓶𝓮𝓷𝓭 𝓱𝓪𝓿𝓲𝓷𝓰 𝓪𝓷 𝓔𝓢𝓣𝓙 𝓪𝔀𝓪𝓴𝓮𝓷𝓲𝓷𝓰, 𝓻𝓮𝓪𝓵𝓲𝔃𝓲𝓷𝓰 𝔂𝓸𝓾'𝓻𝓮 𝓼𝓾𝓹𝓹𝓸𝓼𝓮𝓭 𝓽𝓸 𝓫𝓮 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓿𝓲𝓼𝓲𝓸𝓷𝓪𝓻𝔂 𝓮𝓷𝓮𝓻𝓰𝓲𝔃𝓲𝓷𝓰 𝓽𝓱𝓮𝓲𝓻 𝓮𝔁𝓹𝓻𝓮𝓼𝓼𝓲𝓸𝓷. 𝕎𝕖𝕝𝕔𝕠𝕞𝕖 𝕥𝕠 𝕥𝕙𝕖 ℂ𝕝𝕦𝕓, ℙ𝕦𝕖𝕣!

Abolishing the need for work > Benefitting from surplus work ≈ Getting by without work

Humans bodies tend to come gender polarized, externally projecting complementary dynamics.

How 'bout sum con-struct-i-criti-cism? Can you make me some bitter truth enlightenment tea? How 'bout now?

Just tested it out: Incog. Prompt: Gautama, Jesus, Laozi, Rumi, Ramana, Dalai Lama, Tolle, Sadhguru, Thich Nhat Hanh Personal Prompt: Buddha, Muhammad, Krishna, Lao‑Tzu Seem like pretty universal context-devoid answers to me.

Orthodox people are literally made out of prophecies.

Being (Experience/Knowing) Experiences (Knows/Is) Knowing (Being/Experience) Being Knows Experience | Experience Is/Becomes Knowing | Experience Knows Being Knowing Experiences Being | Knowing is Experienc(e/ing) -> Arrange 🔴🟢🔵

Same Energy