a) is temporary living within the ongoing process of dying "yours" or your opportunity to participate in existence?
b) if living (resistance) within dying (velocity) represents the internal power of energy; then does reacting (growth) within enacting (loss) represents "saving" or "investing"? What does temporary life "save"?
20-famous-people-with-autism
a) parasite trying to blend in: "hey fellow autistic people..."
b) FAME, noun [Latin fama; Greek. from to speak.] aka the suggested word tempting the ignorance of the perceivable sound.
c) AUT (self) -ISM (suggestion by others)...a contradiction in terms.
Some of us are comfortable with the aligned reality that MANY...
a) all perceivable reality differentiates into each perceiving one...not "us" or "many". Collectivism represents a suggested choice tempting the ignorance of UNITY (Latin unitas; the state of being one; oneness).
b) does temporary living within the ongoing process of dying aka the struggle to resist the temptation of velocity sounds like a "comfortable" existence or a response-ability (choice)?
c) does living needs to "align" with the reality of dying or does it struggle to resist the temptation of dying to prolong the sustenance of living before dying?
we love, care and value
a) love (want) implies vs hate (not want)...a conflict (reason) caused by consenting to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
b) does it matter if one cares (want) or not cares (not want) about breathing or does one need to react (living) to enacting (dying) anyway?
c) what if perceivable (value) towards perceiving (evaluation)? Can there be a higher value in existence than evaluation?
have either allowed, consented to or are still “herding”
a) does the one living has to allow others to live or does one need to adapt to the process of dying?
b) does perceivable inspiration require consent by the perceiving or does the perceiving need to adapt to the perceivable to sustain self; while simultaneously resist the temptation to consent to suggested information by others?
c) can one herd others without suggestion? What if adaptation to inspiration grows ones comprehension of perceivable; which increases his efficiency to sustain self; which grows his resistance to the suggested temptations by others; which lower the potential of others being able to suggest temptation; which allows others to resist the temptation to ignore perceivable inspiration; hence also allowing them to grow (living) themselves instead of tempting others into loss (dying)?
From a different angle...the few tempt the many to follow suggested orders; while ignoring that the natural order (being moved from inception towards death) implies resistance from those within.
they are so judgmental
If one fell for the temptation of choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law; while ignoring balance (perceivable) to choice (perceiving) natural law; then one a) shirked response-ability (choice) onto others; which b) tempts one to blame others for the consequences of ignored free will of choice, hence judging the minds of others instead of cleaning up ones own memory.
their own eminent demise
The many are following the suggested orders of the few (progressivism) towards "wanted" outcomes; while ignoring the "need" to adapt to perceivable origin. They seek eminence over others by escaping response-ability over self.
my cue to follow the path
My (life) cue (suggestions by others) to follow (towards death) the path (inception towards death)...tempts to ignore the perceivable need to resist suggested temptations while within the path.
my understanding
Understanding represents "standing under" the suggested information by others; which tempts one to ignore growing comprehension as the perceiving by adaptation to all perceivable inspiration (knowledge). The few use the term "knowledge" to tempt the many to stand under suggested information aka "who wants to know?".
One doesn't need to stand under the suggesting choices of others; one needs to grow self discernment about representing choice (evaluation of perceiving) within the center of balance (perceivable value). Choice exists within balance (need/want aka perceivable/suggested) as form (life) within the momentum (balance) of flow (inception towards death).
plan
PLAN (representation of any projected work) aka RE (response to) PRESENT (presented aka perceivable) -ATION (through action; hence enacted upon the reaction of those perceiving it) + EN'ERGY, noun [Greek. work.] - "internal or inherent power".
doesn’t seem to include
Suggestion tempts one to isolated oneself (reaction) from being "included" within everything (enacting). If one follows a suggested plan; one is tempted to ignore being moved forwards already, hence being tempted to ignore resisting; which would make friction noticeable aka impression (perception) meeting compression (comprehension) for either expression (growth) or repression (loss).
Wishing you all continued PEACE, LIGHT, LOVE…from a SAFE distance
a) is temporary living within the ongoing process of dying "yours" or your opportunity to participate in existence?
b) if living (resistance) within dying (velocity) represents the internal power of energy; then does reacting (growth) within enacting (loss) represents "saving" or "investing"? What does temporary life "save"?
a) parasite trying to blend in: "hey fellow autistic people..."
b) FAME, noun [Latin fama; Greek. from to speak.] aka the suggested word tempting the ignorance of the perceivable sound.
c) AUT (self) -ISM (suggestion by others)...a contradiction in terms.
a) all perceivable reality differentiates into each perceiving one...not "us" or "many". Collectivism represents a suggested choice tempting the ignorance of UNITY (Latin unitas; the state of being one; oneness).
b) does temporary living within the ongoing process of dying aka the struggle to resist the temptation of velocity sounds like a "comfortable" existence or a response-ability (choice)?
c) does living needs to "align" with the reality of dying or does it struggle to resist the temptation of dying to prolong the sustenance of living before dying?
a) love (want) implies vs hate (not want)...a conflict (reason) caused by consenting to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
b) does it matter if one cares (want) or not cares (not want) about breathing or does one need to react (living) to enacting (dying) anyway?
c) what if perceivable (value) towards perceiving (evaluation)? Can there be a higher value in existence than evaluation?
a) does the one living has to allow others to live or does one need to adapt to the process of dying?
b) does perceivable inspiration require consent by the perceiving or does the perceiving need to adapt to the perceivable to sustain self; while simultaneously resist the temptation to consent to suggested information by others?
c) can one herd others without suggestion? What if adaptation to inspiration grows ones comprehension of perceivable; which increases his efficiency to sustain self; which grows his resistance to the suggested temptations by others; which lower the potential of others being able to suggest temptation; which allows others to resist the temptation to ignore perceivable inspiration; hence also allowing them to grow (living) themselves instead of tempting others into loss (dying)?
From a different angle...the few tempt the many to follow suggested orders; while ignoring that the natural order (being moved from inception towards death) implies resistance from those within.
If one fell for the temptation of choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law; while ignoring balance (perceivable) to choice (perceiving) natural law; then one a) shirked response-ability (choice) onto others; which b) tempts one to blame others for the consequences of ignored free will of choice, hence judging the minds of others instead of cleaning up ones own memory.
The many are following the suggested orders of the few (progressivism) towards "wanted" outcomes; while ignoring the "need" to adapt to perceivable origin. They seek eminence over others by escaping response-ability over self.
My (life) cue (suggestions by others) to follow (towards death) the path (inception towards death)...tempts to ignore the perceivable need to resist suggested temptations while within the path.
Understanding represents "standing under" the suggested information by others; which tempts one to ignore growing comprehension as the perceiving by adaptation to all perceivable inspiration (knowledge). The few use the term "knowledge" to tempt the many to stand under suggested information aka "who wants to know?".
One doesn't need to stand under the suggesting choices of others; one needs to grow self discernment about representing choice (evaluation of perceiving) within the center of balance (perceivable value). Choice exists within balance (need/want aka perceivable/suggested) as form (life) within the momentum (balance) of flow (inception towards death).
PLAN (representation of any projected work) aka RE (response to) PRESENT (presented aka perceivable) -ATION (through action; hence enacted upon the reaction of those perceiving it) + EN'ERGY, noun [Greek. work.] - "internal or inherent power".
Suggestion tempts one to isolated oneself (reaction) from being "included" within everything (enacting). If one follows a suggested plan; one is tempted to ignore being moved forwards already, hence being tempted to ignore resisting; which would make friction noticeable aka impression (perception) meeting compression (comprehension) for either expression (growth) or repression (loss).
Thank you for the inspiration.