Als ik mijn partner verlies, waarom is het verlies dan m'n partner zo ik voor mijn part me verlies in de vrijheid die ik verloor toen me partner nog niet verloren was? Als de liefde vol is, waarom dan vol in de liefde duiken? [Een druk zwembad maakt water mijden] Als liefde vol is, wie is dan zo liefdevol om vol voor de liefde te gaan wijl het gelooft in waar ik voor nodig ben, wanneer het vrijheidsvol onder de jij-bent-mijn-lief-en-ik-raak-vol-van-jou-val plaatst? Als ik mijzelf ben, waarom maak ik dan van mijzelf 'ik'? Als mijn verlangen zoek is, waarom zoek ik dan mijn verlangen zo ik pas krijg waar ik naar verlang wanneer ik geen verlangen meer heb? Als ik nergens zin in heb, waarom spreek ik mij dan tegen door deze zin te maken? Als gevoel drugs is, waarom dan van drugs gevoel maken? 
Though not and too good to be true, love and wisdom comes to mind due to Nisargadatta's 'wisdom tells me I am nothing, love tells me I am everything'. definition energy 100% thats what I referred to. Can you imagine that a sentence as 'definition energy 100% thats what I referred to' without quoting where it points to can be puzzling? Telegram style can be appropiate sometimes, but 'definition energy 100%' does not ring me a bell... moreover, I commented that defining 'nothing' is defining the undefinable.
What proof do you have? Instead of just believing what comes to mind, why not research profoundly? Look, theoretically all is possible. That aside, your sentence actually states that letters 'I' write would be processed by 'me'. Then it assumes this is why 'your' thoughts are inside of 'me'. It doesn't make sense. For someone saying it loves high-level science you yourself are showing low level analysis, aren't you?
Depends. Hypothetically yes, but absolutely I indicated that it is pointless to explain the inexplicable. Supposably you understand your words yourself, but can you imagine one might have to decipher it sometimes? The sentence, 'if You say something about nothing isnt it then just energy even when u think about it its aomething' was reread as 'if you say something about nothing, isn't it then just energy? Even when you think about it, it's something.' assuming this is what it supposed to be. Why post comments consisting of spelling mistakes, grammar errors, missing question marks, meaningless capitals and twists in sentences that make it hard to pin point what is meant by it? In the next part I can grasp little of what you are trying to convey. I find it rather confusing. Could you rephrase it, give an example or ackowledge it is so far-fetched to just leave it be?
The key question remains. Thorough investigation can be clue to understand this inquiry. A riddle for a riddle. 😉 Who am I? |
