“There is no need to create unity, when it is already before us. We behold unity when we simply remind ourselves of what is important, versus what is not. For what causes division is the forgetfulness of being one of a kind next to another human being. We merely need to remind ourselves of the fact that we bleed the same color, are molded from the same clay. There is no creation of unity. There is only the simple reminder of its eternal existence, that many will sadly forget.”– Modern Romanticism
“Distrust breeds itself upon those whose grudges bare themselves in remembrance. Memories that do linger, latch themselves as leeches to siphon away any thoughts of a future where hands are held, as steps are walked. Though, between those of shared pain, there is that hurt laying beneath the flames of anger. It is our ocean. It is our tears. For those who conceal their hurt with wrath, are those who simply pretend to be strong. True strength dwells in someone when they are past the pain, past those grudging remembrances, to where unity is formed by that pain being understood, and then, left behind for the green earth to be people’s hope.”– Modern Romanticism
“The Danger of Blurring Lines”
A common human way with our Nature is to believe one should have a choice in any matter, for freedom’s sake. To possess a falsified sense of freedom means to have the reasoning in escaping from the task of being responsible. To be responsible, means to be logical. To hold reason in one’s grasp for a weapon against responsibility, means to invent excuses for why one should not ever be such. It is then to say to have a choice in reference to responsibility, means to always steer in the direction away from it. A person of choice, wants paths. They do not wish to be led down a path, without their choice.
Another common human way with our Nature is to say that what one can choose, cannot be controlled by another. It is this that states a person has freedom of choice. Though, within responsibility, there is no freedom. Among a nation, to throw “responsibility” upon the shoulders of a citizen, force them against their will to do as the nation says, causes rebellion. To force a collective group to think, to behave, to motion on a certain path, defines slavery. Among the individual, however, should they rebel against their own personal responsibility, their immaturity has compelled them to want a choice away from Justice.
For the self, a person has a choice, or a personal endeavor to see a random change to themselves. Among the individual, a person is choosing their path for their life. Among the collective of individuals that makes up a nation or any population, there is only slavery being made of each of them, should such a nation desire control over all. To take away freedom, means to do so by force. Forced unity is a resemblance to slavery, when that system rejects the individual’s motives to earn it. A nation does not gift a person their freedom. For all true freedom, is earned, making the slave only such when they belong in a collection of their same kind. A person can indeed make themselves the slave, should they neglect the idea of earning freedom, and continue to believe it as a gift.
Between Justice and Vengeance, a human who truly fights for the former, does not take to human desire. Desire embraces a path for the self, stepping on the side of Vengeance, over Justice. Justice takes a path for others, stepping into a realm where sacrifice, honor, and selflessness takes place. A person offers wisdom, keeps structure, and above all, forgives enemies, upon when they know that retaliation will cause a war. To feel anger, means to want retaliation. It then becomes a feud, of opposite contrasts, where no closeness is found.
Without a strict focus on the objective definition of Justice, there is only the distance of prejudice that sparks the paranoia of a person’s next vengeful action. For within one action of Vengeance, comes the next. After the next, comes the third action, causing the cycle that repeats, incessantly. Nothing quits this cycle, until forgiveness takes place. There is always fear in it, because fear equates to the distance of lacking forgiveness. Forgiveness involves foresight into knowing that the future will only involve further bloodshed, if such a forgiving behavior is never implemented.
Any human’s first instinct is to be selfish, to feed themselves, to clothe themselves, during a time of survival. It is because of this, that when lines are blurred, Justice is never discovered. For who buries a corpse that had fallen, from being alive, without another’s hands to do it? Who is the Vengeful sort to do this, when they only aim to beat the dead body? Forgiveness has only one objective: to forgive the past, of all experiences during when that corpse was alive. It can be said of the same for anyone, that when selfishness become selflessness, we bury, we forgive, though cannot forget, what had fallen. As any burial, it is a selfless act, like forgiveness. If one were to forget, one would not be able to forgive a haunting memory. It’d never be an ability of a person.
As it is, if to forget was possible, and never forgiveness, then no human would possess a mind stored with the memories of the past. Each fragment of knowledge is a memory, kept in mind from being taken either from a book, or from word-of-mouth. It makes the lacking of fear of any individual, when forgiveness and compassion can be the things offered towards memories that haunt. We know, through memory. Therefore, we can know, through forgiveness, when we understand that what haunts another is at the same level of torment as what haunts us. When humans comprehend that they’re both in fear, both vulnerable, then love can take place, by knowing that not one is stronger than the other.
The ignorance of a human, in contrast to knowledge, resonates in the fear within the distance between people. To what one knows of another, makes knowledge. To what one does not know of another, makes ignorance. This much, is obvious. However, to be fearful, would also mean to be ignorant.
It is the case of any murderer who kills their victim, without compassion, through such ignorance and fear. If they had not been knowledgeable, then they had been ignorant. Their fear enters the picture by way of not stretching outside the realm of selfish discontent of the world, being the murderer’s mindset, to be compassionate. For if the murderer were compassionate, were brave, and not fearful, enough to step outside what has shut them inside their mind, they’d discover knowledge.
It is to be Xenophobic, that the fear a person feels, is only because they do not have the slightest interest in knowing someone. For in being too comfortable with what they already know, they are fearful in knowing more.
For why else would a person not wish to know another, if they did not fear what they possibly could hear of them? It is the greatest pang of fear by a human, to hear something from a source one does not like, and be shocked by its truth. As it is, all truth comes from sources where the fearful one does not wish to acknowledge can be the onset to a unity outside of such fear. If they were to see another, know another, being one other individual, they’d form a bond. That is a fear that comfortable humans do not wish to face.
To be vengeful, or to cling to the side of Vengeance, is unlike fear. One knows, through the personal desire to be vengeful, that the one such Vengeance will be directed upon, has committed an act of betrayal. It is knowledge that acts as the motive for Vengeance, not ignorance. Though, to what the vengeful person is ignorant of, is something that will not birth the forgiveness needed to halt such a cycle of Vengeance. That is the further knowledge needed to complete the tale, bring about the death, and the life is laid to rest. It is the same when one forgives to break a cycle of Vengeance, that one can forgive what can no longer be destroyed, being a corpse or ended life.
A person’s task to be responsible would then mean to be the one who forgives, and breaks the cycle of irresponsibility and Vengeance. It is in the knowledge of who we have forgiven, that we can lay to rest whatever has been strained by hurt, for however long was the time.
In the manner of personal desire, a person does not act responsible. To blur the line between responsibility and irresponsibility, or logic and reason, or Justice and Vengeance, means to, again, fall on the area that is most suited to human instinct. Selfishness is a part of human instinct. Since it is, one should never compare love to the instincts of a human.
When it is about protection, however, of a loved one, that is instinct. It is only due to that love objectively makes the pair unified. They are one, meaning that by one of the two loved ones to protect the other, they are protecting themselves.
All choice, therefore, is not based on the coming death or the coming love. In death, there is no choice, but to understand that it will come. In truth, death is more predictable than love. For what we control, is always our own lives. We are compelled to understand ourselves, as we pull who we love always for a union of singularity. Though, when trust becomes a factor, it is love that becomes limited, only when one now begins to fear something they never wish to involve in their lives.
What is the very difference between trust for a person, who might have a disease, or to simply trust another person? Is there any difference within the word “trust” by these two scenarios?
To love another, to trust another, and when blending both “love” and “trust” together, the only thing that may divide a relationship is betrayal. Such betrayal, stemming from dissatisfaction, stemming from boredom, stemming from tedium, makes a person want more. Such relationship betrayal, even if the reason is different from a disease, still causes hurt. On the psychological level, trust has little to do with the question of whether a person has a disease, or not. It has to do with taking a risk.
One takes a risk, when they trust. One does not trust, out of fear of being hurt. Were one to have a disease, they’d be hurt. Were one to have their trust betrayed, they’d be hurt. What is the difference between being hurt from the disease, or being hurt because your offered trust was used for manipulation?
To build a society around a lack of trust for individuals, and more of a trust for institutions, will make this ongoing virus the saving grace for such powerhouses. For trust is the essence of taking a risk. If a world does not comprehend how to do that, then it will breathe fear as easily as it breathes air. Trust involves risk. Trust involves love, not fear. Therefore, through that love and trust, a person is not ever betrayed, unless they are met with what they fear. A person inevitably keeps that trust, through love.
Therefore, the connection between a one who trusts another who may have a disease, or trusting another for simple trust, is based on risk. Nothing more is present, to describe how a person may become hurt.
“To recognize our strength, is to see where we stand, that we do stand, that we are standing, upon the Earth where others have walked. For we do not walk any path alone, for the same reason as we should know that others know our difficulties, and can understand us. Self-worth has no meaning, if we continue to believe we can make it, without another’s aid. Because, the place where we stand, is a place where others have died, others have fallen, and still, others remain walking. Down the same roads we all travel, there are others to hold hands with, because the only strength we possess, while alone, is an evil and selfish one.
While we stand, we do not sink. We only stand, and remain standing, because we know that others have done the same, as us. Look to those who have made it, and receive wisdom from them. But, look behind you to see those who are struggling, and find yourself to be their leaders.”
With desire, feed me wine,
Among pain, make yourself as mine
Beneath sheets that fade away thy purest form,
As all angels weep above in their enclosure.
For I have destined myself,
To wed myself,
With yourself, a queen of a night,
A desire and a might.
You have felt the sin,
To which we ran the waters
Over our palms,
And over the soils.
When thou did,
Thou filled baskets, with ripest apples,
And filled thy mouth, with words of praise.
Make this kindest moment last.
The moment when we dance,
Before an altar so lit with wonder,
An altar adorned with petals,
I see thee, a face of finest beauty.
I see lips as strips of scarlet,
And cheeks with rose attached,
And eyes that beam out the wishful note,
“Never to leave, never to depart,”
As you rightfully say.
And when I see thy graceful form,
Kept in my palm,
I find nothing else to
Create a qualm.
Face me, dear thing,
You have beauty roaring out,
To the furthest shores,
So mighty that you are, needing to see,
How much I love thee,
And all of thee.
We are now united, with faces to breathe.
Famous and beaming with red,
Lovely until you fall dead,
With the stead of undying love.
Romance has quaked our realm,
While nectar falls from your breasts,
Live in me, oh, beauty from the North.
Give yourself to me,
My final companion.
We shall live and die with the union.
We shall make poetry from our voices.
Our marriage will bloom for many morrows,
And will sow seeds for crops to be reaped.
For a multitude of marriages
To be spawned from our one.
You are lovely, and fit for this occasion,
Your aura inspires awe.
Your face is a wilderness,
For me to be lost.
Your eyes are a darkness,
For me to be displaced.
Grow the garden for our nourishment,
And make merry the words that we’ve kept.
Do not long more for another,
When we drown beneath sheets of purple silk.
Famed are we, under faces that see
Our happiness and our home.
Made for governance to be
A lovely family, so close are we.
Q: You say that to seek the “evidence of God”, one must look no further than upon themselves and their yearnings?
A: What have we of the “Second Coming”? It can only mean that such an event is similar to any other event in one’s life, that involves the “return of love”. As well, the “loss of virginity” to a woman reveals a certain void in her, one that has not yet been filled by the “returned lover” who had taken it. Should it be that such a man who took, or rather, stole a woman’s virginity had only done so, for the sake of taking it, then the “Second Coming” then becomes the yearning. To “look upon themselves” as you quoted of me, is the evidence of yearning. One doesn’t at all seek the “evidence of God” unless through humanity. A machine is impossible in such a task. “God” is always only either denied or longed for, in the return upon the weak, could they be a woman, who desire that void to be filled.
Q: Then, the “evidence of God” has only to do with humanity. How does a scientist comprehend such an ideal?
A: The scientist can only comprehend what changes consistently. Therefore, the scientist, as a scientist, can only comprehend science. The scientist, as a human, will comprehend love, through humanity. For a human inevitably believes in God when in love, and when in love, a human should find that their love is unchanging, much like God. Love should not change, or otherwise when it does, it was only because discontent met love on a path. Everything unchanging dies, and becomes unrecognizable, when it changes. We describe the “face of God” as linked to those we love. And, in the same fashion, those we love should always be recognized.
Q: How is science not ever able to discover the “evidence of God”?
A: It is because science represents the “changing” while God represents the “unchanging”. God is called “unfathomable” or “omniscient” or “perfect” and all such words, because God is unlike the ordinary human, who continually seeks change in their own imperfect lives. As well, God is the God of both love and death, not just love. Such things, both love and death, are invisible to life, especially death. Though, the one thing that puts a halt to life, is death. And the one thing that puts a halt to discontent, is love.