|
|
|
|
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/20/2009 11:49:26 PM | | trulio...your logic makes me dizzy!! | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 2:39:54 AM | The heart sheds the reasons of the
mind; in rebellion to the mind it (the heart) loves what the mind despises,
especially
being entangled
in paperwork
upside down and in the reverse position with respect to all and kindred
so they go about sheltered some how by ancient cedars, and tall ones, that live
alone,
at least that is their dream and final escape, as it is here, in BC | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 3:13:20 AM | Of course more in depth:
We know what love is since it is the most powerful force in life. God is
love, but at the same time God is also process oriented and is the ultimate
'being function' in the universe. The love of God is therefore dynamic and
the sign of this love is the morning light each day. Or in the north, the
stars in the winter, the seal oil lamp in the Igloo. God created the
universe from out of darkness, possibly created it out of thought, by
manifesting light, the single physical attribute of God's love. Therefore we
do not comprehend God and God's love since light itself is invisible but
everything in the universe contains the 'eternal albedo' of God, that is: the
eternal reflectivity of God and love. The love that instills the universe is
apprehended bouncing off the multi-colored walls of
the canyon, and through it the world is enacted. Love is not an emotion, or
a feeling, but a supreme principle become act, an act of supreme creation.
It has no competitor in the universe. It begets all life. What ends life is
not love nor is it life itself. Life does not kill itself, nor does Being
simply vanish. Life is endless and the simple intuition of life as endless
can be seen in the pond where the Great Chain of Being evolves, in the city,
in the agora of the heart of man it acts. God does not command his creation
to love, it is simply impossible to do this, but he is jealous of any
competitors, so when God created the universe he created only one, and he
was happy and content with it. God even asks that love not be commanded but
enacted in the sense that we are 'permitted' to love each other simply
because we naturally know no other force in creation that begets life itself.
What does it mean to focus on what is spiritual? My interpretation is that
what is spiritual is not precisely what is consistent with the neo-Kantian
perspective (although Kant does write on this extensively in terms of his
readings of Swedenborg) in that metaphysics or the task of metaphysics, is
explanatory of concepts such as the
categories of pure reason. These categories are reflective in part of a
tendency in the west to appropriate categories, especially those of
Aristotle, and 're-ify' them. What is not meant to be intuitive is somehow
made out to be intuitive and purely without ritual and liturgy - which is a
logical contradiction. Can you imagine the 'unity of identity and
difference'? Or can you and I be satisfied with the notions such as freedom
and immortality conveyed in highly abstract words alone? Kant was responding
to the ideas of Hume which were also an attempt to discuss the nature of
'reality' by casting experience of what is ultimately real in terms of the
'empirical'. Not an easy nor satisfying task since to cast experience into
terms that are exclusively the domain of cognition is to obscure everything
that is within the domain of feeling, emotion (affective states of the soul
derived from 'sense-perception') and so on. The real problem is with the
constructing of a heart. What I mean by the heart is the 'constitutive
center' of each unique soul (de anima) that is supposed to be the 'mirror'
for the reception of the 'light' or the intellect or first intellect
that constitutes the divine principle of all that is.
"Eye hath not seen, nor has it been prepared in the heart of man, the things
that are too come." [Jeremiah].
In Plotinus I can read an adequate defense of Platonic
theological-cosmology that is consistent within the Judeo-Christian
tradition, but is it also the epitomizing a correspondence with the Hebraic
belief in pre-destination, grace, and charity? Are these really mere words
or first principles? Are there some really working definitions in this
comparison that can be made? For instance, acceptance of one's fate in terms
of gifts that one receives is in fact the first great spiritual achievement,
a recognition of acceptance into a divine order. What is this achievement?
It is something critical to life. I was thinking that the heart is really
the rag and bone shop of the world, the heart as the . This is the
center for each one of us...it is a construction that immortalizes the
embodied soul that we all have, a law of the heart which sends out it's own
arrows of longing, like light taking the straight trajectory, and
self-movement of the soul, alighting and enlighting with warmth and
understanding so as to aprehend. It is the center that does the 'valuing'
and it nurtures the soul with spiritual food. I like to think that what
Socrates says in Phadreus is true, unlike what Aristotle says, that there
are 'eternal truths' such that they need no demonstrations, but like
Aristotle indicating an acceptance between complimentary persons with
intellects capable of recognition of 'principles'. They are what I would
term 'agreements' or 'correspondences' with what is ultimately real in life.
What is ultimately real in life is the light, which is a metaphor for the
warmth and the love that features one powerful attribute of life, the
'regenerative urgency for life to beget life' in the sense that love, or
eros, is an enactment of life begetting itself in diverse ways through song,
through reciprocity and so on.
No simple use of the word by the lips can do justice to the act of love. It
is either a commitment to enact some good, or to engender some form of
respectful relationship with all that has life itself. The ecological logos
then is all about the 'creaturely feeling' that all life intrinsically has
for other life. It is the deep sympathy that I have for wildlife and even
the 'synholon' of ecosystems whether manmade or natural. There is something
odd about domesticated animals on a ranch for instance: the cattle dog, the
horses and the cattle appear to be deeply at one with each other. Little
does the border collie understand about the fate of the steers that are
being taken out to spring pasture, little does the horse understand about
the whole purpose of the herd of cattle, the seperation of the bulls from
the cows and the calfs. The border collie 'aprehends' the cows; little does
it 'comprehend' in the cows. What is really happening here is as old as
creation itself. Now with the introduction of 'planetary capital', 'global
technology', and 'monetary epistemologies' the soul and heart of man is
being completely emptied for the sole pursuit of private advantage,
efficiency, and power associated with 'mammon'. What kinds of values does
the genetic engineer really hold inside of the 'heart' with respect to the
Monarch butterfy as it attempts to digest pollen on the genetically modified
corn crop which is designed to kill pesty insects? Innocent life in
collision with private advantage and 'monetary epistemologies' and the
'economics of marginal cost reduction.'
There is a very good description of the heart in the first epistle of John
in the gospel. It says that the heart cannot be void. It is either filled
with light or darkness. To open the heart to the light is to accept the good
will and the will of the creator. In the strict evolutionary sense this
would mean accepting of the gifts of God, the creator, the Great Spirit that
have co-evolved with man for some millions of years. This is not to say that
this is an ought statement backed by evolutionary laws over an
interventionist and scientific manipulation to perfect nature in whose
wildness is entropy, disorder and chaos, like Francis Bacon and others of
his era envisioned. The truth of the current ecological urgency is this: in
the phrase is a very powerful claim. It is
a truth claim about the ultimate inference that man can make about the
ultimate. It is that there is a mystery so perplexing and profound within
the heart of each one of us that we are led to experience 'urgency'
immediately in our relationships with all things. In the manifest is the
call to all souls, it is the 'stain', the inversion of the eternal
superattendent sense of being. Aristotle made reference to the basic
restitutive sense of 'impulse' and 'resistance' in our activities. What is
the basis of this resistance and impulse that is felt by the heart? Are they
moral and ethical impulses and resistances? A fro and a hence. The one
physical the other spiritual. Are they activities that like the waves in the
ocean which ebb and flow, or like the heart consist of the systole and the
diastole? What is the effect of this movement of the soul? Is it a movement,
or is it simply the spirit [mind], that needs to be harnessed and trained?
The heart can admit both light and darkness. It cannot be left void. There
is no mean between the dark and the light, either the heart is filled with
darkness for one another or it is filled with light for one another. To be
true then to the origin of the light, the source of the light is to graft
onto the self the will of the supreme whose definition awaits. It is the
'supreme definition' that that the mind and the heart lust after, in the
Platonic sense of the divine madness that longs to 'banquet with being' as
described in the dialogue Phadreus. Phadreus means 'brightness' and Phadreus
is a giver of 'perfect speeches' which are offerings to the gods, especially
Zeus. Only the gods can perceive Being directly, man must be content to make
perfect speeches and live or rather walk in the light. The new law of the
gospels is simple: we are permitted to love one another, our brethren, since
we all have a common father. Was this lawful before and manifest in the
sense of duty? Or was this an obligation before? An obligation is an order,
and it is not easy to consent to an order if it is against the nature of the
self. Then as a consequence the law was not an order that required consent.
By being born each one of us was naturally in love with the other. As a
conseuquence of the 'fall' there was fear created in the heart of man, a
contradiction to this innate love of the other, and the new law was not an
admonishment, but a 'permit' to be open to love for the other. Go your way
and love all - animals, plants, people, and even rocks. You 'shall' be happy
to love and not walk 'together in fear' of one another.
There is nothing outside of the universe since if there were
another universe, then God would not be happy but rather 'jealous' of this
other creation. That is what is said by the demiurge in response to God
creating the universe, that it was Good, that it was a perfect image of the
Creator with some limitations of being. The divine madness of human beings
is to dine and serve at the 'banquet of Being' itself. Anything less is
'self-deception' and what is interesting is the statement made by Sankara
about 200 AD. He said that it is better to avoid 'ontological speculation'
and to rather be concerned with the 'salvation of one's soul' !!!
Socrates talks about how the soul originally had wings when it lived in the
heavens in orbit with the celestial objects. This was the happiest place for
the soul. When the soul became 'embodied' it lost its wings and entered the
cycle of 'generation' and thus an unhappy cycle of birth and death. The
difference between the philosopher and non-philosophers is that the
philosopher can escape rebirth:
"Therefore it is just that the thought of the philosopher alone recovers its
wings; for it is always, so far as possible, near in memory to those things
a god's nearness to which makes him truly god (249c)."
I think one of the faculties of the soul is to be able to 'recollect' about
it's true nature, about it's past when it was in the heavens where the
eternal archetypes existed. The mystic claims that the image is a 'stain',
or using the image of the stain as the image of the formal pattern of the
created universe, it is still an image of the eternal archetypes. It is thus
very possible that the soul can 'discern' through the spirit what is eternal
and lasting according to a 'primitive intuition'. There is a syncretic
interpretation of the mystical and the ritual in modern anthropology since
each logos that a culture endeavors to enact as meaning (sense), is
restitutive of the recollection of the soul for a lost paradise, this
meaning can be regained during moments of vision, exstacy, and liturgical
ritual.
I am reading Rapaportes book "Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity"
and in this book the syncreticism is remarkable. It is like a handbook
on humanity, and what makes humanity so wonderful. The section
on Truth and order makes a great deal of sense. He quotes Heidegger:
"To be joined with all things into the "great cosmos" one must, therefore,
elude or reject the instructions of opinion and advantage and follow those
of the logos that stands as a universal beyond all opinion and that, itself,
proposes unity. It is of interest that the term Heraclitus used in Fragment
1 for human incomprehension of the Logos was axynetoi, which is the negation
of syniemi, "bring together. [1969]"
Rapaporte: "Logos may be conceived outside liturgy, but its establishment is
entailed by liturgy and, if Logos has an irreducible social component,
liturgy may even be indispensible to its establishment. Liturgical orders
are "common" in the sense of Fragment 2, and to perform them is ipso facto
to "follow the common," for to perform a liturgical order is necessarily to
conform to it. It is to follow an order which stands beyond individual
opinion and to override the councils of private advantage."
The concept of the ecosystem then is of a 'regulative' nature in that it is
a human hybrid of discovery and fabrication. Rapaporte hypothesizes a
'revitalization' of a logos, the construction of a new logos founded on the
ecosystem concept. He says:
"I have said that the concept of the ecosystem, which Toulmin would make
central to a revitalized cosmos and I to a new Logos, bears resemblance to
religious concepts, or even is at least as much religious conception as
scientific hypothesis. For one thing, its truth is not demonstrable through
the objective procedures of scientific epistemologies (which may, in fact,
threaten it). Its validity is, therefore, like the validity of all
conventions, including religious understandings, a function of
acceptance....As one of Herclitus' modern commentators put it, it 'claims'
those who grasp it How comprehension is to be transformed into commitment is not
clear. We have discussed liturgy's capacities in this regard at length,
considering both formal acceptance with its attendant obligations and
responsibilities and numinous convictions, but we have also noted that
liturgy's capacities may have been weakened since the Enlightenment, and its
weakened powers may not be sufficient to 'claim' those who seem to be in
some degree of control of human affairs, and who may be under the spell of
monetary epistemologies. Weakened or not, ritual and related forms of action
should not be ruled out of attempts to establish a new Logos grounded in the
concept of the ecosystem. I myself have found, in recent work on the social
impacts of outer continental shelf oil leasing and on locating a national
high-level nuclear waste repository, that participation in concerted actions
conforming to or supporting ecological value and theory, or directed toward
the amelioration of ecological or other social disorders, is likely to
resemble 'witnessing' and therefore be 'deeply' or 'highly' meaningful to
participants, and as such strongly committing. With slight increase in the
formalization of some aspects of such action it might become as committing
as ritual."
Well this is a support for an ecological logos...if you have time, or if
you may believe in the concept of 'ecolgocial rotations bounded by ritual
and the commons' let me know, please.
ChaoCITO | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 1:59:31 PM | | I wish I had the background to enter this discussion with you, but I don't. I don't even understand whether this is a philosophically tenable argument or if it is more like metaphysical poetry. One only statement I noted: "By being born each one of us was naturally in love with the other," which is surely more quasi-religiosity than it is demonstrable science or philosophy. | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 5:29:24 PM | Tin treads
impressions
echoes like tinnitus
deep sighs belie
the unhappiness
just below the surface
masked expressions freeze
the reactions of want, need
and....
always the hope that someone
will see the person I am and
love me...
me. | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 10:33:27 PM | That is a phenomenal certainty. Blake once wrote that the baby conceived in joy was begotten in woe. Which explains the mothers pain of delivery, and the joy of concieving.
If the meaning sense of what is read is revealed in some way as 'elation' or as 'uplifting', as music and singing often is, then it is beneficial.
Most modern philosophy is actually a form of 'rhetoric' and 'conversion', and if it is not that, then it is a form referred to as critical philosophy. So there are two major trends: one critical and one speculative. There are intermarriages and blends of the two, of which is above, mine expository writing, on the nature of love.
The premise: "by being born each of us" asks for the outcome, which is self evident "naturally we are in love with one and another."
The young conflate everything, and there is very little strife, as opposed to love in the new/newd
embers and the stars | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 10:35:39 PM | There are many that love in principle and passion..
the earth, there are not many who govern that will ever
submit to any logos other than regulation. If they do...
they left the field and were converted to the light
that precedes the moment they flame out. (forgive the cynic)
Thats me, myself and I. And I do not obviously believe. | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/21/2009 10:44:44 PM | | ...and there is nothing more powerful than the movement of love in the old, the ancient. Youth is youth, old age is harder to bear and the act of love an affirmation that the young surely need to witness. The act of loving in one not young is definitely what makes love gain the worth it so sorely needs. Love spouts endlessly from the young.... divorced (often) from the understanding of its profound significance. | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/24/2009 11:10:12 PM | well how can this be placed inside of joy? after all it is supposed to attenuate, our love!
interest is the attenuation of love, the less interest, the more love.....and it is diurnal, does not disperse during darkness, or stormy oblique
love therefore is an act
speech is one 'enactment', thus: to say: "I love you" is an act.
the less I am interested in the object of my love, the more I am able to act for her, and act 'indifferently'; as I can be hired for small change, I cannot do something for nothing, or for expectation of immense reward. My interest attenuates with love of that kind.
A credo appears: it is a credo absurdum es: it is that it suggests that I cannot be available for the sake of attenuated love, or interest, as I am only interested in the immediate, and what presents now.....so much so: presentational immediacy:
if speech is one 'enactment form of love' and non-attenuated, then it is ever-lasting, pearly, like the small alpine variety, no? | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/26/2009 6:33:18 PM | ...love is never that difficult
love is like jello, waiting to be tickled into wiggling.
love is never in the province of philosophers only
love is a credo, indeed, but never to words
Love begins the flow of eternity allowing you
no fear. Love visits from its many statehoods
fits the pieces into the life that is being lived. | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/29/2009 1:36:02 AM | | Love is everything you want to make it, but not what you want it to be. The consequences of this is that you have to do it, it is an act. Not a wish or sentiment or mere words without effect or affect. You have to enact it, and you cannot compell others to do what you desire them to do as for this act. If not, then they do so, that is gloriosa major....which happens a lot | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/30/2009 12:23:19 AM | The definition of raptus as an english word is
A sudden and violent outbreak of disease; specifically, a sudden outbreak of melancholic insanity. [Funk and Wagnells, New Standard Dictionary of the English Language, 1943.]
This melancholic insanity is the foolishness, the true state of the philosopher as is stated by Nietsczhe, more or less, and even Socrates. This melancholy is being addicted to a single subject of thought that is repetition itself. We melan-cholic babies are left in a vacuum left over by excess. It is the situation of the receeding wave after it strikes the shore, and then sweeps all back into the abyss of liquid profundity, into a watery grave, or resting place. We play with prepositions...of...against....for....from | |
|
| Each word...
Posted: 7/31/2009 6:22:06 AM |
...love is never that difficult
love is like jello, waiting to be tickled into wiggling.
love is never in the province of philosophers only
love is a credo, indeed, but never to words
Love begins the flow of eternity allowing you
no fear. Love visits from its many statehoods
fits the pieces into the life that is being lived.
I love all of this - of course. "Of course" because your poetry always flows as if breathed on to the screen, but "the life that is being lived" has the supreme magic of the simple, the seemingly obvious, that which is so obvious that all too often we overlook recognizing or saying it.
That phrase might do very well for a collection of your poems. Bless you. | |
|
| Reach down inside you
Posted: 7/31/2009 6:47:04 AM | Reach down inside you and find a hug,
Reach down inside you and find the flame that warms up.
The electric spark that runs from belly to spine to mind,
Reach down inside you and try to find
Love
The actor storming on the stage spake loves word in a fashion that the director {love} found absurd.
In act two the actor started to see the expression is a form of want, desire, possesion and glee,
And not really the form or feeling of love.
In act three he realised that although he may try to enact it he could only induct it from the coil of his soul to anothers and could never be sure how it would conduct itself within another.
In act 4 he died, a raging solenoid, peaceful, quiet and calm...
 | |
|
| Reach down inside you
Posted: 8/1/2009 9:25:11 AM |
A sudden and violent outbreak of disease; specifically, a sudden outbreak of melancholic insanity.
that could certainly describe a few ill fated flings begotten in my intemperate youth....But ah, what fun while it lasted...
unfortunately, wisdom generally has to be earned, though it has never stopped those further ahead on the road of life from trying to give it away. .. And that means, making mistakes... | |
|
| Lessons
Posted: 8/6/2009 6:17:15 AM | There are lessons to be learned
in every leaf, in the smiles
or frowns of every passerby.
Let none pass
without noticing them
then all of us shall be
students and teachers alike. | |
|
| August 6, 1942, passim
Posted: 8/15/2009 5:13:52 AM | What can we do
but demand of the past
that it undo itself,
that Januscz Korczak and every orphan
he ever smiled upon
be revived to us.
Light a candle
for all the little ones.
How many would it have taken
to feed the voracious ovens?
Blond hair, brown hair, cheeks
tinged with the last fever of life.
The flames
did not know
how they were named or what
they might have become. | |
|
| This is not a poem
Posted: 8/15/2009 7:45:24 AM | | hi there i am very new at attempting poems though i must say that was fantastic i have a long way to go. | |
|
| This is not a poem
Posted: 8/15/2009 1:09:36 PM |
hi there i am very new at attempting poems though i must say that was fantastic i have a long way to go.
We were all new at this at some point (and apprehensive at presenting our poems) but got to wherever we are as you will, by writing one poem and then another and then another...
Best of luck | |
|
| August 6, 1942, passim
Posted: 8/16/2009 8:42:03 PM | Oh aloyasha..."the flames did not know....how they were named or what....they might have become." I am speechless. Truly.
..and if your knowledge hurts you
can I step in silently, hold you?
can I point to some nebulous wonder.
can I, I cannot ever erase...
yet, I am your friend, I hear you.
without any defense. I hear you. | |
|
| August 6, 1942, passim
Posted: 8/17/2009 7:01:46 AM | Oh aloyasha..."the flames did not know....how they were named or what....they might have become." I am speechless. Truly.
..and if your knowledge hurts you
can I step in silently, hold you?
can I point to some nebulous wonder.
can I, I cannot ever erase...
yet, I am your friend, I hear you.
without any defense. I hear you.
Speechless? And yet you somehow found the speech or the something beyond speech that you posted on "Passing the Salt"!
And "yet, I am your friend, I hear you" has long been evident to me, and cherished. | |
|
| August 6, 1942, passim
Posted: 8/17/2009 11:46:52 PM | Okay,
I wanted to start a new business, one that benefits all, old and small, one that,
I could call,
so I called it the "Floor Collector",
last night my friend commented that I resemble Jack Nicholson, with my smile, and I agreed,
since I did watch "The One Who Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest"
Even though there is no Big Nurse,
Only government, the PC in Whata Waa
And the Sliperal in Vic swata wah | |
|
| |
| Me... and my shadow
Posted: 8/20/2009 10:25:24 PM | I really like that you like this too,
Me and my shallow side.
If I replied with my deep side I would be silent in terms of affirmation but would allude to the next course and minor discussion,
chaocito | |
|
| Me... and my shadow
Posted: 8/20/2009 11:02:08 PM | | Please feel very free to reply with your "deep" side. You have to have the gentle sigh that communicates what you need to. Nothing else works and to be understood, you need to communicate without obsfucation. chaocito. lol. | |
|
|
| Page 12 of 14
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 |
|
Home
login 
