holding is a hand action and balance is something that comes from the gut
Hand implies the choice to grip; gut implies dealing with the consequences of former intake choices. Furthermore; GUT, noun - "intestinal canal of an animal; a pipe or tube extending, with many circumvolutions"...aka a formed "torus of the spiral line of the Ionic order" to deal with the consequences of animation.
As resistance (living) within velocity (process of dying) such circumvolutions prolong resistance by filtering incoming velocity or in the gut case; the animated form passing through.
The balance aspect in this seems to represent the opportunity to perceive the momentum of form within flow; hence experiencing the whole process within the partial (yourself); which should inspire (hunger) one to maintain balance (momentum); yet tempts one (taste) to shove all kinds of crap down the hatch.
I always make my balance
Balancing implies as choice in response to balance, not making it. To balance something else (jelly) still implies as choice within balance (need/want). I leave the need or want of balancing jelly to your experience, cause I need more feedback from my food. Jelly is too easy...I suspect foul-play in that.
to the scale of a boat-oar
That implies a lot jelly to serve...or lots of effort to transport few amounts of it.
to disseminate teachings on the meaning of life to the masses - no doubt having mistaken me for one of those wiseguys
A wise man once asked thee "is it to be or not to be?"...And I replied, "Oh, why ask me?" Like why ask me what you are instead of being what you are until you comprehend what it means?
I sliced that meaning of life
That represents the choice to shape predefined meaning perceived; instead of reasoning over suggested meaning. No wonder that was easier to digest.
"to show, solemnly pronounce"
What shows? The oneness of all perceivable. What can solemnly pronounce? The ones perceiving all perceivable. Hence were back at the the designation of the unit (one).
On idioms...from hwédios, from swéd-yo-s, from swé ("self")
The only self that can be sustained of form (life) within flow (inception towards death) represents the perpetuated one (blood within bloodline); hence ones (form) perpetuation representing an expression of oneness (flow). It's the use of idioms to define flow-state meaning (inspiration) with affixed words (information) that contradicts everything.
If one uses words; one expresses through the suggested tools of others into the perceivable world aka muted communication through noisy miscommunication. Which brings us to those idiots who just can't shut up to listen for a moment.
On a side-note..."a person who has understanding enough to measure a yard of cloth, number twenty correctly, tell the days of the week, etc., is not an idiot in the eye of the law" ~Webster's 1828
private citizen
Private implies separate (the status quo for being partial within whole); while citizen implies at liberty of others; hence incorporated within a city; governed by others. A deliberate contradiction in terms. The kosher legal term would be "private resident" from RES'IDENT, adjective [Latin residens.] - "dwelling or having an abode in a place for a continuance of time, but not definite"; which adheres to natural law; hence being temporarily (resident) different (private).
layman
More trickery here...suggested layman implies distinction from perceivable CLERGY, noun - "the body of men set apart" (hence being partial within whole) and Blacks Law Dictionary defines layman as "a person with no particular profession" aka PROFES'SION, noun [Latin professio.] - "open declaration"; which implies expressing oneself through free will of choice within the perceivable natural order instead of ignoring it.
In short...layman represents the ones being branded and exploited for their ignorance of representing clergy (partial within whole).
Maaaan, try tellin' that to the crowds always trying to scale the mountain.
That's the issue with ignoring need (perceivable) for want (suggested)...they are tempted to want more than everything already offered, and so they claim what is; instead of growing themselves within it.
Which self?
The one...one cannot hold onto; hence the perpetuated self through intercourse with others aka the self which "springs off" one. That's the only self one can sustain within a self sustaining system.
That one over there? Or this one here?
That represents you measuring by choice within the same position of balance...the ever changing moment (um). Here and there implies everywhere; cause all represents one in energy.
out the corner of my eye, all of 'em look like they're phalanges of the same
Because the "all seeing I" perceives moving division within a whole, and the chosen angle of perspective puts them together via comprehension. And as if that wasn't enough of a struggle; there's also the parasitic few suggesting e pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka lumping as many divisions together to prevent the many from adapting to them as inspiration for the sustenance of apartheid (yet another term inverted).
never not play the whole instrument
Like the sticks of a drummer go venturing off center to anything adding a different flavor.
Everything in life is a... metaphor?
All represents one in energy; each one within represents a different perspective; transferring over (metaphor) partial responses within the whole.
The suggested metaphor (similitude reduced to a single word) tempts one to ignore perceivable metaphor (being the reduced partial within the self differentiating whole).
the brands themselves are fictions of a sort
Spell-craft aka suggested words over perceivable sound. The few trick the many to brand a moving system; as to gain control over the suggested brands. The spelling of the consenting many is being crafted by the suggesting few.
Suggestion represents the idolatry of perceivable.
natural court
Reaction (choice) represents the court; enclosed within the enacting (balance) yard...both produced by the motion of nature. The parasitic few suggest judges (their judgement) into the court (choice) of the consenting many. If one consents to the judge; one ignores being the court. Stepping into a court demands wielding free will of choice within balance; while resisting all the suggested imbalances by others.
The suggested "court order" tempts the court (choice) within the natural order (balance) to ignore being temporary disorder (living) within the ongoing natural order (process of dying). So whenever the judge suggests "stop; hammertime"; the court (choice) has to respond with "you can't touch this" momentum (balance). The judge doesn't make order; the court represents the resistance within the natural order..."And I'm known as such...And this is a beat uh you can't touch" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0l4Wo
Motion represents loss; resistance within motion represents growth. Motion inspires resistance by differentiating the whole into the partial within the only whole. The suggestion of winning tempts one to ignore resisting; while suggested losing tempts one to hold onto "prices already won", hence also ignoring to resist being moved.
per "around"
a) PER - "a Latin preposition, denoting through, passing, over the whole extent; by"
b) "around" implies around others; hence among partial; which implies within; by and in response to whole.
armed force
"furnished with weapons of offense or defense" (armed) implies the weapon of choice; while force implies velocity; momentum and resistance aka resistance as the defense within the momentum of offending velocity aka living (defense) within the process of dying (offense).
So we're looking for a man about town and a fella with two arms.
One is being tempted to look forwards; while ignoring the response-ability (choice) to origin (balance). The two armed man about town represents choice falling for the temptation of form (want) over flow (need).
As for "we" and "two arms"...one perceives one arm and another one arm in different positions within the oneness of all, and why would the partial within the whole need to suggest in the name of others (we)? Before both of these issues came the choice to count and brand "units" so that one can suggest both to other ones.
How about from this perspective...to be (one) comes before suggesting what (we)
Was it I that was measuring...
"we" and "two arms" suggests as such.
or did I blurt out strings like a malfunctioning database engine and it was left as an exercise for the reader to go about assigning some sense of what might be called positionality to them?
Whatever you choose has consequences for others; and whatever others choose represents the need to adapt to what's being sensed and the temptation to assign sense to suggestible meaning.
cromulent
A Simpsons reference aka SONs of SIMPle (single; consisting of one thing; uncompounded)...for all represents one in energy.
STICKS!? What is this utter extravagance! We ain't got no sticks
Oh dear; another one burdened by faggots...
I'm gonna make bumper-stickers of this (If one consents to the judge; one ignores being the court)
Displaying messages of empowerment while driving around neutered in electric cars...
The commotion of the motion brings the notion that we're all absolutely stuck, as if by some manner of glue, on a road to, well, somewhere.
What if the process of dying is impressing (loss) to inspire those living within to express (growth); which requires choice of adaptation (need); hence also offering the temptation of ignorance (want) aka self repression?
In other words...those who ignore to grow are tempted to feel stuck; while being moved on a road they ignore (process of dying) towards somewhere (death) their ignorance denies them to comprehend. Furthermore; the choice to ignore need for want; tempts them to want to hold onto; hence gluing themselves onto temporary within ongoing.
The few utilize suggestion to tempt the many to willingly attach themselves to the fleeting material; while ignoring to be the material resistance (living) within the immaterial velocity (process of dying).
commotion of the motion brings the notion
The ignorance of temperance towards permanence tempts impotence of sustenance through lack of resistance.
Which is all fine and good, right up until those differentiated bits start cottoning on and before one can so much as a swing a cat they're all over the show, each one pointing to another one and declaring "That's me, over there!" at which point it rapidly becomes very confusing for everyone.
Which is why the ongoing whole differentiates into "temporary" partials; which have to struggle to sustain self (apartheid); while resisting the temptation of "cottoning" together. Entrance the parasitic few suggesting the ignorant many to pick cotton together.
As for losing and winning - these are different words for what is far too often the same thing
If one (living) comprehends the only origin (process of dying); then it isn't about wanting (winning) vs not wanting (losing); but about the need to grow within loss; by resisting the temptation of suggested wins or loses.
to sell
Choice (consent) towards choice (suggestion) contract law allows the few to sell everything perceivable back to the many who ignore this for suggested.
Everyone (perceiving) exists at the center of everything (perceivable) as the free will of choice to utilize it (growth)...or ignore it (loss). The few sell perceivable loss under suggested growth back to the many who pay growth (living) into loss (dying). A self destruction racket; more or less carefully hidden behind suggested narratives; which are collapsing upon each other over and over again.
In short...suggesting to sell what is perceptibly free.
if choice itself were a weapon...
WEAPON, noun - "any instrument of offense"...there has to be a weapon of offense (choice) within a self sustaining system of defense (balance). The "will" within free will of choice represents the want (temptation) within the need (resistance).
Self discernment has to be grown for one to comprehend that "instrument" implies in response to perceivable sound. Without that one views any weapon as offense vs defense among others; instead of as response-ability (choice) to origin (balance).
I have no basis for suggesting
Choice represents the base for suggestion (want); perceivable balance (need) represents the base for choice. Those who are reasoning against each other about suggestion; lack comprehension about base (choice) because they already consented by choice to the suggested choices of others; hence willingly ignoring free will of choice; while submitting the choices of others.
never yet led me astray
Inception towards death represents the way; momentum (balance) represents what one perceives it at, and ones choice operates at the center thereof. One cannot wander off the path (astray) while being confined to the momentum of the only path. Wandering around in willing ignorance is a choice tho...
face forward, no doubt to better track prey
Why hunting prey? To sustain self. Where to sustain self? Within momentum (balance); hence origin of every choice to hunt. Now change perspective to the prey...sustaining self; while resisting the suggested temptations by others (getting hunted down) all while adapting as choice to the ever changing moment (balance).
Even while both hunter and hunted are "facing" death; they each operate for the sustenance of life; hence adapting to origin...not to the predefined outcome. Once again; such a perspective requires the growth of self discernment about living within the process of dying; hence in need to react to an enacting system; while being tempted to want everything else.
gazes are harmonized somewhere forward
From center (perceiving) into surrounding (perceivable) based on free will of choice.
looking in other directions
a) inception towards death represents the only direction...looking freely (choice) around within the momentum (balance) thereof; doesn't change the direction.
b) constant change (aka forward velocity) represents direction (progress of dying) for those (living) within.
c) if all represents one in energy; then others represent moving partials of the whole. All others represent perceivable inspiration (need) and suggesting information (want) for ones free will of choice. If all represents one in energy; then there can be only one; hence all for one and one for all.
What's lacking is each ones self discernment about representing a partial within a self differentiating whole. The more one comprehends apartheid; the more one comprehends wholeness. The parasitic few distract the ignorant many from that by suggesting diversity (difference) for equality (sameness) as the inversion of difference (partial) out of sameness (whole).
regarded by the aforementioned others as some manner of potentate
Every one represents potential (growth) within potentiality (loss); yet it requires adaptation of potential to potentiality to grow; while resisting the temptation to drain potential among others.
In other words...one is tempted to want what others grow; while ignoring the need to grow oneself.
Also...one doesn't need to regard the suggestions of others; one represents the RE (responding) GUARD (preservation; self sustenance) within perceivable.
to have a posse assembled
Strength in numbers (sleight of hand for strength within the designated unit "one") misdirected by suggested collectivism (out of many; one) against others. Notice also...POSSE (possession) aka want over need.
Wherefrom hangs this platform? Why, from skyhooks, naturally?
PLAT (to spread) FORM (that manner of being peculiar to each body, which exhibits it to the eye as distinct from every other body) aka growth through self differentiation within loss.
Also; PLATEAU (elevated tract of relatively level land) aka choice based growth (elevation) within the momentum (level aka balance) of motion, hence the implied relation of growth to loss; of form to flow; of elevation to degradation etc.
The hook on the other hand represents the snare; the temptation to want to hold onto the material (life); while ignoring to grow in response to immaterial (inception towards death).
Does the rain choose upon whom it falls?
Each drop of liquid seeks level (balance); hence representing choice. Liquid also adapts to ever changing circumstances. You don't perceive rain (plural) but partial liquid within whole motion. Branding the momentum of liquid "rain" was suggested to you. Furthermore; suggested "whom" implies the choice to count; while each part of liquid adapts to the whole momentum until disrupted by "whomever" chose to resist liquid finding level.
automotion
The few suggest "automobile" to tempt the many to ignore being mobility (living) within automation (process of dying). They furthermore tempt choice into a conflict between manual and automatic; as the inversion of being the manual choice within the automatic balance.
Hand implies the choice to grip; gut implies dealing with the consequences of former intake choices. Furthermore; GUT, noun - "intestinal canal of an animal; a pipe or tube extending, with many circumvolutions"...aka a formed "torus of the spiral line of the Ionic order" to deal with the consequences of animation.
As resistance (living) within velocity (process of dying) such circumvolutions prolong resistance by filtering incoming velocity or in the gut case; the animated form passing through.
The balance aspect in this seems to represent the opportunity to perceive the momentum of form within flow; hence experiencing the whole process within the partial (yourself); which should inspire (hunger) one to maintain balance (momentum); yet tempts one (taste) to shove all kinds of crap down the hatch.
Balancing implies as choice in response to balance, not making it. To balance something else (jelly) still implies as choice within balance (need/want). I leave the need or want of balancing jelly to your experience, cause I need more feedback from my food. Jelly is too easy...I suspect foul-play in that.
That implies a lot jelly to serve...or lots of effort to transport few amounts of it.
A wise man once asked thee "is it to be or not to be?"...And I replied, "Oh, why ask me?" Like why ask me what you are instead of being what you are until you comprehend what it means?
That represents the choice to shape predefined meaning perceived; instead of reasoning over suggested meaning. No wonder that was easier to digest.
What shows? The oneness of all perceivable. What can solemnly pronounce? The ones perceiving all perceivable. Hence were back at the the designation of the unit (one).
The only self that can be sustained of form (life) within flow (inception towards death) represents the perpetuated one (blood within bloodline); hence ones (form) perpetuation representing an expression of oneness (flow). It's the use of idioms to define flow-state meaning (inspiration) with affixed words (information) that contradicts everything.
If one uses words; one expresses through the suggested tools of others into the perceivable world aka muted communication through noisy miscommunication. Which brings us to those idiots who just can't shut up to listen for a moment.
On a side-note..."a person who has understanding enough to measure a yard of cloth, number twenty correctly, tell the days of the week, etc., is not an idiot in the eye of the law" ~Webster's 1828
Private implies separate (the status quo for being partial within whole); while citizen implies at liberty of others; hence incorporated within a city; governed by others. A deliberate contradiction in terms. The kosher legal term would be "private resident" from RES'IDENT, adjective [Latin residens.] - "dwelling or having an abode in a place for a continuance of time, but not definite"; which adheres to natural law; hence being temporarily (resident) different (private).
More trickery here...suggested layman implies distinction from perceivable CLERGY, noun - "the body of men set apart" (hence being partial within whole) and Blacks Law Dictionary defines layman as "a person with no particular profession" aka PROFES'SION, noun [Latin professio.] - "open declaration"; which implies expressing oneself through free will of choice within the perceivable natural order instead of ignoring it.
In short...layman represents the ones being branded and exploited for their ignorance of representing clergy (partial within whole).
That's the issue with ignoring need (perceivable) for want (suggested)...they are tempted to want more than everything already offered, and so they claim what is; instead of growing themselves within it.
The one...one cannot hold onto; hence the perpetuated self through intercourse with others aka the self which "springs off" one. That's the only self one can sustain within a self sustaining system.
That represents you measuring by choice within the same position of balance...the ever changing moment (um). Here and there implies everywhere; cause all represents one in energy.
Sleight of hand from the tavistock boys...The Beatles - "Here; There And Everywhere" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xdcSFVXd3MU
Because the "all seeing I" perceives moving division within a whole, and the chosen angle of perspective puts them together via comprehension. And as if that wasn't enough of a struggle; there's also the parasitic few suggesting e pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka lumping as many divisions together to prevent the many from adapting to them as inspiration for the sustenance of apartheid (yet another term inverted).
Like the sticks of a drummer go venturing off center to anything adding a different flavor.
All represents one in energy; each one within represents a different perspective; transferring over (metaphor) partial responses within the whole.
The suggested metaphor (similitude reduced to a single word) tempts one to ignore perceivable metaphor (being the reduced partial within the self differentiating whole).
Spell-craft aka suggested words over perceivable sound. The few trick the many to brand a moving system; as to gain control over the suggested brands. The spelling of the consenting many is being crafted by the suggesting few.
Suggestion represents the idolatry of perceivable.
Reaction (choice) represents the court; enclosed within the enacting (balance) yard...both produced by the motion of nature. The parasitic few suggest judges (their judgement) into the court (choice) of the consenting many. If one consents to the judge; one ignores being the court. Stepping into a court demands wielding free will of choice within balance; while resisting all the suggested imbalances by others.
The suggested "court order" tempts the court (choice) within the natural order (balance) to ignore being temporary disorder (living) within the ongoing natural order (process of dying). So whenever the judge suggests "stop; hammertime"; the court (choice) has to respond with "you can't touch this" momentum (balance). The judge doesn't make order; the court represents the resistance within the natural order..."And I'm known as such...And this is a beat uh you can't touch" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=otCpCn0l4Wo
Motion represents loss; resistance within motion represents growth. Motion inspires resistance by differentiating the whole into the partial within the only whole. The suggestion of winning tempts one to ignore resisting; while suggested losing tempts one to hold onto "prices already won", hence also ignoring to resist being moved.
a) PER - "a Latin preposition, denoting through, passing, over the whole extent; by"
b) "around" implies around others; hence among partial; which implies within; by and in response to whole.
"furnished with weapons of offense or defense" (armed) implies the weapon of choice; while force implies velocity; momentum and resistance aka resistance as the defense within the momentum of offending velocity aka living (defense) within the process of dying (offense).
One is being tempted to look forwards; while ignoring the response-ability (choice) to origin (balance). The two armed man about town represents choice falling for the temptation of form (want) over flow (need).
As for "we" and "two arms"...one perceives one arm and another one arm in different positions within the oneness of all, and why would the partial within the whole need to suggest in the name of others (we)? Before both of these issues came the choice to count and brand "units" so that one can suggest both to other ones.
How about from this perspective...to be (one) comes before suggesting what (we)
"we" and "two arms" suggests as such.
Whatever you choose has consequences for others; and whatever others choose represents the need to adapt to what's being sensed and the temptation to assign sense to suggestible meaning.
A Simpsons reference aka SONs of SIMPle (single; consisting of one thing; uncompounded)...for all represents one in energy.
Oh dear; another one burdened by faggots...
Displaying messages of empowerment while driving around neutered in electric cars...
What if the process of dying is impressing (loss) to inspire those living within to express (growth); which requires choice of adaptation (need); hence also offering the temptation of ignorance (want) aka self repression?
In other words...those who ignore to grow are tempted to feel stuck; while being moved on a road they ignore (process of dying) towards somewhere (death) their ignorance denies them to comprehend. Furthermore; the choice to ignore need for want; tempts them to want to hold onto; hence gluing themselves onto temporary within ongoing.
The few utilize suggestion to tempt the many to willingly attach themselves to the fleeting material; while ignoring to be the material resistance (living) within the immaterial velocity (process of dying).
The ignorance of temperance towards permanence tempts impotence of sustenance through lack of resistance.
Which is why the ongoing whole differentiates into "temporary" partials; which have to struggle to sustain self (apartheid); while resisting the temptation of "cottoning" together. Entrance the parasitic few suggesting the ignorant many to pick cotton together.
If one (living) comprehends the only origin (process of dying); then it isn't about wanting (winning) vs not wanting (losing); but about the need to grow within loss; by resisting the temptation of suggested wins or loses.
Choice (consent) towards choice (suggestion) contract law allows the few to sell everything perceivable back to the many who ignore this for suggested.
Everyone (perceiving) exists at the center of everything (perceivable) as the free will of choice to utilize it (growth)...or ignore it (loss). The few sell perceivable loss under suggested growth back to the many who pay growth (living) into loss (dying). A self destruction racket; more or less carefully hidden behind suggested narratives; which are collapsing upon each other over and over again.
In short...suggesting to sell what is perceptibly free.
WEAPON, noun - "any instrument of offense"...there has to be a weapon of offense (choice) within a self sustaining system of defense (balance). The "will" within free will of choice represents the want (temptation) within the need (resistance).
Self discernment has to be grown for one to comprehend that "instrument" implies in response to perceivable sound. Without that one views any weapon as offense vs defense among others; instead of as response-ability (choice) to origin (balance).
Choice represents the base for suggestion (want); perceivable balance (need) represents the base for choice. Those who are reasoning against each other about suggestion; lack comprehension about base (choice) because they already consented by choice to the suggested choices of others; hence willingly ignoring free will of choice; while submitting the choices of others.
Inception towards death represents the way; momentum (balance) represents what one perceives it at, and ones choice operates at the center thereof. One cannot wander off the path (astray) while being confined to the momentum of the only path. Wandering around in willing ignorance is a choice tho...
Why hunting prey? To sustain self. Where to sustain self? Within momentum (balance); hence origin of every choice to hunt. Now change perspective to the prey...sustaining self; while resisting the suggested temptations by others (getting hunted down) all while adapting as choice to the ever changing moment (balance).
Even while both hunter and hunted are "facing" death; they each operate for the sustenance of life; hence adapting to origin...not to the predefined outcome. Once again; such a perspective requires the growth of self discernment about living within the process of dying; hence in need to react to an enacting system; while being tempted to want everything else.
From center (perceiving) into surrounding (perceivable) based on free will of choice.
a) inception towards death represents the only direction...looking freely (choice) around within the momentum (balance) thereof; doesn't change the direction.
b) constant change (aka forward velocity) represents direction (progress of dying) for those (living) within.
c) if all represents one in energy; then others represent moving partials of the whole. All others represent perceivable inspiration (need) and suggesting information (want) for ones free will of choice. If all represents one in energy; then there can be only one; hence all for one and one for all.
What's lacking is each ones self discernment about representing a partial within a self differentiating whole. The more one comprehends apartheid; the more one comprehends wholeness. The parasitic few distract the ignorant many from that by suggesting diversity (difference) for equality (sameness) as the inversion of difference (partial) out of sameness (whole).
Every one represents potential (growth) within potentiality (loss); yet it requires adaptation of potential to potentiality to grow; while resisting the temptation to drain potential among others.
In other words...one is tempted to want what others grow; while ignoring the need to grow oneself.
Also...one doesn't need to regard the suggestions of others; one represents the RE (responding) GUARD (preservation; self sustenance) within perceivable.
Strength in numbers (sleight of hand for strength within the designated unit "one") misdirected by suggested collectivism (out of many; one) against others. Notice also...POSSE (possession) aka want over need.
PLAT (to spread) FORM (that manner of being peculiar to each body, which exhibits it to the eye as distinct from every other body) aka growth through self differentiation within loss.
Also; PLATEAU (elevated tract of relatively level land) aka choice based growth (elevation) within the momentum (level aka balance) of motion, hence the implied relation of growth to loss; of form to flow; of elevation to degradation etc.
The hook on the other hand represents the snare; the temptation to want to hold onto the material (life); while ignoring to grow in response to immaterial (inception towards death).
Each drop of liquid seeks level (balance); hence representing choice. Liquid also adapts to ever changing circumstances. You don't perceive rain (plural) but partial liquid within whole motion. Branding the momentum of liquid "rain" was suggested to you. Furthermore; suggested "whom" implies the choice to count; while each part of liquid adapts to the whole momentum until disrupted by "whomever" chose to resist liquid finding level.
The few suggest "automobile" to tempt the many to ignore being mobility (living) within automation (process of dying). They furthermore tempt choice into a conflict between manual and automatic; as the inversion of being the manual choice within the automatic balance.