Hmmm... It has been the first time that someone has perturbed the order of fate, life, death and probability this way. I guess this is not going to be the first time. But to be honest, this should not have been this way. After all, this could not actually hold up to the standard of the macrocosm. At least, I should intervene in the life of this being. Wait! Hold on. This being has no beginning, nor end. In the end, this being, therefore, should not exist.
This person could not actually understand it. This figure was nothing, but Chaos that could understand the beginning and the end of everything. However, there was something to it. His shadow was Suntya— the combination between Rhūpa and Ashakti.
Suntya: The thing is, she's not normal. In fact, we don't really know how she was to be; therefore, she should have existed before the beginning of what we thought to exist. At least, in the sense of existence. Because she seems to be connected to everything and nothing at the same time. However, there is something to it. She seems to reject the very connection to the Logos, but she loves it at the same time. However, there is an aspect to it. Infinite ignorance couldn't actually touch her and yet it tries to love her. That motherfucker... He is trying to corrupt her.
That meant that there was something to it—There is life beyond the objective/subjective duality.
One of the originalities of the phenomenological attitude is that it does not seek to oppose
the subjective to the objective, but to move beyond the split into their fundamental
correlation.
PhR takes us quickly into the evidence that consciousness is inseparably
linked to what goes beyond itself (it is ëtranscendentalí in the Husserlian language).
Consciousness is not some private, internal event having, in the end, an existence of the
same kind as the external, non-conscious world. In this case, there could be something essential to the very essence of what we could life. In this manifestation of what we call life, it is meant to wholly appreciate the opportunity of life and what it could be for the main objective of existence that we can observe in this new being.
To begin with, phenomenological investigation is not my ëprivate tripí since is destined
for others through intersubjective validation.
Something that I have to clarify here: people often think of the Goddess as a fertility deity only. Not at all—she's the muse. She's the inspirer of poetry. She's the inspirer of the spirit. So, she has three functions: one, to give us life; two, to be the one who receives us in death; and three, to inspire our spiritual, poetic realization or so as I have read about figures like Sophia and Mary along with the divine feminine that we could actually see everywhere. The thing to note as much as you may see in diverse myths that we could actually find in the West and the East is that all these female figurines are simply naked, whereas the male figures in all the caves are represented in some kind of garment, dressed as shamans. The implication is that in embodying the divine, the female operates in her own character, simply in her nature, while the male magic functions not from the nature of the men's bodies but from the nature of their roles in the society that we could not actually find on daily basis.
When it comes to Asha, In this sense what one is up to in phenomenological attitude is not radically different from other modes of inquiry. As Hut and
Shepard point out in their contribution here:
An analogy with Euclidean geometry may be helpful: once we specify the lengths
of the two sides of the triangle, and the magnitude of the enclosed angle, the lengths
of the third side is fixed and so are the magnitudes of the remaining two angles.
Why is this? Wherein reside the magical power of space? How can space enforce
the ëlawsí of geometry, laws that physical objects obey as well, to a very high
accuracy?
The owner of life: let me check out her connection to us. And also, remember guys: You must give up the life you planned in order to have the life that is waiting for you.