GENIUS FORUMS

Nick Treklis wrote:Don't worry, I wont ask anyone to picture a spiritual teacher, wise man, or sage singing karaoke.

It's not a pretty sight. But it's no different to strumming a guitar or banging on a Roland keyboard. It's funny, really, because by and large I don't like music and practically never listen to it.

Dan Rowden wrote:

So much for free health care.

I know the system causes delays for electic treatments, but I wonder why this is an issue for a sage.

If I have a health problem - such as the one I described - then I believe that early treatment is the best option, to nip the problem in the bud rather than having to wait years for a treatment which may then be too late.

That is sensible.

Why do you think a wise person wouldn't be concerned about such matters? It's no different than being concerned about other health matters, such as diet and exercise.

Let's say you wanted to understand the Hare Krishnas. I guarantee you that you will have a better understanding of them after living with them for three months than relying solely on other forms of information.

The Kevin I know thinks he understands them just by eating at their restaurants and reading their literature.

I've also spent several days living at a Hare Krishna commune, and have lived in similar places when I was in India.

And what's to understand anyway? Give me a single example of something you now understand about Americans that you didn't before this trip.

I understand more deeply what it feels like to live in America. I don't think there's any significantly new idea I have about Americans, but my understanding has been deepened.

Generally speaking, it's fair to say that I found America to be marginally more civilized than I expected - as reflected in my photos. Australians have a habit of demonizing Americans, and that can lead to an inaccurate picture.

times you've been in a position to do so and have chosen other options.

There's only been one time I've had enough cash to do a printing myself (about $5000 required) and on that occassion I judged buying a cheap house to be of higher priority. It may have been the right decision.

I personally believe the book should have its own promotional domain

Yes, I'll see about that.

Here is a link to the proposed cover. Any feedback?

I've just split a whole lot of posts over to a new topic:

Poison for the Heart - and Women

David Quinn, after being critical of Kevin and his holiday, to Kevin wrote: Ok, I'm content with that. Sorry to drag you through the mill like that, but sometimes these things need to be said.

Why would one one person who is supposedly advancing towards egolessness say sorry to another supposedly advancing towards egolessness, like this? And why would you be sorry in the first place for pointing out what you see as faults, when you both say that you want to remove faults? Could it be, that you are really just applying a veneer of comfort for the benefit of his and your egos, with this "sorry" comment?

David Quinn, in another post to Kevin wrote: But not to worry. I've said my piece.

Another example, representative of an apparent deference I think I may perceive in your interactions with Kevin. A number of these seem to crop up at the end of your posts critical of Kevin, I suppose in an attempt to mask the bitter flavour with a sweet aftertaste...??? Something to examine I'd say. An interesting psychological dynamic between you and he perhaps...

David Quinn discussing Kevin with Elizabeth wrote:But as someone else said, it's his business. I'm not above creating bad karma myself, so I'm not really in a position to pass judgment.

Another example of this behaviour, again defensively trailing at the end of a criticism. Again deferring by lowering your own position. That very last bit really is a nasty bit of mediocrity, and one you have spoken out against in others, David. Of course you're really in a position to pass judgement, and you had just been doing so in the preceding posts, you contradictory silly willy you.

You're right. I guess that I was trying to counter the perception that I was being emotional in my criticisms of Kevin, as the criticisms were quite strong. But I agree that it was probably unnecessary.

Thanks for bringing it to my attention.

-

DHodges wrote:

Nick Treklis wrote: I think the goal of any sage is to allow anything about themselves to be a direct representation of wisdom.

Wow, that seems almost completely backward to me. The last thing I would want is people looking up to me as some sort of symbol, thinking I was enlightened or a guru or something. If that happened, I'd start doing all sorts of foolish things. (Fortunately, I am in no danger there.)

You can only go on your own. You can not follow someone else. You must find your own way.

Of course you can learn from other people, but nothing should be accepted uncritically. There is always the possibility of error, from anyone. Anyone could have a blind spot. Being wise can not be a cult of personality. Leading or following such a cult is not wisdom.

I think you misunderstood me. How does seeking to embody and represent wisdom necessarily mean one wants people to look up to them like a god? From my perspective it appears that the wiser one becomes the more likely it is that the masses will view him as useless or "doing nothing".

Dan Rowden wrote:

Nick Treklis wrote:Don't worry, I wont ask anyone to picture a spiritual teacher, wise man, or sage singing karaoke.

It's not a pretty sight. But it's no different to strumming a guitar or banging on a Roland keyboard. It's funny, really, because by and large I don't like music and practically never listen to it.

I like to impose my will upon my opponent in sports, but I actually like certain sports to an extent. So where do you get the desire to sing in front of a crowd if such things don't interest you?

Elizabeth,

Although looking at it from a purely logical standpoint, we don't want to overlook that there is a common cause to both the poverty and the criminal activity

Oh? What would that be? Bad character, perhaps?

it is also important to recognize the direct observation of attitudes of poor people in feeling that since they don't have anything nice, no one else should either.

I see you have some bigoted ideas about the poor. Interesting, but not surprising, since it's America. But I can assure you that not all poor people feel as if they "don't have anything nice." Certainly they may not have anything judged "nice" by American culture, but the parade of material rubbish presumed "nice" in that sense does not exhaust the full range of potentially nice things. Not that it would occur to us Americans, but there are definitions of success which do not include materialistic achievements and may even require their absence.

Many who are last shall be first. Sounds pretty "nice" to me...

Nat, I was speaking of types of poor that were being discussed. I did not mean for it to be a sweeping statement. You are right, and I should have phrased that more carefully.

OK.

The value of poverty, of course, depends entirely on whether one is "poor in spirit," as Jesus put it. As you correctly recognize, many of the poor are poor in wallet only, and have as much desire to be wealthy and worldly as any millionaire. It is these poor who are driven to violence, crime, drink, and drugs by the hopelessness of their situation. They are unable to reconcile their actual conditions with their indoctrinated materialistic desires, and misery is the result. These poor do exist in large numbers and deserve your criticism. There are few more pathetic than the self-loathing poor, conditioned to see themselves (and others of similar financial status) as "failures."

However, I think one would be surprised at the number of poor who are either voluntarily and intentionally so, or at least not deeply dissatisfied with being so. They are very much a minority, and undoubtedly the relentlessness of the cultural environment causes them to experience occasional moments of weakness (I certainly do), but surely there is a significant fraction of the poor population who recognize the considerable spiritual value of material humility. These are the "poor in spirit." They understand that many who are last in one regard are first in another.

I didn't really want to raise all this in public, but the nature of this thread and the way it evolved has demanded it.

"I didn't want to bitch you out in front of your friends dear, but waiting until we got home and speaking to you in private wouldn't cut it. You have to pay for your insolence, you know."

Have you given any serious thought as to why you couldn't have discussed these issues you have with Kevin in private, David? Why did you really feel it necessary to confront Kevin here, at this forum? I found the whole thing disturbing ... on more than one level. All this over a trip? There's something underlying all this scorn (and yes, that's what it appears to be to many of us), and it stinks of more than just seeing a club member break a few rules and face a finger-wagging "tsk tsk."

There are also plenty of poor who are not high minded, but nonetheless neither are they bitter. Those numbers would swell greatly without the American media hype. I've heard many reminiscenses from people who grew up poor, either here or in other countries, in which they had a homogenous community, most people were poor, and the rich were a rare but interesting commodity. The phrase they often use is "we were poor but we didn't know it."

PyroSylph wrote:

I didn't really want to raise all this in public, but the nature of this thread and the way it evolved has demanded it.

"I didn't want to bitch you out in front of your friends dear, but waiting until we got home and speaking to you in private wouldn't cut it. You have to pay for your insolence, you know."

Have you given any serious thought as to why you couldn't have discussed these issues you have with Kevin in private, David? Why did you really feel it necessary to confront Kevin here, at this forum? I found the whole thing disturbing ... on more than one level. All this over a trip? There's something underlying all this scorn (and yes, that's what it appears to be to many of us), and it stinks of more than just seeing a club member break a few rules and face a finger-wagging "tsk tsk."

I'm sure it disturbed a number of people. It was meant to be disturbing.

And yes, it was scorn, it did have to do with something more serious than the taking of a trip, it did have the smell of something more than a dispute between club-members - there's no question of it. I thought I had explained my concerns in that post on page 11. What is it that's unclear?

-

David Quinn wrote:
And yes, it was scorn, it did have to do with something more serious than the taking of a trip, it did have the smell of something more than a dispute between club-members - there's no question of it. I thought I had explained my concerns in that post on page 11. What is it that's unclear?

-

What's unclear is why you felt such "scorn" for Kevin's choices. One of your issues was that he chose to stay with a woman at one point during his travels, you assume (with no pause of thought it seems) that he would be unable to maintain his "philosophical" composure and would be tempted by the "cow." Given your's and Kevin's history, it would seem your first thought should have been "I'll ask Kevin what his reasonings are for going" rather than to just jump to the conclusion that he was becoming a "sex slave" for Liz, rekindling a relationship with a "vacuous female," or that he was in a "passive absorption mode" the entire trip. To be honest, your entire reaction to Kevin's adventure smacked more of "Wow, I wonder if I would be able to maintain myself if I did the same thing," rather than any true aversion to his actions. You even threw a few stones at Joel, William, Greg and Matt (their similar appearances) for no apparent reason other than you found yourself unable to refrain from such (what was the reason for that particular comment anyway? do you believe appearance reflects something philosophical about a person?).

Dan wants to say it was all just "people being honest about their perceptions," one wonders exactly how you perceive Kevin to voice such scorn. Are you Kevin's watchdog? I mean, come on, what does commenting on Kevin's "soulless tourist snaps" (a Dan comment) have to do with anything? Does being a man of Wisdom by default make you a professional photographer? It was a petty snap, as was a few more of your comments;

I just hope that she didn't ogle your shirtless body sweating in the yard and giggle to her friends about how sexy you looked.

You do realize, coming from you, what this looks like, do you not? Concerned that Liz may find Kevin attractive? What does that have to do with Kevin? Unless you assume he would be doing it on purpose...

In the end, it is the connection you have with certain kinds of middle-aged women - the ones who possess a kind of motherly, adult-like mentality - that I can't relate to.

So because you can't "relate" it automatically means something is amiss with Kevin? Again, it sounds like you are chastising the man.

I found it disturbing that your eagerness to get over there seemed to override everything else.

What you should have found disturbing was how you emotionally reacted. It was akin to a Mom being ticked-off her child went on a field trip without her permission... or approval.

I have my reasons for challenging the manner in which Kevin went on his trip, and his lifestyle in general over the past ten years.

You never gave your reasons for the challenge, you simply pointed out what you believed was, uh, improper on Kevin's part. What are your reasons? Did Kevin disobey the rules? Did he make choices you didn't give him permission to make? Do you feel obligated to severely criticize him here for his behavior? You even go so far as to point out that women are coming to Kevin's defense in the thread and ask him what he is giving them! It just doesn't fit in with all you (and others) have embraced here. In fact, yourself, Sue and Dan at times appeared to be (dare I say it) like fishwives!

You say you are not in a place to pass judgment, then proceed to let us all know you think Kevin is becoming a "cow." You complain (I won't use the word that first comes to mind) because he buys a home, health insurance, plays golf, etc. Seriously, if it is true that QRS is not an entity (per se) then it seems there is something far deeper going on here, something that may actually go against all that you espouse. Maybe an unhealthy attachment that is being ignored for some purpose unknown to the masses?

All-in-all, I just found the whole situation to be covered in girlish pettiness, especially vivid in Sue's post(s). It's something I recognize quite easily. ;)

What you don't seem to understand is that David has known Kevin for 20 years and myself only a little less. We have intimate appreciation both of his philosophy and life/history. Plus, as I have have already noted, we respect him and his philosophical legacy greatly. I believe you'll simply have to accept that we know more than need be revealed in this discussion. It's more or less an exercise in QRS hazing done out of simple love for the guy and what he stands for at his best. It has been played out in public because Kevin chose to post this thread and none of us felt it could be left to stand.

Are you Kevin's watchdog?

Yes, in a way we are each other's watchdogs. That's what spiritual friends are for. Having Sue on one's arse is, for example, simultaneously the best and worst of things :)

Dan, you said "QRS?" And just a few words later, you said "love?"

Holy shit, which of Hugh Everett's parallel universes did I wake up in today? :p

Yes, in a way we are each other's watchdogs. That's what spiritual friends are for. Having Sue on one's arse is, for example, simultaneously the best and worst of things

I bet you say that to all the girls. ;)

It has been played out in public because Kevin chose to post this thread and none of us felt it could be left to stand.

I still don't see what the big deal was. He posted a thread linking to some pictures and thanking some people. Where was the big transgression in that? I know you guys see it as an egotistical action, but surely it was a minor one even from that perspective.

I guess I think you guys were still pissed at him over taking the trip and used this thread as an excuse to vent some of that lingering frustration. If that isn't the case, then you need to establish why an issue that is minor from any reasonable perspective has generated a 300 post thread.

Or, alternatively, you can just tell me it's none of my business and to bugger off. But it is you guys who made it all public, when you could have simply ignored the thread and bawled Kevin out in a PM. Philo and I are as friends as good as any, and we never tear each other down in public. Nor do Robert and I, although we've certainly had some substantial disagreements behind the scenes. Friendship, "spiritual" or otherwise, does not require (or arguably allow for) dressing down one's friends in front of an audience. I guess that's why I don't really buy you guys' stated reasons for doing it.

Of course, maybe you guys are coming from a whole different framework in that regard. And maybe I'm biased, because I don't think Kevin did anything wrong at any point in the whole thing, trip included - with the possible exception of allowing himself to be underpaid for work he did. I'm aware that he caused some major embarrassment for "QRS" by running off to visit a woman for several weeks, but I think he had every right to do it.

Unidian wrote:Dan, you said "QRS?"

I believe there are instances where the acronym is legitimate.

And just a few words later, you said "love?"

I probably meant something else but the tear in my eye stopped me from typing properly.

Holy shit, which of Hugh Everett's parallel universes did I wake up in today? :p

I'd answer that if I had any idea who Hugh Everett was.

Yes, in a way we are each other's watchdogs. That's what spiritual friends are for. Having Sue on one's arse is, for example, simultaneously the best and worst of things

I bet you say that to all the girls. ;)

You're making me think of strap-ons which is highly unfortunate.

I bet you say that to all the girls.

Trust me, he doesn't.

Oh, snap!

You're making me think of strap-ons which is highly unfortunate.

So which member of "The Village People" is Dan closest to?

The Cowboy!

I'm not even going to ask how you reasoned your way to that judgment. The familiarity with the members of......

Nevermind..

The construction worker is my favorite.

I'm not even going to ask how you reasoned your way to that judgment. The familiarity with the members of......

"Having Sue on one's arse is, for example, simultaneously the best and worst of things"

Well I didn't think of strap ons in relation to this comment, but you did. Why? Perhaps there is some repressed gayness in you (I relate female using strap ons on males as being caused by underlying bisexuality).

But really I was just stirring you. btw, I had to check that there really as a cowboy in The Village People.

Anyway enough of this rubbish.

I've split several recent posts off into a new topic, "Levels of pyramids, etc"

I have read this thread through. I respond to some of the points as follows:

- The deal Kevin accepted highlights the despicable state of the human race. A board of sage directors chaired by Kevin should be funded hundreds of billions of dollars each year by the world's governments to allocate towards wisdom.

- I see Kevin own's his own home. Owning one's own home acts towards completing the self, by reducing connectedness, dependency, and the weakness these create. Financial power is of advantage to the sage. For example, if he ever has a worldly desire, he can often explore it and deal with it more quickly with greater financial power. I acknowledge however that renting has it's own advantages. I do not wish to be seen as offering a recommendation either way.

- I do recommend travelling to a significantly different place from home at least every few years. In particular, i suggest that individuals with high capacity for memorisation and a strong interest in consciousness are more likely to seek fresh imagery to avoid even minor forms of mental stagnation. The bogey of repetition, the genius's nemesis. I acknowledge this may be a weakness and this may not be the best way to deal with it.

- I have reason to believe that Kelly Jones has misled some people to think wrong things about me, due to her weaknesses. I am not saying this to admonish her, i merely hope to correct the errors. Kelly has shown great pluck in her endeavours, and i hope she continues. The truth is that i have remained under relentless development, against immense social pressures. What i have learnt from this will trickle if not flood through over time. I have large chunks of writings built up over a number of years and often wish for an archivist or the like, but really i must do this myself.