cheirography?

Often you cannot specify exactly where you are, because there's no foolproof way of localizing yourself in tathata.

Fear (Fundamental Explanation of All Reality) -theoretic exegesimals rely on the confusion between schizotomes and holotomes. Often some schizotome is passed off as a holotome. The monism of such exegismals is in major part due to the confusion which schizotomes create.

Imagine you had a tube containing instances of the mandelbrot set, all stacked together. All computations from the onctopoate. First off all, you would notice that this tube could only contain at most a countable infinity of copies of the mandelbrot set stacked together. Now, it's a mistake to argue that saying that "oh, but you're platonism seems to be contrary to the idea of dependent origination. you say that there's this fiber, or this filament of all instantiations, and you seem to be imbuing it with an independent existence. what gives, dude?" The confusion here is between schizotopes and holotopes of the mandelbrot set. Well. We can't really get our hands on the holotope directly. It's not palpable to us in much the same way that the development of culture across ten thousand primate societies isn't directly available research material, and truth be told, data collection is far more accurate than egotistic simulation by a particular species attempting to figure itself out, and then making extrapolations from its own instance of primates, to the entire class of primates: hypervariable surfing is pretty much impossible in autologous contexts. Direct perception of holotopes are kind of impossible for local inhabitants of the indranet. In order to directly percieve holotopes, senses need to be delocalized on the indranet. (remember that the indranet is a prana network, and the do reticulum is tathata based).