or from beyond, think further about

what if the event horizon is a false premise?

what if the ambiance horizon is closer 

to the truth we seek?

what if the method of event is a false premise,

only reflecting the technique of approach

and then subsequently claiming 

as to what by that method is sighted?

in either case, 

we are still only an audience perspective gained.

we are still in the audience stands,

but now claiming we know when the game started.

what if there is no such thing as an event?

that the mechanics of eventfulness are falsely claimed.

that we gloss a deeper truth of function 

that we have not yet mastered as observers.

and so we thrive on conclusions made 

relative to the story we tell as if told.

we are limited by attention span and audience perspective.

we get an account, by not entry into the isness.

we maintain our status as separate from 

with an integrity, it seems.

we have the bias of reading instructions 

to conger approach.

we are premised as separate from 

and maintain that ongoing.

we are perusal and peripheral in posing,

as if anything happened through us of this kind,

we would have to classify it as a miracle. 

on a basis of religious experience,

which already has two strikes against us,

one by religiosity and two by experience.

both, as techniques, are person-reflective as primary

and have little to do 

with the props and methods associated.

the mind-work we use 

has premises we cannot challenge, in that, 

how would we challenge with what it is to start with?

we are inventively circumventive,

even for me, in writing this.

I am inventively disingenuous.

words can never speak 

for where we would have to be coming from.

at best, I am a prisoner 

using a prison means 

to speak about prison life. 

experience keeps us in check, just that way.

if we broke out into a different mind style,

where there was immersion rather than witness

and it invented its own, say telepathic connectivity,

would that be called its language base?

would we have a commoning of sensory in the collective?

would we immerse to the point 

of leaving this mode of experience,

for a deeper sense of being-ness that experience offers?

for now, we don't have the mindset 

to answer to or for that.

I am just throwing words at what can't be said,

or understood as a listener.

it has to be in you, of you, and through you,

without further mental consideration.

it's there but also in you.

it's within but not accessible 

as being conscious thereof.

yes, I've thrown words at it.

now you have picked up on these words

by your own means. 

or you have just read something 

for you to totally disregard 

or from beyond, 

to not think further about . . .