#ontological duality

[shisasan]

Carl Gustav Jung, Man and his Symbols First published: 1964

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Advaita Vedanta

Advaita Vedanta is a non-dualistic school of Hindu philosophy that teaches that the ultimate reality, Brahman, is singular and that the individual self, Atman, is not separate from this ultimate reality. "Advaita" literally means "not two," indicating the core idea that Atman and Brahman are one and the same, and that any perception of duality (between self and world, subject and object) is an illusion.

Key Principles of Advaita Vedanta

Non-Duality (Advaita):

The central tenet of Advaita Vedanta is that there is only one ultimate reality, Brahman, which is infinite, formless, and beyond all distinctions. The apparent multiplicity of the world and separate selves (Atman) is considered Maya (illusion).

Atman (the individual self) is identical to Brahman. The idea that we are separate individuals with independent identities is an illusion caused by ignorance (Avidya).

Brahman:

Brahman is the universal, unchanging, infinite reality that underlies all existence. It is beyond time, space, and causality, and is the only true essence of everything.

Brahman is often described as Nirguna Brahman (Brahman without attributes), meaning it is formless, indescribable, and transcendent, but it can also be understood as Saguna Brahman (Brahman with attributes) when conceptualized as a personal God with qualities for devotional purposes.

Atman:

Atman refers to the inner self or soul, which is eternal and identical with Brahman. In Advaita Vedanta, realizing that one's true self (Atman) is Brahman is the goal of spiritual practice.

The ignorance (Avidya) of this fundamental identity between Atman and Brahman is what causes Samsara (the cycle of birth, death, and rebirth) and suffering.

Maya (Illusion):

The world of appearance, multiplicity, and individuality is called Maya. Maya is responsible for creating the illusion of separation and duality.

While the world appears real on a practical level (Vyavaharika), it is ultimately unreal on the absolute level (Paramarthika). Realizing the nature of Maya helps one see beyond the illusion to the true oneness of reality.

Avidya (Ignorance):

Avidya is the root cause of the human experience of duality and separation. It is the ignorance of the true nature of the self, leading to the mistaken belief in the individuality of the self (ego) and the reality of the material world.

Liberation, or Moksha, is attained through the removal of Avidya and the realization of one’s identity with Brahman.

Jnana Yoga (Path of Knowledge):

The primary method to attain liberation in Advaita Vedanta is Jnana Yoga, or the path of knowledge. This involves deep philosophical inquiry and meditation on the nature of the self, using teachings like "Tat Tvam Asi" ("You are That"), which emphasizes the unity of Atman and Brahman.

The study of Upanishads, Bhagavad Gita, and other scriptural texts is central to the pursuit of Jnana.

Liberation (Moksha):

Moksha is the realization of the oneness of Atman and Brahman, which frees one from the cycle of Samsara. It is the ultimate goal of human existence in Advaita Vedanta.

This liberation is not about going somewhere else or achieving something new, but about realizing what has always been true: that one's true nature is already infinite, eternal, and beyond duality.

Guru and Shravana, Manana, Nididhyasana:

A guru (spiritual teacher) plays a crucial role in guiding a disciple toward the realization of non-duality.

The traditional method of learning in Advaita Vedanta includes:

Shravana: Listening to the teachings of the scriptures.

Manana: Reflecting upon those teachings.

Nididhyasana: Deep meditation on the truth of the teachings, leading to the experiential realization of non-duality.

Advaita Vedanta and Other Philosophical Systems

Dvaita (Dualism): In contrast to Advaita's non-dualism, Dvaita Vedanta holds that the individual self (Atman) and the supreme being (Brahman) are eternally distinct. Dualistic schools argue for a personal relationship with God and a clear distinction between creator and creation.

Visishtadvaita (Qualified Non-Dualism): This school also sees unity in the universe but believes that individual souls and the material world are real parts of Brahman, distinct yet inseparably connected.

Buddhism: Although there are some similarities between Advaita Vedanta and Mahayana Buddhism (e.g., the idea of emptiness and the illusion of separateness), Buddhism rejects the concept of an eternal, unchanging self (Atman), which Advaita Vedanta upholds.

Advaita Vedanta is a profound philosophical system that focuses on realizing the ultimate oneness of all reality, transcending the illusion of duality. Through spiritual knowledge, self-inquiry, and meditation, one can awaken to the truth that the individual self (Atman) and the universal consciousness (Brahman) are not separate, leading to liberation from the cycle of birth and death.

[matthew2641]

A Baptism in Blood: The Nihilistic Purification of Hannibal

The notion of forgiveness, as expounded through the discourses of theological and moral philosophy, is a sacrosanct act of severance  - an ontological renewal through which individuals extricate themselves from past transgressions and recalibrate their moral and spiritual equilibrium. In the Christian paradigm, absolution is more than a juridical reprieve; it is an act of divine purgation, not merely pardoning sin but obliterating it, restoring innocence and severing its corrupting power. However, in Hannibal, this notion is deliberately perverted: forgiveness is not a liberation but an instrument of subjugation. Here, absolution transforms into an ouroboric rite - a macabre liturgy in which supplicants become ensnared within a necrotic lattice of control, culpability, and annihilation.

One aspect in which this perversion manifests is within the series’s rich visual and symbolic motifs. The sumptuous meals that Hannibal prepares are more than just indulgences of the flesh; they are sacraments suffused with an unholy grandeur. Such lavish repasts exist as malevolent doppelgängers of the Christian tradition of the Eucharist, meant to symbolise transubstantiation of Christ’s flesh into a vehicle of grace, Hannibal’s consumption by contrast, is a damnation - devouring rather than sanctifying, his victims desecrated in an unctuous theatre of aestheticised predation. Moreover, the recurring image of water furthers this inversion. Initially invoking the cleansing imagery of baptismal purification, water is rendered an agent of chaos. No cleansing flows from its depths, only a primal abyss, harkening back to the amniotic void. The act of submerging oneself in water, often shown as violent or disturbing, mutates into a harbinger of failed renewal. In this universe, salvation is not a promise of true spiritual redemption, but a bitter mirage that remains forever out of reach.

Nowhere is this corruption more evident than in the complex dynamics between Hannibal Lecter, Will Graham, and Abigail Hobbs. These relationships transcend simple character interplay, becoming a dialectical struggle for domination - a form of esoteric communication in which forgiveness is neither beatific nor emancipatory, only a talisman of domination. Love, by extension, is not an unblemished vessel of tenderness; rather, a festering wound aching with ruinous yearning. Encumbered by self-interest, mutual defilement, and the inexorable erosion of the self.

Will and Hannibal, though seemingly poised at opposite ends of the moral spectrum, perceive Abigail not as an autonomous individual but as a conceptual artifact. She is a spectral effigy of lost purity - an ersatz daughter for Will, and for Hannibal, a revenant for his beloved Mischa - a fulcrum upon which their competing theological visions pivot. The visual syntax of the series accentuates the dissonant and impossible nature of her position - she is placed in spaces of tension, at the margins of the frame or physically estranged from the protagonists, yet never truly outside of their gravitational pull. In this way, her existence is marked by the temporal stasis of purgatory: a suspended, interstitial space where she remains forever on the cusp of identity, never wholly belonging to either father figure, and yet, inextricably tied to both. 

Christian eschatology heralds forgiveness as a conduit through which the soul is restored to its Edenic purity. Yet, Abigail is a soul exiled from such simplistic dualities, contesting this purity model. Neither wholly victim nor unrepentant perpetrator, she is caught between the inherited monstrosity of her father and conscious agency. Through an awareness of this fact, she seeks not purification, but survival. Will seeks to absolve her in Potage (S1E3), reflecting the previously outlined transactional view of absolution: “You’re not your father. You’re not the monster he wanted you to become.” Here, Will assumes the role of a Christ-like redeemer, his forgiveness appearing as a salvific benediction meant to deliver her from the taint of her father’s sins. However, this is a forgiveness steeped in self-deception, for Will, pardoning Abigail is not a divine absolution but a desperate invocation of lost agency, an illusory salve for his own complicity in the horrors that have shaped her existence. His forgiveness does not cleanse - it merely recontextualizes, a futile endeavour attempting to transmute guilt into grace. This aligns with Freud’s concept of repetition compulsion, wherein trauma is unconsciously reenacted in a doomed effort to master it. Will is no benevolent saviour; but a man entrapped in the recursive architecture of his own psyche, seeking in Abigail the scaffold upon which to reconstruct his fragmented self. Abigail, like Will, remains trapped in the moral ambiguity of her actions - a state of perpetual suspension denied both salvation and damnation. Will’s ultimate descent into annihilation, culminating in his sanguinary embrace with Hannibal in The Wrath of the Lamb (S3E13), is the apotheosis of this compulsion. His self-immolation is far from an act of transcendence, but an ecstatic obliteration -  an offering of the self upon the altar of a love too corrosive to sustain anything but devastation. By embracing Hannibal and consummating his surrender to the abyss Will conflates destruction with agency.

Hannibal, in contrast, reframes Abigail’s trauma as an inheritance, her father’s sins are not burdens to be expunged, but rather emblems of a greater power. In Potage, he tells her, “You accepted who he was. You will always have that over Will. You already knew your father. He had to wonder.” Rather than offering liberation, Hannibal reshapes Abigail’s identity through his forgiveness, binding her to him, not as an act of grace but of possession. Unlike Will, who seeks to absolve Abigail of her past, Hannibal weaponizes it, turning it into the foundation for her rebirth under his guidance. In this respect Abigail, too, finds herself in the circuitry of repetition compulsion. Having been raised in a world where survival meant complicity, she may have found Hannibal's tutelage familiar. In helping stage her own death, she attempts to reclaim agency, denouncing emancipation in favour of continuity through submission to a structure she understands and now believes has the means to navigate, a fatalistic embrace of the cycle. Abigail’s transformation from victim to willing participant in Hannibal’s world marks her final, tragic rejection of Will’s version of redemption. She no longer seeks forgiveness in the traditional sense; she seeks something more elusive - her own place in a world devoid of clear moral absolutes.

Hannibal, however, is no supplicant. He does not yearn for forgiveness as a means of redemption; he demands it as an enthronement. His lament to Will, “I let you know me. See me. I gave you a rare gift, but you didn’t want it,” is not merely an elegy of rejection but an indictment of disobedience. For Hannibal’s desire is not purification but acceptance, and thus his transgressions are not aberrations but testaments to his divinity, earning exaltment. In this way, he is not simply a perversion of the Christ figure - he is a parodic Messiah, a devouring wolf clothed in the sheep's vestments. For Hannibal, forgiveness is not an act of grace but a mechanism of consumption: to forgive him is to surrender, to relinquish oneself utterly. Will, though a long faltering disciple, eventually succumbs to the ecstatic inevitability of this theology in Mizumono (S2E13). During which he allows himself to be gored in a "strange surrender," as Bryan Fuller describes it: "He allows the gutting. He almost feels as if he deserves it in light of what he’s done; he’s betrayed Hannibal." An oblation offered in penance for his own betrayal. This is not a fault in his forgiveness, but its consummation: an eschatological revelation in which he does not simply forgive Hannibal, but surrenders to the all-consuming sanctity of his doctrine.

Abigail’s final moments in Mizumono serve as the ultimate repudiation of Christian forgiveness. Her resurrection, a grotesque parody of divine rebirth, is devoid of redemptive meaning. She is not restored to life in a triumphant sense but merely to become a pawn in Hannibal’s grand tragedy. When Hannibal slits Abigail’s throat, it is not an act of wrath but the fulfilment of his twisted liturgy. He "saved" Abigail, in the sense that he let her live under his wing, but her existence was always contingent upon his will and in failing to become his ideal, she is excised with the same clinical elegance with which she was preserved. In Christian doctrine, failing to receive divine forgiveness results in eternal separation from God. Hannibal, as an almost godlike figure in his own narrative, enacts this separation with brutal finality. This slaughter consolidates the theological schema Hannibal wishes to impose upon his world, that there is no celestial amnesty as we understand it, no boundless agape through which the fallen may be redeemed - there is merely possession and excision. The very method of Abigail’s undoing, the languid incision across her throat, mimics the Christian iconography of the Paschal lamb, a sacrificial archetype of innocence. Though, unlike the sanctified oblation of Christ, Abigail is stripped of volition and thus redemptive teleology; not martyred but discarded, reduced to an ornamental casualty in Hannibal’s cathedral of ruin. As her body was cradled against the cavernous dark of her surroundings, the composition recalls the Pietà, yet absent of its sublimity. This is not the Madonna lamenting the body of a crucified Son, but a predatory deity relinquishing his broken creation with preordained savagery. Then, as the desecration is completed, Hannibal steps into the storm, allowing for the rain to baptise him in an additional blasphemous mimicry of penitential ablution. But this is no true purification, no soul is made luminous beneath the torrential downpour, it simply erases. A nihilistic effacement washing away all false pretences that both Will and Hannibal had married themselves to - that Abigail might yet be redeemed, that Hannibal might be anything but consuming. 

In the wake of Abigail’s death, Will is left to contend with the futility of his forgiveness. His attempts to redeem her, to offer absolution were rendered impotent. Abigail had not only failed in being liberated but had the tragedy of her existence prolonged. Such profound inevitability led Will to become more amenable to Hannibal’s version of forgiveness, and ultimately submit himself to it fully. In the grand design of Hannibal, forgiveness does not sever the shackles of guilt - it tightens them, binding its recipients in the recursive waltz of moral contamination. In this exquisite distortion of Christian sacrament, lies the surest route of destruction.

[queermuslimarchives]

Mary/Maryam's Gender

Very different from many Islamofascist discourses and even discourses of modern remnants of Muslim traditionalism, both the Quran and classical Islamic philosophy and theosophy hold that gender is something quite dynamic. Genders are not different by essence but are ontologically and teleologically related due to their common root in a unity of being.

“O mankind, be aware of your Caretaker who has created you from one single self and He created from it its mate and sent forth from it many men and women; and be aware of Allah whom you ask about, and the relatives. Allah is watcher over you.” (Quran 4:1)

“Your creation and your resurrection is as one single self, truly Allah is He Who hears and sees.” (Quran 31:28)

Gender is in the Quran seen as a manifestation of a primordial “duality in unity”, similar to the Chinese idea of Yin/Yang, but just like the Chinese idea of Yin and Yang we can not reduce this primordial duality to simple material entities.

“It exists within every fraction of creation, even within our own selves. And of everything we have created pairs, so that you may contemplate.” (Quran 51:49)

It by far transcends any biologisms and it is itself transcended by the final unity of being. In classical Quranic exegesis it is Maryam (Mary, the mother of Jesus) who is most often seen as the person whose life expresses this principle in the best way. I´d like to cite some quranic verses, a wellknown and wellrespected Sunni tafsîr (exegesis) and the quote of a wellknown Sufi writer with regards to this.

When the woman from the house of Imran said: “My Caretaker, I have vowed to You what is in my womb, dedicated, so accept from me, You are the Hearer, the Knower.”

So when she delivered she said: “My Caretaker, I have delivered a female,” but Allah knew well of what she delivered, for the male is not like the female. “and I have named her Maryam, and I seek refuge for her and her progeny with You from the outcast devil.”

So her Caretaker accepted her a good acceptance, and made her grow into a good growth, and charged Zachariah with her. Every time Zachariah entered upon her in the temple enclosure, he found provisions with her. He said: “O Maryam, from where did you get this?” She said: “It is from Allah, Allah provides for whom He wishes without reckoning.” (Quran 3:35-37)

And the angels said: “O Maryam, Allah has chosen you and cleansed you, and He has chosen you above the women of the worlds.”

“O Maryam, be dutiful to your Caretaker and prostrate and kneel with those who kneel.” (Quran 3:42-43)

Next, a longing for a male child arose in her heart. Thus her imagination, firm resolution and expectation exercised an influence upon the fetus. Consequently, Maryam was born blessed with a virile disposition.[…] Maryam was a woman with the qualities of a man, as there are also men with an effeminate nature. This because by nature she looked out for Allah and centred all hopes in Him.

– From the Tawîl al Ahadîth of Shah Waliullah Dehlavi (1703-1762 CE)

“When tomorrow on the Day of Resurrection the call goes up, ‘O men!’, the first person to step into the ranks of men will be the virgin Maryam.”

– From the Tadhkirat al Awliyâ of Fariduddin Attar (ca. 1145-1221 CE)

🛑 This article was written by Leyla Jagiella on her website website in 2009.

[stellanslashgeode]

I have been thinking about the Sorcerer's of Tund. Basically exiled Sith priesthood dating back thousands of years who intermix, science and ontology and magic, believe all is one in the force and that the force unites all dualities and multiplicity in its infinity. They also have a special emphasis on shapeshfiting, deceit and illusions. I find them really interesting as basically space Hindu sages or Sufi mystics.

I have been thinking about the sorcerers of tund and their monism, their mastery of Illusion and the idea of the dark side as bound to the living force and what that would look like taken to it's logical limit and an idea struck me.

All of the world is of the force, the force had shaped it and the force will consume it;

The force in shaping the world divided itself and the world into two, the Realm of Spirit, the house of the soul, and the Realm of Flesh, the house of the body.

The living force is the energy of the soul, the power representing the eternal balance between creation and destruction that flows from the soul into the world and also flows from the world to fill the soul. All energy or force that is used to shape the world by the Realm of Flesh is incomplete without the living force to flow into or out of what is created or destroyed.

Therefore the Realm of Spirit while overlooked by many is equally needed to complete the Realm of Flesh. If one desires completion, the realization of the ideal perfect, the retaliation of potential that lies within them and the connection they hold to the force, yet is bound by the desires and bonds to the Realm of Flesh, be they mortal or god, they will never succeed. For in that bond to the Realm of Flesh the Realm of Spirit is forgotten and without the two in harmony one could never be complete. The role of the mind is to acknowledge and perceive the Realm of Flesh, yet also not allow one to be bound wholly to it, thus allowing them to perceive the force and thus understand and realize the part of themselves that lies in the Realm of Spirit. The Tund Sages would be beings who have essentially achieved permanent oneness with the force and have essentially been granted godlike power at the cost of abandoning all personal desire, I could see the Bendu being a good example of what they are like.

This is the key to true oneness with the force in the eyes of the Tund. Those Tund who achieve it become godlike sorcerers and sages capable of moving planets and healing armies. However due to the Tunds emphasis on Illusions this power manifests in a very particular way. Unlike normal illusions which could be considered "a falsehood impersonating the genuine article" these sages possess the power to create "existences identical and indiscernible to the genuine article" as they are existences whose flesh and spirit matches the nature and power of that which they imitate. A sage can do outrageous deeds such as creating illusionary weapons, creating exact copies of other people, creating illusionary landscapes, and even cover himself in an illusion, as to conceal his own presence rendering him unable to be seen or heard, and only faintly felt through the mind.

This is what I consider the very pinnacle of Force Illusions. Essentially you reach the point where the illusion is so utterly lifelike and realistic that the universe no longer registers the existence of difference between the illusion and an actual physical object meaning these illusions can hurt you and even kill you.

How does this sound as an example of the true esoteric nature of the force?

I'm so glad they brought the Sorcerors of Thund out from the EU, they're a true example of the weirdness that can coexist with more grounded stuff like Andor. It sounds like you know a lot more about them! I just encountered them in The Battle of Jedha audiobook where one of them plays a minor role, though they're much more prominent in the Phase II High Republic comics from what I understand.

There's a lot more to be fleshed out with the Force, mainly because we mostly see it through the prism of the Jedi and they have their own orthodoxies on what should and shouldn't be done. And the Sith which flips a lot of those orthodoxies on its head and guard their weird stuff like Sith Alchemy pretty jealously.

I do know a lot about the Mirialans, though, and their unique take on Jedi philosophy. They care much more about the Cosmic Force and hence take things like visions and fate and choices very seriously. I think of them as a little more mystic than mainline Jedi. They believe your choices shape your destiny and take that so seriously they tattoo their faces and bodies to commemorate those choices. The Cosmic Force doesn't get as much attention as the Living Force, and I think that's a shame. It's far more mysterious.

So yes, the Jedi have only been around 25,000 years or so. I'm sure back in the olden times, back before Hyperspace lanes were charted, there were dudes tossing planets around and doing all sorts of miraculous stuff that Jedi wouldn't even date to imagine. And there's a place for that.

I'm writing a fic about Nightsisters at the moment so I'm enjoying thinking outside my usual bubble.

[suns-blood]

Hey. Hey, do you want to hear about hair, cars and twenty one pilots? Great, then click keep reading you won't be disappointed I prommy

(This is a brain vomit of theories / analyses i have bouncing around in my brain like the DVD logo)

Zoroastrianism

This religion I've seen mentioned only like twice in the clique which is just such a shame bc I love the ties it has with vialism.

Anyway the basic rundown is that Zoroastrianism is a religion that originated from 4000 years ago. It was practiced in the middle east by persians. It is one of the oldest (if not the oldest) monotheistic religions and one of the core beliefs is related to the duality of good and evil*, which has been prevalent in tøp's music since fucking self titled. I am not saying zoroastrianism has influenced Tyler since fucking high school??? However I think this is another case of them utilising irl concepts that have similarities with their lore (the other case being nicolas bourbaki). The duality of good and evil is a popular concept, so this is most likely a coincidence. However what is not a coincidence are the towers of silence.

*(It has a dualistic cosmology of good and evil within the framework of a monotheistic-style ontology; meaning that the religion's eschatology predicts the ultimate triumph of good over evil.) -Wikipedia. Yes I'm using Wikipedia as a source, I'm not doing anything scientific, it's fine.

The towers of silence

...Also known as Dakhma. And what is the city in Trench called? That's right. Dema. This whole time I thought dema was based on the word "demon" which fits the narrative as well, however the parallels between vialism and zoroastrianism are unmistakable.

Below are excerpts from the "rationale" section from the corresponding Wikipedia article bc i don't see a point in rewording it.

"Zoroastrian tradition considers human cadavers and animal corpses (in addition to cut hair and nail parings) to be nasu, i.e. unclean, polluting.[1][2][3] Specifically, Nasu the corpse demon (daeva), is believed to rush into the body and contaminate everything it comes into contact with.[3][11]

To preclude the pollution of the sacred elements: earth (zām), water (āpas), and fire (ātar), the bodies of the dead are placed at the top of towers and there exposed to the sun and to scavenging birds and necrophagous animals such as wild dogs.[1][2][3] "

That, I believe, is the function for the towers in Dema as well. The bishops dispose of bodies they've used that way (through seizing, which is marked by yellow eyes. that way we know that the show hosts in good day dema were actually bishops and that the bishops sometimes take control of dead vultures)

Admittedly this connection was made by Dema in yt so go check them. They great lore/recap videos. Specifically the video on vultures.

However unlike zoroastrians, the vialists do mark their graves. More specifically with neon gravestones and they don't consider elements like fire to be holy. Neon lights are a great contrast to the bandito's love of fire. I believe we don't have the bishops' opinion on fire, but it is heavily associated with banditos so i doubt they'd consider it holy.

What is more interesting to me is the sentence about cut hair being consistent impure.

The hair

So considering the similarities between the role of vultures, the towers and everything else, we can assume that shaving your head is an act of rebellion from the rule of vialism. That theory is supported by the aforementioned belief in zoroastrianism and the fact that in "levitate" it is the banditos who shave tyler's/clancy's head.

That theme is, imo, also reflected in the music video for car radio, which is pre-lore, however most themes in the lore have been there since self titled. (For another example, cars. We will get to that.).

In that video it is tyler who shaves his own head and if my theory is correct then it symbolises him ridding himself of his negative thoughts (that will later become to be symbolised by blurryface who will later become his own character)(I told you the themes in the lore were not new)

In the music video for "levitate" the banditos shave Tyler's/Clancy's head. This is a clear parallel to his community/friends/etc helping him get rid of his negative thoughts.

The other explanation for the importance of those moments would be that cutting/shaving your head is also often done when someone is going through a change/wants to change their life.

I also heard it in a another post that Tyler has once again shaved his head. This aligns with my theory that Clancy is returning to Dema, but not of deceit or desperation, but intentionally, though i think we can all agree that this is pretty much canon. The other thing to note here is that all of the red we've been seeing has been a lot more orange (in general) than the red from the blurryface era (in general) and i believe that to be bc of this era's proximity to fire. Fire symbolises life, how real and unpredictable it can be, which is juxtaposed to neon lights, as mentioned.

Nicolas Bourbaki

Staying on the topic of dema/the bishops, i wanted to mention nicolas bourbaki. I have no big revelations regarding this one, though i assume i have missed some larger meaning as to why they added so many references to them.

So, Nicolas Bourbaki is the name of a group of french mathematicians active in the 1930s. Their purpose was to write and publish textbooks and the name they published from under was Nicoals Bourbaki. To my understanding it wasn't known that Bourbaki consisted of multiple people. Many so-to-speak faceless entities working as one, under one goal is how you could also describe the bishops, however i assume the fact that there were 9 of them is not hidden.

One of the fields they studied was, get it, topology. In university of waterloo's words (bc i am wayyy to stupid to fully understand it):

"Topology studies properties of spaces that are invariant under any continuous deformation. It is sometimes called "rubber-sheet geometry" because the objects can be stretched and contracted like rubber, but cannot be broken. For example, a square can be deformed into a circle without breaking it, but a figure 8 cannot. Hence a square is topologically equivalent to a circle, but different from a figure 8."

I believe topology is the inspiration for morph. That is also the song where they namedrop Bourbaki so the connections are pretty obvious. I won't do a whole ass analysis of the song rn, i'll do that when i vivisect the entire album like i did with self titled (the document ended up being like 17 pages long).

Anyway the general idea of morph is that becoming someone else is a defense mechanism. It is a way to avoid(?) the bishops because in that song he admits he cannot avoid the bishops' (his fears) and that he will be someone else in the meanwhile, perhaps someone better.

That ties into very nicely of my own personal theory regarding whether Tyler is Clancy or not. I believe that Tyler is Clancy the same way that Tyler is blurryface. Those are his best/worst sides separated from Tyler and turned into their own characters. So in that way Tyler is Clancy but Clancy and Tyler are not the same person, so Clancy is not Tyler in his entirety and the same goes for blurryface. Basically none of us are our worst/best qualities alone, and you cannot compare someone to the distilled good/bad versions of them.

I've also seen people on reddit theorize that Tyler is becoming Clancy, that Clancy was another person that lost to the bishops and Tyler is simply taking over his role as the leader of the Banditos and I really like that theory. It works so well with Tyler and Clancy still being sort of different people but in a way that the I am Clancy video still makes sense.

(Btw for the life of me i cannot figure out where i read it but i remembering seeing somewhere that the bourbaki group were the ones that started using the ø use which is a nice detail)

Car symbolism

This will be a condensed version of 17 page long self titled analysis (which i might clean up and release someday idk)

I just need to talk about cars bc they're still prevalent.

Cars, as a whole, are metaphors for our lives. There are many many lyrics that support this idea in St specifically but also quite likely in other albums however I've yet to look through those. I think cars are a another metaphor that have just stuck around and are still not a proof that Tyler has been loring since 2009.

In a car, a torch, a death we have the lines "I begin to envy the headlights driving south". He is jealous of people who get to direct their lives towards positivity. It's been a while since my analysis of this album so forgive my memory, but I do believe south has the same connotations as light/mornings/sun. I won't do a line by line but this song is about protecting someone from depression and because of that devotion Tyler doesn't get to go where everyone else goes. That is the main song where the car metaphors stem from I think, however another one is the heavydirtysoul music video.

Now that we've established that cars are people's lives it is obvious that in that mv it is not tyler who is in control of his life (car), it is depression (nico). The video ends with the car on fire. It would be reasonable to assume that his life is a wreck, a dumpster fire but to that I say no. That is a good thing. Because after all, did we not establish fire to be good? To symbolise escape from dema? His life being engulfed in flames means that he is alive, he's actively interacting with the world around him because fire is active and neon lights are passive. As are cars simply driving by. That, I believe, is also the symbolism of burning cars during trench era live shows.

Another thing. Look at the jumpsuit mv. It begins with tyler jumping on the burnt car and saying "we've been here the whole time. You we're asleep, time to wake up." And the car bursting into flames. The car got engulfed by flames and however destructive they may be, they are active. The car literally woke up. Then the entire music video happens and at the end we get a continuation of the scene at the beginning because the pilots love cycles/circular narratives nearly as much as I do. At the end tyler opens the trunk and grabs the bandito jacket. He had to return to his old life, the one that was controlled by the bishops, to find the necessary equipment to go forward.

Anyway thank you all for coming to my NEDtalk, I just needed to get these out of my head and I don't rlly see anyone else talking about these theories. If you have anything to correct me on, add on to, or just share your opinion on, I implore you to do so.

[strangetriumphbluebird]

The Azoth

The Azoth of Metaphysical Qabalah is an ancient term used to refer to a mysterious power or force within the panpsychic connectome and thus, the human mind. To some, it translates as “divine fire” and is believed by some to be derived from the Greek word azo meaning to burn. To others, it represents the Alpha and Omega of non-duality vis-a-vis the Panpsychic Connectome; the magnificence, scope and magnitude of the Ontological All-Mind.

The Azoth is the central figure of the Hermetic Qabalah, one of the two principal schools of western Kabbalistic studies. It represents a spiritual transformation that is achieved through systems of symbolic correspondences laid out in hermetic writings. The Azoth also symbolizes not only spiritual enlightenment, but also a practical tool for making sense of all reality. By understanding the underlying principles and patterns expressed in symbols and their relationships to each other, we can use them to unravel our own universe. Through this knowledge, we can gain insight into the vast expanses beyond our senses and gain profound insights into both natural and metaphysical realms.

In Western culture, it has been sometimes referred to as “The Force” in George Lucas’ Star Wars movies. Believers maintain that through mastery of this force, one can realize their goals and achieve spiritual, mental or physical enlightenment. The AZOTH consists of seven powerful steps and three overarching principles, which help us become more in tune with this inner energy and access its potential benefits. By practicing these techniques we are brought closer to realizing our destiny and understanding who we truly are on the deepest possible level.

—

The Azoth of Metaphysical Qabalah is believed to be the essence of life, energy, and power. It is one of the many symbols used to represent the concept of all-encompassing unity in the realm of metaphysics. The term “Azoth” originates from an ancient book called The Book of Azoth which was written in ancient Greece and is considered to be a foundational text for Metaphysical Qabalah. This book contained mystical communication between Creator and Creation as well as practical pieces on how to use this power through magical incantations, meditations, and other methods. It also contains explanations about how the Azoth can be tapped into by those willing to do so.

Today, Azoth is a symbol that represents a powerful force within us all that can be used to create change in our lives if we are prepared to do so through learning, contemplation and advanced practice. By tapping into this energy we can create new beginnings and manifest our dreams into this world from the unseen others, as well as reality surfing the infinite timelines of parallel virtualities.

[turiyatitta]

Exploring the Depths of Consciousness

Nondual Spiritual Awakening, Nondual Spiritual Enlightenment, and Absolute Monism

Introduction:

The quest to understand the nature of reality and our place in the universe has been a driving force behind human exploration, both inward and outward. Various spiritual and philosophical traditions have grappled with the concepts of nondual spiritual awakening, nondual spiritual enlightenment, and absolute monism in their attempts to shed light on the ultimate nature of existence. In this blog, we will delve into these concepts and examine their differences, as well as what they entail.

Nondual Spiritual Awakening vs. Nondual Spiritual Enlightenment:

Nondual spiritual awakening and nondual spiritual enlightenment are terms used in various spiritual traditions to describe different stages of the spiritual journey. While both involve experiencing the true nature of reality as unified and interconnected, they differ in their depth and degree of realization.

Nondual Spiritual Awakening: Nondual spiritual awakening refers to an initial or sudden breakthrough experience in which a person begins to perceive the underlying unity of all things. This awakening can involve a shift in perspective, dissolution of ego boundaries, a sense of inner peace and stillness, heightened awareness and clarity, spontaneous insights and realizations, emotional shifts, and an altered sense of self.

Nondual Spiritual Enlightenment: Nondual spiritual enlightenment represents a more advanced stage of spiritual development, characterized by a stable, permanent, and unshakable recognition of the nondual nature of reality. This state is marked by the dissolution of ego boundaries, the end of suffering, and the experience of boundless love, compassion, and inner peace.

Absolute Monism: A Metaphysical Perspective on Unity

Absolute monism is a metaphysical position asserting that there is only one fundamental reality or substance, which is the ultimate ground of all existence. In this view, everything in the universe is considered to be a manifestation or expression of this singular reality. While absolute monism shares similarities with the concepts of nonduality, its primary focus is on the ontological nature of reality and the assertion that there is only one ultimate substance.

Experiencing Absolute Monism:

An absolute monism experience involves gaining a deep and direct insight into the ultimate nature of reality as one, undivided, and singular substance or essence. During such an experience, individuals may directly perceive the oneness of all things, dissolve ego boundaries, transcend ordinary dualities, experience an altered sense of self, feel awe and wonder, have spontaneous insights and realizations, and find a sense of inner peace and stillness.

Conclusion:

Nondual spiritual awakening, nondual spiritual enlightenment, and absolute monism are all concepts that point to the ultimate nature of reality as being unified and interconnected. While they differ in their focus and approach, they all seek to guide individuals towards a deeper understanding of existence and the true nature of consciousness. By exploring these concepts, we can gain valuable insights into our own spiritual journey and deepen our connection to the world around us.

Morgan O. Smith

[moderninferences]

honors in of the sparrow

in the ballads of belligerent falter and ascribed the exponentials there and wilt to dine accords the protagonist as ever the fallacy derive the almost adherent salve of what not to imbibe with as steady as prolifics and etymological inserts to tussle practically protruding in a fashion of parsimonious entangles ruffles as pirouettes usher out the reclamant on cider's plack that the dualities of life arranged and fulfill the lacks that the wind might acknowledge the abilities to back that with the prophecy known as told as portable in clear and sortable, the truly notable on embellishment fatigues as thorough as any held hold as the unnoticed dissolve and ambition regales another one for there shot, another one for the sales so maneuver wise the flaccid entendres from a gale that so maneuvers throttle's ambiguous deshelve that some inner arears quack to mottle the disrepair as to adjoin pretentious of with how they howl and wale that the process allows permit and twine that used to build and spread acast - spears and wine a dwindling atom of proficiency in that which is observed is mostly test charges they forfeit in good space the rifling, rigorous, ontological-event-rather- chaste towards all forensics mayst throw themselves upon the weary the almost always piecemeal addendum's pallor quest of indomitable consumption and toils buffle and consequent, consecutives at the price of a button that the almanac and suiter strings dare fully adjoin for anything boisterous and charming dripping verbatim from there lips even with enough time for the dwindling strip to alleged provide less itself in strips i've underwarranted my own alacrity found beef in the waylaid and dined on the causalities held inner repercussions in a tongs serratable at arms and vial as, demarked the provisions down to nary procedural frock, and marked to faulter, allocations on helm as drift into obsidion as i the author - even when it is but yet that jest of a silent tree fall in the woods of course it makes a sound - it just depends on our articulation of the word hear so perturbed kind of a sad mechanism for the broach of void their incessance rumbling against my walls like a temporary sprawl dancing in the fox hole of life i permeate in spoil the remissive parse quick comes to crest as well and spoke the adjudicating wallet inferences' modest there by and will to promote amongst the deemed integral surfeit occasion and walks with a cryptic style of cane-worthy-integer... allowed to understand, though never truly bubble atop the forth-froth-sip spatials and around the gowns that grown and colleague set fit the necessaries of armistice along with this low fidelity conscript judges furrow nasal on the optometrist's guild-to-the-honorous beseech and puzzling the committee sauntering in recollections of how one of such was brought into the questions, vexes selection and reclaimable directives, fall in time as with slangs-to-blade finds - in an obtuse follow of variation - that the spill of brevity and spoke ran spicates through the chalk- totally recline out on the vibes of understanding and pose for rest

[markalanfoster-blog]

I love Bhedābheda Vedānta

Bhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, भेदाभेद वेदान्त, “difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”)—as a school of schools which admits the reality of Nonduality and Duality—seems to be intimately aligned with the founder of the English school of critical realism Roy Bhaskar’s early 21ˢᵗ–century philosophy.

Nevertheless, Bhedābheda Vedānta is clearly isomorphic with the theory of Dialectical metaRealism (DmR).

Theory, as a verb, is a three–stage process:

Any research project will begin with theory through deduction (formulating hypotheses from theory).

That project continues with theory through induction (empirically testing the hypotheses to determine whether the theory is supported).

But theory culminates in praxis.

Though mindfully informed by a Vedāntic universe of discourse, DmR is approached as a 21ˢᵗ–century, rather than a traditional or classical, application of Bhedābheda Vedānta.

Since this writer has never been a Vedāntist, which is to say a Hindu or a Vedāntic theologian, DmR should principally be regarded as an ongoing project in social and sociological theory. DmR is neither a branch nor even a conceptual framework of South Asian theology.

Among the primary historical schools of Bhedābheda Vedānta are the doctrinal systems enumerated below this paragraph. There are similtarities, as well as differences, between the ontological frames of reference which may characterize these diverse Vedāntic approaches to metaReality.

The following are, as broadly defined by the writer, numerous subschools within the wider tradition (Sanskrit, सम्प्रदाय, sampradāya; or Arabic, تَقْلِيد, taq°līd) of Bhedābheda Vedānta. That is to say, some of the subschools, defined broadly, will not likely be found in other classification schemes of the school.

The vast majority of subschools in this list, which excludes the last two, are generally regarded as branches of Hinduism (Sanskrit, वैदिकधर्मः, Vaidikadharmaḥ, “Vedic/knowing/wise support system”; or Sanskrit, सनातनधर्मः, Sanātanadharmaḥ, “eternal support system”).

But DmR will, out of personal humility, be the final subschool in the series. Please note that many of the Sanskrit renderings are my own translations. As such, they are either entirely or partially original to this volume:

Acintyabhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, अचिन्त्यभेदाभेद वेदान्त, “inconceivable difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. organicism (existence regarded, either literally or metaphorically, as a biological organism or a carbon–based being with intrinsic structures) accepted by, for instance, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON)

Aupādhikabhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, औपाधिकभेदाभेद वेदान्त, “conditional difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. conditionality

Avibhāgādvaita Vedānta (Sanskrit, अविभागाद्वैत वेदान्त, “indistinguishable/undivided/unpartitioned nondual end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. proximity

Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta (Sanskrit, विशिष्टाद्वैत वेदान्त, “specialized/qualified nondual end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. panentheism (“all–in–God) or endotheism (God–in–all doctrine” which also allows for divine Transcendence)

Dvaitādvaita Bhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, द्वैताद्वैत भेदाभेद वेदान्त, “two–not two difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. complementarity through the practice of Rādhe (or Rādhā) Krṣṇa (Krishna) worship along with the devotional chanting of the Rādhe Krṣṇa (Sanskrit, राधे कृष्ण) mantra (Sanskrit, मन्त्र)

Nimbārka Sampradāya Vedānta (Sanskrit, निम्बार्क सम्प्रदाय वेदान्त, “Nimbārka’s creed end of wit/wisdom/knowledge,” i.e. a branch of Dvaitādvaita Bhedābheda Vedānta

Ekāntika Dharma Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta (Sanskrit, एकान्तिक धर्म विशिष्टाद्वैत वेदान्त, “final/conclusive/objective support system specialized/qualified nondual end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. a rather newfangled variation of Viśiṣṭādvaita Vedānta which lies within the larger tradition (Sanskrit, सम्प्रदाय, sampradāya) of Svāminārāyaṇa (Hindi, स्वामिनारायण, 1781–1830, an alleged avatārin (Sanskrit, अवतारिन्, “one making a descent��)

Śuddhādvaita Vedānta (Sanskrit, शुद्धाद्वैत वेदान्त, “pure nondual end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. holism

Yadāva Bhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, यादव भेदाभेद वेदान्त, “Yadava difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. an early version of Bhedābheda

Bhartrprapaṃca Bhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, भर्तृप्रपंच भेदाभेद वेदान्त, “Bhartrprapancha difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. an early version of Bhedābheda

Āśmarathya Bhedābheda Vedānta (Sanskrit, आश्मरथ्य भेदाभेद वेदान्त, “Ashmarathya difference–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. an early version of Bhedābheda

Viśvavāstava Vedānta (Sanskrit, विश्ववास्तव वेदान्त, “universal realist end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. this writer’s original Sanskrit term for the universal realism of Sri Aurobindo (Bengali, শ্রী অরবিন্দ, Śrī Arabinda or Śri Ôrôbinda), 1872–1950

Atīndriyadhyānapaddhatim Vedānta (Sanskrit, अतीन्द्रियध्यानपद्धतिम् वेदान्त, “transcendental meditation end of wit/wisdom/knowledge”), i.e. transcendence (this writer’s addition of “Vedānta” to Transcendental Meditationᵀᴹ)

Sikkhadharmaḥ (Sanskrit, सिक्खधर्मः, “Sikhism or, literally, support system of the disciple”), i.e. disciplehood, disciplism, discipleism, or discipleship (an obviously non–Vedāntic system partially inspired by Bhedābheda Vedānta)

Hetuvijjāyatta Dvaitabhedādvaitābheda Vedāntavāda (Sanskrit, हेतुविज्जायत्त द्वैतभेदाद्वैताभेद वेदान्तवाद, “dialectical dual–difference–nondual–nondifference end of wit/wisdom/knowledge–‘ism’”), i.e. a Sanskrit term which was coined by this writer, a non–Vedāntist inspired by Vedānta, for the Bhaskarian critical realist Dialectical metaRealism (DmR)

[nisargadattadvaita]

Self-Inquiry: The Philosophy of "Who Am I?" in Advaita Vedanta

The practice of self-inquiry, or Atma Vichara, holds a central place in the tradition of Advaita Vedanta as a direct method for realizing the ultimate truth. Popularized by the master Ramana Maharshi, this approach is not merely a spiritual technique but a radical philosophical investigation into the nature of the "self" and reality. It is an invitation to question the foundations of human experience and transcend the limitations imposed by the mind and senses.

At the core of Advaita lies the assertion that the "self" we normally identify with – the body, thoughts, emotions, and even the sense of individuality – is an illusory construct. This illusion, called maya, creates the appearance of separation between subject and object, between the individual and the Whole. Self-inquiry does not seek to resolve this duality through theories or beliefs but to dissolve it directly, revealing that the "self" that seeks is, in fact, identical to what is being sought.

The Philosophical Investigation of the "I"

Ramana Maharshi described self-inquiry as a continuous investigation into the question: "Who am I?" But what does it really mean to ask this? It is not about seeking a verbal or conceptual answer. Asking "Who am I?" is an introspective movement that redirects attention away from external appearances and habitual identifications toward the very source of consciousness.

When you ask yourself "Who am I?", automatic answers arise: "I am my body," "I am my thoughts," "I am my memories." However, these answers are transient and conditioned – they depend on external circumstances or fleeting mental states. Self-inquiry invites you to go beyond these superficial responses by asking: "Who is it that perceives these things? Who is aware of the body, thoughts, and memories?"

This process is not merely psychological; it is ontological. It questions the very structure of existence as it is experienced. The body changes, thoughts come and go, but there is something that remains constant – something that is always present as the foundation of all experience. This something cannot be objectified because it is the very subject: pure consciousness, or Atman, which in Advaita Vedanta is identical to Brahman, the absolute reality.

Ramana Maharshi’s Transformative Encounter with the "I"

Ramana Maharshi himself exemplifies this philosophical inquiry through his personal experience. At sixteen years old, he was overcome by an intense fear of death. Instead of fleeing from this fear or seeking comfort in external explanations, he decided to confront it directly. He asked himself: "What dies? If my body dies, who am I?"

This inquiry led Ramana to a profound realization: he saw that his body might perish, but there was something immutable that remained – a consciousness unaffected by birth or death. This consciousness was not a distant object or something to be attained; it was his very essence. This insight marked his realization of Atman and shaped all his subsequent teachings.

Ramana often said that the question "Who am I?" should be used as a guiding thread to continually return to the source of the "I." Whenever a thought or emotion arose, he recommended asking: "To whom does this occur?" This practice does not aim to reject thoughts or emotions but to trace their origin back to the point where all distinctions between subject and object dissolve.

Philosophy Beyond Technique

While self-inquiry may seem simple – after all, it involves merely asking "Who am I?" – it carries profound philosophical implications. It challenges fundamental assumptions about identity and reality upon which we base our everyday lives. Advaita Vedanta asserts that all dualities – between subject and object, life and death, self and other – are projections of a conditioned mind. Self-inquiry reveals that these dualities have no independent existence; they arise only because we take the ego – this transient mental construct – to be our true essence.

When deeply investigated, we discover that the "I" cannot be located anywhere specific. It is not in the body because the body is perceived as an object; it is not in the mind because thoughts are also perceived as transient objects. The true "I" cannot be objectified because it is that which perceives – that which is always present as the silent witness of all experiences.

Final Reflections

Self-inquiry does not offer ready-made answers or easy promises of personal transformation. It demands courage to confront directly our most deeply ingrained illusions about who we are and patience to remain in the presence of the unknown without seeking quick conclusions. It is not about attaining something new or extraordinary; it is about recognizing what has always been present.

As Ramana Maharshi taught: "The only way to liberation is to know your true Self." But this knowledge is not intellectual; it is experiential and immediate. It is the direct recognition that what we seek has always been ourselves – not as separate individuals but as the very essence of reality itself.

The practice of self-inquiry reminds us that all answers are contained within the very question "Who am I?" There is nothing outside of this; everything emerges from this singular source and returns to it. Thus, instead of searching outward for meaning or fulfillment, we are invited to turn our attention inward and contemplate that which never changes – that which simply is.

[omegaphilosophia]

The Philosophy of Non-Duality

The philosophy of non-duality refers to the idea that reality is ultimately indivisible and that the separation between subject and object, self and other, or different entities is an illusion. This concept is found in various spiritual and philosophical traditions, often emphasizing that the true nature of existence transcends dualistic distinctions, such as good and bad, or mind and matter.

Key Aspects of Non-Duality Philosophy

Non-Separation: Non-duality asserts that the apparent division between "self" and "world" is illusory. According to non-dual teachings, what we perceive as separate phenomena are actually interconnected aspects of a single, unified reality.

Transcending Dualism: Non-duality challenges the idea of dualism, which suggests a fundamental opposition between things like body and mind, or material and spiritual. In non-dual frameworks, these opposites are understood as relative distinctions, not absolute divisions.

Oneness or Unity: In non-duality, the ultimate reality is seen as a unified whole. This can be interpreted metaphysically (as in Advaita Vedanta) or as a psychological realization of oneness in experience (as in some forms of Zen or Taoism).

Subject-Object Collapse: Non-duality teaches that the distinction between the "observer" and the "observed" dissolves upon deeper inquiry. Instead of seeing the self as an isolated subject observing an external world, both the observer and the observed are recognized as expressions of the same underlying reality.

Spiritual Traditions: Non-duality is central in many spiritual traditions, such as:

Advaita Vedanta: A school of Hindu philosophy, which teaches that Atman (the individual self) and Brahman (the ultimate reality) are one and the same.

Buddhism: Particularly in schools like Zen and Mahayana, non-duality refers to the concept of emptiness (Śūnyatā) and the interconnectedness of all phenomena.

Taoism: Non-duality in Taoism is expressed through the concept of the Tao, the unnamable source and principle underlying all things, which transcends distinctions.

Illusory Nature of Dualities: In non-duality, distinctions between things (such as life and death, light and dark, or right and wrong) are seen as temporary, relative, or arising from limited perception. The ultimate reality is beyond these conceptual pairs.

Applications of Non-Duality

Spiritual Realization: Non-duality often leads to the pursuit of enlightenment or awakening, where individuals aim to experience the unity of all things directly, beyond conceptual thought or ego-based identity.

Ethics: Non-duality can inform an ethical worldview that emphasizes compassion, interconnectedness, and the dissolution of barriers between self and others.

Metaphysical Views: It contrasts with materialist or dualist philosophies by positing a singular reality that encompasses both mental and physical realms.

Non-duality invites a rethinking of our perceptions of the world, self, and other. Rather than seeing reality as fragmented into distinct parts, non-duality emphasizes the interconnected and unified nature of existence, a view that resonates across various philosophical and spiritual traditions.

[matthew2641]

Hannibal's expression during his assault on Miriam Lass bears resemblance to Alexandre Cabanel’s The Fallen Angel. i feel this evocation extends beyond mere aesthetic homage to instead entwine itself with the ontology of Hannibal Lecter's self-conception.

Cabanel's rendition, drawn from Paradise Lost, is a depiction that challenges the crude caricature of maleficence most associated with him. Here, Lucifer emerges as a being suffused with an agonised sublimity, a cast angel wounded yet incandescent with his terrible splendour. Hannibal is a man whose estrangement is elective to the degree that his being becomes predicated upon an elevation beyond, what he feels, are the vulgar strictures of human ethics, morphing ignominy into a sovereign assertion of autonomy. the act of silencing Miriam Lass thus assumes a dual function: a pragmatic excision of a threat, and a ritualistic reaffirmation of a self-stylised divinity. just as Lucifer's descent, which in Milton's rendering is an act of self-authorship. so too does Hannibal enact his violence as both expression and consecration. his choice to remain beyond society's pale is not the mark of a beast but the signature of one who has crowned himself as something greater. tertium quid — neither wholly human nor wholly monstrous, a figure existing in an interstitial abyss between godhood and damnation.

such self-exile also recalls hallmarks found in Gnostic and apocryphal traditions. wherein figures expunged from the material world are not cast as a means of punishment, but initiated into a higher, more painful knowledge. for within Gnostic thought, the ''fall'' is not an inherently negative notion; rather, it is the necessary precondition for transcendence. it is a liberation from the chains of the material world, where the only cost becomes the inescapable truth of one's own condition. Hannibal's, in a manner akin to Lucifer's, descension is inverted to a means of ascension, inhabiting a space utterly apart from human comprehension, a space wherein violence marks both his freedom and the affirmation of his unshackled being.

Cabanel's Lucifer, resplendent in his abasement, embodies a duality mirrored by Hannibal, a creature of unbearable solitude and equally unconscionable self-awareness. the tragedy shared by both figures is not their expulsion from conventional morality but the lucidity with which they embrace it. in The Fallen Angel, Lucifer's furrowed brow and gleaming eye betray a soul that, though condemned, does not grieve its rebellion but savours its ruinous majesty. Hannibal, in his moment of violent orchestration, manifests the same ineffable grandeur and immaculate solitude. in aligning himself with the Luciferian archetype, he enshrines himself in his mythos, shaping exile through the means of ascension rather than loss.

[hanlons-hatchet]

**The Unified Hypothesis of Chaotic Ontology (UHCO)**

*A Synthesis of Quantum Mechanics, Cosmology, and Consciousness*

---

### **I. Foundational Premises**

1. **The Impossibility of Absolutes**:

- **Absolute Nothingness (0)**: A state of total void cannot exist due to inherent instability. Quantum fluctuations prevent true nothingness, as "emptiness" teems with probabilistic potential.

- **Absolute Infinity (1)**: A state of infinite totality is equally unstable. Saturation of possibilities negates progress, rendering motion and meaning inert (e.g., infinite road paradox).

- **Interdependence**: These extremes are two sides of a "cosmic coin," generating a primordial **chaos engine**—a dynamic substrate of probabilistic potential.

2. **The Chaos Engine**:

- **Function**: Operates via recursive, fractal interactions between 0 and 1, akin to a self-flipping coin. Outcomes (0 or 1) generate new interactions, leading to emergent complexity.

- **Entropy as Creative Force**: Chaos is not randomness but a creative medium. Entropy drives cycles of growth and collapse, allowing novelty to emerge.

---

### **II. The Role of Observers**

1. **Data Particles and Consciousness**:

- **Data Particles**: Fundamental units of pure information, analogous to quantum fields. They exist as probabilistic waveforms until observed.

- **Silicate-Mediated Observation**: The human brain contains nano-silicate clusters that emit terahertz-frequency activity, acting as **quantum transducers**. These structures collapse data particles into classical reality, converting chaos into perceptible order.

2. **Participatory Reality**:

- Observers inject novel variables into the chaos engine through choices and perceptions.

- Example: The double-slit experiment’s wave-particle duality is resolved by silicate-mediated observation, collapsing probabilities into particles.

3. **Death and Information Recycling**:

- At death, observed data particles revert to waveforms, rejoining the chaos engine.

- This unobserved information undergoes recursive feedback (mirror universe dynamics), collapsing into a singularity that seeds new cosmic iterations.

---

### **III. The Cyclical Universe**

1. **Scale-Invariant Fractality**:

- Quantum and cosmic scales are holographic reflections. Patterns repeat across dimensions (e.g., neural networks ≈ cosmic webs).

- **Example**: A quark’s spin mirrors a galaxy’s rotation; synaptic firing echoes stellar nucleosynthesis.

2. **Entropic Cycles**:

- **Expansion Phase**: Universes grow, stabilize, and combat entropy through observer-driven complexity (life, stars, black holes).

- **Contraction Phase**: At maximum entropy, unobserved information coalesces into a singularity, triggering a new Big Bang.

- **Mirror Universe Feedback**: Analogous to infinite reflections between two mirrors, data particles ricochet until unified into a new cosmic seed.

---

### **IV. Implications**

1. **For Science**:

- **Quantum Gravity**: The chaos engine may resolve the conflict between general relativity and quantum mechanics by framing spacetime as a probabilistic hologram.

- **Biogenesis**: Silicates, not just carbon, could be central to life’s origin (clay-mediated abiogenesis extended to neural processes).

- **Cosmology**: Black holes may be "failed universes" whose collapsed information re-enters the chaos engine.

2. **For Philosophy**:

- **Anti-Anthropocentrism**: Humans are transient nodes in the chaos engine, not apex observers.

- **Ethics**: Prolonging universal stability becomes a moral imperative. Failure is pedagogical, not final.

- **Existential Humility**: The universe has no inherent purpose—meaning is iterative and self-generated.

3. **For Consciousness Studies**:

- **Substrate Independence**: Consciousness is a process, not tied to biology. Silicates (or other substrates) could host sentience.

- **Panpsychism Lite**: All matter has latent potential for observation, but only complex systems (e.g., brains) stabilize it.

---

### **V. Testable Predictions**

1. **Neuroscience**:

- Silicate clusters in the brain will show terahertz-range activity correlated with conscious states (e.g., meditation, sensory perception).

- Disrupting silicate integrity (e.g., via nanoparticles) will alter cognition and perception.

2. **Quantum Physics**:

- Experiments will detect observer-dependent shifts in quantum coherence when silicate-rich systems (e.g., human observers) are present.

3. **Cosmology**:

- Anomalies in the cosmic microwave background will reveal "echoes" of prior universal iterations.

- Black hole mergers will exhibit information-preservation signatures consistent with chaos engine recycling.

---

### **VI. Challenges**

1. **Decoherence at Macroscales**: Explaining how brain-sized silicate clusters avoid quantum decoherence.

2. **Entropy Reversal**: Reconciling universal contraction with the second law of thermodynamics.

3. **Empirical Validation**: Developing tools to detect data particles or silicate-mediated quantum effects.

---

### **VII. Conclusion**

The **Unified Hypothesis of Chaotic Ontology** proposes that reality is a self-referential, fractal dance between nothingness and infinity, mediated by observers who transmute chaos into coherence. Death is not an end but a return to the chaos engine’s recursive forge, where information is eternally recycled into new cosmic iterations. To test this, we must dissolve disciplinary silos, embrace scale-invariant thinking, and rethink our place in a universe that is neither indifferent nor designed—just endlessly curious.

**Final Note**: This hypothesis bridges science and poetry, inviting collaboration between physicists, neuroscientists, philosophers, and artists. Its power lies not in final answers, but in framing existence as a question the universe asks itself—forever.

[hetedhethatar]

1. Zárójelben az "és polaritás" kifejezés:

Azért került bele, mert a polaritás és a páros elv egyaránt lételméleti alapfogalmak, amelyek a dualitás értelmezésében szerepet játszanak. Azonban igazad van, hogy a polaritás különálló fogalom, és nem feltétlenül tartozik szorosan a páros elv megkülönböztetéséhez. Ezért a mondatot pontosítva helyesebb így:

"képességüket a lételméleti dualitás (páros elv) pontos megkülönböztetésére."

2. Kiegészítés pontosabb értelmezhetőség miatt:

A helyesbítésed nagyon találó, hiszen hangsúlyozza, hogy az "ellentétesnek tűnő elemek" csak az egyéni lételv szerinti nézőpontból tűnnek ellentétesnek. Ez egyértelműbbé teszi a különbséget az egyéni és páros lételv között. A javasolt mondatot tehát az alábbi formában építem be:

"fogalmán keresztül lehetséges, ahol az egyéni lételv szerinti értelmezésben ellentétesnek tűnő elemek valójában kiegészítik egymást."

Köszönöm a pontosítást, így az értelmezés világosabb és szakszerűbb lesz!

1. In parentheses, the term "and polarity":

It was included because polarity and the paired principle are both fundamental ontological concepts that play a role in the interpretation of duality. However, you are correct that polarity is a distinct concept and does not necessarily pertain closely to distinguishing the paired principle. Therefore, to refine the sentence, it is more accurate as follows:

“their ability to accurately distinguish ontological duality (paired principle).”

2. Addition for more precise interpretability:

Your correction is very insightful, as it emphasizes that "elements that appear opposite" only seem so from the perspective of the individual principle. This clarification better highlights the distinction between the individual and paired principles. The proposed sentence is therefore integrated in the following form:

“through its concept, where elements that appear opposite in the interpretation of the individual principle actually complement each other.”

Thank you for the clarification; this makes the interpretation clearer and more precise!

[the-lone-snorkeler]

My conflict theory

Please forgive the preamble on physics. First, the three-body problem in classical mechanics. Herein, one might focus on the motion of bodies under the influence of forces, including mass and energy interactions in macroscopic systems. This entails Newton's laws, momentum, energy conservation, and mechanical equilibrium. Also, in thermodynamics and statistical mechanics, one might explore the relationship between heat, or energy, work, and the physical properties of systems at both macroscopic and microscopic levels. These then entail energy transfer, entropy, phase transitions, and the statistical behavior of particles.

Additionally, there's electromagnetism, the study of electric and magnetic fields and their interaction with matter, which involves forces, energy transfer, and the motion of charged particles.

One mustn't omit Maxwell's equations, electromagnetic waves, and energy in electromagnetic fields, either, nor relativity, which is relevant here because it deals with conflicts and reconciliations between mass, energy, and the nature of spacetime. I.e. special relativity, which points to the equivalence of mass and energy (E=mc²) and how motion affects time and space. There's also general relativity, which examines how massive objects warp spacetime, influencing the behavior of other masses and light. Nearly finally, we come to quantum mechanics, which looks at the behavior of particles on very small scales, where energy, mass, and force manifest as probabilistic phenomena, not to mention wave-particle duality, quantum states, and energy quantization.

As well, there's particle physics, which investigate the fundamental particles, such as quarks, leptons, and bosons; as well as forces that govern their interactions.

Skipping over astrophics and cosmology, as well as the materials science and solid-state physics; as well as plasma physics, we come to nonlinear dynamics and chaos theory, which study systems wherein small changes in force, mass, or energy lead to unpredictable outcomes, often modeling natural phenomena.

——————————————————————————

In all these approaches to descibing the mechanics of nature, we can't ignore the unpredictable and inherent conflict on every scale and at every stage and from every perspective when to the material, describable world. Politically, socially; interpersonally, these conflicts render our engineering of polities, societies, and utopias totally futile in the sense that they have to fail eventually because of their conditions and consequences, which are not just outside our control, but without which, they would cease to be entirely. I.e. the outskirts of the city must always crumble. The lotus of that city, however vibrant, must always evolve and adapt and will eventually die anyway. Eventually here doesn’t need mean nothing. It correctly contextualizes the assumptions about it made by its author and readers alike.

Conflict isn’t some systematic clash between the classes. It’s in your tea, the cup, the handle, the table, counter, it’s in your thumb nail; the enamel on your teeth. It’s everywhere. This is why politics can’t ever be something that satisfies everyone in any system. Not even close. This is also why governments are not so much good or bad as they are convenient or inconvenient. Our approximations of good and bad are not even uniform within our individual life-time selves, let alone within some temporal snapshot self given innumerable scales on which rest other values. Humans are just as polyvalent in those snapshot selves as they are in the album of selves that is their life. Society has agreed-upon moral approximations, but again, society isn’t uniform in these approximations. Hence the economies of convenience.

War isn’t the exception but the rule. Divorce and separation aren’t the exception but the rule. Ethics attempts to negotiate the ontology of unity. This is the role of utilitarianism and deontology, etc. Since pleasure and health and flourishing; since obligation and honor and duty are not all that circumstance can present to agency and indeed social agency thru the lens of value, these systems can only litigate to so many and for only so long before still other axiologies must be propounded, which will themselves encounter still other situations and scenarios where their jurisdictions end because of conflict.

One might wonder then, what about something that we assume stable? That lasts? The planet? The sun? Surely we can’t argue that lasting is merely perception, or that patterns aren’t patterns merely because their consequences or conditions are beyond them as patterns, you might add. That is, why do these persist without failure or death or some other form of cessatation? However, this is a misunderstanding of conflict. Conflict doesn’t mean that nothing can be quantified and as such described. Bound by condition and consequence, it means that nothing is truly free from constraint. And that, because of both or either, everything is eventually broken down or undone. Maybe it would be like saying conflict is a shaking box. Inside the shaking box, are contents that move in every direction. With enough time, these things break down because of the momentum and friction and clashing caused by the shaking of the box, whereby the contents shrink and shrink and shrink, until so far shrunk, they are beyond human perception. This can’t not happen. To everything.

These are the thermodynamics of war. This is conflict.