the Dao of Atheism :jeffers' petroglyph, pre-dakota, minnesota : the Shaman Atheist 70/81


These words of mine
are easy to translate and understand and discuss and practice.

So why is it
nobody anywhere
understands them? practices them?

My words
have culture, have reason, have a system
but try to make sense of them and you will fail,
try to apply them like rules and you will fail.
This is why people do not understand
my words.

So few understand it
but then
that is its value
guarded like
a pond
in the winter.

Inexperience is a form of knowledge.
Like virginity and sex, sex and pregnancy.

Among some people, virginity is the ultimate state of existence -- complete ignorance of the experience of mutual sex, of love-making. And once a person has sex, that knowledge of virginity is lost. Early Christians, and later, the Roman Catholic Church, argued in favor of life-long physical virginity as a way of maintaining spiritual purity. Protestants argued against such self-containment as unnatural.

Among men, pregnancy is a combination of objective knowledge and subjective ignorance. No man can equal a pregnant woman's knowledge of the pregnancy experience.

Atheists have no experience of god.
How can one have such an experience and deny it?
Why should one attempt at arguing a collective objective inexperience over the objections of those who have the experience of deity? Why should the experienced argue against the inexperience of others?

Is the inexperience of deity unnatural?
Is virginity unnatural? Is the inexperience of pregnancy unnatural?

back :: next
first :: middle :: last
cover :: endnotes