Small-talk,

 

I am not very good at small-talk, because I am into Embodied Language (EL), which is considered by everyone with Disembodied Language (DL), as a complicated or deep conversation. To me, EL isn’t unusual or profound, but it is something simple and necessary. However, most people don’t know about the difference between DL and EL and that is why they engage, unconsciously, in DL. They would feel uncomfortable, not knowing what to say and try to make themselves and each other feel comfortable by having chit-chat. In EL, it is okay not knowing what to say. Moreover, it is actually very pleasant, to just allow our EL to happen and to not talk the usual superficial, meaningless, mechanical, impersonal stuff, which people express, who fear being silent.  

 

Once you know the difference between DL and EL, you always want EL and never DL. With EL, in terms of what people call small-talk – which, by the way, never results into EL – you always prefer so-called big-talk over small-talk. As a matter of fact, you will abhor the phony, forceful, ultimately-not-so-friendly-at-all, seemingly-casual conversation, which people use to grease the wheel. Moreover, with EL, you recognize how tiring, disgusting and frustrating it is, that the squeaky wheel always gets the oil. In other words, the most noticeable, loudest problems, are the ones most likely to get the attention. Conversely, our EL is overlooked and ignored, or, rather, not listened to, because during EL, the speakers don’t demand and dominate the listener’s attention, as they do in DL.

 

We talk different languages, but we speak about similar things. In Japan, they would say, the stick that sticks up gets hammered down or the nail that stands out gets pounded down. In Holland, they say, tall trees catch a lot of wind or weed that is growing above the mowing line gets cut off. In China, they say, the crying baby gets the milk and in Korea, they say, the pointy stone meets the chisel. Certainly, the squeaky-wheel-fallacy refers to our common DL and has prevented us, thus far, from recognizing the big problem of not being able to have genuine conversation or EL. Small-talk wastes our time and energy, as it judges our EL as problematic and continues our dumb DL.

 

DL is the reason that people only want to talk about meaningless bullshit and don’t even appreciate the experience of peacefulness. These noisy, distracting universal topics, which are, supposedly, good conversation starters, are, as we all know, the weather, the current news, sports or entertainment. And, of course, you can match your blabber-mouth-topic, to the important interests of the blabber-mouth-people, to have even more blabber-mount-DL, but once you know about the difference between DL and EL, you will not be as likely to engage in this stupid charade anymore.

 

I remember when I came to the United Stated for the first time. I really had to get used to the idea of how people interact. When people ask, how are you, they don’t want to know, but you just have to say, I’m fine, thank you, how are you, as that was just a way of greeting each other and getting on with things. It just so happens, that my name is Maximus, but each time I am introducing myself, people immediately say, you go by Max? Maximus happens to mean, the biggest and I don’t like it that people abbreviate my name like that, right from the start, but just like their so-called greeting, it refers to the strong tendency of people to continue with their pushy DL and to, by all means, not have any room for anything new. Beside the fact that DL is shallow, insincere, posturing and trivial, it is also repetitive, commanding, intrusive and careless.

 

Small-talk is often about asking, how someone’s day was, so that you – if you somehow manage to keep that elusive balance between talking and listening – can get to talk about your day. After all, your version of informal discourse, is always more important than someone else, supposedly, inconsequential, but equally attention-demanding topics. Even while having small-talk, the struggle for attention goes on and that is why DL never comes to an end. To have small-talk, it is pertinent, to create the impression and to maintain the illusion, really, that what you say is not about you. Don’t get personal, but lower the bar, by offering nice words of encouragement. Glad that it’s Friday, any plans for the weekend?

 

In the work-place, always make sure, you are at your best small-talk performance. Be even less personal than anywhere else and try to talk as much as you can about your boring, uninteresting, frustrating work environment, but, of course, always without any gossiping. Make sure, while having small-talk, to never lose track of your place in the hierarchy and be extra polite and subservient. Always show your admiration and respect to your superiors, who, as you may be surprised to notice, love to get their big egos stroked by your self-deprecating small-talk. What a busy day, this is the first time, I got up from my seat, I see you have been very busy too?

 

Small-talk is about stuff everyone can talk about. I like your shoes, it’s so important to have supportive shoes. You can also talk about the place where you are, so the other person always knows what you are talking about. Glad they fixed the heather again, it was so cold in here. Compliments are almost always welcome, as long as you don’t become too much of a slimy ass-kisser. Common interests are the holy grail of small-talk. Make sure to slightly put yourself down, so you make the other person feel good. I tried baking cookies like yours last night, but they came out terrible. How do you make them so good?  

 

Make a comment and then ask questions. I heard you were talking about the animal shelter, did you get yourself a dog? Small-talk may make you seem friendlier, as you want others to perceive you that way and you depend – for your self-esteem – on how others view you and treat you. Of course, this is all part and parcel of how we engage in DL. As in DL, in small-talk, we want remain busy with each other, because it helps us avoid being busy with ourselves. The embarrassment of having to admit to ourselves, our DL isn’t working for us, but against us, is pushed away by our small-talk. Supposedly, we are friendly, we mean well, we fit in, we are confident, but the reality is, our small-talk perpetuates all our big lies.     

 

Start,

 

Let’s start with a new way of dealing language. If you would be curious and courageous enough, to investigate the difference between Disembodied Language (DL) and Embodied Language (EL), you would find, the start of your EL is always a big relief.

 

With EL, you always make a fresh start, but with DL, you start acting, as if you already know, while you haven’t even started, to explore, what it is like, to have EL. And, don’t start acting, as if DL and EL was all my idea and say to yourself these two exist.  

 

EL is not about me – or anyone else – telling you what to do, but about being serious with yourself, perhaps, saying: I don’t want you to start feeling neglected anymore, as I have always done with my DL. With EL, you will start taking care of yourself.  

 

Once you switch from DL to EL, you will start feeling more comfortable about your language, because it is adjusted to your experience, instead of taking you away from it. Yes, with EL, you start to hear and find connections, you didn’t even know existed with DL.

 

Of course, I want you to start instructing yourself, to be in charge of your life. It makes me happy, to hear you say, you are at the start of something new, as our Language Enlightenment (LE) becomes clear in that way. Let me know, when you are ready to start.

 

The question, where to start, has a simple answer. You start by giving attention, to what is asking your attention and you listen to the sound of your voice, while you let your attention jump, from something you see, to something you hear, feel or remember.  

 

Discovering the great difference between your DL and your EL is one thing, but when you start to have ongoing EL, you will realize your LE. This is the most beautiful thing you have ever experienced and you are saying it, hearing it, writing it and reading it.

 

Naturally, the continuation of your EL, as well as the continuation of my own EL, is enhanced, if we start forwarding our individual explorations with each other, by speaking with each other, about what it is like to have EL by ourselves and by writing about it.

 

In EL, we aren’t waiting for someone, to start the conversation, as speakers recognize themselves in other speakers and listeners recognize themselves in other listeners. Speakers start to become listeners and listeners start to become one with the speakers.

 

When we start to feel that irrefutable, marvelous, energizing sense of oneness, with our ongoing EL, we know, we are talking about our LE. Although the boundaries between the speaker and the listener dissolve, this is when we start to be truly ourselves.

 

When you start hearing your own LE and the LE of me and others, you will feel motivated, to continue with your EL, even though everyone keeps engaging in DL. Unless you start to keep your own EL going, you don’t hear your LE and remain busy with others.

 

You start to notice, each time you are busy with others, you are again busy with DL. This is because we are conditioned to listen to others, but not to ourselves. Thus, when you speak with and listen to yourself, you start to come out of your conditioning.

 

Each of us, instantly, knows from the start, that our EL will bring us good results, as there are immediate effects, which accumulatively predict our LE future of happiness, understanding, comfort, satisfaction and beauty. You start to experience the future now.   

 

I write this blog, to start a conversation, about the difference between DL and EL, about what happens when we have ongoing EL and we recognize our LE. This writing can be the start of a new way of life for you and I hope you will try out what I say. Start now.

 

While I already know about ongoing EL and my LE, I start with it, just like you, anew. It is so miraculous and I am so delighted. Yet, I don’t start telling any fairy tales about EL or LE, as it is not a product to be sold or bought. Your DL was doomed from the start.

 

To have EL, you must start by noticing and stopping your DL. While DL is still everywhere, it is clear, the genie of individualism is already out of the bottle. We witness in all Western societies the rapid decline of group-behavior, which was maintained by our DL.

 

Collapse of the free world can only be prevented, if we start to acknowledge our need for the language of individualism, which is, of course, our EL. When we start having EL, there is no end to it. Start with it today and be guided by your LE instead of your DL.

 

DL has always prevented us from being who we are, as it is in favor of sacrificing our individualism on the altar of the group. This is the untenable situation of all Western civilizations and only if we start to have EL, can we accept and deal with this troublesome fact.                 

 

Truthtellers,

 

The other day, I heard someone on TV refer to some politician, as a truthteller. There are no politicians, who have Embodied Language (EL). They all have Disembodied Language (DL), as their language never deviates from their party program. There is no truth in DL. To be a truthteller, one has to stop acting like a politician. Stated differently, if want your language to express your truth, you must stop your stupid DL.

 

Certainly, only someone, who knows about the enormous difference between DL and EL, can be called a truthteller, but there is no need for him or her to be some kind of martyr and risk everything to shed light on the truth. To the contrary, the only way to have ongoing EL, is to enjoy and say your own truth and to radically avoid everyone with DL.

 

In DL, people are supposedly busy trying to separate the liars from the truthtellers, but we, inadvertently,  remain busy with dumb DL. In EL, however, we are not busy with others at all, as we ourselves are the truthtellers. Everyone who disagrees with us is of no importance to us. As truthtellers, with EL, we are only interested in the EL of other truthtellers, as we  all speak about our Language Enlightenment (LE).

 

To be a genuine truthteller, one must have EL and to accomplish that, one has to be brave enough to talk out loud with oneself. In effect, to be a truthteller, one must stop speaking with others, in order to be able to start speaking with oneself. Moreover, one’s EL will only continue, if one considers talking with oneself to be more important than talking with others. In other words, the truth-telling is not done for others, but for oneself. The truthteller always enjoys expressing his or her LE – to him or herself – with his or her EL.

 

The widely spread false notion, that a truthteller is someone, who is telling others the truth, especially about what is really happening in a given situation, is based the assumption, that we ourselves aren’t capable of making that assessment. Surely, it is almost as if these so-called truthtellers, make it no longer necessary for us, to tell our own truth to ourselves, about what is happening, according to us, in any given situation. Our reliance on these people, signifies, we have given up on our own freedom.

 

I wouldn’t even call myself a truthteller, because my truth is my truth alone and you can’t get your truth from me or someone else. I only referred to myself in that way, to introduce that idiotic term and to make my point about EL and LE. You don’t depend on me or anyone else for your EL and your LE either. This entire history of prophets, visionaries, gurus or enlightened ones, people, who presumably were ahead of their time, has its origins in DL. Once we have EL with each other, we are done listening to the nonsense, we keep telling each other, as we have started to talk with and listen to ourselves.  

 

Without exception, all the journalists, philosophers, writers, pundits, psychologists, actors, musicians, pod-casters, influencers, priests, models, professors, politicians and news-anchors, who claim to bring us the unvarnished truth, are not in touch with their own truth, which can only be obtained with their EL. The pompous claims of these despicable truthtellers have cost millions of people their lives and none of them were ever held accountable, because the only way in which that can be done is with the EL, which I express in this writing. As I have stated, I am not bothered by it, but everyone with DL certainly is.

 

I remember from my study in psychology, there are tests, which determine, whether a test-taker is lying, when answering questions. Often these tests are available online. In samples of one test, over time, truthtellers and liars were correctly classified at a rate of 67%, when the topic was constant. Of course, such tests deal with averages, but not with individuals. When we engage in EL, we are no longer fooling ourselves. We know exactly, when we have DL and, therefore, we are 100% correct, each time we are lying or speaking the truth. Psychologists should be interested in EL, but I have yet to hear from any of these so-called mental health experts.

 

I was the black sheep of my family and as such I was often trying in vain to say what other didn’t or couldn't say. For a long time, I considered myself a truthteller, but it was because, as the oldest son, I had totally failed my father’s expectations – I was in his eyes a waste of his time and energy – and, consequently, I felt rejected or mistreated. My desperate truth-telling was always about my misery, and I don’t see any difference between me or the truth-telling of others, as my DL is as much about my traumatic victimhood, as your DL it is always about your eternal victimhood. DL is the meaningless competition of losers, but in EL, we can finally laugh together about this pathetic truth-telling bullshit.        

 

Verschil,

 

Er is een groot verschil tussen Ontlichaamde Taal (OT) en Belichaamde Taal (BT), maar dat verschil gaat pas ervaren, opgemerkt en benoemd worden, als wij BT, in plaats van OT, gaan hebben. Iedereen probeert op zijn of haar manier wel een duit in het zakje te doen, maar welbeschouwd, voegt men niets toe en steelt men alleen elkaars aandacht, omdat men, ongemerkt, met manipulatieve OT bezig blijft.  

 

Lees nog eens, die zojuist geschreven – uit slechts twee zinnen bestaande – eerste alinea, die aantoont dat ik degene ben, die het verschil kent, tussen zijn eigen OT en zijn eigen BT. Uiteraard bestaat voor jou dat verschil ook, maar het is geheel aan jou, om daar eens eindelijk aandacht en gehoor aan te geven.

 

Natuurlijk heb ook jij pogingen ondernomen, om op jou manier OT van BT te onderscheiden, maar je bent nog nooit daarin geslaagd, aangezien je zelfs niet in staat bleek te zijn, om met jou versie van BT verder te gaan. Indien dat echter wel het geval zou zijn geweest, dan zou je, vroeg of laat, alsnog het werkelijke enorme verschil tussen je eigen OT en BT zijn gaan uitspreken, horen, schrijven en lezen.

 

Juist omdat men – wat betreft het grote verschil tussen OT en BT – zo de plank mis blijft slaan, wordt, overal ter wereld, de chaos en het conflict alsmaar groter en staat alles steeds meer op springen, want, hoe iedereen het ook wendt of keert, we willen, ook al zitten we allemaal moervast in OT, toch verder met BT.

 

Voor de een is BT – van anderen – rechtse politiek, maar voor de ander – die net als de ander, ook altijd maar bezig blijft met de ander – is BT meer een kwestie van linkse politiek. Hele volksstammen geloven, ofschoon ze altijd met afschuwelijke OT verder zijn blijven gaan, stellig, dat hun zogenaamde uitzonderlijke BT zou afhangen van hun sexuele voorkeur, religie, land, cultuur, taal en kennis, maar dat is helemaal niet zo.  

 

Iedereen zou – vanwege mijn schrijven op mijn blog of door het luisteren, naar wat ik zeg en zing op mijn You Tube kanaal – tot besef van het verschil tussen zijn of haar eigen OT en BT hebben moeten komen, maar, aangezien mijn woorden, door bijna niemand serieus worden genomen, is Taal Verlichting (TV), die alleen met BT kan worden geuit, schijnbaar niet relevant genoeg, om er eens met mij over te gaan praten.

 

Dit schrijven – maar ook wat ik, over mijn BT en mijn TV, op mijn You Tube kanaal, zing en vertel – is voor mijn eigen genoegen, want zolang als jij er nog niet bent, zodat wij samen van onze BT en TV kunnen genieten, ga ik gewoon verder met waar ik goed in ben, zin in heb en waarvanuit ik heel gelukkig en tevreden leef.

 

Het onomstotelijke verschil tussen jou en mij, is dat ik – met mijn BT – besef, hoe jij, met jou OT, in de war bent, over je ware natuur en daardoor op allerlei manieren wanhopig blijft proberen, om iets te zijn, wat je niet bent. Ik weet dat mijn BT alleen maar gaat over wie ik werkelijk ben en in dat opzicht is er geen enkel verschil tussen mijn BT en de BT van jou.

 

Over het algemeen gesproken, heb je meestal geen enkele moeite, om het duidelijke verschil tussen dag en nacht te erkennen, omdat je lichaam, je nou eenmaal laat weten, dat het weer tijd is, om te gaan slapen of om weer op te staan, maar, zoals je ook waarschijnlijk wel ervarend zult hebben begrepen, heeft de verstoring van je natuurlijke biologische ritme, verregaande negatieve psychische gevolgen.

 

Iedereen weet wel degelijk, dat het alle verschil van de wereld uitmaakt of je met je eigen taal positief of negatief omgaat en toch blijft iedereen, onbewust, bezig met OT, omdat men nog nooit – door kalm te spreken met zichzelf en door aandachtig te luisteren naar zichzelf – het verschil heeft opgemerkt, tussen de alomtegenwoordige, halsstarrige conditionering met OT en de bevrijdende werking van de eigen BT.

 

Het is algemeen bekend, dat het verstoren van het slaap-waak ritme, een rol speelt in het ontstaan van psychiatrische ziektes – die dus eigenlijk helemaal absoluut geen ziektes zijn – maar vanwege onze OT, hebben we nog nooit aandacht kunnen geven, aan het door iedereen, individueel ervaren emotionele, intellectuele en sociale verschil tussen OT en BT.

 

Welbeschouwd – met BT – blijft het onverbiddelijke verschil tussen OT en BT buiten beeld, omdat wij het niet horen. Enkel wanneer wij gaan praten met en luisteren naar onszelf, merken wij dit verschil op, in de klank van onze eigen stem. Eveneens worden wij, vanwege de herhalende, manipulatieve, dwingerige, hypnotiserende en overweldigende werking van OT voortdurend heen en weer geslingerd, tussen iets wat eventjes mondjes-maat appeleert aan onze  onvervulde behoefte aan BT, om ons vervolgens nog meer OT door de strot te duwen en te verkopen.

 

Iemand die steelt, die kent het verschil niet tussen mijn en dein. Het vervagen en opheffen van allerlei voorheen bestaande grenzen, dat in de hand wordt gewerkt en versterkt door de technology, heeft ook een escalerende werking op onze strijdvaardige OT. BT is de, voor het grootste deel, nog onontgonnnen taal van het individu, maar het is eveneens de taal van de eigen begrenzing, omdat wij eindelijk met BT gaan erkennen, dat OT gewelddadig groeps-gedrag bewerkstelligt, dat onze BT onmogelijk maakt.

 

Men zegt, woorden zijn dwergen, maar daden zijn bergen. Hiermee wordt bedoeld, dat woorden er weinig toe doen, en dat alleen daden echt verschil uit maken. De reden echter, dat onze woorden ons tegen houden, om zogezegd te doen wat juist is - wat noodzakelijk is en wat eigenlijk mogelijk is - is omdat wij onbewust bezig zijn gebleven met OT. In BT, doet wat wij zeggen er meer toe vanwege hoe wij het zeggen en bestaat het verschil dus niet meer tussen woorden en daden, omdat wij congruent zijn en daadwerkelijk woord bij daad zijn gaan voegen. Aldus maakt TV zich kenbaar, omdat wij voort blijven gaan met onze BT.  

 

Fire,

 

When you experience, recognize and understand the big difference between Disembodied Language (DL) and Embodied Language (EL), you are on fire, because you know, everyone is, unconsciously, stuck with their DL, while you are now the only one, who is able to have EL. You are alarmed, because things are really not going well with our usual way of dealing with language. Urgent change is needed and yet, everyone seems to be verbally totally asleep.

 

Perhaps, you have heard or read, that shouting fire - when there is no fire - in a crowded theater, is not protected free speech in the United States. It is ironic – but also significant, to notice – that the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, considers it imminent lawless action, to create a panic, or to put it more mildly, to disturb, intimidate, startle, upset or shock people. I believe, we should extend this, to DL, our usual way of talking, which puts fear into everyone and falsely creates the impression, that we are threatened. We are constantly gas-lighted, but, of course, there is still real danger. 

 

If there really is a fire in a crowded theatre, then shouting fire isn’t punishable under the law. While it may not be a legally problematic event, to say or to write, that the world is on fire – due to the mechanical, unintelligent, coercive way, in which human beings communicate and, thus, deal with their language – nobody is going to listen, because everyone believes to be okay with their usual DL. There is no danger of causing a stampede, by saying or even by yelling, our common use of language is the fire, which is burning everything to the ground. As you can see on my blog, nobody comes, to take action. However, although I am, apparently, the only person, noticing the calamity, which is unfolding, I don’t see any use for preaching about EL anymore.

 

When I first noticed the difference between DL and EL, I felt like screaming about it, as I was absolutely sure as hell, I had discovered something of immense importance, but my fire turned people off. Who was I, to disturb people, while they were watching a stupid movie, to distract themselves from the tragic reality, which they themselves created with their way of talking? I was often cited for my so-called disorderly conduct, as I couldn’t keep my mouth shut about the dangers of our catastrophic DL.

 

I no longer shout fire, because it would imply, that I try to address DL with DL, but that is what everyone is doing. Surely, I know better than that, because I am able to address DL with my EL. When there is an actual fire, however, this is as true and as dangerous for you, as it is for me and I can tell you  – with my sixty-five years of experience – DL is as destructive for me, as it is for you. All Americans basically know, that in the realm of political speech, no words are off limits, regardless of how disgusting, nasty, mean, vile or evil they are. It is precisely this freedom of speech, which allows us to say and discriminate the difference between DL and EL and, by doing so, we  hold our civil society together. If we are not able to make this crucially important distinction, there are basically no rules and then, there is no free society.

 

There is currently a lot of empty talk going on about the so-called hate-speech, the public speech, that expresses hate or encourages violence, to a person or group based on their race, religion, sex or sexual orientation. This contentious issue of hate-speech, in my opinion, is often – actually all the time – used as a red herring, as it distracts us from addressing the real issue, which is, of course, the gigantic difference between DL and EL. To call a spade a spade, or to yell fire, when there really is a fire, is to view our DL as the misleading elephant in the room.  This becomes all the more apparent in the legalistic inability of university and college presidents, to unequivocally condemn Hamas brutality, that was followed by the massive outbreak of antisemitism. I want to end this writing today, by saying that speech is conduct, as there is a direct effect of any speaker on any listener. This effect is either positive or negative. In DL it is always negative, but in EL it is always positive.      

 

Instruct,

 

Few people seem to comprehend, that the primary function of language is to instruct. However, there is a great difference between the instruction, which is given with Disembodied Language (DL) and the  instruction, which is given with Embodied Language (EL). With the former, those who are instructed, will perform under a sense of pressure, because they fear punishment, which results from not obeying or doing as they are told, but with the latter, there is flawless performance, as the instruction results in the behavior, which is beneficial to the instructed as well as the instructor. With EL, the instructor and the instructed are on the same page, but with DL, the instructor always dominates the instructed and demands him or her, to follow his or her orders.

 

You may not view it that way, but these words, like all words, were meant to instruct. Every time we engage in language, we either understand others or others understand us. However, this text makes it clear to you, that understanding only occurs in EL. We are, unknowingly, but almost permanently, engaging in DL, in which we do not and cannot understand each other, since we do not and cannot understand ourselves with the forceful language, which disconnects us from our own experience.  

 

As I was saying, it makes an enormous difference whether we are instructed, by someone with DL or EL. This difference is so gigantic, because someone who instructs with DL, is boring, because they are on automatic pilot, whereas someone who instructs with ongoing EL, is engaging, connecting, interesting and stimulating, because he or she is enlightened. If someone gives the right instruction, which results in the increase of the right behavior, this always results in a sense of euphoria, victory and success, which I call Language Enlightenment (LE). Only someone, who him or herself has mastered some skill, is able to determine, if someone else has mastered it. And, then, there are two masters, who with their EL can share LE with each other. It is tremendously joyful.

 

I am enlightened and, yes, I use my language very differently than you. Of course, this text is aimed at those, who don’t know EL, who are unconsciously stuck in their own DL. To me, there is no language, which randomly overtakes me, as I am in charge of it, always. I am not a control-freak, to the contrary, I let things happen and I enjoy what my LE is telling me with my EL. I am bi-lingual and my words may sometimes change from English to Dutch or from Dutch to English, but I don’t know the language of basketball, politics, physics or religion. I know my own EL, which is the language that creates space.

 

While these words have an instructional effect, this effect is not something, which I expect. If they result in your exploration of the difference between your DL and your EL, it would be wonderful, but it is not because I expect you to do that. As a matter of fact, due to my ongoing EL, my LE has taught me, to not expect anything from anyone, not even myself. I instruct only myself and you can, in principle, also instruct yourself with EL, instead of with DL. Surely, because others have instructed you with DL, you are used to instructing yourself with DL as well. This is why you are not happy or successful, as DL means, you are beating yourself up and forcing yourself, to do all kind of things, you don’t want to do, if you would listen to what you say to yourself with EL.

 

I feel no urge to change my EL, as I am very happy and satisfied with it. Unlike your involvement with  DL, I don’t fantasize or fabricate phony constructs. To me, language is like furniture, which makes my life comfortable. I don’t imagine, that I have inner language, as I know, such a belief is the inevitable outcome of our involvement in DL. By now, my DL has practically been reduced to nothing, as I have EL almost all the time. This certainly wasn’t always the case, but I have made it so. Consequently, I feel very proud, that I am able to instruct myself in this way.  

 

As you can tell, for me language is something active,  which I do, consciously, joyfully, effectively and consistently. For anyone with EL, speech is conduct and, yes, how we talk sets the stage for how we deal with our language, as well as our other behaviors, but in DL, we get it all wrong, if we make it seem, as if there is a difference between our language and our conduct. Moreover, of course, our language is conduct, as it is always – relationally – targeted at individuals, who can understand us. We have never acknowledged the difference between DL and EL, but once we get a sense of what EL is, we realize EL is action, but DL has psychologically paralyzed us, as it has prevented us from acting. With DL, is seems as if language happens passively, thus it appears as if your so-called mind has a life of its own. I don’t have a mind, as my EL occurs only where I speak it, when I hear it, where I write it and when I read it.

 

My EL is in the here and now, but your DL is all over the place and, therefore, it prevents you from being where you are. How can you be who you are, if your language doesn’t allow you to be where you are and you do not embody your language? Of course, you don’t know who you are, as you constantly act out of fear. You fear to fail the demanding instructions of your own DL, which generalizes to every aspect of your life. You fear to be alone with yourself, you fear to lose your job, you fear you are not loved, you fear you will die one day. Your fear ruins everything, as it makes life into a meaningless and dreadful struggle.

 

You have tried to instruct yourself, to overcome your fear and other problems, but the fact is, none of your self-instructions work, as long as you engage in DL. There were also a few self-instructions, which have worked, because you came to your senses, you calmed down and you were able to have some EL, albeit, unknowingly. Yes, you had some moments of EL, but you never had EL skillfully, deliberately and consistently and this is why every form of self-help is always self-defeating. The only thing you are good at, with your inconsiderate, insensitive, impatient DL, is pretend you are not afraid, pretend you don’t have any problem, pretend you are strong, pretend you are certain and pretend you know who you are, while in reality, you are consumed by fear, anxiety, stress, worry, jealousy and frustration. DL keeps you running and your language literally drives you mad.

 

Whether you believe it or not, your DL results into your depression, your confusion, your distraction, your inferiority complex, your chaos, your conflict, your eternal victimhood and your exhaustion. You have no awareness, no attention, no energy for how you use your language and you create your own living hell. When you read these words, there is only one thing you can do: understand them and admit it is true. Take your life into your own hands, by paying attention to how your DL determines what you do or don’t do. Your life, is how you instruct yourself.

 

When you engage in EL, instead of DL, you realize that EL isn’t a choice, but a possibility, which was created by you, after you had stopped your DL. The issue of choice is completely misunderstood in DL, as it always seems, as if you choose, but in EL, you find, there is no you – inside of you – who behaves, therefore, there is also no you, who chooses. Stated differently, in EL there is only possibility or potential, which I call LE. Your possibilities with your language are endless, if you listen to the sound of your voice while you speak. It is amazing what you are able to come up with, when EL flows freely and naturally.

 

I instruct you, to stop instructing yourself with your DL, so you can begin to instruct yourself with your EL instead, because your EL is the expression of your LE, which is your wellbeing. This hasn’t happened, not because it couldn’t happen, but because you didn’t know it could happen. Your ignorance about language, is a matter of being stuck with worthless concepts, which prevent you from exploring what your language means to you. As long as you remain afraid, you don’t explore, who you are without fear.

 

Telling yourself to not be afraid has never worked, but letting yourself know, why you feel afraid, is the first step into making your self-exploration with your own EL possible. The moment, you, accurately, in your own way, in your own words, calmly describe to yourself why language works against instead of for you and why you fear your own authority, your fear will disappear. You hear it in the sound of your voice, you can’t miss it, as in that precious moment everything changes by itself, as your EL immediately reveals what you have always been, but what you couldn’t be before, with your DL. With EL, you find, that your language fits with your experience and this match is truly the gift that keeps on giving.

 

With ongoing EL, you instruct yourself into your own freedom. Now you can put an end to the fear, which has undermined your life, by preventing you from doing what you could do and had wanted to do. Also, in the absence of this fear, you will be able to stop what you did, but didn’t want to do, but you did it, as you were conditioned to do it. There will be a selective reorganization of your behavioral repertoire, because of your EL, due to which only what works remains. 

My life is happy, satisfying and uncomplicated, but it can only be this way, because of how I deal with my language. This is not because I am exceptionally smart, skillful or creative, but because I don’t fear my own language anymore. I say it, I listen to it, I write it, I read it and I instruct myself to achieve what I am capable of achieving. I hear it is true and I experience the positive consequences of my own behavior right away as well as later on.             

 

Middelmatig,

 

Het risico van het niet lachen is ofwel hoog, laag of middelmatig. Volgens mij is het heel hoog, maar volgens de meeste mensen, is het tamelijk laag. Omdat ik Belichaamde Taal (BT) heb, schat ik het algemeen heersende onvermogen tot lachen in als een groot probleem, maar aangezien iedereen zich schijnbaar alleen maar wil bezighouden met saaie,  zeikerige, tergende Ontlichaamde Taal (OT), mist men, over het algemeen gesproken, het lachen niet of nauwelijks. Het middelmatig gevaar, van het niet kunnen of willen lachen, is echter zwaar onderschat.

 

Wie vraagt zich nog af: valt er nog wat te lachen? Ik weet zeker, dat alleen iemand, die werkelijke kennis heeft of die in ieder geval een vermoeden heeft van BT, in staat is om deze belangrijke vraag bevestigend te beantwoorden. Voor iemand zoals ik, valt er van alles te lachen, maar het lachen is iedereen vergaan, die gewoontegetrouw met OT blijft doorzaniken. Ja, hoe komt dat nou toch? Met OT blijft onwillekeurig iedereen te serieus bezig met mensen, die, zoals zij zelf, in pure onzin geloven. Je mag dit niet zeggen, laat me niet lachen, omdat dit religieuze kwetsbare gemoederen doet opschudden, maar ieder geloof is natuurlijk net zo belachelijk, als ieder ander geloof.

 

Lachen is natuurlijk geen geloof. Je lacht niet, omdat je in de humorist gelooft of omdat je gelooft dat iets grappig is. Waarom lach je dan wel? Omdat het echt leuk is. Ja, maar wanneer is iets dan echt leuk? Iets is echt leuk, omdat je meteen en moeiteloos moet lachen. Het directe gevolg van iets leuks is, dat je lacht, omdat een andere reactie eigenlijk onmogelijk is. Ofschoon je dus moet lachen, gebeurd het geheel vanzelf en is er dus van moeten lachen geen enkele sprake. Als je niet meteen die blije reactie voelt, dan weet je, dat het niet leuk was, maar, soms, bij een vrij zeldzame vorm van humor, gaat er enige tijd overheen, waarna je ineens moet lachen, vanwege het boomerang-effect, dat je onverwachts overvalt.  

 

Er is uiteraard ook het wachten op het effect van iets grappigs, waar de meeste mensen helaas te ongeduldig voor zijn. Het staat echter niet vast of dit effect zich zal gaan voordoen, maar als het gebeurd,  heeft dit een lachversterkend effect. Het uitblijven van dit effect, toont aan dat er niets te lachen viel. Als je dus na een tijdje nog steeds niet hebt kunnen lachen, dan doe je de lachkennis op, dat het effect schijnbaar niet voldoende was en dat er eigenlijk een schepje bovenop moet worden gedaan, om aan het lachen te raken. Soms is een klein extra schepje al voldoende, maar andere keren is het een kwestie van flink opscheppen en het er dik bovenop leggen.

 

Het dichtgooien van een graf vergt energie. Daar is niets aan te lachen of te janken en dat rouwen, over wie er is doodgegaan, dat moet maar even wachten, totdat de kist is bedekt met aarde. Aldus bereiden wij onszelf grondig voor, om ons naderhand dood te kunnen lachen. We lachen er dus lekker op los. We blijven er zogezegd in en ook al is het misschien wel met onze laatste adem, het begint eindelijk ergens op te lijken, want wie het laatst lacht, lacht immers het beste. We gedragen ons ineens niet meer zo stijf en we laten horen, dat er toch nog wat leven in ons zat, omdat iemand anders de pijp uitging en ons liet weten, dat wij, om de dooie dood niet hoeven te wachten, totdat wij aan de beurt zijn om te sterven.

 

We zingen ook ineens een toontje hoger, in plaats van een toontje lager en we geven ons over aan een groter, ruimer en luider geluid, dat het lachen ten goede komt. Er bestaat grote verwarring over wat het lachen bevordert en wat het lachen tegenhoudt. We lachen zo weinig, omdat we doen dat iets leuk is, wat eigenlijk niet leuk is en we houden onszelf en elkaar tegen, om te lachen als het eigenlijk helemaal van de gekke is. Een stuip krijgen van het lachen, is iets waar we beschaamd over zijn, want stel je eens voor, dat anderen ons een aap zien lachen? Dat zou een afgang zijn voor onze reputatie, die gebaseerd is op humorloosheid. Deze kwalijke houding is zeer ondermijnend en het is van groot belang, dat alle aandacht eens eindelijk daadwerkelijk mag gaan naar het enorme ongemak, wat wij voelen, over het lachen zelf, omdat wij het niet meer gewend zijn.  

              

Om te kijken of iets echt leuk is, moet je het eerst zeggen of schrijven, zodat je ernaar kan luisteren of kan lezen en dan kan je ervaren of je lacht of niet. Als het lachbaar is, dan wil je het nog eens herhalen of nog eens uitvoeriger beschrijven en kijken of het nog meer lachen opwekt, maar als het niet lachbaar is, kun je beter van onderwerp veranderen, want dan werkt herhalen absoluut niet. Onvoorstelbaar, hoe vaak niet leuke dingen, toch nog weer worden herhaald, alsof ze leuk zouden zijn, terwijl iedereen wel degelijk donders goed weet, dat het helemaal niet leuk is. We doen allemaal toch maar mee met die onzin en er is eigenlijk bijna nooit eens iemand, die eerlijk zegt: wacht nou eens even, wat jij daar zegt, is helemaal niet leuk, dus waarom zit iedereen hier daar nu zo meesmuilend om te lachen? Wat is dit voor een waanzin? Het moet eindelijk maar eens ophouden en afgelopen zijn met die nep-humor, die ons opzadelt met een gevoel van verplicht lachen.

 

Als je echt gaat lachen, dan ga je helemaal door het lint, maar met onecht lachen, zit je altijd maar een beetje halfbakken te gniffelen. De doorsnee lach is te fatsoenlijk en middelmatig, om van betekenis te zijn. Angst voor uitersten, ontneemt ons het lachen.  Er is daarom grote noodzaak aan een beoordelings commissie, die bepaalt, dat het ontoelaatbaar is, dat er gelachen wordt, om zaken die niet leuk zijn. De persoon, die buiten het conflict staat, maar die profiteert van de uitkomst – als lachende derde –  die kan zijn lol wel op, als hij of zij beseft, dat zijn of haar humor vals bleek te zijn. Alleen echt lachen, is het beste medicijn, maar lachen zonder echt blij te zijn, is lachen als een boer met kiespijn. Het is van algemeen belang, dat er een duidelijke definiering gaat komen, van alles was niet leuk is, zodat wij het, zonder enige moeite, kunnen onderscheiden van wat wel leuk is. Wij zijn zoveel leuks misgelopen, omdat we, zonder het te weten, bezig zijn gebleven met het eten van droge koek. Het was dus niet het lachen, waarvan wij buikpijn kregen. Deze nare situatie verdient vanaf heden de hoogste prioriteit, want het is zo lang geleden, dat wij echt de slappe lach hebben gehad, dat wij niet eens meer kunnen herinneren, dat dit ooit heeft plaatsgevonden.

 

Ons gemiddelde aantal lachwekkende momenten per jaar is slechts een of twee keer. Dit is beneden pijl en onacceptabel. Het ziet er niet naar uit, dat hierin op korte termijn verandering gaat komen, aangezien niemand zich wil inzetten, om zich een  ongeluk of een deuk te lachen. Ik ben niet alleen bereid, maar vanwege mijn BT, ook kundig, in het bewerkstelligen van een lach toename. Ik neem deze, mij op het lijf geschreven, taak graag op me, omdat ik het vermogen heb om het tij – waarin het huilen ons nader staat dan het lachen – te keren.  

Ik ben me er terdege van bewust, dat vele anderen het al hebben geprobeerd, maar er niet in zijn geslaagd en laat me daardoor niet uit het veld slaan. Integendeel, ik ben vol goede moed en heb mijzelf als doel gesteld, om het jaarlijkse lachgemiddelde met een punt te verhogen. Het is niet veel, maar het verschil zal voor iedereen meteen merkbaar zijn, aangezien ik dit ene punt in verbinding zal brengen met die andere twee momenten van goedlachsheid. Er zal dus, vanwege de aaneenschakeling van drie lachwekkende momenten, een versnelling ontstaan. Uit dit bescheiden domino effect zullen ongebruikte uitvorm geraakte lachspieren worden geactiveerd, op een wijze, die nog niet eerder is geprobeerd. Dit lachspier activatie effect zal van doorslaggevende aard zijn, in het opwekken van wat lacherigheid, die door iedereen zal worden gewaardeerd, omdat ons middelmatig verlangen om te lachen wordt vervuld.