META(NOIA)
F[utu]Re-call
By Andrew J. Fisher (2003)
hompage: www.oocities.org/sablegnostique/
e-mail: sablegnostique@yahoo.com
Table of Contents
Chapter I:-------------Preface
Chapter II:------------Fist-in-the-Face
Chapter III:-----------Malpractice
Chapter IV:-----------Resh Voz (RV)
Chapter V:------------Go-Devil
Chapter VI:-----------Invisible Authority
Chapter VII:----------Conclusion
**************************************************************
Chapter I
Preface
Metanoia: F[utu]Re-call
The object of this Manifesto will be to present the reader with an opportunity to
realize and develop skills which shall enable one to dive deep into unforseeable
recesses of the human mind in the order of integrating memory and present criteria.
The present criteria will be further explored as you learn to receive with the honest intent
of learning to transmit, a strength which will enable the present transmission to
elucidate these "gaps", a form of confirmation if you will. In order to fully grasp
this essence ofthought, there is a useful analogy which I will now introduce to you.
It concerns the concept of Nothingness. Think of this term as a sign for something
for which it represents. In order for anything to exist, it must have a name or
at least the capacity to be represented by a name. In the case of Nothingness, it is easily
understandable that we are dealing with a slippery concept.
However, I believe this analogy should help make things clearer: Nothing cannot be
defined, only confined. For example: "There is nothing in the box." In this specialized
case, one must name that absence which exists within the box. This is an answer.
Perhaps we are speaking of Logistics. Or perhaps of need. Of course, one could merely
not answer the question of what is in the box. Then, you see, nothing was said.
But, even then, the participant was speechless. Without speech. And if this box
exists in a vacuum, then one could say there is nothing within and nothing without. It
is important to note that some words refer to the "actual" while others refer to
no-object. There are the spacers in language such as the word "in". There is no
referent for this word. Much, perhaps most, philosophy deals with abstract terminology. There
are some philosophers who occasionally make use of analogy and even go as far as
writing novels to aid in the elucidation of their philosophies (ie. Sartre). In
this book, which ideally will be a philosophical text, I will attempt to make avid use of
colored speech.
Where shall we begin? The fact that this is a Manifesto should engage us in the process
of presumption, assuming that we already have at-hand the capacity to decipher hidden
meanings from an otherwise mysterious text. Please feel free to gleen your own interpretaions for that is the only way that this text will make any sense. I will
avidly make use of past-reference. This should add a degree of coherence.
The topic of this presentation should be obvious in the title: namely, future memory.
It certainly is an odd idea that the future can be recalled, is it not? How can
we recall something which has not yet occured?
I believe that a clear discussion of memory is necessary. The word "memory" is taken
from the concept of mindfulness. The word "mindful" would seem to mean aware, to
be conscious. Therefore, perhaps we might be able to say that memory is consciousness. And, as we we know, all consciousness is consciousness of something. What then does
it entail to be unconscious? To be 'knocked-out'? What does it mean to be near death
yet not dead? How close can one get to death without being dead? You see, even
unconsciousness has its consciousness. And, I believe, likewise that even atheism has
its God. Something seems to have taken precedence.
Diversion: An Honest Revealing
In my humble opinion, I believe the only way I am going to be able to get through
this book is to make these "Diversions". So please allow me my play, and hopefully
you will be able to see through my meandering and glean some meaning into the overall
structure of the book.
* sit stihl and weight, and spoon enough you'll empty
that doubt-fool prescience w/i the absence into a wise
vessel of leanings that hangs low and deep. and maybee
watt wheel be found is the reality of two distinct truths:
coming-upon & leaving-alone*
Coming-upon is the pre-reflective process of divine assimilation with a leftist swing.
And leaving-alone is the conceptualization of a stahl. Stahling is an important
concept to demystify. It is so omni-present in this changing world that to confront
its delaying would be to resort once again to the coming-upon.
"Stahling" as I shall call and spell it, is the phenomenon of doing nothing. It is
a delay. It is the result of not making a decision, or at least the decision to
do nothing. It is directly related to the everyday aspect which we shall call the
"cue". This cue is of a subliminal yet consensual nature. It can be agreed upon by two or
more people. Where there is a Stahl, cues abound. They take their form in the external.
We will write more of this later.
In the Kabala, each letter of the Hebrew alphabet has a "symbol" which corresponds
to it. In order to fully elucidate the point which I am attempting to make we shall
examine the Hebrew letter 'tzaddi' which means fish-hook. Maybe you are wondering
if there is a letter/symbol for "fish" then. The answer is yes. The letter is 'nun'.
This particular Hebrew letter, as all of the other letters, also corresponds to a
Tarot card. There are 22 letters and 22 cards (0-21): zero being the fool. The
card which fits with the letter 'nun' is the Death card. A cue is much like a fish-hook. It's
sole purpose is to draw you in. To sum up, if you do not "allow" yourself to get
attached to this "flow", then you are in the stahl "mode". Unfortunately, it is
difficult to not-do and not develop symptoms of paranoia/psychosis or bad conscience.
Can a connection be made between stahling, future memory, and nothingness? I believe
so. One way to forsee future events is through comtemplative-deception. What is
meant by this is to plan a future series-of-actions (with or w/o a goal in mind)
and to do something else. Somehow by doing this the future can be divined. So tell me,
can a stahl, with the imminent threat of not knowing, be the creeping DOOM of which
I speak? Answer: it is merely by means of "plodding" that one will confront/dredge
up information which has its place in both the past and the future. A fine mix a haste,
doubt, and Metanoia will reveil the dis-tractions which keep you in check and make
you that aforementioned vessel of reception. The word Qabala means to "receive",
and there can be no reception without transmission.
*Yes, to be a Philosopher is to be a-fool. And I have had my phil. Unfortunately
I flunked. "And it was good!" No(l). And yes, the dead can dance. A beastly Dee
wheel pull through with Nitro-Glycirine. Ye..Cee. RE: evil. A gain; sacred Will.
ROTA. Ptah-or {balasted}. Severed head, Crown of Thornes. Cee-row. Black-TAOT. TarTraTarT.
Mo(ewe)th. A-fool of WATT? [e] cunnexxon patrixide. pele-fit*
As you can now see, this leftist swing of the "coming-upon" can lead us into the labyrinth
of where-are-we (going)? And the answer for all-times is merely Go. There is not
a "with it" to go with. There is nothing in the box. Back to hebrew: "g"-gimel (means: camel and/or bridge). Yes, we've stahled and it is divine. The
camel is the vessel. A means. There is no-end. End Game {the last moves in a game
of chess}. A transvaluation is a re-evaluation. The advent of the Death-ov-God
(1888) is the the last spinne. Cott. FIND what binds. To compell is to drive together.
To possess is to be possessed. To use is to be used.
*Neu-concept: Tube. Pronounced 2-b. Is it of a Logistical stance that I raise this
idea? Dilly-Dali! Your bass has no grain. Don't ask Ebert to hitchhike after watching
Braveheart. All I ask is that you give hymn a brake. Cathode-rey. Tube has a sister: Orb. Pronouced Or-b. Let me give you a few examples. It is a matter of the master-as-slave mentality. Addiction. Death. Kyl (d-Construct) or
be Kyld (d-Constructed). As you can see, we must adamantly d-Con, lose oneself in
this engagement, lest the demise of self-dissection by the Other. But could this
Other be none other but ourselves?*
There are many theories which we must confront before any sense of linguistic aptitute
is achieved/maintained. Therefore let us not regress but, instead, use this twillight
moment to pave the ground which lies ahead. It is true that we will only be given so many short-space intervals to take advantage of. Yes, it is good to take advantage,
for without that fork-lift the meal would be uneaten. However, we have already digressed
too much. Perhaps this says something about the nebulous nature of the topic of which this book is about. But I honestly don't think that is the case. It is
a matter of the breathing-in(spiration) of this 5-th element we call life. There
is no frustration in plodding-on! But what
element will I tether myself in as I dive into the sky? Or do I bore my soul into
the earth?
Recently I heard a good analogy about the process of composing a work of art. It
is this (more or less): the work wants to come together. It's many pieces (of the
puzzle) desire unification.
Unfortunately there is no overall outline to be had, no Blueprint so to speak. So
then, piece by piece, must the composition be enacted'. Things must be checked and
re-checked until everything "falls into place". And I believe that the beauty of
the matter is that the pieces -do- want to fall into place.
Allow me to tell you that my Astrological sign is Pisces. Notice the similarity between
the word 'pisces' and the word 'pieces'. The symbol for this sign is two fish swimming
in opposite directions. There seems to be an innate idea-notion of movement within this represention. It seems to conjure up the mythological
figure of the snake swallowing its own tail: futility. This is the notion of 'no-use'.
But this would seem to denote a falling-back-upon. For if something is of no use,
then we would resort to the aforementioned 'Stahl'. This concept, which is integral to the structuring of this Manifesto, will be touched upon again and
again so that we can come to a real understanding of what it means. The word "fall"
seems to be related to "fail". Soon enough we will come to realize that terminology
from differing sciences gives us a more liberal-universal understanding of what we
are attempting to d-Construct. One such term is "default". This connotes a setting which
a computer will back back upon if none is specified by the user. It is a psychological
neccesity to have something to fall-back upon. [I am hoping that a true understanding of the Fall will give us hope in grasping this enigmatic concept of Future-Call]
Fail-Safe: capable of compensation for a mechanical failure. Back-up. It is my idea
that in order to proceed we must first be able to reverse. This is because, like
many other thinkers, I believe than there are three worlds, with a fourth being a
re-turn to the first. Ah yes, this is the first piece of the puzzle put into
place! This re-turn of the fourth gives us forsight. This "4" is the ZERO which
will give birth to one. To revert is to reveal.
And as I had mentioned earlier, this paralyzation of the stahl leads to a deeply-rooted
Paranoia. My philosophy consists of the dualism between Meta(noia) & Para(noia).
In fact, with my Qabalistic leanings, I have even denoted these mirrored-concepts
with numbers- Meta:444/Para:777. Yes, the concepts are mirror reflections of one another.
Identical in their opposition. Furthermore, metanoia is a re(veil)ing {a covering-up}
while paranoia is a re(veal)ing {an uncovering}. As written of earlier, we are speaking of nothing(ness). Paranoia is nothing, the gaping abyss of nothing, an undefinable
term. It escapes definition. Anxiety. Depression. The death of God has left us
with the futilty of the Absurd. I am now falling-back-upon in the hopes of resurrection. And the 'Stunn' of Thunder has left me at a loss. My confession: I am disabled.
However, with the aid of Metanoia, I shall be able to continue. For this term/ concept/
crutch gives me the ability to piece-together what was once such a mess.
The word "order" is both a verb and a noun. Often I feel ordered. And the 'they'
which order has not yet been defined. On the surface level it would seem that this
'they' are those whom I know. But I sincerely believe that 'they' exist on another
level altogether. And it is this level which we must uncover. We must make use of paranoia
in order to reveal the latent metanoia which cries for birth.
I will let you know that this Manifesto is both of a philosophical and psychological
nature. It is my 'Psychosophy'. Much of what will be written about is from Experience.
Often from the self- analytical perspective. I will continue to make an effort
to divulge concepts which seem to be applicable to day-to-day life. I am not doing
this to make things more interesting for the reader but merely for the fact that
it is these lucid concepts with which I have struggled with and would like to share
with you.
A simple question: what does it mean to write? Answer- to write is to name. To name
is to confine. After confining, one must define. To give definition is to breathe
life into the creation. Without the breath of life, definition, one merely relates
to the confined entity, death. One must catch in order to set free. Unfortunately, many
writers never set their creations free. Instead they eat them. Mordir (sp. to bite).
Re-morse: the bite back. Ah, you who have not set your creations free! To possess is to be possessed. Ah, you who bear the recoil of your lack-of-faith.
When everything has been named and accounted-for, there still exists an unbearable
( ) which cannot be dealt with.
How then shall we deal with this ( )?
Shall we give it a name?
Have we already done so?
I believe even ZERO has dimension.
We shall call it "fist-in-the-face".
***************************************************************
Chapter II
Fist-in-the-Face
Many philosophers and theologians alike have dedicated their intellectual lives to
the pursuit of Truth. They have created many constructs, systems of thought, many
of which hold true even today. However Philosophy is now a dying art, and I believe
the reason for this is that most philosophy seems to be an end in itself. I firmly believe
that True philosophy goes hand in hand with interesting (meaningful) dialogue. And
because Philosophy has a mossy tombstone, perhaps we should turn to the moss for
inspiration.
Perhaps it would be best for us to get in the proper mode: this will enable us to
engage in a reduction-stance. From there we can achieve a view of hypereality, a
self-induced perception altar.
Upon this altar we can place any item of longing which keeps us in check. I must
let you know that this is no game, and to maximize reduction we must install a fraction
of what they might in the future call a betrayal. We all know that this is not what
it seems, and even if we don't, it might be appropriate for us to recall any interfering
overtures of "greatness".
*This moss upon the stone of Truth is nothing but a realized
understanding of what one might call a made-to-order infiltration of species-A: u.s.
(united simulations). -this false premise is falling quickly into a homily of xeromania-
All temporary willingness must be subdued into freeze-frame acrobatics even if,
as described above, a stahl is enacted by the prayer of unabashed rectification*
Undoubtably, we must comfort ourselves by the presence of an alien compatriot. For
we are all aliens in the face of psychological minimalism. I am afraid that there
is no-check in this domain, the realm of the paranormal thief. And all that can
be stolen is the glance of Nothing, leaving us in the wake of quiet contemplation over so
many unsold secrets.
Before we continue, I must once again help you realize many factors are involved of
which I cannot expound upon unless I plunge without restraint into the solemn confessionary
patrix of relative dismayal over the fact that no one person can be more alone than the one who believes that "getting-lost" is a virtuitous agreeing upon common
descent. To be frank, it is without guilt that I believe in the intellectual submersion
as the only means of denial.
Why has philosophy died and grown moss upon its tombstone? My understanding is that
philosophy is, first of all, too cumber-some of a word, too lofty of a concept.
Would people's perception of television be altered if the unit were called Sensory
Assault Machine, or would they just call it "S.A.M."? I have to admit that I have already
grown bored contemplating over this weak term.
It lacks finesse. And my cigarette has reached its finette. In any case, what is
there to love in Knowledge? Is it not an end in itself?
Alas, we must confront this fist-in-the-face! For one, it is an inevitably recurrent
episodic sequence with no-hold. It is boundaryless and sets its limits in semi-temporal
withdrawal. It creeps up upon the individual from somewhere out of sight. It is for this reason that I have chosen it as a key ingredient to any
cogent understanding of this text. This "fist-..." is an ever present reminder that
somethings cannot be overcome. Or so they say. It's rather brash presence is by
necessity. If it were any less intimidating, its availability would decrease. This
would leave the Artist with a way out. And my overarching premise is that there is no
way out. However, there is a way in. And its
availability is always at hand. However it is of a processual nature and cannot be
controlled via standardized means of relation.
So then we must embark upon a dialectical passage through the gates of affliction
into this inner domain which, in my opinion, holds the key to a fully operative means
of existence. It is the Real of which we speak: the imminent threat of infiltration
by the other, a form of rape which strips us of our ability to think for ourselves.
It is as if we can only hold on for so long, much like
riding a wild bull. It is an overcoming of the blank with the fiery desire to permanently
lose oneself in self-created constructs. I must admit with all of my heart that
this is my strongest desire, to dig a self-made hole for myself for which I can call my home. Ideally this will be fully accomplished by establishing set parameters
for myself to dwell and grow. And if a modicum of Divine ignorance is the means
by which I bury myself (permanently) then So-mote-it-be! I have managed thus far
to entomb myself in the finely-construed Philosophies of the admirable, unknown Other, and I
do believe that I too through what I will now call the "tardive", or relaxed memory,
have faith that I can spin my own web. This phenomenon, as we mentioned earlier,
is of a processual nature. In other words, letting go only after there a complete self-reliance
on predetermined modes of understanding. This self-directed mode is the antithesis
to any falling-back upon terms which are devoid of what I as the Kreator deem unfit for combat.
Why didn't Aryadne give me a thread in this river of Lethe? No she has left me half-buried
in this tortured tail (cue) of Tantalus. No metaphor phases us in the realm of the
Fist. There is only direct impact to be played. There will continue to be only one radical menace, and that menace is yourself. The F:F of which we
speak does not exist in the realm of any Other time. You see, time is a construct
built through the consensus of man. It is the immediate present, actually the immediacy
of the moment, hyper-atrophied. If you let it completely creep over you, there is
no way to re(veil) your actions and thoughts. It is a driveness in the Now. I am
afraid that there is no creation in the present moment. The moment must be Kreated.
One must find his sport and support himself upon it until the point of divine pluralistic singularity. There may always be the pursuit of territory before any coming out
of the shallow now can pronounce itself.
And you ask what makes this presence outmoded, done over by the ruling minority?
No Nietschean recalcitrance will aid us into the dungeon of despair and trite excuses.
If doing unto others helps the slave from getting lost, well then we might just
have the speaker as ear. What Organ do we use to gauge our environment; by what means
will we niche ourselves in something we can call our own? How long must we wait
until that self-made suit presents itself to us? I believe social conspiracy is
not that no one has their place, but that they cannot be given the opportunity to create one
on their own.
To take the plunge into the self with no desire to ever return, or only to return
w/i the self-made moment which we, ad-propelum, create in order to set limits. In
fact, this limitation is one which keeps the prototype from ever experiencing birth.
This "now" we speak of is in-fact the dangerous birth which, as we can only try to understand,
is the one and only F:F.
*I am afraid that too many intakes will inevitably lead to the
zombification or the re-double: this web of doubt keeps at bay any disabling positions.
There is none so simple as the icey infiltration of the other. All bouts into mechanized
death Finology will only lead the Reader to catch his break, for to catch is to break*
I am afraid there is no speaking of mountainous peaks without falling from them.
Especially today. This ever-present moment which we could either compulsively ignore
ad-adum or maintain autonomous deception in the order of falling-back, will maintain
remain receptive to our mechanoidal commands. The mossy, god-like Stahl is a "re" appended
to deviation chained by doubt. But if we negate the aforementioned greatness, we
slip into the replica.
But maybe if we never became Thunder-stunned there would be no means of creating any
feeling-catcher. So, no, I must resort to dialectical annihilation as the processual
interaction between myself and the text. I am certain that we must construct a proto-now; we must individually create our own F:F. Not in order to subvert the just,
but just for the experience of subversion. I think perhaps a dash of complete over-turning
would not only hold us back, but instead, the overdue could be given their rightful place. Basically, when you turn in, there is no other; vice-versa is true. Also,
conceiving extra-reality is what makes treason possible as a subdued means of the
'in'.
So, you see, we can in fact back up, and just maybe that will, once as always, as
the eternal now (which we have yet to altar), begin to bloom out of season, just
in time to slip back over into the left field of liberal reasoning. One must befriend
the cloud of self, undo oneself before it, stripping herself clean from
the nude of the norm. It is a deeply rooted disease of the mind. It is never available
for extraction, residing in the filth stench of complacency, resting cowardly away
in the true faith that the hyper-atrophied life has fallen. It is only when our
delusions of the other have put themselves back in their boxes that we can rise from
this Lab. of Pain and resolve the matter, with little aid. But I honestly believe
that what we need is a reversal. When it seems that the only thing that helps you
fall back is the desire never to revert to the preconception. Yes even feeling has its logic.
The true F:F is when memory receeds, when both logics are construed by the alien
presence by the other-as-now. Puzzled by the interesting observation we also confront
as we "consciously" deny that there can be any consensual reality, we regress to the
used.
direct pause: if you are not waiting.
There is a direct sequence which we must confront before we completely fail. Please
believe that there is no fail-safe. The three concepts to be observed will be stahling,
failing (sin[n]ing), and falling. I am not afraid that we should discuss them individually. In fact I see it as a plea bargain with the Sick literacy.
Stahling: basically- to not do. Total unproductivity. An emotionally neutral state.
Remembering. Refusing. A motion. Self. Denial. Bi-polarity. It's relation to
hell is not unusual. It is a sensation of the scorched, scarred, pocked and tarred.
Much like a distinct anguish of the corporeal present which must be
extinguished by submersion into salty waters.
There will be no coming-upon in the realm of contemplation; there will only be vacuum,
a vaporous filling which captivates the user and frees her completely.
-I must say that the F:F is of an undeniable presence, no ammout of
digging will ever completely occult the hole of light-
That which cannot be deconstructed must be sent to space. This will give the language
a richer presentation. (Perhaps they just don't wish to capture us) The fallout
from the extricated signs would rain down on the language needy of air. The language
then could be recycled, not without conscience, but rather schooled
through recognition as bounty towards need. Silence always leads to sound. What
projects itself from the atomic placitudes will inadvertantly revert to inaction,
and then the Stahl: the inexplicable gravity of shame and doubt. bait.
However stahling can lead to a form of productivity that we shall label malpractice
(dealt with in Chp. 2). This is the realm of sin. Today, this means nothing more
than defining and following your own drives. To do so without paranoia is a tremendous
feat. Perhaps one even needy of a HGA.
Flowing from this regressive past leads to the Ultimatum of Falling, which calls in
return the failure to respond. But, then, must not we respond to at least something?
Never to revert to the preconception. Yes even feeling has its logic. The true F:F
is when memory receeds, when both logics are construed by the alien presence by the
other-as-now. Puzzled by the interesting observation we also confront as we "consciously" deny that there can be any consensual reality, we regress to the used. There will
be no coming-upon in the realm of contemplation; there will only be vacuum, a vaporous
filling which captivates the user and frees her completely.
diversion: encroaching NOW:syncro-0 output, a lousy hoax.
take the time to absorb with the sole Desire of quantum rectification. Unleash the
Beast of ROSelf.. pace-in-TAO:t. free dum reigns. Bleak future increasing while the sun is an axis. Dental floSS in the name of the
moon.
And what exactly does it mean to be with the program? I must ask what is this mysterious
program? Does it merely mean to be doing something? How can one do nothing? Could
not "doing nothing" be equated with ceasing to be? And what does it mean to be?
Is the "beingness" of a human different from that of an animal or a plant? Perhaps
we are speaking of Potentiality. Directionality. What can A do that B cannot?
This F:F of which we speak, can it be detected by the human eye? It is difficult
to answer this question for we are speaking of a body-double, a prototypical copy
of the corporeal self. We must not resort to the metaphysical however, nor the paranormal.
This [re] of self is infinitely duplitious to the point of a confusion with the environment-at-hand.
Cues can be both internal and external. But that they are always internal seems
to confront us with an enigma of the refusal.
We must speak more of this refusal. I believe that it is HATE-incarnate. It is beyond
abilities, it is a conscious act. Certainly without lack. It can leave you in the
Stunn position however, and render you with lack and no luster. But how do I steer
clear from this soot and bore a zig-zag path into the centre of this earth? I need
to resort to the life of a Remora and by this I mean, that I need the thread of Potential-Direction
in order to enjoy that fear of being driven. This relationship must congeal into a substantial event of divine aptitude before the devil's bit. The refusal
to accept the paranoia IQ test is a feat untrodden by the Philosophical masses.
However, the personal choice of not-doing (failing) always slides into the Fall of
return. A state held up not by collective means.
I think you are due for a clearer illustration:
[1] existence: the universal/ [they/us {we}] /duality (breath)
>thinking: (not) dreaming/ (other than now)/ duality w/i singularity
>cue: perceived as Command/ {pot. directionality}
<refusal- self/ self-created presence
*dangers: psychosis (stunn)
paranoia
>metanoia: disbelief that anything can exist (see 1)
see: !stahl! (negentropy)
***************************************************************
Chapter III
Malpractice
One item that we have not thourougly discussed is the post-stahl phenomenon of Malpractice,
or doing Nothing. Do not be fooled into thinking that this Nothing is a w/o. Quite
to the contrary, it is very much a doing, or doing-wrong to be more specific. It is the default mode which we fall into when we are not enagaged with a project.
It is, in fact, the uneaten husk of our doings, the potential afterlife which seeks
confrontation with the Practitioner. We must each fall into the past, through the
aforementioned "relaxed memory", and dredge up items of assistance, those items which give
us strength of character and desire to create.
It is only by surrendering to the past that we can catch a glimpse of the future.
This Metanoiac experience is the building of a fortress within our core, an escape
from the current and a release into the Not-doing of dualized existense. Then the
Now can become a zone of passing-through, a weigh station where we can shed our unwelcome
accumulations. However, as time moves on, the periphery of the current becomes commodified
and lessened.
Therefore, it is of the utmost importance that we begin to construct our
dwellings and habitations of thought in the order of creating a bulwark
against the encroaching utter uselessness of the now. Perhaps it would be best to
redefine this "now", lest we become ensnared in its all-encompassing singularity
and mechanization of the banal. Let us call it No(w). This should allow us ample
space for deconstruction.
Malpractice is the short-circuit of the Refusal. The thing to keep in mind is that
it typically can be found in the behavior of everyone. When we consciously (or unconsciously)
open ourselves up by falling, we become the host to the insidious parasite of the No(w). We, in turn, become the parasite and seek out moments of infiltration.
However, most of this is performed on the incognizant level and we never fully appreciate
the bounty which we reap.
Therefore, in this chapter, it is my goal to help you become aware of this potentialized-directionality
so that you do not have to become the victim of becomming driven. It is an important
note that this No(w) is not to be overcome, but dealt with, much like gambling. Since one can never truly escape this presence, for it is the essence
of change (commodified and rationed), one must make haven. On the other hand, the
heaven that they serve us through making sense of time must become a zone of non-compliance. This Other of commodified time is a conspiracy made by those that claim they
have the whole picture; the freedom they proclaim is actually highly modified and
construed so that we, the host, only learn how to make-do with the puzzle piece received.
The answer to how all can be known by the parasitic No(w) should be obvious. It is
not that this presence transcends all times. For this would make the conditional
gift-giving divine rather than what it is: a gateway to the plurality of desires.
In fact, this all-knowingness is quite widespread. It can be summoned up by this broad statement:
"everybody knows everything." The liminality, the membrane, of this gnosis is signified
as the essence of the F:F, for it constitutes the 'almost'. This type of unveiling will soon lead to the deviancy of transition, blurred distinction, and PSI.
Only the master can strike a balance between being partially-receptive and all-giving.
Clue: Presence as gift.
Let's just say that 'tube' is 100% . It, in turn, is a balance.
I would be highly comfortable w/ the ration:
reception: 27% para- 777 -k-
transmission: 73% meta- 444 -z-
Q: mind (NOIA) Zoon 11
Zoon: RAT Al 888: Gnostic Christ.
Limen- threshold.
sub
elf- 11
73/38 (27+11)
111- fool [zero] sTn..69 (alp.bet) OX -aer- Yellow
The principle of the 'almost' is that "it" never occurs, yet getting closer every
day. The increasing immanance of the impending syncro-NOW is the foundation of a
collective memory of the future. We have all fallen-back, for when one loses faith,
the masses soon follow. I proclaim that the only True faith is the faith of Genesis because
faith is One. All that is not One is vacillation and this phenomena is symptomatic
of the end-game, the dashing fin of a super-nova. However let us not believe that
all-encompassing doubt is the one and only verdict. In order to clear up all misconceptions,
I must introduce to you two new terms:
Noble doubt: TAO-t no-idea
Ignoble doubt: Doubt no idea
To have no idea is different than possessing the no-idea (as concept). The first
of these leaves one victim to the Tzaddi and/or community of doubters. Either of
these is far from desirable, for the goal is to individuate beyond the point of integration.
And the concept of no-idea gives the perfect opportunity for this to occur. As you
might have suspected we are dealing once again with the enigmatic concept of nothingness
potentiated as thing-to-be-confronted. Metanoia as future-call(ing) or absolute
disbelief is the specific means of learning to forget. Catch and release is a method
of expansion in a humane manner, rhetorical self-improvement. It is only by means
of dealing with the future by means of falling-back that we can niche ourselves in
a self-created present. And only through practice can one maintain solidarity free from
Psychosis. TAO-t is a conscious process involving the sorcery of adamant denial
or refusal to believe/engage.
The tsunami of change, the advance of technology, is exponential in its growth, as
we all know. What dies? What ends? Does tech. have an expiration date? Does tech.
have its own form of DNA?
Let me give you a cogent example of the drifting nature which is produced by the phenomenon
of TAO-t:
*under the tow of No(w) there exists a series of spectacular images which emanate
from the Desire of all Flesh-monads, each carrying in its proto-heart, a heat-sinking
unit which only fires up when the command for it to do so is implemented. Like cells
of faith,(soon to be d-con into FE) each carrier has a magnetically-active particle
which participates in the self-destruction of id-ridden flux. This pos-sibility
for mutation plays hands with its parasite in order to adapt to the refugium, or
an area which has escaped change. No meta-symbolic short cuts to the core will suffice to make
the participation of ab-
sentee gnosis valid and/or applicable to domain-B. This hyper-situated locale is
saturated to the centre with dimensions of Reason. This keeps the Host in check
and available for any alterations which would make it more of a net-like casing*
As you can now see, slippage into the "set" allows ample past-time for reflection
and de-marginalization, allowing the (en)actor a proto-typical domain of the 'self
produced'. Falling into the past is a learned skill, and the Malpractice which it
involves is, as mentioned earlier, is the direct result of its absenteeism.
A confession that I must now make is due. It is true that I wish I could express
this sentimentality in a manner far removed from that of words. Perhaps I could
use it as a jumping board for further "Philo-sophical discussion". What must ultimately
be divulged however is that an undeniable presence exists between this/that. And, admitedly,
many have striven to make that "/" their Domain. I shall leave them with my respect,
and continue on with Metanoia.
Confession: the simple 'limen' which exists btwn. such terms as Faith and Fe, Doubt
and TAO-t, Paranoia and Metanoia, no idea and no-idea. The simple, yet infinitely
other Difference. The minor subtlety.
Allow me to give you a clear example of each of these phenomena, starting with:
(Fe) In order to understand 'fe' we first must come to terms with faith. "Faith" is
defined as "confidant belief in the truth, value, or trust- worthiness of a person,
idea, or thing." I believe faith to be much like giving yourself over to a structured
system of beliefs, usually created by a given institution, possessing knowledge which
we claim to have minimal knowledge of. We surrender to this body for we claim that
we cannot have the whole picture, and having faith gives us ample room to go about
our lives without competely thinking for ourselves. You see, we become thought-through.
Our eyes, our organs, are sacrificed in the name of divine knowledge. Unfortunately,
I don't see how the faith of one system can be all-embracing. No, it is limited
by its values and structure.
Therefore we must, individually, induce Fe, which incidentally, is all-embracing.
However, it is unecessary to jump to the conclusion that it is superficial due to
its universal nature. On the contrary, because it is self-created, it contains the
nectar of truth in diversity. The vastness in spectrum it delivers is in fact the realm of
thought. So you see, Fe is the essence of thought, which contains in its genes the
possibility for infinite bifurcation while maintaining its accessibility
by specialization. It encompasses not only the written word, but also the glyph,
the motion, the enactment. Fe merely hinges upon individual expression. It is faith
in TAO-t.
(TAO-t) In order to fully understand 'TAO-t' we first must come to terms with doubt.
"Doubt" is defined as "to be skeptical or undecided about. "Doubt is chained to
faith. Heads or tails! They rely on one another.
They feed off of each other, host and parasite. What idea must be kept at the frontline
is that they oppose each other. 50/50. They are in opposition because they are equal,
like: x|o. They break in to three: 100, 010, 001, infinitely replaying. On the other hand, my working definition of TAO-t is different. You see, if all faith is
Genesis, or faith in the singularity of One, then why is there conflict between faiths?
Is not God God? For one, how can God be good if "good" has two "o"s and God one?
Something to think about. No, we must finds what compells us all, what will drive
us all-together. This is my hypothesis you see. TAO-t binds us. If everyone on
the Plane-t experienced doubt simultaneously, we would each be freed from the snare
universal compli-cation, we would each find the Light, the Divine Spark, w/i. And this Spark
is
universal and, ultimately, individual. Doubt leaves us hanging in the dark, while
TAO-t leaves us hanging-out in the dark.
To conclude: The next concept we will set-free is "Fe:TAO-t".
Fe: Z
TAO: K
-t: Q
Here we are dealing with a direct relation between the two previously mentioned terms.
They relate to eachother in a fashion which is mutually supportive. Fe is the transmission
while the TAO is receptive.
In other words, TAO is the means by which an individual finds time by stahling, thus
paying homage to the Current which escapes the Now. This rendition is free from
the current (Now) persuasion and is a direct means of realization of the drawing-in.
The active means of Fe is rooted in TAO, higher in complicity, and its potential for direction
is quite certainly bred by its relativity. And the enigmatic "-t" is perhaps the
most important element thus far. It is in fact 'the flip of the coin', the motion
of uncertainty, the element of change. This gives us, in turn, a clearer example
of what it means to be in TAO-t: by definition, a receptive relationship with the
vicissitudes of change, clearly a refugium, or more properly, a redoubt (leading-back).
This productive withdrawal is the essence of mistakeness. An infinite "take". Due to
the nature of the 'almost', a given amount of 'takes' are possible before the undeniable
presence of the Now is confronted.
yet another diversion:
*Let's take some time to confer with the Greats, for this will enable us to transport
dangerous material into a locale which better supports its perpetual degredation.
Standing back from the present disabilities only finds sufficient time by producing
a vector-of-sound. It is with this that the temporal justifications can be stahled to
the point of return, only the name of slippage into a higher domain. Therefore,
nothing is left to disseminate but the remnants of the absolute energy weight, this
being the yard of waste reduction and postponed neolithic improvement. As you can now thouroughly
comprehend, all dissection is partially responsive to the ever-present undertow.
I will not hesitate to say that instead of absorbing frequencies by dementia, a
feat only able to be performed by quasi-mortal means, we must add to the destructive
process a modicum of self-improved assumption. Now, stand back and adore the complexification
of diversity under pressure before any existing stanes of intellect are to be down-graded by the sad masses who think that it never will rise again. We must pardon
them, for their lack of impression is too silly to reactively analyze, let alone
synthesize into a whole. This too takes the pressure off the lectures of benign
zero-dictatorship*
Now a return to TAO-t. Essentially what is in store here is the need to shorten the
statement "I don't want to" into a single word. Un-fortunately we have already done
so, namely by using the term Refusal.We will now address this issue with a newly-coined word: Commande(a)d. If this term fills you with excitement, you are truly on the
right track. For the absolute freedom this neu-term invokes is the essence of personal
liberty, especially in not-doing.
Allow me to make free to you a certain knowledge which I've come to realize as irreputably
true: it is this, that you can falsely imply, as now, in the order of dessicration
which always will be the perfect reason to have a free reign of ideas. Thus, enabling the constant perception to invoke an irrational mind-set. Perhaps we need to
call Sam.
To "bend over-backwards" for no one (not anybody, neither particularily nor the nebulous
over-arching temptation which gets under-your-skin) is the key, THE key, for pacing
yourself. To [PACE] yourself, in all that you do, never heed! Is this what they
call disrespect? Or has Capi-talism's tentacles bound over their designated domain?
Yes, we have reached a point where something must be done, lest the individual creative
spark dwindle out forever. This psychotism they serve us is a laced food, only nourishment for those who are too tired to think for themselves. Watch your domain or
this man might just slip. The re-
hash complacency you deliver me to my door only strips me of my essence, my True selves.
And let no humor punch a hole in my gut. I seek neither truth nor Truth.. give
me life. Give my "body w/o organs" viscious limbs and mossy ferns.
What we ultimately need is Liberal-Conservatism, emphasis on the C. half. And what
does it mean to hate? I believe it is the internal mechanism of non-compliance,
or more specifically, of non-acceptance. We must downgrade.. down, down, down.
Yes, in fact it is sometimes the invisible which takes precedence, is felt most. Insidious
0-synchro magneticks. And what we must ultimately confront is the "naming" process,
that means by which we escape the 'pull'. Can we live without the "name"; can we
get by without "naming"? Well for one it gives us something to think about.
Why is it that all ailments (especially those of the mind) are to be considered as
"disorders"? Have we placed such faith in the order of things that when we are confronted
with any deviancy, we immediately call upon our faculties of reason, thus bypassing intuition? But let's not jump to any quick conclusions. There is no saying that
this deeply-rooted reliance on gut instinct is a virtuitous past-time or a sound
means of judgement. In fact, many times this reliance on the natural understanding
falls short of creating for us any long-term solutions.
Why is that?
**************************************************************
Chapter IV
Resh Voz (RV)
Psychotism can be defined as a withdrawal from reality. But are there perhaps two
domains of reality: inner & outer? And who is to say that one reality is more real
than another? We each perceive things differently, true? Is this symptomatic of
psychotism? Or perhaps the balance needs to be shifted. Maybe this inner domain should
take precedence over the outer. How would things change if inner perception was
the prevailing means of interpreting and relating to the world? Would confusion
reign or would peace be had? If each of us looked to ourselves for guidance would we reach a
communal water table of shared ideas?
Reality as actuality. Most definitions of the Actual would seem to lead to the premise
that it's presence is supported by the act. However this is not the topic of my
thesis. What I am aiming at is the 'almost', for I believe that this phenomenon
can in fact be more real, more actual, than the Enactment. I believe what we are speaking
of, to be more succinct, is the imminent. Usually this term is used in conjunction
with threat and this seems to work quite well. The impending, is this real? Do
we not prepare for that which is "on the verge"? And who would deny that this over-arching
threat is real? Yet the Actual is not present. Could we not then say that we are
responding to an un-reality?
When we fail to respond to a given cue, we develop RV. Resh-head (Hebrew). Voz-voice
(Spanish). We become stunned and unable to act. Our paralyzation becomes all-consuming
as we are left hanging in indecision. We can no longer differentiate between inside and out. The shield that usually defines the limit between Self and not-Self
becomes shattered. Our thoughts become public domain as we lose the ability to make
distinctions. The longer we stahl, the stronger RV becomes. In fact, it feeds on
our incapacity. The stunn of refusal is much like sinking into quicksand, the act of sinking
being symbolic of becoming devoured by our thoughts.
Let us now consider another defintion for the word "stall". To gain time by means
of a ruse. "Ruse": an action intended to confuse. So you see, stalling can be a
means towards a positive end. When we TAO-t that which seeks to prod us into action,
we fall-back into the refugium of the self-created No(w) and RV subsides. With Fe, we
become the comande(a)d. The mossy-like Metanoia of this divine presence is the antithesis
to RV. We have found Komfort, a state maintained by our refusal to engage in the
fear induced by the encroaching NOW. We place our guide, Dio (K), before us as magnet-a,
and Oid (Q) behind us as magnet-b. We, "Z" (73), as in the myth of Tantalus, maintain
Fe in order to set our limits while being the subject between two unreachable goals. In fact, we must set our sights on that which lies ahead by Fe, for if we fail
to do so, we become devoured by the Oid, or the endless set of Q's which has as its
only goal to make us its Host.
Komfort is the state which conjoins Metanoia, allowing us to make headway through
the personalized act, the self-produced. We must continually change in order to
maintain solidarity, in order to survive.
Another interesting definition for "stalling" is an aeronautical term.
Namely: to reach a condition where the speed is too low to allow effective operation
of the controls. This should give us some guidance. A balance, as in Fe:TAO-t,
must be maintained in order for the craft, Self, to refrain from crashing. What
needs ultimately to be implemented is zero-level maintenance. Do not strive for the domain
of the Real, nor should you allow yourself to be consumed by the hell of the past.
As written of earlier, "relaxed memory" is the key. This is an active relaxation,
guided by Dio, the guide dog. Fe is of a processual nature, not so much a letting-go as
a setting-free. It follows understanding.
We must keep the(-t), or 'q', spinning as we make head-way through the swamp of other
people's opinions, never losing sight of destination. And this mysterious destination
is the act of knowing, gnosis, a perpetual meeting ground for those united by simulation. Yes, u.s., united-simulations, is the breeding ground we arrive at by the
mere act of following our hearts, where l(ov)e resides.
(El)-oid-69-Q.....Go(d)-888:78-11
(Ov)-dio-96-K..... Tar -666:45-27
Re=evil-z......555:33-73
And with the luck of the [K(lov
e)R] we piece ourselves together, this foreplay leading us deeper and deeper in our
Fe, holding the 'imminent'
at bay, moderating the grip of the NOW, the ever-encroaching threat which preys on
weakness. We must each make a furnace of our souls and a machine of our minds, lest
thee become Kreated, a bitter fate. Weakness is easily overcome. The plane resting
on the runway is a phenomenon of weakness; that without impetus is weak. That without
Go, w/o self, is prone to fall. Must we be conscious of our deeds? Is the true deed
the conscious deed? Ah, let us maintain awareness of the future while sliding into
the(n)!
THE
[K]n
o(w)
***************************************************************
Chapter V
Go-Devil
The opposition we confront between the pull towards that which has already happened
and that which lies ahead is one which, on the surface, remains beguiling. In fact,
the extreme essence of this trans-temporal phenomena is a puzzle with no pieces,
the spaces where they would fit escaping any sense of order or means of understanding; no
face value is left but the denial of any subjective re-assemblage. In effect, the
leaving-be is the absolute value of scrambling for solitude. Left alone, we see
no reason to escape, no creating
tunnels beneath that which which hangs in the balance. For, really, what reason is
there to prescribe value to that which has no definition, no purpose? I really don't
think that taking the edge off of deconstruction is the end-all of endeavors which
are hard to intelligently compose. For that would entail a self-conscious denial of
belated misery, the actual diagnostic for real, true-to-date, revelations.
On the other hand, the existense of values is a concept of much importance. As we
understand it, the manufacturing of the Divine, taken as a phenomenon of evolution,
leaves us wondering where we should place justice and might. Perhaps they would
be happiest in the realm of the forbidden, the domain of concepts which refuse integration,
thus maintaining the illustrious plentitude of definition. One might be pleased
to admit that while the reality of substance is transfixed upon the future-as-imminent,
the actual representation of fortuitous circumstances remains enigmatic. Let us make
clear the distinction between law and the undeniable need for simplicity. First,
law contains the absolute factor of intervention as a plus-none denial in action.
This can be proven by means of reducing the occurence frequency of misconduct while increasing
surplus intervention. When this is set as quotient-a, the outcome will be a set
of dominant precursory actions which frame as unintelligible nuances of grace. As
respectable ironmongers of the bygone, simplicity sits enthroned upon mercy, tempered
by thirsty, yet humane, reliance upon the fragments of that shy form.
The formal aspects of the singularizing personal (ie. synchronicity) are now to be
understood as rational, omnipacific, and ultimately rectifying in their quasi-hyper
existense. Allowing equal distribution between selfish pursuit and derailment, the
presence of the time-consuming locus freezes any impediment of hope into one of Great folding.
However, as the predominence of vacuuity manifests, the gauging of death becomes
an incessant flowing, ever outward into the fractalesque ground of solid confusion.
So, to relay the speed, as one would have to do in this case, you would need to temper
the breaking urgency into a small ball of dust. I am afraid that this is the only
way a solid, yet simple, confrontation between the might and fright of soul and law,
as standing, is available. I don't, on the other hand, believe that wiley pursuits
in this defractory way will pull to completion any realm of mistakeness. It can
be counted upon to subside however.
Underlying this eccentric mythology exists a monstrous cavern of betrayal, one which
can never be completely filled, for doing so would involve ignoring the ontological
foundation which appears beneath that one. Yes, layer upon layer, toss upon toss,
the stalwart foundation is duplicious in its presentation, an ever-streaming gap of Will.
Its presence is one of fortitude and familiar indexing. Above all, examination
prior to autopsy is required to obtain a stat-sheet, the Cue as clue.
The absolute negation which now will slowly begin to take precedence must first be
conceived as an aid. Its medicinal properties allow sufficient flow between opposite
fields. In fact, the bi-polar unity which holds all other suppositions in check
holds the mark for elementary conclusionary prefixes. The dynamic which presents itself
is feigned as deliberate, for if it were deemed as the Actual, confusion would inevitably
arise between three seperate, yet united, parties: Fact, Fiction, and development.
However, for simplicities sake, we will ignore the first two listings and focus our
attention on development.
Development: what can be gleaned from this term in such an abstract context? Must
we dilate upon less unpremeditated conditions, or can we dig ourselves a hole with
a view? No, we must stop considering, for further speculation, or bouncing-about,
leaves one with a solid misunderstanding, to say the least. Instead, let us presume that
many sorts of trials are before us, ones of greater stature than can be thought of
consciously. Of course we could have chosen to dream-write, sporadic fillings for
gaps unseen. Nevertheless, development of story lines, nameless diversions, and real troubles
are synonymous. To enlarge upon the nebulous involves a firm persuasion of noble
doubt, let alone the puffing-up which accompanies prolonged mourning, or the belated. The build upon solid mistimings is considered frivolous by the company of lost strangers,
but even they have much to learn.
Encroaching subsistence, and all that it drags along with it, temporalizes the stance
of indifference, allowing equal spacing among classes, while denying captivity-born
dementia breeders will-to-fly. Nothing comes as an option, much like the roll of
a lucky dice, multiplying the options from thourougly-defined limits. And an occasional
persuasion towards the essence of agreed-upon multiplicity can have its effects in
a less than rational fashion, a design soon to be out-of-the-mode. Irreffutable
workings silently dismiss the moods of sadness, for one could agree that the dismissal of
tight deposits is far from circumstatial in its domain. As a simple solution, most
perturbed queries realize their plain misteachings by fracturing the moist interference
of dialectic denial. This dialectic can't be had; it is solitary and random, certainly
not an excuse for silence.
Let us continue to set fundamental precautionary settlements abroad, allowing transversal
dependency a two-sided undersetting; all settlements of conscience aside. New divisions
can be set, but the membrane must not be disturbed, as toying with this seal may lead to fewer deliberations than will take to allow gratutitous freezing. Martial
relaxation may leave one in the know, but once again, tampering with servile preoccupations
gives further distance among leaders. Curtailing westward in a literary fashion is often times the hold that counts as discretion unturned gratuitously. A gem
of a misconstruance is the leavings of many a quirky snail-like husbandry, matrimonial
effects alone will rectify this persuasion. And while the wasteland of meaningless knowledge continues to build up within this monstrous filliment, an unfortunate backlash
of machine-building takes control of the board, leaving the repetition of silence
in its wake.
This machine of which we solemnly speak is the Self in all of its precautionary settle-ments.
Yes, it alone can stem from that which we have chosen to ignore. In its grasp it
holds the key to understanding all aforementioned tanglings of thought. In its divine singularity, it zeroes-in on that which we can deem as the Real, that with
an undeniable substance. But what sense is their to be found in nonsense? Must
we instead explore this nebulous "non". Is it merely that which holds multiplicity
of meaning? That which refuses to remain stationary, which is fleeting by its nature, holds
within its domain a truth greater than any other. Is not the point of truth that
it cannot be had, cannot be held? Yet we each, in the end, meld into one. The divided
plurality of genesis falls into an uncomfortable singularity. But in what do we stand
united? And what difference is their between unity and division?
In unity, their is standing room only. What stands is the plurarity of Simulations.
United by our versions, our takes (and mistakes), we each hold a piece of the ever-growing
compilation. For that reason, we each have our place in the overall scheme, the Agenda. Finding our space by 'relaxed memory', we slip into the strange moss, a
composition of trust. Mutual respect, to see with our 3rd-eye, serves to give us
the acumen of infinite vision, in turn granting us futu(re)-call. Receeding doubt
opens the vista of TAO-t. Allow me to make clear the essence of this unusual term. It is
precisely not
'giving-in' to the flow. Hardly. It is generally setting up your own flow. Self-as-sanctuary.
It is not an altogether easy path. The two key elements of TAO-t are: 1.Stubborn
Refusal & 2. Waiting.
One reason that this is emminently a tortuous path-taking is that it is bound by limit.
The boundary-setting that one must continually enact becomes a laborious and annoying
undertaking. Until this infinite-NO bleeds quietly, yet stubbornly, into the K(no)w, precisely the rendition of No(w), a process of incessant pressure builds up into
monstrous proportions. To be more succinct, it is not enough to say 'no'. We must
have private reserve. And the Sensitive, such as myself, the universal recipient,
seldom has that option. This might be the case, for to have such an everpresent escape
would entail a selfish luxury, a Dis (in the face of authority). Non-compliance
as hatred. Hatred as self-limitation.
Go-73.(fe).Z
Devil-27.(tao).K
***************************************************************
Chapter VI
Invisible Authority
Who is the author of this book: life? Does this author prescribe Law? Is
this author Law? Where is this author? How do we go about proving the existense
of an author we cannot see? Word and space. Space-blank/Word-mark. Yet this space
is limit. Is this blank a simulation of space, a limited space? The difference
between the blank sheet and the space between words. And the Word, further limit. Yet
the word, the words, opening new spaces. Spaces of the mind. Are states-of-mind
separated by borders? Are borders set and distinct or gradiations,like colors of
the rainbow? Is mind a simulation of space? Are the colors of the rainbow the words scribed
upon this space?
We must question what is closest to us. We must forsake the the magnet, the lodestone.
Let us individually create a deity, an author, to whom we can confide in. I shall
have Fe in (Leadstar). The burden, the Weight, the Load- Begone!
I take upon my back a leaden cross, the 'X', the Tao-t, 'the wait'. Let recalcitrant
patience be my Lode, my way; I shall be led by mad intuition. My precious setting,
1.555 grams (pennyweight), that shall be my Komfort.
Our means shall be through Loco-motion, through the Zig-Zag of the fish tale, the
(-t), the flip of the coin. Let one scent of the putrid stench of mindless complacency
lead us back to our redoubt. Dread breeds in space, the moment of no-thing. We
must learn to swim. The fish does not drown. Sink-or-swim does not apply to the fish.
The gill is the lifeline. I never want to come up for air. I want to swim in the
rainbow and burn-in. I want to be strange moss, to be self-contained, Free.
What holds me back is the invisible authority. The compelling 'driving-together'
is incessant. The more it is consciously ignored, pushed back, the stronger it becomes.
But strangeness is stronger. Odd-ad-Absurdum. Let the weird, insidious (oid) be
done in by the great Odd redeemer, Dio.
To be the puppet, to be the created, that is one hell. It seems that when we are
not doing, we are being done. The question is how to remain doing, how to sleep
with one eye open. Society wants us to remain active. And my goal is similar.
However, there are differences between our objectives. The entertainment they serve us is prepared
in such a way that we always come back for more. It is an addictive meal, one of
conditional sustinance. However,one cannot come back for seconds, for the meal is
always changing. They rearrange the pieces to keep us open-ended, to keep us in a continual
state of awe, of wonder. We individually become the 'open work', the blank slate
upon which we are continually enscribed. The invisible authority uses us to project its dreams upon the future. We, the vehicle, become done.
I want to be everywhere, project my soul upon the world. I, the fish, am at home
with the algae. The barnacles are my museum of grace, my shrine to the goddess of
the sea.
My goddess, Green Tara, breathes life into me, infusing me with the patience to withstand
the never-ceasing onslaught of commands. But I am no program; my life is not command-responsive.
I feed my furnace with singularity. You see, it is us who stand out in the crowd. We set the standards but do not ever inflict these standards upon
the other. No, we are guided by mad instinct. We are the blackest of sheep. We:
e.w.e. (exactly-wrong-enterprises). The pace car may not have the speed of the racer,
yet the race cannot begin without us. Sheepish at times, yes. But it is this shy skepticism
which clothes us in the garb of beauty. So let us clothe ourselves in idiosyncracy
and wait, always wait. And you will see, our rewards will be great on earth. Bypass heaven. It is much too bright there. Breathe Rain-bow Sepia. At last, become
the magnet!
I (dio), sin-crazy.
***************************************************************
Chapter VII
Conclusion
To conclude this strange voyage through the seemingly infinite depths of what many
would care to call a fine blend of nonsense and deep, yet fun, philosophy, I must
acknowledge you, the reader. I sincerely hope that I have left you with more than
one idea which you can bring into the concrete world of which you are sitting in now. Once
you stand, the writing will have been compromised, absorbed, integrated.
PACE in TAO-t