You are very much on target with the concept of 'cultural resonance'. There is a history of inventors claiming the same solution often being continents apart and seemingly unconnected but through the general themes within their area of expertise. Call it "Karma" or whatever but smart individuals connected to thematic threads often are unknowingly creatively-connected. Like-minds think and articulate alike.
I appreciate the opportunity also that arose from Josh's oversight and my "hair-trigger" pride of authorship. Here's my response to Joshua in full:
> Yet there's also value in recognizing those who've been pushing these ideas forward for years, often without the recognition they deserve. . . . In retrospect, perhaps we were all picking up on the same signal, with Jasun having developed the clearest antenna years before.
This is generous but it seems a bit “uncle Tom” ish (placatory), and your readers may not buy it. Who *cares* if I thought of it first, unless I still have something valuable to say that makes my early adopting (or coining) of the term more than a feather in my cap that you are now fluffing?
As Clint said, deserve hasn’t got much to do with it. But there is a less egoistic reason for me to assert the value to attribution, as follows:
The problem of the 2nd matrix has to do with *ideas replicating without understanding*, which itself relates to ideas replicating, period.
When knowledge or insights are passed on—or handed down—the likelihood of a “Chinese whispers” degeneration of meaning increases each time it gets passed. Has the recipient taken the equivalent necessary steps to discover the idea for themselves (or receive the angelic transmission)? Or have they only stumbled upon it by blind luck or algorithms?
Ironically (ironic, since I am angling for credit and exposure), the likelihood it is a case of an illegitimate adoption of ideas increases in exact proportion to the popularity, the virality, of the idea in question. The more viral an idea, the more it spreads, the easier it is for people to appropriate the gold nugget without doing any legitimate panning. (A good analogy here is the 2nd matrix cult of psychedelics: promising easy wisdom that does more harm than good for being unearned.)
This makes the process of finding a real paystreak indistinguishable from wandering aimlessly around spiked ground, tricked by dodgy land merchants into investing time and money into a worthless pursuit.
This is how research into conspiracy facts becomes conspiracy theory becomes conspiratainment, which is one of the main (but far from only) wings of the 2nd matrix. (The 2nd matrix extends beyond the more obvious controlled ops of political discourse, ideological affiliations, and social action, into just about everything we deem to be a “way out.” There is a Matrix 2 version of everything: Christianity, psychotherapy, healing, sexual fulfillment, spiritual realization, back to the landism, all have their counterparts and counterfeits.)
The question of *where* an insight originates (even if it is only one of multiple sources), therefore, is much more essential than that of intellectual ownership or correct acknowledgement vs. “plagiarism,” because it has to do with *finding the medium behind the message*; namely, what provides the best *context* for understanding it. If you want to understand Freud or Marx, go to the source; if you want to understand Christ, go to the Gospel.
People want bloggers and substackers and X-warriors with tens or hundreds of thousands of followers to do their heavy-lifting for them by providing crunched-down, easy-to-grok Cliff Notes versions of truth. What they end up with is a pre-baked loaf that they then heat up (with their own zeal) and present as genuine home-baked bread.
In your Jan 6th piece ("The Second Matrix"), you say, “Each movement contains enough truth to attract awakened minds while setting careful guardrails on acceptable solutions—identifying real problems but advocating solutions that expand institutional power.”
I would add that it is not only solutions that expand institutional power that characterize the trap of the second matrix; it is also any solution that comes (or is offered) prematurely and provides an illusory sense of having found a way out. This is the ipso facto, sin qua non of the trap of the 2nd matrix.
Hence, when you offer a number of solutions at the end of your own post, you also risk providing raw material for people to build a new wing of Matrix 2 (create a movement, etc.).
If I *am* the guy who deserves credit for coining the term “second matrix,” this (the above) is my only credential: that I know I still dwell within it, and that nothing I can say won’t be turned into more wings and windows in it. So I should probably be thankful for being “ignored”! ;)
This isn't about victimhood, quite the opposite. Jasun was open to transforming what could've been a simple credit dispute into an exploration of how ideas evolve. That's the opposite of ego - it's using a personal situation to illuminate something universal. It's that type of approach that made his work resonate with me in the first place.
He stole your idea that you stole from someone else (Sophia Stewart) who sued the ppl who stole it from her to make the Matrix and Terminator. I think she’s actually on The Matrix4 or 3rd eye 4.
Is this a third Matrix? IDK I just learned about it recently so thought I’d throw that out there. Somehow I ended up here way late.
And you’re right I was disappointed to find out Terrence McKenna was a Rockafeller charlatan.
He did day “culture is a plot against the expansion of consciousness” which I whole heartedly agree with. I wish they’d stop, this shit they feed us is toxic. The ppl should make the culture, the culture shouldn’t make the ppl.
Where does Jasun prove that he "originated" the term? Seems very egocentric to me. It is great that you both have come to a similar realization without reference to the other -- this is not plagiarism nor theft nor anything important -- it is just the natural emergence of (one hopes) truth. No one has a patent on ideas (The Alice decision codified that, but it has always been true.) That is different from the theft of writing -- that is plagiarism which is NOT the discussion here.
Scallops and humans have very similar ocular structures. To whom shall we give the credit? This entire conversation is nonsensical unless one is trying to grift some $$ out of it all -- other than that, both discoveries (and others out there who are not familiar with either yours or Jasun's work who have also "discovered" the second matrix even if they call it something else) add to the cumulative uplift of the thinking and the conversation and, one hopes, the elevation of life as a reflection of these new insights.
Really a distraction that did not need to interrupt your arc toward something really good here.
Thanks for weighing in, Dr. K. You know I always appreciate your perspective - and, in this case, I appreciate your defense. The thing is, I have great respect Jasun's work (which is why I reached out to him directly when this came up), and that initial exchange actually led to an interesting conversation that went far beyond attribution. But I promise this wasn't self-flagellation. To me, it was more of a case study that emerged from an unexpected interaction. You're absolutely right about the broader idea of nested control systems appearing in many places (I like the scallops analogy, by the way).
What made this interesting wasn't about claiming first discovery or ownership - it was about the meta-layer of finding myself unconsciously echoing someone's specific framework while exploring how ideas propagate. Sometimes these moments of tension create the most interesting insights, and that's exactly what happened here. Far from interrupting my arc, this whole thing actually enriched it - especially from someone who has been influential to it. Related: I can't recommend Vice of Kings strongly enough. That book found it's way to me at a critical moment in my discovery process.
Josh, I am sure his work is commendable and I will go seek out Vice of Kings. As most of your commenters appear to believe, however, anyone who jumps up and says "me! me! I thought of that first" (when it wasn't just stolen which it was not) does not elevate their status which is unfortunate for Jasun. Parallel evolution (hey, scallops!) is a great thing...deprecating it by looking for fame/glory/credit where the timing is just coincidental is just unfortunate.
To be fully transparent, Jasun did initially accuse me of plagiarism... but I think he felt badly about assuming the worst.
The reality is, he's been developing these ideas for 15 years, often working on the fringes without much recognition. I can understand his frustration when he sees these concepts gaining traction without acknowledgment. History is full of thinkers who weren't appreciated in their time - he may be one of them.
Your parallel evolution analogy is apt - but knowing where ideas come from can possibly help us better understand their development and implications.
Had this come from a stranger, I certainly would have still advocated for my integrity, but *might* not have found the opening for such meaningful dialogue. Because I was familiar with Jasun's work and journey, had spoken with him both in writing and on his podcast, I recognized him as someone of character with a genuine commitment to truth. That's what allowed us to turn this potential conflict into something more valuable. I'm glad it took this path and I'm hopeful I can help bring even a little more attention to his work, because it's valuable.
@Joshua - You are such a careful writer, and I salute your attention to detail, and attention to attribution where it is needed. At the same time, unless a patent has been issued, there is no intellectual property right attached to an idea, and even if a patent was issued, then it is protected only for a brief period of time. To assert that you have co-opted a trademarked term ("second matrix") is ludicrous. In fact, this level of picky insistence about proper attribution can interfere with the development of the new consciousness; it can interfere with our breaking free of the current historical legal system and the oppressive frame that it puts upon us all. There is no trademark on "second matrix." It is in the flux of consciousness that we all tap into. You have a particularly good radio to tap into that consciousness, into what is often unsaid and unthought. Thank you for that, and I hope you do not become especially self-conscious about this. I support you in expressing what comes through. To insist on perfect attribution for every idea is egotistical and conducive to separation, not to mention indirectly promoting censorship, and an overly-developed internal critic. On the other hand, to bring through what one gets for the benefit of all humans is not egotistical and it promotes union, development, freedom, and enlightenment.
I want to clarify that this wasn't about trademarks, intellectual property rights, or any kind of dispute. It was simply about acknowledging a fellow thinker's contribution to this space - something I would have gladly done had I known Jasun had originated the term, and something I'd hope others would do for me if the tables were turned.
The reason I wrote this piece wasn't to debate attribution rights, but to explore something far more interesting: how ideas propagate through networks of meaning, sometimes finding their way back to their origins in ways that demonstrate their own principles. What began as a simple question of credit evolved into a fascinating discussion about consciousness, collective understanding, and how we build on each other's insights.
I appreciate your point about the free flow of ideas, and agree that over-focus on attribution can sometimes hinder development of new thinking. But I also believe that acknowledging those who've helped map the territory we're exploring is valuable - not for legal reasons, but for building genuine intellectual community. That's especially true when, as in this case, we're fortunate enough to engage directly with those pioneers.
Very good piece. I like the way you two handled the scenario. Great lesson for many out there. I especially liked the listing of his authored works. Based on this posting I will add them to my acquisition and study list. I am new to your work, do you have any authored works for me to add? I think you are hitting on more confirmation of both the Creator's (for lack of a better term) structure of interdimensional/interfrequency (again for lack of a better description) that allows earned learning from this material school house; as well as the opposing forces who wish all to remain ensnared here in the material control matrix. Good thoughts. Glad I found you.
"When concepts resonate with fundamental truths, they can emerge across different networks...”.
In fact, they MUST do this. We live in an Energy Universe consisting of literally nothing but frequencies and vibrations... as Nikola Tesla and others have brilliantly described so well.
So when something is ‘True’ is must by default and as existentially-wired resonate in lots of places. No one can contain our energetic being (body, mind, and spirit). Our thoughts and feelings (frequencies and vibrations) are being broadcast 24/7 out of our bodies and minds and spirits and into the vast Ocean of Energy in our Universe (which is also referred as The Matrix and The Ground of Being).
‘Truth’ is broadcast this way. But so is falsehood. And everything in-between. That’s why bad ideas can travel as swiftly and as penetratingly as good ones. It’s a vibration that goes outward without boundaries and can find resonance in lots of places as well.
Everything that has ever been done or said continues to echo throughout the Universe and throughout Time. Most of our minds are composites (echoes, copies) of everything we’ve ever heard or been acculturated to. In fact, there is so much of that stuff in there that there is hardly room for anything that we can feel is truly our own. One must consciously and deliberately make space in there to allow freedom and creativity to have a place to be birthed and to shine. That’s why the truly creative are always just a little (or a lot) different from most people you will see on the street. Creative people literally dance to a different drummer because they are wired differently in how they think and act. And they also possess a courage that many people do not possess – the courage to walk an unknown path and to be different from others. Most people seem to seek the safety found in The Pack (with a bit of cowardice showing as a result).
Think about it. Why would anyone want to be just like someone else? Does that make any sense? We are all born into unique circumstances that will never be duplicated in all of Eternity. Shouldn’t we want to embrace and celebrate that? And use this gift of uniqueness to bring something new and different to the World?
No one truly owns anything – including words and ideas. As has been said before... we all stand on the shoulders of everyone and everything that has come before. We are only on this Earth for a blink of Time measured against Eternity. And we can not ever truly own anything. Everything in our lives is at best a Temporary Trusteeship. We have something for a season... and then it either goes away into the void or someone else takes it over for another season. On and on this goes with the passing of the torch from one generation to the next.
As has been said... we are all going to resonate and reflect things that are already Out There – and there is nothing wrong with that. Spiritual sages will tell you that we are all a collective of One Divine Mind anyway when you strip out all the nonessentials and falsehoods and silly conjured divisions we believe about ourselves. And being as ‘One Mind’... there is no true separation among anything in the Human Family and beyond.
We may have copyright laws and trade marks and the like to allow persons to benefit from certain intellectual pursuits for a period of time. But that’s the mirage that obscures our essential Oneness of Being.
Who can ‘own’ a thought? Who can put it in a box and lock it away? A thought is like trying to contain water in a bucket that has lots of holes in it. Try as you might... that water (thoughts) are going to leak out. As was fully intended in this version of Reality in which we currently share together.
The Power of Mind is the most powerful thing in the Universe. We should be more concerned with fully developing this power in constructive and actionable ways than trying to ‘herd the cats’ of our thinking in ways we will never succeed.
Interesting article. There is an immense amount of data and also an immense amount of humans who think about something yet all use language to express their thoughts. What happens all the time that people think about something at the same time periods. The Ego then believes that the thought is exclusive to his mind, yet the topics are general. This leads to situations where one is surprised (unless encountered the situation before) that someone uses the same terminology or that some idea is exclusive. In reality they are not, ideas float around in a "cloud" all the time. Ideas backed by material resources propagate, this is the magic of based Hope. Hope just for Hope's sake is like a feather in the wind. Same time, Hope is an industrial term, it is called "Finance". Some things materialize because there was financing behind it :). Anyone with expectations is predominantly destined to experience disappointments. Acting without any expectations is beneficial in terms that it can lead to positive surprises.
Ok, just a little bit of wow. Impressed. Reminds me of many little phrases generated (?) through my life, since a child, to remind me of this, among them: the rebel becomes(if he wins)what he rebels against. I.e. the latest autocrat. The point being not to identify with an adversary, for by the very nature of the precept, one is wrapt within the confines of ones adversary. Endlessly recursive, yes .
Love Horsley's work and I did think of him when you used the term "second Matrix." I mean this neutrally but your pieces, while complex, are more "Facebook friendly." I can post your pieces to my entirely unawakened friends with hopes that they are a non-offensive but persuasive means of nudging them out of their mainstream media induced slumber. I can't start with Horsley!
You are very much on target with the concept of 'cultural resonance'. There is a history of inventors claiming the same solution often being continents apart and seemingly unconnected but through the general themes within their area of expertise. Call it "Karma" or whatever but smart individuals connected to thematic threads often are unknowingly creatively-connected. Like-minds think and articulate alike.
In mathematics, this is not unusual.
https://mathoverflow.net/questions/337023/examples-of-simultaneous-independent-breakthroughs
Aviation is a great recent example.
I appreciate the opportunity also that arose from Josh's oversight and my "hair-trigger" pride of authorship. Here's my response to Joshua in full:
> Yet there's also value in recognizing those who've been pushing these ideas forward for years, often without the recognition they deserve. . . . In retrospect, perhaps we were all picking up on the same signal, with Jasun having developed the clearest antenna years before.
This is generous but it seems a bit “uncle Tom” ish (placatory), and your readers may not buy it. Who *cares* if I thought of it first, unless I still have something valuable to say that makes my early adopting (or coining) of the term more than a feather in my cap that you are now fluffing?
As Clint said, deserve hasn’t got much to do with it. But there is a less egoistic reason for me to assert the value to attribution, as follows:
The problem of the 2nd matrix has to do with *ideas replicating without understanding*, which itself relates to ideas replicating, period.
When knowledge or insights are passed on—or handed down—the likelihood of a “Chinese whispers” degeneration of meaning increases each time it gets passed. Has the recipient taken the equivalent necessary steps to discover the idea for themselves (or receive the angelic transmission)? Or have they only stumbled upon it by blind luck or algorithms?
Ironically (ironic, since I am angling for credit and exposure), the likelihood it is a case of an illegitimate adoption of ideas increases in exact proportion to the popularity, the virality, of the idea in question. The more viral an idea, the more it spreads, the easier it is for people to appropriate the gold nugget without doing any legitimate panning. (A good analogy here is the 2nd matrix cult of psychedelics: promising easy wisdom that does more harm than good for being unearned.)
This makes the process of finding a real paystreak indistinguishable from wandering aimlessly around spiked ground, tricked by dodgy land merchants into investing time and money into a worthless pursuit.
This is how research into conspiracy facts becomes conspiracy theory becomes conspiratainment, which is one of the main (but far from only) wings of the 2nd matrix. (The 2nd matrix extends beyond the more obvious controlled ops of political discourse, ideological affiliations, and social action, into just about everything we deem to be a “way out.” There is a Matrix 2 version of everything: Christianity, psychotherapy, healing, sexual fulfillment, spiritual realization, back to the landism, all have their counterparts and counterfeits.)
The question of *where* an insight originates (even if it is only one of multiple sources), therefore, is much more essential than that of intellectual ownership or correct acknowledgement vs. “plagiarism,” because it has to do with *finding the medium behind the message*; namely, what provides the best *context* for understanding it. If you want to understand Freud or Marx, go to the source; if you want to understand Christ, go to the Gospel.
People want bloggers and substackers and X-warriors with tens or hundreds of thousands of followers to do their heavy-lifting for them by providing crunched-down, easy-to-grok Cliff Notes versions of truth. What they end up with is a pre-baked loaf that they then heat up (with their own zeal) and present as genuine home-baked bread.
In your Jan 6th piece ("The Second Matrix"), you say, “Each movement contains enough truth to attract awakened minds while setting careful guardrails on acceptable solutions—identifying real problems but advocating solutions that expand institutional power.”
I would add that it is not only solutions that expand institutional power that characterize the trap of the second matrix; it is also any solution that comes (or is offered) prematurely and provides an illusory sense of having found a way out. This is the ipso facto, sin qua non of the trap of the 2nd matrix.
Hence, when you offer a number of solutions at the end of your own post, you also risk providing raw material for people to build a new wing of Matrix 2 (create a movement, etc.).
If I *am* the guy who deserves credit for coining the term “second matrix,” this (the above) is my only credential: that I know I still dwell within it, and that nothing I can say won’t be turned into more wings and windows in it. So I should probably be thankful for being “ignored”! ;)
Oh put a sock in it.
Yawn.
Bruh. You can quit sorting out how you're a victim now. Be an owner.
yr discernment is for the birds
LOL. Of course. Carry on young buck.
This isn't about victimhood, quite the opposite. Jasun was open to transforming what could've been a simple credit dispute into an exploration of how ideas evolve. That's the opposite of ego - it's using a personal situation to illuminate something universal. It's that type of approach that made his work resonate with me in the first place.
What am I missing here?
The story: Oh, we did not know!
Happy to make an acknowledgment.
Here it is.
End of story.
He stole your idea that you stole from someone else (Sophia Stewart) who sued the ppl who stole it from her to make the Matrix and Terminator. I think she’s actually on The Matrix4 or 3rd eye 4.
Is this a third Matrix? IDK I just learned about it recently so thought I’d throw that out there. Somehow I ended up here way late.
And you’re right I was disappointed to find out Terrence McKenna was a Rockafeller charlatan.
He did day “culture is a plot against the expansion of consciousness” which I whole heartedly agree with. I wish they’d stop, this shit they feed us is toxic. The ppl should make the culture, the culture shouldn’t make the ppl.
I love how you sorted out the plagiarism accusation with respectful investigation.
Josh, I disagree with your self-flagellation here. Attribution is unimportant, really -- I will bet if I search long enough I will find someone who has come up with the second matrix idea before Jasun. [One can find references to second (and beyond) matrices all over the place (even places like reddit: https://www.reddit.com/r/FanTheories/comments/ajqda2/the_matrix_has_been_completely_misunderstood_neos/?rdt=50013). ]
Where does Jasun prove that he "originated" the term? Seems very egocentric to me. It is great that you both have come to a similar realization without reference to the other -- this is not plagiarism nor theft nor anything important -- it is just the natural emergence of (one hopes) truth. No one has a patent on ideas (The Alice decision codified that, but it has always been true.) That is different from the theft of writing -- that is plagiarism which is NOT the discussion here.
Scallops and humans have very similar ocular structures. To whom shall we give the credit? This entire conversation is nonsensical unless one is trying to grift some $$ out of it all -- other than that, both discoveries (and others out there who are not familiar with either yours or Jasun's work who have also "discovered" the second matrix even if they call it something else) add to the cumulative uplift of the thinking and the conversation and, one hopes, the elevation of life as a reflection of these new insights.
Really a distraction that did not need to interrupt your arc toward something really good here.
Thanks for weighing in, Dr. K. You know I always appreciate your perspective - and, in this case, I appreciate your defense. The thing is, I have great respect Jasun's work (which is why I reached out to him directly when this came up), and that initial exchange actually led to an interesting conversation that went far beyond attribution. But I promise this wasn't self-flagellation. To me, it was more of a case study that emerged from an unexpected interaction. You're absolutely right about the broader idea of nested control systems appearing in many places (I like the scallops analogy, by the way).
What made this interesting wasn't about claiming first discovery or ownership - it was about the meta-layer of finding myself unconsciously echoing someone's specific framework while exploring how ideas propagate. Sometimes these moments of tension create the most interesting insights, and that's exactly what happened here. Far from interrupting my arc, this whole thing actually enriched it - especially from someone who has been influential to it. Related: I can't recommend Vice of Kings strongly enough. That book found it's way to me at a critical moment in my discovery process.
Josh, I am sure his work is commendable and I will go seek out Vice of Kings. As most of your commenters appear to believe, however, anyone who jumps up and says "me! me! I thought of that first" (when it wasn't just stolen which it was not) does not elevate their status which is unfortunate for Jasun. Parallel evolution (hey, scallops!) is a great thing...deprecating it by looking for fame/glory/credit where the timing is just coincidental is just unfortunate.
To be fully transparent, Jasun did initially accuse me of plagiarism... but I think he felt badly about assuming the worst.
The reality is, he's been developing these ideas for 15 years, often working on the fringes without much recognition. I can understand his frustration when he sees these concepts gaining traction without acknowledgment. History is full of thinkers who weren't appreciated in their time - he may be one of them.
Your parallel evolution analogy is apt - but knowing where ideas come from can possibly help us better understand their development and implications.
Had this come from a stranger, I certainly would have still advocated for my integrity, but *might* not have found the opening for such meaningful dialogue. Because I was familiar with Jasun's work and journey, had spoken with him both in writing and on his podcast, I recognized him as someone of character with a genuine commitment to truth. That's what allowed us to turn this potential conflict into something more valuable. I'm glad it took this path and I'm hopeful I can help bring even a little more attention to his work, because it's valuable.
Just put the fries in the bag, bruh.
I am familiar with Jason Horsley from his interviews with my friend Christopher Loring Knowles. Thanks for this insightful essay.
So, basically, Jasun needed his ego stroked long and hard, and this article polishes that off...
@Joshua - You are such a careful writer, and I salute your attention to detail, and attention to attribution where it is needed. At the same time, unless a patent has been issued, there is no intellectual property right attached to an idea, and even if a patent was issued, then it is protected only for a brief period of time. To assert that you have co-opted a trademarked term ("second matrix") is ludicrous. In fact, this level of picky insistence about proper attribution can interfere with the development of the new consciousness; it can interfere with our breaking free of the current historical legal system and the oppressive frame that it puts upon us all. There is no trademark on "second matrix." It is in the flux of consciousness that we all tap into. You have a particularly good radio to tap into that consciousness, into what is often unsaid and unthought. Thank you for that, and I hope you do not become especially self-conscious about this. I support you in expressing what comes through. To insist on perfect attribution for every idea is egotistical and conducive to separation, not to mention indirectly promoting censorship, and an overly-developed internal critic. On the other hand, to bring through what one gets for the benefit of all humans is not egotistical and it promotes union, development, freedom, and enlightenment.
Thank you, Charles.
I want to clarify that this wasn't about trademarks, intellectual property rights, or any kind of dispute. It was simply about acknowledging a fellow thinker's contribution to this space - something I would have gladly done had I known Jasun had originated the term, and something I'd hope others would do for me if the tables were turned.
The reason I wrote this piece wasn't to debate attribution rights, but to explore something far more interesting: how ideas propagate through networks of meaning, sometimes finding their way back to their origins in ways that demonstrate their own principles. What began as a simple question of credit evolved into a fascinating discussion about consciousness, collective understanding, and how we build on each other's insights.
I appreciate your point about the free flow of ideas, and agree that over-focus on attribution can sometimes hinder development of new thinking. But I also believe that acknowledging those who've helped map the territory we're exploring is valuable - not for legal reasons, but for building genuine intellectual community. That's especially true when, as in this case, we're fortunate enough to engage directly with those pioneers.
I have no complaint about you Joshua. Your way of handling this is exemplary.
Very good piece. I like the way you two handled the scenario. Great lesson for many out there. I especially liked the listing of his authored works. Based on this posting I will add them to my acquisition and study list. I am new to your work, do you have any authored works for me to add? I think you are hitting on more confirmation of both the Creator's (for lack of a better term) structure of interdimensional/interfrequency (again for lack of a better description) that allows earned learning from this material school house; as well as the opposing forces who wish all to remain ensnared here in the material control matrix. Good thoughts. Glad I found you.
"When concepts resonate with fundamental truths, they can emerge across different networks...”.
In fact, they MUST do this. We live in an Energy Universe consisting of literally nothing but frequencies and vibrations... as Nikola Tesla and others have brilliantly described so well.
So when something is ‘True’ is must by default and as existentially-wired resonate in lots of places. No one can contain our energetic being (body, mind, and spirit). Our thoughts and feelings (frequencies and vibrations) are being broadcast 24/7 out of our bodies and minds and spirits and into the vast Ocean of Energy in our Universe (which is also referred as The Matrix and The Ground of Being).
‘Truth’ is broadcast this way. But so is falsehood. And everything in-between. That’s why bad ideas can travel as swiftly and as penetratingly as good ones. It’s a vibration that goes outward without boundaries and can find resonance in lots of places as well.
Everything that has ever been done or said continues to echo throughout the Universe and throughout Time. Most of our minds are composites (echoes, copies) of everything we’ve ever heard or been acculturated to. In fact, there is so much of that stuff in there that there is hardly room for anything that we can feel is truly our own. One must consciously and deliberately make space in there to allow freedom and creativity to have a place to be birthed and to shine. That’s why the truly creative are always just a little (or a lot) different from most people you will see on the street. Creative people literally dance to a different drummer because they are wired differently in how they think and act. And they also possess a courage that many people do not possess – the courage to walk an unknown path and to be different from others. Most people seem to seek the safety found in The Pack (with a bit of cowardice showing as a result).
Think about it. Why would anyone want to be just like someone else? Does that make any sense? We are all born into unique circumstances that will never be duplicated in all of Eternity. Shouldn’t we want to embrace and celebrate that? And use this gift of uniqueness to bring something new and different to the World?
No one truly owns anything – including words and ideas. As has been said before... we all stand on the shoulders of everyone and everything that has come before. We are only on this Earth for a blink of Time measured against Eternity. And we can not ever truly own anything. Everything in our lives is at best a Temporary Trusteeship. We have something for a season... and then it either goes away into the void or someone else takes it over for another season. On and on this goes with the passing of the torch from one generation to the next.
As has been said... we are all going to resonate and reflect things that are already Out There – and there is nothing wrong with that. Spiritual sages will tell you that we are all a collective of One Divine Mind anyway when you strip out all the nonessentials and falsehoods and silly conjured divisions we believe about ourselves. And being as ‘One Mind’... there is no true separation among anything in the Human Family and beyond.
We may have copyright laws and trade marks and the like to allow persons to benefit from certain intellectual pursuits for a period of time. But that’s the mirage that obscures our essential Oneness of Being.
Who can ‘own’ a thought? Who can put it in a box and lock it away? A thought is like trying to contain water in a bucket that has lots of holes in it. Try as you might... that water (thoughts) are going to leak out. As was fully intended in this version of Reality in which we currently share together.
The Power of Mind is the most powerful thing in the Universe. We should be more concerned with fully developing this power in constructive and actionable ways than trying to ‘herd the cats’ of our thinking in ways we will never succeed.
The Song "You Light Up My Life" came to mind when I read this article!
Interesting article. There is an immense amount of data and also an immense amount of humans who think about something yet all use language to express their thoughts. What happens all the time that people think about something at the same time periods. The Ego then believes that the thought is exclusive to his mind, yet the topics are general. This leads to situations where one is surprised (unless encountered the situation before) that someone uses the same terminology or that some idea is exclusive. In reality they are not, ideas float around in a "cloud" all the time. Ideas backed by material resources propagate, this is the magic of based Hope. Hope just for Hope's sake is like a feather in the wind. Same time, Hope is an industrial term, it is called "Finance". Some things materialize because there was financing behind it :). Anyone with expectations is predominantly destined to experience disappointments. Acting without any expectations is beneficial in terms that it can lead to positive surprises.
Ok, just a little bit of wow. Impressed. Reminds me of many little phrases generated (?) through my life, since a child, to remind me of this, among them: the rebel becomes(if he wins)what he rebels against. I.e. the latest autocrat. The point being not to identify with an adversary, for by the very nature of the precept, one is wrapt within the confines of ones adversary. Endlessly recursive, yes .
Love Horsley's work and I did think of him when you used the term "second Matrix." I mean this neutrally but your pieces, while complex, are more "Facebook friendly." I can post your pieces to my entirely unawakened friends with hopes that they are a non-offensive but persuasive means of nudging them out of their mainstream media induced slumber. I can't start with Horsley!