One piece is a worldwide best selling manga and popular anime. The main antagonists of the show are called the world Government. Sound famieler, certain groups may want to establish one here. The world government inthe show has been shown to cover up their atrocities and change history for their benefit. One of their atrocities is destroying the inhabitants of an island because a group of historians and archeologists there may uncover secret history they kept buried. This secret history is known as the void century, and it is essentially a 100 years of history which the world government has buried. It is speculated that this history tells the truth of the world governments founding a d not their propaganda. It is not hard to believe that certain events in our history may have been lied about or altered. Certain events may have been covered up for all we know. We know that the truth of the 2020 election won't be covered in history, and the Trump presidency will be deemed a failure without observing the good he has done. O e of the most interesting things is the rich and powerful of their world can buy and sell slaves at an auction house run by traffickers. That sounds like pizzagate to me. Also, certain families live outside the law in the One Piece world. They are known as the Celestial Dragons and are the descendants of the WGs original founders. They can kill and enslave whoever they want with no consequences. Sounds like some of our elites today. Do you think the author to this series is exposing the real world in his work? One of the characters watching the rich and powerful buy slaves at an auction house said, "this is like a miniature version of the world in here." Who's world, his or ours?
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (27)
sorted by:
Can you define “attached meaning” for me? Do you mean the “author’s intent”, the “critical consensus”, one’s own conjured meaning? Some combination?
Yes and no, I feel like at some level you need to take fiction “seriously” as a level of analysis, one of many. For example in AC they get meta and at one point the “game” has you “playing” as a tester at ubisoft after it was infiltrated by the templars to mind control gamers, lmao, does it get more “on the nose”? So while obviously some interactions are built by those who seek to enslave, surely it is also one of our best tools for liberation?
This attitude has been becoming omnipresent from the institutional voices, and may be the distilled problem behind a false myriad of society’s issues today. Is the only recourse a violent whiplash upon being physically forced to comprehend or is there any way to use language to free our brothers and sisters gently?
While us, as separate ones, trying to communicate the ALL, clunkily clanking keys or even in speech, we are limited a priori, as you elucidate in much of your insights. BUT... from whence do dreams come? Could the MIND not be a middleman between the PHYSICAL (radar dish) and the METAPHYSICAL (signal)? I always come back to John Chang. Video proof of the metaphysical with no (apparent) malign intents on anyone involved’s behalf. What are your thoughts on the metaphysical, and our relationship with it as fleshy vessels in the river samsara?
How could one communicate in English (as opposed to Omnitelepathically) and achieve a state of no proclamations nor ignorance? Are we not by definition ignorant the moment we open our mouths? The moment we formulate our thoughts from the formless? One would need to be god to communicate in your manner or, a god, super natural to the physical, right?
Agreed on almost everything but it couldn’t possibly be everything or else we would be the same person. Thanks!
Can you define “attached meaning” for me? Do you mean the “author’s intent”, the “critical consensus”, one’s own conjured meaning? Some combination?
The "author's intent" is always control, because he "authorizes" information in the name of reality. He offers it to ones free will of chocie, and if one consents to it by believing it; it becomes fiction contradicting reality.
"Critical consensus" refers the odds between those who believe it and those who do not, so it's the result of a belief (fiction) based conflict; ergo only ever more fiction.
Both author and consensus represent offers made by others, which requires one to ignore oneself as the sole authority over self. It is indeed one own free will of choice to ignore reality in favor of fiction that transmutes meaning of predefined (reality) information within ones own mind.
Adding to this...if one consent to the offer of another one, then the other gains the (ignored) power to act in the name of the offered belief, which allows him to freely change the meaning by his free will of choice, while the believer has to adapt to the contradictions to his beliefs.
I feel like at some level you need to take fiction “seriously” as a level of analysis, one of many.
Does any other life form "needs" to take fiction seriously? The fiction is based on information freely offered to you within reality...tap into that source to find out what others did to corrupt it. ALL is inspiration to ONE (even fiction); but adhering to fiction gives others control over you.
they get meta and at one point the “game” has you “playing” as a tester
You can right now perceive the consequences of all actions; trace them back to the action of origin; compare the action to the laws of nature to define the intent of the action, then isolate who acted upon the intent, to then take actions to avoid the consequences of further actions stemming from that intent.
Why choose fiction when reality offers you ALL you choose to make out of it?
The templars to mind "control" gamers, lmao, does it get more “on the nose”?
Sure...whose holding the controller?
surely it is also one of our best tools for liberation?
Is going into a prison the best tool to get out of a prison? Also liberation; from liber - "free". Is ONE within ALL free or bound by the rules that define ALL?
a false myriad of society’s issues today
SOCI'ETY, (Latin societas, from socius, a companion) - "the union of beings". The problem is that we believe that society represents unity, when it represents the isolated selfish under the idol of society aka a false authority. Unity under the laws of nature comes from individual adherence to self sustenance, which then creates the needs to unite under shared responsibilities. Male and female self sustenance leads to what? Procreation aka the family unit, which represents shared responsibility for each otehr, which then grows into more needs (increased potential).
Is the only recourse a violent whiplash upon being physically forced to comprehend or is there any way to use language to free our brothers and sisters gently?
Ignorance represents the temptation of selfishness, which is defined as one shirking responsibility over self sustenance. a) that's ones free will of chocie to ignore, and b) another using force makes the other what? A false authority the selfish can keep shirking his responsibility over self onto.
Comprehension is solely based on inspiration gained, choice made in adherence to self sustenance, and then acted upon. They "need" to confront themselves, but they don't "want" that. This selfish behavior is also exactly what inspires those who exploit the selfish ruthlessly, because the selfish always want more, and their actions prove it.
The problem with language is that the selfish believers will either perceive what you offer as a contradiction and defend their beliefs, or they will believe you, which then tempts you to exploit them. And on top of that every word we speak is corrupted by multi layered rhetorical traps to get us to argue about definitions.
While us, as separate ones, trying to communicate the ALL
Understand that ONE communicating ALL to other ONEs is not a need; it is based on the other ONEs lacking self discernment based on their choice of ignorance. The need lies in inspiring others to stop ignoring themselves, because we need unity for self sustenance, and the ignorance of the majority restricts that.
from whence do dreams come?
Energy is the source of ALL information. Whatever ONE perceives while dreaming was already available no ONE can add information (dream based or not) to reality, one can only create out of aka transmute out of that which already is.
Could the MIND not be a middleman between the PHYSICAL (radar dish) and the METAPHYSICAL (signal)?
The physical represents the potential of each ONE set into motion; and only the mental allows access to ALL potentiality offered aka the unused potential. To get at it ONE needs to increase ONEs own potential through unity with other ONEs.
The reason why there needs to be conscious communication between ALL and each ONE is to establish the function of ALL, which is self sustenance. Energy creating motion through the loss of its potentiality; and motion recharging potentiality through the unity of potential. Both together (within balance aka momentum aka where we are) represents self sustenance of energy aka the source of ALL information.
The radar dish represents perception (input), while the signal represents the motion (the flow of information) allowing those within to perceive the consequences of actions as inspiration. Without motion; no perception; no action.
What are your thoughts on the metaphysical
METAPHYS'ICS ([Gr. after, and physics) - "body first; mind second". It's information first; motion second and then through the momentum (balance within motion) body and mind can coexist as natural opposites.
The information represents ALL; the motion represents the function of ALL (self sustenance), and body and mind in coexistence represent the ONE within ALL.
our relationship with it as fleshy vessels in the river samsara?
The river samsara is allegory for motion, and the vessel (body and mind in coexistence) represents the tool to sustain self, which is within the "shared" bloodline, with the blood (liquid) representing that which remains during the loss/recharge function. Body/mind go right back to base energy; blood/liquid remains, hence it representing a shared self.
Omnitelepathically
If possible; then through unity in adherence. There are many instinctive reactions among collectives within other lifeforms (herd mentality; collective agreement of temporary "cease fire" rules without those rules ever being proclaimed; pin point accuracy of measurement of motion (not time) and placement etc.)
The term "telephatic" is a recent one (1882) so there's certainly deception afoot to corrupt our comprehension of what this is really about. As far as I see it...access to collective mental communication requires massive responsibility over self and to others, which is why unity in adherence seems to be the logical foundation needed for that.
How could one communicate in English and achieve a state of no proclamations nor ignorance?
Questions. Adaptation to inspiration instead of arguing over assumptions about information offered. No idolatry aka no beliefs. And as for ignorance....responsibility over choice for each action.
Are we not by definition ignorant the moment we open our mouths?
Language represents creation within motion (transmutation) aka just an action set into motion. Motion corrupts creation and so language needs maintenance (responsibility) in adherence to the laws of nature (defining how motion operates). Language has to be in adherence to change; build on assumptions and used as adaptation to circumstances within motion; not to proclaim what something is or isn't.
Now to the problem...upholding affixed definitions of words within ones mind; thereby creating the inner monologue (ego) about reasoning over fiction, while ignoring reality. So far my attempts to reel that inner monologue in are fruitless (or so it seems). My comprehension operates unrestricted since beliefs don't even tempt me anymore; I cleared my memory of the majority of loss, hope and fear by comprehending the deception of time, and cleaned up my communication towards adherence to need over wants, which let to endless improvements, but communicating with myself without language, while not falling for the temptation of the ego; that's so far out of my range.
The moment we formulate our thoughts from the formless?
Not formless; potentiality freely offered. One may use it; but one has no right to claim any of it, because that represents ignorance of being ONE within ALL; of being in coexistence as energy.
One would need to be god to communicate in your manner or, a god, super natural to the physical, right?
Wrong. Have you ever perceived a worm proclaiming reality to others or any other lifeforms doing that? Nope, and yet they use language to communicate with each other. It's once again our selfish ignorance at play.
it couldn’t possibly be everything or else we would be the same person
We are ONE as energy, which segregated us into differences to inspire us to sustain ourselves and therewith ALL. Energy represents information, and to act upon information ONE needs inspiration, and that can only come from differences. Imagine ALL is white, and so how would you as the ONE within perceive anything (including yourself) when all is white.
This is why each ONE is different, while having the shared need for self sustenance, which represents the function of ALL. Person means per (through) and sona (sound), which represents resonance within motion, which is what allows form.
Thanks!
And thank you for these great questions.
Have you ever considered a book or anything like that? Maybe in the form of a dialogue? Really appreciate your words there, some great insight to be had for anyone willing to read.
The seeming contradiction in writing a book, I think I observe, is that what you’re conveying is both intimately personal and the most abstract thing conceivable... it’s a universal conversation had with one person, lucky if a few souls more see it, much less to have just the right context to learn from it...
It’s funny, over the last few years I’ve found myself adopting a rhetorical approach to debate, where I would induce a person to ask the obvious question in response to my statement with the “attached” obvious answer. This worked great half the time and annoyed them the other half lol
About language I’m reminded of a quote:
Jesus said: If the flesh came into existence because of the spirit, it is a marvel. But if the spirit (came into existence) because of the body, it is a marvel of marvels. But as for me, I wonder at this, how this great wealth made its home in this poverty.
Have you ever considered a book
Inspiration over information. Submitting information binds me to it; which inhibits inspiration.
or anything like that?
Yes; adaptation to inspiration, which I'm doing right now, and usually I write a lot while doing so, and yet others always "want" more.
Maybe in the form of a dialogue?
I do this as exercise for myself, while representing the consequences thereof in my responses. Distance yourself from the false perception of one and one communication and instead work with the information that inspires you. I cannot tell you anything "new" for I'm merely a vessel for ALL that already is; ONE that is less restricted than many other ONEs, but in the end it's the inspiration ONEself uses to sustain self by comprehending more of ALL.
Really appreciate your words there, some great insight to be had for anyone willing to read.
We all could be like this; it's just selfish ignorance preventing it (and the parasitical consequences thereof).
intimately personal
It isn't tho. Intimacy refers to friendship, with ship representing the vessel within motion, which represents a bond based on adherence to self sustenance. Meanwhile, friend means "one not hostile". The whole friendship deception aims at tricking us to form bonds not based on adherence to self sustenance, but on ignorance; on temptations; on wants, which is why so many friendships "sink".
the most abstract thing conceivable
ONE can perceive ALL that can be. Abstract means "to separate" which represents your chocie to further separate that which motion already segregated for your perception in form of inspiration to your senses.
If you're honest then your beliefs contradicting it is what inspires you to perceive it as abstract. You value based on fiction.
to have just the right context to learn from it
Reality (ALL) represents that which ONE is woven (context) into. To learn (comprehend) requires to choose to not ignore. The choice is free; the consequences thereof cost aplenty.
induce a person to ask the obvious question in response to my statement with the “attached” obvious answer
Prediction about consequences of actions set into motion becomes easy if the other ignores motion, hence a parasite exploiting us all for it.
If the flesh came into existence because of the spirit, it is a marvel. But if the spirit (came into existence) because of the body, it is a marvel of marvels.
Mind and body represent coexistence within ONE, while spirit (spiro; to breath) represents ONEs contract within ALL to uphold life over death aka the demand to adhere to self sustenance within motion.
"patri et filii spiritus sancti" represents just that...father (ALL); son (ONE), holy spirit (contract between ALL and ONE)...it's the "in nomine" (in the name of) that allows another (((one))) to subvert it through an offered contract of belief (faith), which tricks ONE to ignore ALL.
But as for me, I wonder at this, how this great wealth made its home in this poverty.
Poverty (want of convenient means of subsistence) is the consequence of ignoring ones need to sustain self, which in this case represents ONEs responsibility of self in form of the act of evaluation of ALL offered. It's the belief in false value that a) devalues self and b) gives others the power to define value and therewith devalue all others.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4L87pRqRrYE
Hey weird thing, I watched this video maybe like 8 years ago (different upload) and recently rediscovered it. I was hoping it might inspire you to share some of your thoughts on the mechanistic explanations (possible, not proclaimed) that you think could be at play. I saw it with new eyes given what you said about our vessels in motion, thought you might like it/have heard of the theory before