Against,

 

If you know what is true, you’ll have to admit, that everyone is against you. This isn’t some paranoia, but it is the truth about knowing your own truth. Your truth isn’t like anyone else’s truth, because it only matters to you and when you try to adjust it to others, you will lose touch with your truth and get confused and frustrated. The only way to get clear about your own truth, is to stop comparing it to anyone else’s truth or trying to make it acceptable to others. Your truth is irrefutable, because you know it is true for you, so nobody’s approval is needed. However, it is great if others, who also have acknowledged their own truth, confirm your truth. This is only possible with Embodied Language (EL).

 

Most people, unknowingly, engage in Disembodied Language (DL). When they approve or disapprove, they do so, because of their DL, which is against EL, as EL can only happen, if DL is stopped. Approval from someone with EL, is of much greater value, as such an endorsement has nothing to do with what someone, presumably, is thinking, but with what he or she is saying or writing. This difference is of huge importance, because if we reinforce the illusion that someone is thinking, we prevent this person from doing something, that is, we prevented him or her from saying, writing, thus, from verbally expressing something. This will only become crystal clear, once we engage in ongoing EL, but as long as we still have DL, the point I refer to is never properly addressed.

 

Against the backdrop of our EL, everything will be  different and once we discover and begin to admit the big difference between our DL and EL, we will have to reinterpret everything we know, in the light of our EL, because the knowledge we have acquired was attained with DL. The point I am referring to, is that EL, has no relation whatsoever, to what anyone claims to be thinking. In other words, what is said, written, heard, read or understood, has absolutely no connection at all, to what we consider to be meaningful with DL. Stated differently, our EL from our DL-perspective, may seem utterly meaningless.  

 

There is something odd is going on with the social reinforcement of EL. We need the encouragement from others, to be able to allow ourselves, to find out, that EL is actually self-reinforcing. Someone who plays guitar, likes to hear that sound and keeps playing and practicing, because it is self-reinforcing and a similar effect occurs, while we are listening to our voice, while we speak. We can immediately experience these self-reinforcing effects, but we are not used to enjoying our own voice, while we speak, because we were conditioned, to listen to others, but not to ourselves. Even if we listen to ourselves and feel good about our sound, while we speak, it just seems too good to be true. This is the magic energy of our EL, the gift that keeps on giving. As long as we are unaware of and against our natural sound, while we speak, we undermine ourselves.

 

Once we can have EL with others – because we have had it by ourselves – the social reinforcement is like icing on the cake. Others can only reinforce our EL, if they themselves experience the self-reinforcing effects, I mentioned in the previous paragraph. And, we only become convinced, our thinking doesn’t exist, when we acknowledge these self-reinforcing effects of our EL. This wonderful feeling of engaging in EL, is natural, effortless and ongoing, as it comes about without any practice. It is a matter of being attuned to ourselves and expressing what this is like, in our own way, with the words that we have. With EL, we are no longer verbally against ourselves.

 

With EL, we are finally capable of testifying against our own history of conditioning with DL. We were never able to do this before, with DL. Each time we have tried, to go against our DL with our DL, we only made things worse. With EL we are not against our DL, but we can let it be what it is, as we recognize it for what it is. It is how we were taught, but not how we want to be. We prefer to have EL, but we were never able to admit this to ourselves with our DL.

 

With our EL, we feel, we are receiving a precious gift. Our demeanor changes, to accommodate this valuable experience. You can call it divine energy, but I know, it is the energy, which is now available to you, since you are in charge of your language. With DL, all your energy is, unknowingly, lost in language, because you don’t have a clear sense of who you are and, therefore, you don’t have any boundaries. With EL, we have, for the first time in our life, solid boundaries, which means: we know, that thinking doesn’t exist. As long as we are still in the grip of our habitual DL, we talk as if thinking is a real thing.   

 

Our belief in thinking dissolves like snow in the sun, once we engage in EL. Any reference to presumed inner language doesn’t stand a chance against our EL, because we realize language is about speaking, listening, writing and reading, not about thoughts, ideas, concepts, memories, theories or narratives. With DL, we have been continuously bamboozled, because we bought into the false notion of inner speech and we have believed in happenings, which, with EL, turn out to be imaginary. With DL, we say, we think, but we act like schizophrenics, who claim to hear or see things, that no one else experiences, who have many assumptions, which are absolutely not true, whose reasoning is not logical and who have difficulty communicating their experiences.

 

Surely, with DL, we have never been able to protect ourselves against the adverse effects of our belief in our minds, since we have never paid attention to our common way of talking, which – among many other problems – causes so-called mental-health problems. That idiotic word, mental health, is a contradiction in terms. Yes, we will go against the grain, by saying that thinking doesn’t exist, and it will some take time, to get used to it. I myself, for a long time, was lacking proper boundaries, as I was still convinced every psychologist, psychiatrist, therapist, teacher, student, parent – or any honest, intelligent human being – should know about EL, but nobody was interested, as our EL goes against everything we’ve been told. Yet, I insist thinking doesn’t exist.

 

It doesn’t matter, whether you are for or against, your hangup – or hangover – about your thinking is maintained by how you talk. You, unknowingly, have DL, because don’t listen to yourself while you speak. Your attention always goes to listening to others or to making others listen to you. In EL, you joyfully listen to yourself and the fog, which was created by your so-called thinking is gone. I wanted others to know about EL so badly, that I was short-changing myself, but since I have started speaking and writing about my Language Enlightenment (LE), I am no longer so concerned about others and, funny how, I am also no longer so concerned about myself. This major issue, that our thinking doesn’t exist, could only be addressed in the context of our LE.

 

Somehow, I have come full circle, and my energy is now flowing freely with my EL. Also, I really have nothing else to speak or write about than my LE and I feel fully satisfied with that. I don’t care anymore whether others are going to do, whatever it takes, to have EL and I am indifferent to the fact, that everyone keeps unconsciously engaging in DL. It is already a while ago, I gave up teaching, but since I was the person, who discovered EL, I inadvertently, took on me the role, to bring EL and LE to others, but I finally seem to have abandoned that role. I could have never believed, not too long ago, that I would turn against my own inclination, to want to spread the word, but this is how I feel about my EL right now. It is my LE, which makes me be like this.              

 

Truth,

 

I recently came across a piece of my writing, I had never posted on my blog. It was a proposal. I share it with you today, because I still find it valuable. I am doing very well, but there are a few things, I want to get off my chest. This is my truth, for which I have suffered greatly. I don’t regret anything I have done. To the contrary, I am feeling proud, I stood my ground, no matter the many negative consequences. 

I really have gone through this horrendous experience. For the record, none of you, who, supposedly, teach and know psychology, know anything about our Embodied Language (EL), let alone about our Language Enlightenment (LE), which can only be revealed by our EL. I know about this, but you haven’t shown any interest, in what I already knew, while I was still studying for my Ph.D. at Palo Alto University (PAU). During my time there, I gathered all the evidence I needed, to validate my discovery of EL.

 

I must say, I am glad, I did not become a psychologist, but I still insist, I deserve a Ph.D., for what I have put together. I am not joking, I mean this very seriously. If you read my blog, you will find, I have developed an important concept of what could best be described as the psychology of language. It is sad, that except for Scott, the kind librarian, no one at PAU was open to talking with me about EL. I had, naively, but also professionally, assumed, that people in psychology would be nice and friendly, but boy, was I mistaken. Frankly, I felt disgusted, disappointed and impaired, by the shallow competitiveness and superstition amongst both the students as well as the faculty.    

 

Everyone, of course, knew this Dr. Russell was a big fucking, arrogant, incompetent, chaotic jerk, but I had to, initially, put up with this sick moron. You should still give me my money back, just for making me having to deal with this total asshole. Also, if you have any decency at all, you should apologize to me, for the incredible humiliation you have put me through.  

 

In my practicum, in San Mateo - where I, without getting paid, gave therapy to many severely mentally ill and traumatized patients - I wanted to warm up my food, but someone else’s food was in the microwave. I waited a couple of minutes, but no one came and then, I took it out, so I could warm up my lunch. Suddenly, a Chinese man appeared. It was his food, and he was upset, and he repeatedly said that I had touched his food. I tried to explain, I had not touched his food, as I had only taken out his plastic container, with the lid on it, but he was very agitated with me and at some point, I let him know, there was really no need for all this big uproar.

 

My wife happens to be Chinese and my beloved father-in-law happened to have died, just a week before this incident took place. Later, I found out that this man, was a schizophrenic, who was employed by the clinic as a so-called consumer. I had no idea about this and I had never seen this man before. When my supervisor - a stressful, sleezy, chain-smoking, lonely, frustrated, flirtatious, man-hating, single mother, who had a son, whose name was Max and was fanatically into electronic brain-stimulation – spoke to me, suddenly, everything was wrong with me. I had, supposedly, not been culturally sensitive.  

 

I tried to defend myself, but it was to no avail. After all, I was a white, hetero-sexual, privileged male, who had hurt the feelings of a minority person, while trying to calm him down, after he had blown up at me. Short afterward, back at PAU, I was forced to get – costly – therapy, for anger management and when my evil, irresponsible, lazy, dumb supervisor – who, unannounced, had been gone for days – later heard about this, my practicum was abruptly ended, by him, and I was ordered, to appear in front of a commission. This was the worst thing I have ever experienced in my whole life. YOU STINKING MOTHER FUCKERS, ALL OF YOU!!! At that moment, I said FUCK YOU, FUCK ALL OF YOU and that was the end of my graduate study at PAU.

 

Shrewd Dr. Froming knew very well, he had enrolled me in this Ph.D. program, which I had enthusiastically started - we even sold our house, so that I could study - because he had told me, I could determine my own research topic. Weeks before this unfortunate micro-wave debacle, however, I had, unexpectedly, been invited, with my wife, to have a dinner with the director of PAU, Alan Calvin, when he told us, without mincing words, I had to give up on the idea of doing my own research, which up until that moment, I had cherished, as it was the very reason, I went to study at PAU. YOU FUCKING LYING WINDBAG!! I felt betrayed by this inconsiderate, mediocre man and by the faculty of this institution and still hold them accountable for the heartache they caused me. My wife and I were still mourning the loss of her father, whom we had loved so dearly and who  played an important role in our lives. I guess, if I had humbly accepted the punishment, which this FUCKING COMMISSION was surely going to inflict on me, I could have redone my practicum and finished my Ph.D. program at a much later date, if I had had some support, but there wasn’t any.  

   

You are, in my opinion, all a bunch of lazy, phony, cowards, for never responding to my writings and for not taking my work serious. After leaving PAU, I taught psychology for almost nine years at Butte College and, thus, the Master of Science, in clinical psychology, still served its purpose, but I admit, I feel so relieved, I have stopped teaching. Also, at Butte College, there was never any real interest in EL, although I gave various successful seminars for the faculty and although all my students knew about it and loved it. I should be honored as an alumnus for what I have accomplished. I am very glad, however, I never became a fulltime psychology faculty, as I couldn’t put up with all the political diversity-equity-inclusion bullshit.   

 

It is simply hubris, which prevents you from acknowledging the truth of what I am talking about. None of you is worth your salary, because you don’t know anything about – you don’t want to know anything about – and, thus, you can’t share, what it is like, to have EL. I have had a horrible time at PAU, but also while teaching at Butte College, because none of you, has showed any respect or appreciation, for what I was already talking about years ago and have further refined. You are, whether you admit it or not, unknowingly, the biggest promotors of Disembodied Language (DL) and, because of the nonsense you claim to know, you can only pretend to have EL. I am here to remind you, that you are fooling your students as well as yourself. The current wave of antisemitism, which is sweeping across campuses, all over the United States, is because DL has continued unabated.  Yes, DL is a very serious matter and we have yet to start acknowledging, that we unconsciously engage in it, everywhere, day in, day out.

 

Read my blog, talk with me and give me the honor I deserve, by admitting, that I truly have discovered something, none of you have the intelligence to give any consideration to. If you are, as you claim to be, interested in psychology or in learning, if you have any passion at all for human relationship, you must be interested in EL. I urge you to consider, why you mechanically do your cushy job, by demanding your students to adore you. I have no respect at all for your so-called woke-work ethics, as it always implies, you don’t give a shit about EL.   

 

You should not feel offended by what I say, as it is true, that you engage in DL, while you pretend to have EL. Admit it and experience with me, a different aspect about psychology, you haven’t yet acquired. It is our ineffective, coercive, effortful use of language, which determines, we never noticed, the great difference between DL and EL. The ugly truth, about how we use our language, can only be revealed during our ongoing EL.

 

I look forward to talking with you personally and repeatedly, so what I address can be verified and acknowledged. I have no other motivation, than a sense of urgency, which derives from the fact, that DL is everywhere and, yet we don’t even know it and aren’t able to talk about it. DL cannot be addressed with DL. We must have EL, to be able to address DL. I stand by this fact. If you recognize me, PAU or Butte College would become a source of new understanding about human relationship. I look forward to reading your responses to my blog. Do not come with your DL, as that will be deleted. Dependent on your meaningful responses, you can let go of your assumptions, set up a time and place, to talk with me and enjoy new dimensions and possibilities, which open up to us, due to our delightful EL.

 

In closing, psychology has always been and still is about the truth, which can only be found, if we have a real dialogue. Your refusal to have EL, signifies your insistence on a monologue, on boring lectures, and, therefore, on DL. To have EL, your DL has to stop first, and this is not a matter of my opinion. I am not claiming to be able to stop your stupid DL. You have to do this yourself and without complaining to me or anyone else. Are you ready for an intellectual challenge? You will not regret it.

 

Writing,

 

While I was studying psychology, the thing I enjoyed most, was writing papers. I never saw the need for quoting what someone else had said or written, as I always wanted to write about my own language. As anyone who reads my writing can tell, I only write about who I turned out to be, with my Embodied Language (EL). I am no longer interested in who I was, due to my conditioning with Disembodied Language (DL), because I can now fully understand why I was that way. Yes, I am self-realized, and my writing has played an important role in describing and establishing my Language Enlightenment (LE).

 

When I discovered, in my early twenties, the great  difference between my DL and EL, I only wanted to speak about it with others, so that people could hear it and have it. Many people suggested, I should write a book about it, but to me, such suggestions  indicated, they weren’t interested in experiencing EL. I was and I still am aware, people appreciate the written word, more than the spoken word. I am so glad, I have continued with the spoken version of my EL. This writing is the consequence of that fact.

 

Whenever someone has EL, he or she is listening to him or herself, while he or she speaks and he or she is saying, what he or she is saying, to him or herself. Although I know, others can read and understand it, I write this for myself. People who don’t know about the difference between DL and EL, don’t know and cannot know, that all the writing, that was done by others, was based on DL. This writing or the writing of my dear Dutch friend AnnaMieke – who, like me, finds talking out loud with herself and listening to her voice and, thus, experiencing her own ongoing EL, more productive, than talking with others and, inevitably, being exposed to or getting involved in DL – is the only writing, which is based on EL. You can only read about our EL and LE on our blogs.

 

Whenever we are obediently, unconsciously and effortfully listening, to a handful of, presumably, important, knowledgeable, distinguished speakers – without realizing, we never even get the chance, to say something ourselves – we don’t realize, these eloquent, prominent, persuasive speakers – who, of course, only succeed in getting all the attention, by dominating, by determining and by, in one way or another, forcing the so-called conversation – only say what they or others have written. Their speech is scripted, pre-determined, acted and phony.

 

When I went to college and took a speech class, I was infuriated and totally disappointed, to find out, that I was taught and expected, to write my speech, before I could, supposedly, say what wanted to say, in a most convincing – manipulative – way. It really goes against everything I stand for. It goes without saying, I did very badly in that class, because I didn’t want to do, what I was supposed to do. However, it was an eye-opener, to find out that, unfortunately, all public speaking, is always based on writing about what is said. And, this is why practically every public person has written a book, which perpetuates the already existing detrimental notion, that the written word, is more important than the spoken word.  

 

Before I enrolled in the Psychology program of Palo Alto University, I was promised, I would be able to determine my own research topic. However, after I had successfully completed all my course work and was accruing my clinical hours, by giving therapy to severely mentally ill and traumatized people, I was told in a forceful manner, by the mean and arrogant director, that with regard to writing my dissertation, I had to follow the research of my supervisor and that I could write about whatever I wanted, after I had achieved the Ph.D. This was a total betrayal. I hope they read this and give me my money back. I withdrew from the program, because I had wanted to write about, what I am writing about on my blog.

 

I am glad, I didn’t become a psychologist. With my master's degree I became a psychology instructor at Butte College, where one of the assignments, to all my students, was to write a one-page paper, which started with the sentence: when I speak alone with myself and listen to the sound of my voice, then… They would experience, what it is like, to speak with and listen to themselves and then write about that. It was so revealing and so beautiful, what they were writing. I still consider receiving all these wonderful papers as my biggest accomplishment, as a teacher.

 

Certainly, this writing or anyone’s writing about EL, will let you know, that EL really exists, but you will only be able to experience it, if you begin to talk out loud with yourself and listen to your voice. Reading someone else’s writing isn’t changing our behavior, as it distracts us from paying attention to our EL, our own language, with which we instruct ourselves, to be happy and to behave as we want to. Yet, reading our own writing is a different matter, especially, if it is about our EL. By writing and reading about my EL, I have turned the corner on my conditioning history with DL and have become stabilized in my LE. I was against writing about EL in the beginning, because I intuitively didn’t want to be burdened with writing, which must have derived from people their inability to acknowledge the existence of EL, let alone, of the continuation of EL, which would reveal their LE.          

 

Precision,

 

Ockham’s Razor is the scientific problem-solving principle, that suggests searching for explanations constructed with the smallest possible set of elements. Embodied Language (EL) is the language we are only able to produce, when we listen to the sound of our voice, while we speak, so that we can  hear and feel a sense of wellbeing. Everyone can do it, yet nobody does it, since we were conditioned to listen to others, while we speak, not to ourselves. In effect, Disembodied Language (DL) is our common way of talking, which sets the stage for how we deal with our language, as well as with all other behavior. If we really finally want to get serious about moving beyond the us-versus-them divide, which is tearing us apart, it is absolutely necessary, that we begin to differentiate between our own DL and our own EL.

 

The simplest explanation is usually the best one and nowhere is this more apparent, than in EL. Not only  results our unconscious, involuntary and effortful participation in DL, in imaginary, unnecessary and energy-draining complications, once it is stopped, we are wiser, because with ongoing EL, we attain self-knowledge, our Language Enlightenment (LE). If civil discourse and consensus-building is our aim, we must prevent all DL, so that we can engage in EL.  

 

When two competing hypotheses are presented about the same prediction and both theories have equal explanatory power, one should prefer the hypothesis that requires the fewest assumptions. In this case, EL is the preferred hypothesis. However, this philosophical razor is not meant to be a way of choosing between hypotheses that make different predictions. Anyone who has experienced and thus,  explored the difference between DL and EL, knows – although it is mechanically claimed, DL has equal or even better explanatory power than EL, because initially, from our DL-conditioning, EL seems to be more complex than DL – these two disparate ways of dealing with language predict different outcomes. To be clear, EL is not chosen, because others have acknowledged it to be parsimonious, but because we ourselves have individually determined, that our EL is true for ourselves. Nevertheless, we can all acknowledge, EL is true for each of us, individually. EL is based on N=1 and, surprisingly, we all agree.

 

A surgeon must cut with great precision and if we want to be able to cut through the abscess, which has been created by and is growing bigger and bigger, due to our DL – in which we, as speakers, don’t listen to ourselves – then, we must begin to talk with a sound, which represents our mutual sense of being completely at ease. The sharp tool we need, during our conversation, is our voice, but our voice of precision is gentle, sensitive, genuine and calm, not harsh, forceful, painful or frightening.

 

EL makes instantly clear to us, that any talk about the so-called efficacy of deep, empathetic listening in changing minds, is pure nonsense. If we manage to change from DL to EL, we will do so, without any reference to a non-existent mind, but by bringing our attention to speaking, listening, reading and writing. In other words, only overt language is addressed, because covert language doesn’t exist, as it is a fantasy-product of DL, in which we can never express ourselves how we would like to.  

 

The unfolding of our EL is something extra-ordinary. It is the resonant sound of our own voice, which we follow with great precision, which allows us to say things, we were never able to formulate during DL. The accuracy of our verbal behavior is substantially increased, as our EL implies a change of perception. Knowledge, in EL, isn’t something we retrieve from memory, but which we say or write spontaneously, because we have unshackled ourselves, even if it is only for a few moments, from our history with DL.  

 

Ongoing EL, allows for a precision of observation, which previously, with DL, was impossible. Before we can really know and instruct ourselves and each other, into what is the right thing to do, we must first diagnose things correctly. However, DL doesn’t even permit us to say what is, according to us, going on, so whatever we say, with DL, is creating nothing but problems. Sure enough, the polarization of how we communicate, is only further enhanced, by our isolation, while we are sitting in front of our screens, longing for a brief like, that is, a boost of dopamine.

 

Anyone who has paid attention to the lucidity and precision of what I am writing about, in this blog, must admit, this clarity doesn’t show up anywhere else. The four educational institutions I have been part of – Butte College, California State University Chico, Ryokan and Palo Alto University – were not interested in the precision, I brought to our use of our language. Although lots of people must have heard or read about me, nobody ever came to me and said: let us help you, to put this new way of dealing with our language on the map, we would be so proud, to have you as our alumnus. Instead, each of these institutions gave their full support to the dumbing-down of anti-free-speech, anti-intellectual equity-diversity-and-inclusion programs, which, as expected, has only created more DL and division.        

Here is another incredibly moving and beautiful text about crying from my delightful enlightened Dutch friend AnnaMieke, which was read and understood by many people. I have put her text through google translate. Thank you AnnaMieke. 

Here is the link to her blog: Natuurlijk Ontvouwen.: In wie ik ben. (klompanna2.blogspot.com)

In who I am.
I cry to feel,
what it can be like to be able to cry, for what others cannot care about, in what I can show, that in the excessive unfolding my crying can arise. I cry because I know how to feel in seeing all the suffering. Of all the carrying mistakes that make me cry.
I cry about a past that is no longer there, but due to the circumstances in my understanding, I can often cry about what has happened to me and probably also to the other person. And I cry about recognition in a conversation, and I can cry about my knowledge. I cry from my own lack, to be able to say that my crying turns out to be a gift, that my crying when it comes, can be so unconditional, in letting it flow, to the sound that, like a horn, can give me in crying all I can.
I cry to understand my own words, my own existence in the tears that I feel, of my unfolding in the emotion that I often feel and can have. And I can experience in my crying how soft my parts become, how like a mortal , can have in my hands, in the language that frees me. I cry about what happens to me in all my writing, and I cry about the ending that I described. I cry to last, in all my state of being and I no longer withdraw can ask why my crying wants to be with me. I cry to want to be seen, to feel what it should be like, to reveal the depth of my experience in my writing. I cry in my parts and feel it in my heart, that it can sometimes be so moved. And fortunately I can interpret my tears to be able to cry in who I am.

Hier is nog een prachtige tekst over huilen, van mijn verlichte vriendin AnnaMieke, die schijnbaar heel wat heeft losgemaakt bij mensen, omdat zovelen het hebben gelezen en begrepen. 

Hier is de link naar haar blog: Natuurlijk Ontvouwen.: In wie ik ben. (klompanna2.blogspot.com)

In wie ik ben.

Ik huil om te voelen,
hoe het kan zijn om te kunnen huilen, om wat andere niet kunnen geven,in wat ik kan laten zien, dat in het overmatig ontvouwen mijn huilen kan ontstaan.Ik huil, omdat ik weet hoe te voelen in het zien van al het leed.Van al het dragend vergissen, dat mij in het huilen zet.
Ik huil om een verleden wat er niet meer is,maar door de omstandigheden in mijn begrijpen, ik vaak kan huilen wat mij en waarschijnlijk ook de ander is overkomen.En ik huil om de herkenning in een gesprek,en kan huilen om mijn weten.Ik huil vanuit mijn eigen gebrek, om te kunnen stellen dat mijn huilen een cadeau blijkt te zijn,dat mijn huilen wanneer het komt, zo onvoorwaarlijk kan zijn, in het laten stromen, naar de klank die net als een hoorn, mij kan geven in het huilen wat ik kan.
Ik huil om te verstaan mijn eigen woorden,mijn eigen bestaan in de tranen die ik voel, van mijn ontvouwen in de ontroering wat ik vaak ook voel en kan hebben.En kan ervaren in mijn huilen hoe zacht mijn delen wordt,hoe als een sterveling, in handen kan hebben, in de taal die mij bevrijd.Ik huil wat mij gebeurd in al mijn schrijven,en huil om de afsluiting die ik beschreef.Ik huil om te beklijven, in al mijn staat van zijn en ik mij niet meer af kan vragen waarom mijn huilen bij mij wilt zijn.Ik huil om gezien te willen worden, om te voelen hoe het moet zijn, om in mijn schrijven de diepte, van mijn ervaren blijkt te zijn.Ik huil in mijn delen en voel het aan mijn hart,dat deze soms zo in een  ontroering kan zijn.En gelukkig mijn tranen kunnen duiden om te kunnen huilen in wie ik ben.

 Here is another beautiful piece of writing (I put it through google translate) from my brave Dutch friend AnnaMieke (thank you), who gives shape to her Embodied Language (BT) and her Language Enlightenment (TV) in her own precise, fluid way. Of course, BT and TV exist, and it is true that anyone who doesn't want to talk to her or me has never gotten around to it. Here is the link to her blog:

Natuurlijk Ontvouwen. (klompanna2.blogspot.com)

Let it come as it comes.

By experiencing it and not looking for what is no longer there, but continuing to unfold in the crystal light, the wealth of my unfolding shines in a different light. That seeps into every nook and cranny, and a space can arise in it. what I can really tell. The chance to know that in the next line of my writing, will go further in describing my own language. My own language that lets me know the patience I tend to have can be seen from the maturity in my share it and I don't have to do anything about it other than just write in this moment. The specialness in my storytelling is also being willing to bend into what comes and not being able to put my finger on anything anymore, but let what comes come.
Let what comes come is in fact a surrender of my writing, in every word that pops up and I can read it out loud to myself afterwards. In the beauty of my parts, it almost seems like a crusade to know what happens in my act of writing, over the edge of origin, the surprised looks that can look at me, in the incomprehension, of discovering that my own language exists.

As a series of experiences, the future is not yet here, but in this moment of sharing, as a kind of confession, which cannot put faith or conviction in a spiritual capacity, which can only apply in the moment of my writing. Where my focus to listen let come what comes.
It is the wave of life, where the brilliance in my language, I can pass this on and my language remains the reason for all my writing.

Let what comes comes puts my attention in the middle, through my conversation with myself and sometimes leans towards a new moment, where I enjoy staying, where the wind has finally died down again, where the sun shines again for a while, where the puddles of the heavy rain, appear to have dried up, I also put my face in the sun, to feel how the living proof, enriches me in the silence received, in the eternity of being able to be, what I let come while I write .