mysticism is the process of attempting to enter the process of that of god which survives the deaths of gods, doing so by avoiding names. it has no throne: whether reason, passion, self, will, nothing.
i speak of god as god is the most impossible
thing and if i should lose the ability to speak of impossible things i will
lose the i and the ability to speak, which are one.
i and god are one in the way cabbage and god
are one. in this way i speak of god.
the negation of reality is humanity’s only
positive and distinctive attribute and it achieves this to the extent it enters
spaces of zero dimension: god and art
are two common names for this entering.
that the former was dominant in past time and the latter in present and
future time registers in reality but not in its negation; in its negation god
and art are the same.
certain existentialists and others who
thought they were brave derided god as an escape, mysticism as weakness,
sacrifice and passivity as shadows of authenticity; promoted the will, projects,
societal struggle as the valid human
enterprises. and who could not say this
sitting at certain angles? but stretching
the triangles and squares out to be spheres, who could not see escape as escape from
convention, weakness as water, shadows as something to be praised.
that god is obviously unreal hardly prevents
us from believing more (not more firmly, for that is an adverb of the real, but
more spatially) – and yet with another belief – that god is not only the most
real thing but the only real thing. this
possibility is hardly possible in the marketplace, the marketplaces of money
and ideas, the unfirm that pretends not to be.
not suffering leads us to god, for suffering
can equally lead us away, or anywhere; suffering is random in origin and
direction – god leads us to god, and if money is said to be a wall between the
seeker of god and god it is hardly because money is more a wall than society or
art or love or even a wall or non-wall but as it is something and there must be
nothing – not even suffering or non-walls – between.
the demons have left me and i am empty
while they inhabited this i they covered my
disease
with their words, their carousings
now there is nothing
i am an empty monastery waiting for gods
to leave their lives and inhabit these
hapless infinite cells
i am average – the sum and average of all
averages. i cast rough planks on the mud
of life to cross to the outhouses of god.
the planks are made of booze, sex, books, dreams – anything i can find
that prevents me from sinking in the mud.
but i know god is the mud and i’ll never reach the outhouses, only
finally sinking when no longer can i find.
to say that god is death is not untrue. yet even if it were true, would we not now
need god more than ever in time, death being now what it is – a nothing that is
refused?
god cannot enter time but through
shadow. so the lover of god lives in
shadow and the light of the city is a constant burden. that god cannot
is no reason to refuse our need. that
god cannot, that the city is a
burden, are no reasons to assume our divinity, or anything resembling
knowledge, to avoid the city or time.
we hardly ate of the tree of knowledge; this
is history’s ruse. our innocence is
maintained. and only the story we tell
ourselves of our eating deceives us in disbelieving our innocence.
visions of god are not negated from
asceticism but affirmed – god enters vision through unions of flesh and flesh’s
absence.
it has always been the book that has saved
me. but saved me from what? and to
what? that these questions are unanswerable in the i and yet i knows it has been saved - is this not dissimilar to god being dead and in its being dead made more alive?
god is not an escape from reality but a confrontation and subversion of it. for there are those born into the human who test existence and rather than have the capability or desire to conform to it object to its order. god is a name given to this objection and those who conform live in the creatings of that givenness. weakness is a name given by the conformers to the non-conformers. but weakness is everywhere, even as strength; it is rather that they are variously configured - and how are these varieties of configurating seen, but through god?
god is not an escape from reality but a confrontation and subversion of it. for there are those born into the human who test existence and rather than have the capability or desire to conform to it object to its order. god is a name given to this objection and those who conform live in the creatings of that givenness. weakness is a name given by the conformers to the non-conformers. but weakness is everywhere, even as strength; it is rather that they are variously configured - and how are these varieties of configurating seen, but through god?
No comments:
Post a Comment