Where does one put this natural expansiveness to love wholeheartedly,
so that it doesn't backfire and cruel one's openness?
Surely, it's a risky gamble to place that love in what is finite,
given what is finite lacks inherent existence,
is constantly changing in the play of causality.
One walks among the metaphysicians who walk among us, and for whom impermanence has always somehow been in itself a problem
, an internal 'contradiction' in need of a resolution into something that won't move, into an it
. Everything of the temporal, the manifest, the appearance, forms, the meta-stable is
of things is somehow suspect on this condition alone; nothing can be of value unless it doesn't move; unless it persists, stays, and until we locate such an understanding, we suffer; we suffer over this suffering, this suffering of our own creation, necessarily, pluck ourselves into a two-parted creature with a body and a mind, one part to stand for this concrete suffering impermanence, the other part (spirit, mind) capable of exceeding it . . . . This long, long schizoid hangover from a consciousness that wakes to the truth of its own concrete
reality, of its own end . . . and cannot yet live with that.
What we have here is deep deep pathology and the long long waking from a dream that persists in delaying its own end; what we have here is the concrete reality of what we feel as two-parted: that of being both matter and energy. One misunderstands them if one doesn't see them in thermodynamic exchange, and sees this thermodynamic exchange as all that is
. In this way the universe continuously manifests itself, transforming matter into energy and energy into matter, the human being standing as a momentary item (part)conscious of this condition in its everyday living. Those manifestations - those forms, those things
that rise from this have nothing standing behind or before them: they are matter and energy and they move and transform because of each other's existence; existence being all there is. All apparent "law" that we locate about the movement of things in the universe does not precede the things in existence. Things in existence and in relation to one another create those movements themselves. There's nothing "behind" all this. Just this.
What we also have here is history sanitized of its political nature: a bundle of foci that encourages ig-norance of material realities; downplaying of one's concrete suffering and the socio-political reasons that might be bringing it about; take this spoonful of sugar for your existential angst; keep your suffering between yourself and your god; become more spirit than material (as if neither are actually both
) . . . . we have here as well the mystification of 'knowledge' into the privileged purview of the few; those who can see the "unseen," etc. All temporality of form, appearance, you
(and your suffering) have no value in this pathology. Because all things pass is reason enough to pass them by . . . .
There must be something behind
all of this is the dream of every meta-physician; the assumption that there is an is that isn't
(and every other form that thought can take). To place an essence to the universe Above, Apart, Beyond, Outside
it, as Nietzsche said, begs the question of whether or not it is sickness that inspires the philosopher - sickness, as in poor relation with existence, everything that is
. . . . that's the only place we need to 'get.' where we are.