De’ja’Vu

Déjà vu and a mirror walk into a bar together for the first time, again! The bartender says to deja vu. “ Your reflection must second guess itself a lot and deja vu says, nuh-uh, I knew you’d say that! And that’s from both of us! Says Deja’a reflection echoing. So they got drunk and decided to go in together on a virtual reality sex shop called ‘Hey, Close Enough!’

Can we escape who we are? Are we a prisoner of who we are? Is the who of us an identity or a personality? Or is our identity not a who but a, whom? Hey what’s difference? Any at all? Can we even define who we are? Can we adjust who we are or rather adjust who we are becoming? If so, how?

Could it possibly be by something such as geometric proof by which, BTW is almost the exact definition of theatre. The contents and structure of the scenario uses awareness, gizmos, sorters, dividers, organizers, manipulators, modifiers, molders, synthesizers but no creators, that is us human types bailiwick.

All this fine definition/ sharply defined description of something else/an other different thing is described with analogous precision and accuracy, which is inside the yet larger framework the bigger abstract frame. The abstract which the famous Don Juan says is synonymous with intention. In a pragmatic sense, the the abstract intent is an entity. Maybe spirit or the God-works conglomeration? Certainly the mega site builders have been promoting abstraction as one of their themes and Motifs. Particularly the Crop Circles in geometric and maths logic with a good serving of aesthetics holding it all together.

That too sounds like the very definition of Theatre to me. All used to arrive at a conclusion, the same meaning as a, caption punchline/effect about a statement, the same as set up/punch. The rules/logic of the set up leads to insights, aka the punchline.

Consciousness would seem first to be a property of awareness which is capable of noticing; awareness that is aware of itself, (which in itself is a paradigm shift) Consciousness presumes such a thing as, awareness that is aware of itself; that can become enriched by perspective gained from acts of comparison, an awareness that can proactively initiate action.

If the Universe does have consciousness then the universe is now an entity and if only now exists then the Universe has always been an entity and an entity with identity.

A proactive entity/identity has ‘mechanics’ although it is itself not mechanical. The geometry of, the understanding of, the handling of, the mastery of identity and awareness is a main goal of people from earth, earth from the universe. If a universe that could have a goal then maybe one such goal of the universe is to know itself.

Knowing and curiosity are a matched pair. The universe seeking an enriched experience of its own in order to evolve, develop in order to self improve, to share, to be in relationship.

So far the observations of living human systems / complex adaptive systems the path of a healthy human system both socially and genetically is: Survive, Develop, Transform.

Humans too are a direct by-product of a Universe which up until now, is ever and always “already in progress” What kind of dynamic measurement and how would one apply dynamic measurement to that?

Is the function of mathematics to describe knowledge and behavior of “loving”?

If those mathematics existed and were anthropomorphized in a scenario would the cast of characters be us humans who are behaving within an equation whose solution is the behavior of a transcendental number that is always in progress, in a state of becoming but never fully formed, yet still unique?

Shakespeare said the course of true love never did run smooth… so are we humans the de facto emotional wrinkle smoothers attempting to be ironing out the woes of humankind in order to enrich human kindness?

In he virtual Bodhisattva in Mahayana Buddhism, a person is able to reach nirvana but delays doing so out of compassion in order to save suffering beings. Bodhisattva comes to earth to joyously experience the sorrows of the world. Maybe there is a science solution to sorrow we’ve yet to discover but we likely already know the proper response, it is very difficult to perform though and mastering one’s own passions is a main struggle for people. Our history screams that fact all the way down the timeline. We can do better don’t you think? Or is having problems the real payoff? Something to overcome, to develop and transform. Issac Asimov indicated he enjoyed “the finding out” of something new to him, discovery!

So if Lucifer was as sympathetic as we are, how can we empathize? Is Lucifer trying to find out his own personal truth? Did Lucifer find it? What is that truth then? What difference did it make? Is perspective the result of differences? Does death give one the same or different perspective than Immortality’s perspective?

Is Lucifer needed and wanted or was it just his turn in the barrel of monkeys having a barrel of laughs barreling down the primrose path wearing a barrel while seeking their true path in life?

Is Lucifer up against the wall of Jesus’s unmatchable behavior? Or did Lucifer buy strictly and only into survival at any cost? Like perfect computer security-nothing changes. Risk of change as far as death itself must be faced and handled in order to proceed farther along further into one’s cave of innermost secrets and fears. Déjà vu? How come you never see that coming?