witness, as observe,
which might imply objective/subjective realities.
ignoring the objective question, which could be debated,
Perhaps the insurmountable division is the spell they are intending to cast (at the subjective level at minimum).
As form we represent a response to flow; so we are primarily being processed, which makes observation the choice between inspiration (form moving flow) or information (form suggesting what moving form means).
ignoring the objective question
As objective form subjected to flow; we represent the answer (response to flow), which inspires us to question self (self discernment); which is needed for self sustenance as form within flow.
Once again the suggested information by others tempts us to question them instead of ONEself (comprehension) in adherence to ALL (perception).
which could be debated
Debate (contention in words) aka the conflict of reason aka the ignorance of form towards flow not branding itself, but expressing itself through moving form.
the insurmountable division is the spell
Division equals reason (true versus false), which originates in ONEs choice to ignore ALL for believing the suggestions made by another ONE. Suggested words represent the "spell"craft; consenting to believe them by free will of choice represents a) self restriction of comprehension (the perceived insurmountable obstacle) and b) the resulting division that is the conflict of reason (true vs false).
the spell they are intending to cast (at the subjective level at minimum).
the spell (word) represents their suggestion of it; our consent to believe it represents the intended ignorance towards ALL which allows them control over our ignored potential within ALL potentiality. Their suggested words represent the flute of the Pied Piper (an allegory for temptation of suggestion), and us following lockstep behind their chain of command represents our choice of ignorance towards self sustenance aka form going with the flow.
witness, as observe,
which might imply objective/subjective realities.
ignoring the objective question, which could be debated,
Perhaps the insurmountable division is the spell they are intending to cast (at the subjective level at minimum).
As form we represent objects subjected to flow.
As form we represent a response to flow; so we are primarily being processed, which makes observation the choice between inspiration (form moving flow) or information (form suggesting what moving form means).
As objective form subjected to flow; we represent the answer (response to flow), which inspires us to question self (self discernment); which is needed for self sustenance as form within flow.
Once again the suggested information by others tempts us to question them instead of ONEself (comprehension) in adherence to ALL (perception).
Debate (contention in words) aka the conflict of reason aka the ignorance of form towards flow not branding itself, but expressing itself through moving form.
Division equals reason (true versus false), which originates in ONEs choice to ignore ALL for believing the suggestions made by another ONE. Suggested words represent the "spell"craft; consenting to believe them by free will of choice represents a) self restriction of comprehension (the perceived insurmountable obstacle) and b) the resulting division that is the conflict of reason (true vs false).
the spell (word) represents their suggestion of it; our consent to believe it represents the intended ignorance towards ALL which allows them control over our ignored potential within ALL potentiality. Their suggested words represent the flute of the Pied Piper (an allegory for temptation of suggestion), and us following lockstep behind their chain of command represents our choice of ignorance towards self sustenance aka form going with the flow.