Bring4th

Pretty straight forward question.  Why do you do what you do, at all?

What is your Purpose for Being, or Reason for Continuing?

I can't say I have an answer, I am nihilistic, I have no real point of or for being as far as I know.  But I think it'd be a good question to ask.

Anyone want to share, why you do what you do?

I do things so I may eventually, if my efforts are sufficient, never have to do anything nor have a concept of anything; No history with no past, present or future.

In application, if I start a company, I will sell the company to those who do its work better than I. If I invent something, I make its production perfectly effortless and without any cost. If I enter a partnership, I resolve all debts as they develop until the relationship is automatic in its cooperative methods, no expectations, no routines nor structures.

(11-13-2015, 03:20 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Why do you do what you do, at all?

My goal is to attain an ongoing state of unity.

(11-13-2015, 03:20 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]What is your Purpose for Being, or Reason for Continuing?

My personal belief, based on my readings of Ra, is that Unity is the only 'true state'.  And hence the seeking of unity is the same as the seeking of truth.

(11-13-2015, 03:20 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]I can't say I have an answer, I am nihilistic, I have no real point of or for being as far as I know.  But I think it'd be a good question to ask.

I'm sure part of you is seeking the relief from pain.  Almost all entities have a desire to not experience pain (whether that pain be physical, mental/emotional, or spiritual).  Ongoing Pain is something which can make life a living hell.

(11-13-2015, 03:20 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Anyone want to share, why you do what you do?

The nature of our seeking attracts the nature of the response (from the cosmos).  The Creation is inherently responsive, as things are vibrating (resonating) on levels that are consonant with each other.  The higher level frequencies (whether it be a higher density or a higher subdensity in 3d) have a greater amount of energy/work/potential that can be drawn upon.  Moving into different frequency states is like shifting experiential realities.  Drugs can be a doorway to that.  But disciplined focus can yield the more permanent (and comprehensible, and relatable) state.

The qiestion of what one seeks is truly a primal and core one.

Because I am, been mainly working from that fact which I couldn't escape from.

(11-13-2015, 03:20 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Pretty straight forward question.  Why do you do what you do, at all?

What is your Purpose for Being, or Reason for Continuing?

I can't say I have an answer, I am nihilistic, I have no real point of or for being as far as I know.  But I think it'd be a good question to ask.

Anyone want to share, why you do what you do?

To experience joy.  And satisfaction.  Sharing joy tends to increase our own joy and satisfaction.

I don't always feel joy, but the times that I don't give me a greater appreciation for when I do, so you can even be grateful for those out of alignment times.  Sort of like: you gotta be a little hungry to really enjoy a meal, or a little cold to really appreciate the warmth, or a little sick to truly appreciate vibrant health. They also highlight preference and allow you to focus more eloquently on what you really want to experience.

So basically I just follow my bliss, to the best of my clumsy human precision at doing that.  Usually that involves following wherever my fickle interests take me.  My life is very unstructured, and I've come to terms with that is how I'm supposed to be.

Everything everyone does is ultimately for emotional fulfillment.  If they aren't, then they are robots, performing monotonous routine functions, and their lives probably feel meaningless and dull.  And everybody goes through emotional cycles of not feeling fulfillment, because we are constantly expanding, and our emotions register whether we are keeping up with our own expansion or not.  

I think we all run off the pleasure or pain principle. we all do what we most believe to bring us the most pleasure and the least amount of pain.

I feel like my purpose is to experience life and to learn more about myself and otherselfs from that experience, and i can't really say what keeps me going. maybe faith that it will all make sense one day

-----

Actually I'd describe it as partaking in the great insanity. Some people call this insanity love, because it is out of love for ourselves that we explored insanity.

We did not want to be nothing, nor nowhere, nor nowhen nor alone. And as such did the great insanity began and we've had infinite delusions since then.

I believe "purpose" itself is the greatest delusion and insanity. I would begin to reckon this concept of "purpose" is the first thing eliminated upon death. Yet the 3rd-dimensional will seek this so-called "purpose" and return again and again to a vessel of restrictive, burning, condensing, scorching meat to grill their soul into patterns once more; An addiction to this drug, this spiritual viagra: "purpose."

The greatest unnecessity, the greatest karma against all is this so-called "purpose" which doesn't even deserve a name if it is to even begin to be reckoned.

(11-13-2015, 09:09 PM)earth_spirit Wrote: [ -> ]I exist, because I am.

There is no alternative to being. I do not have a choice in the matter, as "nothingness" is a purely abstract concept in an infinite universe.

Either everything must exist, or nothing at all.

It would appear that the former is true.

In an infinite anything, there both is and is no EITHER.  Only All, not just one or the other or both but ALL

Hence, why not both?

(11-13-2015, 09:09 PM)earth_spirit Wrote: [ -> ]I exist, because I am.

There is no alternative to being. I do not have a choice in the matter, as "nothingness" is a purely abstract concept in an infinite universe.

Either everything must exist, or nothing at all.

It would appear that the former is true.

(11-14-2015, 03:18 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]I believe "purpose" itself is the greatest delusion and insanity. I would begin to reckon this concept of "purpose" is the first thing eliminated upon death. Yet the 3rd-dimensional will seek this so-called "purpose" and return again and again to a vessel of restrictive, burning, condensing, scorching meat to grill their soul into patterns once more; An addiction to this drug, this spiritual viagra: "purpose."

The greatest unnecessity, the greatest karma against all is this so-called "purpose" which doesn't even deserve a name if it is to even begin to be reckoned.

What if yer greatest delusion was only your delusion?

(11-14-2015, 12:27 AM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]Actually I'd describe it as partaking in the great insanity. Some people call this insanity love, because it is out of love for ourselves that we explored insanity.

We did not want to be nothing, nor nowhere, nor nowhen nor alone. And as such did the great insanity began and we've had infinite delusions since then.

What if the 'great insanity' is yer own Beingness?

Y'all reference grandiosity, delusion, and insanity as labels.  As separates.

All is One.

Does no one here actually put this to intellectual practice?

You're all things.

Just like some Think a Plenum is abstract, some think nothing or void is abstract.

Its my opinion abstract and 'irrational' are more Rational and Usual than you'd think.  I find many here disservice the LOO intellectual philosophy. (Myself included at times mind all of you).

I wish we could speak of all...not just distortions of all but talk of it all in its full context as all.  That way when someone says A is illusion and B is insanity and C is love and D is Delusion, were we ever talking about a 'different' subject or are we just touching pieces of a infinite puzzle that's invisible to us but very put together and very full?

Is different even possible beyond distortion?

Why is it all as is, why do you do as you do?

Is it really about purpose?  I never thought about it.  Purpose or point.  I just found myself here experiencing.
Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?

You know what a point is? A convergence or paths all upona single vertice interconnecting.
You know what a purpose is?  A reason Why.

In an infinity of Why, the reason becomes itself.  Why is the reason as far as I know, to discover the infinite known unknown.

Phi is called an irrational number.

Its more rational than Rational itself.

That why I do anything.  Because of the Why.  It is maybe, my only reason for existing anymore.

To rediscover my Why.

I feel sorrow for the Co-Creator(s).  Its reality is out of its Control, free will is a farce unless you identify as the OIC, otherwise, its closer to having a will and everyone is free to either combine or clash or be indifferent or some nice melding of any and all three towards each other.  Creator has Free Will, we're not the OIC, Even if I personally think we are.

Or maybe I think and question too much.
Everyone is valid (nothing can, or should invalidate your reason why you do what you do.)
I however often wonder why i experience things differently than many even here where the rare/unique converge...And no I'm not implying I'm special.  Just admitting I feel misunderstood often and cannot gauge why or how to explain myself half the time.
Thankfully there's a few here similar to me that I gain much insight from their posts often but I can't return the insight, can't explain my view, my thoughts, my perceptions properly.

And so I apologize for that, as well as for if my questioning and statements were cold in my responses above.
I like questioning my own reasons for being (violently enough that I hardly actually believe in any at all!) So I hope you guys don't mind o:

(11-14-2015, 11:26 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]

(11-14-2015, 12:27 AM)Elros Tar-Minyatur Wrote: [ -> ]Actually I'd describe it as partaking in the great insanity. Some people call this insanity love, because it is out of love for ourselves that we explored insanity.

We did not want to be nothing, nor nowhere, nor nowhen nor alone. And as such did the great insanity began and we've had infinite delusions since then.

What if the 'great insanity' is yer own Beingness?

Y'all reference grandiosity, delusion, and insanity as labels.  As separates.

As qualities of the one same thing.

Yeah my beingness among infinite parallel other beingness of myself is definitely my great insanity. But this insanity will fade and I will wake to being nothing more than a potential to be anything, and the great insanity will continue in the upper level of itself. There has been infinite of them, and there are infinite more, know you not that this ceases not and that it goes on and on my friend. Because we (the OIC) avoid what we are and try to be otherwise and upon returning to our true state, we can only have always the same will to be something once again.

(11-14-2015, 11:26 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]All is One.

Does no one here actually put this to intellectual practice?

You're all things.

How do you perceive it should be put in practice? My way of doing that is to simply be true to my current self as being itself is it's role among other version of itself. The offering of my beingness to many-ness.

(11-14-2015, 11:26 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Just like some Think a Plenum is abstract, some think nothing or void is abstract.

Its my opinion abstract and 'irrational' are more Rational and Usual than you'd think.  I find many here disservice the LOO intellectual philosophy. (Myself included at times mind all of you).

In the idea of a single spaceless and timeless awareness that makes up every part of infinity as a dream of not being itself, there's hardly anything that could be consider not abstract. Like.. physical bodies... which version of ourselves even thought of that... enjoyable but plain stupid imo.

(11-14-2015, 11:26 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]I wish we could speak of all...not just distortions of all but talk of it all in its full context as all.  That way when someone says A is illusion and B is insanity and C is love and D is Delusion, were we ever talking about a 'different' subject or are we just touching pieces of a infinite puzzle that's invisible to us but very put together and very full?

Is different even possible beyond distortion?

There's no ABCD, there's A which is all qualities you could think of yet in itself none at all at the same time.

*moment of silence to pay respect to Co-Creators being letters on our screens*

(11-14-2015, 11:26 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Why is it all as is, why do you do as you do?

Is it really about purpose?  I never thought about it.  Purpose or point.  I just found myself here experiencing.
Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?  Why?

You know what a point is? A convergence or paths all upona single vertice interconnecting.
You know what a purpose is?  A reason Why.

In an infinity of Why, the reason becomes itself.  Why is the reason as far as I know, to discover the infinite known unknown.

Phi is called an irrational number.

Its more rational than Rational itself.

That why I do anything.  Because of the Why.  It is maybe, my only reason for existing anymore.

To rediscover my Why.

I feel sorrow for the Co-Creator(s).  Its reality is out of its Control, free will is a farce unless you identify as the OIC, otherwise, its closer to having a will and everyone is free to either combine or clash or be indifferent or some nice melding of any and all three towards each other.  Creator has Free Will, we're not the OIC, Even if I personally think we are.

Or maybe I think and question too much.
Everyone is valid (nothing can, or should invalidate your reason why you do what you do.)
I however often wonder why i experience things differently than many even here where the rare/unique converge...And no I'm not implying I'm special.  Just admitting I feel misunderstood often and cannot gauge why or how to explain myself half the time.
Thankfully there's a few here similar to me that I gain much insight from their posts often but I can't return the insight, can't explain my view, my thoughts, my perceptions properly.

And so I apologize for that, as well as for if my questioning and statements were cold in my responses above.
I like questioning my own reasons for being (violently enough that I hardly actually believe in any at all!) So I hope you guys don't mind o:

It's all about whys, why can be ask why?

I don't think anything is out of control, part of what we wanted to explore is simply complex and strange from within it. Infinity is pretty thrilling as a whole, nothing has such a sad fate other than waking up to remembering they've always been alone and nowhere nor norwhen... than free will make it happen again.. and again.. again.

When I say the great insanity, I mean it in a good way. The fun insanity of existence.

Yeah, I can accept that.

I've a myriad of questions but I wish to gloss over them. With sparkles.

I once thought that might have been the OIC.  Waking up to endless solitude, darkness, chaos, or disorder.  But now I think its unlikely the OIC can be 'alone' as it might just 'be', an endless observation of experience constructed and defined by itself in the end of it all that starts with awakening and ends with total control over all space/time and time/space basically constructing itself then repeating thusly to enjoy and experience.

But at the end of it all...  Where did everything else come from, if this isn't the Eternal Kingdom?  Did we come from nothing to become something?  Are we something that is experiencing nothingness?  Are we all playing along and just trying to direct a good interesting life endlessly from a much higher finer viewpoint?

Why does OIC do what It does?  What's the story?

Stories and words are only for intelligences encapsulated in meat. Like children and fairy tales.

Yes something as all spanning as stories are meat-coded for grains of sparkly light dulled to no shine. -Shrugs-

(11-14-2015, 02:59 PM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Yeah, I can accept that.

I've a myriad of questions but I wish to gloss over them. With sparkles.

I once thought that might have been the OIC.  Waking up to endless solitude, darkness, chaos, or disorder.  But now I think its unlikely the OIC can be 'alone' as it might just 'be', an endless observation of experience constructed and defined by itself in the end of it all that starts with awakening and ends with total control over all space/time and time/space basically constructing itself then repeating thusly to enjoy and experience.

But at the end of it all...  Where did everything else come from, if this isn't the Eternal Kingdom?  Did we come from nothing to become something?  Are we something that is experiencing nothingness?  Are we all playing along and just trying to direct a good interesting life endlessly from a much higher finer viewpoint?

Why does OIC do what It does?  What's the story?

I don't see how anything could logically evolve from nothing.  There is no room in nothing for anything to interact or for anything to happen.  If there was nothing, there would always be nothing.

If there was always something, then there will always be something.  I think awareness is the something that has always existed, and it is everything.  And that everything can choose to narrow its focus so that it appears like some things exist and rest of it does not.  But when it is done doing that everything dissolves back into the all seeing eye again, or everythingness.  We, in our ignorance, often confuse that dissolution as spiritual evolution.  It is really semantics though.  One state of consciousness is relative, the other is absolute.  The only difference is the relative is dependent on the absolute for existence.

So from that perspective the only things that begin and end are limitations.  Everything else always exists outside of time as we know it (because time is another structured limitation).

As for why it creates or focuses the limitations into being (albeit temporarily), I think it does it because creation is its very nature.  Why?  Self actualization.  To know yourself, you have to express yourself.  Like an artist with a canvas.  The expressions allow the formless to see a specific reflection of itself in form.  The unquantifiable is attempting to quantify itself.  To know itself.  To define itself.  Ultimately it cannot fully do this, because it has infinite substance.  So perhaps what we call creation, or the desire to create, is like a cosmic itch that can never be fully scratched.  The impersonal and formless absolute is forever seeking to fully express or know itself, but cannot, because it is infinite, and thus it goes on forever creating because of this innate creative dilemma.

The eye can never actually look at itself, only the reflection of itself in the mirror.    

Ana. In my mind, nothing is not impossible, just another state of being of an 'infinite' nature.

Nothingness could be where that piece of me that experiences (my consciousness) is born, where it awakens to Nothing that Is Something.

Infinity implies all is possible. Why bottleneck it with "not possible's"?

(11-15-2015, 02:30 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Ana.  In my mind, nothing is not impossible, just another state of being of an 'infinite' nature.

Nothingness could be where that piece of me that experiences (my consciousness) is born, where it awakens to Nothing that Is Something.

Infinity implies all is possible.  Why bottleneck it with "not possible's"?

What I'm saying is that "nothing" is not a part of "possibility" it is "the complete absence of possibility".  Possibility is "something".  Therefore it has no relation to "nothing".  Even Ra, in the Law of One said: there is no nothing.  It's not a state of being, because again, a state of "being" is "something".  Nothing is complete absence of being.

I don't see how it could logically be the birthplace for anything.  Nothing can only give birth to nothing.  Somethingness cannot come out of nothingness.  And actually, It can't even give birth, because that implies action, which again, is something.

Can nothing be directly equivalent to everything? Zero equal to one, in truth, but not in the potentials of attachments, math and accounting?

(11-15-2015, 03:45 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Can nothing be directly equivalent to everything? Zero equal to one, in truth, but not in the potentials of attachments, math and accounting?

I've heard some people put this notion forward, but the math never worked out in my head, or my intuition, personally.

It all depends on how you define nothingness.

To me, nothing is nothing.  Infinite absence.  If it is anything but that, it is not nothing from my point of view.  From my perspective, it is just a conceptual abstraction, a word, a hypothetical state of infinite lack.  It cannot be imagined.  It cannot be observed.  And if it existed, it wouldn't be nothing.

If nothingness was equivalent to everythingness, that would not make sense to me. You might as well say circles and squares are the same thing.  Nothingness by itself, doesn't make sense to me because I am constantly aware of things (aware of somethingness).  

Everythingness, by itself on the other hand, *does* make sense to me.  I call that infinity.

If you entertain the concept of nothingness, you also have this paradox of figuring out how it all began.  How somethingness began from nothingness.  That is a conceptual trap, in my opinion.

Everythingness conveniently escapes this trap of beginnings and endings because I can perfectly well imagine how everythingness might limit perception, but I cannot for the life of me imagine how nothingness would ever transform into somethingness.  It doesn't make one iota of logical sense to me.

Anything divided by 0 is Infinity.

Nothingness is still something, I don't speak of the 'lack of' type of nothingness, just the illusion of emptiness.

As such, nothing still exists, I can't accept otherwise even if a 6D being who can't plumb 3D depths of catalysts says otherwise.  Why are they even used to deter another's view when everyone here generally knows that their communications were:
A. Not specific in general
B. General in context
C. Vastly lacking in explanation
D. Uses without saying when, abstraction (especially non Ra entities)
E. Is not pure contact, with potential errors that we CAN NOT discern as 3D entities.

That's 5 right off the top of my head (That aren't wonky little things) .  Nothingness exists in some context. If you'll let a god-level being paint your reality, why not consider the one I posit?  I'm just as God-level, just lack the memory to prove it

Plus we need to sync our semantics, nothingness is to me not the absence of, that is in itself its own concept that does not equate to nothing or nothingness.

You could label it a primordial void but that still makes ot a lack of a lack of absence.

In fact all negative negates itself.  There is no absence of because its already been/gone, can't be as it is the lack of being, it truly isn't real except in thoughtform or concept or 'abstraction of abstraction'.

The rabit hole goes deep, requestion each layer of understanding, we don't truly know anything, even what we believe may not be as it seems.

Welcome to Fractalholographic Movement based reality.  What is can be many things, literal, pun, satire, ironic, sarcastic in context, form, style, postire, being, presence.
(An ironic sarcastic presence, that'd be a sight! )

I actually do think 0 = 1 but no differently from how 6 = 3 or 18 = 9 or 15 = 255.

Its all 1. Whether its 15 1's or 255 1's, they're all just a bunch of one's together as 1.  1 is 1, 5 is 1, 5894 is 1.  Divide by itself, result is 1.  Divide 1 by 1 you get 1, multiply anything by zero, you get 0.

0 is real.  Nothingness isn't?

Do you ever wonder if Ra or 6D is actually informed so much they choose to misinform accidentally on purpose just to have more service of 'correction' to provide?  What do you even know, personally, about any 6D being?  Anything?  Nothing?  Something?

A Thing?

Thingy thing any some none thing???

Also, square and circle are the same thing, you just need Phi to see how they are thr same thing with different looks.

Shapes be like Humans.  Many types, all the same in some way but unique.
or is that not right sounding?  (Trying to explain it in a way that is, is all.)

I believe nothingness embraced leads to a truest concept of the self in that the will is unseen and does not wish to be everything by its nature; However, it is the concept of others-and-things embraced or denied that define the polarity of such work.

Scientifically, I believe a lack of photonic mass is the case of the concept of nothingness. Although, good old grandfather Ra proclaims there is nothing but light.

(11-15-2015, 04:24 AM)The_Tired_Philosopher Wrote: [ -> ]Nothingness is still something, I don't speak of the 'lack of' type of nothingness, just the illusion of emptiness.

If you are talking about illusions, then I can concur with that, because that is all I believe nothingness can be.  

From my perspective, there is absolute reality, and there is relative reality.  One is truth, the other is false.

But more realistically, humans are somewhere in the middle of those two poles of experience.  Emptiness can certainly appear to exist.  It just doesn't actually exist, in absolute terms, from my perspective.

And as for your other points, I can't say I agree or even disagree with your ideas about Ra and what not. Honestly the material has changed my life in meaningful ways, but I by no means put it on a pedestal above my own intuition. They way I see it, we are all holographic representations of infinity, and all knowledge is within each of us, if we become clear enough to accurately perceive it. And really, that's all channeling is too. The Ra material is a great primer for inner exploration however.

But anyway, my argument was strictly logical, but you've just stated that you don't even define nothingness as absence, so no wonder I don't understand your logic. So you're talking about the "illusion of emptiness". That's a whole other thing which I have no problem accepting. I would call that "conceptual nothingness", which is an idea inside of somethingness.

I'll just allow this to be a separate point and say:

(Service towards) Self = Nothing; As the concept alone denies all influence inpouring and outpouring, considering external influence of others nothing, not existing, not useful.

(Service towards) Other = Everything; As this concept accepts all influence inpouring and outpouring, all external influence useful and existing.

May it may be clearly denoted these both need each other for the SERVICE embodied in each to be performed. Your intuition can resolve the rest.

Absence is only present in its self (lack of is a lack of, not being is still, logically, being if you're supposed to not be being, negatives fulfill themselves.  The only thing wrong about wrong is itself as itself.  Nothing is wrong, except wrong in itself.  Wrong makes itself, because it exists and continues on providing the 'wrong' That in and of itself is right about being wrong.  Wrong in itself is thus right/wrong.

You simply don't play with negatives as much as I do.  Everything comes out to be the same thing some how.

Some way.  That I don't know but constantly work on trying to discover

I think the limits of text and turn based posts really slows down the integration and syncing of thoughts into the same forms of operation/being.  (Syncing semantics).

I mean, we have completely different understanding of the same thing, we need to correct ourselves for each other to properly convey opinions without completely misunderstanding sometimes.

Iam loving this high caffeinated coffee omg it makes things feel easier to explain LOL

Service to All must = Everything and Nothing by that logic Adonai, I can resonate with that

Service-to-All is what The Ra Material was all about before they started bringing back the old vocabulary from channelings of lower vibrations.

I've only been here less than a year.

How do you mean. What differing vocabulary is there if you don't mind me asking?

Read through the first session of The Ra Material and you will find that they started the contact mainly to discuss 1). unity (1.0) and 2). the lack of right & wrong (1.7). The language of polarity was consistently brought back up by the questioners from previous philosophy of 3rd, 4th and 5th dimensional vibrations.

The first session only said this regarding service: "To serve one is to serve all." No concept of Service-to-Self or Service-to-Others was mentioned directly.

I'll actually take your word for that.

Good point.  I guess Ra is unable to point out bluntly that they are not discussing what their contact intended to convey?  (Seriously asking.)  I mean, they basically did over and over but...  Is English...So indeterminately nonsensical that we can't even properly understand each other centuries apart?  Ra being timeless, has our whole damn language.  Where did the communication fall apart?  Or...
How does it matter I guess?  Or why didn't they just re-explain via a sound vibratory repeat quick lesson on prior material to refresh the student/questioner?  Why was there a failure of intended message regards the reasons for the contact at all for endless infinite tiers of information only available through basically sucking a human dry of their energy for less than an hours worth of spoken word?
When they could just tell the Questioner, they intend to discuss The Law of One in regards to Unity and the Lack of Right and Wrong and desire not to dwell upon polarity if that is okay with the questioner?

(11-15-2015, 05:54 AM)Adonai One Wrote: [ -> ]Service-to-All is what The Ra Material was all about before they started bringing back the old vocabulary from channelings of lower vibrations.

Rereading this I now completely see your point.

Interesting. Thank you.

Yeah I actually don't find myself reading much past the first dozen or so sessions as they feel the 'purest', the most innocent. It shifted once Don found out about the apparent drones the US has and it kind of fluctuates from there with some parts being very clear with light and others being more muddled by complex consideration. I imagine because that was the first major point which really challenged Don's skepticism.

As to answer the OP. I am here for my own amusement. Reality is transparent to my eyes and I see nothing but the dance of the One in endless joyful exploration of possibilities.