Karma

In regards to this and this:

It sounds to me as though the question is whether a disregard for time would be damaging to the individual attempting to break away from the matrix, in which case it would only be damaging if the individual had not fully prepared themself for their own decision. If the question is, in fact, whether it would be damaging to the matrix itself in the eyes of others who percieve it, the answer would be entirely based on how many other individuals depend upon a shared reality with the person who has accepted this disregard for time and their own matrix. Using your logical model, this linear structure is, as you said, a web.
Since we are dealing with a consciousness instead of a physical manifestation, if we can accept that there is indeed a collective unconscious that joins these, there is great potiential for chain reaction — and what I would rather call a “breakdown” in the matrix than a destructive element.
From what we have collectively observed, this hasn’t happened, or at least not on a very noticeable scale.
That in itself brings me to the crux of it, because though observation is a physical thing, what we see has a very large impact on our general interpretation and perception. And this is where the observable breakdown begins. People are interdependant, and when we see what happens to the percieved reality of someone who gives up their reliance on “time”, it alerts us to that possibility - so if we can’t handle it, it becomes destructive to our personal matrix. That is a direct effect.
I define the accepted “reality” as the place where our perceptions overlap. So: in order for it to be destructive to this overall impression, it would have to directly affect enough individuals to break a large number of “sections of the web.”
So in short, if the question is to the destruction of the individual’s matrix, the answer is obviously yes, because that is the whole point of the person’s letting go of that dependency - but only compared to what the individual is used to, and so it is ONLY “damage” if the individual is still percieving in the same sense enough to categorize their reality as “damaged” in a bad way. So really, if the person enters into this with the intent of shifting this reality for themselves, it is not damaging to their own matrix! It is merely a shift — meaning that it is only “damaging” to those who rely on that particular individual’s matrix remaining static.
If the question is to the destruction of the shared matrix, which we percieve as the blanket “reality”, then the answer seems to be yes only in the case of a large-scale reaction of direct effect, and then again, only to those who rely on this blanket reality remaining static.
So after all this lengthy babble (which I’m only leaving here so you can see how I got to this point), I think the answer is in the definition of the word “damaging.” To those who can accept the change (which I should hope the initiator of a personal change like that would be able to), it is merely a shift. To those who consider it detrimental, it is indeed a destructive effect.

It is indeed only damaging to those who rely on the matrix in question maintaining a fixed state.

(I must note, “damage” is implied in this entry to be a Bad Thing. This may not always be true, and it may not be how he meant it. I used it this way to emphasize the difference between “damage” and “alteration” to a thing.)

There’s a rather large church not far from my house, on the way to my boyfriend’s. It also happens to be right across from where I spent a horrid year of sixth grade, but that’s not important. The only reason this church is memorable to begin with is because it has one of those large billboards, the kind that other businesses in the area use to post things like "DO YOUR DOORS NEED FIXED? WE HAVE FAST SERVICE" in big, blocky, black plastic letters. Their board has sayings. I think they are supposed to be advice, but sometimes I wonder. Through these, I would suppose, their aim is to advertise themselves to the prospective congregation driving by. So imagine you’re cruising along, and you see something like this: "BE KIND TO YOUR ENEMIES. IT MESSES WITH THEIR HEADS." Kind of ha-ha, right? I liked that one, personally. It’s true, and it’s kinda funny. Good bunch, good sense of humor. So now, imagine you drive past them again the next week and you see this: "CHANGE IS INCONVENIENT, EVEN FOR THE BETTER." ..What? It is? Maybe some people believe this, I don’t know. But it caught me off guard. It wasn’t witty, really, and it didn’t seem like a joke. Was it? It seemed, in fact, outright depressing. What are they trying to tell us? Sometimes change sure does suck. But when it’s for the better, how is that inconvenient? So the change from being "lost" to "seeing the light of God" becomes, by their statement, also inconvenient. And it seems to me that’s more undermining to them than anything else. It occured to me that perhaps they were trying to use reverse psychology to get us to think… in which case, well, it seems to have worked. So now that you know some of the history behind this place (there have been dozens of others, and if I remember other old ones I’ll mention them), let me get on to what I saw yesterday as I cruised down the road and glanced, out of habit, at their sign. It read: "EVEN A DULL PENCIL IS SHARPER THAN THE BRIGHTEST MIND." What is the first thing you think of when you see that? It doesn’t matter how smart you are. It doesn’t matter how smart you are, because a pencil is still technically sharper than you. You could be a genius, and it won’t stop anyone stabbing you in the face with a pencil. Lovely. It’s kind of insulting. But in a way that doesn’t even make sense, because who cares if a pencil is physically sharper than you? It doesn’t mean you’re any dumber. It seems to say, in fact, that no matter how smart you are, the brute force of something is still able to penetrate the physical form around that knowledge. Matter over mind? It has been my experience that this is the sore opposite of what most bastions of spirituality will tell you if you seem to be losing your faith. Is this at all in character coming from a church leaderboard? Is this reverse psychology again? Are they making some kind of tongue-in-cheek statement about the new security laws regarding airplane carry-on, and do they mean it as a joke or do they actually think pencils and other stabbity office supplies should generally banned? The only bit of advice I can surely draw from the thing is this: Don’t be a smart-ass, or someone’ll stab you in the brain with a pencil. Possibly God.