Holes,
every where,
holes in
people.

Everything we do is an attempt to
fill
the
-m.
Voids are vacuous -- left unattended,
they are wounds, or virgins. Harmful or unfulfilled.

Love is hole-filling.
Sincerity is depth, and
happiness is success.
Despair is
cavity.

'She took something from me -- a part of me is gone that I'll never have again.'

There is no p-
ure blood; there is no being wit-
hout tran
s
plantation.
That is becoming.
That is human living.

i'm not calling it a mass conspiracy -- i think we're neither sophisticated nor coordinated enough to perform something like that on a world-wide scale. but it is
something
-- something right in front of us, while hiding in and among everything, everyone. it's surely more like a grand, massive misperception, due to no one's direct intent but to a universal condition as to who and what we are

.

God. The deepest, most intimately
obscure parts of me, of everyone,
that penetrate into this conscious world,

peeks in, as though
through slitted paper,
between and throughout
the mediating delays of
apperception and experience.


Love. The becoming-God.
As gods ourselves, we incline
to unify while retaining our
plurality, our independence.
It is impossible, but this
is what we do,

liberating ourselves
by adding restrictions.

We know ourselves by
auto-perception, relying on
the eyes, ears, tongues,
bodies

of neighbors, parents,
lovers, friends, children,
teachers, colleagues,
others.

We feel ourselves, show
love for ourselves, by auto-
stimulation, the fingers,
lips, tongue, arms, words,
praises, skin, embraces,
collisions,

of those whose
perceptions we prefer.
It is automatic

even to where it is identical
to loving them.

Otherwise, there'd
be no purpose
in it.

Fear. The denial, rejection
of these things

because some-
times, they only
bring

pain.

An introduction to existentialism

Is this the limit to Being? Is all I have to do is put on a happier tune and dance around like an idiot, have a good meal, and walk out that door to fool everyone that all is alright, that I somehow know what I'm doing? Do I just need a girlfriend? Do I just need a friend? Do I just need a new journal? Do I just need more sex? Do I just need more exercise? Do I just need to be more diligent? Do I just need faith? Do I just need enlightenment? Do I just need to love someone? Do I just need to love myself? Do I just need to keep fighting? Do I just need to relax? Do I just need religion? Do I just need philosophy? Do I just need to appreciate 'the little things in life'? Do I just need to 'remember the big picture'? Do I just need something? Do I need nothing? Is that all?

Logic can tell us
how to think
and express ourselves
clearly,

but

it can tell us absolutely
nothing
whatsoever
about either the way the world is
or the way it should be.

No
worldview
follows
from
intelligibility.

Intelligibility
and its formalization
as funda-
mental rules
of logic

can only help us articulate a particular worldview
-- a worldview that may or may not be accurate.
Logic
requires
only
that
we,
not reality,
make sense.

-- Thomas Kasulis,
Intimacy or Integrity

Individual organisms do not branch;
only populations do
-- and the causes of a population's branching
can rarely be reduced
to the adaptive improvement
of its individuals.

-- Stephen Jay Gould
(concerning punctuated equilibrium),
"Darwinian Fundamentalism", 1.12.97

we are humans

we live

we create

and

and

we die

we destroy

we are gods.

"It seems the more detailed and rich the analysis,
the more impossible a true comparison becomes."

-- Thomas Kasulis, Intimacy or Integrity

"You cannot get it
by doing something about it
;
you cannot get it
by doing nothing about it.
...
Wherever you look for it,
it runs away
;
and if you try to deceive the devil
by pretending to yourself that
you are not looking for it,
you certainly
won't deceive
the Tao."

-- Alan Watts, Talking Zen

"Those who claim
to lead the masses
must resolutely refuse
to be led
by
them,
if we want to avoid
mob law
and desire ordered progress
for the country.
I believe
that mere protestation
of one's opinion
is
not only not enough,
but
in matters of vital importance,
leaders
must
act
contrary to the mass of opinion
if it does not commend itself
to their reason."

-- Gandhi, Young Indian 2.23.22

There is no benefit
to avoiding mistakes.
On the contrary,
there is
an art
to making them,
as the only real form
of honest
learning.
The discipline of it
is in
listening closely to one's heart
and reason,
one's
bodymind,
to avoid making
the wrong mistakes.

"What is the value of completeness
if the possibilities generated
during the classification process
have absolutely nothing to do
with the subject area?"

-- Klaus Glashoff, "Problems of
Transcribing Avinabhava
into Predicate Logic"

Indeed,
there is the case in which disbelief is only support for the construction of the object or substance, the ontology, disbelieved --

atheism is the validation of something divine to disbelieve.

The game of God is still played by those who deny God;

the Universal Conspiracy is potentialized (and thus given possibility and room for actuality) --

for this is the very nature of construction,

constructivism,

of nominalist becoming.

It's therefore also the very nature of disbelief, of denial.
In this scheme, of course we only continue to affirm the domain of choices

even by the choice not to choose.

But the problem with games is that we are capable, and often do, forget the rules. I have no contention with God if I have no memory of what God is,

or at least what God's about.
What you have proposed counter to this, my friend,

is the issue,

the superordinate problematic,

of power:

"But what if I kill you
[if you don't play the game]
?"

We are playing life-or-death --

literally, another game with overlaying rules to the above.
Religions,
at least those parts that contend with power --

the dominant and the oppressed,
death and fear of it --

hold the card for challenging this game,

for they are their strongest in spiritual quality

(the origin of purpose for religions)

under the weakest conditions,
at the very brink of their supposed

losing.

(Thus, it is true that you really do sometimes win when you lose.)

Of course the idea is that power belongs to the winner, and that is how the domain of what we call the spiritual

transforms the game of power:

it wins by its loss,

by its surrender to death,

by its crucifixion,

by its Forgetting of death

and thereby of the rules

of the game of power.

As such, the superordination of power over the games of choice and belief and the like, is only so by its affiliation and not by some
intrinsic significance.

But isn't belief the very source
(or at least the vehicle)
to even Religion?

Let's say this:

you must be engaged in
something,
even if in nothing

(which validates there
being something)

We call this belief, passion, whatever you like.
But let's not forget the difference between religion and Religion,

the spirit and the institution.
One only exists by the game of power;

the other can't be contained.

in a dream, there were two of me. one is the recognizable version, the philosopher and dreamer, the one i know best. the other seemed exactly that: other; the symbol of the vision, the master of silence and intensity, the christ.

both are hunted by the tyrannosaur, a constant monster-figure of my childhood. its footsteps thunder throughout every location, the sound of death approaching.

one of us fears it more than the other; in fact, the other is completely without fear. he flies over the head of the monster without a thought. the philosopher cowers and hides. he reasons the best strategies for facing it, but must still resign to a life of reaction and retreat. he must fear, for the structure of his world requires the object of his fear. the sound of footsteps is significant of his reasonable worry.

the other does not cower, he does not flee. the tyrannosaur is hardly any more significant than the trees. the only thing that keeps him from flying, from soaring away into the unknown, is his compassion for the dreamer.

"If we are to reach real peace
in this world
and if we are to carry on a real war
against war,
we shall have to begin with children;
and if they will grow up in their natural innocence,
we won't have to struggle;
we won't have to pass fruitless
idle
resolutions,
but we shall go
from love to love
and peace to peace,
until at last all the corners of the world
are covered with that peace and love
for which
consciously
or unconsciously
the whole world is hungering."

-- Gandhi (Young Indian, 11.19.1931)

The problem is not that they fail to know,
but that we fail to challenge them
with the opportunity to find out.