SEEKING ALL

essay 4 October 2026

The trees were soaked with blood, and the sky rang with the croaking of crows. John said to himself “When did the light pass out of me?” The moon soared, as if thrown by a divinity like a ball in the sky. The figure aged and died in three clock ticks. The earth revolved as usual around the sun, but the sun now lost it’s glow, even if the planet was scorched by it. When looking at it, there wasn’t that feeling where the cosmos peeked into the soul through the eye, but rather that of some vacancy. It was just hot, nothing more. All meaning was reduced to the ticking of clocks and vibrating of atoms. Molecules vibrated and bumped together and bound themselves together into intricate patterns, and the light reflected off of this admixture, being absorbed by it before being re-emitted again in new quanta. Well, at least that’s the picture that the all knowing narrator is drawing, but what if the narrator is not all knowing and is merely playing the role of one that is all knowing? This is the current scientific picture, or a certain imperfect rendering of it. Do I need this picture at all ? Do I need science at all ? Is what I wish to convey to you, I the writer now, and not the narrator, predicated on you grasping the precise details of the motions of molecules, which in any case I don’t have?

Well, as I was saying, the trees were soaked with blood, and the holocaust cross wearer swore up and down the hall that his cross was not hollow but hallow, and all that disagreed deserved the gallows. HE SAID IT! I said. I didn’t say it, he said it. Let’s give the priest a voice, so that he may converse in tandem with our description:

Wait, but I just mixed my grandiloquent and tasteless attempts at epic prosaic poetry and mock taste with the priests voice. Nein. The priest hath no voice like that. Look at me, I said hath! Let’s try again

Well, I made the priest say ’worm’, that’s a kind of cute. Also, I corrected kinda cute for a kind of cute, because the latter makes sense, whereas the former does not. Also, note that I said ’note’ and used the ’former’ and ’latter’ construction, and that I know what a ’construction’ is. Now, the question that’s clearly pressing against our consciousness is WHO IS THIS WRITER, and why does he wish to say what he wishes to say and why does he use the language that he uses ? Does he wish to signal status or learning or something like that ? And if that, why that ? Is it because he cares about the opinions of others ? And why does he care about that ? Is it because he wishes to do well in society ? Well, that would make sense! But why that ? Does it boil down to wanting to survive and reproduce and live well ? Probably.

Okay, so I don’t want to introduce characters and narratives, and I don’t want to commit to a choice of language either way. I don’t want the pragmatic, simple, direct language, nor do I want the grandiloquent language either. I don’t want characters, because characters encapsulate state, in a sense (if such a thing as ’state’ exists in the first place). No, what do I want then ? I want to somehow peer behind reality, and maybe alleviate my loneliness too. One may say, do as the others do and then you won’t be lonely (yes, I said ’one says’ lets put that aside for now and just talk however we talk!), but that’s not how it works! You won’t be lonely for the moment that you think your attempt will lead to you not being lonely, but as soon as you’ve made your attempt for long enough, you’ll realize it doesn’t work, and then you’ll stop being hopeful about it working, and you’ll be lonely! Even if you find a woman, or man if you’re a woman, and have a kid, and have a dog, you’ll still be lonely, because you can’t connect with them in the way that you want to. You’ll always connect in a way that doesn’t feed you.

Well, so that’s why I’ve taken to writing this. Why a short story ? Why a story at all ? Indeed, a ’story’ is not what I wish to tell at all, actually! I wish to get behind my consciousness. What do I hope to discover ? God ? Yes. I seek God. Do I ’seek’ God, though, and can thought reach God ? Is this thought ? My sentences are linear, but are they rooted in linearity ? In other words, is this just a thinking machine which spits out words, or is there a transcription from the wordless world to the words ? The latter has a chance at touching God, but the former does not. If I’m just rooted in words and thinking and logic and structure, then I will merely find the results of that in my words, and be surprised.

Suppose I try to build a theory that explains the psychological and physical without distinction between them using the same formalism, would I thereby capture what is ? Would my models and simulations then recreate the world, and if it did, would it recreate my world ? Would it not be a world in a world, and would it not somehow thereby have to be lesser than the bigger world ? I don’t know, and it doesn’t really matter I suppose. My point is that somehow modeling is not the way forward either! Well, that means mathematics is not the way forward either, and neither is physics or any sort of modeling. Forget the subjects and specializations, any organized approach at this is not going to get at it, unless of course I erect my own scaffolding momentarily with a particular goal and then put it away, not leaving a trace of it for others. This, not out of hatred for others but simply because I don’t think that the scaffolding can reach God, and of course reaching God already on the face of it sounds stupid. As far as I understand you can’t seek at all, because seeking itself already presupposes a target to be sought, and that target then is what you find. You find what you sought, but how ? Do I understand this ? If I seek Jesus Christ, I may meditate on Jesus Christ for a long time, or take say lsd, or something similar, and truly feel like I made contact with Jesus Christ. What if my mind is fixated on Krishna, or some other deity instead ? If I devote myself, starve myself, and orient my psyche around this one devotional figure, would I not then eventually find that figure ? If so, does that say something about that figure, or does it say something about the mind’s capacity to generate percepta? Well, so is God just a hallucination that I chase ?

This is where I think the answer is obviously no. God is not a thing amongst things. God is ALL. God is therefore MIND, MATTER, KNOWLEDGE, IGNORANCE, I, and OTHER. It doesn’t matter if you’re pantheist or panentheist, in either case you can capture it in ALL. For instance, if I suppose there is a God over and against Others, then I can just capture both in ALL, which is strictly greater than either. ALL escapes logic and rationalization and mathematical modeling and structuring, and so on. Well, what is it that keeps me from ALL ? This is now obvious. There’s no sense in seeking, because there is nothing to seek. It’s already there. ALL is always there. The mind which can glimpse ALL reflects ALL within itself, and the only thing keeping it from doing this is getting caught up in day to day events. Someone lied or cheated or stole or murdered, and my attention is locked in that. Someone spit on me, or called me stupid, or said I’m not enough, or that I don’t measure up. I start wanting, I’m scared, I’m lonely, I’m hungry, I want sex, I want fame, I want friends, I want to be liked, I want to be adored, etc. This is what comes up, and this is where my mind gets lost. I get fixated on these little happenings and ALL is obscured in a maze of particularities, i.e. of particular events, particular objects, particular theories, particular patterns, and so on. ALL is therein LOST, and I am thereby LOST, and I therefore make ALL another Object called God and seek that! No wonder I’m lost. I’m thinking ALL is another object amongst objects. Swap in God, now. I invent stories of God. My mind never leaves the world of variegated particulars, but instead invents a God as a particular among particulars, and tries to find that ! Then, I seek what I find is merely a statement of the minds ability to generate percepts. What a great self deception I’m lost within! And I suffer. I really suffer. I don’t want to end my suffering though. The more I suffer the more I seek a way out, and then I invent what I’m scared of in the first place, and so I’m stuck in a maze of gorging myself to escape what is and then inventing stories about what is that bring me to fear and then gorging myself some more as a consequence of this new found fear.

Well, but it’s not just me that does this to myself, except it is if we forget distinctions between brains and minds and see it as one more or less similar mind, which can be given some loose approximation as ’Human’. We’ve elaborated whole systems around this. Advertisement keeps me wanting, and my wanting keeps me buying, and my buying keeps me working, and my working keeps me starving, and my starving keeps me wanting, and my wanting keeps me working, and so forth; and in this there are gradations and ranks. There are the poor and the rich. There are the dumb and the smart, the pathetic and the elite, and so on. There’s a new means of making myself feel better. I can compare myself against those below me and remark on my individual great qualities as I do this. This genuinely makes me feel good, and I find that this is the only respite I can get.

I start to fixate on myself. Who am I ? Where do I stand relative to others? This then becomes big business, this fixation on who I am, and constructing my self, and bragging about myself, and achieving, and so forth. This is the driver of the economy, so to speak. The economy is what though ? What is this ’economy’ ? To put it in perspective, what is the economy of the human body ? What is the ecological economy of an ecosystem ? What is the economy of a solar system ? Does the economy come first, as the sole driver, or is there movement before ? Is that movement merely material and random, or does it have mental aspects ? If it has mental aspects, do they only start in human brains, or does this sort of mentality generalize or is it a side of being that is as primitive as what we call form and matter, if not, indeed, MORE primitive, than even form itself ? It seems that we must say that mentality comes before form, and even before order. A mind orders. Does mind come before matter, or the other way around ? It seems we can drop distinctions when we drop order, and thus we can say that here we’re at the limits of language. For instance, what is matter ? Atoms ? But atoms are mostly empty space. What are atoms ? Bosons and fermions and anyons and ? But what is that ? Excitations of a field ? But what is the field, an if the field is ontologically primitive than what of thinghood itself since one can imagine the field spread over everywhere and everywhen. What of locality and globality ? Do these come out downstream too ? What happened to matter ? The more we look into it the more it reduces to order, but we said that mind seems to be even beyond order, i.e. that the mind orders. Okay, and what about energy then ? But what is energy ? Can we identify energy with mentality, and say they are two sides of the same coin, from which source the rest emerges, like a seed budding a world ? Is this God? Is God the seed or the plant, or both ? ALL is beyond distinction, beyond locality and globality, and beyond order, and thus beyond time! I seek a God, and that’s where I get lost. I seek an object among objects that I can worship, and here I become an idolater, worshipping images. I’m lost in the image of myself, i.e. my self image, and in my image of God. I rebel against God, and yet am stuck in image making and worshipping. Can this Human mind grasp ALL without images ?