New but Familiar (2)

Few months passed by after I wrote New but Familiar (1). I was frightened by changing. When I tried to read my past writings, I realised how much words I have written about the fear of changing. Then, a question came in. What is “New” and “Familiar” to me? Why was I thinking about them as a changing? Familiar can be something well known from long or close. It can be described as diamond or mineral. First, it was the minuscule amount of fragment which is “new”. After, it piled up until hardening enough to become one large piece. This is how I imagine about Familiarity/Wontedness. It should be new at the first time. There is no, I believe, such a thing that already used to seeing or acting without the experience.

However, when we witnessed and recognised something as “Familiar”, it is already passed that moment of the present. Is it past then? The moment I experienced is not present, but it can be called present, just altered as hardened diamond. The Familiarity or experience are already absorbed to the Present. For example, if I used to drink coffee every morning. The morning coffee is familiar to me. This accustomedness is the feeling that I can feel now. Only I can be sure about nowness, not the bygones because I believe, time — especially that now experiencing time is the only moment that I can say about existing.

Once, I said, “I think therefore I am”. To be sure, I want to fix it precisely. “I am thinking therefore I am”. I think only one thing in the world I can say confidently is one fact that “I am thinking”. Accustomedness is only the fact from the moment of the present but emerged just now which I believe that it might affect from my memories.

Back to the “coffee”, I know I have been drinking coffee almost every day, so I feel comfortable with morning coffee. However, this feeling is newly fabricated just “now” because all the past/memories only exist now, it cannot be in the past as a new memory. If it can exist, it cannot be me, memory itself separate from me and become “I am”. Moreover, if it exists itself as a new memory in the past, then I cannot attest it is there. If my thinking is correct, which accustomedness is newness and there is only one dot/now, what is accustomedness exactly? I described as diamond or mineral which I only witness the existence as a diamond. Nevertheless, I cannot observe the past. I do not deny scientific truth or fact. The starter of the diamond exist but as a now, as emerged into the present. It is here together. My standpoint can be controversial and ambiguous.

My standpoint can be controversial and ambiguous. But now, it is clearer that I was frightened changing was actually was not changing but disconnection of the Logos. I was, and I am splitting myself into two or more. I said present me and past me, but it is also present me. They are here, but I forced to separate each other. I thought I know what happened in the past which exist in the present. But both are present. Both are one. The past, present and future are Trinity – except I don’t believe future exist itself because it is just probability from the present, so it is also following present but not hoarding.

Now, it is time to – I know, it is a contradictory word – talk about Newness/changing.

To be continue