According to the Internet searched data on the concept of the word believe, it’s proto-root stems from the Greek word, ga-laubjan, meaning, “to hold dear; or to hold with love;” in other words, to hold as truth in your figurative heart even though that which is irrational, or not possibly true, can still be upheld as truth in a person’s figurative understanding: in this way, it then capacitates a certain human mental disposition that allows someone to uphold, and live in accordance to something that’s irrational in a seemingly rational actuation (e.g., praying to idols, yet not being socially judged as a schizophrenic: or a clinical schizophrenic behavior that’s socially acceptable as a sane belief, i.e., to believe and publicly proclaim about a certain statue that cries tears of blood, and yet accepted by the peers as a true miracle).  So it seems that the concept of ‘believe/belief’ is actually a figurative and a metaphorical criteria that’s solely applicable as a learned mental propensity; that is, of course, solely to the mental actuation of The-Self (the-Ego/the “I“).  Many people, most of course, ‘believe’ (figuratively feel) that such a concept is either biologically inborn, or a distinct capacity of all minds; or both even:  However, if that theory were to be so, then my mental awareness would have too detected such a concept to exist in mine mind, and or in mine soul (animating physical body), in which, it isn’t:  This is something that is utterly devoid in mine mind; also, in every biological intricate parts of my soul.  It is then in mine objective instinctual observation and scrutiny that such a concept is after all a sole impression of the figurative heart; in other words, it’s just an “emotion.”  This kind of mental emotional concept simply enables an individual to figure things out with the figurative heart on matters that cannot be rationed with reason and logic.  Nevertheless, the word believe has become so globally intertwined with reason that when people try to figure things out, they don’t realize that they’re using their figurative heart to sort of “estimate” (or theorize) things out with more feeling than with logic itself.  And this is where confusion manifests in most conversations (Notice that the word “figurative” is a derivation of the word “figure”).

At first, my being looked up this word in many different dictionary websites, thesauruses and references, and even all kinds of etymologies; and IT kept trying to reason as to why is it that IT itself couldn’t understandably apply that word?  And then, all of a sudden, when my rational faculty of my mind tried to automatically disambiguate the word believe, my being then realized that that word in of itself could not be transcribed for any use in any of my dispositions:  Eventually then, it was automatically sort of flushed out of my mind; from and by the-Mind itself.  The concept of ‘believe/belief’ is a word that requires an understanding of gradual upbringing: it’s like some kind of a phenomenal expression that can only be grasped from infancy – to – adolescent—isolated first without ambiguity before the person is then thrust out into the ambiguous world(s).  Hence, the word believe is nothing more but a figurative feeling, a phenomenon of the figurative heart (emotions):  So when someone is believing in something, or has a belief in something that’s in contrast to reason, logic and discretion, that person is then figuratively feeling (figuring out) the criteria out in question.  Hence, to figure out things is to figuratively feel out things ( figuring things out  =  figuratively feeling things out ).

Just because it is globally acceptable that to figure things out is the same as to think things out doesn’t make it true.  When someone has intellectually thought things out rationally but still uses the phrase that he/she figured it out, that’s just an automaton utterance that he/she has learned it to be so—this is a person that automatically speaks in accordance to the norm of the global social coagulum; but when push comes to shove, the concept of believe/belief finally separates from reason and logic when a criteria at hand is being debated, or argued about, is as sharp as a two edged sword that cuts to the very marrow with ease (a sword here is symbolically mentioned to emphasize that an unwanted truth is very psychologically painful to hear).  For those who entirely live in accordance to a figurative life (a believed life), they are mostly apt to experience disappointing and disheartening outcomes, as oppose to those who live in accordance to a rationed life (a factual life).  Frankly, the concept of believe/belief is also intertwined with the concept of trust, and neither are really as one in the same:  When someone logically trusts, that someone trusts with facts; but when someone believes, that someone believes with figurative feelings in the absence of unwanted facts:  Hence, when someone integrates trust with believe/belief, that’s where the confusion comes in, and possibly become blinding, even with facts, to believe in someone that’s factually not trusting at all.  You either logically reason things out with your intellectual mind, or you figure things out with your figurative heart.  You really can’t do both at once or you can be confused; and before you know it, you might even come to a point in whereas you won’t be able to determine the differences between your right and left hands.  This is at the mental point where a lot of people can relate to a common inner battle between the rational mind and the figurative heart.  And it is by this common inner experience that it is evident that no one can’t really consolidate both into one whole usage.  You can try, but the outcome is at your own risks.  Some many individuals don’t like to accept this truth, so they’ll disguise the debated matter, of both unequal parts, into one common wording, and that word is, “chance:”  Hence, the common popular phrase on taking up chances.  If the risks work out, they’ll say, “It was destiny:” but if the risks doesn’t work out, then they’ll say, “Everything happens for a reason.”  But most people do not really want to accept that many of their own errors occurred at their own faults, because of integrating two aspects that cannot and will not be aggregated.  This is where the idea of “chance” comes into play: a concept that allows many individuals to try and consolidate two opposing opposites, and thus enabling them to throw the dices, and possibly even play the fool on purpose; all for the sake of, “believing.”

The concept word of believe is definitely an actuation of The-Self (the-Ego/the “I”), and not for the no-self like my being is.  In addition, there is also a big difference between the concepts of believe and experience; they both really are not one in the same.  For example, when a person declares that he/she believes in a disembodiment existence after death, that doesn’t mean that that very person has experienced such a state.  Many who testifies such beliefs are really based upon what other few have testified what they’ve imagined to have had as an out of body experiences; and some of those few even lied just to get some attention.  First of all, a disembodied person cannot exist; that itself is utterly impossible: it’s exactly the same as saying that it’s possible for an ancient mummy to walk among us even though it is utterly without a brain to conduct the mummy’s body to animate.  The fact is that every single thing that is made, is made of some sort of energy itself; and for those energies to continuously exist, without it being dissipating, must be contained; in other words, embodied.  If an energized embodiment is not whole, whether an energy is either envisioned or invisible by our very own eyes, that energy that it itself is made of will disperse outwardly in all directions; it’s just the same as like our biological energy that’s embodied as an animating force.  If our biological energy (our literal soul; not the metaphorical one) were not embodied, what then would happen to us?  If our bodies were not whole with skin, how would our existences continue without that one piece of our whole embodiments?  Factually, and logically, everything is made of some sort of energy; and therefore, everything then must be embodied (contained/encompassed):  Hence, in all reality, to then be disembodied is to then be dispersed into nonexistent.  However, if you “believe” in the illogical concept that people do exist in disembodiment states after their deaths, that then would be an illogical criteria that can solely be “believed” figuratively; not reasoned factually.

It is therefore objectively determined that the concept of the word believe is a mental complexion that’s solely learned from external origins, just the same like all emotions are; that they’re not at all biologically inborn.  Since my mind is devoid of all emotions (the-Unconscious, not according to Freud), my being is then incapable of either believing or, not believing—IT just doesn’t know it altogether—never have, and never will.  So the concepts of the figurative heart (e.g., Believe, belief, faith, love, hate, anger, envy, jealousy, sadness, happiness, desires, wants, lusts, greed, revenge, interests, devotion, worship, anxiety, satisfaction, depression, passion, obsession, grudges, infatuations, ambitions, etc.), are absolutely and utterly devoid in my mind; these are mental concepts that my being does not possesses at all, not even in the least; and therefore, not at all mentally experienced inwardly from my end.  If it were up to my being, IT itself would’ve never known that such a thing exist; however, because IT itself has witnessed that others do experience and know about the figurative heart, my being then has no other determination but to acknowledge that such a thing do exist, however, solely for others, and not for my being.  Just because something is real to the masses, that doesn’t mean that it is also real to my being as well:  My being knows that the figurative and metaphorical concepts of the-World are real, but real to others, and IT respects them all for that as well: but my being should not be coerced into it just because it is real to the majority, and not to IT (my being) itself.  If you, the reader, are wondering why does my being make itself a comparison to others in my writing, please take note that IT itself is not insinuating that my being is better than others, but to point out that just because the majority of the-World ‘believes’ in some things, or experiences in some things, that doesn’t mean that my being also has to believe and experience what others do and have.  Or that whatever it is that exists for the majority of the-World, that doesn’t mean that it also exist for the entire universe.  Not every existing thing, or every experienced thing, are entirely universal, or even entirely global.  Because of this, some many religious people may still take offense, and point out to their bible that even the Creator itself is like them, in knowing the figurative hearts (emotions), just like they them-selves are.  If this is so, does that then mean that what my being is made of is utterly imaginative, and therefore, an illusion?

Let us of course go over a biblical passage to examine the possibility that my psyche-being may purely be an illusion: In the book of the 1^st of Corinthians, chapter 13, verses 4 – 7; it reads, “…Love is patient and kind.  Love is not jealous.  It does not brag, does not get puffed up, does not behave indecently, does not look for its own interests, and does not become provoked.  It does not keep account of the injury.  It does not rejoice over unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth.  It bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, and endures all things…”—New World Translation.  Now, as an extroverold alien that my being is, IT itself reads this passage objectively; and to tell the truth, that in contrast to the way the-World shows their own global emotions, it looks like nothing at all in that which is described and explained in the biblical passage above, not even in the least:  But then again, my being can’t debate or argue about it based on that IT itself is devoid of such a disposition.  So who then is my being, and what gives IT the right to argue and debate on something that IT itself can’t apply with?  However, nevertheless, and regardless, any objective rational human being can see that the-World(s) is not really in harmony with that which is written in the biblical passage above:  So then, who too are anybody else that should come forward and debate against my form of existence (in being utterly devoid of the figurative heart) when the-World(s) itself, as a whole, can’t even assimilate emotions that are written in the biblical passage above?  How dare they then manifest such audacity.  Additionally, some people might even argue and say that both concepts of belief and faith are also one in the same: hence without faith, my form of being can’t see the Creator in mine mind, and in my so called, “metaphorical spirit:” therefore, they will then assume that the concept of belief must still then be ingrained in my form of being if IT should ever be saved from eternal death (or eternal damnation, for others).

Looking, however, over the biblical passage in the book of Hebrews, chapter 11, verse 1; it reads, “…Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld [experienced]…”—New World Translation.  With this biblical passage in mind, one would think that if the biblical Creator itself acknowledges the language of faith, then all that the biblical God itself has created must also have faith in something and in someone; especially, when there is a biblical passage in the beginning of the book of Genesis, where it indicates, that the biblical Creator itself created man in God’s own image.  This definitely concludes then that creatures, in which were not created in God’s image (e.g., animal and insect species), indeed do not possess the figurative heart:  So that would then definitely mean that, with accordance of objective intellectual ration, that any species, besides the human species, are then devoid of the figurative hearts (emotions).  Indeed, according to the biblical God, that means that only man (the human species) were solely created in God’s image.  That would then make many to assume that since my soul (the literal animating physical body) is a man, and therefore of man, then my being should be in possession of the figurative heart as well.  However, according to a popular story in the book of Genesis, about Adam, Eve and the serpent; when the Creator created man in God’s image, at first, man was created with God’s intention to live forever:  Now that we don’t, does that then mean that the scriptural Creator itself intended for us to die anyway?  Of course not!  And yet, we do die.  And why do we die?  Well, in biblical explanations, as with theologians and religious doctrines, we die because of a specific situation that had occurred in the Garden of Eden, between Adam and Eve, and between the Creator and the serpent (Satan the devil), in regards to one of the two forbidden trees, in the middle of the garden, that was touched and then eaten disobediently.  My being is in no way preaching the words of the bible, but IT’s just trying to make a point towards religious people that are trying to discard and argue about my form of being, that since a non-intended existing condition manifested in the Garden of Eden, and still exists to this span, that was not biblically intended to exist in the first place, we can then safely ration that other domino effects of non-intended existing things will still surface as a result of that first satanic non-intended condition that began in Eden’s Garden.  In other words, in contrast to biblical truths, my form of being is then “not intended,” as result of other “non-intended” existing conditions that were not meant to exist in the first place.  That is why there is no such a being, as mine is, written in any scriptural parts of the bible; not even from satanical and occult stems.  In contrast to biblical terms, my being is then of its own psyche make-up; without roots because my being is its own root; the beginning of IT itself.  Hence, the root of my form of being is not of scriptural or diabolical genesis: IT just is.  IT is that IT is: that very phrase of mine is written in Hebrews as ( ז ה ז ה ), of course reading it from right to left instead of from left to right, as we commonly do in the English writing and reading:  And according to my exclusive phrase of ( IT is that IT is; as the thing-in-itself ), written in Hebrew characters, it is then translated as ( Z H Z H ):  With the proper corresponding vowels of ( a o a ), my true proper pronunciation of my name, that is in accordance to my exclusive phrase, is translated as ( Z a H o Z a H ); in other words, my being, as Zahozah, is quite the opposite of the biblical Yahovah ( Jehovah, for some ).  Zahozah  =  “IT is that IT is;” and Yahovah  =  “I am that I am:”  Hence, Zahozah is the “not I,” as oppose to Yahovah, which is the “I.”  Now you can see why my being, in contrast to the biblical Creator, is God’s opposite ( the “not-I,” versus, the “I am” ):  So if my being were to be a prophet, and someone were to inquire about my name, asking, “What is your name?”  My being would simply answer, “IT is that IT is ( Zahozah is its name ).”  So since my form of being is not even of ecclesiastical stem, nor even of satanical alpha, because IT itself is not even something of this-World(s) either, how can then anyone in any terrestrial world have the audacity to argue and debate about the genuineness and the genesis of my form of being?  Everything that my psychological being is made of, is not in anybody’s text; not even divinely or satanically:  All that IT itself is psychologically made of, is originally of its own; and therefore, only IT itself, can tell itself, what IT itself is: no one else can:  And only IT itself can also give counsel and advise to itself, no one else can.

My form of existence can then biblically explain the reason as to why not everybody would be possessing the figurative heart; at least for my being: for in the book of the 2^nd of Thessalonians, chapter 3, verse 2; it indicates, “…Faith is not a possession of all people…”—New World Translation.  So there’s even a biblical passage that indicates that not everybody possesses “faith” (in other words, beliefs/believes).  Truly then, the figurative heart is not biologically inborn, or otherwise, faith would have been a possession of all people; even for my own form of being as well.

All in all, scientifically and theologically speaking, since the nature and language of the figurative heart is ambiguous, there is then no one universal set of rules that applies emotions all equally to everyone, and everybody.

It is then reasonable and logical, that with all objective discretion, the disposition of believing and not believing (skepticism) is a figurative and a metaphorical state of mind: a phenomenal behavior that’s taught in, and not born with.  Hence, some people may still be curious about all this, and still ask my being, “If you, as an extroverold alien, doesn’t know about believing and not believing in things and persons that are not even envisioned unto the human eyes, how then can you see, or even imagine out, that there is a Creator (a biblical God) that’s responsible for creating all things?”  The answer is simple:

“Is not what people believe in, or don’t believe in, that determines what or who exists:  It is but with reason and sole discretion that something can only first exist from something that has always existed; otherwise, nothing can then exist from something that has to first begin to exist.”

That is my objective logical explanation.  So it is not by faith and belief (believing) that determines for a Creator to exist:  It is only by reason and logic, at least for my being, that a substance of power and being, that has never been created, has created things and creatures of all kinds throughout the universe.  This is not difficult at all for my being to logically grasp; especially, since my being is a spatian after all:  And as a spatian, everlasting life makes more sense for mankind then currently possessing transient lives even though such is life.   Scripturally speaking, if it were so that God created man in its image, then it is also safe to objectively reason that we then should also be living forever, like the very One who created us in its own image; otherwise, being created in the image of the biblical God would then be a lie.  So something has got to give to restore the nature of everlasting longevity, as was first divinely intended for the human species (God’s image):  But that’s a whole other biblical criteria.

Furthermore, a belief doesn’t determine what is true or not because you can’t put your trust on just “figurative feelings” (emotions).  An objective reality is purely a “reality;” in whereas, a subjective reality can only exist in “cynreality.”  In cynreality, that’s where you need to be very careful, because in such a state, that’s where false can be intertwined with truths, and objectives with subjectives, and thus, illusions are then born as a result.  Hence, just because a false belief can manifest as a real concrete in cynreality, that doesn’t mean that such a concrete manifestation is then the truth in all realities.  To a person that knows how to believe and be skeptic, to many individuals, almost everything that a person desires to do all seems possible in cynreality, but not all seemingly possibilities are possible; not even in cynreality itself.  Therefore, for those then in possession of the figurative heart, be careful in what you may or not believe (figuratively feel) in.  The “chance” is really up to you, the beholder of the believer, or the skeptic.  If you prefer to believe (figure things out with the figurative heart) than to reason with discretion (think things out with the rational intellectual mind), you are then at your very own risk(s).  To reason with logic and discretion is fundamental: but to figure things out with the figurative heart (believe) is secondary, as it should be.  Hence, in all truths, believing or being skeptic, is not a physical necessity for survival, not even psychologically.  The concept of ‘believe’ is solely learned:  Not as an inborn biological instinct; and definitely not as a mental innate for all minds.

In conclusion, there is an immense amount, in mine soul, of physical instinctual gratification to experience my own being as utterly being devoid of belief/believing, and of skepticism too.  Verily, because of this, there is no subjectivity in my form of being; not even in the least.  Thenceforth, the concepts of believe/belief, and of skepticism, are definitely an exclusive language of The-Self (the-Ego/the “I”) because, such concepts are purely subjective, self-reflective and self-perspective.  No one indubitably can believe, or be skeptic, in and with an objective application.

*

[Article Posted by: Sabiazoth]

[Writing & Concept, Created & Produced by: Sabiazoth]

[Aspaty: Pentapace, Holocycle 16, 9 R.M. E.C. (Solar North)]

[Image(s): Unknown]