From So Not a Cafe to So Merton...
myriadsmallcreature
wordplay. However...
Just before our hero leaves Domino's apartment on his way to the cafe,
he gets a call from his wife, and there is a copy of "Introducing
Sociology" prominently displayed, as he is talking to her. Surely
Robert Merton has a chapter of his own in this book.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_K._Merton
Merton's theory on deviance stems from his 1938 analysis of the
relationship between culture, structure and anomie. Merton defines
culture as an "organized set of normative values governing behavior
which is common to members of a designated society or group." Social
structures are the "organized set of social relationships in which
members of the society or group are variously implicated." [8]
Anomie, state of normlessness, then occurs when there is "an acute
disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and the socially
structured capacities of members of the group to act in accord with
them." [8] In his theory, Merton links anomie with deviance and
argues that the discontinuity between culture and structure have the
dysfunctional consequence of leading to deviance within society [9].
The term anomie, derived from Émile Durkheim, for Merton means: a
discontinuity between cultural goals and the legitimate means
available for reaching them.[10] Applied to the United States he sees
the American dream as an emphasis on the goal of monetary success but
without the corresponding emphasis on the legitimate avenues to march
toward this goal. In other words, Merton believes that all subscribe
to the American Dream, but the ways in which people go about obtaining
the Dream are not the same because not everyone has the same
opportunities and advantages as the next person. This leads to a
considerable amount of (the Parsonian term of) deviance. This theory
is commonly used in the study of criminology (specifically the strain
theory).
The following article refers on the book, but without making the
Merton connection.
http://www.visual-memory.co.uk/amk/doc/0096.html
Interesting, though not unrealistic, that a "hooker" would have
textbooks in her library--not to mention "Shadows on the Mirror."
kelpzoidzl
Merton is frequently mentioned in connection to Club of Rome and
Bilderberg
Maybe he was at the ceremony, maybe he is Red Cloak, maybe that is
SK's secret message there.:)
dc
.
myriadsmallcreature
I find no such connections anywhere online. Links?
There is another Robert Merton, an economist. The son...
an economist, he was connected with a hedge-fund scandal that some
call a financial scam, in the news during the filming of the movie.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_C._Merton
"Together with Myron Scholes, Merton was among the board of directors
of Long-Term Capital Management (LTCM), a hedge fund that failed
spectacularly in 1998 after losing $4.6 billion in less than four
months.[2] The Federal Reserve was so concerned about the potential
impact of LTCM's failure on the financial system that it arranged for
a group of 19 banks and other firms to provide sufficient liquidity
for the banking system to survive. Although these investors were
eventually paid off, the reputation of Merton and Scholes were
tarnished."
So, that would put the father, born in the lower middle class, in the
position defining the relationship of the elite to the rest of
society, and the son in the position of perhaps being one of those
elite. Just the kind of irony that Kubrick would appreciate, allowing
the economy of commenting on both sides at once.
kelpzoidzl
>
Yes i know Robert K and Robert C are father son.
Robert K wrote a book with Umberto Ecco years back. Ecco wrote a
Forward for him. And book dedications Who of course wrote name of the
rose and those other secret society books
Before I realized what a crazy scam the Club of Rome and the
malthusian psychosis was, I was reading all that and Merton books were
cited alot. i don't remember the details. The whole idea of a "self-
fulfilling prophecy" is like the parnoid catastrophic expectation.
that worrying about the end of the world is a self fulfilling prophecy
and the principle can be used if you believe.
Robert C is all about globalization.
I don't have time atm to look further, but interesting .
Merton was a very influential person very much a darling of a certain
segment of social engineers,
dc
kelpzoidzl
Merton is listed in Club of Madrid also, another social engineering
org.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
You seem intent on implicating one or both of the Mertons in nefarious
activity. Too strongly stated?
Questions...
Do you believe that social engineering of any kind is necessary today?
Do you believe that all members of the Club of Rome subscribe to the
same methods of social engineering?
Might Merton Sr. have been involved in the abovementioned groups
BECAUSE of a difference of philosophy in the implementation of social
engineering methods?
Could those who use Merton's terms and data actually use his name to
advance social engineering agendas which differ from his own?
Think Nietzsche here...
Is it possible that Sr. and Jr. are radically different in their
philosophies and their attitudes?
kelpzoidzl
Yes too strongly stated, through the imagined EWS filter, but I
watched some youtube videos with Robert C and Paul Samuelson were
talking to refresh my memory as to where he was at, and notice how
often he used the word "global"
I'm not into globalization at all. I used to think that way years
ago, then realized that is idiotic, idealistic and naive.
Robert K had some brilliant ideas and was very central to Socialogy
and Social Engineering theory. Is that nefarious?
It is if they are manipulating people IMO. Social engineering to me
is repugnant and unnecessary and by it's very nature includes the
"Elite"
Last night I watched the new Richard Kelly film "THE BOX" It had bad
reviews so I expected to be disappointed, but it was a pretty trippy
film. Not to give anything away to those who havent seen it,
conspiracy is involved and a diabolical social engineering going on.
> Questions...
>
> Do you believe that social engineering of any kind is necessary today?
Only laws arrived at through correct Constitutional process not
progressivism or ideology.
> Do you believe that all members of the Club of Rome subscribe to the
> same methods of social engineering?
No, but I think there is a general atttitude which at one time I
myself had.
>
> Might Merton Sr. have been involved in the abovementioned groups
> BECAUSE of a difference of philosophy in the implementation of social
> engineering methods?
I just know that even brilliant people can go through long periods of
naivite and blind spots in their thinking--best example of that I use
is HG Wells.
> Could those who use Merton's terms and data actually use his name to
> advance social engineering agendas which differ from his own?
Yes. Very possibly. That would be worth researching further--if for
no other reason then to interpret Kubrick and what messges really are
being imparted. Also it would be very funny to uncover more meaning
like that from EWS, beyond just a book that happened to be on the set
and had no special meaning---fat chance with Kubrick.
> Think Nietzsche here...
>
> Is it possible that Sr. and Jr. are radically different in their
> philosophies and their attitudes?- Hide quoted text -
>
I don't get that impression but I do get the impression that he had
his wealth handed to him on a silver platter. He doesn't strike me as
being the giant brain his dad was.
Until you mentioned it i didn;t think too much about it, taking it
more as a commonly read book that would be owned by a college
student. Perhaps the only meaning was SK making it clear she had been
or was a College Student with a baby---there is that baby carriage
outside the door.
dc
kelpzoidzl
>
> - Show quoted text -
Correction: stroller not carriage
kelpzoidzl
Could be Sally's stroller.
Unrelated I'm sure but there is also that chance that Domino told
Sally to say she had AIDS out of guilt knowing he was married-----
suggesting she was more then just a cheap hooker ---maybe hooking to
take care of her baby---that would also help explain the question as
to why Sally seemed to assume they had had sex. Would Domino lie to
Sally that she had sex with him?
Perhaps there's some sociology at work there too.
dc
kelpzoidzl
So a mother, trying to follow society's goals but there is a
disconnect with her goal and ability to reach it, causing her to hook
after having a baby. That would also mean she wasn't the kind to have
an abortion, implying high standards. Bill's visit knocked her into
reality and she felt guilty, decided to quit hooking but when he
returned she hid telling Sally to "tell him I have aids!"
dc
myriadsmallcreature
Yes, fat chance that Kubrick would pass up the opportunity to enrich
the landscape.
Have you read "Shadows on the Mirror"? I think it also adds a lot.
Professional woman/"pro"/elite/murder/class/anomie/deviance etc...
Author Frances Fyfield's bio is interesting also.
If Kubrick is implicating the Mertons as sympathetic to the elite,
whoever they are, it adds to the poignancy, don't you think, given
Merton Sr. characterization of the elite, and the American Dream.
kelpzoidzl
<myriadsmallcreat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Thanks for responding so thoughtfully. Refreshing.
>
> Yes, fat chance that Kubrick would pass up the opportunity to enrich
> the landscape.
>
> Have you read "Shadows on the Mirror"? I think it also adds a lot.
>
No I haven't read it. Looks interesting. I'll check it out and read
her bio.
> Professional woman/"pro"/elite/murder/class/anomie/deviance etc...
>
> Author Frances Fyfield's bio is interesting also.
>
> If Kubrick is implicating the Mertons as sympathetic to the elite,
> whoever they are, it adds to the poignancy, don't you think, given
> Merton Sr. characterization of the elite, and the American Dream.
I'll have to think about that ("the Poignancy) a while.
The elite have this ability to co-opt others. Wine and Dine them,
romance them and even put them on pedestals. I'd be interested to
find out more to see if there is any real reason to think he became
one of the elite. Sometimes brilliant minds have blind spots when
manipulated.
Be funny if Merton became a leader and not just a theoretician used by
a secret cabal.
.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
> romance them and even put them on pedestals. I'd be interested to
> find out more to see if there is any real reason to think he became
> one of the elite. Sometimes brilliant minds have blind spots when
> manipulated.
>
> Be funny if Merton became a leader and not just a theoretician used by
> a secret cabal.
>
> .
> dc
Maybe. Wining and dining is more appropriate for celebrities. I think
a more persuasive approach for intellectuals is the intellectual
approach.
The scenario goes something like this...
Show them what is just beyond the umbra of their profession.
Political, military, biochemical, psychosocial 'truths' of which they
may not be aware.
The way the Clintons and Obama were sold on the program?
kelpzoidzl
Looking over her books and quick bio she looks interesting.
I guess that is the first book of a big series. i could get into that
if it's good.
One thing about EWS I like to ber able to look at it with the
conspiratorial POV as if we have to start with the premise that EWS is
a message about a REAL:life conspiracy Kubrick was privy too and he is
acting as a whistleblower, rather then it just being him playing with
conspiracy theory for fun and creative mindgames. I find the most
entertainment value in that POV.
If the above premise is true then Sk would somewhere plant clues as to
the identity of these elite.
I never considered the Merton connection that way.
Who is Red Cloak and who is Sandor? in the conspiracy
My Sandor theory
http://img146.imageshack.us/img146/9226/sandorsoroszy1.jpg
dc
kelpzoidzl
yes,
Wine and Dine=Flumux them and dazzle
>
> The way the Clintons and Obama were sold on the program?
And then perhaps the fear of what would happen were they to blab.:)
Some Hillary expression during the campaign had a dear in the
headlights look on it and then suddenly she basically gave up
campaign, even though she was winning with the popular vote. the
mysterious day trip she and Obama made lving bus loads of journalists
waiting with PR spokesmen on an unscheduled meeting somewhere.
How so many keep getting these mild heart attacks or sudden
hospitalizations .......... from Svensmark the solar scientist AGW
denier, (youtube search svensmark heart attack) whose pacemaker
apparently freaked out in Copenhagen, to Clinton and Limbaugh, Glenn
Beck, Dole and Cheney.
:) IN EWS mode.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
Apropos of nothing in particular...
Have you read 'Eyes Wide Open'? Eye opening.
In particular, there is an exchange between the author and Kubrick
about 'two kinds of Jews'.
re: Domino... She asks Dollar Bill for the time as part of sizing him
up. To see what kind of watch he had to go with his suit. "Want to
come inside with me." I love that.
Nevertheless, in my opinion, if she were a typical hooker she would
not have turned down his money. That she did distances her from the
stereotype.
In my opinion, she is not a pro, but more like the protagonist in
'Shadows on the Mirror'-- or in the tradition of the Oscar-laden
hookers with a golden heart... rather than the sexually abused and
neglected painted ladies who typically walk the streets.
In my opinion, she did not have HIV. In keeping with the tone of the
book, because he had no need of Domino's services, Sally lied on her
behalf so he would go home to his family.
In a way, Domino is like many of Kubrick's heroines, and in this case,
she is at the moral center of the story. With the singer serenading
soldiers in the enemy tongue. The defiled daughter marrying the
innocent young man who needs her. The Vietnamese sniper fighting for
freedom. The slave girl winning the heart of a gladiator.
Bill is another story.
:)
kelpzoidzl
There is also the comedic heroine in the novel Candy by Terry
Southern. It has an aspect of self-sacrifice and innocense when Candy
gives herself to others.
> In my opinion, she did not have HIV. In keeping with the tone of the
> book, because he had no need of Domino's services, Sally lied on her
> behalf so he would go home to his family.
>
agreed
> In a way, Domino is like many of Kubrick's heroines, and in this case,
> she is at the moral center of the story. With the singer serenading
> soldiers in the enemy tongue. The defiled daughter marrying the
> innocent young man who needs her. The Vietnamese sniper fighting for
> freedom. The slave girl winning the heart of a gladiator.
>
> Bill is another story.
>
> :)-
Some of Bill may have been Tom Cruise and I wonder what part of Bill
was really SK himself.
dc
kelpzoidzl
Yes I read Eyes Wide Open, but it hit my circular file after the last
page
dc
myriadsmallcreature
The door is opened for him.
He passes the first test in the bathroom at the Ziegler's.
The second test is at the Nathanson's. Result inconclusive. Did you
notice the clumsy greeting between Marion and her fiance? An arranged
marriage...
But Bill is Bill to the extent that he puts his family in peril
repeatedly, despite being warned, with his indiscretions.
He consents to indiscriminate sex with a woman who may, as far he
knows, have HIV.
He takes a taxi to Somerton. High comedy.
He refuses to take his clothes off at an orgy!
He goes to Nightingale's hotel.
He returns to Somerton and stands expectantly at the gate.
He goes to the hospital to see 'Amanda'.
Did I miss anything?
He drinks beer.
Not exactly a viable candidate.
:)
The door is closed behind him. On his way out.
Have you ever noticed the parallels between EWS and 'The Ninth Gate'?
kelpzoidzl
That's funny:)
Submit to the test.
Poor Bill My dad used to say "he'd starve to death with a loaf of
bread under his arm" I think that applies to Bill----i can relate to
that naive state living in Sonambulence and striving for normalness
even when theoretically one has it all figured out.
> Have you ever noticed the parallels between EWS and 'The Ninth Gate'?
Yes in a general sense and no in the specific.
Depp's character is smarter and an action character, not like dull
Bill. Corso was more of a serious Indiana Jones type with only
begrudged ethics or morals.
The woman of course -----But
What parallels do you see?
I am kicking around the idea of going to see Ghost Writer tomorrow
night.
dc
kelpzoidzl
Polanski attracted his disasters. Or should I say "summoned."
dc
kelpzoidzl
So, not recognizing the Bardos................one fails. Selling ones
soul and failing to beat the devil one fails.
This AMK thread I was fooling around with EWS and the Tibetan Book of
the dead and color
dc
myriadsmallcreature
'I look at my own childhood in a different way now. I look at it
through the prism of my children and I imagine how my parents
perceived the problems that occurred at the time, which I didn't know
before. My life is the best now it ever was. I had a very happy period
in London too, but that's the past.'
What's he going to do next? 'I wish I knew,' he says. 'Or do I really?
I used to talk on the phone to Stanley Kubrick. These were
conversations which would last sometimes for a long, long time. I
liked him very much. He was brilliant and bright and it was always so
exciting to talk to him because he knew so much about everything. And
he said, 'Don't you hate that interim period when you don't know what
you are going to do next? Why is it from film to film more difficult
to decide what you want to do?'
'And I remember I said 'yes, yes, yes' but I didn't know what he was
talking about. Because in those times it was so easy for me to choose
my next film. But now I know what he meant. One is much more exigeant
- what is this? Demanding? Because you know it takes so much of your
time and energy. It's like taking a dive. You hesitate before you
jump.'
myriadsmallcreature
Odd as it may seem I think that EWS and 'The Ninth Gate' are
deliberate extensions of one another, were made with each other in
mind...
part of a Millennial revelation trilogy...
:)
kelpzoidzl
Perhaps Polanski never passed the test--is still taking the test.
I wrote this once:
"I was the young long-haired, buddhist holy. hippie kid hitchhiking
(car was broken) up Benedict Canyon (where my girl friend lived),
getting picked up by an incredible blond in a black Mercedes,
wearing
only a lace white sheer top and High Heels. Stoned out of her mind.
wanting me to come up to her new house. Why oh why was I already in
love? How in the world did I turn that down? Guess I was protected.
"
"I don't know how well I could stand up under torture"
I passed the test or maybe just evaded it for a while.
dc
kelpzoidzl
hmmm, well I love both films although I think Polanski and Frank
Langella blew the ending--such a poorly executed ceremony---then the
image of the girl saved it somewhat.
Whats the third film in that trilogy?
dc
kelpzoidzl
I find it funny how Kubricks work is now all interpreted from so many
conspiratorial angles. SK purists used to poo poo the overly
conspiratorial --but with kubrick you have to think of everything.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
Did you read 'The Club Dumas'?
kelpzoidzl
No but i've wanted to, just never got around to it, I've heard its a
good one.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
There is much more to 'The Ninth Gate' that can only be understood by
reading the book.
While that is true of many adaptations it is central to 'The Ninth
Gate'.
In particular, at 86:33, the scene in the library, Corso is staring at
a picture--the wrong picture. Why is that?
As it turns out, NO ONE in the world (on the Internet anyway) has made
mention of this--even as a continuity error.
Must have been disheartening to Roman and his associates to draw so
little scrutiny at the most important moment in the film.
Although I suggest that there is a subculture quietly aware of the
meaning of that scene.
Again 86:33 in the library... nothing is happening, right? Just enough
time to go to the loo before the music starts up again.
kelpzoidzl
>
I'll check that out right now see if I had noticed anything previously
dc
kelpzoidzl
this is what i see at 86:33
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/7161/ninthgate8633.jpg
Only thing I see is the reflection in his glasses. Am I missing
something? or wrong frame?
He's just looked at the lucifer signed kessler white chessboard and
prior to that the knight on the horse and prior to that the postcard
photo.
After my 86:33 he uses the magnifier on the Balkan xerox Monk on his
knees about to be beheaded
So elucidate
dc
kelpzoidzl
>
> Only thing I see is the reflection in his glasses. Am I missing
> something? or wrong frame?
>
> He's just looked at the lucifer signed kessler white chessboard and
> prior to that the knight on the horse and prior to that the postcard
> photo.
>
> After my 86:33 he uses the magnifier on the Balkan xerox Monk on his
> knees about to be beheaded
>
> So elucidate
>
> dc
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Just before he is hit on the head he falls into the Kesseler photo of
the monk
dc
kelpzoidzl
>
> Just before he is hit on the head he falls into the Kesseler photo of
> the monk
>
correction: after he is hit on head he falls...etc
myriadsmallcreature
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Just before he is hit on the head he falls into the Kesseler photo of
> the monk
>
> dc
But he's looking at the wrong picture. That much is discernible by
attending only to the movie.
Why is he looking at that engraving? Who is the executioner?
Those questions can only be entertained intelligently only by reading
the book.
It's unfair really to expect the audience to reach that second level
of understanding.
So Polanski is making a movie on at least three levels (and more). The
first level is a horror/adventure movie. On this level, it is dreadful
in my opinion. Little effort was expended in that effort. The next
level is a mystery of sorts, demanding closer attention by the
audience. The audience has not been interested in playing. The third
level is revelation of several kinds, some of which can be gleaned
from the movie itself, some demands more. But I'm being redundant.
kelpzoidzl
>
> > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > Just before he is hit on the head he falls into the Kesseler photo of
> > the monk
>
> > dc
>
> But he's looking at the wrong picture. That much is discernible by
> attending only to the movie.
>
> Why is he looking at that engraving? Who is the executioner?
>
> Those questions can only be entertained intelligently only by reading
> the book.
>
> It's unfair really to expect the audience to reach that second level
> of understanding.
>
> So Polanski is making a movie on at least three levels (and more). The
> first level is a horror/adventure movie. On this level, it is dreadful
> in my opinion. Little effort was expended in that effort. The next
> level is a mystery of sorts, demanding closer attention by the
> audience. The audience has not been interested in playing. The third
> level is revelation of several kinds, some of which can be gleaned
> from the movie itself, some demands more. But I'm being redundant
Well ya got me watching the whole thing again. I hope the book is at
Barnes and Moble or Borders. I'll pick it up tomorrow.
Is that frame i linked the same frame you are talking about?
So who is the executioner? we don't see the signatures on the
executioner prints.
Which picture is the forgery?
I can wait to read it and see what I think.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
>
Roughly. The scene lasts about a minute or so.
> So who is the executioner? we don't see the signatures on the
> executioner prints.
The answer is in the book. The real question is why?
> Which picture is the forgery?
That's a whole other thing. The girl is leading him, obviously. But
she isn't exactly telling him the truth about the engraving either.
myriadsmallcreature
Above, you said...
"One thing about EWS I like to be able to look at it with the
conspiratorial POV as if we have to start with the premise that EWS is
a message about a REAL:life conspiracy Kubrick was privy too and he is
acting as a whistleblower, rather then it just being him playing with
conspiracy theory for fun and creative mindgames. I find the most
entertainment value in that POV."
My original take on the possible Merton connection was that it showed
Kubrick's opinion (unfavorable) of the orgy. Certainly, deviance and
anomie characterize the action and the participants. I'm not
necessarily so interested in the real-life models for the characters,
as others similar would likely arise to fill any void, in their
absence. If you follow my meaning.
However, Kubrick does leave what may be interpreted as a clue in the
New York Post article. 'The Club Dumas' makes a more thorough catalog
of likely suspects. IMO.
Which is not to say the two groups are necessarily the same. Or have
the same agenda. Or that either of the two have anything to do with
Polanski.
Just saying.
:)
CM
>
> Have you read 'Eyes Wide Open'? Eye opening.
>
> In particular, there is an exchange between the author and Kubrick
> about 'two kinds of Jews'.
Could you elaborate on this discussion? The book isn't available at
any library in my area :( Did it have to do with Kubrick's research
on Hilberg's Destruction of the European Jews? It's intriguing on
Kubrick's contemplations on Jewish issues, since it was so subtly
exercised in his movies.
kelpzoidzl
Those that escaped and those that were more sheepish, that thought
everything would fine is my interpretation. Much like today-saome
would say in reverse,
So maybe an allusion to Polanski as an escapee as an indication of xyz
conspiracy, that theory would have an obvious problem with denier
theories.
One can come up with numerous possiblities about Polanski and his
mysteries having nothing to do with conspiracy xyz.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
'Eyes Wide Open', claiming that it was irresponsible and/or
inaccurate. Perhaps Katharina will deign to interject here.
My hazy recollection is that it came up in conversation between
Stanley and the author in regards to Doctor Bill walking around with
so much cash in the middle of the night. My memory, if I remember
correctly, is not what it used to be, if it ever was. There was not
much more discussed or divulged about two kinds of Jewishness than
that. For instance, Jewish by blood versus conversion to Judaism did
not explicitly enter the conversation. I found it remarkable that he/
they would make any such distinction. I believe it was Stanley who
made the remark.
Katharina?
If it is of interest to you, CM, I could reorder the book through my
local library and relate precisely what was said. Let me know.
kelpzoidzl
Well, well well., Lord Bullingdon! It's about time. actually your
style gave you away...as welll as your Pink Floyd passion.
Last time you were here I was one of very few who thought you had the
right to express your opinions and found you more entertaining then
most. But I never will back up people getting nasty or insulting to
Kubrick family as you had earlier then that.
dc
----------------------------------------------------------
"I am a 22 year-old Brazilian. I am single. I live in Sao Paulo,
in the southeast region of the country. I'm a mechanical
engineer, and I'm making an MBA on Business Administration at
USP (Federal University of Sao Paulo). I have one brother.
I like classical music (specially Bach, Beethoven and
Schubert), Jazz and progressive rock****** (specially Pink
Floyd).******* I
love cinema, specially the films from Kubrick, Ingmar Bergman,
Akira Kurosawa and Luchino Visconti. I like travelling, and I
have visited Europe (England, France, Czeck Republic, Italy,
Switzerland, Spain and Germany) and United States. I'm 1.76 m
high, and weight 82 kg.
I use hotmail because it was the first one I found. I also have
another mail address, but I don't use it anymore.
Did I answer your question?
L.B. "
kelpzoidzl
(Harry Bailey,) ( Gnome) etc. having a nice long discussion.
You might attract to old crew back to amk for al ittle more of the in
and out.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
Sorry to disappoint, but I've kept the same name throughout my
Internet career from 2004 forward. Wrong continent, age, education,
interests, height and weight, etc. Maybe we're twins.
:)
Close to 7 billion of us standing toe to toe on this island, we're
bound to resemble one another. There are reasons especially why your
LB and I might both share an interest in the Floyd and Kubrick, just
as there is a reason why David Gilmour would name one of his songs
'Childhood's End' and put Clarke's prose into his songs.
I have nothing against the Kubrick family. Exchanged a few emails with
Katharina through her studio email account. She was friendlier than I
had a right to expect. But not informative regarding the subject
matter at hand. Which was to be expected.
Ultimately, as the publius says it's more important to attend the
words, not who says them. Though I understand why you might read my
profile, check my old posts: to get an idea who you're dealing with.
Indeed, that's why I keep the same email account for all my posts. For
the sake of continuity.
Fortunately or unfortunately, I won't tip my hand about what I believe
is happening. First of all, you wouldn't believe me. Secondly, it
would deny you the pure joy of self-discovery.
But it doesn't matter. I have discovered through repetition that those
who believe in TPTB or the xyz conspiracy or the Illuminati--or
whatever--have too much invested in their research to give up their
hard-won beliefs easily. Not that I'm referring to you necessarily. I
can't say. Just that anything more than a few words here and there
soon reach the point of diminishing returns.
I do want to say this: Knowledge is disciplinary, wisdom
interdisciplinary. Forums often suffer just because of their subject
matter and because of it end up rehashing the same material over and
over. Kubrick was who he was because his mind wandered everywhere, and
saw connections everywhere. We do well to follow that lead. Off topic
with a purpose. It has to do with the left and the right. The red and
the blue. Don't you want to go where the rainbow ends?
Have you seen the new release of Jung's 'The Red Book? In this, his
life's magnum opus, he is obsessed with one symbol. What is it?
:)
kelpzoidzl
<myriadsmallcreat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Mar 11, 7:05 pm, kelpzoidzl <kelpzoi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I would love to see---for entertainment purposes----you and Padraig
> > (Harry Bailey,) ( Gnome) etc. having a nice long discussion.
>
> > You might attract to old crew back to amk for al ittle more of the in
> > and out.
>
> > dc
>
> Sorry to disappoint, but I've kept the same name throughout my
> Internet career from 2004 forward. Wrong continent, age, education,
> interests, height and weight, etc. Maybe we're twins.
>
> :)
Oh well. Do an archive search for Lord Bullingdon get some laughs.
Creeping cryptography, always culminating in a bitter explosion
>
> Close to 7 billion of us standing toe to toe on this island, we're
> bound to resemble one another. There are reasons especially why your
> LB and I might both share an interest in the Floyd and Kubrick, just
> as there is a reason why David Gilmour would name one of his songs
> 'Childhood's End' and put Clarke's prose into his songs.
Plausible., I don't recall LB denying he was he, on various
appearances.
Then you must remember LB?
>
> I have nothing against the Kubrick family. Exchanged a few emails with
> Katharina through her studio email account. She was friendlier than I
> had a right to expect. But not informative regarding the subject
> matter at hand. Which was to be expected.
Sorry then
> Ultimately, as the publius says it's more important to attend the
> words, not who says them. Though I understand why you might read my
> profile, check my old posts: to get an idea who you're dealing with.
> Indeed, that's why I keep the same email account for all my posts. For
> the sake of continuity.
>
> Fortunately or unfortunately, I won't tip my hand about what I believe
> is happening. First of all, you wouldn't believe me. Secondly, it
> would deny you the pure joy of self-discovery
I've never been big on spoilers, but frankly nothing surprises me
anymore,
Still the creeping-crypto-socratic writing style is old to me. I'm
all for forthrightness.
After all it is just opinion neh?
> But it doesn't matter. I have discovered through repetition that those
> who believe in TPTB or the xyz conspiracy or the Illuminati--or
> whatever--have too much invested in their research to give up their
> hard-won beliefs easily. Not that I'm referring to you necessarily. I
> can't say. Just that anything more than a few words here and there
> soon reach the point of diminishing returns.
I think you took some cynicism of mine as acceptance or denial when in
reality it was an attempt at dry humor.
Like global warming "science" nothing is settled.
if reading those books you recommended should cause me to discover
your theory then feel free to hold back the spoilers, but thats not
important. Feel free to expound in crupto if you like but srsly just
say what you mean. If it's foul i'll tell you.
> I do want to say this: Knowledge is disciplinary, wisdom
> interdisciplinary. Forums often suffer just because of their subject
> matter and because of it end up rehashing the same material over and
> over. Kubrick was who he was because his mind wandered everywhere, and
> saw connections everywhere. We do well to follow that lead. Off topic
> with a purpose. It has to do with the left and the right. The red and
> the blue. Don't you want to go where the rainbow ends?
>
> Have you seen the new release of Jung's 'The Red Book? In this, his
> life's magnum opus, he is obsessed with one symbol. What is it?
>
> :)
I've only seen the pdf about it. Lots of Old imagery a red cross Tree
of life and snake scenes....do you have the book? What is it?
Without googling it, probably his own dick in one hand and a DH
Lawrence book in the other. (my cynicism again)
dc
kelpzoidzl
> interdisciplinary.
to me, real wisdom comes entirely from practice and is experiential.
Earthly secrets and intrigue is entertainment but few things offer
much surprise.
Forums often suffer just because of their subject
> matter and because of it end up rehashing the same material over and
> over. Kubrick was who he was because his mind wandered everywhere, and
> saw connections everywhere. We do well to follow that lead. Off topic
> with a purpose. It has to do with the left and the right. The red and
> the blue. Don't you want to go where the rainbow ends?
>
> :)
Since the rainbow never has a true beginning and end it has to be
understood in context.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
The two ends of the rainbow remain to be seen.
If you have nothing else, you'll always have your cynicism.
Relatively speaking, the multiverse is infinite, the mind is finite.
Overwhelmed by sensory data, the mind/brain compensates by reducing
the stream into patterns and models. Models communicated from others
give wisdom that cannot be got from experience alone. That is the
difference between the left and the right.
The red and the blue are the extreme limits of the range of visual
sensory perception. Or are they? Don't you want to go where the
rainbow ends?
Have you seen 'Sliding Doors', a little throwaway by Pollack?
kelpzoidzl
Yes, I've seen it.To me it was Cute.
"Experience" in my meaning is not only daily life experience. I've
been a buddhist practitioner for 45 years. All inclusive experiences
I had back in 1967-68 showed me much more then lifetimes of regular
practice or thoughts. The theory or mental machinations behind it
really means nothing in the big picture.
dc
kelpzoidzl
<myriadsmallcreat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> I downloaded the pdf file of 'The Red Book' (illegally?) from a site
> called Rapidshare? but can't find the link. Maybe it's still out there
> somewhere. Maybe it's been pulled.
>
> If you look at it, you'll find the wisdom he has to offer by
> recreating his experience, as is your preference.
There was a direct link somewhere can't find it right now.
I have it on my computer.
I'lll take a look.
dc
kelpzoidzl
Ya I have the whole thing in pdf
dc
myriadsmallcreature
A buddhist practitioner for 45 years?
Excellent, kelpzoidzl. So then of course your vision extends, as it
does with the birds and the bees, into the ultraviolet, and then also
into the infrared, and your hearing extends below 20 hertz and above
20,000. And the rest of your body has eyes and ears of its own. You
can make one hand pale and cold, and the other red with heat. Your
breath is a perfect engine for health and vitality. You can cry all
day like an infant without losing your voice. Removed from desire you
feel no fear of loss of life or property. Free from fear, your body
vibrates in tune with this garden universe, feeling the force in its
pure state without the need for mediated perception. Yea verily, you
are as a god on the Internet. I envy you that. For that is what it
takes to make models and patterns superfluous to experience. And I
thank you for walking this path with mere mortals.
Teach me.
kelpzoidzl
Your description above and much more occurs during long term fasting,
abstinance and periods of single pointed meditation coupled with the
use of visionary plants.
Have you read the saddharma pundarika?
http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/lotus/
dc
kelpzoidzl
1. An inconceivable number of thousands of kotis of Æons, never to be
measured, is it since I reached superior (or first) enlightenment and
never ceased to teach the law.
2. I roused many Bodhisattvas and established them in Buddha-
knowledge. I brought myriads of kotis of beings, endless, to full
ripeness in many kotis of Æons.
3. I show the place of extinction, I reveal to (all) beings a device
to educate them, albeit I do not become extinct at the time, and in
this very place continue preaching the law.
4. There I rule myself as well as all beings, I. But men of perverted
minds, in their delusion, do not see me standing there.
5. In the opinion that my body is completely extinct, they pay
worship, in many ways, to the relics, but me they see not. They feel
(however) a certain aspiration by which their mind becomes right.
6. When such upright (or pious), mild, and gentle creatures leave off
their bodies, then I assemble the crowd of disciples and show myself
here on the Gridhrakûta.
7. And then I speak thus to them, in this very place: I was not
completely extinct at that time; it was but a device of mine, monks;
repeatedly am I born in the world of the living.
8. Honoured by other beings, I show them my superior enlightenment,
but you would not obey my word, unless the Lord of the world enter
Nirvâna.
9. I see how the creatures are afflicted, but I do not show them my
proper being. Let them first have an aspiration to see me; then I will
reveal to them the true law.
10. Such has always been my firm resolve during an inconceivable
number of thousands of kotis of Æons, and I have not left this
Gridhrakûta for other abodes.
11. And when creatures behold this world and imagine that it is
burning, even then my Buddhafield is teeming with gods and men.
12. They dispose of manifold amusements, kotis of pleasure gardens,
palaces, and aerial cars; (this field) is embellished by hills of gems
and by trees abounding with blossoms and fruits.
13. And aloft gods are striking musical instruments and pouring a rain
of Mandâras by which they are covering me, the disciples and other
sages who are striving after enlightenment.
14. So is my field here, everlasti.ngly; but others fancy that it is
burning; in their view this world is most terrific, wretched, replete
with number of woes.
15. Ay, many kotis of years they may pass without ever having
mentioned my name, the law, or my congregation. That is the fruit of
sinful deeds.
16. But when mild and gentle beings are born in this world of men,
they immediately see me revealing the law, owing to their good works.
17. I never speak to them of the infinitude of my action. Therefore, I
am, properly, existing since long, and yet declare: The Ginas are rare
(or precious).
18. Such is the glorious power of my wisdom that knows no limit, and
the duration of my life is as long as an endless period; I have
acquired it after previously following a due course.
19. Feel no doubt concerning it, O sages, and leave off all
uncertainty: the word I here pronounce is really true; my word is
never false.
20. For even as that physician skilled in devices, for the sake of his
sons whose notions were perverted, said that he had died although he
was still alive, and even as no sensible man, would charge that
physician with falsehood;
21. So am I the father of the world, the Self born, the Healer, the
Protector of all creatures. Knowing them to be perverted, infatuated,
and ignorant I teach final rest, myself not being at rest.
22. What reason should I have to continually manifest myself? When men
become unbelieving, unwise, ignorant, careless, fond of sensual
pleasures, and from thoughtlessness run into misfortune,
23. Then I, who know the course of the world, declare: I am so and so,
(and consider): How can I incline them to enlightenment? how can they
become partakers of the Buddha-laws?
myriadsmallcreature
I knew that was coming. Am I psychic?
Must have been the reference to the Leary canon.
myriadsmallcreature
> 1. An inconceivable number of thousands of kotis of Æons, never to be
> measured, is it since I reached superior (or first) enlightenment and
> never ceased to teach the law.
etc...
So why scare the locals with all the conspiracy shit?
kelpzoidzl
lol....good point.
cause I always like a good story.
dc
kelpzoidzl
A real answer.
No one is doing it. It's cause and effect. The impartial Law.
The inherent darkness in life (Gampon-no Mumyo) does it. Thus the
need for practice and expiation.
Have you read the Chi-Kuan?"Cessation and Calming" bu Chi-I? Or a
better translation the great stopping of the mind and observation of
it.
The wonderful Law of the Lotus Sutra--all the buddha's in the ten
directions of space nod in agreement.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4er2rXL8f8
dc
myriadsmallcreature
> better translation the great stopping of the mind and observation of
> it.
Not that, not that...
:)
kelpzoidzl
this may be interesting to you some early writings of Sun Lotus
(Nichiren)
Thesis on Becoming a Buddha in a Single Lifetime
Isshô jôbutsu shô
Goshô Shimpen, p.45-47
The seventh year of Kenchô (1255) at 34 years of age
If those who are detained, in the beginningless chain of living and
dying, should this time firmly decide to substantiate their supreme
enlightenment, then they ought to contemplate the inherently infinite
existence of the intrinsic Utterness in the lives of sentient beings.
The intrinsic Utterness in the lives of sentient beings is Myôhô renge
kyô, the Sutra on the Lotus Flower of the Utterness of the Dharma.
Therefore reverently reciting Myôhô renge kyô is to contemplate the
inherently infinite existence of the intrinsic Utterness in the lives
of sentient beings.
Because this textual line of the Dharma Flower Sutra is entirely
correct it is the king of sutras, whose words and ideograms are not
separate from the real aspect, and the real aspect is not separate
from the Utterness of the Dharma.
However, what this comes down to is that to expound and reveal the
meaning of the dharma realm, as the oneness of mind, is to say that it
is the Utterness of the Dharma, therefore this sutra is said to be the
wisdom and discernment of All the Buddhas.
The significance of the ten realms of dharmas and their three thousand
existential spaces of the dharma realm is the oneness of mind, its
subjectivity, its dependent environments, its materiality and mind,
its insentient plants and trees; without ignoring its empty space, the
flash of time in the terrain of where the one instant occurs or even
one particle of its dust, all of these are stored away in a single
instant of mental activity.
What this one instant of mind means, is that it is the whole content
of the dharma realm. This is referred to as, all of the dharmas.
To be knowingly aware of this principle is to have to admit that the
dharma realm is the oneness of mind. However, even though you may hold
to reciting Nam myôhô renge kyô , if you think that the dharma is
somewhere outside your mind, then it is in no way the Utterness of the
Dharma but some inferior teaching.
Such inferior teachings are not the present sutra; if it were not for
this sutra then it would be an expedient means, or something from the
provisional gateway, and it could not be the direct path for becoming
a Buddha. By not being the direct path then it will be an attempt to
become a Buddha through practicing for numerous lifetimes, over
countless kalpas, and it would be impossible to become a Buddha in a
single lifetime.
You must give rise to a deep mind of faith to understand that when we
recite and read Myôhô renge kyô, which is the Sutra on the Lotus
Flower of the Utterness of the Dharma, it refers to the one instant of
thought containing three thousand existential spaces that make up our
lives. They too are Myôhô renge kyô, the Sutra on the Lotus Flower of
the Utterness of the Dharma.
You must under no circumstance ever imagine that the repository of the
eighty-four thousand dharmas of a lifetime of holy teaching as well as
all the Buddhas of the past, present and future of the ten directions,
exist anywhere else other than in your own mind.
Although you may well have studied the Buddha teaching, if you do not
contemplate the nature of your own mind you will never get entirely
away from the cycles of living and dying. If you do search for a path
outside of your own mind and then do ten thousand austerities and ten
thousand good deeds, they will all be as useless as a poor man who
counts his neighbour's wealth day and night without gleaning from it a
share as small as half a brass coin.
However among the explanations, with regard to this in the writings of
Tendai, (Chi-I) we have, ‘If you do not contemplate your own mind you
will never eradicate the layers of karmic entanglements in your life.'
Through not contemplating our own minds we condemn ourselves to a
lifetime of countless bitter austerities.
Because even though the people who behave in such a way have studied
the Buddha dharma, they bring shame upon it by becoming just like
those of other sects. With regard to this, there is a comment in the
Universal Desistance from Troublesome Worries in order to See Clearly,
that says, ‘Although they study the Buddha teaching, their views
become the same as those of the heretics.'
In the meantime you must build a mind of faith by reciting the name of
the original Buddha, reading the Sutra, spreading flowers and offering
pinches of powdered sandal wood over burning incense, all of which in
the oneness of our minds becomes the meritorious virtues of good
roots. In the Sutra concerning Yuimakitsu, it makes it very clear that
should one look for the freedom and release of all the Buddhas, from
the sufferings of living and dying, then it is to be found embedded in
the minds and practices of sentient beings, because a sentient being
is not separate from the enlightenment of which he is capable of
attaining, as those who suffer in the cycles of living and dying are
not separate from Nirvana of which they are capable of reaching.
Again if sentient beings befoul their minds their dependent terrain
is also befouled, likewise if they purify their minds then also their
dependent terrains become purified, nonetheless at the same time the
terrain that is befouled or the one that is purified are not two
places. They are seen as such due to the good and evil in our minds.
So it is the same with whom we refer to as sentient beings and those
whom we refer to as Buddhas, when a person is bewildered he is talked
of as being a sentient being but on his enlightenment he is then
called a Buddha.
For instance, a tarnished metal mirror when polished up will shine
like a jewel. If when the mind is bewildered, just for one instant by
its fundamental unenlightenment, it immediately becomes like a mirror
that has been neglected, but once it is polished it will attain the
brilliance of the true suchness of the dharma nature. You must give
rise to a deep mind of faith in order to polish this mirror mornings
and evenings. How should you polish it then? Just by reverently
reciting Nam myôhô renge kyô, which is what this polishing is called.
Now then, what does Utterness [myô] really mean? Utterness is the part
of our one instant of thought that can neither be thought out nor be
expressed [since it is utterly all embracing]. It is what the mind
cannot ponder over nor put into words. However as soon as you
diligently look for it in your mind, you find that it has neither a
colour nor a shape to show that it exists. Again, if you say it is not
there, then all sorts of things come into your mind to show that it
is. You cannot say that it does not exist neither can you say that it
does.
The two words for existence or non existence do not cover it, nor can
it be explained by the meanings of these two words either. It is
neither existence nor non existence, yet it is omnipresent in both.
By being the embodiment of Utterness of the sole reality of the middle
way, it becomes imponderably inexpressible and goes by the name of
Utterness [myô]. By giving such implications to the word Utterness it
is then referred to as dharmas [as its manifestation]. This gateway to
the dharma, with its revelation of the imponderably inexpressible,
alludes to the phenomenal dharmas assuming the role of the lotus
flower which is the simultaneity of cause and effect.
When you realize that your own mind is Utterness, then in turn you
realize that other minds are the Utterness of the Dharma also, this is
called the sutra which is its own utter and intrinsically infinite
path. It is the king of sutras and the direct path to becoming a
Buddha since it explains that the actual fundamental substance, from
which both good and evil arise, is the fundamental substance of the
Utterness of the Dharma itself. If you hold a deep faith in the
significance of this and recite Nam myôhô renge kyô, you will without
any doubt become a Buddha in this lifetime. Because in the text of the
Sutra it tells us that, ‘After my passing over to extinction you must
indeed hold to this Sutra, those people who do so shall decidedly,
without any doubt whatsoever, be on the path of enlightenment.' On no
account must you have any doubts. With awe and respect. You must have
a mind of faith and become a Buddha in this lifetime. Nam myôhô renge
kyo, Nam myôhô renge kyô .
Thesis on the Whole being Contained
in the One Instant of Mind
Sôzai ichinen shô
Goshô Shimpen, p.111-116
The second year of Shôka [1258] at 37 years of age
In the sixth fascicle of the Explanatory Notes on the Recondite
Significance of the Dharma Flower it says, ‘The whole is contained in
the one instant of mind which, in further detail, is divided into
materiality and mind.’ The question is asked: what are the
implications of the whole being contained in the one instant of mind?
The answer is given: it is not easy to give an even perfunctory
answer, there is, however, one significant point that is decided, it
must be what happens in the primal instant of life of sentient beings
when they are first conscious. If one carefully investigates the
samâdhi of stopping all mental activity and allowing no distraction
whatsoever, then one can say that nothing is repressed by it nor is
anything recorded by it, nothing is taken for being good and nothing
is taken for being evil, it is a state of mind that is like the ocean
depths overflowing with darkness. This is said to be the eighth
cognition. This eighth cognition, by being the embodiment of all
existence and because it contains all dharmas, is said to be the whole
contained in the one instant of mind. It is, however, the one instant
of mind of the eighth cognition in a practical sense.
However when this one instant of mind moves and fluctuates, looking
out towards the environments that are determined by karma, it does not
yet discern what those karmically determined realms, with which it
associates, are. This is called the seventh cognition.
This seventh cognition, by fluctuating and being agitated by
confrontation with good and evil situations and its delight in
joyfulness and grief through sadness gets itself entangled with both
good and bad karma. This is called the sixth cognition.
When this sixth cognition is made aware of its karma it then becomes
aware of its physical form [shiki] and the karmically deserved
situation such as family, race, country and economic conditions, etc,
for life in the future [hô]. It is as though the primal one instant of
mind is cavernous, unfathomable water; by its undulation and swell it
faces all kinds of situations but even if the wind blows and makes the
water billow it does not break into waves and bubbling foam.
Through the fluctuations of being agitated, through facing both good
and evil environments that are conditioned by karma, the delight in
joyfulness and the grief in sadness are like the appearance of the
undulating waves of the water rising to their height. Then, with the
acquisition of the physical form and the requitals for life in the
future, the waves break upon the rocks and turn into a mass of foaming
bubbles both large and small. The bursting of those bubbles is like a
return to death. You should skilfully and thoroughly think this
through.
Whether one refers to waves or whether one refers to bubbles both come
from the one water we have been using as a metaphor. In terms of the
dharma, the progressive changes of the primal one instant of mind
become our physical characteristics and what we karmically deserve.
This is due to the fact that there is absolutely no exception to the
totality of mind becoming our person and body. You must take care that
every single exception to this concept has to be discarded. For
instance, when all this water becomes extremely cold it turns into
smaller or larger pieces of ice. Consequently one might say that this
is a person who falls into hell in the midst of a cavern of raging
fire and becomes completely consumed by the flames.
We can continue until we come to the reality of the Buddha realm which
becomes its own sublime and solemn manifestation. Nevertheless this is
all the working of the oneness of the mind. Similarly, when wickedness
comes to the surface we become sensitive to the embodiment of the
three evil paths and when we resolve to attain to a mind of
enlightenment we feel the personification of the Buddha and the
bodhisattvas. In this way the awareness of the workings of karma
solidify into pack ice in the ocean of the oneness of mind with the
ten realms becoming separate entities since the source of the ten
realms of dharmas is the singularity of the fundamental substance.
Although there may only be one realm of dharmas called hell, hell is
also endowed with nine realms of dharmas. It is also the same with all
the realms of dharmas including that of the Buddha. In this way the
ten realms of dharmas are mutually furnished with the same ten realms
so that the total of these dharma realms becomes one hundred. Then as
each single one of these hundred realms of dharmas is equipped with
the ten such qualities, the hundred realms of dharmas become a
thousand such qualities. These thousand qualities by being furnished
with the existential spaces of sentient beings, the existential space
of the five aggregates and the existential space of abode and terrain,
the thousand such qualities become three thousand. The dharma gateway
of these three thousand existential spaces is fully present in the
primal instant of mind without any omission whatsoever. It is due to
the fact that the one instant of mind is not separate from the
physical body but is endowed with the three thousand existential
spaces. This is the dharma gateway of the one instant of mind
containing three thousand existential spaces.
In this way the realm of hell is not to be feared nor is the Buddha to
be particularly venerated, they are the perfect combination of our
physical aspect and what we are essentially. You should abide
completely in the unshakeable silence of the oneness of mind without
any further thought. The dharma gateway, which I have just mentioned,
is an insight that is referred to as the contemplation of the real
aspect.
Superfluous cogitation becomes the movement of thought, the movement
of thought becomes a lack of clarity and this unenlightenment becomes
bewilderment. But if one abides in the contemplation of the real
aspect, then what is projected from the inseparability of our person
and the fundamentally existing three thousand existential realms is
called the Buddha.
In view of this the Universal Teacher Myôraku says, ‘Indeed you should
know that in the body and its terrain there are three thousand
existential realms. Because, when one attains to the path it is in
accordance with this fundamental principle, the one instant of mind in
the body includes all the realms of the dharmas.’
Those who cannot hold on to this insight pass on to other
contemplations but they should contemplate the state of mind that
arises out of the primal instant of thought. The condition of mind
that arises and sets the stillness of this one instant of thought in
motion becomes one of bewilderment. This movement of thought is
entirely the threefold axiom of relativity, phenomenon and the middle
way.
The threefold axiom is in the midst of the fundamental substance of
our minds, the instant of thought that arises in it is phenomenon and
the non-existence of self-nature in the instant of mind is relativity.
When this threefold contemplation of the dharmas is realised, the
instant of mind that moves becomes inseparable from the instant of
mind that is immovable. This insight into the inseparability of
enlightenment and unenlightenment is referred to as the insight that
existence is nothing other than cognition.
Nonetheless, even though it becomes the insight that existence is
nothing other than cognition, it is ultimately the insight into the
real aspect of all dharmas. Myôraku says in his explanation, in
Illustrations of the Significance of Desistance from Troublesome
Worries in order to See Clearly, ‘The roots and the branches reflect
each other, phenomena and its intrinsicality are not two.’ The roots
are the insight of the real aspect of all dharmas; the branches are
the insight that existence is nothing other than cognition.
Phenomena become the insight that existence is nothing other than
cognition and the essential point of that insight is the insight into
the real aspect of all dharmas. When this imponderably unutterable
insight is attained to then one ascends to the consequent fruition of
temporarily cutting off and destroying the ever-revolving cycle of
birth and death. This is called the single fundamental substance of
phenomena and its essential quality is that the whole of existence is
contained in the one instant of mind.’
The manifestation of each and every thing being endowed with the one
instant of thought containing three thousand existential spaces is the
revelation of the thirty-two bodies of Kannon and the luminosity of
everything being endowed with this intrinsic fundamental of the one
instant of thought containing three thousand existential spaces is the
manifestation of the thirty-four bodies of Myô.on. If it were not so
then the emanations of the Buddha or the transformations of the
bodhisattvas would have no reason to become apparent. Again, when this
principle of the one instant of thought containing three thousand
existential spaces is not adhered to, then the one thousand two
hundred Buddhas of the two mandalas of the Womb Store Realm
[Garbhadhâtu] and the Vajra Realm [Vajradhâtu], the homogeneous body
of the Tathâgata Dainichi as well as his transformations would be
difficult to know. The essential to these gateways to the dharma is
each and every thing being endowed with the one instant of thought
containing three thousand existential spaces.You must retain this
secret and keep it to yourself.
On explaining this one instant of thought containing three thousand
existential spaces Tendai said, ‘In the oneness of mind there are ten
realms of dharmas and then when each realm of dharmas is again
furnished with the same ten realms it comes to one hundred. Each realm
of dharmas is then provided with three thousand sorts of existential
space so that the hundred existential realms amount to three thousand.
These three thousand are present in the one instant of thought in the
mind. If there is no mind we need go no further but if there is even
the tiniest scrap of mind, it is provided with the three thousand.’
Myôraku said, on explaining the words‘tiniest scrap’, ‘It alludes to
the feeblest presence of mind. What is intended is hardly any.’
Consequently we must understand this as whatever the occasion the
oneness of mind is the root and the ten realms of dharmas are the
branches. This is a gateway to the dharma that can be thought out and
deliberated upon. But when it is taken as an imponderable that cannot
be deliberated upon, it is because the whole fundamental substance of
the oneness of mind is the ten dharma realms becoming the three
thousand, there is no one thing that can be set apart from it neither
has it an inside nor an outside. The oneness of mind is not separate
from the three thousand and neither is the three thousand separate
from the oneness of mind. One could make a comparison with the
unknowing person who believes that ice exists apart from water.
Therefore one should realise that there is no disparity between the
one instant of thought and the three thousand, they are both a single
dharma. Accordingly Tendai explains this by saying,‘At all events mind
is all dharmas and all dharmas are mind. There is neither a vertical
nor a horizontal and there is neither oneness nor multiformity. It is
abstruse, utter, profound and superlatively all embracing.
There is no way of knowing that can know it and there are no words
that can formulate it. Therefore we refer to it as the imponderable
that cannot be deliberated upon, it is here where the meaning lies.’
The one instant of thought is not the one instant of thought by being
inseparable from the three thousand. The three thousand is not the
three thousand by being inseparable from the one instant of thought.
Therefore it is the dharma gateway to the cultivation of the essential
non-duality of the fundamental substance and its intrinsicality.
What is unthinkably unutterable about this one instant of thought
containing three thousand existential spaces is that the existential
space of abode and terrain is a part of the three thousand so that
plants, trees, tiles and stones, by being also furnished with the
three thousand, are completely filled with the fundamental substance
of enlightenment. However, that may be because we are provided with
three thousand existential spaces, we too, are the originally existent
fundamental substance of the Buddha. Therefore it follows that the
sentient beings in the hell of incessant suffering by being endowed
also with the three thousand existential spaces are at one with the
fundamental substance of the Tathâgata who is enlightened to utterness
without any discrepancy whatsoever. This is why Daibadatta, who in the
flames of the hell of incessant suffering due to his unpardonable sins
of creating a schism in the community of monks, stoning the Buddha to
the shedding of his blood and killing a nun, received, contrary to all
expectation, the prophecy by the Buddha that he would become the
Tathâgata Tennô. If this is the case of a person in hell, then why
should it not be so with the other nine realms? When their
discriminative thinking and intellectual knowledge is cleared away and
even people of the two vehicles can become Buddhas, then why should it
not be so with people of the remaining eight realms?
As each and every blade of grass, trees, as well as all the rest of
the environment is the originally existent Buddha substance with its
three thousand existential spaces, it is not a matter of casting aside
evil thoughts and evil dharmas nor adopting good thoughts and good
dharmas. Because this principle by being discussed and revealed in the
present sutra, it is given the title Myôhô renge kyô, the Sutra on the
Lotus Flower of the Utterness of the Dharma. The Utterness of the
Dharma is furnished with the ten realms of dharmas and the three
thousand existential spaces of plants and trees without a single
dharma being left out. As for the Lotus Flower, the person who has
become enlightened to this principle, must, as an equal to the Buddha,
be placed upon the calyx of the Lotus Flower. The Lotus Flower
solemnly ennobles that person and it is said that the Lotus Flower is
the adornment of abode and terrain. That is to say that his body is
not separate from the fundamental substance of all the Buddhas of the
past, present and future. Without a grasp of this principle it cannot
be referred to as the seeds of the Buddha. Myôraku explains this when
he says, ‘If it is not the objective realm of the Buddha wisdom, if it
is not a random counterfeit, even then it cannot be the seeds.’ You
are already aware that since all the sutras that were expounded prior
to the Dharma Flower have provisional dharmas entwined into them, so
that even if one were to accept and hold to them for a continuity of
kalpas, as many as there are grains of dust, they can never become the
seeds of Buddhahood. Due to the fact that the sutras do not reveal and
account for the totality of the Buddha wisdom, nor do they expound the
whole of the wisdom of the Buddha, nor do they state that women and
people of evil disposition can become Buddhas. Among the elucidations
of Tendai it says, ‘In the other sutras the Buddha prophesied that
only his disciples who were bodhisattvas would become Buddhas and that
people of the two vehicles would not be able to do so and that only
good people can become Buddhas and wicked people could not. He
prophesied that only men could become Buddhas and that women were
excluded, that only humans and devas could become Buddhas but not
animals; but in the present sutra all these categories are foretold as
being able to become Buddhas.’ Myôraku justifies this by saying, ‘Even
if there are sutras that are designated as the King of Sutras they are
not said to be the foremost to have been expounded, are expounded or
will be expounded in the future. You must be able to understand the
significance of the doctrine that the particular teaching stands in
addition to the others, that it is only the teachings of the three
receptacles, that the equally broad teachings were in answer to people
who had the propensities for the four teachings and that the wisdom
teachings include both the interrelated and particular doctrines in
preparation for the all-inclusive teachings.’ Just as these
explanations infer, all the sutras prior to the Dharma Flower are an
expedient means and are not the direct cause for becoming a Buddha.
The question is asked: among all the sutras that came before the
Dharma Flower, are there any that illustrate the so-called all-
inclusive teachings as being particularly superior, how is it that you
pick out all those sutras that came prior to the Dharma Flower as not
being the seeds for Buddhahood? The answer given is that even though
the all-inclusive teachings are dealt with, the all-inclusive
teachings prior to the Dharma Flower Sutra let the Buddha seeds go
astray since it does not discuss the hearers of the voice, those who
are partially enlightened due to circumstances, people of evil
disposition and women becoming Buddhas. This is the ultimate extremity
of the all-inclusive teachings. Without this final superlative they
would not uphold the original intention of the Buddha and also because
they are devoid of the Buddha’s wisdom they could not be the seeds for
becoming a Buddha. It is on this account that I have pointed to all
the sutras in contrast to the Dharma Flower. Referring to this point
there is a Universal Teacher who said, ‘Both people who are refined
and those who are coarse have made this mistake [through not
understanding the simultaneity of cause and effect] which means that
both those who are refined and those who are coarse can be referred to
as being crude and oversimple.’Consequently none of the other sutras
are called the Sutra on the Lotus Flower of the Utterness of the
Dharma.
The question is asked: what advantage would a dunce who cannot read
have in reciting Nam myôhô renge kyô? Answer: even though somebody who
may be illiterate and who does not even know one ideogram were to
exert his faith by reciting it, then, out of the three karmas of body,
mouth and mind, it would be his mouth that would be the first to
realise its meritorious virtue. When this meritorious virtue is
accomplished with the Buddha seeds being stowed within his breast, he
evidently becomes a person who is coming out of the bewilderment of
the realm of life and death. The fact that this sutra surpasses all
other sutras, it is taught that those who ridicule and disparage it
reverse their karmic relationship for enlightenment and become people
whose values are mean disregard and vilification. What would one then
say about the people who exert a mind of faith and comply with the
affinities to become a Buddha? Accordingly the Universal Teacher
Dengyô wrote, ‘It is decidedly preordained that both the person who
slanders and the person who has faith will become Buddhas.’
The question is asked: on becoming a Buddha what is the significance
of the three bodies?
Answer: the three thousand existential spaces that are in our bodies
by being completely merged into each other are the same as dharmas.
The body whose wisdom exhaustively knows this principle is that which
is called the reward body. As this principle is the final superlative,
then from the eighty four thousand features and distinguishing marks
on the body of the Buddha to the bodies of the tigers, wolves and
jackals which are made apparent for the effective benefit of all
beings, are understood as being designated as the corresponding body.
The Dharma Flower Sutra in its exposition of these three bodies says,
‘Such an appearance, such a nature, such a substance.’ The appearance
is the corresponding body, the nature is the reward body and the
substance is the dharma body. We have been endowed with these three
bodies since the primordial infinity with no exceptions whatsoever.
However, the clouds of our bewilderment hide these three bodies so
that we are not aware of their existence. But he who is referred to as
the enlightened Buddha knows this essential element and is also the
practitioner of the Dharma Flower Sutra.
Having been unaware and ignorant of these three bodies since time
immemorial, we become closer to an enlightenment to them by being
induced by the preaching of a moderated Buddha discourse which is
called the temporary gateway. Without any sort of confusion with
regard to the fundamental principle of our being endowed with these
three bodies, it is also explained that they have their abode in the
past, present, future and throughout eternity. There is no dimension
that is not pervaded by these three entities. This is referred to as
the original gateway to the dharma. Even though it may be that the
difference between the original and temporary gateways is merely a
matter of the relatively recent past and primordiality, the
fundamental substance of the dharma remains the same. This is the
reason why Tendai says in his explanations, ‘Even though the original
and temporary teachings have their peculiarities their oneness is
their imponderable inexplicability.’
When we say enlightenment, it simply means to be enlightened to and to
know what the intrinsicality of the fundamental substance is. It could
be compared to the opening of a door of a storehouse of wealth and
taking away the treasure within. Enlightenment does not come from the
outside, when we clear away the clouds that bewilder the oneness of
mind it becomes the substance of dharmas which is the axiom of
relativity, phenomena and the middle way that always abides in the
past, present and future and throughout eternity. It is like a mirror
that no longer reflects because it is covered with dust but when it is
cleaned every kind of image glides across it.
The dust is removed by people cleaning the mirror but if it were not
cleaned the images would not appear. It is supposed of course that the
person who transforms the bewilderment into an enlightened awakening
is the one who practises. The intrinsicality of the substance that is
the three thousand existential spaces, the three axioms of relativity,
phenomena and the middle way as well as the three bodies are
inherently and infinitely existing, which have nothing to do with the
makings of humankind. Again, even though the cultivation of
bewilderment is something that is done by human beings, one does not
see this bewilderment going away of its own volition. It is like
sitting in a dark room for a hundred years with a burning candle
wherein the lightlessness does not go away entirely. This transforming
of bewilderment into an enlightened awakening is to turn back the flow
and finish at the source.
The inseparability of enlightenment and unenlightenment as only being
bewilderment and enlightenment is none other than the single entity or
the oneness of the substance of unenlightenment and the dharma
essence. I respectfully fear and beg of you to be prudent and discard
all other ways of knowing. If you ever perceive bewilderment and
enlightenment as two separate entities, you will be distancing
yourself from becoming a Buddha; it will be like climbing one Mount
Sumeru after another. Those who, since the origins, have been
bewildered about the non-dual nature of the intrinsicality of the
fundamental substance are called sentient beings and the person who is
enlightened to this non-duality is called the Buddha.
You must really get to understand the all embracing significance of
what I have written without any omissions or misconceptions. These
writings involve the Buddha’s one universal concern about living and
dying. Also these writings are the Buddha’s fervent desire to come
into the world in order to save people from the bewilderment of living
and dying. How can you enter into a treasure mountain and come out
with empty hands? It would bring about a thousand myriad regrets and
there would be no advantage to it whatsoever. When Emma takes someone
to task or the lictors of hell raise their staves, they do not choose
people at random but only those who have done wrong. If these
wrongdoers can get away from this harsh situation by being born as
human beings, they will live through hundreds of thousands of myriads
of kalpas without even hearing of the name or ideogram for the Buddha.
They will also become progressively immersed into the three realms
where (i) sentient beings have appetites and desires which (ii) are
incarnated in a subjective materiality with its physical surroundings,
who (iii) at the same time are endowed with the immateriality of the
realms of thoughts and ideas, as well as being persons who must drift
about the six paths of unenlightenment. To not be able to hear the
essential dharma in order to escape from the bewilderment of the realm
of life and death is sad indeed, it is also frightening to suffer the
punishment of the ox-headed demon lictors of hell.
myriadsmallcreature
:)
"Thesis on Becoming a Buddha in a Single Lifetime"
What was that symbol again?
kelpzoidzl
Arthur Clarke: "We just
discovered that there is a Buddhist Sect which worships a large,
black
rectangular slab. ...
myriadsmallcreature
> discovered that there is a Buddhist Sect which worships a large,
> black
> rectangular slab. ...
Of course, you know I'm not referring to YOUR symbol.
Oh well... If you absolutely must...
"Worships" is the key word in your quote. I'm sure the monolith's
similarity to the Cinerama screen ('2001's' original format) has been
covered here in the past. What was your take on that? I'm afraid to
ask.
I found a thread of yours (Freud and Cocaine) circa 2007. There is no
reason IMO to have the same discussion again.
from dc in the above-mentioned thread: "There are also old Japanese
paintings of the monks arms outstretched, surrounding the "Monolith"
that look so much like the monk-eys surroundiung the monolith in 2001
it is astounding it could be right off the storyboard."
:)
It seems you miss the irony here. Anyone?
Listen: Kubrick joined to observe, not to believe. Belief is the
enemy, so to speak. To be transcended. A radical empiricism which
leads to a final syncretism: there is no final syncretism.
From the same thread: "For instance, a women does not have to believe
anything for an embryo to grow inside and to give birth. But there are
techniques people can learn and practice. for birth to be easier and
to be more in rhythm with the natural birth process. The natural
stages of pregnancy and birth are inherent. The same is true of
Buddhist enlightenment. It is a natural process. Not a theory. It does
not vary from person to person."
This is patently untrue. While technique is invaluable, the process
does vary from person to person, and can never repeat. Indeed, the
differences are vital to the process. It seems you are arguing here
for models and patterns as primary, even a priori. Ziegler is German
for what?
If I absolutely, positively must choose a belief system/dogma, how
about Aurobindo Ghose? 'The Life Divine'? The materialist denial. The
spiritualist denial. East meets West. Endeavor the twain shall meet.
You get the last word, and we get a gold star for our efforts.
I have to go meet the Buddha in the road...
kelpzoidzl
<myriadsmallcreat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Arthur Clarke: "We just
> > discovered that there is a Buddhist Sect which worships a large,
> > black
> > rectangular slab. ...
>
> Of course, you know I'm not referring to YOUR symbol.
I'm not sure which symbol you were tlaking about.
>
> Oh well... If you absolutely must...
>
> "Worships" is the key word in your quote. I'm sure the monolith's
> similarity to the Cinerama screen ('2001's' original format) has been
> covered here in the past. What was your take on that? I'm afraid to
> ask.
My take on it is that Kubrick was looking for a shape for the
monolith, found the shape he wanted. The shape being like a Cinerama
Screen may also have been part of it;
>
> I found a thread of yours (Freud and Cocaine) circa 2007. There is no
> reason IMO to have the same discussion again.
>
It's pertinent in a general sense, to say that any mind altering
drugs, even such a damaging thing such as cocaine influeneces people's
ideation.
> from dc in the above-mentioned thread: "There are also old Japanese
> paintings of the monks arms outstretched, surrounding the "Monolith"
> that look so much like the monk-eys surroundiung the monolith in 2001
> it is astounding it could be right off the storyboard."
>
> :)
>
> It seems you miss the irony here. Anyone?
I don't miss the irony at all. I am talking about a very old
paiinting that depcits a scene that looks very similar to the apes
huddling around the monolith with outspread arms.
> Listen: Kubrick joined to observe, not to believe. Belief is the
> enemy, so to speak. To be transcended. A radical empiricism which
> leads to a final syncretism: there is no final syncretism.
I have no idea the extent of SK's actual practice in those years, I
know his ravenous hunger to learn anything and everything and so I
have a good idea what texts and theory he studied.
In terms of "belief," a maxim in this buddhism is to "belief" is not
necessary to begin the practice. For instance what one "believes"
about gravity does not change what happens to you when gravity is at
work. You can believe all kinds of things, but the law of causation,
both linear and simultaneous is strict in a natural way just as
gravity is strict if you jump off the roof.
In Buddhism, the cause and effect law is strict and natural.
> From the same thread: "For instance, a women does not have to believe
> anything for an embryo to grow inside and to give birth. But there are
> techniques people can learn and practice. for birth to be easier and
> to be more in rhythm with the natural birth process. The natural
> stages of pregnancy and birth are inherent. The same is true of
> Buddhist enlightenment. It is a natural process. Not a theory. It does
> not vary from person to person."
>
> This is patently untrue. While technique is invaluable, the process
> does vary from person to person, and can never repeat. Indeed, the
> differences are vital to the process. It seems you are arguing here
> for models and patterns as primary, even a priori. Ziegler is German
> for what?
No. It's completely true. I don't know how you might be interpreting
this but you must be missing the siomple point for other distinctions.
What I am saying here is more fundamental then differences between
people. I used this analogy to show natural law of cause and effect
and how a process such as birth like all aspects of reality function
on a natural way and any theory about it, is trumped by the reality
of the process. The easy way to undertsnad what i mean is to examine
the natural process of birth contractions and physical changes that
occur. Its a process generally on auto-pilot.
Have you ever witnessed childbirth? Once it kicks in and the
contractions start, the mother, the baby and the doctors are subject
to the natural process.
Death is a similar process. Have you been around people when they
die? A natural process kicks in. Believe how ever you like at the
moment of death, natural death still comes and the process is
essentially the same for all, as gravity is the same. Cause and
effect is cause and effect. end of story. It's called "reality as it
is," not as one believes or speculates. One can be ignorant of the
law of cause and effect but it happens anyway. It's just objective
reality.
> If I absolutely, positively must choose a belief system/dogma, how
> about Aurobindo Ghose? 'The Life Divine'? The materialist denial. The
> spiritualist denial. East meets West. Endeavor the twain shall meet.
>
In the case of specific religious each has roots and causal basis,
buddhism, hinduism and christianity is all connected in terms of the
experiential source and bsed on generic yoga.
> You get the last word, and we get a gold star for our efforts.
>
> I have to go meet the Buddha in the road...
This last sentence is a Zen idea. Historically Chan/Zen is a
schismatic offhsoot of Chi-i's (from China) buddhism. Within Zen one
finds opposing views often created by political views and views that
develop when buddhism is mixed with Taoism that differs in it's POV.
Two of the greatest Zen buddhists, Dogen and Hakuin, ended up refuting
what had become pop versions of buddhism and both of them eneded up
proclaiming the superiority of the Lotus Sutra . With pop Zen (Zen
has always been pop buddhism--even at it's inception) and with some
other sects, the argument in those days goes like this:
"All beings have a buddha nature already, so why do I have to practice
to attain it?"
or
"If all beings are equal and have buddha nature then why should I
revere buddhas or sutras?"
This kind of thinking is mental machinations and a logic that is
divorced from reality as it is using certain Mahayana principles that
teach that Buddhahood can be achieved in an instant in the current
lifetime and it ends up denying the need for practice. Of course
even the most pop version of Zen still practice basic mediatation and
read sutras. The contradictions of Zen defines more about how people
are schismatic by nature and will look for an easy way.
Sun Lotus referred to Zen as the bottomless pit, meaning repetition
that is endless. There are other forms of perverted buddhism, such as
that which has a tantric basis and involves sexual activity and warped
ceremonies. In Japanese history they came up with all kinds of odd
practices and hierarchies that were not real buddhism, but were called
buddhism.
Underlying all that is the principle of "an instant of
thought" (ichinen). Ichinen is sort of like one's will or motive. if
the will or motive is weak or contradictory the result is weak and
contradictory. If on the other hand, the ichinen is strong and pure
and what is held in the mind is strong and pure, then the result is
strong and pure.
Ultimately ignorance and suffering, can lead to faith and practice and
that can lead to awakening and enlightenment where faith is now
replaced with actual knowing.
Did you watch my video on 2001 and buddhism?
dc
kelpzoidzl
justice to it and words can be an obstacle to actual practice.
Practice entails winding down thoughts and associations not gearing up
a whole new giant belief system. Intellectual types actually have a
built in obstacles, part functionla mind babble as well as a tendancy
to self-satisfied arrogance thinking "I am smart and i know alot"
Actual practice is the ONLY way to find out what it is all about and
what I am saying is ONLY a pure practice not distracted practice.
They are many stages of religious awakening and many layers of
philosophical thought. it is easy to rest on laurels and get hung in
theory, but practice is fusion of subjective and objective, so that
trumps all transient teachings and expedients.
Also understand that my POV regarding the use of visionary plants as
fundamental to the experience of buddhism and religion itself--is
contrary to what most religionists will teach.
To me, that is just normal ignorance and not understanding that the
"Drug War" was going on in anicent India and elsewhere --over the
SOMA---even 5000 and more years ago. Few have researched such a
thing. I've research it for many years. To me it is just fact and
reality, that like other realities are obscured by ego and ignorance,
people are not immune to being dumb. Anyone can be dumb--even all
these buddhas.......
I can also say that for whatever reason I am stuck with a difficult
project. On one hand I can offer a simple practice that can benefit
anyone and so they need faith to try it. But for some other people
who might be of a more cosmic bent and have a stable mind, I can also
tell the truth about it.
Otherwise, if I am just talking to eternal mental masterbators who
are puffed uop and have no clue..... ...well then I end up mentally
masturbating as well. :)
dc
kelpzoidzl
the Pyramid texts or the most ancient western tradition and have an
ability to see things hermauetically in context, to grasp the thesis
of the Enthoegenic origin of all religion, then It's is a tough road
to convince people, unless they have actual proof and there's the rub.
Practice is like work and we all know how much most people like work.
dc
myriadsmallcreature
>>> I am also trying to clue people in to the fact that SK during the
>>> filming and release of 2001, did in fact join this particular
>>> buddhist sect, receive his own copy of the mandala, whcihas Arthur
>>> Clarke said, "We recently discovered there is actually a Buddhist
>>> sect that worships a large, black rectangular slab...." Quote
>>> from The Making of Kubrick's 2001, edited by Jerome Agel.
You clearly imply that 2001 is strongly influenced by Kubrick's
involvement in this particular Buddhist sect. Yet, if there is a
connection at all the comparison of monk to monkey itself seems to be
in the form of ridicule. Therein lies the irony as I see it.
"The easy way to undertsnad what i mean is to examine
the natural process of birth contractions and physical changes that
occur. Its a process generally on auto-pilot.
Have you ever witnessed childbirth? Once it kicks in and the
contractions start, the mother, the baby and the doctors are subject
to the natural process."
Autopilot?
Your attitude leads to a certain fatalism that I do not share. I
witnessed the birth of three of my four children, the last two by home
birth, using the LaMaze method. Being 'subject' to the natural process
of childbirth does not mean it is without midwifery. It is hardly on
autopilot. For the process is problematic and rewards the watchful
eye.
The birth process is fraught with potential dangers.
The entire human race is entering a period in which the birth process
is becoming more and more difficult, regarding the relative size of
the birth canal. Perhaps courtesy of the starchild. In any case it is
hardly autopilot. Not to mention the problems with mismatching blood
types, e.g. rh factor. The most common solution, caesarean, is
problematic, and hardly what might be called autopilot.
The natural processes at work are far more complicated than imagining
they are operating simply in favor of the mother and child. Think of
the natural birth process meeting the natural death process all in one
event.
If in hindsight, you restrict your meaning only to attuning to cosmic
rhythms, whatever that ultimately means, I disagree nevertheless, as
cosmic rhythms are not without the murmuring any more than the rhythms
of the mother.
"For instance what one "believes" about gravity does not change what
happens to you when gravity is at work."
I disagree with this also, but I won't tell you why, because it is in
what seems to be your blind spot. First you must be aware of Newton's
long forgotten 'Law of Levity'.
And so we have arrived: The point of diminishing returns has
intersected with the point of no retu
kelpzoidzl
<myriadsmallcreat...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> from the Freud and Cocaine thread...
>
> >>> I am also trying to clue people in to the fact that SK during the
> >>> filming and release of 2001, did in fact join this particular
> >>> buddhist sect, receive his own copy of the mandala, whcihas Arthur
> >>> Clarke said, "We recently discovered there is actually a Buddhist
> >>> sect that worships a large, black rectangular slab...." Quote
> >>> from The Making of Kubrick's 2001, edited by Jerome Agel.
>
> You clearly imply that 2001 is strongly influenced by Kubrick's
> involvement in this particular Buddhist sect. Yet, if there is a
> connection at all the comparison of monk to monkey itself seems to be
> in the form of ridicule. Therein lies the irony as I see it.
Of course it's ironic. Buddhism itself will be the first to tell you
how it will feel ironic considering human nature.
>
> "The easy way to understnad what I mean is to examine
> the natural process of birth contractions and physical changes that
> occur. Its a process generally on auto-pilot.
>
> Have you ever witnessed childbirth? Once it kicks in and the
> contractions start, the mother, the baby and the doctors are subject
> to the natural process."
>
> Autopilot?
>
utterly.
> Your attitude leads to a certain fatalism that I do not share.
This is a tip off you are not getting my meaning. You are going belly
up on an analogy.
Ask any woman who had kids while conscious, about how contractions
kick in and a natural process takes over and it has nothing to do with
anything they have much control over.
I
> I witnessed the birth of three of my four children, the last two by home
> birth, using the LaMaze method. Being 'subject' to the natural process
> of childbirth does not mean it is without midwifery. It is hardly on
> autopilot.
Stick to what I am referring to----the physical process. I used it as
an analogy about how things happen naturally such as the process of
childbirth. A mother dioesn't have to know anything about it. They
can pop out kids without a second of comprehension about how the
process works. It takes over. The midwife or doctor is there just in
case and there are techniques claimed to help but none of it has any
control over the cause and effect reality of the process.
>For the process is problematic and rewards the watchful
> eye.
> The birth process is fraught with potential dangers.
Oh well thats the way it is.
> The entire human race is entering a period in which the birth process
> is becoming more and more difficult, regarding the relative size of
> the birth canal. Perhaps courtesy of the starchild. In any case it is
> hardly autopilot. Not to mention the problems with mismatching blood
> types, e.g. rh factor. The most common solution, caesarean, is
> problematic, and hardly what might be called autopilot.
>
Please understand this is a tangent and is missing the point of the
analogy in the first place.
The idea of suffering in hard core nature is another issue also
attributable to cause and effect.
> The natural processes at work are far more complicated than imagining
> they are operating simply in favor of the mother and child. Think of
> the natural birth process meeting the natural death process all in one
> event.
> If in hindsight, you restrict your meaning only to attuning to cosmic
> rhythms, whatever that ultimately means, I disagree nevertheless, as
> cosmic rhythms are not without the murmuring any more than the rhythms
> of the mother.
you have quite a duality going.
> "For instance what one "believes" about gravity does not change what
> happens to you when gravity is at work."
>
> I disagree with this also, but I won't tell you why, because it is in
> what seems to be your blind spot. First you must be aware of Newton's
> long forgotten 'Law of Levity'.
I don't have a blind spot. You are simply reacting as to be expected..
>
> And so we have arrived: The point of diminishing returns has
> intersected with the point of no retu
As I have said and is my main point, this can only be grapsed through
practice and experiential and eveyone has they own mental windmills
they are going to have to cut off, to be able to practice.
The egodeath process can be abrasive to......the ego. But prepare for
the real thing with some non-destructive testing.
dc
kelpzoidzl
> happens to you when gravity is at work."
> I disagree with this also, but I won't tell you why, because it is in
> what seems to be your blind spot. First you must be aware of Newton's
> long forgotten 'Law of Levity'.
Whatever your explanation for disagreeing with cause and effect might
be, it's going to miss the mark.
It is silly to deny a strict law. Again a simple analogy to go on a
tangent about. The tangent misses the meaning of the analogy.
Someone could go up to the top of a building and jump with no net
thinking they can fly or should be able to fly or if they believe hard
enough they can fly or they want to die, and the only one of those
motivations that would be valid would be the later. They will fall
and probably die if they are high enough and land hard enough. People
can cast spells and recite incantations at the Ninth gate all they
want. They gonna die if they jump. telling me it is possible a
flying polar bear will catch them just before they hit the ground is
possible. okay it's possible. Not real probabable.
I suspect you have a current ideation or interpretation of an
ideation that you are defending. There is no need for that Cause and
effect is the ultimate leveler.
I am simply talking about cause and effect here, not opinions or
beliefs.. this is just reality as it is.
dc
kelpzoidzl
The engineer must have had an embolism.
myriadsma...@yahoo.com
> like a train going in one end of a tunnel...and never comng out.
>
> The engineer must have had an embolism.