either it all comes here
in a meltdown of particulars
or we go to that non-there
of limited sensory means.
and that non-there has
a nonexistent context
for this 'either-or' premise.
here has all parts possible,
maybe eventually discoverable,
as working in unity.
while non-there has
un-divisible confluent oneness,
un-abided by our style
of sorted and secular notions
of nominal comprehension.
for example,
our version of comprehension
is standing tall,
high on the ridge of a mountain,
surveying all that is
in the visual surround
as in a one-minute experiential sketch.
while the mountain is
of ancient living art itself,
without being realized
by us, as such.
we have it that
language plays as a constant
but is loosing every game with the 'now'.
it is as if a lion attacking
from behind an unseen
but thick clear plexiglas of the now,
as the emerging past
is then experientially reflected
upon shockingly hitting that glass
with sensory impact resulting.
yet once again,
but still confounded by now's presence.
we are that lion of sensory-awareness.
now is always on the other side
of that temporal plexiglas.
and we want the universe to openly bow,
honoring comprehension's advance
as if to adhere and comply.
for once again we are stifled by method
and by the construction of method
that falsely assumes the value and worth
of comprehension as a means to an end.
we say we want that means to an end
but we expect that means as an addition
and not as a transformation.
we still want experience
as spectators to do the work,
when all the methods of experience
are composed of verified short-comings
to say enlightenment, as we claim it to be.
so far, thought-provoked has excess baggage.
maybe experience as we claim it
is just a wardrobe error.
and we are chasing awareness
with the wrong press core effort.
if we go,
do we leave a 'behind'
and do we solely yet transformationally
come into the 'now'? . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment