James didn't share the author's idea with me, but the author said these words which James translated to English for me (only my paraphrasing from loose recollection): "I can't know if you have thought of this idea on your own, but this will be the alternative conclusion to the story. I feel you may like it more than the original which you criticized, even if it tells you only what you already know." James said they wanted to anonymize and publish my critique after the final anime episode was published to acknowledge my contribution.I can tell you how Episode 25 ends, but it hasn't been published yet so all I can say is I would've launched myself out after she drifted away in space, despite that she was unconscious and already dead at that moment and despite knowing full well she was and that it would be nothing but meaningless self torture for me ... Shizaru. ... why/because I'll tell you why: because I said so (it doesn't matter.)
Apparently they are supposed to publish my 2016 critique rant from IRC (?) anonymized after the episode is published and after it has some settling time. I hope people can cope with a slightly deeper story. It's like Idiocracy didn't fare well initially in theaters upon release, because it wasn't a story about three hundred years in the future ... it was a story about the time the author experienced while he was writing it from ~1995 - 2005. The audience couldn't cope with the film being ABOUT ALL Y'ALL GOOD FOLKS.
Sore da yo!
Sore demo ...
I can describe the Koan "What is Buddha?" more accurately. In ancient bone script the symbols are in fact "granary", "three layers" (earth, air, heavens) and "axe" (division.) What the master meant is not the usual interpretation translated as "three units of flax." He meant "a granary filled in all divisions." This is abstract and idiomatic such that only Buddha knows the meaning. It is intended to impose self-doubt upon the student.I hadn't realized that in 2016, but I had reflected upon it. What I hadn't reflected upon was interpretation via bone script symbols, which is how the most ancient variants of this Koan are recorded in fact.What the student should ask is "what are the divisions, what is the granary, what is the unit?" The master had implied that the unit, in other words unitism (like dualism, which is based upon unitism) is per se invalid and that logic constructed from it is therefore inheriting that invalidity.Buddha, ironically, is that per se: the unit is invalid yo.
In Buddhism, the "First Sin" or "Original Sin" is considered to be willful ignorance. Leaving the granary unfilled. All other sins emerge from this by inheriting it, such that sin per se is defined as "sin = inheriting from willful ignorance."Buddha can be expressed in a somewhat different way in that by acknowledging we can't define Buddha nor fill all divisions without first dividing them or using unitism which is per se invalidating via inheritance. That is okay because we do not need to "know" our own limitations in order to "know" innately and by pure and original means intuit that is the foundational truth of reality.Should I have spoiler tagged my digressions about Buddha? Only the a priori gnosia, for short, agnosia would require the spoiler tag. Therefore it is unnecessary.
EJR is still here if approval for publication is required in some form. I can sign upon review, although as I stated back then this is solely motivated by accommodation of the author themselves who has committed all the work. Whereas my contribution of simple ideas is despite being perhaps eye-opening to potentiality not innately worth much on its own. The development of an idea, putting the spade into the soil and moving it then planting seeds is where the real value lies.I can be reached via KVRAudio indirectly, despite not being a Kissless Virgin Retard I can sure act like it all the time.
