Purpose/objective in life (ie universal truth)

[Carl G]

Right. What the fuck. I was mirroring the insanity of the poster who suggested the main purpose of life is entertainment -- yep, go tell that to starving African child.

Anyway, if you read my description carefully, I think you would see it was meant metaphorically: "I see myself as an entertainment center." I admit I left off the word "as" but I think you get my drift.

That aside, I don't think fun and spiritual work -- or for that matter any work -- need be mutually exclusive. They should rather be mutually supportive, and ideally be one and the same.

[Alex Jacob]

Obviously, the whole core of any idea of transcendence (that I am aware of), with the idea of the possibility of transmigration to higher or to lower worlds (lokas, spheres, 'planets'), hinges on the idea of 'immortality'. Whenever any transcendentalist involves themselves in trying to represent any level of idea to support a metaphysic of 'immortality' they stumble and fall. Even the yogic schools which are the ones who have the most invested in the idea of transmigration and transcendence are forced to use a psuedo-materialistic lingo to support their claims, and it always fails. The most famous book to jumpstart this sort of thinking in popular culture was Yogananda's 'Autobiography of a Yogi' and he borrowed, and bent, materialist ideas to allude through 'subtle energies' and other flim-flam to present his far-fetched ideas. The rap can get ever-more sophisticated and (as it is now) begin to borrow terms from (*awed hush*) quantum physics, but in the end it is just mumbo-jumbo and gobbledeegook that is easily taken apart. In short, there is no possibility to use human language or any symbols to describe 'sat-chit-ananda': that which is alive and is life and consciousness has no origin and is simply always is. Everything you might say about 'sat-chit-ananda' can only turn into a poem, to an allusion, to a representation of something you can only feel.

It seems to me---no, it very definitely is---part of the whole Nietzschean problem, and the modern problem, and one of the reasons why in fact 'God is dead', God is just not around anymore, God has left our world, or we have in fact---we are now in fact---'killing' God, pushing him-it out of the picture. There is no language or symbol of science and philosophy that we can avail ourselves of to uphold the idea of a living consciousness, a supreme being, and a supreme existence to whom we must answer. Well, there is, but who really listens to the bogus stories of the theologians anymore, anyway? It is only preaching to the converted, and it's all just pep-talk and the stroking of exhausted metaphors. The fact is, 'intelligent people' cannot really have a theology, and they certainly cannot have immortality.

[And so in literature you have the rather frequent image of the literally exhausted modern (male) figure, close to death or suicide, who happens to meet a more simple figure who is 'ignorant' and yet whole, in whom hope and faith still live. And they look at each other, they even converse, but it is no use. The latter cannot save the former. It is a Dostoevskian theme through and through. A common motif. For example, Klingsor's Last Summer by Hesse, and even Harry Haller in Steppenwolf. In no sense at all is it absent from the denizens of this forum, and in my view it is one of the causes of mental disorder. In fact, it is mental disorder. Hence my my self-diagnosis of 'modernity': Modernity is my affliction...what's yours?]

You run through all the proofs and it is all...scientifically impossible. And so for that and many other reasons you wind up in the somewhat unenviable swamp of modernity, the second fall of man, and the second ultimate sacrifice of God. The only good thing about that is...the prospect of redemption. [But redemtion as a real thing, a completely new thing, an unknown thing unspoken by any lip. No one knows what it is or has even the merest idea of what it might be like...]

Everything about 'God' will now appear in quotes, and everyone will always ask, 'And what do you mean when you say 'God'?

The way I personally understand this idea [sophistry] of continuance, or immortality, in the specific sense that I used it, is that the very core of what is you and what is me is taking place in a place that is eternal, but this world (this loka, this sphere, this 'planet') is a giant fabricated and agreed-upon dream in which we appear as actors. We believe in it---we really have no choice but to believe---and so it is 100% real. The world and its atoms, this world of energy and matter, is 'real' and there will never be an end to looking into it, exploring it, going to the ends of it, discovering once and again ever-new frontiers within it. That is one of the qualities and features of this 'dream'. For all intents and purposes it is real, and solid, and there is nothing beyond it. That is, until you have another experience, and it is always and only an inner, subjective experience, with no 'proof' other than a hunch, that it might be this way. But people have and of course do describe 'waking up'. That is also part of the picture.

Anyway, the idea or the hunch of continuance is the core that animates all the ethics that transcendentalists practice. But when examined closely it always turns into absurdity!

[Alex Jacob]

Carl, I just describe the ideas and the practices making no judgment as to if it 'goes far enough' or doesn't. I assume nothing goes far enough, but I have tended to notice that the people here grab and use what they need to live. People sometimes, in a very real desperation, hang onto the smallest thing that happens to come their way...to avoid annihilation. There are infinite numbers and qualities of experience, and though they may occur in a unified field that is 'this life', I for one have no way of deciding what is best or what 'goes far enough'.

The origin of the Vedas begins with some people looking atthe world they live in, seeing the conditions that prevail, and in using force and emotion to achieve within the limits of the possible. The Vedic view, if looked at closely, is not at all exclusively a difficult and demanding path of renunciation and spending your life in a cremation yard in a lion-cloth and smeared with ash. All magic has its origin in various branches of shamanism, and practicing the art of getting out of life 'what you need to live' is not at all a worhtless path. 'Self-tranformation' is a later idea, and is hardly for everyone.

"Ugh. And beyond material culture and ordinary religion, this has what to do with deeper purpose of life?"

I couldn't dismiss this way quite as easily as you do. To remain within time and history, and to work in time and history, is most likely (from what I get intuitively) what Cory is most interested in. Indeed, the only 'real' possibility for humanity. There is an acute tension and a sort of productive symbiosis between this ideal, which is in no sense easy, and the 'transcendental' ideal which can lead to oh-so-many errors.

"This is more poetry than truthful. There have been people who live and died, for example, without intense suffering. And who's to say all achievements disappear (notwithstanding your qualifier "eventually.")? Your transcendental ideal (3) would seem to defend the idea that you can and do 'take it with you' when you die. Transferrence, not death, building over time and space rather than winking out after a momentarily shining in the sun, and all that sort of thing."

The part that was least poetical and more expressed what I think is true, you take as poetical. 'This material life' is rife with pain. It is initiated in pain and ends in pain for the majority. And most people live in nearly-constant pain in which 'well-being' is a thing of mere moments. The greatest minds and the most giften minds were mostly deeply pained souls. The ones who have given the most, seemed to have hurt the most.

"Huh? The problems of hopes dashed and karma incurred are precisely the ones designed to be dealt with through the transcendental view, are they not? They are not fatal flaws in the system. Do you imply there are problem-free paths open to humans?"

No, what I meant (really what the transcendentalist say) is that there is always a danger in lingering in this problematic world. Today or tomorrow, as we linger and dally here, we could get ourselves caught up in some 'material entanglement', some karmic situation that compromises, if you will, our present fund of 'good fortune'. We may come into this world through the birth canal with a great deal of enthusiasm, but things can and do happen, and we can get 'lost' in this realm, and that is of course the meaning of the idea of 'samsara'. I might do any number of things to clean or purify my 'karma' but I could, in one minute. sacrifice those gains through a bad choice.

"Here again you appear to mix things. Preparation to leave the Earth Plane, and practicing detachment from materiality in no way necessarily involve shrinking from life."

Well, I'd like to hear what you think. As I see things, it is this problem that twisted Nietzsche in knots. The Christian ideal (a kind of transcendentalism) inclines one to minimizing oneself and one's needs. not in making them large and 'tragic'. The religious ideal of the East tends toward humility, smallness, leaving no footprints, quiet and all the rest. It goes against all ideas of building up, taking over, asserting oneself. There are 2 poles of activity, one tending toward greater material entanglement, and one that tends away from it. The problem of life takes place in that tension, as I see things.

[Carl G]

Carl, I just describe the ideas and the practices making no judgment as to if it 'goes far enough' or doesn't. I assume nothing goes far enough,

Ah, a judgment itself!

I was merely pointing to the apparent limit, and inconsistency, of your definition of the 'magical' path.

but I have tended to notice that the people here grab and use what they need to live. People sometimes, in a very real desperation, hang onto the smallest thing that happens to come their way

True, and not just here, of course. And, basically nothing wrong with that, for most of us.

...to avoid annihilation.

Yep, you're a poet, all right.

There are infinite numbers and qualities of experience, and though they may occur in a unified field that is 'this life', I for one have no way of deciding what is best or what 'goes far enough'.

Thanks for the disclaimer, though it isn't needed.

The origin of the Vedas begins with some people looking at the world they live in, seeing the conditions that prevail, and in using force and emotion to achieve within the limits of the possible. The Vedic view, if looked at closely, is not at all exclusively a difficult and demanding path of renunciation and spending your life in a cremation yard in a lion-cloth and smeared with ash. All magic has its origin in various branches of shamanism, and practicing the art of getting out of life 'what you need to live' is not at all a worhtless path. 'Self-tranformation' is a later idea, and is hardly for everyone.

Oh, I don't know. From what I know of Vedic thought, it is definitely about self-transformation.

And here you go again assigning magic specifically to the mundane needs of life -- making it rain, having a good hunt -- whereas magic has a higher expression, too, in alchemy, which at root is the art of self-transformation.

To remain within time and history, and to work in time and history, is most likely (from what I get intuitively) what Cory is most interested in. Indeed, the only 'real' possibility for humanity. There is an acute tension and a sort of productive symbiosis between this ideal, which is in no sense easy, and the 'transcendental' ideal which can lead to oh-so-many errors.

Don't get me wrong. I agree that both materiality and ordinary religion are viable paths for many folk. They help organize lives into ways productive to society and along guiding moral avenues beneficial to the individual -- and let's face it, it's all many people can handle. And yes, the transcendental path is fraught with danger, it is more for an independently minded and tenacious rock climber.

The part that was least poetical and more expressed what I think is true, you take as poetical. 'This material life' is rife with pain. It is initiated in pain and ends in pain for the majority. And most people live in nearly-constant pain in which 'well-being' is a thing of mere moments. The greatest minds and the most giften minds were mostly deeply pained souls. The ones who have given the most, seemed to have hurt the most.

"Rife with pain," "Intense suffering." Sounds like you have experienced some of that.

Anyway, you made it sound like a universal fact of life, and I'm just saying I know people who live pretty well pain free. In some cases thanks to anti-depressants, but nevertheless.

No, what I meant (really what the transcendentalist say) is that there is always a danger in lingering in this problematic world. Today or tomorrow, as we linger and dally here, we could get ourselves caught up in some 'material entanglement', some karmic situation that compromises, if you will, our present fund of 'good fortune'. We may come into this world through the birth canal with a great deal of enthusiasm, but things can and do happen, and we can get 'lost' in this realm, and that is of course the meaning of the idea of 'samsara'. I might do any number of things to clean or purify my 'karma' but I could, in one minute. sacrifice those gains through a bad choice.

I don't see how one bad choice could undo "any number of things to clean or purify" your karma. Does that make sense to you?

Sounds like maybe some embedded Jewish fate/guilt/Wrathful God belief poking through?

Well, I'd like to hear what you think. As I see things, it is this problem that twisted Nietzsche in knots. The Christian ideal (a kind of transcendentalism) inclines one to minimizing oneself and one's needs. not in making them large and 'tragic'. The religious ideal of the East tends toward humility, smallness, leaving no footprints, quiet and all the rest. It goes against all ideas of building up, taking over, asserting oneself. There are 2 poles of activity, one tending toward greater material entanglement, and one that tends away from it. The problem of life takes place in that tension, as I see things.

One can be spiritual in a monastery, or in the midst of life. The midst of life is much more difficult but the potential for advance is proportionately greater. Each are right for only a few.

[brokenhead]

That aside, I don't think fun and spiritual work -- or for that matter any work -- need be mutually exclusive. They should rather be mutually supportive, and ideally be one and the same.

Well put. In a way, this is the answer to the thread's implied question. I agree 100% with this.

[brokenhead]

The religious ideal of the East tends toward humility, smallness, leaving no footprints, quiet and all the rest. It goes against all ideas of building up, taking over, asserting oneself. There are 2 poles of activity, one tending toward greater material entanglement, and one that tends away from it. The problem of life takes place in that tension, as I see things.

This thought, or a variation of it, arises in my life every single day, Alex. It's as if the proper mode is to execute the motions of life in a detached manner, or as detached as you can make it. If it at times feels like "just going through the motions," that is the price you pay for sanity, the very survival of your spirit. A famous jazz guitarist (sorry, I forget who!) once said, "Never play all your note."

What happens then is rather surprising. The part of yourself that you withhold begins to spiritualize. That may be the wrong word. But it develops into something that can glean meaning from what had previously been ordinary and/or meaningless.

[Alex Jacob]

Carl G wrote:

"And here you go again assigning magic specifically to the mundane needs of life -- making it rain, having a good hunt -- whereas magic has a higher expression, too, in alchemy, which at root is the art of self-transformation."

Because it just seems to me that putting energy into what you call the 'mundane needs of life' is really a 'magical activity'. It just seems to me that any and all focus of the will is nothing less than magical activity. Also, it is completely admirable and completely necessary that people practice their 'mundane magic', and if they can see it in the context of a bigger picture, so much the better. It seems unfortunate that people separate their mundane needs and the facts of mundane life from higher ideals, whereas they can function together. I think this is one of the bad effects of Christian asceticism. But this asceticism does not exist, for example, in the (widest conceptions) of vedic religion, so getting wealth, enjoying prosperity, enjoyment of 'earthly things', sexuality, government, all have their very important place in the scheme of things, but the ideal is to live one's material life in a regulated way, and not lose sight of the ultimate end of all life. Here, on this list (predominantly) those who defend higher ideals do so through negating all they consider 'low' and unworthy, and in this sense this forum has an essential, ascetic tinge. It is potentially schizophrenic, certainly neurotic, and leads to internal division that is unecessary.

'Vedic thought' is about how to organize human society in all its levels so that the whole system operates in harmony. But, Vedic thought never takes its eyes off the Divine as the central focus of all activity, and indeed states that all doing and all thinking [being] is a direct expression of the Divine. I will certainly grant you that it takes real effort to wade through the superfluous in the scriptural expressions, and to translate the terms into modern terms that we can grasp and use. For example, Sue [Den Mother] on another thread is talking about prayer as 'thought', but according to Vedic conceptions prayer [and thought] are part and parcel of 'mantric vibration'. If you want to have success in this plane of existence there are mantric vibratory patterns that one can intone [in a literal sense] that work on these levels. The same is true for any and all endeavors within human concern. The whole cosmos is a vibratory manifestation of 'God', and so aligning one's own vibrations [will and thought] with 'cosmic vibrations' leads one to experience that frequency. But no matter how you describe it, or how outrageous your prose becomes, this is exactly and precisely what all people are always doing anyway. Every single day, merely to exist, they employ all the tools of magic, or all the secret potencies to which the 'Vedas'---the inner core of shastra---allude.

Creating wealth, enjoying the luscious yoni of your beautiful wife, and giving honor to the creator of life in meditation, sacrifice and ritual---are these things mutually exclusive? For Christian prudes, yes. But according to the 'Vedic' conception they are unifiable. And if they are unifiable, man is unifiable, and we all seems to recognize that we are all divided, fucked up, and mentally ill. This forum is a place for the mentally ill who seem to want to get better, but are clueless as to how to do that [in my opinion]. They come forward with partial and extremely tendentious recepies that---so it seems---will only drive someone mad. And they flutter in and out, jabbering like magpies...that is GF.

"And yes, the transcendental path is fraught with danger, it is more for an independently minded and tenacious rock climber."

The path of lunatic escape artists who are essentially unprepared for spiritual life [who cannot even define it in the first place] is certainly fraught with danger. That is why there is such polarity in these 'conversations'. Someone asserts a recipe for madness, some deranged concept of life, some twisted interpretation of reality, and 'healthy voices' come forward to counter the mad concept, but the twisted pseudo-spiritualist, diagnosed with some mental illness, insists that his view is Correct, and fights against balance. It is my personal opinion that the very idea of 'transcendental life' is more often than not misunderstood, and I certainly feel it is misunderstood on this forum. On this forum, 'transcendental life' involves a sort of assassination of something vital in oneself, something that in fact cannot be denied, or that one denies to one's peril.

When I said 'rife with pain', etc., I was not referring to my own experiences, but to what I see in the multitudes, especially here in Latin America, and especially here in war-torn Colombia. If you want to know how things can go wrong, and if you want to muse about how things might go right, a place that is in disarray is the place to do it.

I certainly know what pain and anguish are, but like most [here] our struggles are mental, and so is our pain and anguish.

"I don't see how one bad choice could undo "any number of things to clean or purify" your karma. Does that make sense to you?"

I knew a guy who led a very clean life, generally speaking. He even had a 'spiritual life'. One evening in some mountain town he went into a bar and had some drinks. He got into a conversation with someone and the conversation led to an argument, then a confrontation. To defend himself, he took out a pen-knife, and when the dust settled he was charged with attempted murder, assault with a weapon, etc., etc. In one instance his ertswhile harmonious life was transformed, and it will take years and lots of money to get out of this 'karma'. That is just one possible example, there are millions. If in one single moment we forget ourselves, we can endanger the whole trajectory of our lives. This is just a simple, existential fact. The nature of this plane is that 'good fortune' can be transformed instantaeously into a pit of misfortune. So, the 'vedic psychologists' warn of the dangers of 'the material entanglement'.

"Sounds like maybe some embedded Jewish fate/guilt/Wrathful God belief poking through?"

I threw a dry and rock-hard bagel at it and it seems to have gone away...

[divine focus]

This thought, or a variation of it, arises in my life every single day, Alex. It's as if the proper mode is to execute the motions of life in a detached manner, or as detached as you can make it. If it at times feels like "just going through the motions," that is the price you pay for sanity, the very survival of your spirit. A famous jazz guitarist (sorry, I forget who!) once said, "Never play all your note."

What happens then is rather surprising. The part of yourself that you withhold begins to spiritualize. That may be the wrong word. But it develops into something that can glean meaning from what had previously been ordinary and/or meaningless.

Those withheld notes are actually the you of you, the truth of you. They are what give the played notes meaning. This has always been the case, but with so much focus on the heard notes, the meaning was lost in the background. Bringing the withheld notes to the foreground, so to speak, allows greater appreciation of those notes that are heard and brings a realization that they are obviously not all the notes!

In one instance his ertswhile harmonious life was transformed, and it will take years and lots of money to get out of this 'karma'. That is just one possible example, there are millions. If in one single moment we forget ourselves, we can endanger the whole trajectory of our lives. This is just a simple, existential fact. The nature of this plane is that 'good fortune' can be transformed instantaeously into a pit of misfortune. So, the 'vedic psychologists' warn of the dangers of 'the material entanglement'.

Of course, good fortune or misfortune is also in the eye of the Beholder. If a choice leads to a "misfortune" that one actually learns from and grows through, would that be "bad" karma or "good" karma? I say karma is just karma, consequences are just consequences. What really matters ultimately is a willingness to see beyond good or bad, right or wrong, in order to come more fully into what one is. Then one can be more aware of karma, or the consequences of choices, and choose those that are preferable to him or her. Karma will be seen as built-into one's natural structure, and that the choice for the good of he or she is for the good of all.

[Carl G]

Carl G wrote:

"And here you go again assigning magic specifically to the mundane needs of life -- making it rain, having a good hunt -- whereas magic has a higher expression, too, in alchemy, which at root is the art of self-transformation."

Because it just seems to me that putting energy into what you call the 'mundane needs of life' is really a 'magical activity'. It just seems to me that any and all focus of the will is nothing less than magical activity. Also, it is completely admirable and completely necessary that people practice their 'mundane magic', and if they can see it in the context of a bigger picture, so much the better.

I wasn't disputing that. You seem to change the subject often when replying. Maybe you are not conveying at the beginning what you really mean to say.

It seems unfortunate that people separate their mundane needs and the facts of mundane life from higher ideals, whereas they can function together. I think this is one of the bad effects of Christian asceticism. But this asceticism does not exist, for example, in the (widest conceptions) of vedic religion, so getting wealth, enjoying prosperity, enjoyment of 'earthly things', sexuality, government, all have their very important place in the scheme of things, but the ideal is to live one's material life in a regulated way, and not lose sight of the ultimate end of all life. Here, on this list (predominantly) those who defend higher ideals do so through negating all they consider 'low' and unworthy, and in this sense this forum has an essential, ascetic tinge. It is potentially schizophrenic, certainly neurotic, and leads to internal division that is unecessary.

So, then, are your main points of this and your previous essay-length posts that 1) Negation of material life is unnecessary for spiritual advancement, and indeed may hamper it, and 2) QRS philosophy has that ascetic style you find unhealthy and self-sabotaging?

I thought you were comparing what you deemed several viable systems.

'Vedic thought' is about how to organize human society in all its levels so that the whole system operates in harmony. But, Vedic thought never takes its eyes off the Divine as the central focus of all activity, and indeed states that all doing and all thinking [being] is a direct expression of the Divine.

Not just "Vedic," but Taoist, Gnostic, Sufi, Lakota, and others.

I will certainly grant you that it takes real effort to wade through the superfluous in the scriptural expressions, and to translate the terms into modern terms that we can grasp and use. For example, Sue [Den Mother] on another thread is talking about prayer as 'thought', but according to Vedic conceptions prayer [and thought] are part and parcel of 'mantric vibration'. If you want to have success in this plane of existence there are mantric vibratory patterns that one can intone [in a literal sense] that work on these levels. The same is true for any and all endeavors within human concern. The whole cosmos is a vibratory manifestation of 'God', and so aligning one's own vibrations [will and thought] with 'cosmic vibrations' leads one to experience that frequency. But no matter how you describe it, or how outrageous your prose becomes, this is exactly and precisely what all people are always doing anyway. Every single day, merely to exist, they employ all the tools of magic, or all the secret potencies to which the 'Vedas'---the inner core of shastra---allude.

What is your purpose for inserting this explanation of prayer here?

Creating wealth, enjoying the luscious yoni of your beautiful wife, and giving honor to the creator of life in meditation, sacrifice and ritual---are these things mutually exclusive? For Christian prudes, yes. But according to the 'Vedic' conception they are unifiable. And if they are unifiable, man is unifiable,

Again, I hadn't realized that your main thrust is to compare the 'wholesomeness' of Veda with the 'asceticism' of QRS.

and we all seems to recognize that we are all divided, fucked up, and mentally ill.

Who are you calling 'we'? Humanity as whole does not recognize itself this way. That is to say, most people would not agree that they are divided, fucked up, and mentally ill.

This forum is a place for the mentally ill who seem to want to get better,

It may be for that type of people, but most here do not see themselves as mentally ill, and do not want to get better. Witness my current conversation with Laird in the Nuthin' thread, for an example.

but are clueless as to how to do that [in my opinion]. They come forward with partial and extremely tendentious recepies that---so it seems---will only drive someone mad. And they flutter in and out, jabbering like magpies...that is GF.

Such are the limitations of the Internet.

BTW, I compliment the management for allowing it, because it goes hand in hand with granting the freedom to really call someone on their shit without fearing moderator reprisal for not playing nice.

"And yes, the transcendental path is fraught with danger, it is more for an independently minded and tenacious rock climber."

The path of lunatic escape artists who are essentially unprepared for spiritual life [who cannot even define it in the first place] is certainly fraught with danger.

I didn't say that. Why do you change the subject??

That is why there is such polarity in these 'conversations'. Someone asserts a recipe for madness, some deranged concept of life, some twisted interpretation of reality, and 'healthy voices' come forward to counter the mad concept, but the twisted pseudo-spiritualist, diagnosed with some mental illness, insists that his view is Correct, and fights against balance.

This is how you describe the adherent to the transcendental path? To me, the transcendental mountain climbing is only for clear thinking coldly sane people. I'd sooner say real rock climbing is for drunks.

It is my personal opinion that the very idea of 'transcendental life' is more often than not misunderstood, and I certainly feel it is misunderstood on this forum. On this forum, 'transcendental life' involves a sort of assassination of something vital in oneself, something that in fact cannot be denied, or that one denies to one's peril.

Transcendental life is something that is rarely even mentioned on this forum, and never in that terminology. In fact, the only one here who speaks of it with any regularity is David.

"I don't see how one bad choice could undo "any number of things to clean or purify" your karma. Does that make sense to you?"

I knew a guy who led a very clean life, generally speaking. He even had a 'spiritual life'. One evening in some mountain town he went into a bar and had some drinks. He got into a conversation with someone and the conversation led to an argument, then a confrontation. To defend himself, he took out a pen-knife, and when the dust settled he was charged with attempted murder, assault with a weapon, etc., etc. In one instance his ertswhile harmonious life was transformed, and it will take years and lots of money to get out of this 'karma'. That is just one possible example, there are millions. If in one single moment we forget ourselves, we can endanger the whole trajectory of our lives. This is just a simple, existential fact. The nature of this plane is that 'good fortune' can be transformed instantaeously into a pit of misfortune. So, the 'vedic psychologists' warn of the dangers of 'the material entanglement'.

Thanks for the story.

First, what happened to him didn't happen in "one instance." No, he "went into a bar and had some drinks. He got into a conversation with someone and the conversation led to an argument, then a confrontation. To defend himself, he took out a pen-knife, and when the dust settled..." He had opportunity to halt this freight train of events along the way.

Second, how do we know how clean and spiritual he was, that is to say, in what state his karma was in prior to the events?

Third, how do we know how his karma was affected by the events, other than to say he is facing legal charges involving years of fees, maybe prison, etc. We are judging by our standards and from outside the situation.

Question: do you believe in random acts of fate, or do we construct our destinies, or does it depend, and if so, on what?

[bill]

[And so in literature you have the rather frequent image of the literally exhausted modern (male) figure, close to death or suicide, who happens to meet a more simple figure who is 'ignorant' and yet whole, in whom hope and faith still live. And they look at each other, they even converse, but it is no use. The latter cannot save the former. It is a Dostoevskian theme through and through. A common motif. For example, Klingsor's Last Summer by Hesse, and even Harry Haller in Steppenwolf. In no sense at all is it absent from the denizens of this forum, and in my view it is one of the causes of mental disorder. In fact, it is mental disorder. Hence my my self-diagnosis of 'modernity': Modernity is my affliction...what's yours?]

Could it be Schizoid personality Disorder?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schizoid_p ... y_disorder

[Alex Jacob]

Revealing your cards, Carl, especially in a disfunctional environment, is not a wise ploy. There are the lines, and then there is what can be read between the lines, and then there is what never even appears on the page. Everything I do and write originates in structures that never appear on any page.

"1) Negation of material life is unnecessary for spiritual advancement, and indeed may hamper it, and 2) QRS philosophy has that ascetic style you find unhealthy and self-sabotaging? I thought you were comparing what you deemed several viable systems."

For me, they are really questions. I just try to define, in my way, what are the issues in the hope of inspiring conversation. Sometimes I think it's one thing and then at others quite another. I think that you must admit it is a little difficult to have had any encounter at all with Nietzsche and not have some serious questions about what we are even talking about when we mention the possibility, even, of 'negating material life'. One way I look at Nietzsche is to see him as the sum total of the Roman Christian project, whose end is to get the men dressed up in snappy little Sunday suits all of bright blue and with little black bows on their patent leather shoesies. Really, at the end of the day, this is how I see Nietzsche and his dilemna, the one he fought so hard to get free of, and which struggle may have cost him his sanity. Does it surprise you that I note a similar theme in these pages, on this forum? Yet instead of breaking free of unnatural and excessively restraining patterns and impositions, they seems to act to put them on again. I have my own ideas that I included in my 'essay-length' post, but I also remain aware that this monologue-conversation takes place in a specific place, that is to say the GF forum. And really, if the truth could be told, I am really anxious to hear what you, Carl, think about all this, and indeed anything and everything! How do you live? What are you hoping to achieve? Does your path conduce you to well-being and 'happiness' or to misery, depression and exhaustion? Are you a true modern man? Oh, there are just so many questions! Indeed, I could match 10 of your questions with 100 of my own and there would be no end to it.

...and I was not exactly comparing individual 'viable systems' as trying to isolate main tendencies that I have noticed, mostly in my self. I think I said that.

"What is your purpose for inserting this explanation of prayer here?"

Again, I would only refer to what never appears on the page, and what cannot therefor be read between the lines. If I put on a little black tuxedo and with white gloves picked up a big top-hat, then took out a nifty little magic wand and said "I am going to pull a rabbit out of this hat!", but instead the rabbit appeared in your own hands or on your own head, or even more profoundly in the depths of your own thought, and beyond that still in a dream you will have tonight...Then, you see, I will have succeeded. The long and the short of it is that, as the Mysterious Ashkenaz, all that I do is shrouded in mystery. This is part of the Jewish mystery: to be interred in History and yet only to answer to a directive potency that stands outside of Time, and that pushes your naked & exhausted body along in front.

Random thoughts with no seeming connection to anything are the ones that contain the Keys to the Kingdom of Understanding...perhaps only for future generations the way things seem to be going...

What do you think about prayer, Carl? Is prayer a relevant activity in your life? Whoever is there to be prayed to, I ask?!

AJ: The path of lunatic escape artists who are essentially unprepared for spiritual life [who cannot even define it in the first place] is certainly fraught with danger.

CG: I didn't say that. Why do you change the subject??

I think that perhaps you need to go back and read Alice in Wonderland, or Mysteries by Knut Hamsun, because what arises in me as a response is something like what the Mad Hatter might have said, or Nagel to Dagny....

Look, you are here in the den of madness, with a bunch of pretty nutty people half of whom are plainly on a path that leads to insanity, and you are asking me why I change the subject when it strikes my fancy?? But I could just as easily say that no subject was changed because the subject is plainly many different things. The subject is a plurality, Carl, don't be so dammed singular, querido amigo!

The point of the story was only to illustrate a solitary point, now long past, mentioned in one main school of transcendental thinking, the vaishnava school [Visnhu-worshipping]. And that is that from the perspective of a voyage through this world to a 'world beyond', it is wise not to dally in this one hoping for some dribs and drabs of pleasure. It is possible to make a mistake that could cost one lots of time, and lots of [unneccesary] pain. Since this is a didactic tid-bit [as are so many of the tid-bits within didactic ethical systems] the meaning is: stick closely to ones transcendent path, and don't stray from it.

"Question: do you believe in random acts of fate, or do we construct our destinies, or does it depend, and if so, on what?"

I am just a humble pilgrim on the road to Kucha, brother. Why do you test me like this?

Okay, I'll bite. If you choose a road that leads to mire, you had to have been forwarned, but that forewarning might only be a sense, a subconscious knowing. But you didn't or couldn't listen. As a strong believer in omens, I think 'we' are often fore-warned through omens. The brighter and more intelligent the person, the quicker speaks 'the spirit'. For the lucky, karma is fast and swift, and for the unlucky it builds up, slowly and surely, until it crushes them under its weight, dragging them down to hell-realms.

[I touch upon almost all of this in my correspondence course, BTW.]

[Carl G]

Revealing your cards, Carl, especially in a disfunctional environment, is not a wise ploy. There are the lines, and then there is what can be read between the lines, and then there is what never even appears on the page. Everything I do and write originates in structures that never appear on any page.

I copy.

"1) Negation of material life is unnecessary for spiritual advancement, and indeed may hamper it, and 2) QRS philosophy has that ascetic style you find unhealthy and self-sabotaging? I thought you were comparing what you deemed several viable systems."

For me, they are really questions. I just try to define, in my way, what are the issues in the hope of inspiring conversation. Sometimes I think it's one thing and then at others quite another. I think that you must admit it is a little difficult to have had any encounter at all with Nietzsche and not have some serious questions about what we are even talking about when we mention the possibility, even, of 'negating material life'. One way I look at Nietzsche is to see him as the sum total of the Roman Christian project, whose end is to get the men dressed up in snappy little Sunday suits all of bright blue and with little black bows on their patent leather shoesies. Really, at the end of the day, this is how I see Nietzsche and his dilemna, the one he fought so hard to get free of, and which struggle may have cost him his sanity. Does it surprise you that I note a similar theme in these pages, on this forum? Yet instead of breaking free of unnatural and excessively restraining patterns and impositions, they seems to act to put them on again. I have my own ideas that I included in my 'essay-length' post, but I also remain aware that this monologue-conversation takes place in a specific place, that is to say the GF forum.

The religious "projects" serve many, some well, some poorly. I have made peace with them. You appear to still be struggling to put them to bed within yourself. GF is another matter for me. I hold it to a higher standard, because it attempts to address ideas closer to the root. Therefore I take an active role in attempting to shape this environment while I am here.

And really, if the truth could be told, I am really anxious to hear what you, Carl, think about all this, and indeed anything and everything! How do you live? What are you hoping to achieve? Does your path conduce you to well-being and 'happiness' or to misery, depression and exhaustion? Are you a true modern man? Oh, there are just so many questions! Indeed, I could match 10 of your questions with 100 of my own and there would be no end to it.

Feel free to PM me.

Again, I would only refer to what never appears on the page, and what cannot therefor be read between the lines. If I put on a little black tuxedo and with white gloves picked up a big top-hat, then took out a nifty little magic wand and said "I am going to pull a rabbit out of this hat!", but instead the rabbit appeared in your own hands or on your own head, or even more profoundly in the depths of your own thought, and beyond that still in a dream you will have tonight...Then, you see, I will have succeeded. The long and the short of it is that, as the Mysterious Ashkenaz, all that I do is shrouded in mystery. This is part of the Jewish mystery: to be interred in History and yet only to answer to a directive potency that stands outside of Time, and that pushes your naked & exhausted body along in front.

I see. And I see you are still learning how to orchestrate and be the baton. You are producing an overlay of bunnies in Cleveland along with those in your recipient's thoughts. But, good going!

What do you think about prayer, Carl? Is prayer a relevant activity in your life? Whoever is there to be prayed to, I ask?!

Prayer boiled down is intention coupled with humility, and ideally, once formed, married with work.

The point of the story was only to illustrate a solitary point, now long past, mentioned in one main school of transcendental thinking, the vaishnava school [Visnhu-worshipping]. And that is that from the perspective of a voyage through this world to a 'world beyond', it is wise not to dally in this one hoping for some dribs and drabs of pleasure. It is possible to make a mistake that could cost one lots of time, and lots of [unneccesary] pain. Since this is a didactic tid-bit [as are so many of the tid-bits within didactic ethical systems] the meaning is: stick closely to ones transcendent path, and don't stray from it.

Good. Same sort of idea as in the Disney version of Pinocchio (didn't read the original Italian book): "Go straight to school, don't talk to strangers" and instead growing donkey ears in Pleasure Land on the way to the salt mine.

"Question: do you believe in random acts of fate, or do we construct our destinies, or does it depend, and if so, on what?"

I am just a humble pilgrim on the road to Kucha, brother. Why do you test me like this?

Haha, Kucha on the Dung Road! Know it well.

Okay, I'll bite. If you choose a road that leads to mire, you had to have been forwarned, but that forewarning might only be a sense, a subconscious knowing. But you didn't or couldn't listen. As a strong believer in omens, I think 'we' are often fore-warned through omens. The brighter and more intelligent the person, the quicker speaks 'the spirit'. For the lucky, karma is fast and swift, and for the unlucky it builds up, slowly and surely, until it crushes them under its weight, dragging them down to hell-realms.

[I touch upon almost all of this in my correspondence course, BTW.]

You give a correspondence course? In what?