Balance

[Aaron Mathis]

David Quinn says balance is unimportant.

This appears false to me.

My physical human body, like anybody elses, needs balance.

Extreme asceticism, where one only eats one kind of food once a week and sleeps only a few hours a night will seriously derange a person.

Not sleeping for many days, weeks or even months straight will damage the brain.

Reading too much will make one dull.

Lau-tsu says: Over-sharpen the blade and the end will soon be blunt.

Buddha once spoke of the middle way, where you treat your body and mind like a musical instrument, having the strings of mind and body tuned not too tight, not too loose.

Nietzche portrays the superman walking on a tightrope, trying to keep the delicate balance.

Masanobu Fukuoka has something to say on the subject of balance:

In making the transition to this kind of farming, some weeding, composting, or pruning may be necessary at first . . . but these measures should be gradually reduced each year. Ultimately, it is not the growing technique which is the most important factor, but rather the state of mind of the farmer.

For 30 years I lived only for my farming and had little contact with people outside my own community. During those years I was heading in a straight line toward a "donothing" agricultural method.

The usual way to go about developing a method is to ask "flow about trying this?" or "How about trying that?" . . . bringing in a variety of techniques, one upon the other. This is modern agriculture and it only results in making the farmer busier.

My way was opposite. I was aiming at a pleasant, natural way of farming . . . which results in making the work easier instead of harder. "How about not doing this? How about not doing that?"—that was my way of thinking.

By taking this approach, I ultimately reached the conclusion that there was no need to plow, no need to apply fertilizer, no need to make compost, no need to use insecticide! When you get right down to it, there are few agricultural practices that are really necessary.

The reason that man's "improved" techniques seem to be necessary is that the natural balance has been so badly upset beforehand by those same techniques that the land has become dependent on them.

Make your way carefully through these fields. Dragonflies and moths fly up in a flurry. Honeybees buzz from blossom to blossom. Part the leaves and you will see Insects, spiders, frogs, lizards, and many other small animals bustling about in the cool shade. Moles and earthworms burrow beneath the surface.

This is a balanced ricefield ecosystem. Insect and plant communities maintain a stable relationship here. It is not uncommon for a plant disease to sweep through this region and leave the crops in my fields unaffected.

And now look over at the neighbor's field for a moment. The weeds have all been wiped out by herbicides and cultivation. The soil animals and insects have been exterminated by poison. The earth has been burned clean of organic matter and micro-organisms by chemical fertilizers. In the summer you see farmers at work in the fields . . . wearing gas masks and long rubber gloves. These rice fields—which have been farmed continuously for over 1,500 years—have now been laid waste by the exploitive farming practices of a single generation.

For centuries, farmers have assumed that the plow is essential for growing crops. However, non-cultivation is fundamental to natural farming. The earth cultivates itself naturally by means of the penetration of plant roots and the activity of micro-organisms, small animals, and earthworms.

When the soil is cultivated, the natural environment is altered beyond recognition. The repercussions of such acts have caused the farmer nightmares for countless generations.

What do you say about all this Quinn?

What about you Solway?

G-forum crew?

[Elizabeth Isabelle]

It all depends on how the term "balance" is perceived. Quinn pointed out that achieving enlightenment is not possible through what today's concept of balance is. Buddha's middle way does not match what today's concept of balance is. The modern connotations of the term "enlightenment" do not indicate balance in either the modern or the original concept of balance, which, I believe, is why Quinn finds the word to be an effective teaching tool.

I do not like the term "enlightenment" because the term itself has too much baggage. Although there are a few who will be inspired by the word (which is why it is good that someone is willing to hang that albatross around his neck), most will find it both a point of ridicule in someone else and an unattainable state for themselves. Calling one's self enlightened sets one up to be compared to the modern connotations and they myths surrounding the legends. Few people are suited to spend a life teaching by defending their title, and most people can not relate such a teacher to themselves and therefore find the goal achievable.

I believe that to be effective at inspiring more people into a life of wisdom, one should live in such a way that others will say to themselves that they would like to live basically like that person is living. I also belive that by wearing one's imperfections and showing how far one had to climb to get where they are, more people can be inspired by the perception that the goal is achievable.

The goal is the important thing, and there are differences of opinions on whether it is more effective as a teaching tool to call the goal balanced, enlightened, or anything else.

[Aaron Mathis]

It all depends on how the term "balance" is perceived. Quinn pointed out that achieving enlightenment is not possible through what today's concept of balance is. Buddha's middle way does not match what today's concept of balance is.

That doesnt mean 'balance' is unimportant.

And just because people preach deluded notions of enlightenment, you don't hear Quinn saying 'unenlightenment' is unimportant

Balance is a word that points to something important.

Although I agree, people use their pansy notions of balance in order to defend themselves from greater consciousness and responsibility.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Lau-tsu says: Over-sharpen the blade and the end will soon be blunt.

Buddha once spoke of the middle way, where you treat your body and mind like a musical instrument, having the strings of mind and body tuned not too tight, not too loose.

Nietzche portrays the superman walking on a tightrope, trying to keep the delicate balance.

What if these folks all spoke of different things in different contexts? Why would they point to anything similar you have in mind?

Some say that at 9/11, when two planes hit the Two Towers, some manifestation of balance occurred.

But for whom?

[Matt Gregory]

People like the idea of balance because it's so much easier to strive for in comparison to truth.

[Steven Coyle]

Balance is it.

For every cause, an effect.

A form of balance.

For every action, an equal and opposite reaction.

Balance.

Yin and yang.

Balance.

A tasty deli sandwich.

Balance.

[Matt Gregory]

I think it's a good idea to have a balanced perspective on balance because sometimes balance is useful and sometimes balance is not useful.

[ExpectantlyIronic]

Temperance, like all things, should be practiced in moderation. :)

[Katy]

You need to balance times when you need balance and times when you don't. lol


Totally OT, but EI, I love your userpic thing.

[David Quinn]

Aaron Mathis wrote:

David Quinn says balance is unimportant.

As I say, my point was that the word "balance" can mean whatever you want it to mean. Thus, it is not unimportant as such, but rather, just completely useless.

The only people who could possibly find some use for it are those who are averse to extreme forms of behaviour. In this way, "balance" becomes a code word for moderation, mediocrity, conventionality, finding virtue in doing nothing, etc.

Spiritual teaching should be all about pushing and encouraging people into making every effort to become enlightened. The world "balance", on the other hand, implies such striving should come to an end. It implies a holding back, a giving up, a contented settling down into a pleasurable lifestyle. That is why I think it is an evil word and should be banished from the lexicon forthwith.

-

[Aaron Mathis]

David Quinn wrote,

Aaron: David Quinn says balance is unimportant.

David Quinn: As I say, my point was that the word "balance" can mean whatever you want it to mean.

I do get your point. People in my life who preach moderation often tell me that I'm too extreme. Yet these funny people are almost always in need of a diet, or have very superflous addictions, etc.

The only people who could possibly find some use for it are those who are averse to extreme forms of behaviour.

But I'm not against extreme forms of behavior, yet I think that the word balance points to something useful.

In this way, "balance" becomes a code word for moderation, mediocrity, conventionality, finding virtue in doing nothing, etc.

That really is true. Almost everyone I know is that way.

Spiritual teaching should be all about pushing and encouraging people into making every effort to become enlightened.

Ok, so what about guys like Otto Weineinger? Don't you think that he could have benifited from a bit of balance?

The world "balance", on the other hand, implies such striving should come to an end.

Not always. If i'm walking a tight rope, or climbing a moutain, I need to value my balance - yet I am by no means wanting to bring my striving to an end.

But cliches about moderation really are all too common.

Don't get me wrong - - I am extreme. I do know what you mean about how people protect themselves by chanting the senseless mantra of moderation and work/wife balance. But to deviate in an extreme way from humanity, you do need to keep yourself balanced Quinn - I mean, you can't just grow a big beard and live on the dole.

HA! - gotcha Quinn! I'm joking friend. You made it onto my list of heros for doing that.

But hey, when I first came to this forum I heard you giving advice:

You said that posters should not post too much, and should devote themselves to x ammount of thinking per post. You advised against over-posting. Why?

Balance maybe?

[Pye]

.

Interesting range of interpretations and reactions to the word balance on these threads, as varied as the personalities putting them forth. To many, apparently not quixotic enough, as though it is a position of stillness - uncourageous, inactive, passive, perhaps even feminine to those who are inclined to speak and think this way. I'll add to the pile.

Balance = the weighing in of the most possible things at any given point (you).

Further, for the warrior-minded afeared of the smell of mediation to this word, I suggest there is no greater point of tension and no greater feat to maintain than this point where all things weigh-in. It is anything but passive, anything but still. And anything but easy.


.

[David Quinn]

Aaron Mathis wrote:

DQ: Spiritual teaching should be all about pushing and encouraging people into making every effort to become enlightened.

AM: Ok, so what about guys like Otto Weineinger? Don't you think that he could have benifited from a bit of balance?

I agree that he should have slowed down a touch and paced himself better. But why introduce the word "balance" here? It is unnecessary. Why not simply say that he needed to slow down a touch?

DQ: The world "balance", on the other hand, implies such striving should come to an end.

AM: Not always. If i'm walking a tight rope, or climbing a moutain, I need to value my balance - yet I am by no means wanting to bring my striving to an end.

It is appropriate to use the word "balance" in those sorts of circumstances because what is being referred to here is the physical act of balance, which is a physical reality. There is no added reference to any nebulous metaphysical or psychological forms of "balance".

But cliches about moderation really are all too common.

Don't get me wrong - - I am extreme. I do know what you mean about how people protect themselves by chanting the senseless mantra of moderation and work/wife balance. But to deviate in an extreme way from humanity, you do need to keep yourself balanced Quinn - I mean, you can't just grow a big beard and live on the dole.

HA! - gotcha Quinn! I'm joking friend. You made it onto my list of heros for doing that.

What do you do for a living?

But hey, when I first came to this forum I heard you giving advice:

You said that posters should not post too much, and should devote themselves to x ammount of thinking per post. You advised against over-posting. Why?

Balance maybe?

I was simply encouraging people to apply more thought to their posts. It has nothing to do with the concept of balance. I wasn't trying to get people to align themselves with some sort of law of the universe. I was merely trying to get them to think more.

-

[Aaron Mathis]

David Quinn, this is for you.

DQ: Spiritual teaching should be all about pushing and encouraging people into making every effort to become enlightened.

AM: Ok, so what about guys like Otto Weineinger? Don't you think that he could have benefited from a bit of balance?

DQ: I agree that he should have slowed down a touch and paced himself better. But why introduce the word "balance" here? It is unnecessary. Why not simply say that he needed to slow down a touch?

Ok, but it seems like doing that is just being euphemistic about the issue.

For instance, why advice him to ‘pace himself’ or ‘slow down a touch’?

Could it be in order to achieve the following descriptions:

3. mental steadiness or emotional stability; habit of calm behavior, judgment, etc.
4. a state of bodily equilibrium: He lost his balance and fell down the stairs.

The definitions above of course are all for the word balance.
I think that the word balance only becomes useless when the human being is using the idea of balance in order to maintain a self destructive and unintelligent network of relationships, whether those relationships comprise the school system one works for, the company one works for, the friendships one has gradually fallen into, etc.

But first of all, before we go any further, I just want you to know that I realize it’s all relative. What is balance to one person, is disorder to the another.

But the moment you value survival, you value some sort of balance.

Since people have different ideas of survival, then there are different ways of attempting to get balance. Often, the effort to achieve balance, creates imbalance. Marriage is a good example of that. The neurosis of (types) of meditation is another.

Anyhow, if you have no notion of balance, then you have no notion of values, and thus you are a mere nihilist.

DQ: The world "balance", on the other hand, implies such striving should come to an end. AM: Not always. If I'm walking a tight rope, or climbing a moutain, I need to value my balance - yet I am by no means wanting to bring my striving to an end.

DQ: It is appropriate to use the word "balance" in those sorts of circumstances because what is being referred to here is the physical act of balance, which is a physical reality. There is no added reference to any nebulous metaphysical or psychological forms of "balance".

There is no psychological balance? I think the brain, like an eco-system is a very delicate balance (in the case of the brain it is a chemical balance) that can be permanently disrupted by various ‘unbalanced’ attitudes, usually pertaining to external consumption.

If you take too many pills of ecstasy, sometimes all it takes is one powerful dose; then the brain is permanently unbalanced, unable to maintain an emotional equilibrium for the rest of the person’s life. Perhaps a very careful diet and a very careful regime of medication can help establish the right chemical balance.

AM: But cliches about moderation really are all too common. Don't get me wrong - - I am extreme. I do know what you mean about how people protect themselves by chanting the senseless mantra of moderation and work/wife balance. But to deviate in an extreme way from humanity, you do need to keep yourself balanced Quinn - I mean, you can't just grow a big beard and live on the dole. HA! - gotcha Quinn! I'm joking friend. You made it onto my list of heros for doing that.

DQ: What do you do for a living?

I’m going to school part time, floating on loans, and doing some part time work at a call center where I do technical support for high speed modems.

Now it is my turn to ask you a personal question Quinn:

How did you get on social assistance? I realize that you were diagnosed with a mental disorder, but did you expect to fall into the opportunity you fell into? Or did you experience it as an uncomfortable misfortune that later was revealed as an opportunity after you thought about it more? A bit of both maybe?

Did the company you were working for send you to a psychiatrist due to what they thought was unbalanced behavior? Did you give the psychologist honest answers, or did you exaggerate things in order to get yourself diagnosed?

I’m asking because I would like to get some tips from you. The company I am working for pays for a psychologist if I were to need one. My manager already suggested I see one, and gave me a card. (I've said a few things to some people that I shouldnt have)

[AlyOshA]

Uh-Oh! Semiotic analysis of the word "balance" leads to the attachment of vague descriptors to a multifaceted concept for our selfish advancement in the endless convoluted chess game of philosophy discourse. Hmm... Is the word balance to blame? Or do we do the same thing with the word "feminine". What about the word "truth" or "virtue" or "wisdom" better yet the word "reality" and best yet the word "enlightenment"? No these words have concrete universal understandings and there’s no room for self-centered misinterpretation. Next time, when I have time, I promise to lay down concepts succinctly and with concrete relevance. Maybe we all should

[David Quinn]

Aaron Mathis wrote:

But first of all, before we go any further, I just want you to know that I realize it’s all relative. What is balance to one person, is disorder to the another.

But the moment you value survival, you value some sort of balance.

Since people have different ideas of survival, then there are different ways of attempting to get balance. Often, the effort to achieve balance, creates imbalance. Marriage is a good example of that. The neurosis of (types) of meditation is another.

Anyhow, if you have no notion of balance, then you have no notion of values, and thus you are a mere nihilist.

To my mind, the best course of action is to strive as much as you can to become enlightened, and then decide, after you have succeeded in this, what a "balanced" lifestyle is. That way your conception of balance won't be at odds with wisdom.

AM: If I'm walking a tight rope, or climbing a moutain, I need to value my balance - yet I am by no means wanting to bring my striving to an end.

DQ: It is appropriate to use the word "balance" in those sorts of circumstances because what is being referred to here is the physical act of balance, which is a physical reality. There is no added reference to any nebulous metaphysical or psychological forms of "balance".

AM: There is no psychological balance? I think the brain, like an eco-system is a very delicate balance (in the case of the brain it is a chemical balance) that can be permanently disrupted by various ‘unbalanced’ attitudes, usually pertaining to external consumption.

Well, a chemical unbalance in the brain is really just another form of physical unbalance - which, I agree, must be acknowledged and respected.

But when it comes to the realm of psychology - that is, what values, beliefs and habits we should cultivate - it is purely subjective. What a sage considers to be psychologically balanced a criminal regards as extremely unbalanced.

Now it is my turn to ask you a personal question Quinn:

How did you get on social assistance? I realize that you were diagnosed with a mental disorder, but did you expect to fall into the opportunity you fell into? Or did you experience it as an uncomfortable misfortune that later was revealed as an opportunity after you thought about it more? A bit of both maybe?

I don't really have a mental disorder as such. I have been diagnosed with "shizoidal personality disorder", which essentially means that I am quite different from the norm - different enough to be deemed unemployable. The primary reason for this difference is my philosophical nature and my "excessive" valuing of wisdom.

When I initially applied for the disability support pension on the basis that I value wisdom, it was a bit of a gamble because I didn't know anyone who had done this previously and I wasn't sure how it would be received. But nevertheless, I was confident in the truism that valuing wisdom in this world is universally regarded as a form of madness. And so it proved to be the case.

Did the company you were working for send you to a psychiatrist due to what they thought was unbalanced behavior?

I've never worked for a company. The only full-time job I've ever had was chaining for a surveyor back in 1982.

After I left university in 1987, I went on the dole for a few years, and then, in 1992, I applied for the pension.

Did you give the psychologist honest answers, or did you exaggerate things in order to get yourself diagnosed?

I told the truth at all times. It was my ambition to get this pension on the sole basis that I valued wisdom. I wanted to prove to myself, and to others, that society regards the valuing of wisdom as a form of mental illness.

I have copies of all my social security files, which I obtained under the freedom of information act, and one of these days I will scan them and post them on the web. They're quite amusing.

I’m asking because I would like to get some tips from you. The company I am working for pays for a psychologist if I were to need one. My manager already suggested I see one, and gave me a card. (I've said a few things to some people that I shouldnt have)

My main advice to you, should you go down that path, is to be very open about your love of wisdom and show them that you will never compromise yourself. If you show any hesitation, or wavering, or signs that you are ready to cave in, they will pounce on you. But if you impress upon them, politely and intelligently, that nothing in the world will ever cause you to abandon your relationship to wisdom, they will respect you - and with a bit of luck, they will even start accommodating themselves to your wishes.

It is a gamble, though. I don't want to pretend that you are guaranteed of success. You could find yourself on the streets instead.

-

[Aaron Mathis]

Hello again David,

To my mind, the best course of action is to strive as much as you can to become enlightened, and then decide, after you have succeeded in this, what a "balanced" lifestyle is. That way your conception of balance won't be at odds with wisdom.

This sounds very good. Overall, I understand your point about balance and how it is an evil word. Balance, like anything, doesn’t inherently exist, it is a relative construct established to preserve values, which are for the most part bad.

When I initially applied for the disability support pension on the basis that I value wisdom, it was a bit of a gamble because I didn't know anyone who had done this previously and I wasn't sure how it would be received.

This is hilarious. What was the first step you took? Was it filling out a form?

And on the form did you have to state what your disability was?

And if so what exactly did you write down? Something along the lines of “My disability is my profound intelligence?” “My disability is my inability to be foolish?”

If there wasn’t a form, but instead a phone interview or a personal interview, how exactly did you state your case? It must have been weird trying to get the ball rolling. How did you open your case?

My main advice to you, should you go down that path, is to be very open about your love of wisdom and show them that you will never compromise yourself. If you show any hesitation, or wavering, or signs that you are ready to cave in, they will pounce on you. But if you impress upon them, politely and intelligently, that nothing in the world will ever cause you to abandon your relationship to wisdom, they will respect you - and with a bit of luck, they will even start accommodating themselves to your wishes.

It is a gamble, though. I don't want to pretend that you are guaranteed of success. You could find yourself on the streets instead.

I’m not really afraid of the physical hardship as much as I fear shaming my family.

Psychological pain is much more overwhelming than physical pain.

It causes me pain and guilt to think about my mother crying, lonely, embarassed and disappointed in regards to me, and it likewise causes me pain and guilt to think about my fathers feelings of shame in regards to me. There is no way my father could interpret my behavior in anything other than ‘weakness’. The son of a father is genetically programmed to want to please him. A person if fighting against their genes when they leave their parents. On top of that it just seems evil and through gossip your extreme actions will be known by everyone connected to your parents and siblings, spreading to your community reaching old friends.

It is great suffering isn’t it?

But I’m open to the possibility of overcoming this genetic programming. It is overwhelming nonetheless.

Hey Quinn, are your parents still alive? Did your attachment to them give you too hard of a time? Do you still talk to them? Do you let them see your son?

With today’s health standards, the parents live too long. In older times, most people’s parents were dead by the time they had to make serious spiritual decisions. My parents will probably live to their 90’s as they are healthy and my father is rather successful financially. (he is building a luxerious new house and him and my mother are trying to get me excited about the room they have built for me - - it's as if they know I don't want much to do with them, and so they are setting all these traps to make me like what they like and get me hooked to their addictions to luxury)

[Trevor Salyzyn]

Aaron, I'm curious what you meant by this:

Anyhow, if you have no notion of balance, then you have no notion of values, and thus you are a mere nihilist.

I can't see how the conclusion follows. Could you elaborate?

[Aaron Mathis]

Trevor :)

I told you there would come a time when you and I really got down to some serious business. Well, I am more sick of my lower self than ever, and thus I am prepared to whole heartedly engage with you.

TS: Aaron, I'm curious what you meant by this:

AM: Anyhow, if you have no notion of balance, then you have no notion of values, and thus you are a mere nihilist.

Let's try this:

The consequence to valuing some form of survival, is valuing some idea of balance.

This is why we have doctors who give us advice on what medications and treatments we should take. Why do we want to listen to the doctor? Because we value enchancing balance, stability.

Of course, Doctors can often be very ignorant and futile, giving diet pills to people who eat lots of twinkies and drink lots of pop. But there are some good doctors out there who can help us bring our bodies and thus our minds into greater balance.

There are wise ideas of balance, and on the other hand there are foolish-cartoon like perceptions of reality which try to be passed off as balance.

Generally, all humans want to feel stable, and not feel miserable.

However, most humans try to feel good in a way that leaves them unintentionally drowning in pain, gasping like fish out of water, gasping for more of what has dried up almost completely.

let's try picturing an attempt at colonizing space. You're going to have to have a very carefully worked out, a very finely tuned balance in many different areas. Food production on a space craft would require a carefully worked out balance.

Often in agriculture, we have systems that, to the workers suprise and dismay, increasingly degrade and wear down as the years go by. These are unstable farming systems governed by an unstable psychology. Humans, when feeling the scale of balance starting to tip dangerously, study and search for truth in order to find a way to bring the system they need to survive, back into balance.

It's kind of like this global warming/fossil fuel thing. They are calling for a reduction in emission. Surely this is because we want to try and tip the scale back into a more stable position.

Now let's look at the common trajectory of teenagers who don't have any clear idea about what they value. These kids pop ecstasy pills while on alcohol and cocaine. They become chemically imbalanced addicts as adults. Some teens become bulemic, anorexic, etc. Some grow into very obese adults.

Often these kids arent even conscious about why they are doing what they are doing. They are just eating and puking themselves out of consciousness.

So, in the sense that they arent aware of why they do what they do (no thought out values, no clear notions of survival and thus of balance) they are thus nihilists, they have no individuality, coherent sense of balance, personhood, soul.

People who are conscious, respect nature as a delicate balance and they submit to her rule, or God's rule. This can be very uncomfortable at first, but it brings greater stability in the long run. Whereas rebelling is exciting at first, but very uncomfortable later.

The wise, because they understand natures way to a helpful degree, voluntarily forego pleasure, and voluntarily suffer, and they do this because they have faced up to the need for a certain balance. They thus attain greater stability and thus survive more effectively.

[David Quinn]

Aaron,

DQ: When I initially applied for the disability support pension on the basis that I value wisdom, it was a bit of a gamble because I didn't know anyone who had done this previously and I wasn't sure how it would be received.

AM: This is hilarious. What was the first step you took? Was it filling out a form?

The process started when I began telling the dole office that I had no intention of looking for work.

Looking for work is a basic requirement that dole-recipients have to fulfill in order to receive their payments, and up until this point I used to do what a lot of other people on the dole did - namely, pretend to look for work. Each fortnight I provided a fake list of employers that I supposedly contacted about the possibility of work, which was fine until I started becoming unhappy about engaging in that kind of deception. And so I made the decision to stop providing these fortnightly lists and tell them openly that I had no intention of ever finding a job.

I was immediately referred to psychologists, told to undergo tests, was examined by social workers, told to see psychiatrists, etc. It took about 18 months before I was finally granted a pension, but not before having to spend 7 or 8 months of that period without any income at all as I was booted off the dole for not looking for work. I had to stay with friends and rely on their charity. But eventually things fell into place and I started receiving the pension.

And on the form did you have to state what your disability was?

And if so what exactly did you write down? Something along the lines of “My disability is my profound intelligence?” “My disability is my inability to be foolish?”

If there wasn’t a form, but instead a phone interview or a personal interview, how exactly did you state your case? It must have been weird trying to get the ball rolling. How did you open your case?

Here is a copy of one of the early reports by a social worker I saw back in 1993, which will give you a good idea of my approach: part one and part two.

Here is a translation of that document.

DQ: My main advice to you, should you go down that path, is to be very open about your love of wisdom and show them that you will never compromise yourself. If you show any hesitation, or wavering, or signs that you are ready to cave in, they will pounce on you. But if you impress upon them, politely and intelligently, that nothing in the world will ever cause you to abandon your relationship to wisdom, they will respect you - and with a bit of luck, they will even start accommodating themselves to your wishes.

It is a gamble, though. I don't want to pretend that you are guaranteed of success. You could find yourself on the streets instead.

AM: I’m not really afraid of the physical hardship as much as I fear shaming my family.

Psychological pain is much more overwhelming than physical pain.

It causes me pain and guilt to think about my mother crying, lonely, embarassed and disappointed in regards to me, and it likewise causes me pain and guilt to think about my fathers feelings of shame in regards to me. There is no way my father could interpret my behavior in anything other than ‘weakness’. The son of a father is genetically programmed to want to please him. A person if fighting against their genes when they leave their parents. On top of that it just seems evil and through gossip your extreme actions will be known by everyone connected to your parents and siblings, spreading to your community reaching old friends.

It is great suffering isn’t it?

But I’m open to the possibility of overcoming this genetic programming. It is overwhelming nonetheless.

Hey Quinn, are your parents still alive? Did your attachment to them give you too hard of a time? Do you still talk to them? Do you let them see your son?

When I first told my parents that I wanted to be a spiritual man, just like Jesus and the Buddha, my father wouldn't speak to me for a year and my mother would burst into tears every time she saw me. But I didn't really care, for my mind was filled with grander things.

After a time, my parents gradually reconciled themselves with my decision and soon accepted me on my terms. My father even became enamoured with Eastern mysticism through my influence and gave up his Catholic faith, so there you go. You never know what might happen.

I'm actually living with my parents at the present time as my mother has dementia and my father needs help in looking after her. So in a sense, things have come full circle.

With today’s health standards, the parents live too long. In older times, most people’s parents were dead by the time they had to make serious spiritual decisions. My parents will probably live to their 90’s as they are healthy and my father is rather successful financially. (he is building a luxerious new house and him and my mother are trying to get me excited about the room they have built for me - - it's as if they know I don't want much to do with them, and so they are setting all these traps to make me like what they like and get me hooked to their addictions to luxury)

There's a lot to be said for euthanasia and the enforced killing of old people. My mother's mind is just about gone, her life is all but non-existent, and yet she is still consuming resources and requiring other people to look after her. Perhaps a system in which people who reach 60 or 70 have to show that they are enlightened and wise, or else be put to death, should be put in place. It would diminish the drag on the world's resources and might even encourage people to seek wisdom.

-

[Aaron Mathis]

There's a lot to be said for euthanasia and the enforced killing of old people. My mother's mind is just about gone, her life is all but non-existent, and yet she is still consuming resources and requiring other people to look after her.

How preventable to you think dementia is? Was your mother at all intellectual? What are your thoughts in regards to whether or not the brain has the ability to regenerate, and be renewed?

Is the brain like a system of muscles, in the sense where, if you don't use the whole of your brain on a regular basis, but instead just indulge in a narrow part, then the brain deteriorates?

Do you think 'lop-sidedness' is a good word to describe people in general?

Perhaps a system in which people who reach 60 or 70 have to show that they are enlightened and wise, or else be put to death, should be put in place. It would diminish the drag on the world's resources

Here it sounds like you are saying: "unbalanced people are throwing my world out of balance. By killing them off, we can tip the scale to a more ideal balance".

[Jamesh]

How preventable to you think dementia is? Was your mother at all intellectual? What are your thoughts in regards to whether or not the brain has the ability to regenerate, and be renewed?

Good question. My guess is that she was no intellectual, and that for David it mostly came from the father, or perhaps with the common skipping of a generation genetic scenario, his mothers mother.

i have a feeling she was intellectually inferior to her husband and turned insular. This insularness, and lack of thinking as a result over a few decades is the cause of her dementia.

I really must congratulate David on what he has done in terms of getting and maintaining the disability pension. No lies or bullshitting in that doc, just a reluctance by Western society that any Westerner could desire to be a monk, and that this desire could in any way be respected by society to a sufficient degree to provide alms for him.

I guess this is why (to some small degree) I am becoming a little fascinated with Asian cultures that have a buddhist element , where such things are more or less taken for granted, though they are too poor for governments to provide for monks.

I've only ever been to one Asian country, Thailand. Does Japan, a highly western thinking Asian country provide similar govdernement supplied alms to monks? Very unlikely. Poor countries like Thailand and India don't count as the alms are provided by other poor folk, not the government.

[Aaron Mathis]

Reading over David's documents was very amusing and a little bit sureal. It didnt seem real, even though I have no doubt it was.

[Katy]

I've only ever been to one Asian country, Thailand. Does Japan, a highly western thinking Asian country provide similar govdernement supplied alms to monks? Very unlikely. Poor countries like Thailand and India don't count as the alms are provided by other poor folk, not the government.

As I recall, there is some system in place but the majority of their money comes from donations. But it was quite some time ago that I looked into it and even then only halfheartedly listening to a professor lecture on the television before I had bothered to get out of bed for the day.


Anyway...

There is no psychological balance? I think the brain, like an eco-system is a very delicate balance (in the case of the brain it is a chemical balance) that can be permanently disrupted by various ‘unbalanced’ attitudes, usually pertaining to external consumption.

Not all psychological issues are chemical. For example, with me they are constantly working towards a chemical balance that allows me to perceive the world more similarly to the way everyone else does. However, even when that's working, I still have to deal with the non-chemical psychological effects of living so long in such a state.

The first part of that is balance.
The second part is not.

[Aaron Mathis]

However, even when that's working, I still have to deal with the non-chemical psychological effects of living so long in such a state.

Well, it sounds like dealing with your new reality is about adjusting, becoming stable, balancing.

By living so long on the left, you need to get used to living on the right. I'm sure it takes time to accumulate the new experiences that are neccesary to outweigh the power of your old experiences.

It takes time and practice to become balanced and stable with your new view.

I realize a person, when he's defending his position, can stretch a word to mean practically whatever he wants.

But I think if you're open minded you'll see what I mean.