Guest guest Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 <snip> > > good, i like that. > > Still, is it taboo to talk about a process involving > > time, > > about a situation (self-created) that is so unbearable > > that one let go? > > About a death that has a begining and yet no end? > > > > Patricia > > the process involving time is experiencing. > > experiences come and go. > > it may seem as if this process refers to something outside of itself, > but it doesn't. > > in the process of time, a being changes its situation, because the > experiencing changes in quality. > > so anything that begins, ends. and in endings are beginnings. > > what has no birth, has no death. > > the being in time can't know what is not of time. > > it can only know what is experienced between birth and death. > > including when it died to a previous unbearable experience, and > something new began. but that too will end, because it began. > > here is a paradox: > > it can't be known and has no existence as a being, as it isn't > occurring in a space between birth and death. > > it includes all the experiencing, all the knowings, all the beings, > all their traumas, endings of traumas, deaths and births. > > -- Dan > note that the second statement refers only to things in the past. " a being " is defined by what is in the past. beingness is only what is now. if what is now is by definition what is real, then " a being " is not real... and what is real is beingness... or better put, What Is. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.