We use to say that the things subsist in the present moment. But what if we say that things exist in the past's memories? Would be this frightening for all our beliefs?
For sure it is.
In saying ''this is'' we kill.
There is something wrong in the language, or maybe on the time. Language is most dangerous weapons in the World. Language is a cryptotype, a submerged, subtle, elusive meaning that does not correspond to any real word or image. The word or the image has no longer a definition but multiple definitions based on the context in which they are placed. Images and words are in action and each keeps it within their frame, the storyboard of all the instances through which it has been created or it has been translated, showing its becoming. In the eyes of the guest, the whole and the overlapping of his past identities are always present. The image the word are mutant beings. The language kills because it is a personal code. Language kills because it gives definition to living and mutant things.
It is a paradox defining things which are living because in doing so the becoming 's lose its meaning. TO LIVE MEANS TO BECOME BUT IF WE ARE WE WON'T BE.
I will give some example of a language which won't kill:
Speaking about the past: "I am" - because it is past and I was someone that I am not now.
Speaking about the present: ''- - -'' - formation moment. It's the time of work.
Speaking about the future: ''Want'' - aspiration to a definition.
Vanity as only reality. On it there is a great force and energy. This is the reason why the dust, the grateful dust, the powerful dust, the circular dust.