I'm looking at this new possibility I seem to be being. It's lush,
mellow, cool tones comfort and calm me with azure notes of loveliness
and smooth sensuality. And yet, tantalizingly, it's just out of reach
of languaging. I see it. I feel it. I know I want it. Yet
it's not clear enough for me to say exactly what it is.
has given me tools with which to look for, at, and into possibility.
Perhaps the most powerful aspect of what he's shown me is this: if you
can't articulate possibility you can't have its results. To
become possibility (here the verb "become" is active
rather than passive - in other words, to manifest / to have the results
of who you're being like a possibility), you must say it in a
way that's clear and comprehensible to others. It's not enough to
simply get a sense of what's possible. The results of
what's possible become available when you say what the
I don't know why it's this way. I don't always like it that it's this
way. Yet after close scrutiny and examination I'm clear Werner's right
you can't have it until you get it clear enough to say it. And here,
"say it" doesn't mean "talk about it". Here "say it" means
"generate it with language".
So I start asking myself "What is this new possibility I'm
being for myself and for my life?". I keep on inquiring until it
suddenly pops into sharp focus and I get it.
The possibility I'm being for myself and for my life is the possibility
of redemption and peace.
calm and quiet; lack of interruption or annoyance from worry,
problems, noise or unwanted actions.
I'm providing the
listings for redemption and peace, the possibility I'm inventing, for
clarity to ground it. However, rather than discuss the genesis of the
possibility of redemption and peace, the purpose of this conversation
is to add voice to Werner's idea that you can't have the result of a
possibility until you articulate it and others get it and are inspired
When I examine this axiom, this law of the universe, I'm amazed
by its efficacy. What Werner has noted on this score is not merely a
matter of grand philosophy, of right or of positive thinking. It's a
matter of how life works.
Can you ie are you willing to allow that
of what makes for having life
I'm not naïve. I know that being the kind of people we are,
accepting that is a stretch, a tall order. But that's understandable.
How can people who don't know Werner possibly know where he looks
from? Who can get or even lend credence to that the way Werner
looks is he simply observes life working then reports on
ie transcribes what he sees?
This isn't religion. This isn't a system of thinking. This isn't even a
well crafted set of beliefs. This is looking into the
beingsphere then saying whatever's there. To be sure, this
way of looking (or said more accurately, the willingness to look this
way) is a gift. The way to empower a gift like this, especially the way
to get the most value from it is to check it out, try it on, look from
its vantage, and then take what you get.
While it's been well documented and duly noted in the thirty five years
and more of
looking this way doesn't have any value at all (indeed
can't have any value at all) until you bring forth a
willingness, a risk ie take a chance to let it be
valuable. When people do, reportedly what shows up for them is the
only reason they didn't yet have the same observations as Werner is
they hadn't invested the time looking. I assert if you invest the time
looking, you'll see the same consistent axioms of workability as
Werner, life being what it is.
That said, for me to have the results of my invented possibility
redemption and peace in my life, what's called for is to
enroll others in me having gotten that possibility. Why? Because then
people can relate to me as that possibility. That ... and
because it works that way.
Now I'm redeemed and at peace. No one ought to be surprised.