Characteristics,

 

After one has explored one’s own Embodied Language (EL), not merely once or twice, but multiple times – as often as possible – one becomes familiar with the characteristics of one’s Disembodied Language (DL) and one's EL. The same criteria show up again and again and, yet each time one experiences something new. Only our EL can inform us about our DL. There is nothing accidental about this, as our EL is possible, due to our awareness of the discriminative features of both our DL and our EL.

 

Initially, the various characteristics of EL strike us as intriguing, in and of themselves, but, as time goes by, they blend into this majestic, new, robust behavioral pattern. Certainly, the beaty, coherence, consistency and creativity of our EL is very different from our insensitive, uncomfortable, energy-consuming, contradictory, unnatural, effortful, chaotic DL.

 

The reality of one’s Language Enlightenment (LE) is revealed, once one becomes capable of continuing with EL. Our LE is the realization that there is absolutely no language anywhere inside of us. There never was any text found inside of a human body. This absence of covert speech is something, which debunks our so-called mind or our thoughts. It takes time to counteract our previous conditioning, but it eventually begins to get through to us, because, with our EL, we keep letting ourselves know, whatever we want to say. We experience with certainty, in the let go of EL, there is no inner me, who causes us to behave as we do, as we are truthful, silent, peaceful and empty.

 

If people are confused, they sometimes say: I was drawing a blank. However, with EL we find, that being blank – is our LE – is our natural state. Also, if someone is distracted, we say: he or she isn’t really there. In this case, the person is internally stimulated. The crux of EL is, when we continue to express, verbalize and say out loud, in our own words, in our own way, what we believe to be thinking or experiencing, our imaginary internal speech stops, as it never existed in the first place.  

 

When we engage in EL, instead of DL, it appears as if we become quiet, because of EL, but that is not what happens. With EL, we always are quiet and there is no process of becoming. Therefore, this reference, to becoming quiet, is still saying something about our conditioning history with DL. With DL, we cannot comprehend, what it is like, to be relaxed, open, receptive, because we remain on guard and fearful. Thus, we perceive, becoming quiet, in our DL, as not speaking, and, consequently, during EL, we still tend to say, out of our old habit, that we have become quiet by speaking, but we are already quiet, each time we engage in EL, as there is no inner language.   

      

These characteristics are observable, because they are audible, while we speak and listen to the sound of our own voice. Our ears have been conditioned to hear the sound of DL, which we hear every day, everywhere. We tend to filter out the sound of our own wellbeing and, as a result, we neither produce this happy sound, nor do we hear this sound, as produced by us. It seems as if we are deaf for the sound of our EL, which we only produce, on occasions when we listen to ourselves while we speak. However, there’s nothing really wrong with our ears, our deafness is only a matter of our conditioning. We can still – without any exercise or practice – make the sound of EL and hear this sound and be affected again by what should be called the resonant vibration of our sanity.

 

Our conflicted, violent, troubling conditioning history with DL makes us believe, that we have thoughts, a mind, inner language, but each time we say what we supposedly think, it disappears, and, in fact, we find out, it wasn’t even there to begin with. Each time, we say what, presumably, is on our so-called mind, we feel relieved or free, but this is not the case, as long as we still engage in automatic DL. During DL, our illusion of inner verbal constructs, ideas, concepts and beliefs makes us do many horrible acts, to justify, that we are right, and others are wrong. We don’t fight our religious and cultural wars – as we all tend to believe, with DL – about our overt language, but about our imaginary inner language. Indeed, we are willing to die for our fantasies or we sacrifice our individuality, to maintain our belief, that we belong to some group.           

 

When we say, again and again, out loud, alone, to ourselves, our troubling thoughts – and listen to the sound of our voice – we hear a change in the sound of our voice, when we shift from DL to EL. Instantly, there is a sigh of great relief and our EL reveals something about us that is true, but which, previously, with DL, we couldn’t and didn’t say. Now, as we say it, we no longer think it, as the words we speak, were never inside of us. We say to ourselves: there aren’t any words or sentences inside of our brains. We can hear and sense, the internal conversation with ourselves, we believed to be having, was only an illusion, created by DL, our usual way of talking. Mind, our crazy fantasy of inner language, is a fiction, created and maintained by our DL, in which we are not allowed to say what we wanted to say and what we are perfectly capable of saying.

 

Our DL and our EL can be recognized by their very distinct characteristics. Once these have been identified, we are bound to prefer EL and abhor DL. In the beginning, we seem to achieve our LE with our EL, but, as we continue with our EL, we realize, we have actually always been like this. Also, with our EL, we feel, we have always been looking for our EL, we have, unknowingly, always wanted to have EL and only now we are having it. Our personal history is analogous with the history of all of mankind. This gives us a profound understanding about, what is not only our common problem – DL – but also, our common destiny: to overcome DL and have EL.

 

Each human being has an autonomic system, which makes us want to achieve and maintain our homeostasis. Ideally, it is our EL, that is, our consciously spoken words, which represent this self-and-other-regulating process, by which we maintain stability, while adjusting to the conditions that are optimal for survival. Surely, our DL prevents us speaking about and from listening to our physiological experiences and from responding to what comes naturally. Obviously, our biological need for homeostasis is only met during our EL, but never in DL. When biological systems succeed in achieving homeostasis, life continues, but when they are unsuccessful, disaster or death ensues.

 

We don’t necessarily die, due to our stupid DL, but we certainly create nothing but tragedies. Moreover, with our dissociative, insensitive DL, we never acquire, what biologists call dynamic equilibrium, the stability, in which continuous change occurs yet relatively uniform conditions prevail. Threat is the only uniform condition, which prevails due to our DL. Whether we admit it or not, are willing to talk about it or not or capable of talking about it or not, all humans share the same biological characteristics. This means, mapped onto our language, we all don’t want to have DL and we all, unconsciously, only want EL, as with EL, we are truly at ease and ourselves, as we can fully express ourselves and feel totally resolved about all our experiences.

 

The more we continue with our EL, the more its characteristics, but also the characteristics of our DL become familiar to us. With ongoing EL, we express a sense of completeness, in which we grow, learn, enjoy and keep experimenting. There is never a stop in the flow of life, which is as much part of our language, as of our bodily experience. This link, between our language and what we experience in our body – while we speak – is at the core of EL. Since EL expresses our experiences correctly, there is no need to go back and forth between our language and our experience, because our EL expresses our experience directly, accurately and satisfyingly. In DL, however, this is not the case at all. At any given moment, we are either getting stuck on the descriptions of the experiences we attempt to describe, or we are fixated on, impaired by or paralyzed by experiences themselves, without being able to make any sense of them verbally.

 

Our ability to speak about our bodily sensations calmly and safely in EL, ties in with our ability to express our emotions correctly and satisfyingly. As we all, in some way, know, it is easier to talk about our experiences without emotions, than to talk about our experiences with emotion. In EL, it is, at long last, apparent to us, that talking about our experiences – without talking about our emotions – isn’t really talking about our experiences. This is what we attempt to do in DL, which, as we all, somehow know, is never successful, because, inadvertently, this results in speaking about emotions, while neglecting our experiences. Another weird complication is the contradiction, in DL, supposedly, we can talk about our experiences and our emotions separately, which, of course, is a complete lie.

 

During DL, we all somehow buy into the idiotic idea, that we can talk about our emotions and our experiences separately. The reality of our phony DL is, that we can talk about what are, presumably, our experiences, but not about our emotions or, we only talk about our emotions, but not about our experiences. In each case, we remain incomplete, and we seek to compensate for our inability to express ourselves totally.

 

There are some differences within DL. Those with DL, who are more prone to expressing their feelings, they always condemn those who are more prone to expressing their experiences. Naturally, the opposite is just as true, as those, with DL, who are more likely to express their experiences, always judge those who express their emotions. The bottom-line of DL is, that the latter group dominates the former group and, generally speaking, the expression of our emotionally devoid, presumably, objective or scientific experience always appears to be more important, than expression of emotions, which are the co-occurring feedback phenomena that are happening simultaneously with our actions.  

 

The adaptive characteristics of our EL should not be underestimated. When someone has EL, he or she has it, in spite of the DL, that is going on everywhere all the time and in spite of his or her own conditioning history with DL. In DL, we are, basically, only allowed to talk about what we do, but not about how we feel about what we do. Of course, our neglected feelings don’t go away and always come back to bite us. As stated, we compensate for not being able to express our feelings and not being able to feel. The things we do, to get away from ourselves, have adverse health effects and severely impair our ability to relate to ourselves and each other. In our EL, by contrast, everything we have been avoiding in DL is coming into our attention and is expressed with acceptance and integration.

 

EL has intellectual and scientific characteristics, but our DL is hopelessly anti-intellectual. To put it bluntly, DL, our common way of talking is in denial of our human nature. We make it seem with DL, as if the ideal way to communicate is to try to be open, so that we accept and understand each other, but with EL, we are not trying to be open, to accept or understand, because we are really open, we accept and we understand. These effortless characteristics of our EL signify our LE.