Is of the category,
the means by which the crime is committed.
It leaves unanswered,
the motive and the killer.
Sorry I don’t think I properly understand this.
Were I to take it literally. Then I would have to say that motive and killer, are human, or more broadly, life traits. There is no underlying purpose or motive for nature. It does not create and destroy by some form of choice.
Time can’t have any other properties - it's fundamental, ie it has a single property, expansion of itself at a rate relative to its infinite past, without requiring external causes. Its external cause is only ever its past, lesser self. It only ever becomes more of itself, but its very nature is one that automatically creates a duality - Now, +Now.
Layers of differentiation occur due to warping, caused by the fundamental "inequality" of Now and +Now. Space itself is the first level of warping (thus the huge relative distance between things like within atoms or between galaxies). The warping exponentially increases as time passes, as time grows, which cause space to overlap and contract into energy and, then later on, mass.
Taking your comment as meaning that my own conceptual proliferation, being a desire brought about by the self, is the motive and the killer, then I don't know what to say.
I'm talking about, for instance, when walking.
Being the walking.
Being the crunching gravel giving way underfoot.
Being the delight of the birdsong heard in the distance.
Being the experience of aghast at unwittingly stepping on and squashing a snail.
Being the experience of humility in the conditions.
Direct access that's not a head full of conceptual proliferation.
I don't live my life like this. I don't ever attempt to set it up so that I have situations where I would be calm like that. There is no chance, I'm an entertainment junky (which means most of the time I don't over conceptualise, at least in terms of becoming overly earnest). Part of the reason for that is because I live alone, and prefer my own company, and hate exercise, and discomfort.
I had a fluctuating emotional crisis that lasted about 18 years, it made me constantly irritated and stole my joy in life, though I was never a positive based person. It was a physical affect that I could not ascertain the cause of. It became a neurosis, wherein the mental part was far more distressing than the physical side*. The suffering did lead me to philosophy though, but I haven't had enough time on the other side of what it has taught me, for me to become serene. I'm far too frightened of returning there, to take any significant life changing moves, to make peace with my mind, although the positive outcome could very well be quite favourable.
* I view mental illnesses, where there is no direct physical cause (accident, drugs, genetic etc), as being an emotional problem that goes into a toxic loop. The more attention the mind gives to it the worse it gets, the more the loop is intensified. It consumes one's consciousness making it difficult to make rational reactions, causing further emotional problems. One emotional problem leads into another. It can damage the ego program causing breakdowns and random things like delusions of grandeur.
We remain as the condition:
the unanswered question is open.
But it can be dismissed by logic. One can define what it must "sort of be like" and thus takes away all the layers of mistaken possibilities, like God, or even something more realistic like "that the totality is uncaused". It ties all the secondary level truths, which are of vital importance, into one logical reason for them to be truthful in the first place.
I think you might see this theory that is part of me now, as now being really just a delusional confidence building exercise, a delusion of grandeur. So be it. While I do get confidence from it, surety breeds confidence, it is just that it also because it just seems to fit into everything else, so I'm not seeing any reasons to dismiss it.
Well apart from this "still mind" business, which as I've mentioned does not fit into my present circumstances. Being outside of that though, or having not achieved that if you like, I could also call what you have a delusion of grandeur. It seems to me that those who attain the deepest understanding of reality, are more often than not, the most naturally sensitive people. If you are sensitive, you are likely to suffer more. This will cause some attributes to arise, like: negativity; scepticism; self-absorption; determination; a desire for solitude; reflection; desire to understand causes, empathy for the suffering of the unfortunate, etc.
Other than genetically, then from then on, your own life experiences will determine how you deal with those attributes. If the quest for truth begins early, when one is more naïve and say you cope well with controlling or beneficially steering the reactions your attributes cause, then you may be more inclined to the more mystical style of enlightenment, or you might get stuck in a uni. That is where part of your past self still is in your memories, most of which will never appear in your consciousness.
Others may have tougher time and be more hardened in some mental fashion. You have overly your earnest people, the "Needys", the need to be enlightened type, and you have the "Carefrees", and the not fully recovered from a "Breakdown-ers", the noticeably delusional - the "Self-Advertisers", the inwardly troubled "Jokers", and the Materialists like me who see the most real answers in the examination of things.
Lastly we have the Gurus, the ones appear to have the required wisdom-vibe.
We are all some of each, but with different mixes, different overall patterns. It is sometimes difficult to see where the delusions of grandeur are hidden.
It is easier to be the writer of words than to be the reality behind them. All our other roles in life are acts of habit, and so to can this be, it can be just a skill. The tests at this forum though, are more difficult than anywhere else I've seen, all the actors fall down if sufficiently questioned.
Over the years, there are some people I've not been able to dismiss as not being enlightened, but I haven't been paying that much attention in the last few years. I probably wont back here long unless I can find something novel to talk about or get too bored at work :) Tired of the old scripts. This has been fun though. I've discovered a bit more about my theory and had a nice bout of free range philosophical reasoning, discovering some things from my own mind. Who knows, maybe I've even learnt something about your way of thinking but don’t realise it yet (bearing in mind that I agree with pretty much everything you've said, either completely or from one angle, and the important sticking point, the still-mind, has to have more causes than just conversational ones).