But the earth is round and by definition has no 'sides.'
How many things -- perhaps all things -- are just like that?
Sides create what is in-between.
But in-between doesn't pan out. It is fool's gold, isn't it?
I suppose all this could be serious as a porcupine quill.
On the other hand -- on the other side of the earth -- perhaps it is as jolly and loving as a mother tickling her toddler child.
Bristling with laughter.
At the turn of the 20th century there was an expression to describe a (wo)man who lived directly. I heard my father use it from time to time: "(S)he has no side" or "there is no side to him/her."
I guess the expression is lost, but the capacity remains the same.
The apparent dual nature of the universe requires a point of perception, and a self to claim that perception. Ol'buddha man suggested we lose that. I haven't heard it used in forever, but having a side meant not taking risks, no schemes on the side, a conformist, a careful self. Better than a reckless self, but still a self. Thus spake my self.
ReplyDelete