Look as related to Sartre’s eye

Continuing the discussion from [look of eyes](look of eyes

Sartre’s look : who ever thought that Thomas Mann had it down
Magic Mountain, the countess could afford to turn her back on other diners.

Once upon a time , for real Irene said that romantic love is truly an unaffordable luxury nowadays . She lived in Brooklyn Heights ca. 1964, onnHicks Street next to a little brownstone church. Her only frien visited her frequently, after he passed, she was caught by illusion, until delusion lifted it up, and last time she went to Budapest, it was said, she thought she was still in Brooklyn, and at last she ended her days at Bellevue, her thoughts unknown, silenced in passage to eternity.

Sartre’s eyes

I’ll get to that later on could paste that but that would entail getting out again copying first.

All reader(s) possibly tired of reps of thematic nuanced, pasted stuff, so to encapsulate the ‘look’
Within the travails of the eyes.

That is recollecting thematically the self consciousness that develops the anxiety of perception, (close enough), similar to the mirrored image, of growing self recognition.

For some artists/autists, the recognition lags behind the ‘look’ that is produced by reflection. And for Witgeinstein types it’s chronic and everlasting.

Some day that artistic types value this lag, dunno.

At any rate here, in Cebu, suffering from jet lag, and subsequent sleepless nights don’t help much

So with that out, here is a video representing Shirley and Johnnys technique of isolating sources above long time ago on the original I love philosophy forum, and is an initial sign/form of quandary strongly related to the distinct separation of the eye from the look.

Cut from the ‘Turn’ that Heidegger came up with late in life, and significant enough to merit a more than coincidental mention:

Now please I must continue tomorrow but not without a look, onto Sartre and how it relates.

Simply must continue and the miraculous Mandarin sewn in to the fabric of memory,

Primarily 50%

And yes we are here, miles and years away from the origin, Johnny just laughs at the illusion of eternity, of strife, of dark light, of light dark.

It’s a grey fog covering the world, where we are, to spare us from the direct blaze that the sun postscribes. In fact the fear of leaving, being left behind is quite a misnomer, Nichiren said of Sakamuni that he had to delude people of having left, whereas that is a necessary light, for the sake of their belief, so how else could they believe in the solidity of eternity, if it wasn’t with the promise of his eternal return?

Even one return visit sets the mark, and their positive essential security in the soundness of being here, whereas, that could become an absolute guaranty that they do so exist?

So Johnny angel weeps at night, Shirley is bemused and busy as the ticking melt of the clock made to look the part of Swiss cheese.

The great thing was about Kim Novak in Vertigo, was the dream of sustained America, in such shocking colors dropped back into the twillit world of super technicolor reality, with the frozen whiff of time when we smiled at the rebirth of all that’s possible in imagination, brave and unhindered, paradise regained, briefly and but oh, so tenuously of countless golden aged eternities to come. His swagger down the Chevy, that for so many millions of cherub faced sins died, only captured in one still take of a seaman kissing his expectant bride, Levittowns all over, time stopped to break the dual nature of time’s Iron Maiden’s grasp .

Everything imminently possible then a voyage into the plenum of immediate light, the faces melting in the rain.

Johnny is and is not fictional. He exists in a hinterland, Turning positively toward the magic of participation into I/though , suggestive of the necessity of doubling up, away from singular pillar of narcissistic dread of the unknown, but embracing the preeminence of the two in one configuration within the third , to whom existence is so matter of fact and brave , sight unseen

I have been advised not to disturb the dead.

Ok the dead are done with, but Sare is as alive now as he has always been.

The point is the imprinted message which come through regardless of if it is intended or otherwise determined, by a source outside or inside the cranium, if in fact it is from the outside, that could make a difference.

To repeat, the Turn, the eye and the look are resources correspindingly.

Particularly as autism, schizotypal disassociation and alternation in vision may be approached, deferential to a schema beyond the good(progressive) and bad (regressive architecture of what has been upheld as Aristoteles’ soul with that of Plato .

This is such a confused prefiguration coming from a novice , that certainly such could be dismissed , if it did not align the autistic-artificial continuum.

Mark Epstein
New York, New York
One of the casualties of the twentieth century introduction of Eastern contemplative traditions to the West has been the misappropriation of Freudian terminology by scholars and practitioners of these Eastern traditions. Nowhere is this more evident than in the confused use of the concepts “ego” and “egolessness” by psychologists of the meditative experience (Engler, 1986, p. 18). “Ego” has become variously equated with the rational mind, the self-concept, or the experience of individuality and has informally come to represent all that must be let go of in the process of meditation. “Egolessness” has become an acceptable aspiration of those practicing medita- tion; yet, more often than not, this goal is understood from a Western psychological perspective, rather than with the more subtle, originally intended Eastern meaning. The word used in translation, “egolessness,” has brought with it connotations of an upsurge in primary process thinking and id-dominated intrapsychic forces (Meissner, 1984, p. 229) that are often mistakenly embraced by Western practitioners eager to jettison their egos. As a result, concepts that include the Buddhist “anatman” (no-self) doctrine and the psychodynamic “ego” are often understood only superficially, hampering dialogue and understanding between the two traditions.
The fate of the ego in Buddhist meditation, in fact, has not been clearly delineated in Western psychological terms. The ten- dency of contemporary theorists has been to propose develop- mental schema in which meditation systems develop “beyond the ego’” (Walsh & Vaughan, 1980), yet this approach has ignored aspects of the ego which are not abandoned and which are, in fact, developed through meditation practice itself.
Copyright © 1988 Transpersonallnstitute
uses of the Freudian terms
and “ego/essness”
The Journal o f Transpersonal Psychology, 1988, Vol. 20. No. I 61

the “experience of I” within m(!ditation
Familiarity with the current ego psychological-object relations view of the ego reveals that meditation can be seen as operating in different ways on many distinctive facets of the ego, promot- ing change and development within the ego, rather than beyond it. This view requires that the ego be understood as a complex and sophisticated matrix of structures, functions and representations, rather than as a single entity that could be readily abandoned. It recognizes the indispensability of the ego while at the same time revealing how meditation practice can uniquely modify it, producing an ego no longer obsessed with its own solidity.
Buddhist meditation systems that stress the development of mindfulness and the cultivation of insight (vipassana) spe- cifically focus on the “experience of I” within the meditation. The “I” which is investigated is that which is felt to be “permanent, unitary, and under its own power” (Gyatso, 1984, p. 162) or which seems to have its own “substantially existent or self-sufficient entity” (ibid). It is the “independent I under its own power” (ibid, p. 163) that is revealed through meditation to be lacking in “inherent existence” (Hopkins, 1984, p. 141) and “merely designated in dependence upon the aggregates of mind and body” (Gyatso, 1984, p. 163). Thus, in accordance with a modern object relations view of the self-concept as a “fused and confused . . . constantly changing series of self- images” (Jacobsen, 1964, p. 20), the “I” experience is revealed to be a constantly changing impersonal process, increasingly insubstantial the more carefully it is examined. As a result, the self-concept that was once experienced as solid, cohesive and real (see Guenther, 1974, p. 139) becomes increasingly differ- entiated, fragmented, elusive and ultimately transparent. This is the cardinal concept of “anatman,” “the idea of persisting individual nature” (ibid, p. 207) that is destroyed through meditative insight.
It is this realization that is at the core of what has conven- tionally become known as “egolessness” and it is clear that such an understanding is not one that is easily reconciled with Western psychoanalytic notions ofthe personality (Goleman & Epstein, 1981). Yet to conceive of this understanding as equivalent to “moving beyond” the ego is to ignore much of what years of exploration of the ego has revealed. This e~plorationhas mapped the structure and functions of the ego sufficiently that the changes in the “experience of I” enumer- ated within the Theravadin Buddhist system can, in fact, be explained within the psychoanalytic framework of the ego.
As can be seen from Figure 1, psychoanalytic understanding of the ego has fleshed out much of Freud’s original formulations,
The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1988, Vol, 20, No, 1

.--------;;::::::;— ’
Reality testing
Reality mastery Adaptation Conflict-free ego sphere
Defensive (A. Freud)
Continuous experience Ego feeling (Federn) “Erlebnis” (Wittels)
Autonomous-not derived from instinctual drives
Mediator (Freud)
Drive regulation Mental conflict Supervisor
Postpones and controls
discharges of excitations
into external world Masters tensions
Synthetic (Nunberg)
Organ of equilibrium Coordinating
Continually re-establishes

Multiple internalized
representation of significant others

Object representations

~ ~ --…
“I” experience Multiple other
Mental content “Self-representation as agent” (Rothstein)
The ego is now understood in representational (Rothstein, 1981) as well as functional terms, with the former stressing the process by which a picture of the self and world is built up out of multiple mental images, constructs or “representations,” and
the latter stressing the various roles or functions that the ego ego
plays within the psychic economy in maintaining psychic in
equilibrium and facilitating adaptation and growth. Ego func~ representational tions are thus to be distinguished from the “self” and the “self- and representation” (Stolorow, 1975, p. 180), and the ego is seen as
a system composed of structures and sub-structures which can terms
be in collaboration or conflict (Hartmann, 1939, 1950). Roth-
stein (1981) integrated this formulation with those of post~
Freudian elaborators of object-relations theory by conceptu-
alizing “the representational world as a substructure of the ego
of equal importance to the substructure ot ego functions and
importantly related to them” (Rothstein, 1981, p. 440).
Thus, the often referred to notion of Freud’s (1923) that the ego is that which “masters the tensions,” “controls instincts,” “regulates the drives” or “postpones and controls the discharges of excitations into the external world” becomes but one of the substructures of ego function. This is the classic view ofthe ego as supervisor of “aU its own constituent processes” (ibid) or as mediator between demands of id and super-ego or id and environment. Other important functions, elaborated soon
The Deconstruction o f the Self: Ego and “Egolessness” in Buddhist Insight Meditation 63

representational component complements functional view
thereafter, include those of defense or inhibition (A. Freud, 1937), adaptation or reality mastery (Hartmann, 1939, 1950), and, most significantly for this discussion, that of synthesis.
This synthetic function acts as an “organ of equilibrium” within the internal world, promoting integration and organization of diverse and conflicting inputs and components (Nunberg, 1955). As Freud, himself, made clear, it is opposed to the function of repression (Freud, 1925) which splits off and isolates conflicted material from awareness. Its role is to assimilate the products of an ever-fluctuating and increasingly differentiated psyche, without rejection, facilitating a stable and coherent (Nunberg, 1955, p. 153) experience. “The ego mediates, unifies, integrates because it is of its essence to maintain, on more and mOre complex levels of differentiation and objectivation of reality, the original unity” (Loewald, 1951, p. 14).
The representational component of the ego complements the functional view by stressing the “conglomerate of pre-individ- uated impressions” (Rothstein, 1981, p. 440) that pattern into mental images of the self. It is through the development of the representational dimension that the individual’s coherent self- experience is built up, contributing to the creation of a sense of a solid “I.” The means by which this occurs has been the SUbject of debate within analytic circles for years, with some asserting that the “I” is experienced affectively (viscerally) and other cognitively (as an abstraction). Federn, for example, spoke of “ego feeling” as the “sensation, constantly present, of one’s own person” (Federn, 1952, p. 60) and insisted that it was a “continuous experience” rather than a “conceptual abstraction” (p. 283). Wittels (1949) also spoke of the ego as “a direct inner experience” (p. 54) and, by attaching the Germanic concept of “Erlebnis,” tried to connote the inner reverberations of being that are interpreted as “I.” While not rejecting the role of the affective experience, Rothstein (l981) also emphasized the manner in which “I” may become a belief or abstraction. From an abstract perspective, Rothstein conceptualized the “I” ex- perience as a content of the ego, which he designated as “the self-representation as agent” (ibid, p. 440).
Thus, the “I” is not identical with the ego but is more precisely a component. It is described as a self-representation as agent because it sees itself as the one capable of activity. It “conceives of itself as existing actively to pursue and insure its well-being and survival” (ibid, p. 440). It is an idea, an abstraction, contained within the ego, that embodies the ego’s sense ofitself as solid and real. It is not, however, to be confused with the entire ego. Developed out of the ego’s continuing sensation of
The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1988, Vol. 20, No.1

itself, it remains, nevertheless, at base a concept that the person holds dear.
At the core of the self~representationas agent lies the narcissis- tically invested ideal ego (Epstein, 1986), “an idea which the ego has of itself” as perfect and inviolable (Hanly, 1984). The ideal ego involves a sense of inherent perfection, a “state of being” equivalent to the Tibetan description of the “independent I under its own power.” It is an ideal that is not recognized as such, but is, instead, deeply felt to be real, denying all transience, insignificance and mortality.
Meditation systems, then, that develop the factors of mindful- ness and insight, focus particularly on the “ego feeling” of an “independent I.” While concentration practices can temporarily suspend ego boundaries and provide a deep sense of ontologi- cal security through the merger of ego and ego ideal (Epstein, 1986), insight practices operate within the ego system itself. Attending to both the subjective intimation ofthe experiencing I and to the abstract cognitions that form it on a conceptual level, insight practices seek to uncover the elementary particles of the “I” experience. This occurs through a definite sequence of events that profoundly alters the structure of the ego.
As meditation develops, the various self·representations first come into and out of focus. These include those that have served as “the repository and container of various fears concerning oneself” (Joseph, 1987, p. 14) and those which have become “narcissistically and I or masochistically invested” (Rothstein, 1981, p. 441). Exposure of these representations through the non-judgmental light of mindfulness permits a simultaneous dis-identification from and integration of self- images that have often been unquestioned assumptions or split off rejections. As meditation deepens, the representational nature of the grosser self-concepts becomes clear, but a more subtle and pervasive tendency to identify with experience persists. This tendency to identify surfaces most often as a resistance to mindfulness [“This is mine, this is I, this is my self” (Nyanamoli, 1975, p. 743)] and is attended to just as are resistances in psychoanalysis which mask unconscious material. In this manner, the “experience of I” is ultimately de-con- structed (Engler, 1983) in terms synonymous with what is implied by the self-representation as agent, as an image, abstraction or simulacrum. The ability of the ideal ego to “influence the ego’s self-observing activities even to the extent of causing the ego to deny its own nature” (Hanly, 1984, p. 260) is finally extinguished. The self is not eliminated, it is revealed to be what it has always been. "Selflessness is not a case of something that existed in the past becoming non-existent;
of meditation on
rep resent at i o n
The Deconstruction o f the Self: Ego a n d " Ego lessness " in Buddhist Insight Meditation 65

The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1988, Vol. 20, No.1
a “therapeutic split in the ego”
rather, this sort of “self” is something that never did exist. What is needed is to identify as non-existent something that always was non-existent. … " (Gyatso, 1984, p. 40).
What is unusual about the Buddhist view from an object relations perspective is the assertion that an individual could experience the pure representational process without becoming destabilized. Thus, while the uncovering of the self-representa- tion as agent is one major modification of the ego system produced by insight meditation, it is unlikely to be the only one. From the representational point of view this is clearly the major transformation. Yet from a functional perspective, a further compensatory modification is required in order for the requi- site stability to be conferred, stability that could only derive from the synthetic capacity of the ego.
The development of mindfulness, like that of evenly suspended attention (Epstein, 1984), involves a “therapeutic split in the ego” (Engler, 1983, p. 48; Sterba, 1934), in which the ego becomes both SUbject and object, observer and observed. This capacity for observing the dynamic flow of psychic events is very much a synthetic function, maintaining equilibrium in the face of incessant change. Just as the synthetic function of the ego is said to hold objective reality to itself, “detached from itself, before it, not in it” (Loewald, 1951, p. 18), so does mindfulness, in the traditional Buddhist psychological text, “guard and confront an objective field,” “steadying the object” and “keeping it immoveable” (Nyanamoli, 1974, p. 524). Mindfulness maintains a sense of connection within mind moments whose transience becomes increasingly evident as meditation progresses. “It should be regarded as like a pillar because it is firmly founded, or as like a door-keeper” (ibid, p. 524) because of the way in which it guards the mind and senSe~ doors in the face of change. Mindfulness allows each moment to be experienced in its entirety; it is synthetic because it binds awareness to the object, neither holding on to, nor rejecting, whatever projects itself in the mind.
This synthetic function of mindfulness recalls what one of Freud’s teachers (Pierre Janet, in 1903) referred to as the pinnacle of healthy mental functioning, the “synthetic opera- tion” of attention to “the formation in the mind ofthe present moment” that he termed “pre-sentification,” “the capacity for grasping reality to the maximum” (Ellenberger, 1970, p. 376). Janet understood that this capacity could be developed and that to do so contributed to the sense of psychological well- being. "The natural tendency of the mind is to roam through the past and the future; it requires a certain effort to keep one’s attention in the present, and still more to concentrate it on
the synthetic function

present action. ‘The real present for us is an act of a certain complexity which we grasp as one single state ofconsciousness in spite of this complexity, and in spite of its real duration. . . . Pre-senti fication consists of making present a state of mind and a group of phenomena’" (ibid).
Advanced stages of insight meditation involve profound ex- periences of dissolution and fragmentation, yet the practi- tioner, through the practice of “making present,” is able to withstand these psychic pressures. It is the ego, primarily through its synthetic function, that permits integration of the experience of disintegration. In true egolessness, there could be only disintegration, and such a state would manifest as psy- chosis. The ego system is certainly a target of these meditation practices, but what results is more properly conceived of as an intrasystemic (Hartmann, 1959; Rothstein, 1981) reequilibra- tion rather than a progression beyond an outmoded structure.
As the moment-to-moment nature of reality becomes more and more directly experienced, it is the synthetic function of the ego, as mindfulness, that must continuously re-establish con- tact with the object of awareness. “To maintain, or constantly re-establish, this unity . . . by integrating and synthesizing what seems to move further and further away from it and fall into more and more unconnected parts” (Loewald, 1951, p. 14) remains a function of the ego that is not obliterated through meditation but that becomes increasingly necessary as the self- representation as agent loses its authority. Through this relent- less exposure, insight meditation radically alters the experience of the representational world. What once seemed solid is now perceived at its quantum level, more differentiated and pat- terned, more highly complex and fragmentary, more discon- nected, and less coherent, real and inherently existent. As the representational aspect of the ego is decathected, there is a compensatory evolution of the functional component, such that the higher order of differentiation can be integrated. “Conscious reflection,” argues Loewa1d (1978), is necessary for the development of the ego, for the attainment of a “higher organization of psychic processes” (Joseph, 1987). The Budd- hist texts agree. Mindfulness, the vehicle of conscious reflec- tion, of “remembering and not forgetting” (Nyanamoli, 1975, p. 524), leads to insight into the differentiated nature of the psyche and propels the development of the synthetic aspect of the ego, preserving, on a moment-to-moment basis, the inte-
grity of a more highly complex psyche.
Thus, mindfulness is not a means of forgetting the ego; it is a method of using the ego to observe its own manifestations. Development of the capacity to attend to the moment-to~
ego permits integration
mindfulness and a
highly complex psyche
The Deconstruction o f the Self; Ego and “Egolessness” in Buddhist Insight Meditation 67

the enlightened ego abides
moment nature of the mind allows the representational nature of the self to be experienced without the distortions of idealiza- tion, thereby promoting a change within the ego system different from that envisioned by most Western personality theory. Rather than encouraging a consolidated ego sure of its own solidity, the Buddhist approach envisions a more fluid ego able to constantly integrate potentially destabilizing experi- ences of insubstantiality and impermanence. From this per- spective the great promise of the Buddhist psychologies can be fully appreciated. The enlightened ego abides, but in a form which sustains the realization of impersonality. As the Dalai Lama has expressed it, “This seemingly solid, concrete, inde- pendent, self-instituting I under its own power that appears actually does not exist at all” (Gya180, 1984, p. 70).
ELLENBERGER, H. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious. New York: Basic Books.
ENGLER, J. (1983). Vicissitudes of the self according to psychoanaly- sis and Buddhism: A spectrum model of object relations develop· ment. Psychoanalysis and Contemporary Thought, 6: I, 29-72.
ENGLER, J. (1986). Therapeutic aims in psychotherapy and medita- tion. In K. Wilber, J. Engler, & D.P. Brown, Transformations of consciousness. Boston: New Science Library.
EpSTEIN, M. (1984). On the neglect of evenly suspended attention. Journal of Transpersonal Psycho., 16, 2, 193-205.
EpSTEIN. M. (1986). Meditative transformations of narcissism. Journal of Transpersonal Psychol., 18, 2, 143-158,
FEDERN, P, (1952). Ego psychology and the psychoses. New York: Basic Books.
FREUD,A.(1937). Theegoandthemechanismsofdefense.NewYork: lnt. Vniv. Press.
FREUD, S. (1923). The ego and the id. New York: Norton.
FREUD, S. (1926). The question of lay analysis. S.E. XX, London:
Hogarth Press, 1955, 179-258.
GOLEMAN, D. & EpSTEIN, M. (1983). Meditation and well-being: An
Eastern model of psychological health. In R. Walsh and D. H. Shapiro, Beyond health and normality, New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
GUENTHER, H. V. (1974). Philosophy and psychology in the Abhi- dharma. Berkeley: Shambhala.
GVATSO, T. (1984). Kindness, clarity. and insight. Ithaca: Snow Lion. HANLV, C. (1984). Ego ideal and ideal ego. Int. J. Psycho-Analy.,
65: 253-61.
HARTMANN, H. (1939). Ego psychology and the problem o f adapta-
tion, New York: Int. Univ. Press.
HARTMANN, H. (1950). Comments on the psychoanalytic theory of
the ego. Psycho-Anal. Study Chi/d. 5: 74-96.
The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 1988. Vol. 20, No.1

HOPKINS, J. (1984). The tantric distinction. London: Wisdom Pub- lications.
JACOBSEN, E. (1964). The self and the object world. New York: Int. Univ. Press.
JOSEPH, E. J. (1987). The consciousness of being conscious. J. Am. Psychoanal. Ass.• 35: I, 5-22.
LOEWALD, H. W. (1951). Ego and reality. Int. J. Psycho-Anal. 32: 10-18.
LOEWALD, H. W. (1978). Instinct theory, object relations, and psy- chic structure formation. J. Amer. Psychoanaly. Assn., 26:453-506. MEISSNER, W. W. (1984). Psychoanalysis and religious experience.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
NUN8ERG, H. (1955). Principles ofpsychoanalysis. New York: Int.
Univ. Press.
NYANAMOLI, B. (Transl.) (1976). Visuddhimagga: The path afpuri-
fication, by Buddhaghosa, 2 vol. Boulder: Shambhala. ROTHSTEIN, A. (l981). The ego: An evolving construct. Int. J. Psy-
cho-Anal. 62: 435-45.
STERBA, R. F. (1934). The fate ofthe ego in analytic therapy. Int. J.
Psycho-Anal. 15: 117-126.
STOLOROW, R. D. (1975). Toward a functional definition of narcissism.
Int. J. Psycho-Analy. 56: 179-185.
WALSH, R. H. & VAUGHAN, F. (1980). Beyond ego. Los Angeles:
WITTELS, F. (1949). A neglected boundary of psychoanalysis. Psy-
choanl. Quart. 18: 44-59.
Requests for reprints to Mark Epstein, M.D. 52 White Street, New York, NY
The Deconstruction o f the Self: Ego and “Egolessness” in Buddhist Insight Meditation’


The particular generally defined gaps existing between Eastern and Western sources, may bring Sartre’s nauseous self thought man ‘s quandary, into a recollectable as-hoc fast track mode of apprehension, that self learning in Sartre’s time was way more intuitive then as it is now, and this same stream has continued to evolve it’s embedded slate today. (M.Polanyi)

Schopenhauer’s representation of the will, turned Eastward, , Niet

Long story short, we are not aseity.

Yes Ishthus, but let me clarify ,

The world as will represented is tatamount of defying it as a power motive of a developmental evolution simply to overcome the bars to singular power motives. Which truly is a pure abstraction of the Hegelian kind. But spirit represents more complex factors in the will of a demonstrated egolessness of the kind manifested in the most complex-simple sutra , the Lotus Sutra. That manifests a representation of the communal ego, to diminish weltschmertz, to re-present a complex idea which can not duplicate its essential simplicity within its upward historic evolution a-posteriors, backwards.

That the axiomatic necessary natural progression of ‘events’ that can point , signal a reoccurance which can demonstrate such a constructive effort, strangely, magically, from sources that form the safety net under the guise of ‘participation mistique’ becomes instrumental in developing the almost sub-human, pre-cuvilaziational energy required to lift up this amassed colossus that can overcome the weight of singular energy.

That virtually necessary world has had a good, promising run, to be able to rise above it’s weakened, wrongly prescribed agenda of fearful self destruction, by de-differentiation , the criteria by overlapping means, a new , widening reintegration as the good and bad that seeks to diminish the power of the will, to redefine them in terms of degrees of positive value, based on the view that evil is founded on the dramatic loss of information garnered fear, rather than intrinsic within it’s own construction.

This re-affirmation gathers energy, as to utilize increased power, gradiently, in a new parallel that aims at that, that is both in and out of its self.

Happy Easter Sunday,

: from Manila , Philippines

Hegel was pointing to the concrete demonstration of Jesus’ incarnation, death, resurrection.

How weird is it that out of one side they say “the real is the ideal” and out of the other side they refer to pure/mere abstraction… and they’re talking about the same guy.

It’s the weirdest.

So grateful I am a mystical participitant in that weirdness, rather than merely being weirdness It’sSelf!


Or, ohohoh ?!?


1 Like
1 Like

What’s the backstory there?


Mike is someone, could be anyone very special, an extremely strong-vehement archetype, who could resolve until near the death trip. On anything.

Up until the course, the trip, where everything may dissolve, including any form of resistance, an anomalous stilled picture, axiomatically removed, cut, but at the moment of near resolve, all that would reverberate in absolute terms, for which no recall of absolve, could offer a credible absolution, meaning a solution into the very proto- configuration possible.

Yes, however

Picture, perfect jail stay, overnight in throes of death trip, no escape from death there personally at that trip.

None, whatsoever, but cogniscence of a very powerful antidote ( heard magic mushroom love or higher yet)

That of & this on recoil ) tantric kundalini) tantric hereday, that a deal can be made, a deal, that could inject a prefrontal shock, (somewhat like Carl Solomon’s description on chemical shock) that concievably could fight the demon of vanity of Schopenhauer briefly , slightly, scanned,

That the pain of vanity, described could overcome any doubt that the primal, sensory, sexual doit, Dias, double take, ( here it becomes too probabilistic from a higher, categorically loaded selection process=as becoming ultra subtle, that it need just complement each other, the primary doubling of male female, sensed earliest by the past-just formed revolutionary choice of identity.

Than disposition of the supporting chord, the cut from the umbilical chord , the first struggle to exist, and being thrown into the light.

Mike is something to talk through to sing through, as Madonna nearly swallows it whole, borderline her first huge hit,

Edit Piaf was said to be disseminated , her voice to low alto, etc.

The power of the universe, says the human, others not yet to understand that concept called love will overcome, the naturelessness of that fallacy,

Here in the third world og magic, mushrooms are ingested, liberally disseminated, call’em as you see ‘em.

Kids that are lived have to break this chain, if they can continue to exist without becoming uninspired bored, and worse, but Mike was the man from the forth looking into his back view mirror, who left, and out of kindness, because he too knew instinctively the magic of it, and violating it on principle would break that chain.

You’re not making any sense. Even though you’re using a bunch of keywords that are relevant in different contexts, what you’ve woven them into doesn’t work as a reply to the video of that kid. Make it make sense. I’m also not interested in watching the rest of the videos. Something is definitely off.