Ich will

... daß Du mich liebst, nachdem ich Dich in mich verliebt machen wollte, wie ich viele, ohne es zu ahnen, oder auch, während ich es weiß, in mich verliebt machen will ...

... daß Du wissen willst, wie ich denke, bis zum tiefsten Kern meines Wesens, und darüber hinaus, niemals endend, denn wir sind unsterblich ...

... daß ich Dich liebe, nachdem ich Dich benutzt, verunglimpft, verbittert und enttäuscht, alleingelassen habe, und Dir sage: Ich weiß, was ich getan habe, und ich mußte es tun, um es nun bereuen und Dir ins Auge sehen zu können ...

... mich enttäuschen, alleinlassen dürfen, verbittert sein dürfen, alles dürfen, um am Ende ein Wir zu kennen ...

Wir wollen ... uns in die Augen sehen
Darin verweilen

Und ruhen.

Es könnte keinen unpassenderen Titel geben, als diesen, weil er die Vergänglichkeit gleichermaßen ausdrückt, wie die Aktualität des Eigentlichen, einen Wendepunkt quasi als Scheitelpunkt einer Kurve ausdrückt und nicht die Gravitation und Trägheit bewußter Entscheidung im Hinblick auf gewollten oder bekannten Verlauf.

Das Internet - hier wieder reflektiert als Ersatz für ein Tagebuch, in strahlender Sprache, unter der Kraft der Wahrheit - kein Tagebuch hat die Geschwindkeit der Tasten unter den Fingern, in voller Ruhe schöpferischer Kraft - wohne Du in mir, Vater.

Was gibt mir Ruhe?

Der Gedanke, mein Wesen im Wesen anderer zu teilen und mitzuteilen, das Schwesterliche und Brüderliche aus abgeschiedenem Geiste in die Gegenwart der Schwestern und Brüder hineinzusehen, sie einzuladen auf solche Art, daß meine Abgeschiedenheit endlich ihre vermeintliche Würde verlieren darf. Die Feigheit sei nicht länger statisch, wenngleich zu viel noch in ihr ruht. Vergeben sei ihr, schon von hier aus, bevor derlei Dinge flugs praktischer werden sollen.

Ich beschließe kurzerhand, mir diverse Formen der Kommunikation und andere schöpferische Tätigkeiten zu Nutze zu machen, um meinen definitiven Mangel an Ausgetauschem, an schöpferischem Ausdruck und gegenseitig-bewußter Gegenwart nicht nur zu kompensieren, sondern - gemäßg einer irgendwie doch alten Tradition - zu heilen.

Was bilde ich mir eigentlich ein, diese Würde am Leben zu erhalten, die mir gar nicht zusteht? Welche Change, Respekt und Gegenseitigkeit in einer Welt ohne offizielle innere Bildung zu lernen, unter dem Ungehobelten der geistigen Restlandschaften einer für Höheres bestimmten Welt?

Oh, Ihr macht mir keine Furcht mehr!

Ihr armen Hartgesottenen, wir teilen eine Zukunft. Und Ihr Gebildeten, wir teilen den Wunsch des belohnten Wissens, und haben ihn nun überwunden.

Fortsetzung folgt ;-)*

wer seid ihr da draußen, und was machen wir nur

mit der liebe zwischen uns?




nein, ich weiß.

ich hänge noch

frei zwischen jenem ort

und dem du nicht

hier jedenfalls




hier wollte ich

nicht mehr alleine sein

nur weil ich frei




freitag. stotter ich.




ach, robinson.




ich lerne langsam, aber doch.

und lernte grad, nicht den wert abzuziehen.

von meinem sinn.




als perle unter säuen.

perlmuttern licht

komm spielen wir

du siehst mich nicht

und sieh mich doch.

In the palette of combineable qualities or settings, already with only two factors, our possible deepening is unbelievable or hard to imagine.

Mercy: In that we have nothing but understanding for whatever action of the other, even if it may come from the total lack of understanding of him. This may even lead to the more seldom levels of uninterpretable or ill action. Our understanding is just a phase of mercy itself, within that we have full excuse for errors or self-misguidance of the individual, as a form of love's activity. Mercy as a feeling can act as the resoluting counterpart of the non-understandable; it is the movement towards love.

Approach a problem with the feeling of mercy, to feel its potentialities.

In the special instance, a moment, a wonderful, hesitating "jiffy" - I have felt a future in the "now". I feel how far my inner sensory mechanisms help me to instantly translate the outer moment into conceivability: highly selective content, broadly displayed as its original quality. It feels like knowing something, before to think of it. Knowing something... directly.

What does now happen, (or, in the suggestion of a typo: what does not happen) when I watch my love, my darling, with these two special qualities, happenings, settings... on the stage of mind, with no viewers or actors but the two of us?

Do I feel that she suggests her content (topics, moods and substances of communicative exchange) - but does not easily wish for mine? What, if I agreed to her content - but swallowed mine for "some other" communication? How would she then react, when I tried to communicate mine - and if she reacted towards it (what i cannot believe) - why do I still feel alone?

In these surroundings, this time, even in Mercy and in the merciful allowance of Intuition as a Master Spirit, I have to say, and I can say: She did not see my inside; she maybe... fell in love.

What a hard kind of insight. How alone do I feel now? Mercy is here... how could she have known, have acted better. If she just could do it, knew how to value a soul space that still must be hidden to her (otherwise she would enjoy communication with me here), - she would be by my side...

After forgiving her - one of the qualitatively related actions of Mercy - should I try to manipulate my "content" about her? No. Should I try to suggest a different way to her? Not more than once. So, no more. Should I try to make an early start into communicative fulfillment?

As long as I can imagine its existence, it must be "out there / in here". Her response to my movements here may be noticeable; but what she cannot talk to, this she cannot guide: It seems to be situated in the Unqualified Absolute. So where do I search, staying-being clearly eye-to-eye with her, without that I let myself be misguided by my thought (and "content") of her simple presence? Where else am I?

Love cannot lie togetherness; it cannot lie. But it will show up every time we look for it; it cannot be absent. We may think to see absence, if we want to shape it; but what is absent is not Love.

Should I now try to make an early start into communicative fulfillment?

Here it is.

Balzac and the little chinese seamstress. A couple... maybe?

The supreme being. What a titling for a process that is so much - consciously - developmental, ready for action, reaction and learning, for constructive dealing with intercommunication, rather than interference.

Love and love. Two words, not meaning the same?

When we were kind to each other, to understand, as much as we could, the other. To understand him so far, at least so far, that we would not have to give up - what? And what, if we gave it up? And what, if we gave it up?

Now, that our souls got used to each other .. (here is, what is really deep) .. we see that a togetherness does mean change. How much would an intimacy in (whatsoever form of) communication change the standards that we more or less consciously/carefully developed as single beings?

Could it mean love, not to know, what we do, when we give in to the other? Or is this just the loss - for both, or one of us - to give in, in the loss of a freedom, a highly educated standard of personal importances.

If I suppose that there is something mutual - in spite of warm energies we both carry, for each other, and ourselves within the "us" - the doubt of maybe being able to "come over" this strange feeling of a potential, rather than a real togetherness seems to want to be touched. What can touch him? In the dreams and fantasies of the upper levels of existence, such mind pictures are moving and stepping soft steps as tender minding within the pure agreement. Agreement with the key thoughts and feelings of such a being that seems to be not understood. So, to expand agreement, we might have to search for a point from that we agree, to expand the feeling of agreement. How far can we reach out together? Can we finally reach each other, and in the new time reach out in togetherness?

The doubt is in the room, not as a doubt, but as an intense wish to develop. To educate, to self-educate in subjects such as "the released relationship", "sharing truth with your partner" and "being ready to give up the secret burdens". What a kind of school is this?

Oh, all that we know, how important is it, if we do not recognize it healingly in those spaces where our worries show ... (maybe even creatively ;-) ...) ?

Thoughts are having a certain gravity. And if not gravity, they at least show a certain liking to attach to specific others of their kind. To express them brings something new. Not to express them - brings what?

In our relationship, what has not been expressed? What has not been expressed in that form that it could be named communication? And finally, if it could be communication, hopefully, the essence was not lost?

Without that the essence gets lost, communication must be there. We should have the feeling to love the other, not our picture of him, or the picture that we get through mistakeful approach and communication.

When we don't understand each other, what do we do? We easily draw back to our positions and compare the others behavior with what we would like to happen from there.. are these not our standards? If both are ready to search for the other, cannot both most easily find each other "in the middle"?

How would it feel like, this "middle", for you, ... for me?
For us?

In what nature does relationship appear for you, and can it be close to my nature? In what nature does relationship appear for me, and can it be close to your nature? Let's say, nature is the skin we will never get out of, and flexibility the resources we have to still find together, are we flexible enough to bridge our natural differences to reach ... some truth, beauty and goodness? Some more than some, maybe?

In an overview to fly over the incredible capacities of a creative mind: these to be dwelling in a surrounding of - so seeming - limiting forces of more or less independent interference factors - is certainly not too easily done.

Traditionally, we would begin with what is closest to us, in form of adjectives, rather than nouns: being creative. Being open, flexible, curious, testing, playful, being wide in horizon, being playful with our change of position, with creating shapes and ways of reaction and interaction, with creating. Oh, horizon, oh range: oh tiniest field of applying!

Then, on the other hand, we would make a resolution of the "other side", so that both hands go for the task.

What is organization but ministry? What is organizing but ministering? Now, the daily tasks - the multitude and overlapping of duties and life necessities, social, personal or otherwise - are not to be done by themselves. What is our general approach to "the ministered" when we now try to coordinate it with being creative?

In which way is creativity searching for another river bed? And where can we use it for - ministry?

So, here we see, how much "both hands" serve the task, as well as a Deity Absolute might encounter the Unqualified Absolute, while the Universal Absolute answers the question for how to face a - former? - tension.



A next step (after having carefully approached the basic choices of independence in both our hands) would be so search for the key areas of testing application. How conscious are we of our possibility to influence their key factors?

Spontaneously I would like to suggest two areas of difficulty, one in minor and one in major creativity fields. Here we see how much life is not a task, but a field of exploring, to the evolving god, while exploration may become and absolute task to the individual, it may also be a challenging, or painful, or rather creative - co-creational - cocreational in very personal colours - experience for another individual.

The imagination of "what else" could I form the shape of this situation is often the answer on: I cannot compare my flexibility to my own static view onto non-static "things".

Even the words of this writer could be static to himself; but he explores, now, without losing the texture of an internet narrative, that language - spirit stream - knows different coordination potentialities with an interferent - communicating - being.

To say it differently: How have you solved problems, that I try to deal with in a better way? How much is your answer valueing my being in its specific needs - am I ready for a dialogue with you?

So, the same space where we encounter the very individual way of sight and experience of the material and supermaterial levels of reality brings us to a way deeper ability of reaction towards "the obstacle", the "minor time factor", the "commitment to duty". It is dangerous to say that we should develop besides this two-handed approach, because we could easily be limited in developing "split brains". We smile, when we leave work, we press the lips together, when we begin? The flow of creativity - while continuously exploring changing (- expanding -) riverbeds - is not to be suppressed by such a surrounding. A man can write symphonies in his mind, while his hands do sort different types of screws under a neon lamp. As well as a screw can be a symphony for appropriate cocreators. Maybe I should imagine that I need people (beings) whom are creative on a very different level than my personal one.

This leads me to an amazing viewpoint. If I am not counting screws today: where is my actual, where is my potential river bed?
Is it different from where I see it?
Is there communication between where I see it and where it may be?

Should it have needed all these introductory textual movements, to ask these questions?

Answers cannot be generalizing. But they can be expanded in time, as creativity can expand time - within time-space-realities - to some sort of content or into more realized potentials. How individual such an attempt must be! What way does it see, in you? And what way do you see in it? And is there a bridge, for communication?

The persons I was able to watch in my life whom I associated a certain "freeflow" of activated spirit potentials and operating creativity activity where professors in their subjects, even if not titled as such. A natural interest has helped them to shape the river beds without the force and duty of high payment and respectable standing in society: They could concetrate on their form of real content, hereby developing an unreflected, open and direct response to a meanwhile differently confronted society. Their relationships where so free as their scientific or personal interest (subject) allowed them to be in this directness. Freeflow is established as a quality in - during life phases or lifetimes - not having to roll against non-qualities of others (or, far-fetched, the Unqualified Absolute), but simply be adequately qualitative in interaction. The real interaction, thereby, may have happened with their subject.

Party. People. Something like the feeling, maybe, cited from Max Frisch (1969): "Einige waren sehr nett, fand ich, sehr anregend..."

So, what is your subject? Is it responsive to you? What are those liquid shapes in your inner mind picture screen saying, when you are trying to align - what, when you're listening?

The adjectives are not far away; I have mused about this sentence: "Doing by learning". The wrong one?

There are phases and modus, moods and organizing temperaments within an evolving mind-spirit-complex that are altogether difficult to symbolize. Where does my focus have its rest, when I speak so?

The quietness and undisturbedness of an old hayfilled barn, sleeping in warmth, looking at the stars, offering ones scars, only subconsciously, to nature, while the conscious is in its business of enjoying: quietness, undisturbedness.

The diary, it seems to come from the word day, and yes: dies- the day; diarius - daily. Without such an introduction, could I have thought that a diary is more than writing occasionally?

From another perspective, the diary offers and opens up manifold possibilities to communicate and be coordinated "with the one that lives within". Not only the perspectives of the inner child, the Son of God, the self in progess ... are put into potentialities here - positionings and perspectives, even more instantly than in a novel or sometimes a short story, can be sketched to feel them on life's paper, as if they would not already move out loud. In my need to express it with one further approach, let me say "The diary can make true, what otherwise would only beginningly be sensed in the writers perception", and more precise: "Who develops alone - among others - may need the guidement of his inner voice, as of prayer -lived out actively in diary-resembling ways of expression."

Since us humans, we may all be busy in more or less trying to find equal approaches to a calm, fulfilled moments, we can be in such a rush that we hardly share moments of equivalent contents. With whom to share, if not with those that are closest to us? How realistic is the wish for those that may understand us from far away? A perfect divinity tension: on the one side our family with its own dynamics; on the other side the equivalent of the Epilogue of the Workbook for Students from the Course in Miracles:

"You do not walk alone. God's angels hover near and all about. His Love surrounds you, and of this be sure; that I will never leave you comfortless."

With the Angels, at least, we can potentially or more or less experientially share such understanding, as I may learn in gratefulness. Such a hard projection of expecting is there, in the attempt to be coordinated with our fellow humans! Another perfect divinity tension?

So, "listening to the inner voice", holding dialog with oneself, allowing the "conjoint actor", as far as i can understand it, to bridge the information flow between Father ans Son, receiving the "Thought Adjuster", also called "Mystery Monitor" - these are, as in prayer, factual processes happening around the word-center of a "diary".

But how daily is their happening experientially? Is it even possible, to be gentle in that force that we might attempt to use in trying to impose insight onto the yet fearful little learner? Is there not the eventuality to let him have expansion into the insightful surrounding he is embedded into? So, love would not be artificial,l hypothetic or esoteric, not would it be scientifically termed: it could even be expressed and self-expressing.

Its tongue is moving in the zone of diary-rersemblances much sexier than in an ad-banner world, and much more personalized than media delusions, even more real than in personal illusions. Yes: The No to this would be the only No.

A personality - in this world existing in many phases of reality - has many choices to make, when it comes to an introduction of personal scope, subjectivity and spectrum.

The fast eye usually is a fast mind. How to track down (back) the manifold positioning processes in ourselves and the fellows, when we so very slowly develop an own position?

The feeling that we are unique is easy to defend, by simply not allowing communication - only very directly. When communication begins, usually, a coordinatedly fallen type of mind preset - this as a result of the history of our planet, in coordination with actuality of personality potentials - communicates to a likewise situated brother personality. In watching our fellows (so as ourselves) here, organizing a stairway towards the more social or collective approach towards higher meanings and values, we experience the very basic tension - a tension that has been called "the primal relationship" in the Urantia Book. This relationship is described between deified and undeified realities, or between the Deity Absolute and the Unqualified Absolute. Is it not fascinating to perform the inner calculation of "what a philophy is", when having to face reality? Only processes that can be validated experientially do lead to our collective blueprint availability in brotherhood experience. I believe I can even understand why exactly the exercise of faith is the basic limit for experientially validating the shift from philosophy to experientially revelative tendencies.

These writings, that are largely influenced by the revelation of the Urantia Book, reflect my own development of spirit and life, while I try to be a positively willed coordinate personality to the developing soul, mind and spirit happenings of this present world.

To be what I am not, in the minds of many of my fellows, since they cannot have a pattern for me, is obviously a necessity: images that are close to reality are always fluidly present, and do not deserve the so-seeming fixedness of some memory portions of a mind (hereby I have carefully requested to be seen as I can be seen now).

These words I speak to virtually find images - mind contents - of Deity equivalents in mortals who peruse this world as a spiritual one, in those described or seen higher meanings. It is an experience-field, a study zone and a school of self-reflection - much more to myself than probably to any reader.

As I find myself largely unshared by my mortal brothers and sisters, since the expression of sentences as this alone may create serious brow-raising, a diary - a blog - looks like an appropriately rooted mechanism to anchor self-reflection, deal with specific spiritual content, as well as just being socially bookmarking or just surf-logging my very ordinary interests.

Since the personality-development beyond the daily influences of the so present echoes, having originated from the rebellion ... had to be happening in the more non-talking levels of social sharing, it might be interesting in what way such a blog can be interassociative in many personal and social potentialities.

The word absonite does refer to those events where realities of time and space - experientially, rather than philosophically - transcend to a less finite and more eternal life-discernment.

Well, practically, I am a very simple guy that just wants to talk and searches for some limits in his conditions, I want to share and evolve - but the "limitation" of being in sweetly intimate contact with the quality of true revelation makes a friendship rather potential than actual in many phases of my otherwise very human life. It is fascinating how a revelation can uplift a person of faith, but not supply with fellow believers in adequate sharing depth. I believe that when I share my personal thoughts, happinesses and musings likewise (as my concept of revelation-equivalents), I can be a true mirror either for potential fellows or for those at my side of the game. For others I might in the best case be a study object of missing common sense, haha, or, a person that is in need of true love - which I certainly am.

Das zahme Leiden einer spirituellen Jugend



Der Trott in dem "wir Menschen" täglich gefangen sind - ein weniger tiefer Zugang zu uns selbst und anderen, ein materiellerer Ablauf von "Lebenssinn" - er läßt den bewußter-Tieferen unter uns eine Art Zeitfenster offen, ihre "fellows in the flesh" angemessen einzuschätzen und kennenzulernen. Die Feinheit, die Brillianz der Geister, die sich in Brüderlichkeit verwandelt ist noch weitaus mehr im Sinne unserer eigentlichen Natur, wie ich ahnen muß, als solche Feinheit und Brillianz, die den Hauch der Distanz nur etwas zu verlängern sucht. Die Eigenschaft der Gnade auf die eigenen Fenster und Möglichkeiten anzuwenden zeichnet unsere Brüder aus.



Am Schlimmsten ist die 'Liebe', die sein könnte, würde sich einer öffnen, der es nicht tut - noch schlimmer ist es, wenn einer das Tor aufhält, durch das der andere nicht schreiten wird (oder will), und inmitten des Tores schon ein neues Sozialgefühl spürt, das es nun wieder zu verlassen gilt. Die Brüderschaft fordert, selbst die Wahl zur Einsamkeit - die oft die (vielleicht unbewußtere) Wahl zur scheinbar größeren Lebensnähe bedeutet - brüderlich zu akzeptieren, wie ein Vater einen Fehler des Kindes akzeptiert, ohne Vorwurf, mit dem stetig hintergründigen Angebot einer weiteren, näheren Lebenserfahrung.



Sehen wir nun durch unsere und andere Fenster ohne jene Sentimentalität des Könnteseins, mehr mit der schaffenden Eigenschaft des Mitgestaltens, erzeugen wir ein Miteinander diesseits des Wunschvorhangs, hinter dem es eigentlich nichts gibt. Treffen wir hier "zufällig" einen Menschen, verfolgt dieser mit seinen Sichten und Worten dieselben Wünsche, und wir können ihn für seine persönliche Näherung so akzeptieren, als wäre er ein unentfernbarer, niemals eintretender, wahrgewordener Wunsch. Selbst aber das Wundern darüber würde nur sanft und mit Verständnis liebend geschehen, kein Trara und Gebrüll, kein Vorzeigen und nichts Fremdes geschieht hier: wir wissen, daß im leichten Treffen von uns "Menschen" das eigentliche sanfte Geschehen des Miteinander-Redens geschieht. Wir respektieren es: unsere absoluten Wünsche und entferntgewordenen Sehnsüchte transferieren und transformieren sich in die Verbautheiten, Komplexe und Verklemmtheiten, Sehnsüchte und Plumpheiten der einfachsten Menschen: wir respektieren sogar die uns lang scheinende Zeit, die sie benötigen, denn es scheiterte schon einmal an der Zeit, die wir ihnen nicht geben wollten.



Wir sind von einem fernen Stern, wir sind von einer Welt, die der diesen Zeit zu schenken hat, in allem Streß - wir können an ihm Leben lassen, und doch haben wir unsere Heimat nie verlassen. Das Erlebnis, daß wir uns "zufällig" treffen, den Erkennenden (widerum) erkennen - das ist das strebsam Erfüllte, das in großer Lebensspannung Entspannte, das reif sich Begegnende, in einer Vorformwelt, die in uns nur ihresgleichen suchen konnte.

der menschen, du, die ich verschlüsseln wollte
entschlüsselt hast du sie
hier sterben sie wohl
nach ihrem eigenen gutdünken

und ich darf sie sterben lassen
für mich allein ist kein sieg
keins der gräber ist hohl
wo ihr körper noch immer und immer wandelt.