Nameless and I

Darkness is only apparent absence of light, otherwise there is no such thing: the word can only indicate that absence, for such itself has no kind of presence.

Death is only apparent absence of life, otherwise there is no such thing. The word only indicates the absence of the presence of life. To think of death as such is senseless. There can never be any such presence, for phenomenally it is only an absence.

'Life' is a concept extended in space-time, and as such it is only an image in mind. Conceptually also it is the absence of 'death' which - as we have seen - is the absence of 'life'.

Evidently, therefore, there is no such factuality as 'life', nor any such factuality as 'death'. Nor can there be any factual entity such as a 'liv-er' of life or a 'dy-er' of death.

But there is a phenomenal manifestation called 'liv-ing' and another called 'dy-ing', both extended in a space-time concept, and these latter have a direct relation to what we are.

Such relation, however, can never be evident as long as we adhere to the notion of 'life' and 'death' as factual existences.

What we are is manifested in the spatio-temporal appearance of 'liv-ing', and dis-appears in that of 'dy-ing', but in order to apperceive what this is it is necessary to discard the notions of the 'liv-ing' of a 'life' and the 'dy-ing' of a 'death' - for what-we-are neither 'lives' nor 'dies'.

We must cast both into the dustbin of futile concepts, and so leave ourselves in our presence, which cannot be subject to any kind of phenomenal extension, either spatial or temporal, or to any kind of sensorial objectivisation whatever.

What, then, does this imply? It implies the abandonment of split-mind as an instrument of apperceiving, for such abandonment leaves us inevitably in our wholeness - also 'holiness' and 'health' which are the same word - and as such we are noumenal integrality, - neither positive nor negative, immanent nor transcendent - nameless and I.

* * *

We have to split mind in order to dream,
We have to split mind in order to live and to die,
Let us stop splitting mind - and stay whole!

One might be lonely in the absence of 'other'?
Unless 'one' were 'all' there could be no 'one',
Unless 'all' were 'one' there could be no 'all'.

(© T.J. Gray, 1968)

* * * * *