Does time precede being? Kant didn’t think so. But if time was made before space or being, God ought to be present. But it could never be evidenced.

Time, space, being, change, if all those things was made simultaneously, all things’ birth was accidental, these things are miravle. By the way, another all those things would be possible, wouldn’t they?

If other all things with time, space, being, change is present, our own universe might have been just accidental. Charactaristic matters as being individual is either.

I would never look for myself. Rather I want to make myself assimilated to the air, or all beings. Society is just illusion. I just survive only for meeting nothing.

Culture is habit. It means justification to inertia. It means also persistence to biased memory and reminiscence as just our fact in everyday life. We should destruct cultural consereve character.

Culture is never what we should obey, it means creating matter for us.

Memory must be present only for forgetting it.

Don’t cling on to your memory, it must only be an illusion.

Being alive in surviving the world means forgetting.

In our disposition that we could never see the world as the beauty, there’s truly our spiritual danger. Coz beauty is nothing but a momental death in lifetime. The spirit which adores death must promote the human-beings have so funnily excentric and erratice action, and we are apt to regard it as so valuable.

Action is never so praisable matter but if we express it with words, it must sound so beautifully. At the matter of fact, at this fact, truly dangerous spirit disposition, already prepared for us.

At music, rhytum is never so sinful. But melody is more sinful than it for its trait to pull our memory.

Touched feeling must discriminate the ones who cannot be so touched, it must make us memorize the evaluated cognition so persistently. If it turns out to be habit, it must work as an authority.
Because rhythm is just physiolosic, but melody is semantical and taste to get us into evaluated paradigm.

History is made of arbitrary impression afterward.
Aethetic historical vision itself must rule the future, if its matter was debated along the cultural aspect, and it could be so dangerous symptom. Literture must have that kind of it, the most. Eventually literature relies only on whether any reader can be sympathized to the author’s touched emotion to discover the truth between the past and the present in action seen so analogous or not.

(Ogirinally, upped at another blog Nameless-valueの考えてみたいこと　in Japanese, transpated it into English, at Feb. 12th. 2019) from the article self-choice to twitters in Twitter (3). (upped at Dec. 29th. 2009)