Why are we here? Many refuse to disturb themselves with this question. This question is the shadow of death itself. It lurks within the mind, taunting one's convictions. It challenges one's thirst for existence. If one ponders it excessively, it fortifies one within a portrait of angst. Even the misologist is not safe. He too must confront the void. The tabernacle of ignorance is but a temporary refuge. It soon serves one an eviction notice. One is then cast to the desert-to be tested by the very realities one has eschewed. Depression then imprisons the spirit. The mind becomes an adversary. Tears deplete the reservoir of hope. Without knowledge, one is intellectually homeless. Without faith, one is unable to seek out knowledge; for one must first believe in order to seek. Never has one sought for a thing, without the belief that the thing in question exists. Emptiness itself first believed in the adjective empty in order to add the suffix thereupon. Or else, the attainment of emptiness would have been impossible. One is thus subject to inquire of the following: Does a thing exist before it is believed to exist-or does it exist notwithstanding one's belief?
To believe does not cause the manifestation of something that did not first exist in order that it may be believed to exist. Belief is a key. With this key, one opens the entrance of the matrix. Belief becomes conviction. But conviction is without substance unless one's conviction can withstand the furnace of intellectual assault. To merely assert that one knows, and to then adamantly holdfast to one's conviction, without first challenging with all of one's soul the conviction in question, is equivalent to deceiving the self; for to believe unto conviction does not necessitate the truth factor of the conviction, nor does it empower the believer. It is when one has set out with vigor to refute the conviction, and has failed repeatedly, that one may lay claim to a conviction worthy of its proclamation. This process takes place inwardly. It is without merit to merely construct a method of query and thereafter assert that whatsoever conviction that does not withstand the application of the constructed method is nonsensical and unworthy of belief. This too is merely a temporary escape from the caldron on thoughts. It is not considered ingenious to start from an assumed supposition and thereupon build the edifice of one's belief system. However, it is the conviction which has proven itself irrefutable within the mind of the impartial inquisitor that is then worthy of serving as an established pillar of one's belief system. I say these things to at once catapult the notion of traditional objectivity back to where it originally surfaced from; namely, out of the mind of arrogance, feigned as certainty, disguised in the shrouds of science; for that that has been created, cannot be real; that is, only that that has not been created can be said to be real. Therefore, it is unreasonable, even absurd, to attempt to test the real by methods of the unreal.
I must now inquire of something that appears to me as most important; that is: When is it appropriate to trust and put faith in one's ability to think correctly? We should all agree that one must first be trained in the art of reasoning. But by who's methods? Consensus seems a shallow backboard to draw deductions from on behave of the whole. As history has taught us, the opinion of the majority is often enforced without scruples. Nevertheless, a sound backboard is required if one is to avoid self-deception. It is similar to creating what is respected as good-art. We must first determine what is meant by the use of the term, good-art. This presents many difficulties; for I have already discredited the notion of consensus. I too have discredited the notion of objectivity and constructed principles of inquiry. I am moreover not clever in stating that subjectivity, that is, inward investigation, is the path to self-discovery and truth. Greater minds have stumbled upon this very conviction, after voyaging painstakingly into the depths of philosophic inquiry. However, subjectivity is often deemed as naivety. Many equate subjectivity to the misconception of liberalism, unaware of the many industrious years that have been invested in critical thought in order that one was able to establish their conviction without desecrating the sanctity of intellectual integrity. True conviction is predicated upon intellectual exhaustion. That is, a worthy conviction has been inwardly contradicted, tried, taken to trial and acquitted. Therefore, setting aside unsophisticated notions of subjectivity, I here use the word subjectivity as the establishment of a conviction that has inwardly withstood-vigorous, intellectual and impartial, systematic contradiction.
We return to the notion of the unreal applied to the real. I have stated that such a method is absurd. That is to say, reasoning, notwithstanding its depth, is a construction of the intellect. Therefore, reasoning is unreal. It lacks the property of reality. It is thus ineffective when it comes to the discovery of inward truths. Nevertheless, reasoning serves its purpose in the following. If applied correctly, specifically in matters of the inward discovery of truths, reasoning leads the inquisitor into the confines of an intellectual cul-de-sac. However, here is where the true journey begins. That is, when it is the case, that one has sufficiently applied the art of reasoning to a subject-matter, and subsequently one is unable to obtain a definite conclusion, it is at this point that one crosses over into the world of inward truths; for it is illogical to take that that has been created by way of the intellect and apply it to that which exists eternally, that that has not been created. At this segue, one is compelled to rely upon inward experiences which either sustain or refute the viability of the conviction in question.
Setting manmade reasoning aside, nevertheless aware of the pitfalls of self-deception, one enters into the realm of inward experiences of the Divine Energy. To state it with clarity, one enters into a world of vibrations, resonant particles of the eternal. One's psyche is thereby transformed. Perception becomes an inward opposed to an outward activity. Appearances begin to take on variegated, perceptible dimensions. It becomes unacceptable, I dare say, even unintelligible, to engage the old linear method of perception; for it is easy to discredit a theory imposing itself upon the mind by way of its impression through the media of the eyes; but it is nevertheless impossible, to effectively discredit experiences of the eternal, which transpire within. That is to say, a theory is merely an intellectual proposition; but inward experiences of the eternal impress upon and mold the character of the experiencer. Such transformations emanate from within impressing upon the experiencer in such a way that subjectivity by way of inward experience has taken on the properties of what we respect as objectivity. To explain, I am not here using the term objectivity in its traditional application. That is, objective, or rather, an objective methodology, is indicative of self-effort, and/or self-action, ideally applied impartially to an external object in the hope of proving or disapproving a presupposed set of hypotheses. In my usage of the term objectivity, I am referring to the inward experiences of the eternal, manifesting in the character of the experiencer, hereby becoming an objective reality. That is, what was at the first pure subjectivity reveals itself outwardly in the characteristics and dispositions of the experiencer. However, such a transformation takes place of its own will. Efforts, and/or actions of the experiencer, cannot, and do not, assist the transformation process. In this sense, the experiencer is a passive vehicle by which the eternal expresses itself through itself. It seems apparent that the void begins to dissipate.
The experiencer is evermore consumed with the nature of the Divine. What began as an inward activity, expresses its presence by way of the many streams of consciousness. Vibrations, stillness and energies become modalities of Divine Communication. Existential realities are no longer perceived as haphazard and unpredictable occurrences. Life in itself becomes an entity, possessing distinction, indifferent of perception. The experiencer, from within, is identified as a divine extension of the eternal. The panic of death loses its sting. Schisms evaporate. Sin reveals itself as the great divider. The experiencer morphs into the ontology of cosmic music. The heart is ever enlarged by the presence of Spirit. It leaps and communicates its essence in the embodiment of love. Walls of separation dissolve. The initial I-Thou relationship becomes a prismatic oneness beyond compare. Illumination infuses the soul. Esoteric truths are spontaneously given utterance. Intuition reveals the depth of its knowledge. The experiencer begins to know without seeing. Depression is then but a sojourner, without a home to lay claim too; for the interior of the experiencer is furnished in celestial radiance. Verily, one becomes the fullness of one's truest nature. We are thus here to again become the wholeness in which we have slipped away from. We are thus here to realign ourselves with our self-reflection.
Experiencer: The agent undergoing the experience
