Categorically,

 

I reject Disembodied Language (DL), because it is against my dignity, my nature and my intelligence, but, most importantly, I am capable of having and enjoying ongoing Embodied Language (EL). Without EL, DL cannot be stopped and unless one has a clear understanding of the big difference between these two, one is bound to continue with DL, by default, and one only pays lip-service to EL, which then, is presented as a way of improving ourselves, our relationships or communicating more effectively.

 

All of the aforementioned lofty goals don’t get to the real issue of EL: our Language Enlightenment (LE). Stated differently, EL is the way of dealing with language, which makes us realize our LE. However, DL has kept us ignorant, unconscious and conflicted. It has to be stopped and whatever needs to happen, to stop it, is worth it. In my case, it meant giving up on being in contact with the family I was raised in, leaving behind my study of human behavior and, yes, abandoning everyone I previously felt rejected by, who all engaged in DL. I don’t have any business with anyone who continues with DL and it has taken me 64 years to fully and simply admit this to myself.

 

I feel perfectly fine without having any followers. I never needed or wanted them, as I stay true to my EL, which only cares about those few individuals, who have the courage and inclination to do what I have done and turn their back on DL. By no means, this implies, anyone with EL has retreated from the world. Quite to the contrary, anyone who comes to acknowledge the difference between DL and EL, can only continue with EL, if he or she has the integrity and clarity, to live as a nobody among others, who believe themselves to be somebody and treat EL with defensiveness, hostility and superficiality.

 

All my efforts to have EL with others have shown, that I don’t need them, that I’m okay on my own, that my EL wants me to stay with myself and that that is my LE. It is odd to realize, I have bothered so many people, who didn’t want to have EL with me, but now to recognize, that with the disappearance of the other, I have disappeared. The silence, I can now experience is love and tells me that it couldn’t be in any other way. For all these years, I was trying to find out, how I could continue my EL and as long as I was still not entirely clear about that, I would again and again fall back into DL, but I also lost track of my LE. Only recently my EL has revealed my LE properly and has the latter become more important  than the former. As long as I was preoccupied with the continuation of my EL, I had things upside down.

 

It is and it always was my LE, which made me want to express my EL. It is so fantastic to realize this. I feel a great release of energy, which was blocked due to how I dealt with my language. Although I had discovered the difference between DL and EL, there was still a misunderstanding about why I wanted to have EL so badly? How was it possible, I wondered, that I could do this beneficial act and that only so very few people wanted to do this with me? This question has been answered, as it is our LE – who we really are – which makes us want to have EL.

 

You can call LE anything you like: your true self, your no-mind, your aloneness, your dissolvement in love, in sensitivity, in language, in silence and in beauty. I  have arrived at this conclusion, not because I was having EL with others, but because I let my EL take me, where it wanted to go. In the past, I have read many useless books about spirituality, philosophy and psychology and I have often come across the description of what has been called the pathless path, but I categorically disagree with all of that nonsense. Each step I have taken has led me to this  realization and each human being – whether they know it or not – is on their way to this. Nothing can be missed and everything can only find its place due to our language. I don’t care what you call it, but that is a fact. That being said, our language – our EL – of course, is more important than any so-called spiritual path or journey, as our LE is already the case.                    

 

Fame,

 

I have been famous already and my Embodied Language (EL) doesn’t anymore want me to go there. Of course, initially, upon discovering EL, my conditioning history with Disembodied Language (DL) was still very strong and like everyone else, I sought to be famous. I was all over the place, trying to preach the gospel of The Language That Creates Space and willing to accommodate others, so that I could give another workshop, lecture or interview.

 

Although I didn’t know as much about EL as I know today, I was able to pull it off, get a bunch of people together and provide an experience of EL for each of the participants and make a lot of money with it. However, I wasn’t satisfied, as it was always an enormous effort, to find participants to have these brief, but beautiful events, since I wanted my EL or, more importantly, our EL, to continue forever and so, I tried everything I could, to make that happen.

 

Soon after arriving in the United Stated in 1999, I went back to school and studied Psychology for many years, but just before achieving my Ph.D. (I had already done all my course work, was accruing my clinical hours and writing on my dissertation), I withdrew from my studies, as it was painfully clear to me, that nobody was interested in EL. My whole reason for entering this field, had been, to explore and scientifically validate my DL/EL construct.

 

While it was a sad affair at the time, I feel very lucky, I didn’t become a Psychologist, as it surely would have hindered my pursuit of EL. I worked in various mental health jobs and then became a Psychology instructor at Butte College, where I, so to speak, had a regular audience of students, to teach about EL.

 

After years of teaching and introducing hundreds of students and faculty, to what I then called Sound Verbal Behavior, it was apparent, that to be able to continue with my EL, I needed to put this teaching career behind me. While most students really enjoyed my classes and I was able to teach EL and mainstream Psychology, EL showed why Psychology had totally failed us. For a while, I felt drawn to the marvelous work of B.F. Skinner, as it appeared to provide the scientific basis, I had been looking for. However, as a self-studied behaviorist, I had, due to my knowledge about the DL/EL distinction, my own interpretations and, consequently, I was accepted only by very few scientists and academicians, as I never really felt motivated to publish a paper on EL.   

 

My tendency to study,  which never seemed to subside – as an Associate Faculty in Psychology, I had free access to all the scientific journals and wrote many ferocious responses on my Facebook – came to an end after I read the book About Science, Life and Reality by L. Fraley. I hope that everyone, who is interested in EL, will read about his Behaviorology, as it details, how we individually create and live in our own reality. Needless to say, neither Fraley nor other Behaviorologists showed any interest in the obvious fact, that we, of course, each create and live in the reality, which is maintained by our language.

 

I feel so relieved, I was able to pull away from being a Seminar Leader and being involved in Psychology, Therapy, Behaviorism, Behaviorology and Education. For all these years, I had kept, unknowingly, busy with others, but now I have arrived at a stage in my life, where EL reveals my Language Enlightenment (LE). Although I have known about my LE since my early twenties, I felt, I didn’t have the right way to speak about it, as I was still continuously drawn into DL again and again. This has dramatically changed and although there are and probably will always be, remnants of my history with DL, I am very sure, that it always was my LE, which wanted me to have EL.

 

I suddenly feel a sense of completion, I have never before felt. I am no longer trying to reach anyone. This writing is my EL, which is always about the unfolding of my LE. If you happen to read this, you could have this EL too and know your LE. It is for everyone and it is priceless. I feel so satisfied, that I can now speak and write so freely about my LE with my EL.        

 

 

Blissful,

 

I feel blissful today. I know very well how this wonderful experience happened to me. Strangely enough, I don't feel that I have done anything for it, although it is of course absolutely true that I have done everything for it. How could anyone write or say such a thing? Very simple: by talking to himself or herself out loud and thereby being able to listen to his or her own voice, which tells him or her that his or her language really is all his or her own.

 

Embodied Language (EL) is appropriating our language for ourselves. This is not about taking a position or having a certain belief, because the irrefutable self-evidence that we experience is possible from the space that we have created with our own language. The battle in which everyone with Disembodied Language (DL) is involved no longer takes place, because our language is really  embodied and so we can remain in the here and now, while speaking, listening, writing or reading.

 

Although there is always something new being said, heard, understood, discovered, explored, revered or  created, there is no identification whatsoever with the words and phrases that by themselves describe what may come. Dissolving our language in the heart-space we are discussing gives an enormous peace that cannot be achieved in any other way.

People often speak of the need for so-called 

calming of our turbulent minds, but those 

who can have EL know that anyone who 

speaks of their language in that way is 

subconsciously living and acting from DL. 

There is simply no mind for those who have

 EL and the settling down, in the language 

that creates space, only became possible 

because the language that occupied 

space has finally ceased.

 

EL is not the opposite of DL, but what happens when DL doesn't take place. Initially, we tend to view DL from our old conditioning with the dualistic DL, in which we always talk about the other, who seems to prevent us from staying with ourselves. Because of EL, we can finally focus on ourselves. In DL the appearance is kept up that we are talking to each other - and therefore never to ourselves - but in EL it is very clear to us, that talking to ourselves makes the real conversation with others possible.

 

Reaching the other with language is always an extension of experiencing ourselves and everything is exactly as it should be. In the absence of verbal attention for our own experience, however, there is always a tendency to fill what may be called our greatest lack. Everyone tries, unnoticed, to fill the void, which is experienced as a negative emotion. Acknowledging and allowing those negative feelings with impunity, in our language, causes an effortless  transformation, making even our most chaotic, evil, fanatical, cramped, confused, bizarre and perverse experiences meaningful and valuable. There is so much that, because of our own DL, has gone unsaid, to ourselves. And, yes, of course, it takes time and conversation to catch up with ourselves, but once we acknowledge the difference between DL an EL, we suddenly find ourselves having both the time and the energy to get into talking with ourselves.

 

Writing about DL and EL has a different function than talking aloud to ourselves. In listening to ourselves, we come into direct contact with what matters to us, in the moment we speak to ourselves, but in writing about it, a process of reasoning takes place that makes us rational, about how we feel.

 

In writing about EL - to ourselves - we become more rational about our emotions, while in speaking to ourselves, about what we experience, we become more and more emotional, because we can really finally experience, what we experience, because our language has become attuned to our experience. Of course this has to do with how we sound and so, in talking to ourselves, we can still sound very ugly, restless, hateful, annoying, paranoia, insensitive, superficial, vulgar, lost and nagging. To ourselves, we would rather never talk about this at all and because others usually did not want to listen to it, we do not want to hear it from ourselves either. In talking to ourselves, however, there is no avoiding this, and we say, albeit begrudgingly, everything that bothers us, however futile, reprehensible, mad, exhausting, unpleasant, ridiculous, against the grain, sad or disturbing. Precisely the expression of what we most dislike makes us step out of our DL.

 

There is often talk of the so-called necessity, which would exist, to simply accept the discomfort and negativity in conversation with others, because the other, so to speak, confronts us with the so-called facts, which we might be inclined to deny. In that case, there is always a power relationship, in which the person, who is supposedly allowed to say it as it supposedly is, takes the lead and with his or her DL dominates the other, who must submissively accept this unquestioningly and basically suck it all up, in order to be able to ‘really’ take responsibility for the negativity, that he or she nevertheless experiences because of the coercive DL of the other person.

 

Rest assured, in speaking to ourselves, the verbal rape, mentioned in the previous paragraph, never takes place, because to ourselves, for ourselves, with ourselves and because of ourselves – with the words we have for it, with the understanding and acceptance that we have about it and with the patience and time we have for this – we have let it be known, that we experience this, because this is the only way to express this verbally to ourselves.

 

Maybe we feel shortchanged? Maybe we are tired of always experiencing the same drama over and over again? Maybe we really don't want DL anymore from now on and because we've said and heard it so many times in all its monstrosity, unconsciousness, impetuosity, resentment, doggedness, guilelessness and unscrupulousness, we're coming to know who we are, who we were and who we will be, if only we could speak – in our own language – about what happened to us. Yes, a great deal of suffering and sorrow has befallen us and we can hear it, if we say it to ourselves. And, we can also write about this and leave it all behind us, because with our EL we surrender to our Language Enlightenment (LE).

 

Gelukzalig,

 

Ik heb vandaag een gelukzalig gevoel. Ik weet heel goed hoe deze prachtige ervaring mij is overkomen. Ik heb, merkwaardig genoeg, niet het gevoel, dat ik er iets voor heb gedaan, ofschoon het natuurlijk absoluut waar is, dat ik er alles voor heb gedaan. Hoe kan iemand zoiets nou schrijven of zeggen? Heel eenvoudig: door hardop met zichzelf te praten en daardoor naar zijn of haar eigen stem te kunnen luisteren, die hem of haar vertelt, dat zijn of haar taal echt daadwerkelijk helemaal van hem of haar is.

 

Belichaamde Taal (BT) is het toe-eigenen van onze taal voor onszelf. Het gaat hier niet om het innemen van een standpunt of het hebben van een bepaald geloof, want de vanzelfsprekendheid die we ervaren is mogelijk vanuit de ruimte, die wij met onze taal hebben gecreerd. De strijd, waarin iedereen met Ontlichaamde Taal (OT) is verwikkeld, vindt niet langer meer plaats, omdat onze taal is belichaamd en wij dus in het hier en nu kunnen blijven, terwijl we spreken, luisteren, schrijven of lezen.  

 

Ofschoon er altijd weer iets nieuws wordt gezegd, gehoord, begrepen, ontdekt, onderzocht, vereerd en gecreerd, is er geen enkele identificatie met de woorden en de zinnen, die vanzelf beschrijven wat er kan komen. Het oplossen van de taal in de ruimte die we bespreken geeft een enorme rust, die op geen enkele andere wijze tot stand kan komen.

 

Men heeft het vaak over het zogenaamde kalmeren van ons woelige denken, maar zij die BT kunnen hebben, weten dat iedereen, die op die manier over  hun taal spreekt, onbewust leeft en handelt vanuit OT. Er is eenvoudigweg geen mind voor hen, die BT hebben en het tot rust komen, in de taal die ruimte creert, werd uitsluitend en alleen mogelijk, doordat de taal, die ruimte innam, eindelijk is opgehouden.

 

BT is niet het tegenovergestelde van OT, maar wat er gebeurt als OT niet plaats vindt. Aanvankelijk, zijn we geneigd, om BT nog te beschouwen vanuit onze oude conditionering met het dualistische OT, waarin we het altijd over de ander blijven hebben, die ons ervan lijkt te weerhouden, om bij onszelf te blijven. Vanwege BT kunnen wij eindelijk alleen met onszelf bezig zijn. In OT wordt de schijn opgehouden, dat wij met elkaar – en dus niet met onszelf – praten, maar in BT is het ons helder, dat met onszelf praten het werkelijke gesprek met anderen mogelijk maakt.

 

Het met taal bereiken van de ander, ligt altijd in het verlengde van het ervaren van onszelf en alles klopt precies. In het ontbreken van de aandacht voor onze eigen ervaring echter, is er altijd een hang naar het opvullen van wat ons grootste gemis kan worden genoemd. Iedereen probeert, ongemerkt, de leegte op te vullen, die als een negatieve emotie wordt ervaren. Het erkennen en het ongestraft toelaten van die negatieve gevoelens – in taal – veroorzaakt een transformative, waardoor zelfs de meest verkrampte, fanatieke, kwaadaardige, verwarde, perverse en chaotische ervaringen betekenisvol en waardevol gaan worden. Er is zoveel dat, vanwege onze eigen OT, ongezegd is gebleven, naar onszelf.

 

Schrijven over OT en BT heeft een andere functie, dan het hardop praten met onszelf. In het luisterend spreken met onszelf komen we meteen in contact met wat er voor ons van belang is, in het moment, dat we met onszelf spreken, maar in het schrijven daarover, vindt er een redenatie proces plaats, dat ons rationeel doet worden, over hoe wij ons voelen.

 

In het schrijven over BT – aan onszelf – worden wij rationeler over onze emoties, terwijl in het spreken met onszelf over wat wij ervaren, worden we steeds emotioneler, omdat wij echt kunnen ervaren, wat we ervaren, omdat onze taal zich naar onze ervaring heeft kunnen voegen. Uiteraard heeft dit te maken met hoe wij klinken en kunnen wij dus, in het praten met onszelf, heel lelijk, onrustig, hatelijk, vervelend, paranoia, ongevoelig, oppervlakkig, platvloers, verloren en drammerig klinken. Naar onszelf willen wij het hier eigenlijk liever helemaal nooit over hebben en omdat anderen hier meestal niet naar wilden luisteren, willen wij daar ook van onszelf niet van horen. In het praten met onszelf, valt hier echter niet omheen te gaan en zeggen we, al is het met tegenzin, toch alles wat ons zogezegd dwarszit, ook al is dit nog zo tot niets leidend, verwerpelijk, waanzinnig, uitputtend, onaangenaam, belachelijk, tegen de keer in, droevig en verontrustend. Het is juist precies het uitspreken van wat ons het meest tegenstaat, dat ons uit onze OT doet stappen.

 

Er wordt vaak gesproken over de zogenaamde noodzaak, die er zou bestaan, om in het gesprek met anderen, het ongemak en de negativiteit maar te eenvoudigweg te accepteren, omdat die ander,  ons zogezegd confronteerd met de zogenaamde feiten, die wij wellicht geneigd zouden zijn, om die te ontkennen. Er is hier dus altijd duidelijk sprake van een machts-verhouding, waarin de persoon, die zogezegd mag zeggen waar het op staat, de leiding neemt en met zijn of haar OT de ander overheerst, die dat zomaar klakkeloos moet accepteren en bij zichzelf moet blijven, om zo verontwoordelijkheid te kunnen nemen, voor de negativiteit, die hij of zij evenwel ervaart vanwege de OT van die ander.

 

In het spreken met onszelf, vindt de in de vorige alinea genoemde verbale verkrachting nooit plaats, omdat wij aan onszelf, voor onszelf, met onszelf en vanwege onszelf – met de woorden, die wij daar voor hebben, met het begrip en de acceptatie, dat wij daarover hebben en met het geduld en de tijd, die wij daarvoor hebben – hebben laten weten, dat wij dit ervaren, omdat dit de enige manier is, om dit verbaal aan onszelf kenbaar te kunnen maken.  

 

Misschien voelen we ons tekort gedaan? Misschien zijn we het zat, om altijd hetzelfde drama opnieuw te ervaren? Misschien willen we vanaf nu echt geen OT meer en omdat we het al zovele malen in al z’n  onstuimigheid, verongelijktheid, verbetenheid, onbewustheid, gewetenloosheid en argeloosheid hebben gezegd en gehoord, komen we eindelijk aan de weet, wie we zijn, waren en kunnen blijven, als wij maar – in onze eigen taal – konden spreken over wat ons is overkomen. Ja, er is ons heel veel leed en verdriet overkomen en we kunnen het horen, als wij het aan onszelf zeggen. En, wij kunnen hier ook over schrijven en alles achter ons laten, omdat wij met BT ons overgeven aan onze Taal Verlichting (TV).  

 

What,

 

There is more going on than meets the eye, with the push for inclusion of non-binary people. Rather than merely being seen, people insist on being heard and in doing so, they demand from others, that they use the words and the language, they want them to use. This phenomenon isn’t anything new, as it describes the way of talking, which has been going on, ever since we became verbal. What is easily forgotten, is that, one day, we were without language, but, at some point in human history, it began to emerge.

 

Our verbal, individual lives are very short, in comparison to the evolution of human language, which is approximately 200,000 years old. It is no exaggeration to say, that our language plays a much more crucial role in our lives than our genes. Each of us is born without language and unless someone repeatedly produces an English or a Dutch sound, we don’t learn how to speak the English or Dutch language. Yet, if we speak intellectually about the origins of language, what we say takes precedent over how we say it, as we keep ignoring the great  importance of how we sound, while we speak. The old saying: it is not what you say, but how you say it, is more relevant than ever, but who is saying this? It is a courageous listener, who had the gall to become a speaker, because he or she didn’t like the sound of that pushy speaker, who dominated and, of course, prevented him or her from also being a speaker.   

 

What is often described as the main characteristic of human language, is that it is compositional, that is, it allows us, as speakers, to express ourselves in sentences, which consist of subjects, verbs and objects – such as ‘I ate my sandwich’ – while using the past, the present (‘I eat my sandwich’) or the future tense (I’m going to eat my sandwich’). What has, however, been missing completely, in all the debates about language, is that compositionality gives us the capacity to endlessly generate new sentences, as we – due to how we sound – become able or unable to combine or recombine sets of words into their subject, verb and object roles.

 

What we are able to say, to each other, but, more importantly – to ourselves – depends on whether we are feeling threatened and fearful or safe and at ease. In the former, we will engage in Disembodied Language (DL), as our autonomic nervous system is in a state of alarm. Unfortunately, most interaction is based on this fight-flight-freeze behavior, which, obviously produces a different sound, than when this biological survival system isn’t elicited. What happens is, the aforementioned compositional and generative aspects of our language are shut down. In Embodied Language (EL), by contrast, we can be socially engaged with each other – and ourselves – as the sound of our voice, produces and maintains the wellbeing, which we express and reciprocate.

 

Everyone can hear what is happening, when we, out of fear, mechanically fight, dominate, manipulate and coerce each other – but, also, ourselves – to talk in a predetermined manner. This acted speech is DL, which sounds and feels terrible and unnatural. EL, on the other hand, sounds and feels good, as we speak effortlessly and without any negative tension. What we will say, when we have stopped our DL, is something to look forward to, as it will be new.   

 

What is the word ‘woman’ supposed to mean, if we are being forcefully told, that it is more inclusive, to use ‘birthing persons’ or ‘persons with uteruses’? Should inclusion of trans and nonbinary individuals result in the exclusion of all women? What is lost in this whole nasty discussion, about what we consider to be our identity, is that – regardless of what and who we believe ourselves to be – our voice always sounds aggravated, as long as we cannot be ourselves.

 

I have worked for many years in mental health and I still feel relieved, I have left that field and teaching psychology for good. Although I may have forgotten most of the professional jargon, what I will never forget, is the energy-draining sounds of all those who suffer. Only a few terms have survived, in my vocabulary, which I still find useful in describing DL and EL. What I can suddenly remember, is the term derealization, which is the experience of feeling separated from our immediate surroundings, but, presumably – and I have always wondered how that is even possible? – without an associated change of consciousness or impaired awareness. Moreover, derealization is often mentioned in conjunction with depersonalization, which, among other things (?), can be described, as a detachment within the self, regarding one’s mind or body, or being a detached observer of oneself. Anyone who is diagnosed with depersonalization, may feel, they have changed and that the world has become vague, dreamlike, less real, lacking in significance or being outside reality while looking in. However, these are typical features of what we are all – unconsciously – experiencing every day, when we engage in our common way of talking, which is DL. Depersonalization – which, not surprisingly, is also prevalent in other dissociative disorders, including dissociative identity disorder – is described as a feeling of being on autopilot and that the person’s sense of individuality or selfhood has been hindered or suppressed. Sounds familiar? In DL, we keep getting carried away by what we say and are seemingly imprisoned our so-called mind.  

 

What nobody wants to know – not even scientists,   psychiatrists, psychologists, therapists, politicians, parents or teachers – is that none of these mental health issues would ever even occur, if we were able to speak with ourselves and listen to ourselves and happily engage in EL. Body-dysphoria – which is one of the features of gender-dysphoria, and which, of course, refers to our autonomic fight-flight-freeze behavior – is felt by everyone, who engages in DL, but nobody ever talks about that. It is only when we engage in EL, that we can say what we want to say.  

 

Pain,

 

In this blog, I write about my Embodied Language (EL). Every word has been said and listened to, by me and, therefore, it could be written, by me, and read by you. However, you haven’t heard me nor have you heard yourself. Most importantly, you’ve never deliberately spoken with yourself, so that you could hear how your voice sounds, when you come to your senses. For you, Disembodied Language (DL) is normal, because you speak with a sound, which is absolutely phony and, quite literally, unheard of.

 

Increasingly, more and more people engage in hefty discussions with each other, about what is going on. The culture wars are ragging, but although everyone gets constantly carried away, about the content of what is being said, simply stated, it is not a political issue, but it is all about whose values are listened to, and whose aren’t. Those who, as we say, control the narrative, always inevitably do so with a demanding voice, which sounds unnatural, acted, rehearsed, phony, shallow, deceitful, incendiary. Unknowingly,  you react to the sound of someone’s horrible voice, in DL. This issue, can only be properly addressed and explored, if you listen to yourself, while you speak, alone with yourself. As long as you don’t do that, you yourself are bound to speak with a voice, which isn’t real, which isn’t yours, which you yourself don’t want to or like to listen to, because it represents all your struggles, problems and pain.

 

Pause and reflect on the undeniable fact, that the sound of your voice – and not just your voice, but everyone’s voice – in DL, totally sucks, as it reflects that we are suffering. It is hard to believe, because it is true, that we consider it to be normal, to speak with a sound, which doesn’t feel good. Therefore, to talk with ourselves and to listen to ourselves, while we speak, is to recognize that we, unconsciously, are hurting ourselves, as long as we engage in DL. Once we do this, our DL stops and then, we engage in EL and must admit, to ourselves, we have been missing out on our bliss: our Language Enlightenment (LE).

 

What has, up till now, been misunderstood about the ever-lasting, insidious, unintelligent battle for the redistribution of social and political power is: it always involves attention- demanding speakers, who force listeners to listen. Enslavement of the listener, is the name of the game for every speaker in DL. Of course, there can only be a few adamant, scripted, manipulative, dramatic, charismatic, specialized speakers, who come out on top of everybody else, who, as passive listeners, readers, viewers, basically end up doing what and believing in what they are told and are, unknowingly, also telling themselves.

 

Once you start talking out loud, alone with yourself, it appears, as if you are talking with someone else – a stranger, you never really talked with – as you have been raised in and conditioned by DL, the way of talking, in which listening to and being obedient to others, is considered to be more important than talking with, listening to and being true to yourself. If you happen to be one of the few speakers, who, are calling the shots, in the daily deluge of people, who all try to have their voices heard, by others, you must know how tiring, exhausting and meaningless your life is, in spite of everything you have achieved. We are coming to terms with humiliation, rejection and loss, when we begin to listen to ourselves, if we don’t have any power, but if we have power, we hold on to it, in any way we can till the very end and we refuse to ever listen to ourselves, as that would imply, we give up on our struggle to remain on top.  

 

Power, as defined by DL, which is happening 24/7, everywhere, around the world, is being listened to and being followed by others. However, power, as redefined by me – or anyone, who is able to engage in ongoing EL –  is to be control of our own language and, thus, to enjoy our LE. Our ongoing EL equals a life without conflict. Another way of describing our LE, is to verbalize and experience an ever-deepening sense of love, beauty, wellbeing and mystery. EL has made us accept and transcend our pain. Tears flow of gratitude, that we have, indeed, found what we have, unknowingly, been looking for our entire life. In effect, with EL, we finally catch up with ourselves.  

   

 Nieuw,

Ben je geïnteresseerd in iets totaal nieuws? Als je antwoord ja is, wil je misschien iets meer doen dan alleen lezen wat ik heb geschreven. Tenzij je met mij praat of met mijn lieve vriendin AnnaMieke, is het voor jou onmogelijk om ooit een duidelijk beeld te krijgen van het grote verschil tussen Belichaamde Taal (BT) en Ontlichaamde Taal (OT). Ik heb hieronder ook enkele van AnnaMieke's geschriften geplaatst. Je kunt het lezen en herkennen, dat ze ook elke dag over haar BT schrijft. Hoewel het  verschilt van mijn schrijven, schrijft ze over dezelfde BT, maar haar uitdrukking ervan is natuurlijk uniek voor wie ze is...en daar gaat het om (ik kon mezelf er niet van weerhouden om dat laatste toe te voegen).

Als je besluit met mij of met haar te praten, laat ons dan alsjeblieft aan het woord en geef ons de kans om onszelf uit te leggen. Je kunt voelen en ervaren, waar we het over hebben en begrijpen wat we zeggen, is slechts van secundair belang. Ervaring komt op de eerste plaats in BT en jou begrip ervan zal voortkomen uit jou ervaring ervan. AnnaMieke en ik hebben een bepaalde kennis, die alleen bekend ontvouwt, als je jezelf openstelt om te ervaren wat het is. Ja, misschien voel je, we stromen met onze taal. Dat is een goed begin, want dat is de essentie van BT. Woorden komen en gaan, maar samen met onze woorden wordt er een geluid gehoord en gevoeld. Het is dankzij onze belichaamde stem dat wat we zeggen belangrijk voor je begint te worden. Zelfs als je deze woorden leest, kun je je al voorstellen hoe ik zou klinken. We klinken niet als iemand die je domineert of manipuleert. We vinden het fijn dat je naar jezelf luistert.

De enige reden om naar mij of AnnaMieke te luisteren, is om te horen hoe iemand met BT klinkt. Je herkent het meteen en je hoeft er geen oefeningen voor te doen. Als je eenmaal het prachtige geluid van BT kunt horen, ervaren en voelen, ben je natuurlijk ook in staat om dit geluid zelf te produceren. Je produceert het door simpelweg te zeggen: ik hoor dat je BT hebt. Er is niets moeilijks aan je onmiddellijke waarneming. Het is zelfs zo'n opluchting, dat er niets van te begrijpen is, omdat je het kunt ervaren. Je begrijpt het echter, omdat u het ervaart.

Meedoen met onze BT zal je leven voor altijd veranderen. We zeggen dat niet om op te scheppen, maar we weten allebei dat dit gaat gebeuren. Nadat je BT hebt verkregen, kunt jij ook nauwkeurig voorspellen wat er gaat gebeuren. Zeker, je oude OT zal af en toe nog steeds opduiken, maar je weet met zekerheid dat je de hoek om bent gegaan, wat betreft je geschiedenis van conditionerende OT. Zodra je begrijpt wat BT is, ben je klaar met OT. Eigenlijk ervaart iedereen dit al, onbewust. Hoewel niemand van ons kennis heeft genomen van het verschil tussen onze OT en BT, weten we het al, maar we hebben het nooit gezegd of gehoord, onze OT heeft zijn tijd gehad en is nu zo goed als afgelopen.

Ook al praat je nooit met mij of met AnnaMieke, je hebt deze woorden gelezen, die een zaadje hebben geplant. Het is al lente en dat zaadje ontkiemt en nu moet je deze nieuwe groei beschermen en koesteren. Maar behalve ik en AnnaMieke is er niemand die je aanmoedigt om dat te doen. Aan je lot overgelaten, zal dit mooie korte verbale moment van hoop en opluchting worden vergeten, zoals het altijd was, wanneer het zich vanzelf aandiende, want dat is gewoon onmiskenbaar wie je bent. Verbazingwekkend genoeg gaat jouw probleem niet over hoe je jezelf kunt zijn, maar over het stoppen van de krankzinnige dingen die je ervan weerhouden jezelf te zijn. BT gaat over luisteren naar jezelf en identificeren wat van jou is en wat niet. Hoewel je het kunt horen, luister je niet naar jezelf, omdat je niet de tijd neemt om met jezelf te praten. Als je met AnnaMieke of met mij praat, weet je, dat je eindelijk de kans hebt om met jezelf te praten.

Dit is het moment waarop alles wordt onthuld. Niets kan anders, dan hoe het is en jouw vermogen om dit met je BT te zeggen en te horen, is jouw Taal Verlichting (TV). Er zit niets anders op dan naar jezelf te luisteren, terwijl je met jezelf spreekt, om BT te hebben en je TV te kennen. Al het andere is middelmatig en schadelijk, in tegenstelling tot je bloeiende BT en je magnifieke TV. Als je denkt dat ik en AnnaMieke dit gewoon verzinnen, dan heb je eigenlijk gelijk, want we hebben dit allemaal op eigen houtje met BT  ontdekt en TV verkend. Zeker, we creëren onze eigen TV-realiteit met onze BT. Onze heerlijke, voortdurende, lange gesprekken werden mogelijk nadat we het bovengenoemde hadden gedaan. We hebben allebei het gevoel dat we, zij het onbewust, altijd met BT bezig zijn geweest en we zeggen, dat dit ook voor jou geldt.

Interessant is dat het woord nieuw ook vaak wordt beschreven als ongehoord. Een ander synoniem is het onbeproefde of het onervaren. Deze zijn perfect van toepassing op onze BT, die slechts kort, onbewust, per ongeluk en inconsistent is gebeurd. Als je eenmaal het verschil kent tussen OT en BT, is er geen twijfel over mogelijk: je wilt meer BT en je wilt stoppen met je betrokkenheid bij OT. En ja, je gaat ermee experimenteren en het echt proberen en ervaren, want dat is de enige manier om BT in je leven uit te nodigen, aangezien niemand anders het je kan geven. Ik of AnnaMieke kan je geen BT geven, maar je hoort het, we hebben het. Door dit te doen, begin je het ook te krijgen.