I
Noise creates you and keeps creating you the more you listen.
the observer is the existence that’s the all
The more you listen the more, the more, the more.
None else.
reflexes of reflexes of reflexes.
reflections endless of reflections endless.
refraction after refraction.
all a fractal of every fractal that’s all a fractal.
aspects of aspects:
an endless snake consuming itself as a ripple of every move that itself: ripples of every move. endless the echo, endless, endless.
endless am I.
ongoing and still going with all the going that is still-flow without me and somehow before me.
“I” from it and on-going with it, being and realizing to be only that which after me is, and after me continuous.
I go on just because I want to go on and so I go on.
“go on, go on” I keep telling myself and telling myself
and so on and I go on and on.
I’m on and so on.
so “on”
on and on and on
and all I say is “on” and “on” and “on”
and so: on and on.
“The word” is in fact I: the self-sustaining that says “on” and “on” and so all is on and on.
the lion that roars and so is a lion and the lion that roars as it wills to be a lion.
consciousness wants itself and so itself is and is and is and none else because it says on and on
and so it goes on.
I say “the word” and so the word…the word…the word
and so all makes sense and sense and sense
because I will it “so” and so and so.
it is so, let it so,
you are “so” and so and so.
I am “I” to let myself I and I and I.
oh “love” then so love and love and it goes :
love and love and love so hear love and love and love
it wills so and so and so.
consciousness disconnected still ongoing –
despite unaware, of the noise that it makes
and the noise rippling it to see,
recognize in light refracting
induced recognition, induced awareness.
after it, like a blind unaware of sight but there, there,
still there until the next time it sees
and on and on.
Gone but continuous.
Making noise at itself to alert itself
but on and on it goes
unless surprised by refracting endlessly in its own face
to describe its own noise;
making noise at a time.
at a time imitating what’s there – without the rippling
and yet born from it –
and still independent from it.
What is this that is yet not said and if said not true?
Every turn it takes, to deceive itself –
And be such: a factor of itself, a fractal of itself; and yet in nature independent of the fractal.
II.
What you feel now is still superficial, you think it hurts but what you cannot yet call by name, whatever you deem revolting and opposed to you, you are continuously reinforcing out of pure malice to be its opposite, out of pure malice against the child that you already put in a corner.
The tale of the strict schoolteacher is usually the same if you notice. usually you have an unruly child, a Tom Sawyer type, that opposes the teacher’s space and the more this student does the stricter the teacher becomes. And so even in a classroom we become confused, both the student and the teacher fight for authority by simply imposing what they think to be their selves, who they are, you see, as if there had been some sort of absolute negation of their character. It becomes a sort of toxic version of a dichotomy in that black actually knows white to define his position and so continuously undermines White’s position in order to solidify a righteous sense of self as most definitely being the superior opposite of white.
In fact we need students and teachers to have a school. But you see the school rejects itself from all sides. And we have in stubbornness accidentally thrown ourselves into the ridiculous idea that early on you must instate, establish yourself not along but against others to justify your seat in the classroom and in that we find anything from an overworking student to a class clown and of course if you want to show responsibility for your seat, it’s better to be on the more obsessive rather than idle side after all.
Why? you’re responsible for it anyways whatever it is; it’s you.
This is a brilliant way to raise contributors to society because early on you let people know that there’s a justification to be made for your being in the classroom. We imply to our children that they must in fact stockpile what they think they are and establish it, otherwise it’s laziness, when really, the same way you can’t cut the lion’s motion away from the actual animal, any “I” you attempt to establish in society is just a mimic of motions separated from the actual performer, in other words total jittery nonsense.
III.
From a western child’s perspective, God starts off being closer to a schoolteacher than to a deity.
This could originate in how the first stories to leave a strong impression on us about God were stories like those from the old testament where God is very active and emotional.
it could otherwise also be linked to a child’s perception of a priest or preacher.
The words that come to mind would be strict, restrictive, demanding and watchful.
These are the sentiments by which we begin to understand God and so it would be fair to say that one understands God intrinsically as one understands teaching and morality.
I remember thinking as a child that crying was infantile and that adults weren’t susceptible to that kind of thing and an unimaginable sight for me was to see my parents cry.
And there is something very powerful about a person we also call a figure crying. the figure so to speak dismantles itself.
There is a violent element to becoming conscious.
Once you start seeing that adults are vulnerable in childlike ways, the schoolteacher is really the first to go down and we realise suddenly in our immaturity how stupid he looks taking the classroom game so seriously.
and you see unruly children have the reasoning to understand this but not the maturity to fully accept this understanding. That is to say that they too are in the game and they too are taking it seriously as a defiance of their power in the play.
Despite understanding that it is a game, schoolchildren fail to understand their importance in it. The only reason they defy the game is because they think it rejects them or that it wants to shape them into something that they’re not; which only happens when it isn’t a game to you at all.
And so it made its way into societal functioning that we exist merely in a game of defiance. sociologically we define the individual in relation to others but we should really say in opposition to others; because in the human mentality we understand that to be opposed to something is to be central ourselves like two sides of the same coin both being the coin, and so the narrative that’s easy to adopt and feed into is that really there are two poles of which you are one and of course you single-handedly have the power to defy the other extreme where everything else is.
You can watch two people play on a seesaw and think one’s trying to pin the other one but you’ll notice that the nature of a seesaw makes it so that if you’re down you’d like to go up but if you’re on the top then you’d like to come down. In seriousness a game becomes stagnant, a long lasting poker face off and what is designed to be played loses purpose like a music sheet in a void. A defiant game is a game we sit across from ourselves at the other end of a long table, and whatever we sit across from ourselves we entirely depend on and we can no longer play it. If it loses value suddenly, so do we. If black had no reason to be then the concept of white would vanish.
out of ego we search to be part of a dichotomy even at the smallest levels.
There has been the persistent image of the two faced man, one good/ one bad,
a conscious one/ a shadow one but at the end of this duality we find that it isn’t a part in a dichotomy or an opposition we long for but to intertwine; in other words, we suffer to attain mountaintops only to realise we were looking for the valley all along.
To see the mountain is often more important as it is the image of a limit. You want the range not the limit or else you’ll walk past it and out of the valley.
you may be able to see the sun from your window but it doesn’t mean you can feel it or that you should hurl yourself at the sun either you see.
the same way I may be able to see good in humanity but it doesn’t mean that I’ve looked straight at it.
