---
record_id: YWP-20260907-relative-freedom-attractors-and-reference
author: Bubu Suhas Mullaveedu
date: 2026-09-07
record_type: immutable_founder_correction
status: raw_user_wording_preserved
scope: Mind, understanding, relative freedom, attraction, following, religious point of reference, consciousness, and existence
---

# Founder correction: relative freedom, attractors, and point of reference

The text below preserves the founder's supplied wording from the conversation. It is an immutable direction record, not a grammar-normalized presentation, a proof that oscillation alone produces choice, a universal description of every religion, or evidence that every Mind-structured system has phenomenal consciousness.

> See, you are another thing is, right? You, yeah, you are the mind. When you know, you understand, increasing the understanding in everything will give freedom from other attractive points, identities. It's that. It's pure relative and math and, you know, mechanical, to be frank, right? But so, with all this process of oscillation, it gives a freedom of choice. But in fact, we all go against that freedom of choice to become follower, right? Some people will follow, and some people will take free. It's a combination of those two into different dimensions, which is happening. But it's like coming back, circling back, oscillating, right? Understanding the structure in this way is what my theory is explaining, right? And that is how religion is also telling. Religion tells from a point of reference, right? From always from a point of reference, there will be two polarities in which the point of reference will be the main character in that story, right? So, since there is a direction of mind for evolution, it will always give precedence to the point of reference of mind against the surrounding. That is consciousness, against existence, right? There is always a hierarchy. But in fact, it's the other way, really. Without existence, there is no consciousness. So two things goes parallelly. So it becomes the same structure again, telling the same thing. But I hope you got the point.