experience is person-perceiving referential.
it generates objectified subject matter
but lost is the clarity of the methods used.
the way we have consciousness, in a brains sense,
is dependent on these methods
which we take as essential and valid towards account.
but the systemic nature of this usage
is concealed from itself.
any higher-mind advance is perceived as phenomenal
or redirected into an observational sense
which regulates it, first person, experientially,
which is, of itself,
in the same internal 'experiential' way.
there is no higher perception
that does not fall prey to lower observational styles
as the means of understanding or determination.
there are so many subtle rules to self-consciousness
and the majority of each person’s lifetime
is spent in this preoccupation
within that self-sense of experience.
there is no self-dialogue
in which transcendence supersedes experience.
even if experience is a fallback position,
one would have to leave language
and the traditional methods of thought-style
to come to a clarity that has no familiar agendas
or means to present without reductionism as means.
therefore there is no capture in thought,
no matter how original the think might go.
if think went to where the hidden dynamics were,
there is no compulsion or directive to return
as if our version of experience was the driver of that.
therefore, we can’t conceive of laws we can’t comprehend.
and we can’t comprehend by the methods we currently use
and expect receivership with any reductionistic clarity.
the universe does not exist in any conclusions-made way
as that is our self-assigned status
and our presumption of need.
we are 24/7 consumed in systematic execution
of experience that we are heavily endowed to pursue.
if, in fact, it was simply to say that we need
to leave cognitive intelligence
and immerse ourselves in vibrational intelligence,
then our cognitive self would demand an explanation
based our style of current comprehension
and subsequent understanding there of.
the universe does not function by our mandates,
for the way we keep ourselves, prohibits us directly
from deeper presence and insights,
which would take us out
of the human experiential metaphor
and place us in a quantum consciousness,
connected without any experiential account to observe,
since we would not be of audience as our existence.
that concept embraced, leaves no resulting experience.
whatever could be said in a language way,
would be trivializing.
for the vibrational is currently beyond our sensory range,
directly, and therefore we dwell in cognitions
as a way of rendering or hypothesizing,
with thoughts featured as representative
but not quantum-essential.
if think would take up a subtler consciousness,
no thought is redemption from immersion would return
and therefore there is only further expansion.
and we seem to be involved in a kind of myopia
that precludes the possibility of that advancement
unless we go with where we are and take that with us.
in essence, there is no such thing as change
but we still feature that as method
when evolution would not work that way.
transcendence does come with travel baggage.
there is expansion to include
but if the mind directive still functions as operative
then we have gone no where except as visitors
who only see in a comparative truth fashion
and plan on taking that back to our conventional thought.
we are all quantum but cannot experience that directly
as freestanding in and of itself,
because that ‘self’ is the universe
beyond our methods of comprehension,
even if it is us already,
but unknowable by our means.
so if one, let say, goes there,
they can only report from a bystander’s account
in a language base
that essentially denies direct participation
because what we demand from experience
fundamentally denies any isness access
without a fallback status in return.
people would logically say
if I go to a place where no experience occurs,
what is the point?
the dynamic rules of the universe
are really a human conundrum of systemic proportions.
syntactically the research is us,
and then the universe will present in a deeper fashion,
but not for our residence of intelligence
for it to be operational.
every person is their own mind-scape of research.
there is no experiment that is not also quantum based.
but then in the formulation,
there would already instantaneously be the answer,
and inquiry at that level would be transcendent to start.
thus the end to dualistic thinking as an operative means.
and all conclusions are stall-points from emergence.
despite our cultural heritage as mind-training,
each person has unannounced options cross through them
on a daily basis.
but we have no cutting-edge means of recognition
that does not feature experience as the resultive state.
if you went, what you have 'is' the constancy of going.
there is no refrain of memory,
no fall back of account,
just the zest as focus and absolute as surrender,
and experience was left at the initial frame
of this vibrational overwhelm.
for there are no pieces to the whole.
the whole has no boundaries as awareness guides.
and awareness has no audience sense of itself.
for there is no concept of separateness to existence.
it is only our convention of thought
to hold it that way.
so from this current human-side of things,
we would say,
by a languaged construction of particulars
and to evolve,
we would have to atrophy all methods and means
of self-sense to be intrinsically the whole,
without any referential positions to sustain.
our minds would be mindlessly in dynamic usage
and our myopic medium of existence
would cease in its relevancy or usefulness.
thus the atrophy of our three-dimensional mentality
as entry into optimal reality . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment