when syntax is the graze of common knowledge,
when the questioning gods of how
become the collective demand,
do we, as the awareness of presence, advance?
otherwise circumventive is the circuitry
to be more of what we can't claim, by knowing,
by mindful as a sovereign glance.
even how, may be the wrong wrench set to apply.
the mind, as a mechanic,
basically works on the passing cars
and not directly on the concept of motion.
mind scrutiny in mirror time,
does that generate any advancement?
how can appraisement study itself,
when left without the familiarity of its language base?
we could say, the mind beating out the mind,
but that sounds like an audience event
that people would pay to watch,
for its shocking entertainment value.
but personal advancement from that,
as an audience participant,
does not transcend to impress.
what syntactical tools are we afforded?
it's like a rubik's cube without colors or surface.
we'd like to think of this as a hands on process.
well, the problems with that, are think and hands.
so how to track oneself, as lost but found
and in know way get in the way?
since knowing will lobby for itself as if disguised.
we can only have the mind as the subject matter.
how to witness or overview
has to come from deeper within.
could one say, channel a source higher than mind?
could one be present for such a say
and not get immersed in a transduction's account?
would language even provide for such to occur?
so say we went there, by some means,
would 'there' be a want or a need to ever come back?
so if we knew from then
as if we know now,
would we be in this predicament of discovery by search?
it seems that all of search in a handicapped method.
and even method as so intended,
lacks the essentials that would be needed
to get beyond what beyond would claim.
we simply can't have this conversation
without confusion making claims.
syntactical, is as least a start place,
even if meaning can't go along for the ride . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment