Oct 2016
machina ex deus
is contradicted by
deus ex machina
(the old familiar
sadist,
or the old
familiar
******* on the crucifix,
for i fear this was the son of Golgotha's
intention).
but so is **** ex machina
(man out of the props / machinery) -
strange, that it has to be so,
to have made sadistic machinery
with good intention in order that
love and all the essence man strives for,
to be paradoxically placed
in order to receive both praise, and blame,
but so far as i can see:
machina ex ****
is just as sadistic
machina ex deus -
or as buddha said:
the middle, try the middle (path);
what Tibet is to Asia
Israel isn't to Europe...
but the Italians said it was so,
not beyond the island
did they ascribe their "dominant" pressure...
the snowy curtain stopped them,
it is truly a question
of **** ex machina
as is the case of deus ex machina,
because both machina ex deus
and machina ex **** are diabolical
manifestations
of what would otherwise be
an impossibility -
where both would reign
in the realm of the per se...
and it's unfair, and it's cruel,
and it's everything we wish to be told
as being untrue...
but it is life, it is colour,
and of course there's an argumentative
mandate
to criticise both parties,
wouldn't we all wish
to lounge
and exist without a single
determining, anguishing thought?
were we truly born for
lounging or a horse's gallop?
but as arguments go:
for man to assert himself as a deus ex machina
is deeply flawed -
as evidence: the man pits himself
against the mass and is duly blamed,
since for our physical strife,
there the gods contemplate the strife they create
and occupy a wholly thought-bound realm of our
mediation - not this squabbling on hands and knees,
not that.
no philosopher squanders the concept of god
or dismisses the concept, you might say
biologists are first to plunge into an atheism,
while philosophers play with indivisible things
that later read as: b o m b.
i believe that the machina ex deus and the machina ex ****
are infernal -
the points that could be
made: but we can sustain life is simply a judiciary statement:
not the statement of the individual...
somehow the middle ground...
out of the machinery of man
a god-like interaction,
a lubricated assertion:
do not do unto others as you do not wish others
to do unto you...
and out of the machinery of god
a man-like interaction:
as Moses suggested: i was basically talking
to an ***...
the **** of a woman's gladly juiced peach
buttocks: flirting with a flutter away away away:
if only i didn't make that moral judgement and
said what i think i said to be:
me forget Egyptian princess, me return from what
didn't seem to be a fool's errand... blah blah blah.
well, ******-me-ginger, i'd done that too!
higher calling, gotta wear the leash.
in mirror form:
machina ex **** sued xe anihcam
yhwh
^ ^
a e
d v
a e
m
well sure, even on Malta they call god Allah -
we can safely say: it's just a question of a noun,
and it is, but certain orthodox Jews went a bit far
with censoring the word d-g the devil and god
on a ******* ferris wheel - i'm saying: give me something
to work with, yeah? give me something to reconfigure,
a lament configuration sort of thing -
give me something durable,
a play-dough manifestation i can play with, look at
and reinterpreted (plus, lucky me, the Jews hide the
vowels, and their vowels are like diacritical marks on
Latin letters) -
i can sing both Allah and Jesus Hosanna
*** bi yah in the churches, but i need thinking grit
for me to stumble against from time to time;
basically i need to make the evolutionary step in taking
a very secretive tribalism of nomads and speak about it
in a Roman Forum without banter;
but i guess i'm doing that already.
well, i would argue further, but this form doesn't exactly
allow distressing narratives
about the plight of Norwegians writing
an existential systematisation outside of novels
(much to their comfort with their reading diet) -
hey, hands in the air like i just don't care:
the machinery created by the gods is as much infernal
as man's machinery to create states and society...
successful, sure... give each side a Nobel prize for
acquiring a however-many galaxies there are
and however-many Mr. Po's there are in China...
all that's bugging me is:
if a god emerged from the machinery of man
with the biblical narrative (however obscured by
Moses writing in Egyptian and writing poetry) because
those pyramids were never going to fly...
how was it that man emerged from
the machinery of god?
well, that's a bit easy
and leaves all forms self-serving acknowledgement
for cult-establishing permission in the air...
don't know, don't care, Darwinism is to the second right,
caveman is: turn around and walk until you
see a dodo
and everything else
you might want to think of as your
own egocentric octopus offshoot is on parade:
it's moving, it's moving,
it's speeding, crashing, farting,
hot-smoking alive...
and then dead.
is contradicted by
deus ex machina
(the old familiar
sadist,
or the old
familiar
******* on the crucifix,
for i fear this was the son of Golgotha's
intention).
but so is **** ex machina
(man out of the props / machinery) -
strange, that it has to be so,
to have made sadistic machinery
with good intention in order that
love and all the essence man strives for,
to be paradoxically placed
in order to receive both praise, and blame,
but so far as i can see:
machina ex ****
is just as sadistic
machina ex deus -
or as buddha said:
the middle, try the middle (path);
what Tibet is to Asia
Israel isn't to Europe...
but the Italians said it was so,
not beyond the island
did they ascribe their "dominant" pressure...
the snowy curtain stopped them,
it is truly a question
of **** ex machina
as is the case of deus ex machina,
because both machina ex deus
and machina ex **** are diabolical
manifestations
of what would otherwise be
an impossibility -
where both would reign
in the realm of the per se...
and it's unfair, and it's cruel,
and it's everything we wish to be told
as being untrue...
but it is life, it is colour,
and of course there's an argumentative
mandate
to criticise both parties,
wouldn't we all wish
to lounge
and exist without a single
determining, anguishing thought?
were we truly born for
lounging or a horse's gallop?
but as arguments go:
for man to assert himself as a deus ex machina
is deeply flawed -
as evidence: the man pits himself
against the mass and is duly blamed,
since for our physical strife,
there the gods contemplate the strife they create
and occupy a wholly thought-bound realm of our
mediation - not this squabbling on hands and knees,
not that.
no philosopher squanders the concept of god
or dismisses the concept, you might say
biologists are first to plunge into an atheism,
while philosophers play with indivisible things
that later read as: b o m b.
i believe that the machina ex deus and the machina ex ****
are infernal -
the points that could be
made: but we can sustain life is simply a judiciary statement:
not the statement of the individual...
somehow the middle ground...
out of the machinery of man
a god-like interaction,
a lubricated assertion:
do not do unto others as you do not wish others
to do unto you...
and out of the machinery of god
a man-like interaction:
as Moses suggested: i was basically talking
to an ***...
the **** of a woman's gladly juiced peach
buttocks: flirting with a flutter away away away:
if only i didn't make that moral judgement and
said what i think i said to be:
me forget Egyptian princess, me return from what
didn't seem to be a fool's errand... blah blah blah.
well, ******-me-ginger, i'd done that too!
higher calling, gotta wear the leash.
in mirror form:
machina ex **** sued xe anihcam
yhwh
^ ^
a e
d v
a e
m
well sure, even on Malta they call god Allah -
we can safely say: it's just a question of a noun,
and it is, but certain orthodox Jews went a bit far
with censoring the word d-g the devil and god
on a ******* ferris wheel - i'm saying: give me something
to work with, yeah? give me something to reconfigure,
a lament configuration sort of thing -
give me something durable,
a play-dough manifestation i can play with, look at
and reinterpreted (plus, lucky me, the Jews hide the
vowels, and their vowels are like diacritical marks on
Latin letters) -
i can sing both Allah and Jesus Hosanna
*** bi yah in the churches, but i need thinking grit
for me to stumble against from time to time;
basically i need to make the evolutionary step in taking
a very secretive tribalism of nomads and speak about it
in a Roman Forum without banter;
but i guess i'm doing that already.
well, i would argue further, but this form doesn't exactly
allow distressing narratives
about the plight of Norwegians writing
an existential systematisation outside of novels
(much to their comfort with their reading diet) -
hey, hands in the air like i just don't care:
the machinery created by the gods is as much infernal
as man's machinery to create states and society...
successful, sure... give each side a Nobel prize for
acquiring a however-many galaxies there are
and however-many Mr. Po's there are in China...
all that's bugging me is:
if a god emerged from the machinery of man
with the biblical narrative (however obscured by
Moses writing in Egyptian and writing poetry) because
those pyramids were never going to fly...
how was it that man emerged from
the machinery of god?
well, that's a bit easy
and leaves all forms self-serving acknowledgement
for cult-establishing permission in the air...
don't know, don't care, Darwinism is to the second right,
caveman is: turn around and walk until you
see a dodo
and everything else
you might want to think of as your
own egocentric octopus offshoot is on parade:
it's moving, it's moving,
it's speeding, crashing, farting,
hot-smoking alive...
and then dead.
