say what

if form must always follow function, then worshippers of form are shallow? at least this is my empirical understanding of shallowness. but without the perfect form, the function wouldn’t manifest itself in its resplendence. and this is where the two schools of thought that often collide … collide yet again.

A can implement the best form. B has a supreme function to be implemented. B has some ideas about implementation, but only A can do it just right. in the current moment that is. A has nothing to implement at the moment, but can implement anything. style. process. plan.  divine. look forward. look backward. plan. implement.


A says anything.

B says what do you want to manifest? figure that out. the means will follow. the proficiency of the means will be determined by the intensity of your desire to manifest.

B is afraid that “what?” is lost in the whole “process.”

A says “you could do it so well.”


C wanting to write should not be mistaken for C having an idea to express. Only if there was something to be said, C could do an outstanding job of it. A communicator and a Mont Blanc pen are more or less the same.

What has changed thrice.


i believe i may be in a place where i can go back to zamm again. page 277.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s