The "Source-Texts" of My Direct Self-Utterance are the Always-Living Word of Reality Itself, now (and forever hereafter) Spoken by Me to absolutely every one, and all, and All.

The "Source-Texts" of My Divine Avataric Word always Communicate Reality Itself in-present-time.

The "Source-Texts" of My Divine Avataric Word are the Perpetual and (now, and forever hereafter) Always Direct and Non-mediated Self-Utterance of My Real Person — As I Am.

The "Source-Texts" of My Divine Avataric Word are Addressed (by Me) directly to every particular individual — personally, but, also, in and As Reality Itself (and, Thus, Eternally Prior to the ego-"I"). Such is the Uniqueness of the Forever-Spoken Word of Reality Itself.

No matter how many times you read (or Listen to) My Divine Avataric Word, every time you read It (or Listen to It) you will "experience" unique and distinct responses, unique and distinct "subjective" activity, and a distinctly unique circumstance altogether.

Nevertheless, the reason that My Divine Avataric Word is (in Reality) new every time you approach It is not simply that you are always going through changes. Rather, the reason My Divine Avataric Word is always new (and Always Now) is that It Is the Direct Self-Utterance of Reality Itself — Which Is Always Already Prior to time, space, "location", "point of view", and ego-"I".

The conventions of everyday speech and writing are based on a social convention that is, in Reality Itself, untrue. The "I" of the presumed separate and independent "self" is an illusory (or, in Reality Itself, non-existing) and abstract (and, thus, universal, and inherently non-personal) identity, by which (as a device for social "dramatization", or relational reference) all common spoken and written language is proposed. My Divine Avataric Word is not spoken or communicated from — or, Ultimately, even to — the egoic "point of view".

It is commonly presumed (merely as a matter of convention, rather than of "experiential" observation) that intelligence and thought are functions of personal identity, inherently associated with a central and constant source-construct, which is the "I"-thought (or a separate "self", or a separate "personal mind", identified as the origin of intelligence, thought, and action in general).

However, in fact (confirmed by direct "experiential" observation), intelligence and thought are autonomous activities, associated with the brain-body-complex and with the structure and symbols of language itself (both verbal and abstract).

Truly, the exercises of intelligence and thought go on constantly, and, in general, without a context of "I"-reference (or of a separate-"self" presumption). Intelligence and thought are, in general, no more the evidence and the result of an active and central ego-identity than any instance of mere perception, originating (as it does) from the simple contact between the brain-body-complex and a source of sensation.

The "I"-reference is a convention of social representation — and, in fact, no definable, quantifiable, or comprehensively identifiable separate "self" is (or even can be) observed.

Likewise, no separate, definable, quantifiable, or comprehensively identifiable "personal mind" is (or even can be) "experienced" or (by any means) "known".

Thus, the "I"-reference, the separate "self", and the separate "personal mind" are mere (and otherwise un-"knowable") conventions of common speech — and, otherwise (or in, of, and as "themselves"), they are fictitious "entities", or socially and "subjectively" presumed myths.

In general, the "I"-thought does not arise in the context of active intelligence and active thought. The exercise of intelligence and thought does not, in general, include "I"-references — as if to remind oneself "who" is thinking, reading, counting, perceiving, talking, and walking.

Thus, the "I"-reference is, in general, reserved for socially interactive communication (and other forms of socially-dramatizing or socially-speaking mind) — and, otherwise, the "I"-thought (or "I"-concept) does not arise in the reveries of intelligence and thought (whether in the waking state or in the dreaming state).

My Divine Avataric Word is, primarily, a Spoken Message. However, That Message is not Spoken by an ego-"I" — nor is That Message Spoken (either originally or, forever hereafter, in any then-present-time moment) within a mere social context, or as an address to any mere "social ego".

Written language is, basically, a representation (or a picture) of spoken language. Therefore, My Divine Avataric Word is (in Its Written form) a visual Representation (or always Now-Spoken Textual Sign) That Extends (or Self-Radiates) My egoless Self-Nature, Self-Condition, and Self-State — Which Is the egoless Self-Nature, Self-Condition, and Self-State of all-and-All.

I Spontaneously Uttered the "Picture" that is My every "Source-Text" of Divine Avataric Word — each of Which is a by-Me-Given Means Whereby I Speak from and As the Reality-Position That Is Prior to egoity, Prior to the body-mind-complex, Prior to conditional existence, and Prior to time and space.

Therefore, My Written Word Is the Speech (or Direct Self-Presentation) of Intrinsically egoless (and Self-Evidently Divine) Transcendental Spiritual Conscious Light Itself — the Most Perfectly Self-Awakened (and Self-Evidently Divine) Self-Consciousness, the Heart-Word of Reality (Itself), Which Is the by-Me-Divinely-Avatarically-Self-Transmitted Inherent (and Tacit) Self-Apprehension of Being (Itself).

Ordinary speech and written language are a "theatrically"-conceived mode of communication, which (as such) is "played" upon the "fiction" of an ego-"I" — much as a tent for social meeting is hoisted on a centerpole.

Therefore, in the ordinary written language of English, the ego-word "I" is commonly capitalized, and everything presumed to be (at least grammatically) subordinate to the ego-"I" is shown in lowercase.

Indeed, everything that is grammatically and linguistically conceived to be "other" than the ego-"I" is grammatically subordinated to the egoic "I"-reference — and, thus and thereby, "defined" as "not-self".

Any presumed "persons" grammatically identified as "other" than the principal subject or speaker are commonly shown in lowercase only — unless they are being addressed or referred to by name.

Capitalization is otherwise commonly reserved for "big meanings", or whatever the "fictional" ego-"I" presumes to be somehow great, or even Larger (and, therefore, the ego presumes, "Greatly Other") than itself.

Thus, the "fiction" of ego-"I" is a mere grammatical convention — as is every "other", and, indeed, all of "not-self". The ego-"I", the "other", all of "not-self", all of "separateness", all of "relatedness", all of "otherness," and all of "difference" is a mere convention of speech (and of speech-born thought).

In this manner, grammar (or the conventional logic inherent in the autonomous proceedings of language itself) rules both daily life and all of human thought and philosophy — unless Reality Itself (Which Is Truth Itself) Intervenes, and subordinates all language to Itself