Stosh

If a person wanted to quit smoking , the way to induce themselves to do so is to ,, not try to exert any willpower?

Intending would mean one was taking part in some action to bring the future event about. Expectation doesn't have that connotation of Wanting the event to unfold. An accident could be be a surprise , or it could be an unwelcome surprise. Either way they both entail having an imagined future which may or may not happen. Anyway ,,That is how Im meaning it , Can an accident that happens at an intersection downtown be statistically predicted? Sure , but holding in the 'present' mind ,the vision of an 'unreal' possibility ( unreal at the time its being held) Is common to both. What has objective reality ,is that only what happens actually happens .. and one can attribute- fate ,or intelligent design -or chaotic chance or ,karma ,,, etc -- but these are basically confabulations of the mind IMPO (which serve to lend structure to the mind, or serve to assuage concerns that people have.) Thats a fair view , yes we only get to go so far before we get to the end of the leash. but that leash is long and loose IMO

Accidents are when that which we expect , is not what occurs . Even the stuff that befalls us out of the blue, is not an 'accident' unless you deem that as a thing that shouldn't happen , or it was "undeserved".. Should shouldn't deserved undeserved accident intended All these things are just ideas that people entertain. If you are comfortable looking at the events that occur , through the lens of perceived intent or accident , that is up to you.. Its not truthful thinking though. IMPO! The ' benefit ' of truthful perception however, is also illusion! Because it is subjective. Personally I reject the idea of predestination because it contradicts Free. Will... that's just me though.

Zzz Nice to see you back!

] He was inspired a lot by fire, as this drawing shows very clearly , the houses are going up in flames! Burning the neighborhood down is not a very compassionate attitude IMO , the motif shows up a lot in many of his more popular works. For the most part ,,If it isnt burning , it is falling down, or its a burnt out cinder. The troubling part is that ones initial impression is of a quiet side street or growing trees etc as you look at it longer ,, it is destroyed.

Oh, youre thinking the image captures- the portrayal of his appreciation for nature which is the "art" . Thats quite a creative spin , I like it.

What about this?

He might be examining himself, or the sacred mountain, or filled with his emotions ,, but any- way that is ,, I couldnt see how that could be considered "expression" or "art " .. but it certainly looks like a very appealing place to stand.

I dont recognize the painting and can't read the signature , Im assuming that no comment on your part is to allow uncontaminated comment. Though some others like it , I cant say I am with them on this image, which strikes me as insincere , like its CGI or something.

You already did , in post # 99,it is the philosopher one, right above Jeremiah ( mind you , it needs a cleaning so you can see the second woman better) and of course the poem refers to the nightmare which is is in post 100 I was making a concerted effort not to wander off subject

My take on it is - that there are many such analogies along those lines , the macrocosm vs microcosm , phylogeny recapitulates ontogeny , all of fractal mathematics. There truth in them if one bothers to see HOW there can be truth in them,, or one can walk away with nothing, if one wants remain aloof to the relationships. Western argument , philosophical traditions put an emphasis on destructing another persons argument , if you can poke a hole in it , all the assertions are invalid or one should mistrust them. The result is very solid grounding on facts. Eastern style discussions , can employ that too , but they tend to lean a bit more toward "giving the guy a benefit of a doubt" one investigates whether one CAN find evidence to support the claim or description, the result is a more spiritual personal understanding of truth. The two systems make a great complement to one another,, if you can master it.

The "philosopher in meditation" painting seems like an upsidedown Taijii symbol does it not? E. Darwin The Loves of Plants "Such as of late amid the murky sky Was mark'd by Fuseli's poetic eye; Whose daring tints, with Shakspeare's happiest grace, Gave to the airy phantom form and place. Back o'er her pillow sinks her blushing head, Her snow-white limbs hang helpless from the bed; Her interrupted heart-pulse swims in death. O'er her fair limbs convulsive tremors fleet, Start in her hands, and struggle in her feet; In vain to scream with quivering lips she tries, And strains in palsy'd lids her tremulous eyes; In vain she wills to run, fly, swim, walk, creep; The Will presides not in the bower of Sleep. On her fair bosom sits the Demon-Ape Erect, and balances his bloated shape; Rolls in their marble orbs his Gorgon-eyes, And drinks with leathern ears her tender cries"

I watched an interview with Mr Krishnamurti last night . Gave the TM a try. I was impressed by the ease and effectiveness of his TM approach . Im a fan already . Thanks. Stosh

Ego wasnt invented 2000 years ago It is a modern conceptual construct EGO: For Freud, the ego is "the representative of the outer world to the id" In other words, the ego represents and enforces the reality-principle whereas the id is concerned only with the pleasure-principle. Whereas the ego is oriented towards perceptions in the real world, the id is oriented towards internal instincts ; whereas the ego is associated with reason and sanity, Please use a different word (and the parameters of) your "source of evil" Im really very curious what you come up with, because Ive heard this kind of thing over and over again and I really cant 'sanity and reason' as evil, nor do I see having an 'identity' as evil either. Nor do I see babies as evil. (undeveloped egos)

Judas Iscariot was given the job of keeping track of the common purse.

Yep, thats pretty much the way I see it too. People see a need for governance and law of some type , political reformers fight political battles and religious reformers fight religious battles ( for the most part) IMO

I understand what youre saying , but I just disagree- that the thrust of the new testament had much or anything to do with a specific tax policy or even the Roman power structure. It was about the relationships of man with god and other men. The Romans werent really the ones who wanted him crucified, they did it to placate the Jewish establishment and keep order. (or so ,I was taught ,the book says)

Im thinking there is more evidence that He was more against the Jewish religious community as it was at that time than the Roman empire specifically. The Roman empire was the status quo of the day. 2. Jesus Corrected and Confronted Directly: Jesus directly confronted false teachers in the church with the repetitious, “Woe to you…hypocrites.” When they came to trick Him, Jesus frequently silenced the Chief Priests, Scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees but putting them in their place with Scripture. On one occasion He came right out and said, “You’re wrong, not knowing the Scriptures or the power of God.” Jesus was not afraid to tell people–in the most confrontational way–”You’re wrong.” The thrust of the new testament was towards reforming the "church" and working out a new covenant, not overthrowing Rome or defeating taxation.

You said a lot there I just dont 'get' Steve. Its even hard to bend my brain near that . It has a nebulous feel Im not comfortable with. I guess thats the aspect of 'art' as a 'Spiritual Quest" I object to , but other folks seem to be fine with. the nebulous and 'wishy-washy' Back to art though for now right?

You may be right on that.I'm thinking that folks define what is significant relative to themselves, their aspirations , goals values etc. Like a child might be cherished , and this relationship would would have significance, be important , meaningful and enriching ..even the tribulations. Whereas the eternal tao makes no provisions at all for that relationship The child could slowly freeze in a winter storm , unmoved , the snow remains cold. Some feel that lack of bias or preference or reflection emulates the eternal Tao. And so that peace of personal noninvolvement is virtue , is spiritual .. .because it instigates no defensive worries concerns guilt sorrow retribution indignation anger. My middle view may not be pure sanctioned taoism but it doesn't philosophically deny what it is to be human. It doesn't remove meaning from our lives even in argument. It just points to our biases as belonging to ourselves , and our own crosses to willingly bear alone. Feel free to contrast that if you choose to, I won't challenge your right to your own view if it differs .

I guess my point is that it's more about allowing the question to be there and even to stimulate inquiry and yet not getting hung up on finding an answer or even that there is an answer to be found. Questions are alive - they stimulate and motivate us, they make life interesting. Answers are dead. They give us the illusion that we have mastered through understanding - more often than not, it is not truth. And when we spend too much time with questions and answers we miss all of the life that is going on around us Im of an opinion that answers complete questions , its a natural cycle , better not to abort to prolong the life of the question at the expense of the cycle, there will be always new questions because the river is never the same twice, and because new answers beget new questions rather than leaving us to revolve around old questions in frustration. But sure , we can get wrapped up in intellectual pursuits too. Agreed on that.

Maybe our definitions are out of phase ,, for 'meaning' 1. Something that is conveyed or signified; sense or significance. 2. Something that one wishes to convey, especially by language: The writer's meaning was obscured by his convoluted prose. 3. An interpreted goal, intent, or end: "The central meaning of his pontificate is to restore papal authority" (Conor Cruise O'Brien). 4. Inner significance: Im thinking that the 'meaning' of a thing is embodied in how it relates, is defined relative to- another goal-objective like a person , society , event To have a meaning to one thing ,there must exist a goal affected by it. "Significance" being a little more restricted to the quantitative aspect of the meant thing vs the goal.

I cant get clear on this subject myself, as it relates to standard views. It could use closer inspection. If a person had a baby child , would not that event be filled with meaning and at the same time spirituality? If the parent didnt care about the child at all, would not the event be without spirituality and/or meaning ? I dont know that our personal perspective is not also a truth. Im thinking it is , subjective though it may be Lost the box here for some reason.. so youre in red As I have progressed through different stages of spiritual inquiry, I find that it relates less and less to meaning and more and more to being. Looking for meaning is well and good and is a natural consequence of the human mind and verbal ability. But there are certain fundamental questions that arise where meaning just doesn't apply and contradiction is everywhere, and that is where spirituality begins, for me at least... Are you just thinking that giving up on 'making heads or tails' on a situation is the spiritual approach? Were on the same page there though ,Steve.

BONK! (sound of jaw dropping)