Moonbeam: The path that leads into being ends when 'I am" Being is being, everything without division A path cannot be the source of being, and hence cannot "lead into being." Were that the case, a path would be a method of reproduction, or at the minimal, production. Rather, the existence of a path is inconsequential if no rational beings are able to seek self-actualization upon the path. This is the path of surrender that leads to being, not being itself More so the path that leads to a new state of being, for one cannot begin upon a path without being in some form. Rational agents must be in act in order to follow upon a path. To fall in love with the path is not to arrive It is to at least arrive to the start of the path. Whether or not one begins upon the path is a seperate choice. It is discontent that surrender conquers Surrender does conquer discontentment, but at cost. For other emotions are at play with any act of surrender. One may become nonchalant, caloused, or fall victim to an unhealthy low self-esteem. There is no goal, no orientation and no bath. There is only being These things are displayed as attributes of being. They are present only as contingent qualities of being, and not as predisposed actualities. For of what importance is a goal once completed? It is but a moment in the past, a milestone, a place where one says, "There I was," yet the path continues on. (Yes, except when the goal has turned to being) The path may not turn to being, although it might provoke questions that challenge the core of being. For if the purpose of the path is to establish being in act from potential contingent causes, it fails as the path, because the path is determined with not just the presence of being, but the development thereof. Being is filled with being and nothing else but being. Being is the end of time What is the path that leads to where you have always been? Being is filled with essence. For it is one thing to say that a thing exists, it is quite another to say that it exists as something , as if, by a priori knowledge, one might establish that there is more than one kind of being, say contingent versus necessary. As far as "Being" being the end of time, the statement requires the generation of an establishment of time, which is nothing more than an observation of the potential contingencies assigned to "Being" in act. For being is not the end of time, per se. Rather, the presence of being itself establishes cognizance of a sequence of activities, a chronological set of events, as it were, that defines "time." Furthermore, it is true that perhaps the path leads one to where he was before. But this should not be perceived as a disappointment, for what is a racetrack except a path that ends where it starts? Ultimately, it is not as much the path itself which defines being, or the individual path, but rather, it is the method in which rational agents develop along the path that defines how their being, both collectively and individually, is shaped. So in essence, it's a path circumscribed inside the path, which might be misconstrued as an integral part of the path, but rather is individually developed by each rational agent along the path as his own personal "path toward the path." These individual branches might take one or many forms, and perhaps in summation accounts for more significance than the path itself.