Living the moment between two times.

Living the Moment Between Two TimES

On presence, division, and what cannot be reassembled

Time is a measure of change. No change, no time.

When nothing significantly changes, time feels frozen. The seasons advance and the clock marks hours, but the meaningful change — the resolution to a new state of being — does not arrive. Subjectively, we remain stuck in the exact same moment we inhabited weeks, sometimes months or years ago.

This is not paralysis. This is not stagnation. This is the specific condition of the middle place — the moment between two times, between what ended and what has not yet begun.

There is a discovery you can make jogging up a hill.

When you keep your eyes on the destination — the crest, the flat ground where the effort will finally end — the legs become heavy. The body rebels. Not because the incline has grown steeper, but because attention has contracted. You are no longer present to the climb. You are present only to the gap between where you are and where you need to be. That distance is what exhausts.

Change something. Stop looking at the top. Concentrate entirely on the feet. On each individual step. On the specific texture of the pavement directly beneath you.

Something shifts. The legs feel lighter. The world becomes visible again — the trees, the light, the cold air in the lungs. The hill does not become shorter, but time becomes real again because it is no longer being measured against a distant point. It is being lived.

The moment you look back up toward the summit, the desperation returns. The present collapses back into the weight of the distance.

This is the exact geometry of the middle place, the moment between two times. Not geometry as measurement — the distance between two points, the height of a hill and our point in the side of it. Geometry as the invisible structure that tells us where we are and where we want to be, that distance is what holds things together even when they appear broken. The order you cannot see yet, but that is already operating beneath life.

The rational mind knows — statistically, reasonably — that eventually something will resolve. But just like seeing the top of the hill, that visibility produces desperation. The constant measurement of the gap between current displacement and future stability is what exhausts.

The teaching of the hill is simple: stop looking at the destination. Not because it doesn't matter, but because the destination is not where the moment occurs.

The hermetic tradition has a name for this specific suspension: Citrinitas — the yellowing, the philosophical dawn. Not yet the sunrise of a new life, but the dark night has ended and the light is beginning to change. The tradition says something precise: 

 The previous structure must be completely broken apart before the elements can recombine in a different way. 

The dissolution is not a failure of healing. It is the condition required for what comes next to be genuinely new, because the broken material cannot return to what it was. What emerges from the middle place is not a restoration. It is a recombination. Something that could not have existed before the fall. This changes the relationship to the waiting.

If you are waiting for restoration, every day in the middle place feels like failure. But if you understand that what is being built cannot be recognized yet, the middle place becomes purposeful. You are not behind. You are in the exact stage the work requires.

It is not possible to fully know what a fall means while you are inside it. The significance of what is being assembled only becomes visible later, from a distance that does not yet exist. That movement without certainty is not waiting. It is the work itself.

The key is to concentrate on the work, not the final result. And to do it without resentment toward life or the people who may have contributed to the fall. This is perhaps the hardest part: the separation of the wound from the source that produced it.

When you stop measuring time by the destination, the clock starts moving again. A life being lived — even in pieces, even in suspension — is real.

That step is the only presence required.

If this text resonated with you, leave a like.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"The Woman" Does Not Exist

Image
  The Woman Does Not Exist: Lacan, Gender, and the Fantasy of Identity In the previous post, we explored Jacques Lacan’s provocative statement: “There is no such thing as a sexual relationship.” We clarified that this doesn’t mean there’s no sexm but that sex, in Lacan’s view, doesn’t guarantee mutual understanding or symbolic unity between partners. Instead, it often reveals a fundamental gap between subjects. In this post, we’ll explore another equally disruptive idea in Lacanian psychoanalysis: “The Woman does not exist.” Let’s be clear: Lacan is not denying the existence of real women. He is not saying women as people don’t exist. Rather, he’s questioning the existence of The Woman   (with a capital W) as a stable, universal essence or truth about what it means to be a woman. What Does It Mean to Say "The Woman Does Not Exist"? Lacan’s phrase "La femme n'existe pas" challenges the notion of a singular, coherent idea of womanhood. In psychoanalytic terms, ...
Read more

The Cat F. and her object of desire

Image
There is a toy the cat I live with, F., loves. A small, insignificant object by itself—a hair band—but for her, it is everything. She plays with it, run with it, and then—loses it. Again and again, it disappears under the sofa. At first, I thought it was mere accident, an unfortunate consequence of her wild enthusiasm. I would retrieve it (with difficulty, moving the whole big and heavy sofa), place it back in front of her, and she would resume the game. Then I noticed something strange: F. was not merely losing the toy—she was hiding it, pushing it carefully under the sofa and then wait. Not searching for it, not retrieving it herself, but waiting for it to come out, like a mouse. This is the game. Not the toy, not the having of it, but the not having it—the game of waiting. Lacan taught us that desire is not for the object itself, but for the dream of having it, and the wonderful things that it will make us feel. The objet petit a , that little elusive remainder, is not what we want...
Read more

Unmasking Evil: The Truth Behind Our Darkest Desires

Image
Evil, as an action, could be a thought, but that is usually forgotten, a damned intranscendent mental Sin. In general, evil is only evil when it becomes action and comes out of us as a manifestation of our darkness. But, as an action, it is not inherently evil; rather, it is evil only in relation to other actions or, better yet, perceptions of actions—interpretations. Above all, evil is a function of one's relationship with one's manque, the fundamental lack that structures one's desire. Most of the time, what is evil is not determined by an external reaction, but by the accusation of one's inner Other, nor by the moral codifications that attempt to define it. Rather, evil’s true weight emerges in the subjective coordinates of one's own lack, in how one's act situates itself in relation to this void that constitutes one. In Lacanian psychoanalysis, the subject is always structured around the manque-à-être—the lack of being. It is this absence that fuels desire, ...
Read more