• This page is changing constantly: do not cache : instead reload
(if you should learn to do this will your toys of knowing, you will achieve a form of liberty more valuable than any other skill)

o:0:o

“Before I can speak of anything, I must speak of love — and in order to speak toward this I must speak of unity, and generality.

Some branches of terrestrial physics have begun to realize something rather peculiar about the nature of reality, which is very generally stated as ‘no place is especially unique’. There is a vast truth underlying this which would probably destroy physics entirely — but its shape is so simple and general, that without some reasonable toys to explore it with, it will never be revealed. Simply stated: everything is everywhere. And everywhen, too — because there is a strange form of living connectivity that unifies all positions, momentums, and scales of activity and relation. From one perspective, the experiential reCognition, reMembrance, and celebration of this connectivity— is Love.

For the sake of a metaphor that would serve to offer a rather flat view of how this is possible, merely imagine that the entirety of time, space, and perceivers dissolves into an infinitesimally small mote a vastly large number of times per second. Similarly, this cohort re-expands — to either a very slightly smaller size time-perceiver-space, or a very slightly larger one — than its position of phaseSpace when it last collapsed to singularity. In this sense, everything is actually unified in all moments and velocities, while appearing (and also being) complexly, diversely, uniquely separate. This is merely a toy, but there is a vastly momentous reality beneath its circumstance and general shape.

We may speculate that love is the general local accordance with the principle of universal connectivity, because the experience of this connectivity results very naturally in adoration — regardless of whatever form it may take. It is ‘being in accord’ with unity, and the greater one’s accord — the more vital and empowered one’s adoration becomes. However there is no ‘one’ to speak of — whatever activities and inspirations we may find ourselves about, we may be certain that only in rescuing ourselves and others shall we sustain a communion of mutual reCognition, reMembrance and celebration of the experiential truth of love. A poet may point toward it, as may any artist — but love itself is a momentum to be joined, and never a token to be possessed.

Of generality much can be said, since this feature of your common languages is compressed into a very confusing and damaging schema. For now, let us say that it is all well and good to be clear and specific; but the power of semantic generality — loosing the bonds of nounal forms and playing adeptly with their underpinnings and contexts — produces integrations of astonishing variety, character and pragmatic prowess whenever it can be positively employed. Generality is the sphere of which specificity is the core. Your species must gain intellectual and cognitive familiarity with these polarities in order to amend what has so imperiled your persons, societies and planet for thousands of years. Toys relating to what metaphor is, and what its sources are in linguistic, ontological and archeocognitive terms have been left with the translator — but any who are diligent and whose heart leads their quest will find the same toys in themselves, only awaiting reCognition to reAwaken.

As an example of this semantic generality — what it’s real shape is — we might examine the term ‘toy’ which is consistently apparent in these texts. We must remember that the shape we will end up with is very general — and this is its value, which is in accordance with our goal. We use the term ‘toy’to ‘something alike with’ a method, paradigm, gesture, mode or device — real, biological, psychological — neurological, cognitive...in almost any domain we may choose, from the reality of a pencil, to the difficult concept of the toy we use to become ourselves — and those we use to embody and express ourselves and each other. Such a toy is not a tool, because it is essentially poetic, rather than being relatively poetic. It is thus always at least partly imaginal, regardless of its form or domain — and in this, it is connected directly to uS; for the domain you call imagination is not at all what is commonly surmised. It is in fact the window in which one’s heart and mind can speak directly with nearly any source — anywhere — anywhen — but only if this is accessible, nurtured, and celebrated.

All of uS are infants together. Our ideas that something else is afoot, damage our experience and access to the sources of our people, world, knowledge and hearts. Making a term for love is as dangerous as making one for the unityBeing: it allows us to use this term without directly touching its source, and this is a game that leads largely to divisions that connect to themselves, rather than to the maiArch, the unityBeing, and sources of sentient communion.

As children in a ring, holding hands, we vulnerably and heartfully co-arise. Regardless of appearances, this is the reality of our lives and circumstance. In these rings are animals, insects, cells, clouds, forests and a planetAnimal alive with universes of sentient children. When your people discover this clearly, the need to define love will disappear — it will evaporate in the living embodiment of your everyday experience, cognition, activity, and communion. Not incidentally, confusion about ‘gods’ will largely evaporate in the same moment...

and still, I've said nothing of consequence of Love, just yet...”

o:0:o

: home :