There is more proud savagery in the person whom no pleasure can satisfy than in one who feels frustrated by everything and barks at the fun others have. The energy needed for supersession is to be found in the first, whereas the anger of the second perpetuates the impotence of a world where nothing changes. Instead of contenting ourselves with compensatory sprees, which is the suicide’s homage to what is killing him, we will destroy the world and offer nothing in its place. No barrier can stand up to the centred violence of irrepressible gratuity. Instead of taking advantages of laws framed to exploit us, we gradually substitute a practical innocence in which all legality is null and void. The time is near when no one will be presumed to know what the laws are at all.
i) The Book of Pleasure (Le Livre des plaisirs). Trans. John Fullerton. London: Pending Press, 1983. p.65
ii) “Die Welt ist alles, was der Fall ist.” (The world is all that is the case). Ludwig Wittgenstein. Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.1961 Pears-McGuinness translation. Cited from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Wittgenstein
iii) “So long as an illusion is not recognized as an error, it has a value precisely equivalent to reality. But once the illusion has been recognized as such, it is no longer an illusion. It is, therefore, the very concept of illusion, and that concept alone, which is an illusion.”
“We are faced, ultimately, with two irreconcilable hypotheses: that of the extermination of all the world’s illusion by technology and the virtual, or that of an ironic destiny of all science and all knowledge in which the world – and the illusion of the world – would survive. The hypothesis of a ‘transcendental’ irony of technology being by definition unverifiable, we have to hold to these two irreconcilable and simultaneously ‘true’ perspectives. There is nothing which allows us to decide between them. As Wittgenstein says: ‘The world is everything which is the case’.”
Jean Baudrillard. The Perfect Crime (Le crime parfait). Trans. Chris Turner. London & New York: Verso, 2008. p53, 76.
「倒數」實在是一件很有趣的事，它令所有人變成牛頓學派，認為時間是不受整個宇宙的任何事件所影響的真實存有，以不變的絕對速度向單一方向運行，一切現象於此維度上依次發生。「倒數」的重點，計時，對時，可是令人頭痛的事，即便所有人能對準「國際協調時間」（Coordinated Universal Time, UTC），它也不過是由七十國二百多個原子鐘數據統計整合，再由巴黎天文台的「國際地球自轉與參照服務」（ International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service，IERS）決定何時加入「潤秒」（Leap Second）的人為計算結果；「剎那」切成再多的細碎分段，人們還是無法指認，一年之始終，終於何時，始於何時。而且我們應當知道，月球正要擺脫牽引，離我們愈來愈遠，潮汐的力量減退，令地球自轉速度也每天減慢，去年的365天真的比今年那365天苦短。現今通用的國際標準時間，徹頭徹尾是現代產物，許多人不知道，在1925 年以前，所謂「零時」一般是指正午，而穿過格林威治、把地球隨意分成東西兩半24 時區的「本初子午線」（Prime Meridian）之釐訂，本是為了配合英國的航海軍事利益，也符合南北戰爭後步入工業化的美國外交、外貿計劃，1884 年的國際子午線會議，僅25 個與美國有邦交國家參加，就是否把零度經線設定於格林威治的決議亦沒有一致共識，每15 度為一時區的劃分，自然又因為國土邊界問題與政治考量，需要各種折衷調整。(*)
“…I’ve always been fascinated by the imbalance between the physical author of a book, the individual who puts his name onto the cover, and the authentic author who I am not certain is the same person. Take War and Peace, for example. On the cover it says, ‘Leo Tolstoy.’ You open the book on the first page, and somebody starts speaking to you. Is this Tolstoy real? No, it is the one that can be perceived as the narrative voice of Tolstoy. One that is very different from the man called Tolstoy. The stories, it seems to me, are written by a certain place in our interior which is unknown and inaccessible to us. This is the reason why the biography of the writer and his work are never in accordance. A biographical study will never tell you where exactly the work came from.”
You are a human being. The human part of you is a seeker. Seeking eventually leads to frustration, confusion and failure of finding the truth. We reach a point when seeking just stops. It is at this point that we start discovering BEING! It is through the human seeking that we finally find what doesn’t work. Embrace your humanity. Through this allowing and surrender of humanity we find what we have always been…BEING ITSELF!! It is through separation that we find Oneness!
Emotional feeling is Energy-Motion (emotion) brought about by thought. Any thought believed to be real acts on the body as sensation.
（*）這讓我想起最近讀到的一個故事：年邁的Peter Dieter和老婆Erika 回到以前的德國人佔領區Wroław尋找自己的故鄉村落，來到波蘭西南端的Szklarska Poręba 附近的山上，老婆累了留在車上休息，他逕自吃力攀到波蘭與捷克的邊界，終於見到夢迴一生的那幅兒時看到的大片風景，他一隻腳在波蘭另一隻腳在捷克坐了下來，嘴裡含著一塊巧克力不能咽下，就在那裡昏了過去、非常緩慢的要死了，到入黑，兩個捷克邊境巡邏員發現了沒有氣息的他，但想到晚餐時間快到，有那麼多的文件要填報，兩個就把那「屍體」推到波蘭那邊；半小時後，波蘭的邊境巡邏員也發現了他，同樣以為他已死了，就把那「屍體」推到捷克那邊。身體僵直的Peter Dieter，死前的最後記憶就是這樣給兩對士兵，從一方推到另一方，沒完沒了。
見：Olga Tokarczuk. House of Day, House of Night. Trans. Anotonia Lloyd-Jones. Illinois: Northwestern University Press, 2003. p 92-98.
God is in a word. God is in a word. God is in HER. She said, “Her, HER, HER, I am Her, I am Hermione… I am the word AUM.”
“I am the word AUM” frightened her. She tired to forget the word AUM, said “UM, EM, HEM” clearing her throat, wondered if she had offended something, clearing her throat trying to forget the word… I am the word… the word was with God… I am the word… HER.
《聖經》的「作者群」很明顯不只是為了當地、當代人的個別社會情境的溝通。《聖經》的寫作成為了對歷史，對遙遠的未來的一種歷史性介入和重劃：只要一天有人相信、信仰，嘗試理解，以至質疑「In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God….」這一句話，裡面的「上帝」就會一路在人們的信心中存在，或在辯證中成為可能。
I am the word AUM：她連一個「字」都不是、她只是一個啍聲，無以形容，無法區分。
她聽見自己說，「I am the word AUM」，她嘗試忘記但她不能忘記，她害怕，說出真相會冒犯了甚麼（something）。在男人的語言裡，「她」是第三身單數，但她名叫HER，「她的」，那麼一定有屬於她的甚麼、以至她的全部，只是那並不屬於「世界」的部分、不算作「世界」的內部，「世界」沒有涵蓋。一切以外，還有。
_____________________
1. H.D. HERmione. New York: New Directions. 1982. p32
2. 於是我想到Ina Grigorova的一句話：「having the word may have the magical power against the unravelling of the world.」
3. 希伯來原文「מְרַחֶ֖פֶת」一詞，英譯多為「hovering」、「moving 」，並沒有中譯「運行」所隱含的規律或方向性。
4. 這樣我們會比較容易明白，何以《浮士德》的主人公在復活節的早上，概嘆行醫者無能、殺人比戰禍更多，才又一個人回到書房裡，一輪斟酌苦思，把《約翰福音》首句翻譯做「Im Anfang war die Tat 」，「 die Tat」，即行動 （Deed / Act），也就是意志的體現；現代神學家／哲學家Gordon Clark （1902-1985） 更直接把它譯作「邏輯」：「In the beginning was the Logic, and the Logic was with God and the Logic was God. 」；天主教教宗本篤十六世亦曾強調，基督信仰（Christianity ）始終應被理解為邏各斯的宗教（Religion of Logos）（01/04/2005, Lecture at Convent of Saint Scholastica in Subiaco, Italy.）見： http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/politics/pg0143.html。
Derrida 甚至認為，猶太人作為一沒有國土之民（People），乃基於對一部經傳的篤信。
Derrida describes an ‘unnatural’ ghostly haunting whereby the dead are taken into us, but they are not internalized as they would be under more ‘normal’ circumstances (a psychoanalytic view of mourning) – he labels this as ‘terrifying.’
Derrida recounts his 1982 arrest in Czechoslavakia on trumped-up drug charges …
see also this clip in which Derrida plays ‘himself’ in the film and comments upon ghosts as they pertain to cinema and representation itself; the late Pascale Ogier (1958-1984) plays ‘Pascale’ who is questioning Derrida.
