Why So Much 'Explaining...'

It's certainly possible to post a straightforward series of simple steps, and the next thing you know... ....well.

And then, just like that man-made prism-shaped metal post someone stuck into the sand in San Juan County, Utah, we could just, I suppose look at it, and toss it into the huge pile of other stupid ideas and stupid objects and 'deep, meaningful writings!'

'Anonymous,' in the immediate earlier posted, advanced the idea that people do harmful things because they have a malignant and narcissistic ego or personality, and their strategy is a 'no lose' (for them) thing, because their egos are served even when they are caught, because there's nothing anyone can do about what they already did, and, I think, the proposition also included that they enjoyed openly watching other people twisting in the breeze once, or even when, they were 'caught.'

This is not just a 'valid' idea - it rather well describes what individuals who create a lot of mischief and harm, actually do; and it describes their style and attitude.

I have several reasons for going round and round in seeming circles, almost never getting to the target of what was aimed at. One reasons is that there are those countless mischievous people who want to grab their hands onto dangerous things and turn them around onto you!

My belief is that they are not genuinely intelligent enough to understand, ultimately, what I am saying here...

In the long run.

This is called 'projection mapping.'
Very cool. Only for rich people, though.
You and I can't go there. 

But like any decent modern thermal-tracking or EMF tracking 'hot' missiles, they are still quite capable of following for quite a long way, and only until you 'notch' them, once their fuel and eventually, their energy too has been sufficiently depleted, will they drop off.

Secondly, the whole presence of dedicated mischief here on this planet is entirely systematic, and very very long-term - it's been going on in exactly the same way, around the same basic issues, for a long while.

When you encounter an individual person, you can 'see' their ego at some point. But the 'style,' the methodology and the 'tell-tale footprint' is always the same.

Fundamentally, you will observe that the simple idea always at work, is to create enough space for a person, or the tippy-top of a grand hierarchy of same-minded beings, to slot in where that space was created - by pushing out your sovereign right to have an idea of your own.

If you take the account of 'Doubting Thomas' and his encounter with a proposed humanly-tangible God, Thomas has the idea that he cannot accept the idea of a being in front of him, either literally being the same individual person he saw crucified, or even any person at all and perhaps instead, a phantasm (perhaps an amazingly modern kind of psychological hallucination brought on by the 'outlier' capacities of the ordinary human mind, when pushed to some emotional crisis point...).

And Thomas expresses the idea that were he to put his own physical material hands into the literal physical material wounds of this 'figure,' then his mind would have to re-consider what it was experiencing.

Cartier, Paris - artificial clouds, nighttime.

So we see the fabricators of the Gospels, interestingly make this disturbingly different response to the standard 'power game' profiles, by what they are offering us, is 'God,' by God then telling Thomas that he is allowed to have that viewpoint, and that moreover, He (putative God in this instance), is going to accommodate Thomas' idea.

So either these story-tellers are very clever people, or they are simply relating a fact.

A 'fact' has no reason to have to disguise itself by means of a tactic. It either is a fact, or it is not a fact.

So when you read in Wikipedia what 'Hinduism' is, for example, there is no objective reason for the description in there to contain deception or masking, or hidden semantic qualifiers which shift the meanings of things unnoticed by the unsuspecting.

I could run through a short list of modern public 'philosophers' or at least 'expounders of ideas' and all of them would possess the exact same peculiar habit of telling only one kind of lie:

George Monbiot, Russell Brand, Bernard-Henri Levy, George Soros, Jordan Peterson, even Lionel Nation for that matter - certainly Stephen Fry too and Richard Dawkins...

All of them.

This is what they do - for some odd reason, they want to tell you about the difference between 'non-dualism' and silly stupid primitive ignorant superstition. Same as Wikipedia does.

Thus, when you pick up the Wikipedia entry for John Woodroffe, you will find in there, a statement along the lines that he wrote in English on the 'non-duality' basis of 'Advaita'-ism/Hinduism.

Redpill VR
You can go to a virtual reality dance party

And if you go even to the entry on 'Hinduism' itself, you will again find a continued assertion that a major strand of this religion (it is not a religion at all...) is the concept that only Brahman exists as one single non-dualistic thing.

And then, if you go to any of the almost 2 billion Muslims on the planet, you will once again, encounter the idea that 'Tawhid' is the teaching that 'God is One;' and that Islam is a monotheistic religion. And yes, that is indeed what they all believe - except that is not what the word says or means...

The word means 'to unify' - in fact, it specifically, grammatically, is 'the act of unifying, bringing together.' And what can you bring together if there is only 'one' of it?

So - Tawhid does not mean what modern Muslims think it means.

'Advaita' is arguably, to Sanskrit scholars, not even a word that means 'not dual,' but rather, 'not multiple devas.'

Again, the real basis of Indian classical religious beliefs is the existence of a materially-governing deity Shiva, but who was activated by another Supreme Deity altogether - namely - Adi Shakti.

'Shaktism' specifically is a whole entire range of female divinities within the apex leadership of 'Adi Shakti'

Neon art

There is no monotheism in 'Hinduism.' At all. And that's even if you just use the word in the erroneous way that a lot of modern people do - to imply that it is the 'religion' of the peoples of the Sub-Continent of India. But you try and convince modern people in India of this.

Thomas Aquinas misquoted early Greek texts about the so-called monotheistic 'First Cause' and this gives the path to later spouters like Stephen Fry, the chance to attack this false antithesis on the grounds of modern 'scientific reasoning' and broader concepts about human moral philosophy (Fry accuses 'God' of being a primitive, malign, sadistic, tyrant).

The whole of Stanford University's religious and early philosophy curriculum, is based on the entirely false idea that Aquinas accurately quoted the primary Greek texts; but he did not.

You can get a handful of University degrees - just like Reza Aslan, for example - and spout forth all kinds of nonsense and everyone must be obliged to listen to you.

Is all of this 'just a mistake' that happened over and over never to have been corrected even the once, down through two and a half thousand years?

If I give you a method, let's say, taught to me in a Kung Fu school in Canton, for you to stick your hand right through a concrete wall - in the words of Christian Prince: 'what you will do?'

I was talking with this Jewish rabbi just this week, and as he was propounding some impressive ideas about the Greeks and Western ideas, and how Hebrew ideas challenged those but hadn't succeeded in overpowering them - he came out with this interesting perspective about the comparison between 'the Greek mind' and 'the Jewish mind:'

He said - the Greeks proposed that what you could not see, was not real; and that they had challenged the Jews saying 'well, did Moses actually see God? Have any of you seen God with your actual eyes?'

Whereas - so the Jewish rabbi continued - the Hebrew mind identified the realm of invisible ideas as being as real, probably more real, than merely the passing materially tangible world of things.

There's any amount of speakers on ET aliens, metaphysical things, chakra activation ('cleansing,' and 'balancing...!' LOL), Hindu mantras, Islamic Jinn mysteries, Christian spiritual-ism, Hebrew occultic practices.

None of them will show you how to plunge your hand hand right through a material wall and come out the other side without any harm or effect on your own body (as in, 'ouch!').

None of them will show you how to turn water into wine.

None of them will show you how to find a 'burning bush' that will talk to you.

But all of them want your attention.

Because they all say, that the realm of intangible ideas, is as important as engineering and mathematics and material physics.

And Stephen Fry and Wikipedia will tell you, by the same token, that although there 'may be' an ultimate reality, there is only one of it, it's 'the Singularity' and whatever you think, it will never ever belong to you, you cannot command it, and after all, fancy being so egotistical to think you could do, and you will never grasp it or understand it fully (they always produce the qualification of 'fully')...

...but perhaps, if you just make way for them, make some space for them and their ideas, and for the institutions that stand behind them, then all will be well with you.

Otherwise, you're going to get hurt. By them.

Got it?

This is a power thing.

Evil is about power. Power over you.

This is a place in Svalbard,
where they are stockpiling seeds, 
in case of a global catastrophe. Nice.

My comprehension of some strange and outlandish things, is that, for sure you can grasp them yourself, and wield the powers that go along with all of that - but the others who are already there before you or I, also have a say in what goes on, and maybe we should make some attempt at coming to terms with who they are, what they are like, and what they don't like and might respond and react violently to. To be in that circle, you have to be like them.

You have to be 'Tawhid.'

And I guarantee you, there ain't two billion of them out there! There's maybe like, two hundred. Just one of them single-handedly, can slaughter eighty thousand in one night. You wanna play with these guys?

I'll show you. No problem.

You will see with your eyes, feel with your hands, eat and drink with your tongue and mouth with them too, if you like.

But is it time, Morgiana? Is it time?

Don't know. Not sure.

There's plenty down here in the box though. Plenty of stuff. Life is long. LOL