ok who am i?
hmmm that seems to be the question
even if i would decide not to be...
..would i be: not
thus in denial of my beingness
so, the question 'to be or not to be', would only cause a question to follow, like: 'what?'
'to be what?' or 'not to be what?'
meaning then that u would first have to have a description,a defenition of what or who you will or will not be.
and, this question can only emerge from an already made definition. because, something that is, will not perceive itself to have the choice of being or not being. it is. even if it would choose not to be, the beingness would merely change from being something to being the choice of being nothing. eiter way, it is, and will remain being, no matter what it is.
so, we all know we are, no one will deny this.
what or who we choose to be or not to be, is the defenition of being.
and from this defenition, we can indeed ask ourselves this question: to be or not to be.
if my defenition for being today, would be: happiness
my question is: to be or not to be happy?
maybe my defenition for being is: anger towards bush for raging a war and killing people
then my question is: to be or not to be angry towards bush for raging a war and killing people
underneith that defenition for being lies this other defenition: finding it normal for being angry towards bush for raging a war and killing people
question here is: to be or not to be finding it normal for being angry towards bush for raging a war and killing people
all different defenitions i could find for me being, me as a defenition.
constantly changing, rearranging
naming it not defenition, but personality, opinions, principles, morality, character, 'way of life'
keeping myself from realising that life needs no way but to just be
it needs no path or person or opinion or description
no finding itself different from 'other lifeforms', because even though the form may differ, all is life
the only thing that keeps me from seeing me as life is me as a defenition of life
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten