Wachten,

 

De enige manier waarop je in staat zult zijn om voortdurend Belichaamde Taal (BT) te hebben, in plaats van Ontlichaamde Taal (OT), is door te wachten tot het vanzelf gebeurt. Ik weet het, dat je dat geduld niet hebt, maar als je BT wilt, dan zul je je ongeduld onder controle moeten houden, want je ongeduld is een basis kenmerk is van je OT.

 

Als je rust, ontspanning en stilte wilt ervaren, is het nodig om te wachten, maar dit wachten moet wel  gepaard gaan met taal, die deze sereniteit, balans en vrede beschrijft. De reden dat je deze kwaliteiten, voor een gelukkig en tevreden leven, niet zo vaak ervaart, is omdat je taalgebruik ze niet omvat, omdat je er nooit met jezelf over praat en daarom gebeuren ze niet, omdat ze niet kunnen gebeuren.

 

Als je eenmaal door hebt dat je BT kunt hebben in plaats van OT, dan kun je nauwelijks wachten tot het plezier begint. In mijn geval waren het echter deze positieve rusteloosheid en ontevredenheid, die ervoor zorgden, dat ik zo gefrustreerd raakte, over het praten met anderen, dat ik eindelijk het hardop praten met mezelf praten en luisteren naar mezelf serieuzer begon te nemen. Het bleek, dat ik in mijn eentje heel gemakkelijk kon wachten, omdat mijn BT eigenlijk altijd onmiddellijk plaatsvond.

 

Je kunt geen moment wachten, omdat je OT niet toestaat dat je het wat langzamer doet met je taal. Als je dit eenmaal tegen jezelf zegt en het jezelf laat weten, dan wordt je kalm met je BT. Het gebeurt moeiteloos en je weet, wat ik zeg over je taalgebruik is waar: tenzij je hardop met jezelf praat, zodat je aandachtig kunt luisteren naar het geluid van je eigen stem geluid, voel je het verschil niet tussen je OT en je BT en blijf je dus bezig met je automatische OT, zonder het zelfs maar in de gaten te hebben.

 

Lang geleden zag ik het toneelstuk 

Wachten op Godot van de

 beroemde Ierse toneelschrijver 

Samuel Beckett. In deze

 tragikomedie, die werd 

beschouwd als het belangrijkste

 Engelstalige toneelstuk van 

de 20e eeuw, voeren twee

 personages een verscheidenheid

 aan discussies en ontmoetingen, 

terwijl ze op een zekere Godot

 wachten. Het wachten lijkt 

echter nogal lang te duren 

en ze weten niet eens of ze 

Godot ooit hebben ontmoet 

en of hij eigenlijk wel zal 

komen. Twee andere 

getroebleerde figuren 

komen ook even in beeld, 

maar voegen geen enkele 

betekenis toe. Hun vertrek

 laat die eerste twee kerels

 verbijsterd achter, om weer

 verder te wachten op die 

afwezige onbekende Godot. 

Uiteindelijk komt er een

 jochie aan die hen vertelt, 

dat hij een boodschapper 

van Godot is, die niet vanavond zal

 arriveren, maar zeker morgen. Ze

 vragen van alles over Godot, wie hij is, 

wat hij doet, hoe hij eruit ziet en waarom 

hij op zich laat wachten, maar de 

jongen heeft slechts een paar vage 

antwoorden en vertrekt al snel.

 

De twee mannen praten over de mogelijkheid om te vertrekken, maar besluiten toch te blijven en het wachten gaat door. Omdat het stuk zo elementair en simpel is, nodigt het uit tot allerlei sociale, politieke, filosofische en religieuze interpretaties. Niettemin schuilt er zo’n zinloosheid in alle vragen die worden gesteld en de antwoorden die worden gegeven. Het is beslist hun OT – hun zogenaamde conversatie – die de nutteloosheid van het bestaan ​​van de mens aangeeft, wanneer de verlossing wordt verwacht van een externe entiteit, die ons, welbeschouwd, de zelf-introspectie ontzegd. Hun wachten kon niet resulteren in BT, omdat hun OT nooit goed werd verwoord en besproken. Met andere woorden: hoewel het een vrij goede benadering was, was het stuk slechts de zoveelste mislukte poging – in de trieste en lange traditie van mislukkingen – om OT, onze gebruikelijke, erbarmelijke, dwaze manier om met taal om te gaan, te identificeren en te stoppen.

 

Misschien moet ik BT, de taal van het wachten gaan noemen? Als je durft te wachten, dat wil zeggen: als je de moed hebt om te wachten, dan zal het wachten paradoxaal genoeg slechts heel kort zijn, ook al duurt het – zoals in mijn geval – vijfenzestig jaar om het door te krijgen. BT is het wachten waard, en het is nooit te laat, om te wachten, dus waarom probeer je het niet gewoon en wacht je eens af, om te horen of het gebeurd? Er ligt in jou BT zoveel goedheid op je te wachten. Als je eenmaal grondig je wachten hebt beschreven, dan zal je BT door blijven gaan en je zult ook ineens merken dat Godot is gearriveerd, omdat je je Taal Verlichting (TV) hebt gerealizeerd.

 

Wait,

 

The only way, in which you are going to be able to have ongoing Embodied Language (EL), instead of Disembodied Language (DL), is if you wait for it to happen. I know, you don’t have the patience, but if you want EL, you have to control your impatience, which, of course, is a basic characteristic of your DL.

 

If you want to experience peacefulness, relaxation and silence, there is a need to wait, but this waiting, must be accompanied by language, which describes this serenity, rest and stillness. The reason you don’t experience these essential qualities very often, is because your language doesn’t include them, you never talk with yourself about them, consequently, they don’t happen, because they can’t happen.

 

Once you have figured out, you can have EL instead of DL, you can hardly wait for the fun to happen. It was, in my case, however, this positive restlessness and dissatisfaction, which led me to be so frustrated about talking with others, that I finally began to take talking out loud with myself and listening to myself more seriously. As it turned out, on my own, it was very easy for me to wait, as my EL immediately occurred.

 

You can’t wait a moment, because your DL doesn’t allow you to slow down. Once you tell yourself and,  let yourself know, you can only become calm with EL, it happens effortlessly and you will know, what I say about your use of language is true: unless you talk out loud with yourself, so you can attentively listen to the sound of your own voice, you can’t feel the difference between your DL and your EL and you  continue to engage in DL without even realizing it.  

 

A long time ago, I saw Waiting For Godot, a play by the famous Irish playwright Samuel Beckett. In this tragicomedy, which was considered to be the most significant English-language play of the 20^th century, two characters engage in a variety of discussions and encounters, while waiting for Godot. It appears to be a long wait and they aren’t even sure if they have ever met Godot or whether he will ever arrive. Two other troubled men briefly join the scene, but don’t add any meaning. Their departure leaves the first two fellows bewildered, to continue their wait for the absent Godot. Eventually, some kid arrives, who tells them, he is a messenger of Godot, who will not be arriving tonight, but surely tomorrow. They ask the boy about Godot, what he does, what he looks like and what is holding him up, but the boy only has some vague answers and soon leaves.

 

The two men talk about the possibility of leaving but decide to stick around and their wait continues.  Because the play is so stripped down, so elemental, it invites all kinds of social, political, philosophical and religious interpretation. Nonetheless, there is such senselessness in this questioning and guessing. Surely, it is their DL, their so-called conversation, which signifies the futility of man’s existence, when salvation is expected from some external entity and the self is denied introspection. Their waiting couldn’t result in EL, as DL was never properly addressed. In other words, although it was a good approximation, the play was merely another failed attempt – in the sad and long tradition of failures – to identify DL, our common foolish way of dealing with language.

 

Perhaps, I should call EL the language of waiting? If you dare to wait, that is, if you have the courage to wait, paradoxically, the wait will be very short, even if it takes – as in my case – sixty-five years to get it. It is worth the wait, and it is never too late, to wait, so why don’t you just try it and wait and see? There is so much goodness, that lies in wait for you. Once you describe your waiting, you will not only allow your EL to continue, but you find Godot has arrived, as you attain your Language Enlightenment (LE).         

 

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.