I have become something of an anti-intellectual; to the extent that I have become aware of its limitations in the way that it is used– The intellect is like an eternal stem and rose bud; it is a thing to blossom, but we do not know how to give it proper water or sunlight that it has become shy–
The mind like an atmosphere in which we give rise to the intellectual rose; is as dynamic as any experiential ecosystem– It is an actual living garden, and we do not recognize the garden’s needs– And we cannot recognize the needs, because we have separated the external garden from the internal garden.. We do not treat the whole garden, we treat each garden as separate; and by separating them we ignore the transcendent dynamics that sustains them, and thus provide them with lower quality care because we treat it at a level that does not match all dynamics at play and so doomed to deteriorate as the forces will not be able to carry it out if their paths diverge in expected effect from actual effect– Death is the inability to identify with something transcending the current limits of self, lower quality existence is the inability to identify a transcendent mythology that orientates us to transcendent ecosystem–
The two gardens must be treated as one; but one must see them as the same in order to treat them the same– Is that possible, and how deep do I mean this? I mean that the limitation of the intellect is that by reflecting reality, we are seeing one as two things; this puts the thoughts in our mind in something of a reverse orbit, that requires the model of reality to be with so much complexity that it is capable of sustaining its existence for a greater amount of time in said reverse orbit, creating the complexities of science and religion we know today– The more complex the model, the more circular in reference the model is; the more it obscures the transcendent features, while simultaneously increasingly expressing them in a manner that is lower in quality–
Why? Because if I say that by reflecting reality we put them in something of a reverse orbit; it is so because if the thought, which is made of the same forces it refers to, does not refer to itself in a direct manner– Unless the thought is seen as the same thing it refers to, in order to point somewhere else it must distort its appearance as to not look like itself in order to point to something that isn’t inherently itself– Thus all reflective thought, all intellectual thought in the manner it is used; cannot follow the same path as that which it refers to, and thus governs the mind where no one involved can fully act on their will without appearing discordant with the universe–
However, what exactly makes all this anti-intellectual; am I not just espousing philosophy?
The intellect as it blooms, is not the same discerning faculty we have treated it; it is an expressive one– Each time you identify a thought as the force itself, you will come to find your own will in a greater context; it is not a matter of the forces in front of us being lower or higher, this too is one garden– It is a matter of directly understanding the situation through non-discriminatory faculties, because the will of the forces in their coherent state is the same will you find yourself with in reverse orbit; and so, to recognize the thoughts as referring to themselves is to directly understand your own will in alignment with the forces that make up your existence; and thus allow one’s own narrative to be directly gifted from the whole of creation, allowing one an expressive intellect that need not act as one and can remain in the reflective state with a narrative that supports the identity in its cosmic intentions, while simultaneously allowing sense of self to be more fluid as to whether you experience using powers as an extension of yourself or by the grace of god in alignment–