knowing is a libel state

an essential problem with understanding

is that you end up knowing.

and knowing has it limitations 

of interactional truth.

the deepest of science ventures 

into this problem.

science can't explain essence of anything past knowing.

knowing has labeling and description. 

in all cases, we end up with knowing,

but that is it.

what we know reflects how we know,

as knowing is only referential, at best.

inquiry beyond that, 

wants to address deeper issues.

inquiry eventually wants 

to become the essence.

not that that is ever said out loud.

but search for source 

is to become the essence of source.

and we are not technically gifted 

by our means,

to become that essence, 

we consciously seek.

all we get is peripherals to being it.

once we start talking atomic or beyond,

this starts to directly address 

our nature of inquiry.

yet we call it science

and we wanted that kind 

of mental equivalency 

to do the work.

we wanted comprehension up to that task

but even comprehension is still 

an audience view.

we are no closer to the essence truth

than we were before we had science 

doing this work.

thee days, training minds to do science

is not advancing the script more deeply.

sure, there are more connections made

and more cross-referencing done,

a deeper integrative view developed.

but isness obtained, essence imbibed,

still makes our world into only tool usage, 

at best.

monks and mystics are pursuant of the same

but from a radically different 

sense of approach.

if oddities happen in humans 

in a unique way,

we have ways of dismissing them.

we are ever phenomenalizers 

to the immediate and nth degree.

we have mental reductionism to everything.

science wants to take us there,

where no one has actually gone as such.

but science has brain baggage as a necessity.

and understanding are the decals 

of proof positive travels.

yes, we have experience for its trippyness,

but not as our evolutionary means.

our evolution demands going forward

and seriously not enrolling a lesser state

of the what or the how.

much less attending to it that familiar way, 

in the first place.

what we refer to as genius,

is in each of us 

as our evolutionary means.

but it's not thought provoked.

and experience only lessen that state 

of its foremost existence. 

we are all so close to evolving, 

yet constantly and prominently distracted.

knowing, as our means, 

really gets in the way . . .