Fodder,

 

Fodder is food for domestic animals, especially, coarse food for horses, cows, sheep and pigs. However, fodder is also what the Democratic main-stream media feeds to people, who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS). It is disastrous, that media and education have been overtaken by Left-wing politics, which pushes anti-Americanism, antisemitism, weirdness and chaos. There’s something inherently childish, perverted and stupid about fodder, which is best described by the charm of endearing child actors, who later become tabloid fodder once they grow up. Fodder is about some form of abuse, which is presented as lost innocence.

 

Our habitual, accepted, common, automatic, unnatural, unintelligent way of talking – which I call Disembodied Language (DL) – in which we don’t listen to ourselves, while we speak, is superficial, meaningless fodder, because we don’t listen to ourselves while we speak. No, it doesn’t feed anyone, DL is horseshit. The other day, I was riding my bicycle at the park, where there are stations, from which people can get a little plastic bag, to pick up their dogshit and throw it in the garbage. However, I saw some people on horses, who laid piles of shit, which are ten times as big as dogshit, but nobody picks that up. Supposedly, horseshit is okay!?

 

This constant scoring of political points, by the Left and the Right, is fodder, that obfuscates the issues, which are never properly addressed, let alone solved. People say, it is politics as usual and they casually call politics a blood sport, but they never realize, it is always more of the same destructive DL. Since we don’t know anything yet, about the great difference between DL and Embodied Language (EL), there is no understanding at all, about what politics would be with ongoing EL. However, this is the only real future of mankind.

 

Have you heard about cannon-fodder? It is an informal, derogatory term for combatants, who are regarded or treated by the government or by the military command as expendable, in the face of enemy fire. The term is generally used in situations where combatants are forced to fight against hopeless odds – with foreknowledge that they will suffer extremely high casualties – in an effort to achieve a strategic goal. For example, trench warfare in Word War I. Also, the term is used pejoratively, to differentiate infantry, that is, those who actively engage in warfare combat and other forces – such as artillery, air force or navy – to distinguish expendable low-grade inexperienced combatants from the more military valuable veterans. In DL, everyone is cannon fodder, as the only objective, is to dominate and win the battle for attention, which is the essence of DL.   

 

During our repetitive, humorless, meaningless,  profoundly troublesome DL, people are treated as things, which are only useful for a stated purpose. In the struggle for survival, in which everyone wants to be important or famous, we feed off of each other and politicians are always good fodder for comedians, who, supposedly, make jokes about them. Anyone with EL, never laughs at these phony jokes. Humor with EL is based on laughter about our stupid DL, that is, in EL, we laugh about ourselves. Yes, in EL, we no longer fear or try to protect or defend, our overrated cherished dreams. In EL, we laugh together about our grandiose childish fantasies, which are now fodder for public entertainment.  

 

The kind of fodder, people gossip about at the water cooler or in the locker room, is always DL, but there is an underlying attempt at EL. People want to talk and connect, but don’t know how else to do it, then with their usual fodder. We are made to believe DL is okay, when in fact, it prevents us from having EL and, therefore, it is absolutely not okay. Somewhere, somehow, we all know, we that could have – and really need to have – real conversation, instead of our usual fodder, but our DL-conditioning is too strong.  

 

I was walking by the second hand book store. In the windows were all the pathetic books, which were written by people, who ambitiously had wanted to publish a book and become famous. I was glad not be one of them, because I didn’t want this writing to be fodder. My work is not for sale and EL cannot be bought. You cannot and you do not need to buy into my message. As long as you still assume, you have to believe in or have faith in, what I or what someone else  says or writes, you are merely a consumer and as such, you are always being used as fodder.

 Ridiculous,

 

You, with your Disembodied Language (DL), are totally ridiculous. It is so obvious, that you are suffering, yet, you make it seem, as if you are doing great. You cannot acknowledge – with your DL – you have problems, which don’t go away, but which will only get bigger and more complicated, as the years go by. Why can’t you admit, you feel hurt and everything you do, is a failed attempt, at trying to not feel aggrieved?

 

Ridiculous comes from Latin ridiculus, which means laughable, funny, absurd; ridere, to laugh. Related to the French word, risible, given to laughter, from Latin risus, past particle of ridere, to laugh. Once you know the difference between DL and Embodied Language (EL), it no longer makes any sense to consider DL as your choice, because you engage in it unconsciously and so, the whole idea of moving away from EL is quite ridiculous.

 

With automatic, unnatural, effortful, stupid DL, in which people are only able to pretend they have EL, nobody is having self-care, self-acceptance or self-understanding, to acknowledge – with language – what they are going through and they can only act tough, defensive or arrogant, to show, they are supposedly fine and in charge of their lives. Surely, they are reactive, instead of responsive. The difference between these two is enormous, because being responsive requires a different way of dealing with their language.

 

In EL, you listen to yourself while you speak, but in DL, you either want others to listen to you, or you are listening to others, but you never listen to yourself. It is absolutely ridiculous, after all these years of me speaking and writing about it, you still don’t have a clear sense about the importance of the difference between, when you listen to yourself, while you speak and when you don’t listen to yourself, while you speak. No matter how you much you want to avoid this, your way of dealing with language depends on your DL or your EL.

 

Don’t make it seem, as if I – or someone else – is responsible for addressing your ridiculous DL, because you need to stop it, before you are able to have EL with me or with anyone else. DL, in which you never speak out loud with yourself and, consequently, never have the chance to listen to yourself, is like a ridiculous concept to me. What you consider as listening to yourself, is your belief in the fantasy of inner language. I can speak about it, as I know the difference between DL and EL, so I can go on with my EL.

 

As long as you still go on with your draining DL, you still don’t know the difference between DL and EL. All you are really capable of is DL and more DL, which isn’t helping you. In fact, you are your own worst enemy. Your stubbornness, is actually your stupidity, because, how can you say that you are in charge of your life, when you don’t listen to yourself while speak? You refuse to admit that you are stuck with DL. Since I have EL, I can hear and see what is really going on. It doesn’t bother me – but it bothers you, that it doesn’t bother me – that you are stuck with DL.

 

What is so ridiculous about the aging process, is that it is more and more difficult, to keep up our tendency, to have DL. Go ahead, have some more DL, I’m not part of your sour way of getting old. Your way of life – to have DL – happens to be everyone’s way of life, because when it comes to language, we are all equally conditioned and gaslighted by our culture. It may sound exaggerated, that everyone, like you, engages in DL. That is the reality. I didn’t make it that way. Stop blaming me for pointing this out. I am about EL, which can only happen, if you recognize how hopeless your DL really is.

 

We have all endlessly gone through a ridiculous length, to presumably have some EL, but we are still having DL. It isn’t bad because I say so, but because you say so. Yes, you don’t even realize, you have already said – a million times – that your DL is bad, that your DL should stop, that you don’t like your DL and that your DL is the cause of all your problems. So, why haven’t you stopped it? I know why. You haven’t talked with me. You haven’t seriously read and understood what I’ve been saying and writing: you need to stop your own ugly DL. You need to tell yourself that you can’t go on with that shit. Unless you do that, you can’t talk with me. You have been lazy, irresponsible, cheap and superficial. You have always said, you, supposedly, wanted to have EL, but you always went back to your dumb DL.

 

It may seem ridiculous to you, but all your effort to have EL has been in vain and a waste of your time. Everyone in DL, is constantly pretending to have the moral high ground, but someone like me, who has ongoing EL, laughs about this. I know, you don’t like to hear that, but you can’t un-hear or un-read, what I’ve just made you understand. The buck stops with you. Basically, all the people with DL, have always been saying, all along, oh no, we don’t have DL, we have EL, and since nobody knows what – the hell – EL is, they get away with DL, but I know what EL is.

 

I don’t refer to EL as some ridiculous, idealistic, spiritual hypothetical. This is what everyone in DL is always doing, even when they claim not to have any religion. My ongoing EL signifies my Language Enlightenment (LE). Even if my history with DL rears its end again, I will stop it, as this it the only way to continue my EL. This writing is the result of my joy, intelligence and ability, to express my LE with my EL. Many people have come and gone, who said, they wanted to have EL, but they only went on with it for a while and then, they gave up. The undeniable reality of our EL is, that we have never created – together – the safe circumstances often enough, in which it could continue. Due to our conditioning with DL, we have always, at some point, distrusted each other and backed out. In other words, there never really was any faith in love. Instead, we have continued to believe in our fantasies, which always distracted us from the real deal. I am not distracted from my LE, as I have EL.

 

In closing, here are seven ridiculous jokes. 1) How do your build suspense?.......(?) I was at a funeral of a friend of mine. His wife asked me if I could say a quick word. I stood at the front, cleared my throat, chocked back the tears and said “Plethoria”. “Thank you” his wife said, as I sat down. “That means a lot.” 3) I had a dream last night I was a muffler…I woke up exhausted. 4) What do you call a fake-noodle? An impasta! 5) Did you hear about the guy who stole the cheese? He was up to no Gouda. 6) Two fish are in a tank. One turns to the other and says “How do you drive this thing?” 7) I used to be afraid of hurdles, but then I got over it.                              

 Daarom,

 

Niemand schijnt te beseffen, dat het natuurlijk de Marxisten, de Socialisten, de Communisten, de Globalisten en de Linkse rakkers zijn, die er in de regering, de media, het onderwijs, de gezondheidszorg en de wetenschap zo’n enorm zooitje van maken, want nijverige, zelfstandige, ondernemende, normale, rationele, eerzame, vaderlandslievende, nuchtere, meestal Rechts-stemmende burgers, zijn niet geinteresseerd in en hebben geen tijd voor protest-acties, die altijd worden gevoerd door hen, die anderen van alles door de strot proberen te duwen.

 

Uiteraard ligt een heel nihillistisch wereldbeeld ten grondslag aan het linkse, anarchistische, anti-kapitalistische, antie-persoonlijke-vrijheid, en altijd afstottelijke geschreew. Het streven naar een samenleving – in de nochtans vrije Westerse Democratische landen – waarin mensen zonder een hogere macht of autoriteit zouden kunnen gaan leven, lijkt alle macht en autoriteit aan het individu te hebben gegeven, maar omdat wij nog steeds niet het enorme verschil erkennen, tussen wat ik Ontlichaamde Taal (OT) en Belichaamde Taal (BT) noem, is OT, wat dus een groeps-of-kudde-gedrag is, blijven voortgaan in de naam van zogenaamde vrijheid.

 

Wanneer wij die term, anarchisme, nog eens nader beschouwen, komen wij erachter – via de Wikipedia pagina – dat het zou gaan om een verzameling van ‘denkwijzen’, die terug te brengen is tot de ‘gedachte’, dat een individu op geen enkele manier een ondergeschiktheid aan of van iets of iemand erkent. Indien wij echter het onderscheid maken tussen OT en BT, dan is het ons duidelijk, dat wij geen innerlijke taal of gedachtes hebben en dat anarchisme slechts een verwijzing is naar onze gebruikelijke wijze van spreken, waarin wij niet naar onszelf luisteren. Anarchisme is dus een van de vele gefaalde, desastreuze-gevolgen-hebbende pogingen, die mensen historisch hebben ondernomen, om uit hun erbarmelijke conditionerings-geschiedenis met OT te stappen. Daarom loopt het dus in OT volledig uit de klauwen, met onze zogenaamde ‘individuele vrijheid’, waarin alles moet kunnen, want we hebben nog steeds niet de taal, die echt past bij onze vrijheid, wat natuurlijk BT is.

 

Anarchisme is dus niet terug te brengen op een verzameling van denkwijzen – en al helemaal niet op een enkelvoudige gedachte – dat wij ons, als individu, aan helemaal niets of niemand ondergeschikt zouden maken. Anders gezegd, anarchisme is alleen terug te brengen naar de wijze waarop wij met onze taal omgaan. Het is daarom, dat Linkse mensen altijd de betekenis van van alles willen veranderen, omdat zij niet bewust zijn van het verschil tussen OT en BT.      

 

Rechtse mensen krabben zich tevergeefs aan het hoofd, hoe het – in Godsnaam – mogelijk is, dat we in zo’n wantoestand terecht zijn gekomen. Als wij het verschil tussen OT en BT zouden hanteren, dan kunnen wij niet anders, dan toegeven, dat OT, past bij de Linkse-Anarchistiche-Marxistische Ideologie, want zij zijn altijd degenen, die hun stem verheffen. Doorgaans zijn Rechtse mensen behoudender, geloviger, ouderwetser en fatsoenlijker dan Linkse mensen en zijn zich meer bewust van hun eigen keuzes, onafhankelijkheid, verantwoordelijkheid en hun vermogen om zakelijk te redeneren. Omdat Rechtse mensen redelijker zijn dan Linksen, staan zij dichter bij BT, de taal van het individu en daarom creeeren alleen zij met de welvaart.

 No Way,

 

I am not sorry, there is no way I can help you! If you want to have Embodied Language (EL), you’ve got to stop your own Disembodied Language (DL). No way, I will ever deal with your nasty DL. No way, anyone is able to get done, what you have constantly refused to do for yourself.

 

There is no way, anyone with EL is ever going to be able to have any conversation with anyone who has DL. The two never meet. There is no way, to defend the stupidity, the superficiality, the ignorance, which goes on in the name of our common, usual, phony, unnatural, insensitive way of talking – DL – in which everyone keeps being upset, that nobody is listening to each other, but everyone is unconscious about the fact that nobody is listening to themselves.  

 

No way, means, under no circumstances. There is no way, in which EL can occur under the circumstances in which only DL can occur. If we talk about whether a speaker listens to him or herself, while he or she speaks or not, we are talking about two different circumstances. In other words, listening to ourselves while we speak, positively changes our individual situation, but in no way can it ever change someone else’s situation. There’s no way for anyone with DL, to understand EL, in the same way, that there is no way for anyone with Russian to understand Chinese.

 

Someone, who speaks Russian, knows he or she is speaking Russian. Someone who speaks Chinese, knows he or she speaks Chinese. The Russian speaker is used to hearing Russian and the Chinese speaker is used to hearing Chinese. Similarly, the DL speaker is used to hearing DL and the EL speaker – ideally speaking – is used to hearing EL. However, there’s no way, in which anyone can totally undo or extinguish the history of conditioning, we all have, with DL. The best we can do, is become aware of it and stop DL as much as possible. If we do that, there is no way, we favor – as we have done – our dreadful history with DL, because we want to have EL.

 

There is no way, in which a couple of brief moments of listening to ourselves while we speak, is going to counteract our long history of conditioning with DL. There will only be re-conditioning – in which we can identify and stop our DL – and counter-conditioning – in which we are able to have ongoing EL – if those, who can have EL, meet, talk and mutually reinforce each other’s EL. As with any other language, if there are no more speakers, who are speaking and sharing this language together, it will die. Likewise, if more and more people would engage in EL, instead of DL, DL would no longer occur. EL, the language of the individual, is mankind’s future, but DL, the language of the group, is outdated and is in a death-struggle. 

 

No way, EL is some ideal, to be strived for. Surely, EL and DL occur within every language, in each culture. Thus, DL and EL are cross-cultural or universal, they basically signify the verbal expression of negative or positive experiences. This is how language works. It is interesting to know, that lofty attempts at creating a universal language, Espiranto – which translates in English: one who hopes – have failed, since nobody was speaking it. However, every human being already knows DL and EL, even though, with our DL, there was no way, to have the conversation, in which we could – and would – become clear about this crucially important biological-psychological fact.

 

There is no way, any psychologist, actor, philosopher, religious leader, politician, journalist, monk, therapist, economist, follower, influencer, satanist, programmer, writer, drug addict, porn-star, bully, scientist, celebrity, professor, tyrant, teacher, holier-than-thou, liar, pervert, race-bater, lawyer, authority, stand-up comedian, mother-fucker, desperado, transgender, pro-Hamas protester, asshole, criminal, snake-oil-salesman, sooth-sayer, poet, musician or vagabond is going to be able to retain their identity, if they engage in EL. And, of course, there is also no way, we will ever be able to address, let alone, solve our problems with our DL. Our overrated, attention-demanding identity has always been our biggest communication problem.  

 

Although there is, as people used to say with DL, no way, in which East and West shall ever meet, there surely is a way, to become cognizant about these two ways of dealing with language. By simply speaking alone with our self and by listening to the sound of our voice, we start to admit and acknowledge the great difference between, when we don’t listen to ourselves while we speak and engage in DL and when we do listen to ourselves and engage in EL. When our DL stops, our EL begins and each time we forget to listen while we speak, we fall back in DL and our EL has stopped.

 

There is no way, in which it is possible for words or sentences, to occur inside of our body. Go and ask any neuroscientist, if he or she has ever found any language in the brain. No way, there can exist inner speech. Also, there is no way of knowing, what is on your so-called mind or what anyone else is thinking, unless we have said or written something about it. Moreover, unless we have said or written it, we cannot hear or read it. There is no way – just stop it! – we can hear our so-called inner voice or the imaginary voice of some higher power, deity or soul. All of this is nonsense, the result of DL, in which we don’t speak, to be able to listen to ourselves. Those, who have tasted the difference between EL and DL, but who have backed out on talking with me, want to hang on to their childish, fear-fantasies of DL. In that sense, what is called trauma, is mostly just ego.      

 Better Than Fantasy,

 

Embodied Language (EL) is better than fantasy. You keep having the latter, because you don’t know how to have the former. You can’t have EL as long as you haven’t accepted, understood and applied, the difference between your Disembodied Language (DL) and EL. Unless you stop your DL, you can’t have EL. Once you know the difference between your DL and your EL, you will know, your EL is better than your DL.

 

Unconsciously, everyone wants to have EL, but they don’t know how to have it. In effect, they continue to have DL imagining that it is EL, but they are merely living in a fantasy. Surely, such a fantasy is afforded by our ineffective use of our language, as in DL, we don’t listen to ourselves while we speak and, consequently, we believe in inner language, so-called thoughts or mind.

 

I feel better than ever, because of my ongoing EL and my ability to stop my DL. It is still a revelation to me, I am really not the person, I believed to be. With my educational and employment background in psychology, I have for a long time viewed myself as someone who was helping others, but I have left this fantasy. I don’t care people engage in DL and as a result do horrible things to each other and themselves. I don’t wish anyone to go to hell, as I know, they already live in it, with their DL.

 

They say, there’s no place is better than home, but we can never be ourselves with DL. When someone says that someone else, supposedly, thinks they are better than others, they have always said something, which made the other person, supposedly, think, but also say – usually behind their back – they were, supposedly, thinking they were better than them. In other words, in DL, we are always saying, that we or others are thinking something – which we are actually saying – because in DL, we are unable to say it. Whatever we say we are, supposedly, thinking is always what we have been saying. Obviously, the latter is better than the former, because the former isn’t true, but the latter is.

 

Reasoning with EL is simple, but with DL, we are incapable of formulating something presumably complex – our communication – into something simple. Words, like numbers, have meaning, but in DL, we are manipulatively messing around with the meaning and everything starts to get totally confusing and messed up. 2+2= 4 is said to be correct, good, right or valid, but 2+2=5 is considered to be incorrect, bad, wrong, invalid. I don’t think – with EL – I am better than others, who have DL, but I certainly know something, which others don’t know but claim to know.

 

When someone, who, previously, was feeling bad, is now feeling better, we say, that he or she is in better spirits. This is total nonsense, as we could all see and hear, he or she was unwell. He or she wasn’t having a hard time or, as we say, a bad day. However, with stupid DL, we can never address what is really going happening and so, we use these euphemistic expressions, to, indirectly, describe what, supposedly, is going on. To have real relationship, however, we must be open, direct, honest and sincere. Fantasy doesn’t cut it and this is why we have so many problems.

 

Only spoken communication, in which we abandon DL and have EL, improves relationship, which, as of yet, is in a profound crisis. Due to technology, we can no longer beat around the bush, as our lies are recorded and on record. Books or texts don’t make us any better or wiser. We can’t study our way into living better lives. This is the big hoax of psychology. Freud or Jung or hot shots, keep telling us something important about ourselves, which is so much better than what we can tell ourselves. This is an enormous falsehood. DL removed us so far from ourselves, that we prefer to listen to others, rather than talk with and listen to ourselves.  

 

What do you mean, when you say, you like to be better with this person, than with that person? You feel something within your own skin, which can only be properly addressed, if you listen to yourself while you speak and have EL. Most likely – albeit unconsciously – you can actually already have some EL with such a person, who doesn’t make you feel threatened and stressed. It is astonishing, that we haven’t acknowledged the great difference between DL and EL already. Every intelligent person should speak about it.

 

We all know a computer can do some tasks better than a person, but no computer will ever be able to have EL, only living human beings can. Similarly, EL cannot be acted. Our infatuation with acting, films, movies, written books, texts, social media or visual stimuli, is the result of our usual way of talking – DL – in which we don’t listen to ourselves, while we speak. We are living in an increasingly noisy world, because we are expected to block out and not pay attention to what we are hearing. With EL, we hear, the DL-emperor has no clothes.

 

Fantasy or wishful thinking isn’t, as is often said, a defense mechanism, but it is our inability to stop our DL and to have EL. Yes, we lack the skill to be able to produce EL and we are helplessly stuck with our dumb, tiring, blunt, insensitive, repetitive, coercive, unnatural DL. Yet, technology shows us the consequences we still refuse to see, if we would listen to ourselves while we speak. Thus, we cannot escape the devastating results of our unscientific, unrealistic way of talking. Whether we admit it or not, our DL is on its death bed, regardless of the fact, that we keep dragging our heels about our need for EL. Our fantasy is based to our need for authentic EL. We are only going to feel better about ourselves with ongoing EL. P.S. In case you still imagine, I am just making this up, check out my two You Tube channels: 1) Maximus Peperkamp and 2) maximuspeperkamp-hw8sw          

 Kort,

 

Kort gezegd, ongemerkt begeeft iedereeen zich iedere dag in Ontlichaamde Taal (OT). Ik zal kort antwoord geven waarom dat zo is: we luisteren niet naar onszelf, terwijl we praten. Ook wil ik even kort aanstippen, dat al onze problem, die wij ervaren, worden veroorzaakt en in stand gehouden door onze OT en zouden kunnen worden opgelost door Belichaamde Taal (BT).

 

Wat BT betreft, hebben wij allen slechts een kort geheugen, maar met OT blijven wij ouwe koeien uit de sloot halen. Kort voordat wij BT kunnen gaan hebben, zullen wij eerst alle tijd en aandacht moeten besteden, aan het feit dat wij zelf onze eigen OT volledig moeten stoppen.

 

Ook zullen wij meerdere malen, kort na elkaar, met elkaar in gesprek moeten zijn geweest, zodat onze BT wederzijds bekrachtigt kan worden, want zonder die bestendiging, zal onze BT slechts van korte duur zijn en vallen wij onwillekeurig weer terug in ons oude verhaal met OT. Ook al doet iedereen in OT heel naar en kort af, er lijkt nooit een einde te komen aan het gebruikelijke gezijk, gekanker, gejammer, geouwehoer and gezift.

 

Bij bejaarde stelletjes is het vaak zo, als de een de pijp uit gaat, dat kort daarna ook de ander het loodje legt. Dit is een kort voorbeeld van hoe mensen – met OT – altijd leven voor elkaar, maar nooit voor zichzelf. Met OT is men altijd kort door de bocht. Omdat wij niet in contact zijn met onszelf, zijn wij voorbarig en ontbreekt het ons aan nuancering. In OT voelen wij ons te kort gedaan, maar worden wij ons niet bewust van wat wij zijn tekort gekomen. In BT maken wij korte metten met onze tekort komingen.

 

In OT zeggen wij tegen elkaar, laten wij het kort houden, maar we blijven maar door drammen. In BT zijn wij echter kort en duidelijk, omdat wij kunnen zeggen wat wij willen zeggen. Wij zijn, of we het nou toegeven of niet, kort gehouden door onze eigen OT en niet, zoals wij beweren, door andere personen. Soms hebben wij, heel even, omdat er zich een positieve situatie voor doet, een korte adem pauze van onze OT, maar het valt ons niet echt op, hoe onze BT tot stand kwam. Daarom is het, als wij soms toevallig wat BT kunnen hebben, altijd maar van korte duur en zijn wij niet in staat, om voort te gaan met BT.

 

Zodra wij de vaardigheid ontwikkelen, om naar onszelf te luisteren, terwijl wij spreken, dan valt het ons kort daarna op, dat onze voortgaande BT onze Taal Verlichting (TV) impliceert. Vanaf dat uitzonderlijke moment, hebben wij, kort en goed, altijd gelijk, omdat wij op correcte wijze over onszelf spreken en omgaan met onze taal.

 

Dit schrijven geeft ons een kort overzicht over het verschil tussen OT en BT. Uiteraard is dit eveneens een kort fragment van mijn BT, dat het beste hardop kan worden gelezen, zodat de lezer een korte, aangename, gerichte ervaring kan hebben, van het luisteren naar zijn of haar eigen stem. Wanneer het aldus mogelijk is, om een korte, maar krachtige, episode van BT te beleven, dan zijn wij in staat, om eindelijk toe te geven en te begrijpen, dat wij, vanwege automatische OT, schromelijk te kort schieten, in het spreken over wie wij zijn.

 

Met onze voortgaande BT kunnen wij – zoals het eigenlijk ook zou moeten – eindelijk heel kort zijn over moeilijke toestanden, conflicten, complicaties, dramas en tragedies, want we hebben al zoveel van ons leven verspild. Wij zullen, nadat wij het verschil tussen OT en BT erkennen, het nog maar heel kort over OT hebben. Het groeps-gedrag, OT, waarin wij telkens – verbaal – de hele boel kort en klein zijn blijven slaan, heeft geen enkele toekomst, want BT is de taal van onze individuele vrijheid.         

 Silence,

 

I have said so before and I will say it again: my silence is different from the imaginary silence of anyone, who still believes in inner language or in having thoughts or a mind. Whenever I don’t talk, don’t listen, don’t write or don’t read, I am totally silent, because I am without any language.

 

Those who know the difference between DL and EL, will stop their DL, because they prefer to have EL and they experience their silence as a result of their ongoing EL. In effect, they will know, their silence is created and maintained by the presence of their effective language, language which accurately describes who they are and what they experience. Those who engage in DL, however, view language and silence as incompatible, because DL describes their experience incorrectly. Consequently, in DL, silence means, the absence of language, but in EL, silence means, the presence of language.  

 

Interestingly, a very similar thing occurs with listening. In unconscious, automatic, unnatural DL, listening always only either seems to mean, listening to others or making others listen to you, but in EL, listening only means listening to yourself. Moreover, in EL, listening to yourself means listening to others, but in DL, listening to others means not listening to yourself. To be clear, in DL, we never listen to ourselves and in EL, we always listen to ourselves.  

 

Silence and listening are, of course, connected, but this connection is only becoming evident to us during EL, because it is obfuscated during our usual, insensitive, coercive, unintelligent DL. In EL, we realize, we are silent, and, yet, there is no urge to be silent. Stated differently, in EL, we no longer believe in becoming silent, because it is our self-nature, to be silent. In our conflicted DL, we are endlessly trying, to find peace and quiet, but we never succeed, since we believe ourselves to be the product of DL. Although we have been conditioned by DL, our self-nature hasn’t changed. Each night, in deep sleep, we are rejuvenated, as we are without language.

 

For those who begin to explore the difference between DL and EL, it is of great importance, to fully recognize – each time, when they don’t speak, listen, write or read – that there really is no language, no thought and no mind. Initially, due to our common history of conditioning with DL – when we don’t speak, listen, write or read – we still believe, that we have private speech, covert conversation or inner language, but if we manage to have ongoing EL, and, therefore, stop our DL a little longer, we become more and more sure, there really never were any words or sentences inside of our heads.  

 

Another fascinating aspect about silence, is that in EL, it continues, while we engage in language, – that is, while we speak, listen, write or read – but, also while we don’t engage in language. In EL, we understand, rationally, that we never go in or out of our silence, but in DL, we seem to be either going away from our silence or out of our silence, but seldom, if ever, into our silence.

 

When it is said, someone’s silence is worse than his or her anger, we refer to the so-called silence of DL. Also, if someone’s silence said volumes, we are dealing with DL. These two sayings are good examples, to make clear, that it is merely a way of saying. Likewise, having thoughts, a mind or hearing internal speech, is due to our habitual way of talking, in which we don’t listen to ourselves, which is DL.

 

When you say, that his or her silence lasted for a minute and then, he or she began to speak, you first didn’t hear him or her say anything, but then, you heard him or her say something. In both cases, you weren’t listening, because in both cases, you were – due to DL – assuming, imagining, believing, that he or she was quietly, deeply, mindfully, thinking something, which he or she, then, supposedly, expressed, as if covert language became overt. However, this person was simply relaxing his or her body, so he or she could speak. ‘Thoughtful’ speech is less noisy or coercive or emotional than our usual speech.

 

Only during DL can a silence be experienced as uncomfortable. The discomfort is always about the fact, that – although we don’t know about the difference between DL and EL – we don’t like DL and, unknowingly, prefer EL. When, in DL, someone, finally says something, he or she,  of course, broke the painful silence of DL. Yet, this so-called speaking up or speaking out, has never resulted in EL, as it always meant more of the same DL. Breaking the silence also indicates that we speak, in order not to feel what we feel.

 

The silence of our ongoing EL is our Language Enlightenment (LE). With EL, we are silent with and without language. Everything we say in EL dissolves and, therefore, we are continuously new. Moreover, in EL, our silence isn’t – as we say in DL – deepened, but it is renewed. In the same way, that what we say – in EL – is never the same, our silence is also never the same.