Sitting on the couch Alone again today, I realized there was Something more I needed to say.
Poetic justice Some might think To want more than Just a tiny drink Of things I've Written about but Never truly known, The poet's life Too often lived alone.
Sitting on the couch Alone again today, I realized there was Something more I needed to say.
Too short a time, Too short indeed, When you're gone I do but bleed. Waiting, an open sore Never enough of you I truly want more, And I won't be whole Until you walk Through my door.
Sitting on the couch Alone again today, I realized there was Something more I needed to say.
Well, for years I thought E-dating was hooey. Happy to say I was wrong after meeting Joli, and I just stick around to provide proof that it can happen. Sure there are barriers, but it all depends on how serious you are about things and your attitude.
I never expected to find anyone with the guts to come see me or visa-versa. My advice is to take it slow and be your own best friend first and foremost. If its too good to be true, it probably is, but that doesn't mean anything really. People who want perfection from their fellow humans are just dooming themselves to disappointment.
The things I miss, Your voice, your kiss, Your eyes, your lips, Your breasts, your hips.
The things I miss, Coming home and finding You there waiting, The things we ridicule, Having fun together hating.
And the things I miss Being together on the couch, Talking about video games Or why all idiots don't slouch. What is the purpose of the platypus, the appendix Or the spleen, its all On Discovery, if you Know what I mean.
The things I miss, Your voice, your kiss, Your eyes, your lips, Your breasts, your hips.
On a more serious note. I probably will have to marry her. Not only do I love her (and she knows where everything is ), my entire family loves her too.
One thing I learned a long time ago. You can't fight city hall. My mom and aunts have a new shopping buddy, and I have someone who knows where my keys, shoes, wallet, and mind are.
We'll not discuss where my mind is at.
This is a one word inside joke that only you will understand, Joli: Woof!
I didn't ask to be born. After that though, everything has been a matter of choice.
Don't like the world you were born into? Do something to change it.
Don't like the way people treat each other? Be the first to do something different.
Don't like the things you've done in the past? Do something different in the future.
I don't regret who I've been, nor am I ashamed of who I am now. I didn't ask to be born, but I sure as heck can make the place better than when I arrived. One action at a time.
Okay. Joli has left on the train today after spending the summer here with me. I'm bummed about that for myriad and indescribable reasons. But she'll be back in October so its not the end of the world.
The most important thing while she's gone is: How Will I find anything?
On numerous occasions while she was visiting I would be searching for something, my cigarettes, my shoes, my keys, my phone, you name it.
She would get that indulgent look in her eyes as I ran around like a lost puppy.
"What are you looking for?" "Insert X"
"On the nightstand; under the coffee table; on the coffee table; in the bathroom."
I think its a female conspiracy to make themselves indispensable. Nobody can keep track of that much flotsam and jetsom trivia without some sort of ulterior motive.
Anyway, does anybody have thoughts on this? I might have to marry the girl, I can't seem to find my keys.
...It contained something new, something completely imaginary and yet frighteningly real. It contained a “metafive”. A metaphor is a comparison between one item by directly representing that it is another. A simile does the same thing but uses the words “like” or “as” in its comparison. Sort of a junior metaphor, with a couple of flash cards to help it along. Now that we are done with the language lesson, we can move on to just what exactly a metafive is and is not. What it isn’t is a Mercedes. It simply refuses to be. Nobody knows why. Being as metafives had just been born and yet were infinitely ancient, they tended to be like willful little children, which is a simile we’re going to use as a metaphorical springboard on which to leap into this giant pool, again metaphorically speaking. Get used to it. A metafive is very much like a metaphor and yet not the same at all. Which is why they tended to be childishly adult. Like waking up on a weekend and having a tantrum because you don’t have to go to work that day. It isn’t a typewriter either. This can be explained, although not satisfactorily. Rather far from satisfactory actually. Sometimes explanations can be like that, especially in the vicinity of a Mott. To start with we shall use an anti-simile. Typewriters are not at all like pink elephants. Pink elephants, on the other hand, are pink. On the other other hand, the thought of a pink elephant using a typewriter is patently absurd. Typewriters, on the other hand (the original other hand), aren’t pink. Well maybe some of them are, but so far it has yet to be proven. Pink elephants have been proven to be pink; otherwise they would not be called “pink” elephants. One would leave off the pink and just go with the elephant part. If you’re confused by the explanation, then it has succeeded in its purpose of not getting its point across. This phenomenon is known to Science now as the MAEF (Mott Anti-Explanation Field), and has become quite useful to politicians. Crowds of voters now go away from political conventions feeling they have learned something, although it’s achingly apparent they are not at all sure what it is. Nor is metafive a ham sandwich. It would be dangerous to ham lovers everywhere if this were the case. It’s very dangerous to fully chomp down on a metaphor. People can get hurt. Having a soiree with a plateful of metafives would be like having an open house in a burning building. You’re not bound to make many friends this way, unless you enjoy the company of a bunch of firemen who think you’re a bloody idiot. And this is why metafives are not like ham sandwiches, or for that matter, like any other perishable. Because of their ancient newness, metafives could actually be said to be imperishable, which is why in effect, they are far from being ham sandwiches. We continue to edge about the central issue, and this is because we want as much distance between ourselves and the issue when we solve it as possible. It’s a matter of personal survival. What exactly is a metafive, if it is not a Mercedes, typewriter, or ham sandwich? Considering the vast diversity of the universe in all its myriad forms, that still leaves quite a bit that metafives might possibly not be, which is a polite way of saying, “I’m not bloody telling you yet.” One might say (but still not actually come close to the truth) that a metafive is a metaphor that is all grown up now and got its simile together. But this wouldn’t even touch the essence of what we’re actually dealing with here. Metaphors and similes were invented to describe the qualities of things that can’t normally be described. You can’t see them or feel them or hear them, and these are the types of things that metaphors describe about things. Metafives are for describing something that cannot even be thought about, let alone seen, felt, or heard. This is why they are dangerous. They probe the unthinkable, like poking a huge shark just to see if it will eat you.
The public arena of policy, freak. This is about science vs. religion in the political world, or have you forgotten the original topic in your attempt to do whatever it is your agenda happens to consist of with me personally?
As far as being impressed with myself, you seem to think of yourself as a very clever collie so I'd be careful of flinging accusations of self-importance around. Any further rhetoric or are we done now?
So its on to the ad hominem, making amateur assumptions about a personality disorder you assume I have? My narcissism is nothing compared to what you just projected onto me.
Fair enough. You believe what you like, and as long as it doesn't enter the public arena, you are free to do so.
Try to institute laws based on your beliefs (or lack thereof) and you will experience my dissent. Until then, get bent.
I accept things based on fact not conjecture and speculation.
Do I get a prize for my essay if I narrow the field? Didn't think so. I expend about as much effort at refuting posts on this board as I would swatting flies. If it annoys me or makes me think, I will respond. The manner in which I respond depends on my mood.
A ten-inch brush paints window frames just fine with the proper masking. Are you offering compensation for brilliant posts or just being contrary because you can? You get what you pay for.
I get paid to paint windows. Likewise, I get paid for my gift with words. Show me the money and I will put forth more effort. Until then, I will entertain myself, and perhaps a few others, pro bono. And I won't suffer editorial guidelines in the process.
I won't argue Faith-based organizations don't do good. I will argue that Religious political leadership inevitably leads to War and Suffering with other Religious leadership that doesn't agree.
Unless there is proof of God (not what is written in some book written by people about Him0 and what He wants from us, then we're better off muddling along without Him. Or any half-baked "Messiah" who tells us he knows what "God's will" is.
It's time to grow up and take care of our own household without the big sky-daddy.
You bring historical matters up. Did Christian doctrine work for Spain during the Inquisition, or the Albiginesians during the Christian massacre of said "Heretics"? Does Sharia law suit you?
If God is on our side, and wants us to live a certain way, I want proof. Not doctrine from a mythology book.
So many people do "good" in the name of God. As long as it's "their Good" and "their God". Until He can and does speak for Himself through other than Revelatory means, He's a myth "believers" foist upon others to get what they want.
You're welcome to believe what you want in private.
You are not welcome to create policy based on Faith; the Muslims have just as much claim to their system as yours. That's the essence of Separation of Church and State. Which Church dictates what kind of State, but either way it isn't a Free society. It's one based on fear of HUMAN reprisal, based on HUMAN doctrine.
In secular matters its good enough for everyone. Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. God has no place in policy or He shouldn't, unless He'd like to come down here and represent Himself. Until then, no priesthood should have anything to do with things which are rational and serve the public.
Ford: Arthur... what if I told you I really wasn't from Guildford? I was from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse? Arthur: [chuckles incredulously] Is that something you're likely to say?
Trillian: Can we put your ego aside for a minute?! Something important has happened. Zaphod: If there's anything more important than my ego on this ship, I want it caught and shot right now!
Gnosis has been hi-jacked by the Church, and by the Temples. Gnosis belongs to us all, according to Christ and Buddha both, and is not in need of an intermediary, in True Christianity or in Buddhism. Priest-craft is the biggest scam ever, and is contrary to everything either of them taught. Only when people's minds are free of doctrine by truly understanding the limitations of doctrine (Zen satori, for instance) will they begin to understand themselves, let alone God.
The Gnostics had a particular view of Judas. He was the instrument of the true God that wished to free himself from the grip of Matter (Samael, or the Blind God, the Son of Sophia, or Wisdom, without God, or Spirit, thus creating an entity which was blind to Spirit, blind to infinity) which is the false God. Only by becoming pure Spirit could the Christ fulfill his Destiny of Messiah, or Anointed One.
As to the Catholic Church. The concepts about Jesus as a man/god of Arius and various other Gnostic dissenters was intolerable to the structure of veiled polytheism which is the Trinity. Anyone that did not acknowledge the Creed of Nicea was a heretic, and sentenced to at least exile (Arius) or death (Albigenisians).
Anything which did not fit the power structure of the Church (at one point Geocentric/Heliocentric theory and the freedom to research as in Galileo) was considered Heretical. As late as the 1600-1700's the Church had absolute control of the paradigm under which people saw the world, and that meant absolute power.
It was reluctant to change because any change was inevitably a change toward lesser power to them in an almost entropic fashion. Empire's fall harshly and with a crashing sound; only the Chinese have maintained a multi-millenial dynastic structure because their philosophy is comfortable with the fact that everything changes and everything moves in circles, and thus the I-Ching, and before that the shells of turtles.
The reality of gun ownership is almost a given in America. The type of gun is a different story. Rifles and shotguns are in every pickup in Oregon. Backwards? Maybe, but I'd rather be backwards than eaten by a bear.
Don't get me wrong. By disturbing I mean thought-provoking. In a sense that goes beyond words, much like a Zen master striking a student without explanation in order to focus them on the now. A picture paints a thousand-words they say, and if they were of the nature of Dorian's, what a story they would tell. An ever-evolving and decaying portrait, even as Dorian stays young.
There is magic in imagery. Even as we are blind to the reality of the inevitability of entropy so does our mind blind us to the joy of the now in the wake of imagining things that don't actually exist. The reality is reflected somewhere, whether we like it or not.
Life is short. Many people choose to live in denial of this. All we have is what we have, and wherever we go, there we are.
The theme of temptation and redemption is a literary archetype that is used by Wilde very astutely in Dorian Gray.
Dorian is rich in symbolism that I, as an artist find particularly disturbing. To wield such power demands an enormous amount of personal responsibility. And my belief is we all unconsciously paint the picture that is our life. A good metaphor for Karma in fact.
It also puts forth the question of the value of man's mortality. Everyone fears Death, but it's a natural function in life, and is an eternal lesson in acceptance of truth. The only truth there is. Everyone must pay the Piper.
Galactic_bodhi Forum Posts (9,196)
RE: SIDDHARTHA
The Man or the book? I think anyone who wants to know what the Buddha is about should first start by reading the book by Herman Hesse.