On the worth of human beings...

[R. Steven Coyle]

Miffy,

Hello. If I could speak for everyone, I'd say that we'd all enjoy it if you rested here awhile. A doctor-in-training must be willing to brush aside some.

The Philosophy of Laughter and Tears:

They say laughter is the best medicine. But, why? What are we laughing at exactly? In any circumstance, isn't it our own folly? We often lose a sense of our self in our own laughter: If we could learn from our laugh, then haven't we discovered something wonderful? Haven't we discovered a hidden elixer that only improves with use? And what about our tears? Surely, they have something to say, don't they? They may well up, balancing the sun and the moon, and the tide of our mind. Or they might pour, like the seasonal storm. But, which season is it? A summer rain surely needs no remedy. Or does it? What about a spring shower? That seems like too much of something. In winter we can see our own beauty more clearly with the gathering of snow. But with too much snow, it soon becomes difficult to rest easy. We build fires and pile on clothes to warm our spirits - soon enough, the snow melts.

[edit: underlying things]

[sschaula]

Sapius wrote,

Perhaps not, but I wonder... why do you ask?
Would that be worth something?
Or is that a worthless argument?

I don't think so, and hope that you don't too.

I’m not in the position to explain things academically; you already have quite a few views in that regard. So the above is how I see it, that is, if thinking is worth any thing at all to begin with, and then all that it entails. If not, then you could always ask Dan to delete this thread. Not in my opinion though.

I asked because you were placing value on thinking over not thinking, and it didn't seem correct to me. A good thinker sees through his own thought. This is a quote found in David Quinn's Wisdom of the Infinite:

Many people are afraid to empty their minds lest they plunge into the Void. They do not know that their own mind is the Void.

- Huang Po

How could a person value what is empty in nature? Valuing the mind is just like valuing anything else...of course with the help of the mind we figure out the truth, but when it's fully figured out, what use is there for the mind?

Thinking is only worth something to someone who can't think clearly enough.

[Nick]

What is higher or lower consciousness? Isn't there only one kind...one which is aware of something?

So animals aren't worth anything...I'm sure you'd disagree the second I took you to a nice steakhouse and showed you the menu, telling you to pay for my dinner. Who makes the categories? You? Humans run from tigers...and gazelles run from cheetahs in the same way. Beavers build dams, and humans build office buildings. What makes humans better? Animals don't have consciousness? How does anyone know this? Have they gone inside of the mind of an animal to see what it's like for them to exist?

Can you honestly say that you believe all humans are equally conscious? Can you honestly say that you suspect animals might be as conscious, if not more so than humans? If you believe that, then it is easy to see that you are not as conscious as I.

By saying our worth would be equal to that of animals I meant spiritual worth. I thought that was obvious since the topic never mentioned anything about how appetizing animals may be or their nutritional worth.

[Carrotblog]

Hello Mr Drowden,

It's a pleasure to discover that you too have a sense of humour.

Miffy, having qouth Zagreus with wanton heart, but with innocent need of knowledge hitherto unrevealed, spoketh:

Quote:
Dear Zag,


Such intimacy pains me more than you could know , for 'tis I - "TIS I!!- that dubbed him "Zag"......I must declare my unashamed love for the abbreviated name!.

Is it possible then....that you too have feelings for Zag? This is most impressive. I shall hop back to a burrow's throw for how can I compare with the love of one man from one to another? Perhaps this expression of unashamed love brings us closer to answering questions on the nature of love. Or "lots of love" ;)

Oh, my lady, um, Bunny, are we not all on a journey? But pray I confess lifeless platitiude doth taste sweeter from the soft voice of the carrier of myxomatosis.......

Alas, sadly not. Not everyone is on a journey. And on this forum, many suffer from the symptoms of myxomatosis: swellings in their heads; swelling in their genitals, swellings all over. Swelling large, yet empty all the same. And paradox! As a rabbit, I am freed from such symptoms, escaping from comfort on this my journey. Destined by the Furies to mix with those with foot-in-mouth disease. Others - some escape from their own inner journeys through geographical ones. No journey to speak of; no uncertainty beyond the sphere of belonging. This is safety and one's own comfort zone. I too once found home in a forum - and stayed. My journey aborted, a death each day as I rested longer within, until my face too had become a mask. And on this forum, there are plenty of those around, pretending to be people. Worse yet - pretending to be human.

Pray tell how you can even stoop to call dear Zag 'an ugly f__ker'! The superficial beauty of this physical world I will have none of; I am in search, on a journey beyond the transience of powder puff and Chanel no.5.

Socrates, my most esteemed model was the ugliest of all: wretched and contorted through obesity, Hugh Hefner would have struggled to recruit any bunny to appease the monstrosity he embodied. Yet wait! On my journey, I have learnt to see beyond what is ugly on the surface, and love the surface with joy. The ugly exterior of Socrates does not deter me from learning. It hides not the beautiful essence of a man whose openness challenges a forum replete with middle-aged wankers, haughtily sneering in narcissistic arrogance at all that is beneath them. And I am a lowly rabbit - the milk of human kindness flows where poesie's "strife" does not. Socrates, the most ugly of all the philosophers, expresses the most pure of heart and he is my spiritual kin, though I share not his looks (fluffy ears were not in fashion in academic Greece).


The ugly man on the surface may still possess an unrequited inner beauty. When man can meet with others in kindness, his reason is all the more beautiful. Therefore let Zag be five times uglier than he is, and he shall be more beautiful still!

Oh, dear lady, dear rabbit, dearest bunny, dearest, dearest miffy muffy etc......'tis the shadow of the one for whom you have yet to take out a restraining order....

And is this possible? The physician cannot heal the malady of the soul. And please....none of this ingratiating nonsense. Muffy is my sister; I am Miffy. Call me Miffy - I boast that I have no need for title nor for grandiosity.

Ahhh, quoth thou the innocence of the experiential, such that it is, and is not. It dreams of its own wisdom, but cannot wake from that which is only a dream. A pleasant, enchanting, imaginative dream that is only wakefully dreamt by the wise who dream with lucidity...

Dear brother, please refrain from being an asshole. The wise who dream with lucidity also see with lucidity. Lucidity is a property of wisdom, not of dreaming. In dream, the dream of wisdom still cannot be awoken from reality, as reality is concrete experience and in dreams and waking, one finds subjectivity lapsing into its own, void of shared experience. What is pleasant and enchanting in the dreams, that is only wakefully dreamt, is....is a wet dream. I, rabbit , a mere creature, shudder - no - reverberate in terror at the thought....

My shadow never leaves, yet always follows. And when it leads I turn as if the natural wont of my nature is to tread on that sycophantic prick! But......

Perhaps some take the path more sycophantic.. and others take to the path filled with the latter...

My shadow never leaves me; he is my closest friend, he follows without doubt or judgment or question or envy or haste or sloth or anything that gives me a reason to fuckin' hate his guts!!

But.....

Where was I?

If the opinion of the self and its shadow never part company, how are you to know?

Perhaps a journey is indeed called for.

Lots of love (and furry rabbit hugs)

xoxoxoxoxo

Miffy

http://carrotblog.livejournal.com

[Carrotblog]

I am on a wandering. When very young I thought I had a home from which to journey, but later saw I hadn't even a landscape!
How I loved them still, these things that were their own against my holding them, how I resolved to...pursue them!
Faint at last, I sought myself. Led on by thought of the purpose of consciousness, of what it must culminate in, a chiasmus, then only an imagining, my secret desire, I, a March hare, discovered it, and have been lost ever since, which is not to say mad, but wandering, wondering how to find it again without going mad...

Hi Zag,

Did your shadow run away from home before you left home? Control is letting go and in the holding, I too have wandered from home, holding onto the memory of the material comfort of abundant carrots. Starved on a diet of scholastic philosophy laced with slices of European existentialism, the crisis of modern thought was toasted at graduation and I came into my own landscape. All alone. My refuge and haven when syntax and semantics turn back on itself. Years of incarceration with Foucault's tomes tires my mind to the Freudian love, repressed within madness when nothing is more human than its expression.

"The frightening thing is not living.
The frightening thing is not dying." - T Bone Burnett

http://members.tripod.com/~tbonepage/

Lots of love

xoxoxoxo
Miffy

http://carrotblog.livejournal.com

[Carrotblog]

Hello. If I could speak for everyone, I'd say that we'd all enjoy it if you rested here awhile. A doctor-in-training must be willing to brush aside some.

The Philosophy of Laughter and Tears:

They say laughter is the best medicine. But, why? What are we laughing at exactly? In any circumstance, isn't it our own folly? We often lose a sense of our self in our own laughter: If we could learn from our laugh, then haven't we discovered something wonderful? Haven't we discovered a hidden elixer that only improves with use? And what about our tears? Surely, they have something to say, don't they? They may well up, balancing the sun and the moon, and the tide of our mind. Or they might pour, like the seasonal storm. But, which season is it? A summer rain surely needs no remedy. Or does it? What about a spring shower? That seems like too much of something. In winter we can see our own beauty more clearly with the gathering of snow. But with too much snow, it soon becomes difficult to rest easy. We build fires and pile on clothes to warm our spirits - soon enough, the snow melts.

Hello Steven,

Thank you for your kind words.

Your thoughts are beautiful - I understand these through two texts which inform me on the philosophy of laughter:

Soren Kierkegaard: The Concept of Irony with continual reference to Socrates:
Henri Bergson: The philosophy of laughter (The meaning of the comic):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Con ... o_Socrates
http://www.authorama.com/laughter-14.html

xoxoxoxo

Miffy

http://carrotblog.livejournal.com

[R. Steven Coyle]

Hey Miffy,

Thank you.

After reading "The Meaning of The Comic," I have to admit that I am grateful for my Zen practice.

What are your thoughts on eastern philosophy?

[sschaula]

Nick,

Can you honestly say that you believe all humans are equally conscious?

By conscious, I guess you mean...of true things. By conscious, that means less stupid. Like how people casually avoid the fact of death everyday, and when it confronts them they're shocked...that's pretty unconscious.

But what consciousness is, is the same for everyone. It is that which sees...not the capability of logical thinking. That's wisdom. No one is without consciousness (that which sees), unless perhaps they don't have a brain. I heard of a baby a couple of days ago that was born without a brain...I wondered what it was like to be that child.

Perhaps because he has a spinal cord, he has consciousness? You know, thoughts aren't entirely contained in the brain.

Can you honestly say that you suspect animals might be as conscious, if not more so than humans?

Anything that fears death is conscious...fish fight the line, deer run off, birds fly anywhich way they can. Do you really think it'd be possible for a lifeform to run from death, if they didn't have consciousness? Do you think it's just reflexes?

I am not that stupid that I'd assume such a thing.

If you believe that, then it is easy to see that you are not as conscious as I.

Haha, yes, Nick...you seem so very conscious.

By saying our worth would be equal to that of animals I meant spiritual worth. I thought that was obvious since the topic never mentioned anything about how appetizing animals may be or their nutritional worth.

It was a joke.

[suergaz]

Miffy:

Did your shadow run away from home before you left home? Control is letting go and in the holding, I too have wandered from home, holding onto the memory of the material comfort of abundant carrots. Starved on a diet of scholastic philosophy laced with slices of European existentialism, the crisis of modern thought was toasted at graduation and I came into my own landscape. All alone. My refuge and haven when syntax and semantics turn back on itself. Years of incarceration with Foucault's tomes tires my mind to the Freudian love, repressed within madness when nothing is more human than its expression.

"The frightening thing is not living.
The frightening thing is not dying." - T Bone Burnett

Is ones shadow then the frightening thing? I have never graduated in anything save myself. I ditched school for art school, which I ditched on the first day, for art, which I ditched because I never could. Leaping ditches or hedgerows can leave you fallen, or quite caught up, but leaping nonetheless in having leapt. To demarcate ones present is impossible, and so one goes to the future, to be brought up by my past leaves me beside myself with mirth :D

[Sapius]

Scott,

Many people are afraid to empty their minds lest they plunge into the Void. They do not know that their own mind is the Void.

- Huang Po

If I met the gentleman I would ask, how is it possible to empty the mind to begin with, what is a “Mind” if not consciousness itself, so how does one empty ones own consciousness? Absurd. I cannot fear anything unless I assume it first, just as people assume Death to be an end to ones self, which is a fact from the causal pint of view, but not form the causality point of view, and once that is conceptually realized from the causality point of view, there remains no fear of Death, or fear of “Void” as such, since both are necessarily assumptions.

However, to me it is perfectly clear, that “Mind itself is a “void”,” in the sense that he is pointing to the casual nature of it, and any or all things that seem to exist, actually hold no real essence. Which he wants to express in the word “void”, which he does not actually mean as literally being EMPTY.

The things in them selves that come and go are not as permanent as their coming and going. Hence the Reality that IS, lies in the –ing-ness, which remains permanently, and that –ing-ging is not of any particular thing but Totality, and is a permanent property of Totality, and Totality not being a Thing in any sense, that is not an ing-ging-ness of it, but it is IT itself, as in simply IS.

With this understanding under it’s armpit, consciousness, a permanent sleve to duality, gives it a sense of thing-ness because we cannot understand anything unless it is a “thing” due to our consciousness that is necessarily based in, and is so, because of duality, hence one gives it a name to communicate with another, say Void, Emptiness, Toa, Infinity, Universal Consciousness, the thought that emerges from his own “logically” preconceived values and judgments. Trying to describe a thing-ness of that which actually is not a Thing in the first place. And then reluctantly tries to argue or explain from his own conscious point of view, that “that is not what I actually mean, void does not Empty” “Emptiness does not mean Empty” “Tao can be felt, but not see for it is not a Thing” “Infinity is Infinity, all that one has to do is think it so, for that is what I see IT IS, but that does not necessarily make it an IT”, and the best of all, “ I realize that there is consciousness in every thing, hence there must be a mother of all consciousness behind it, or its actually only that that is at work, hence takes birth a Universal Consciousness, inferring some sort of thing-ness to Totality, which of course…. Is not what he actually means. Throwing away all that is actually also Reality at work, calling it literally an ILLUSION, and hence worthless once Reality is realized, not realizing that he cannot even maintain the thought of Reality itself, without the so called “illusions” holding them up.

This is of course, not for every body to understand or accept, since this may come from an un-clear thinking, I really wouldn't know.

.........

How could a person value what is empty in nature?

You are taking a literal meaning of Empty. Emptiness of things does not mean Empty as in nothing whatsoever. Are you saying that a Mind is nothing whatsoever? Since it is really a "viod" in some other sense?

Valuing the mind is just like valuing anything else...

You cannot help that. Ultimately you are a slave to A=A, albeit human consciousness has more freedom in the sense like a dog who has the freedom to move around on it’s own (conceptualization, choice to say NO, in humans), but as much as the length of his leash allows him, which is ultimately held by Causality, and is nothing else other than that when seen in some dogs that refuse to go out in the rain, whereas others enjoy a swim, depending on their own casual nature created by causality in their particular thing-ness.

(I went a bit astray, but that happens since all is so so connected)

However… the moment a differentiation is made, say for example an amoeba, senses any thing at all, and reacts accordingly, a value judgment has been made. And that is what consciousness is all about. Reactions through sensations, If no reactions, there is no consciousness, no value judgment made.

So, are you saying that I dump my consciousness, as in sitting under a tree and chanting that I should not react, I should not react, or thinking is worthless, thinking is worthless, wherein I’m being blind in not seeing that I am doing exactly just that, reacting to some preconceived value that valuing is worthless?

Have you ever tried meditating? I mean really hard, to all your limits, say just for 5 days at a stretch, without any food or water so that it may not disturb your concentration?

Pye: It appears that 'worth' in itself [i.e. valuing] is a function of consciousness itself. Quite literally, "worth" would be out of the picture altogether without some level of consciousness to identify it as such.

So, we're stuck worthing things (valuing them or not), including ourselves.

In a way this should have been more than enough to point you in the right direction, but I don’t think you have paid much attention to it.

Scott: of course with the help of the mind we figure out the truth, but when it's fully figured out, what use is there for the mind?

You can’t throw out the mind my friend, nor it’s natural distinctive powers that react as a value judgment, try emptying your mind with the mother of all meditations you want, and then let me know where you stand.

Thinking is only worth something to someone who can't think clearly enough.

Only clear thinkers see the real worth of thinking to begin with, others simply think they think, ergo they are. (No offence to the person who said that, Descartes I think. because he didn't actually mean what others take that to be, superficially.)

[sschaula]

Sapius,

Thinking is a fluctuation. It is a form. It is empty, in that it doesn't have a concrete existence. It is causal. It's a mirage.

I think it's good to think if you value the truth. Thinking is the only way you can learn and know the truth...it's reflection on things you've found. A way to progress towards enlightenment. It's good to reflect on how things are true...but if you think clearly enough about the true nature of thinking, you see that it's unreal.

False thinking is the primary cause of the imperfection of philosophers. False thinking is when your ego is in there...when "you" are thinking. Even if "you know the truth" beyond a shadow of a doubt, it's still delusion because it's built upon falsehood. You are the falsehood.

So when thinking is stripped bare, and pure logic is applied to every part of the thinking process, perhaps then enlightenment can be attained.

Does this stuff make sense to you?

BTW, I haven't meditated for 5 days with fasting or anything like that. I like to be down to earth. I don't think "divine intoxication" is a good way to go about finding the truth. Finding the truth requires clear thinking. I do practice yoga and meditate, though, for short periods everyday. I think it helps.

[Nick]

Anything that fears death is conscious...fish fight the line, deer run off, birds fly anywhich way they can. Do you really think it'd be possible for a lifeform to run from death, if they didn't have consciousness? Do you think it's just reflexes?

I am not that stupid that I'd assume such a thing.

I didn't say animals are completely unconscious. The differenece is a matter of primitive and cognitive consciousness. A very big difference at that.

Haha, yes, Nick...you seem so very conscious.

As conscious as a conscious does, hyuck hyuck...

[Sapius]

Scott,

Sapius,

Thinking is a fluctuation. It is a form. It is empty, in that it doesn't have a concrete existence. It is causal. It's a mirage.

I think it's good to think if you value the truth.

OK, if you say so, I will listen to a non-concretely existing fluctuation of a mirage.

Thinking is the only way you can learn and know the truth...it's reflection on things you've found. A way to progress towards enlightenment.

Does this stuff make sense to you?

Does it have to, Scott? To me that is. And even if it did, how would that help you? Are you looking for confirmation whether your thinking is clear enough? I sincerely hope not, since actually you are all alone when it comes to cognition, I cannot get into your head neither can you get into mine, each mind is a world in its self, and YET, however illusory that All IS, All is not an Illusion (with a capitol I). Unless a mind cannot clearly realize that, at once, it shall always remain lost in contradictions, chasing some sort of objective enlightenment.

I say forget that word and focus on Knowing Truth, That's all.

[Carrotblog]

Hey Miffy,

Thank you.

After reading "The Meaning of The Comic," I have to admit that I am grateful for my Zen practice.

What are your thoughts on eastern philosophy?

Hello Steve,

I love Bergson, and perhaps that was my first introduction to the possibility of mysticism within the western empirical tradition. Continental philosophy took a marked turn with Bergson, and Brunschwig in the late 20th century, and then seemed to descend split-part into phenomenology and existentialism.

This is my main reason for exploring eastern philosophy, although perhaps we can leave the Kama Sutra for the Sapius to practice on himself. Mr Drowden may also be instructed in the Eastern philosophical slant of "what is love?" Oh - here's a link:

http://users.forthnet.gr/ath/nektar/kma/main.htm

;)

I do revel in the way eastern philosophy has grown organically within the holistic tradition; western philosophy, if I can be so crude to paint such a broad brushstroke, has swung hysterically from pendulum extremes to another, generally overshooting the moderated 'truth' which is intuited in eastern philosophy. Fascinating too that late 19th century, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and other existentialists turn towards mystical thought when reason no longer can access truth.

The western problem is a denouncement of everything mystical [noumenal] and interior, and an acceptance of only rational phenomena or observable sense-data [phenomenological]. Black and white thinking, all or nothing dichotomy. Straight back to to Mr Rene Descartes.

Yet the worse problem is neither the eastern one, in which truth is non-verifiable, nor the western one in which truth is dichotomised, and mysticism completely lobotomised from reason. It is the masses of agnostics (literally, ignorant) scholars, lobotomised or otherwise, who proclaim they have access to truth using their own "genius" or personal methods. None of which are verifiable, nor sensible to anyone but the most meretricious and impressionable. Thinking of various swamis, cult leaders, and the Moon cult, there are greater numbers of vulnerable people, impressionable and desperately in need of a spiritual centre, turning to the most ludicrous philosophies of life to fill their own (existential) emptiness.

That's the saddest part. Not the question of western vs eastern philosophy for me. Those in need, are the ones who are more likely to settle for a lemon philosophy, lacking the critical thinking capacity to seperate good philosophy from bad, and non-philosophy (i.e. superstition) from what is contrasense - against common sense. In that instance, mysticism or rationalism in its distortions might even be preferable to ignorance and ignorance's acceptance of truth as valid when it is not.


Lots of love.

xoxoxoxo

Miffy

http://carrotblog.livejournal.com

[Carrotblog]

Is ones shadow then the frightening thing? I have never graduated in anything save myself. I ditched school for art school, which I ditched on the first day, for art, which I ditched because I never could. Leaping ditches or hedgerows can leave you fallen, or quite caught up, but leaping nonetheless in having leapt. To demarcate ones present is impossible, and so one goes to the future, to be brought up by my past leaves me beside myself with mirth :D

Dear Zag,

You are an artist! I paint with my lips with words which takes my mind by surprise. A photographer accompanies me to bring me more appeal than my lattice of words would hold me, weaving through each gap, rendering sense out of nonsense. And rendering me cute and bunny like, although melancholic and laden with tristesse on dour moments like these.

You have taken leave from hedges and hurdles and I wonder how it must be, to ponder: what if......? what if I picked myself up after a fall?

If the frightening thing is not living; and the frightening thing is not dying, what is it?

Is it not the fear of living in the shadow of life itself? Knowing that one cannot cease to be: death, which brings an end to everything (eventually) is not frightening: we all know we will die. Yet to fail to live inner life by falling into its shadow.....

xoxoxoxo

Miffy

http://carrotblog.livejournal.com

[R. Steven Coyle]

Miffy,

Fascinating too that late 19th century, Schopenhauer, Nietzsche and other existentialists turn towards mystical thought when reason no longer can access truth.

I'd argue that continued reasoning inevitably leads one to a mystical understanding. The threshold being the level of objectivity introverted into a subjective frame of reference. Until the line between the two disappears.

The western problem is a denouncement of everything mystical [noumenal] and interior, and an acceptance of only rational phenomena or observable sense-data [phenomenological]. Black and white thinking, all or nothing dichotomy. Straight back to to Mr Rene Descartes.

The irony of the situation is that Descartes did get it right. You think, and so you are: Your being [numen, as opposed to the noumena of Kant] is contingent on what thought surrounds, and what your thought surrounds is your being.

Yet the worse problem is neither the eastern one, in which truth is non-verifiable, nor the western one in which truth is dichotomised, and mysticism completely lobotomised from reason.

Truth need not be verifiable, it is always contained within each thought. The unfolding of truth, of beauty, is our own self-reliance.

--

Ever heard of the band "Of Montreal"?

Zag,

Have you?

Both your personalities remind me of their style.

http://www.ofmontreal.net

[sschaula]

Sapius,

OK, if you say so, I will listen to a non-concretely existing fluctuation of a mirage.

Don't be a jackass..the point isn't to believe in what I say. I say the things I do so that they might help you realize the truth. Of course you should think on your own...but pay attention when your logic is shown to be inadequate.

Does it have to, Scott? To me that is. And even if it did, how would that help you? Are you looking for confirmation whether your thinking is clear enough? I sincerely hope not, since actually you are all alone when it comes to cognition, I cannot get into your head neither can you get into mine, each mind is a world in its self, and YET, however illusory that All IS, All is not an Illusion (with a capitol I). Unless a mind cannot clearly realize that, at once, it shall always remain lost in contradictions, chasing some sort of objective enlightenment.

I say forget that word and focus on Knowing Truth, That's all.

Um...apparently it doesn't make sense to you.

[R. Steven Coyle]

[edit]

[suergaz]

Never heard of of montreal, R.




Miffy,

the deepest bliss will rule! Deep sadness never knew.

Are you a speaker? In Life? A writer? A talker? What happens when one doesn't know anymore? Beyond the moment?! Isn't the frightening thing becoming a thinker and grasping the critical? Grasping there is nothing at all but love holding us to life?

Where are my keys?!

:D

[R. Steven Coyle]

Okay (?)

[suergaz]

Hold your horses, I think Miff is coming back to pleasure you

:D

[Carrotblog]

Miffy,

the deepest bliss will rule! Deep sadness never knew.

Are you a speaker? In Life? A writer? A talker? What happens when one doesn't know anymore? Beyond the moment?! Isn't the frightening thing becoming a thinker and grasping the critical? Grasping there is nothing at all but love holding us to life?

Where are my keys?!

Dear Zag,

bliss has been apart from me since departing the womb. Seeking refuge in the ivory towers of the academic life, all I have found there are pink elephants. Yet even pink phantoms can terrify one so small as I.

What am I in life? A speaker? writer? Talker? Perhaps in engaging with my phantoms, I have tried all. Yet doing only undoes being, and reflecting as a rabbit is my distinction in life; the reflection which holds me in life, is the reflection which others fail to penetrate. I am being in effort, not vain. And is reflection synonymous with critical thought?

In university I have waxed and waned with critical thought, yet no matter, critical thought still is the product of the ivory tower with the phantom elephant determining how my life in animal farm was run. Reflection and critical thought orbit within the same hand of reason, yet love which holds your key, is on the same hand as reflection, whereas critical thought is indifferent. Without love, who are you? Who am I? To say nothing of a critical thinker. The erotic is not enough; love transcends the erotic through its capacity for reflection....

[suergaz]

Dear Zag,

bliss has been apart from me since departing the womb. Seeking refuge in the ivory towers of the academic life, all I have found there are pink elephants. Yet even pink phantoms can terrify one so small as I.

What am I in life? A speaker? writer? Talker? Perhaps in engaging with my phantoms, I have tried all. Yet doing only undoes being, and reflecting as a rabbit is my distinction in life; the reflection which holds me in life, is the reflection which others fail to penetrate. I am being in effort, not vain. And is reflection synonymous with critical thought?

In university I have waxed and waned with critical thought, yet no matter, critical thought still is the product of the ivory tower with the phantom elephant determining how my life in animal farm was run. Reflection and critical thought orbit within the same hand of reason, yet love which holds your key, is on the same hand as reflection, whereas critical thought is indifferent. Without love, who are you? Who am I? To say nothing of a critical thinker. The erotic is not enough; love transcends the erotic through its capacity for reflection....

Beautiful Miffy of the impenetrable reflection, love wants eternity, and so it must have our distress, sharp reflection on our failings, peerlessness, even solitude in love! Yes only you can go through your own looking-glass, and it is then when it is most loved by others who still see themselves in it however incompletely. Are we to be afraid of where our courage exceeds the courage of others? Considerate where we could be indiscriminate in love? Do we love imparting our knowledge more than we love it, and if we do, when shall we, humans bunnies and everyone, lay it bare, when will we unveil the erotic as means to finding higher functions of love? Your distinction in life is met for more than its reflectivity little rabbit!

I can see bliss in you!

:D

[sue hindmarsh]

Scott wrote:

Just because the majority of people may choose to do the wrong thing, does this mean that they aren't worth a dime? I guess determining that is all about the things you value. If you value enlightenment, of course people that are unenlightened will seem like pond scum to you. But what does that make you?

Anyone who thinks another person is pond scum, is themselves pond scum. A good person, in my opinion, sees the faults of other people as things to improve upon...he keeps the future in mind. There is a saying somewhere about Michelangelo's sculptures...he said that he sees the finished product in his mind, and just chisels away the excess stuff until it's revealed.

Like Michelangelo, the wise man slowly chips away at his attachments to reveal the eternal that is his true self.

The fact that most people do not do this, doesn’t necessarily make them “pond scum”, it just means they are feeble-minded. That is, they lack the strength of mind to strive toward individuality. Instead, they meld with the mob, and through them, they gain their personality.

Being so feeble-minded, they cannot be expected to understand anything about good and evil. Only those that are highly conscious are fit for such discriminating. The mob, operating with the barest of consciousness, and at the mercy of their emotions, is incapable of discriminating between what is important and what is not. For example: they consider the day’s events, such as: wars, environmental disasters, celebrity weddings, deaths, taxes and other such social gossip, as being worthy of discussion. But as I said, without the strength of mind to be able to focus on one thing, and one thing only, the mob can’t help but find everything distracting.

But; there is some hope for them. They are not total “pond scum”, because there is always a chance that one of them may use that ounce of consciousness they possess to drag themselves away from the mob, and so begin the journey toward becoming an individual.
-
Sue

[sue hindmarsh]

Scott Schaula wrote:

Speaking of goodness...a lot of philosophers want to skip over it to reach an understanding of truth. They scoff at it, thinking they are better than it because they can think. I'm sure a lot of people reading this right now are subconsciously thinking, "Wow this shit is boring...goodness and whatnot, blah blah blah. What a waste of my time! I know the truth...I don't need spiritual principles, and an ethical system." Unenlightened people desperately try to escape it, by whatever means possible. They want to think their way into an everlasting understanding of the truth, without ever changing themselves...they hold fast to their stupid way of life and delude themselves, thinking "I know the truth, therefore I don't need morality".

What “spiritual principles” and “ethical systems” do you recommend? And which philosophers do you consider live according to these principles etc?

All the while, their subconscious mind is avoiding every actual stab the truth makes at their life. They retain their ego, actually boosting it up with thoughts of how great a thinker they are, all the while deluding themselves. The perfectly enlightened person is pure and good, therefore the thinker should also try to make themselves pure and good...otherwise he will never become perfectly enlightened. All the thought in the world isn't worth a dime without this potential.

What is “pure and good”?

As a test of your enlightenment, I challenge everyone at this forum to be perfectly good. What could it hurt? If you already know the truth, that all things are empty, why not let this person be perfectly good in emptiness?

Good? Empty? Could you flesh out what you’re driving at here?
-
Sue