The master appears when student is ready.
But if you are serious look into advaita or madhyamaka.
But if you are serious look into advaita or madhyamaka.
Oh, you've now edited your comment from calling yourself a "master" to something else entirely (while still not answering the question I asked).
I am writing to impress you anonymous stranger. Maybe for karna farming. Or to inflate my ego.
Or maybe there is a pointing that you can't grasp yet that inan trying to convey.
Or I am full of shit.
Thus, of your three options, two are much more likely, and one much less likely.
I have told what I think is true from my understanding.
If you don't understand it or thinks it's bs it's fine. Just leave it.
My goal is not to awaken any of you.
I just posted it because it felt true to me.
And if someone else resonated that's good enough.
I understand when you say it sounds BS and empty.
I would have said the same a few years back.
And I don't think anything I have written could have changed that opinion.
You see the words just appear as patterns to you.
The meaning is generated internally.
Nothing in what you wrote makes sense. Do you know what a double negative is?
But you can always copy paste my replies to your modern LLMS and ask what I am talking about. Maybe they can settle for sure I am full of shit..
The question is settled; a software LLM is not needed.
You are focused on trying to understand truth through axioms which you have already assumed to be be true.
Can't you see the contradiction?