how about now 2/4/18

now is a stripped down smothering absence,

an absentia that is both calling and daunting,

a quicksand for cognition’s entry,

a mirror of phenomenology’s debasement,

a false beckoning towards honoring the future

but unaddressable

without the lingerings of mutterings from the past.

it is profoundly steeped

in inaccessibility’s boundless mocking presence.

it is as if one would go there with a microphone

to interview the future

but only get referential remarks

about the imminent immediate most recent past.

mockingly as if that is the currency of now,

like a practical joke being played on the interviewer.

there is no mike drop at the end when discovered.

muddle-dom has definite unique detailed aspects.

now can pose as any point in time as a bystander for that.

now is indefinable within the commentary

as just offerings from the past in review.

now is a strip-down and a get current

that is still unassailable by current cognitive means.

now is a civilization living on a bandwidth

that neither the future nor the past can name.

the callout seems ineffective.

there is nothing there giving in

to the instantaneous prominent past

as an offering or a gesture of consent.

the bodyguards at the door of now are impervious

to any sense of acknowledgment or admission.

now parties on, everyone is invited

but now has sparse first person attendance.

it is like a drug that has no fallout,

no lasting affects.

well, there are no opportunities for affects,

one does not take in impressions.

there is no happening experience-wise.

once in, no one wants.

the floorshow is beyond the potential

of belief-intentionality.

the dance and the music have no historical means.

everyone is everyone else also.

how strange is that?

now is wall to wall, and then-some, there are no walls.

but no one is casing the place as if they can dig it.

now has no rhetoric and no commentary responses.

belief never got out of the car of the past.

now moves on

as if there is no time or place considerations,

just the complete and a total presence of now.

it’s like a reverse amnesia

in that you can only remember now, as now,

hence the end to the usefulness of remembering.

yes, lots of techniques generally usable here,

are not in the now.

self has no sense of itself in that way.

there are no assumptions made,

no self is referential.

the syntax for now is always current in the ever-now.

thought is fluid and there are no nouns.

if language, then everything is all one verb.

description does not exist.

sensibilities became irrelevant,

for the lack of observation

experience, as if in comparison,

is all output, but not intake.

now has no lost and found,

no measure of distance.

how you have known yourself to be,

has been abandoned.

the mind does not venture into retention.

no images are stored,

as a self sense is wildly inefficient.

now has no think to it.

that we have right now as thought and retention,

is not common to any of this.

our ability to feel has more of life in the now

then any of our current think would have.

feel may even open to door to now

but think would have to get over itself to go.

so, how about now?

is it a risk worth taking

or a leap of faith based on the unknowable?

so really, is it how about now

or now, about how? . . .