Matrix and freedom

[Mellowmarsh]

9 hours ago, Inliytened1 said:

Bro don't bother with him he ie a neo-advaitan through and through.  I tried. There is no self to correct.  It's the biggest garbage there is. 

There is no such thing as a “Neo-advaitian” That idea is born of language which is a form of knowledge. Knowledge is the separation that is illusory.

On Infinity & Language: Gura argues that because infinity includes everything, it cannot be defined from the outside. He notes that language and analysis, by their nature, falsely subdivide this unified, infinite reality.

 

Art is natural. You are natural. While the nature of language and analysis is ARTificial. 
 

Edited yesterday at 06:36 AM by Mellowmarsh

[Mellowmarsh]

I am the consummate artist.

 

 

[VeganAwake]

The matrix is living with a guidance system of reality 

Liberation is recognizing thats bs 🤑

[Mellowmarsh]

11 minutes ago, VeganAwake said:

The matrix is living with a guidance system of reality 

Liberation is recognizing thats bs 🤑

🎯 

[Breakingthewall]

5 hours ago, Mellowmarsh said:

My point is that if there’s only absolute being, then you are already the absolute, and there’s no one to become it.There’s no one to open up to it.

 

You already are the knowing that cannot be known. The paradox is the illusion.

You are a very complex mind that can be aligned to be open to its ultimate nature, or be closed and lost in the emotional structure of the psyche. 

There is not any illusion, just levels of density. 

[Mellowmarsh]

1 minute ago, Breakingthewall said:

You are a very complex mind that can be aligned to be open to its ultimate nature, or be closed and lost in the emotional structure of the psyche. 

There is not any illusion, just levels of density. 

According to you there, no problem. For me here, I see it differently. 

[Mellowmarsh]

Everything is so fleeting, nothing is forever.

Ultimately, in the end, it doesn’t even matter. Nothing matters. 
 

Alone again, naturally. 

[Mellowmarsh]

21 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

You are a very complex mind that can be aligned to be open to its ultimate nature, or be closed and lost in the emotional structure of the psyche. 

There is not any illusion, just levels of density. 

Self-deleting is not Self-defeating. It’s how the mind is able to care for it’s mental health, in the most effective way that insanity is never allowed to gain a foothold. It’s simply child’s play.

[kavaris]

Good now yous are thinkin', As i can tell cause the physical and mental are coming together, and all of those sparkling gems are falling out... Its like pulling on one side of a metaphysical curtain, whilst the other side (call em the tech side) pulls the other (i gave the two sides names, technés and mechnós) but its like, revealed in the center is something, of which all the gems of intrigue are appearing, sorta like a video game, if you are like me "Oh, wow its fun now" sorta thing, granted the gems represent lots of answers or unanswered questions. We're just tryina pull, pull... pulling, pulling, pulling on the curtain, thats all.

p.s. wait i forgot, you cant go without sayin' this, "Goooooooooooooooooooood"

Edited 7 hours ago by kavaris

[kavaris]

In runescape, you have like firemaking, fishing, woodcutting, etc, in Philosophy you have components that can increase in level, like language and rhetoric or something for example (a rhetoric lvl / melodic/musical lvl, since Greek speakers realized that good speech had a musical quality/and were further trained in pitch, rhythm + sure pauses, emphasis, etc.) And ὑπόκρισις (hypocrisy) is talking about delivery of words: voice, gesture, expression, through interpretation or acting (not overly performative of course)

Thats just one example, there are components that build your intuition around philosophy, or your understanding of it, and nouns in language can become a hierarchy if seen as combinations NOM., GEN., DAT., ACC., ... And how it relates to English... And how to re-imagine language and the way you construct ideas can be played w/, plus you can invent / construct it all from scratch, As its not like theres a sign that says "what you have to do to do it right". It can all help to yank that curtain, crank that soljaboy, as its about reality itself, not just something thats for pure fun. It transcends fun in that way. Or it reorganizes the components assoc. w/ fun + games

 

Edited 6 hours ago by kavaris

[kavaris]

Its like that curtain in M II, and we're tryina get that back to reveal the world of stuff, the 6.2 World / Level for example:

[Mellowmarsh]

Fluidity and Non-Attachment: A rigid mind breaks under pressure, but a liquid mind adopts the shape of the present moment without clinging to outcomes. 
 

 

[Breakingthewall]

4 hours ago, Mellowmarsh said:

Self-deleting is not Self-defeating. It’s how the mind is able to care for it’s mental health, in the most effective way that insanity is never allowed to gain a foothold. It’s simply child’s play.

Self deleting use to be a kind of evasion to avoid suffering making a new mental frame where the self is seen as an illusion in comparison to a reality, then if many things are painful you think that are illusions then they stop hurting, but at the end it's a closed mental frame. 

Why not stop categorizing the self and just understand it's dynamics? Why it's important if the self is real or not? Notice that the categories are a function of the self, without self you couldn't make categories as illusion vs real, then the self is affirming that the self doesn't exist.

Edited 3 hours ago by Breakingthewall

[Sugarcoat]

On 2026-08-09 at 8:31 AM, Mellowmarsh said:

There is no such thing as a “Neo-advaitian” That idea is born of language which is a form of knowledge. Knowledge is the separation that is illusory.

Can’t get more “Neo advaitian” than this😂😂😂

[kavaris]

Oh Oh Oh Oh.... Yous made me think of something, that which i was lookin for the words for... its like...

When yous think of the more dualistic side to things, for the moment, or the *differences*, as it were, where everything is just like a giant difference machine, conflicting at every single thought or turn, thats actually not quite (it?) (and thank god, cause who would want to be trapped in that). Im not saying ive ever seen that here, but im just anticipating it, in the future.

Being is such that it can choose both directions, or neither direction... Being can settle for one, and explore the other later... Thats just to say, Being is the layered experience, where dualistic rules arise out of options that you gave yourselves. There are no rules that were there, until the paths to those rules occured; Like thats a whole lot of limitation that ppl are bringing on theirselves. iuno... thats a whole nother rabbit hole to try to find the words for and i fumbled through it, But yous will likely swing back to it one day and come up w/ a better, simpler one liner for it or somethin'.

p.s. im gonna have to accept defeat on this idea, And openly admit, i must, so people can be at peace w/ losing / defeat. We have some time to try our best on it another day.

Edited 49 minutes ago by kavaris

[Mellowmarsh]

2 hours ago, Sugarcoat said:

Can’t get more “Neo advaitian” than this😂😂😂

😂 Yes, I understand the contradiction, I must be tripping again. 😂😉

[Mellowmarsh]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Self deleting use to be a kind of evasion to avoid suffering making a new mental frame where the self is seen as an illusion in comparison to a reality, then if many things are painful you think that are illusions then they stop hurting, but at the end it's a closed mental frame. 

Why not stop categorizing the self and just understand it's dynamics? Why it's important if the self is real or not? Notice that the categories are a function of the self, without self you couldn't make categories as illusion vs real, then the self is affirming that the self doesn't exist.

Like I’ve just said..Self deleting is not Self defeating. The dynamic of Self is fully recognised to not mind or resist what happens in the immediacy of happening. Because it’s not like happening can ever stop happening from happening by unhappening itself, can it?

[Mellowmarsh]

2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

Self deleting use to be a kind of evasion to avoid suffering making a new mental frame where the self is seen as an illusion in comparison to a reality, then if many things are painful you think that are illusions then they stop hurting, but at the end it's a closed mental frame. 

Why not stop categorizing the self and just understand its dynamics? Why it's important if the self is real or not? Notice that the categories are a function of the self, without self you couldn't make categories as illusion vs real, then the self is affirming that the self doesn't exist.

Just for your information, I personally don’t think this about avoiding pain and suffering, it’s about a curiosity as to whom pain and suffering is arising to. On closer introspection which is the nature of the self aware human being that then discovers that pain and suffering arises and is not personal, even though it jolly well feels personal. 
 

 No person is denying their sense of self doesn’t exist, I mean that’s impossible simply because the pain and suffering still arises anyway, so there must necessarily be something that is aware of these sensations , it’s not as if these sensations are suddenly going to stop arising just because some human being has transcended the illusion of separation, no, the sensations are still going to arise, and the human being is able to recognise that these sensations are not personal anymore, that’s all. No human being I know is denying the sense of self doesn’t actually exist, that’s just another sensation that cannot not exist because it’s simply known to exist, but not to any one personally, that’s all, because we’re all subject to the same pain and suffering, just as we’re all breathing the same air, and bleeding the same red blood.
 

[kavaris]

Ive been up for a few days str8, but i need to leave this video here, as a memory holder for the words / wording / way that something was phrased, combined w/ somethin else... of which i also dont know / remember what thread it was in, but i want to see what happens when those two idea are overlayed on top of one another, cause it was like two pieces of a whole. And i feel too defeated nd tired to find it atm

 

[tvaeli]

By Buddhism, we exist in interdependent reality.

This means there is some matrix built by others - but instead of destroying, we have to base our parts in the thermodynamic laws:

• Thermodynamic law destroys what it is meant to destroy.

Wu wei is flow through this, and actually helping out early others from the worst thermodynamic conditions, to some degree this is possible, for example limitation of consequence is also their ethical degree in yin aspect of reality, whose meanings surrender to reality like women like to do.

So the Matrix:

• Partially, the universal matrix presents challenges, unknowns, yet even what is irrational might be someone's own free will inside their own realm or world - it's wrongly symbolic to you, but you also cannot fail the minimal free will where realms meet, for them to imagine their own.
• Partially, we need to surrender: the matrix is the actual flow of material reality, and yin aspect is to move along, and to do your things along - staying independent from fundamental hierarcy of dependency, because the item will soon be gone if it is:
  • Thermodynamic forms in local tunnels of material reality, which rather runs it's trials first and does long-term metaphysics last. This is where laws do their work, and where government and police try to understand laws, how they govern human reality - so needs to do every invidual, because in every moment we constitute even to honour realm of second-order laws, to put others to worlds they deserve, and this is not necessarily a police law - rather, it's the zone where the police and government might fail, if they talk about their base-level survival in context of higher integration levels, derivations of similar basis for others, who didn't do this trial in similar condition of this implied conditioning - at first, the law is not so easily conditioned.
  • We find the long term realm:
    • In long term, the prophecy has to hold.
    • Now, who is supported by unknown forces - higher math of physical reality, rather than the reality itself in it's local behaviour in space and time, the material condition itself; rather, now it has evolved through repeated game, where proper parties have represented the right thing.

Goal based logic:

• Parties who now are seen as right, in some extent, also are the ones we talked about goal-based right, in initial conditions, our actual history. They are the ones we meant and the present situation is what we meant by "future". So the account holds very well about this actual future.
• If we did not believe they have honour for us:
  • The ones who asked for full belief, told they are responsible and honourable, reputable peers in the society we live in, have to be that today in the actual future, and in goal based situation - for the party left.
  • If we gave stories with anonymous accounts but claims to be aware of:
    • In Goal based logic this equals, we do nothing about people, but we make the goals safe and spread the highest at least sectionally to people we still trust.
    • These means are not public asset, but the responsibility inside our society:
      • Now if we were thrown out for having "spiritual weakness for goals" or "conspiracy theories", they built forced matrices to our realms which are not that they initially belonged to our future honour, reputations and practical needs. Honour is about our investment:
        • Now, all our taxes, whether they believe our realms or not, have to circulate always back to ourselves, and every spiritual realm which brings income, pays taxes but gets it's own balanced realm not to be suspected by these taxes for real, because their spiritual situation of doubt of income is virtual.
    • Goal based logic holds:
      • Spiritual people talk about big models, so does Christ and Buddha.
      • These models are goal-reasoned and hold, and the actual incomes come from referred sources and their actual authors.
        • Scientific value is not about names, identities of the authors, but goal based logic can be reasoned by goal based logic - Christ, Buddha, Confucius form such basis of truth which is *simple* and *intuitive*; their life stories are little bit outside scope of strict proven logic - indeed, we cannot find fundamental proofs of the life stories, and the logic is verified while the life stories in this logic, are indeed either true or false, but so is their work.
    • So to support any material, legal or political claims against spiritual people:
      • If this works based on logic, and estimations of miracle possibility or existence of miracles in strict sense, such as Life or Christmas gift to poor girl - they exist, simply that. To balance your goals and align with positive outcome of everybody: in goal based logic this simply exists as quite trivial truth, and indeed it's false to not do that, also thermodynamics sees the system which fails in moral support in this claim of democratic, liberal country or just the one which survives today, so even the "country" is an estimation about what is written tomorrow, at the very same or better positions of future. We let them flow in this existence of negative income, and in "soft thermodynamics" provided by Capitalism, wu wei or democratic country and it's survival threats and karmic death of the form of it's defined existence - the one which needs to be reborn, reclaimed for fresh freedom of that particular party.
• Society is what supports us up when it uses it's accumulated wealth for long term.
  • Every accumulated wealth becomes to it's owner, for example democratic party left out of power and it's integrated accumulation and removal of risks of this very party, also have the actual ownership of their tax controls but the nature asks you alive - so the same similar thermodynamic condition of 3rd integral, the society, is left to be form: everything granted, from safety of money and law, to the actual grammar of the textbook which supports any fruitful spiritual business out of it's own rewards - in thermodynamic tunnels, which kill the illusions, the survivers do not need economic grants, but the actual fractal repeats even stability for their initial seeds, balanced even if wrong, and grants them the circulation of their own blood in society.
    • Charlatans who tell us about governments, financers and goodwill, but cannot serve the practical purpose of our own life and society, which has given what we actually valuate, not what they want to take from us: this is the liberal way to produce the economy, growth and government of our own will, because our own government houses, for our legal cityzens, do not need "yes" for those who do not believe in our own beliefs - they just need our own taxes if there are many it's done, legally - undone only by parties which appear social in their own realms, but impractical for our goals which do not suit their needs - this is where the actual *thermos* of the circulation can go wrong, for example if they trust in investments out of our scope, but also say it's "practical" to have more of our tax money, but less of our direct commands at their mailbox which should follow anyway, as we polster: even our own means of creating our somewhat differently fake realities. If they say spirituality is wrong and that's why they take these taxes or rights or thing they become responsible in something in our minds, hands, deeds out of our seeds; they have to give direct proofs, and disprove spiritual models - mine are mathematically proven today, stating my opposition in past definitely made intented errors, if they removed any of my legal rights for these claims: because they had to prove my spiritual claims to avoid being criminal, even if science only does not prove they are right.

This is the theorem:

• In terms of criminal law, there must be proof that spiritual law is wrong:
  • Thermodynamically, in anything not out of disorder and constitutional deficit:
    • Where there is no deficit, no loss of order, no chaos and nash triangles of opportunities and fears;
    • criminal laws state: in case you judge on spiritual claims, as much as you have power and your word holds, such as reputation and moral wellbeing, justice of others, you must prove 100% how they lead to loss of money over long term. In case you say you are "not guilty in honour and failure of moral establishment as a social actor of roles of reputation"; you have to prove that conspiracy theory is wrong, not declare it's not proven - conspiracy theory is wrong in case you can see finally two parts:
      • You did not do crimes to others, where you provided your "reputation" as goal value in their society itself; if this means specific role which was not granted by others as internally social members of society, related to matters themselves, and their practical value - own skin -; you have to provide: altough you was accused, if no legal loss of honour was done and you remained in unaffected, actual position. Here are two aspects of crime: 1) surviving yourself, well with your honour, and not attacked by other party in sense of being disresputed in terms of money, law rights, honour in terms where you did directly show it, while others also grounded themselves and partitioned their investments for future guarantees; now today is the "later" 2) being able to hurt others, keeping authoritative in their realms in matters of disturbing them in their own political financial etc. estabishment to guarantee pensions, proper tax returns, and government houses which function in their particular intent and deeds they did put to this tax income - dreams, beliefs, plans and choice of their own style and private realms. Existence of public realms which are their-coded, in world we move in.
      • So both are abilities: unhurt, on your ethical grounds, not materially disturbed by others, while you say the matrix was not there you understand others still live in their own matrix, and it grants that you are not needed for their survival and ambitions first because it has it's spiritual right and you told "nobody" does this intentionally, but in goal based logic - everybody who does it intentionally, understands the reason, why others do, proven by: the reason is correct, consistent to advanced logic, and certain intelligence grants it. Nobody is lost in: whether they were asked for this grant. So for you, if you said you are atheist, against mental growth, if the realm was provided which was based on those grants and these incomes to others, and you was able to maintain based on society; now if you are able to hurt others: it becomes crime to say their sciences and spirituality are not proven if you are able to hurt them materially. Because if they say it in advance, what was your crime: it's decided in the end. If you saw they accused you in this sense of higher honour and belonging to realms, which in their own way - actually provide the reason, actually keep this order; now even if they accused you in this sense, but this did not mean material consequence: now if they do not belong to your society, and if their actual deeds they like were not supported by you but you turned this to material affection - if they now have to build society from grounds up, one which grants their own realms, pleasures and realities not supported by you in advance; if their deeds actually grow and the ones you demanded die - the tax controllers in cycle are now the ones, who granted this particular cycle, and for the real deed - money talks it's not irrational, because science, to not be criminal, if it accounts, must also prove not just that the spiritual meaning or personality did not hold, but also that in this particular case there was definite loss. In capitalist terms, because their correct solution is not to invest there, and constitutionally not investing means not claiming rewards, for example if tax system declined to invest in future big thing, also the ones who actually did can now be the part of parliament, which matters in this - talking with money. Because another capitalist, dead sure: if they did not invest to your business, they invested their life full. And for your input, they came back with real money: if they circulated this in more efficient business than yours, they bring it sooner, and it's more.