Thursday, March 17, 2005

Full Frontal Fashion

Physical, silent consciousness, is a genetic expression of what you are - all the higher animals have their own unique expression (and just how low one would have to go before some creature did not appear to express some form of consciousness is unclear), and thus all lions express that consciousness similarly, as do gazelles, giraffes, rhinos, dogs, cats, monkeys, squirrels, rats, etc.

Gazelles never act like giraffes, dogs never act like cats, and squirrels never acts like rhinos - though, the thought *does* certainly bring a smile... Only "humans" do not act like Humans (capitalized, and without quotation marks), and that certainly brings an even wider smile!!

Humans, being part of the organic life on earth, and the highest animal in that global biosphere, are all a genetic expression of what they are, but there is something uniquely different about their expressions, than even their nearest genetic relatives.

And, obviously - for those who think about such things - it is due to language, i.e., the conscious part of the brain, the cerebral cortex, which is capable of thinking abstractly, symbolically, metaphorically, and representing the external world as perceived in it's entirety within the apparently limited confines of a 3 pound mass of gray matter.

And that is where humans differ - not only dramatically, but moreso - from their nearest genetic relatives, who have no such capacity, and don't even appear to be nearing the acquisition of such capacity. Humans are eons ahead of even the apes, and they are probably eons ahead of everything else. (While there is apparently nothing which is eons ahead of mankind.)

So, why would the biosphere - Life itself - need to make this unique creature, totally unique on this planet, and for all anybody knows, perhaps in the entire universe, and provide it with the capacity to think symbolically, and talk amongst themselves, sharing information about the world, that only they can?

There are theories of course - and they abound - but they are all just that. Individual evolution begins with a personal investigation, using oneself as the object of study, regarding the one significant question that any human can possibly ask: Why do I talk (so much, all the time, non-stop, AD NAUSEUM!!) when my natural silent consciousness is more than sufficient, and EVERYBODY (from swamis to gurus to masters, etc.) says in (really) no uncertain terms: stop thought, stop thinking, stop talking... meditate, be mindful, remember yourself.

That is, what is going on that, on the one hand, Life has created all creatures - including man - with a degree of consciousness suitable for their profitable existence, but only Mankind with something else, which all of (supposed "more enlightened") humanity agrees is something to stifle, stop, slow down, and eventually, shut down entirely, in favor of changing the relationship between silent and talking consciousness from 1%-99%, to 50%-50%, or even 100%-0%??

Jump right in if you dare. You don't have a clue, but you might have some fun making stuff up.

Here's a little hint/shove/push: Talk covers the sheer nakedness of natural, physical, silent consciousness, so as to pretend - full frontal fashionistas that we are - to be "Something-or-other" for the world to see, NOT, NOT, NOT because something is wrong, NOR that the "self" or "mind" is operating incorrectly (as the faux enlightened advaitins might incorrectly suggest), but something else entirely.

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Why do you TALK so much?!?

Think about it - yeah right, as if you CAN think about it, as if you can get past the "so much" part of the question that probably reacted somewhat, oh I don't know, negatively with your "image of yourself", as if the question is a criticism about how much you talk.

But, that's not really the question worth asking. Here's the real question. Why do you TALK... at all?!? (and here, talk means write, and they both mean, 'think')

Consider your basic physical consciousness, that allows you to get dressed - reasonably correctly, shoes on feet, pants on legs, shirt on back, hat on head - and go outside - without falling down the stairs - and take a walk in the park - without tripping over the bushes and running into joggers and stepping in the doggy-dodo - and without a lot of unnecessary conversation in your head, take in the scenery, looking and listening and smelling the natural surroundings and feeling the warmth of the sun and coolness of the breezes on your skin while being noticeably uplifted by the entire experience - such as you are able.

Consider all that, and how your physical, silent consciousness has absolutely no need of conversation to experience that hours-long walk in the park, returning refreshed and enhanced in every way...

Then, you sit down at your keyboard, and start pumping your typical nonsensical drivel into cyberspace, and for the next 10-12 hours, it's TV, radio, email, telephone, chatting with your kids and spouse and friend(s), and more email, until beddy-by time.

Consider all that, and how your noisy, talking consciousness has virtually taken over 95-99% of your consciousness, and you're neither "upset", "dismayed", or in agreement about that assessment. "Who, ME?!? I'm not like that, I'm in total control here!!"

Ok. Fine. So, answer the question without another one of your typical dodges, side- steps, and distracting changes-of-subject/context: Why do you TALK? When your silent, physical consciousness is so well-equipped to live well, happily, and without undue concern about life. Why wouldn't ANYONE - realizing all this - prefer a lifetime of at least a 50-50 split between physical and talking consciousness?

But, that's NOT what we have kiddies. It's much more like 95-99% talking, and 1-5% AT MOST silence. And if you doubt those numbers, then you just haven't looked. Don't forget the 8 hours in beddy-by - the talk doesn't stop.

Tuesday, March 15, 2005


If there's one thing humans can be absolutely counted upon doing, it is bleeding profusely when cut, which has even been immortalized in a famous line that goes, "If you prick me, do I not bleed?" as if, claiming to be human - and supporting it with proof - is such a great thing. Yes, Mr. Shylock, humans bleed when cut - so what? What's your point? Dogs do it, Cats do it, Cows do it, Sheep do it.

There's another thing humans can be counted upon not doing, and that is stopping the bleeding once it has started. Apparently, the flow is pleasurable to them, and to stop the flow would be just too unbearable to consider, so bleed they do, from birth till death, a slow, oozing bleed, from many and daily increasing number of cuts, so that humans have sort of a pinkish-reddish glow around them, which also emanates heat and a dull, almost freakish light.

Makes a pretty sickening picture doesn't it?
Makes me laugh. I wonder why.
Perhaps because I'm angry, or sick. Who cares?
At least I've stopped bleeding.
At least the glow has subsided.

Monday, March 14, 2005

Word Wars

Men don't start wars, words do.
Men don't start arguments, words do.
Men don't fool men, words do.
Men aren't confused, ignorant, "un-enlightened", words are.
Men don't wake up, become conscious, "enlightened", words do.

As such, men are just the playing field of the words engaged in an ongoing struggle, not only for the available territory for which they live and die, but for the amusement of the Great Omni-Linguist in the Sky.

Humans don't know about this, though they - each one - suspect it from an early age, which is why they set up schools, and educational institutions to teach languages to each other, so as to have at least the possibility of defending themselves against the interminable, unstoppable, never- ending onslaughts brought on by the waves of words upon them.

But, of course, it's all to no avail, though it does bring a smile to the Great Omni-Linguist in the Sky, knowing as it does - since it made all the rules - that running about and bumping into each other is what generates the Life energy that powers the whole thing.

Men are batteries, and words are the electrons and ions, positive and negative, that attract and repel and build up within them:

Try to think about this with a straight face, I dare you!!

Sunday, March 13, 2005

Schiavo Schmiavo

There is nothing like a worldwide BFD to bring out the two halves of humanity - the "I'm for it"'s and the "I'm against it"'s - in fact, the way these BFD's are reported, is calculated (not by the reporters, of course, who are clueless, but by the brains which inhabit the heads of the reporters) to divide humanity into one or the other camp.

WHY?? Ask yourself about this, without instantly smartassing, or wiseacring about it.

It would seem that Life, which is behind all BFD's, wants mankind to talk about which side they are on, and when they don't KNOW which side they are on, they are literally FORCED (by a microphone being shoved in your face - or someone asking you >>the question<<) to make a decision, and state their decision/position, internally and even externally.

WHY?? What could Life possibly be gaining - and make no mistake, Life always gains in these transactions - by forcing humanity to take a position, and state it publically (first for themselves to know 'what I think', and second so others will know), knowing (as it surely does) that which ever side is taken is absolutely irrelevant - neither side is, nor can be, "correct" or "incorrect", "better" or "worse", "right" or "wrong", not certainly to Life.

It doesn't make a bit of difference that Schiavo finally died, or my brother finally died, or your sister finally died, or you finally die - not to Life (there are more than enough "yous" to go around - to get the bigger job done) - but to the rest of humanity, it appears to make some difference, but perhaps, it doesn't make enough difference to humanity to naturally "force" a comment about it (that is, going back into mankind's talking history, to jump start his talking consciousness, his ability to talk at all which carries forward even into today.)

Perhaps, Life somehow realized that DEATH, and especially the death of the near-and-dear was a viable way, callou callay, oh frabjous day, to jump start the consciousness of man out of it's natural, silent, physical-only state of human consciousness, to the next evolutionary level of talking consciousness we all know so well today.

However, oddly enough, once that level of consciousness had been reached - those many thousands of years ago - Life >>seems<< to have stopped right there, stopped SHORT!!! of going further, into the next level of consciousness only a few know, and fewer are willing to discuss publically.

For example, bringing all this right down into the present day, which side do YOU fall on? Are you on the side that approves entirely of the way Terry was handled, tubes withdrawn, allowed to starve to death... finally for chrissakes!, or, do you fall on the side that heartily DISapproves of the way she was mis-handled, OR...

Yup, that's the keyword there... OR

Now, how would you describe to yourself that third position, you now claim you in your presumptive enlightened understanding have obtained/ reached?

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Intelligence and Belief

There is a direct inverse relationship between intelligence and belief mediated by fear, yup the big F.

The more intelligent one is, the less they believe in stuff - from Sandy Claws, to Easter Bunny, to God and his evil twin - and fear, yup the big F, is directly affected.

The more intelligent one is, the less fearful.
The less intelligent one is, the more fearful.

The most intelligent one can be - while locked inside a human body -is to be totally without fear about anything, including death.

The least intelligent one can be - is to be totally fearful about almost everything.

It's absolutely NO WONDER, that waking up, becoming enlightened, being liberated, are just euphemisms for becoming Intelliigent (with 3 i's), while being asleep, being in prison, part of the herd, are just euphemisms for being Ignorant (or, to be fair, "ordinarily intelligent" (with 2 i's), i.e., normal.

Go figure, if you dare you fearless ones.

Friday, March 11, 2005

"Sitting at the feet of..."

Whenever a person willingly "sits at the feet of..." another human, regardless of their claimed, or assumed position in life, either mundanely or spiritually, the one at the bottom can learn something from the one on top. And, after that (set of) transactions have occurred, they can switch positions, and the same law holds true.

If people could understand this PRIOR to the debasing act of "sitting at the feet of..." they would already comprehend much about what understanding means - both in the literal sense, and the metaphorical sense.

The "idea" (that everybody bandies about >>as if<< they understand it, but in fact, they don't - because if they did, they would stop saying it) that Life is really the only and best teacher, or put another way (so as to "include" themselves in the equation), anyone can be your teacher... the clerk, the beggar, the businessman, the mother, whomever, is a variation on the genetic realization mentioned in the first paragraph.

Go figure.

Ok, here's an ad hoc figuring, since I'd bet $1000 dollars I mentioned it first, but then, who could prove it either way... take ANY person on this or ANY email list - it doesn't matter - and try to "sit at the feet of" just that ONE person, let him/her be your one and only teacher for the moment, try to UNDERSTAND what they are teaching you (because that is ALL everyone is doing everytime they open their mouth, everytime they write a post, everytime they anything (within your ear- and/or eye-shot) - they are teaching YOU something you need.)

That is to say, if you actually listened to what somebody was trying to tell you, and seriously attempted to "do as you were told", you would make (the kind of) progress in whatever "thing" of which you are attempting to make progress, according to you.

Thursday, March 10, 2005

Logic can't help you

If you want to fix something which has broken down in your house, like your toaster, or iron, logic is your best friend. With an ordinary amount of logic, you can look at the problem, analyze the situation, develop a suitable plan of action, get started, and even if you're just a high school graduate, sometimes even less, you can very often complete the project successfully, one way or the other. Logic, what a tool!

But - ah shucks, there's always a but, ain't there? - if you want to fix yourself, which in your opinion must surely need to be fixed, since with no effort at all, you or anybody can list 15 to 50 problems in your life, from your personal interactions with other people, to your obvious lack of understanding about the greater ideas available to those with at least a normally functioning brain. Not only does the investigation necessarily stop short, right there, you can not even understand the problem, let alone analyze it, develop a plan, get started or complete successfully. Logic, what a tool! Except that it can't help you one iota!!

Who knows this? Nobody knows this! And the proof is that in every single area of human endeavor where the subject under investigation is the human being, especially the psychology of the human being, the spirituality of the human being, the esoteric evolution of the human being, the ONLY thing available of which you have access, are books, which were (99.999% of the time) written by people who don't understand that logic can't help you (and even more rare than books, are authors/teachers who don't know this either), and thus, their extremely logical theses - regardless of the title, area of study, bibliography, and most, most especially, the lists of supposedly credible reviewers and other log-rollers who hold the effort in their highest regard - the book will not help, the book CAN NOT help you... nothing can help you... yes, virginia, you're screwed, up the river without a paddle, and barking up the wrong tree when all you've got AT YOUR COMMAND is logic.

Well, unless and until you discover something about the way human consciousness operates in all human beings, including yourself even on good days. There is something else, men have called "insight", "inspiration", "awareness", "perspicacity", "epiphany", and a hundred other euphemisms for the ONLY thing that can truly help you - and ONLY when it's AT YOUR COMMAND.

I won't bore you further with the details, but don't be so certain either that you already know it, or that I don't.

Wednesday, March 9, 2005

Tattoes on the brain

There was guy who was so sure he was "right about things", so sure he had "seen the light", that he decided to have his thoughts tattoed on his brain, so as never to forget them even when confused or in the dark. The idea was sound, he found someone to perform the operation, he picked out the color scheme and chose the appropriate font, and when the day and hour finally approached he entered the clean room wherein the performance was to occur.

First they removed the top of his skull in order to expose the yards and yards of tightly furrowed gray matter whereupon the designs were to be engraved, and while the surgeons were unfolding the folds in order to begin the intricate process, they discovered a both horrifying and yet exhilarating sight that caused the entire team of artists and surgeons to gasp and shudder at the thoughts that quickly swarmed in their own minds.

Deep beneath one of the folds, behind a particularly hard to unfurl swath of yardage, one of the surgeons discovered a deeply imprinted serial number, about 17 digits long, in perfectly readable roman numeral characters: I, V, X, L, C, D, and M.

Well, the silence was so thick, you could have heard a gnat burp, as their faces went absolutely white with amazement, fear, excitement, and horror, when suddenly, before the pink came back into any of their faces, could be heard perhaps the loudest peal of laughter ever heard on this planet.

Then, believe it not, they all died of heart failure.

The end.

Tuesday, March 8, 2005

Words on a plate

It's funny how a simple recipe of words mixed together on a plate, sprinkled with a bit of magic sparkle dust, can seem to convey meaning to the consumer, but in fact, no such thing occurs.

Words are like conscious fruits, each one with a will of its own, that accumulate and mix together by external forces and internal affinities known only to themselves to form delicacies which can seem both palatable and digestible to the consumer, but in fact, no such thing occurs.

It is not the words that are ingested and digested and transformed into something useful for the consumer, while leaving behind an accumulation of waste materials for later removal, for in fact, no such thing occurs.

Thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts which take shape and are then transmitted to other
thoughts weave and warp and woof their meaning in a thought
bubble that surrounds this planet connecting each and every
head that would hear it and transformation takes place deep
inside the brain cavity where flows an energy that enlivens
and sustains each head whose continued existence is assured.

When the talking stops
the bubble bursts, and
the words are set free.

Monday, March 7, 2005

Language, talk

Language, and it's physical manifestation, talk, does not need anything from man - far from it. Man needs/requires more from talk, than talk needs from man.

Those millions of humans (talking apes) taking one side in an ongoing social argument/conflict (euthanasia, right-to-life, being just two currently heated ones), do so because Talk makes them do it; just as those taking the other side do so because Talk makes them do it; just as those on the periphery who apparently (by their, ahem, comments) don't have an opinion either way, don't because Talk makes them do it.

Except in certain cases of physical, material, scientific matters, man is not in charge of the things that flow through his brain/mind -regarding non-physical, non-scientific, intangible matters - that gives rise to the words that come out his mouth and/or through his fingers and onto paper or keyboard. And, if you seriously believe that you, personally ARE in charge, then answer this: ... what ... are ... you ... going ... to ... say ... ... next! [see, you have no clue**].

As such, man is not in control of himself, of the things that he says, though with practice, and an "observing I" in place - being able to observe the intellectual center operating - he can edit "in-place" and sometimes, when the skill is honed, edit "before-the-fact".

Such humans, with this unnecessary skill, can in fact, inhibit the natural desire to argue with other humans, and when the skill is honed even further, to transform the natural desire to argue with themselves, to what might be called, a new kind of intelligence that does not need, nor even utilize "conversation" to get to the bottom of things.

ps- **if you answered, above, that you did in fact know what you were going to say next, then either you were lying to yourself, or you aren't seeing clearly. Even in those extreme cases where you can see in advance what you are going to say next, you must be able to realize - for yourself - that such is NOT the norm, but extraordinary in the extreme.

pps- and, of course, you have already totally forgotten about that (your condition described above), and will never again remember it, unless somebody ELSE reminds you about it...

Sunday, March 6, 2005


Euthanasia (Greek, "good death") is the practice (the action) of killing a person or animal, in a painless or minimally painful way, for merciful reasons, usually to end their suffering.

The word, verbalized as euthanasia (the thought about the action), like many, many similar words humans are identified with (in the sense that they "identify" their sense of self with the position they take, verbally, on the subject) is a self-limiting device, language uses to keep humans "in their place" (in the same way a nail could be used to keep you in the basement, by nailing your foot to the basement floor).

Becoming free of the effects of language - while sounding like something that "could be done" (if only you knew how) - is what awakening, enlightenment, liberation is all about (if it can be "said" that those "terms" are "about something", "pointing to something")

Becoming free from language - willfully moving away from the mother's teat which language is/has become for humans - requires a certain kind of absolutely unnecessary effort, that one must acquire a "taste for", in the same way that one might actually "love" brussels sprouts (it is generally not natural to love brussels sprouts, except in an extremely small minority of humans.)

That is, loving consciousness MORE than the words about consciousness... loving being conscious MORE than talking about it... to the point of experiencing something that one knows (only for oneself, and which can not be proven to another nor should even be attempted), could only BE experienced while over the line of demarcation (the ties that bind) that represents one's lifelong attachment to (identification with) words.

The reason people all over the planet are presently engaged in this discussion about euthanasia - and killing a brain-dead (or extremely damaged) woman as an act of kindness - is NOT because one viewpoint is right above all others, and they (who are so engaged/caught up in the discussion) must enlighten the rest as to that rightness, but rather to continue the confusion that exists in humanity about the topic, which, of course, is right order - the "higher right".

Conversation is NOT about clearing things up. Conversation is about continuiing the confusion - the "higher right".

Life is the higher right, not the viewpoints of a bunch of confused humans who have yet to discover what Life is doing, nor why it's (apparently) doing it.

Saturday, March 5, 2005

Suckling pigs

Modern pigs are rooting animals, so although their heads don't look so large, they still need strong muscles (and significant attachment sites) to generate the high forces necessary to plow their noses through the ground. As you'd expect, they also can't lift their heads above their shoulders (It is physically impossible for pigs to look up into the sky.)

(keys: attachment sites - where they are identified; plowing the ground - studying the writings/writers of old; lifting their heads to the sky - activating unused and unknown parts of their cerebral cortex.)

Humans are like that, you know, whether or not you appreciate being compared to rooting animals, and whether or not you consider humans at the level of suckling pigs.

They are, nevertheless, and in a quite specific way.

Language is the mother sow, and humans are still suckling at her teat because that mother will not - unlike real farm swine - kick them away when they continue to come back for more. As such - in their childish behaviors exhibited so graphically by their "understanding" (lack thereof) of what language has done to their higher intellectual centers - language has kept them intellectually infantile.

Suckling pigs - humans, including college professors, nuclear physicists, spiritual gurus, religious leaders, political pontificators, literary poets and novelists, and the general population - are not just *afraid* of walking away from mommy dearest, they are not *wired up* to walk away, they are not *supposed* to walk away - that's what the "sounder of swine" requires to stay together (group of pigs is called a "sounder.")

But, for a suckling pig to "grow up" and become the hog that it is in reality (pigs are hogs under the age of about 10 weeks of age), it must invent a new language, a new fuel to empower it, and stop relying upon the mother's milk it was born to die repeating and repeating and repeating - for the sounder, for the sounder.

Friday, March 4, 2005


If a person actually had the intelligence the writers of dictionaries ascribe to mankind in general ("a fast-moving stupidity-wave?"), he would not need, nor want to, study the writings of those humans who've already passed away, regardless of their oft-reported level of attainment, unless he wanted to become a scientist - someone who studies physical/material matters of any and all kinds - wherein the primary rule seems to be: "why re-invent the wheel?" (based upon the correct idea: you don't have enough time to "catch-up")

But if a person wanted to know about non-scientific, non-material matters - like awareness, consciousness, awakening, enlightenment, liberation, psychology, philosophy, etc., etc., including the all-inclusive "What makes me and humanity tick?" - "inventing the wheel" is your only choice, as there are no wheels that you can utilize in there (or can even insert in there) - between the ears -you have to invent your own, and then you have to learn to ride them to actually "go anywhere."

The nay-sayers who, in their assumed cleverness and intelligence reply: "There is no where to go, and no one to go there, and no there in any case" (blah, blah, blah), or "Hey, they're time-honored methods - that's gotta make 'em good, doesn't it?" (yada, yada, yada), say that because they themselves have never gone anywhere other than where external forces have pushed them, and getting older, and feebler, have simply given up - and now can only talk about what their heroes talked about (blah, blah, and yada, yada).

Funny thing about "inventing" wheels, and then "learning" to ride them, and then "going somewhere new" - you can only describe in the most general of terms, what works for you, and what works for you only works when it >>did<<, and then it's time to invent something new, so you're always in a mode - when you (almost literally are coerced to) discuss such things - of describing that which you've already surpassed, gone beyond, and "outgrown".

When you can't invent on your own, discuss prior inventions of others, and complain about and criticize others who discuss them -that, is the primary rule of the general population on planet earth, who need to read the dictionary more often, and try to apply what they read.

Thursday, March 3, 2005


Humans have become thoroughly and completely seduced by their language, and that seduction - by a "beast" which did not even need to seduce them, being perfectly able to fuck them at will - has caused and does continue to cause all the confusion that runs rampant on this planet today, yesterday, and the day before that...while they remain oblivious.

Humans are like, oh I don't know, monkeys that woke up one morning and opened their mouths to welcome the morning with their hoots and whistles and yowls and calls, and suddenly discovered they had a new voice - to them both sweet sounding yet shudderingly scary - as they knew not from where it emerged.

After a short while, minutes perhaps, maybe as much as an hour or two, it became quite clear - at least to a few of them - that the new voice was coming from inside their own heads, and that shocking realization engendered a sense of "love", also quite new to them, as well as it's counterpart, "fear/hate", each of which terms had yet to be discerned as distinct from the general background noise their new voice had now become.

As the process now developing between their ears became more and more efficient, many more words - and their attendant feelings - arose in these previously dumb beasts, and they were now able to share the results of this mental/emotional activity with their group.

Within a very short time, all the concepts their species were even capable of hearing in their heads, were heard, shared, and - after the day's work of gathering food, eating it, fucking each other whenever possible, and sleeping were not taking center stage -discussed.

Since then, even until the present day, the thoughts in their heads -older than any of them could possibly imagine - continue to amaze, and confuse them, being as they are more wonderful than any sexual partner, right up there with food, rest, and fucking. Talk is now, and has been for thousands of years, the fourth S (along with sustenance, shelter, and sex), speech.

Humans - those talking apes in this factual story (like it or not, argue with it or not, agree/disagree with it or not) - owe their general state of mass confusion and mass delusion, to their being so enamored of, and distracted by the language (the words, the ideas, the concepts), that it blinds them to what is actually going on - how it happened, how it's still happening - and it will continue to blind them because there is almost no possible way to get free from their "beloved" short of an intentional prefrontal lobotomy. This meta-whore, language - again, who no longer even needs to seduce them, being perfectly able to fuck them AT WILL - is paid, and must be paid, in blood.

Wednesday, March 2, 2005

Sex is a principle

The two lobes of the human brain, are the female and male halves of the human organism. Contained within those two lobes, are all human possibilities realized.

The female side, the left side, creates culture - all word-based human activities. The male side, the right side, creates technology -all image- based activities.

This *seems* to go counter to the notion that men are left- brained, and women are right-brained. Sometimes (if not all-the-time), if something can be considered correct in *one direction*, it can also be considered correct in the *other*.

This is why females can - and even seek - descriptions of sexual activity and can become aroused, even orgasmic thereby. While males rarely can - preferring images of sexual activity.

Thought about Images - the left brain considering the right brain -generates all stories, mythologies, religions, philosophies, psychologies explaining what is seen. Thought does not, by itself, modify the external world, being totally focussed upon the man.

Images about Thoughts - the right brain considering the left brain -creates all changes, modifications, improvements to material images, and picturing what is invented thereby. Imagery does not, by itself, invent stories about mankind in the external world.

It is said that women are sexual over their entire body, while men are sexual in only one place. Perhaps, consciousness is a feminine trait, in that consciousness is attention over their entire body, while the masculine counterpart is attention in only one place.

Tuesday, March 1, 2005

People, I think.

People believe they are individuals, because they sense their bodies as separate from the floor, walls, and furniture - and from that perspective they are correct.

In the same way, people believe their ideas are personal, because they sense personal enjoyment by the sudden emergence of certain "emotionally-tinged" thoughts - usually, just memories - and irritation by the sudden emergence of other people's thoughts.

But, it's all a sham. Look how readily each and every one of them, pepper their speech with the quotation of others, even going so far as correctly attributing those quotations (though usually, they fail to do that). They derive a real sense of enjoyment in that activity - quite mechanical to them - and that enjoyment, from speaking/writing someone else's idea(s), supports their own belief of individuality.

People (the mind) are playing dress-up, and the suit of clothes in which they dress themselves up, are those others whose ideas they so freely speak and so-conveniently forget to correctly attribute. Fred "sees" himself as Mr. X., and so he speaks Mr. X's ideas as though they came from his own understanding. Mary "sees" herself as Mr. Y., and so she speaks Mr. Y's ideas as though they came from her own understanding. And Fred and Mary, remain completely in the dark, as to what is really going on.

But, don't fret for Fred, don't mope for Mary - hell, they don't.

Sunday, January 23, 2005

Money back guarantee

You want to lose pounds of excess weight?

Here's the absolute guaranteed sure-fire way:

Eat less, move more.

(Dine less, exercise more.)

There you have it - what more could you ask for?

You need a "personal weight-loss trainer" to tell you that?

You want to lose pounds of excess stupidity?

Here's the absolute guaranteed sure-fire way:

Sleep less, observe more.

(Gossip less, think more.)

There you have it - what more could you ask for?

You need a "personal enlightenment trainer" to tell you that?

You want to know why these two money-back guarantees fail to impress 99% of the population, besides the OBVIOUS fact they are too damn simple (and in the minds of the ordinary 99% - simple means simplistic)? Because the unimpressable 99% of the population - too fat and too stupid for their own good (according to themselves) - think there MUST be a secret out there, a pill, a trick, a device, a method, a guru, and that if they can only FIND it (using their too fat and too stupid intelligence, of course), then they will have "cracked the case."

"Cracking the case" - finding the secret of success - is MORE important to the ordinary 99% than actually losing the fat and losing the stupidity, in fact it's a satisfyingly satisfactory substitute for >>doing the work<<.

Saturday, January 22, 2005


What a word!

Humans just love it, and they most especially love to express their suffering - from love poems to a lost lover who'll never read it, to hate letters to a magazine editor who'll never read it, and everyone in between.

Oh, humans just luuuuuuv their suffering - especially that particularly sweet smelling mental kind, that they don't even have to TRY to conjure up, it's just there, like stink on shit, or white on rice... no, I think stink on shit is more appropriate.

You know WHY humans luuuuuuv their suffering? Oh, you "think" you do, you "believe" you do, you'll even SAY you do, but do you really? (I'm not talking about someone else, here, I'm talking about you, dear, you the reader right now: "Why do you luuuuuuv your mental suffering?")

I'll tell you - right now, because you need to know this ;^) It's so you can tell someone about it, and then tell them how it all turned out. That's it, in a nutshell, and all wrapped up like a present someone leaves at your door without knocking, and you open up the door, and open that little package, and it !!!EXPLODES!!! in your face, killing many, and leaving you a crippled and damaged, >>thing<< - for awhile, and you start suffering over it, and thinking about it, and telling all your friends and family, ad nauseum (till even THEY get tired of you and your whining), just so you can tell them - much, much later if you're quite ordinary - how it all turned out, you know, that "funny story".

It's delicious the way people luuuuuuv their suffering.

Friday, January 21, 2005

Real Idiocy

Only in the human kingdom, can such a concept be discussed - certainly not in the non-human kingdom, for all non-humans are simply >>what they are<<, doing >>what they do<<, driven by a higher force, Life itself, doing what Life does here.

Only in the human kingdom, can real idiots flourish, and when one bad apple gets into your bushel, *look out*, because in no time at all, the whole bushel becomes compromised.

These bad apples are quite unique in the living kingdom, in that they start dying from the inside out, and only become noticeable, when the degree of death has reached a point that it can be >>communicated<<, and that's how one bad apple can spoil your bushel, unless you are alert, and look out for them.

Bad apples come in many colors and flavors, and humans love them, because they spice up what is generally bland and uninteresting. When a bad apple shows up in the bushel, all the other apples are completely unaware, and as soon as an unaware apple becomes, actually, *aware* of the existence of the bad apple, it has already acquired the dis-ease of the bad apple. The longer this *awareness* of the bad apple persists, the greater degree of dying from the inside out proceeds in the otherwise - except for that *awareness* -healthy, colorful, and succulent apples.

You know what real idiocy is, in the world of humans? You know, right? You don't need to be told, right? And you certainly don't need to ASK? Right?

Thursday, January 20, 2005

The Herd Handbook

There is a page in the Herd Handbook, which, unfortunately for most, never made it to the widely published version, yet DID make it into a few of the handbooks:

The (concept of the) herd is NOT out there, in the world of humans - that is, not the conception nor the expression of the concept - though many (read: MOST) take it that way, judging by their gutteral reaction to it when upon hearing about it, think they've been called, sheep.

The herd is somewhere else ENTIRELY! And only a small, small minority ever see that, or at least, see a piece of "that" (herd), for even when they are told, in print, they can't remember it in realtime. And...

Sheep are somewhere else ENTIRELY! But only a smaller still minority ever even catch a glimpse of "them" (sheep), let alone a full-frontal witnessing, for even when they are told, in print (ha! a pun!) they can't remember it or realize it in realtime.

But, when you find out - on your own, not because someone told you about it, and you went, "Yeah, I guess I sorta see what you're suggesting here... but I'm not convinced it's the TRUTH! (I'll have to think about that later.)" - it's a "kind of" awakening, the likes of which you have not experienced yet.

Believe it or don't.

Wednesday, January 19, 2005

"Resting on one's laurels"

[To rely on one's past achievements instead of working to maintain or advance one's status or reputation.]

This goes hand-in-hand with erecting monuments to one's self-professed achievements as proof of those achievements.

There are several people here and elsewhere (though they likely - and this is funny AND revealing - don't even know who they are), who have made, and are making a career out of "resting on their laurels", and each supposed effort they make to further their shaky status, is nothing but further erections in their life's-work of building a monument to their self-proclaimed prior achievements. (So they write a book, publish a website, author a "My Story" page detailing their "sudden enlightenment.")

"I am GOD realized (and you're not!) Here's what happened."

"I had an instant enlightenment in 1986 (and you didn't!) Here's my story."

"I am a yam and that's all that I yam (and you ain't!) Here's the glorious details."

Nothing but BRICKS in the monument, pushed into place by people who have nothing more intelligent to do with the rest of their lives than erecting monuments while resting on their laurels.

And, they actually think/believe/hope someone is impressed by all that.

Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Greetings from the future

Groups; up and down, small and large, forever;

stuff bunches up then breaks apart only to bunch up again.

People join groups and they all feel better by their new associations, and so it spirals out and out and captures everything in its path. But it goes beyond just the camaraderie, the communing with other people, the desire for sex - ah, the humanity. It's genetic/magnetic, and first it's happening in your own brain,...

in words; in and out, short and long, forever; non-vocal and sub-vocal "sound" bunches up and forms thought then breaks apart only to bunch up again. Words connect with other words and running through these thoughts is the "prime-ordinal thought" that this-is-thinking, and with all these new associations it readily speaks out and tells off every thought in its path. But it goes beyond just the chaotic symmetry, the harmonic resonance, the symbolic significance. It's electro/chemical, and it's happening out in the civilized world of men,...

in speech; it is the purpose of speech, prepared ones and unprepared ones, forever to put down other words. It is the purpose of speech to invalidate prior speech. It is a self-cleansing mechanism - that which is or has become useless >>should<< be excised, else it brings down the rest, the healthier and more alive parts.

Monday, January 17, 2005

In the beginning...

In the beginning, your "beginning", after your physical beginning, was the word, speech, and practically all child-speak is hostile; parents act as the instigators and invalidators in this dynamic, especially right after all the goo-goo baby-talk ceases... ("Johnny! Stop throwing food on the floor!"). Later, the grown-to-full-size-child (some call them adults, ha!) continues this outward invalidation of everything he/she hears.

Everyone's head, today, is a metaphorical cosmos of "core ideas", little sub-versions of the "core ideas", and clouds of debris fields swirling about the cranium. If you (can) look just a little askance, you can see it.

The sun, or one's sense of oneself (what one thinks/feels one truly is), is the "core idea". Spinning wildly but orderly, arms flailing, about that core, are words which have grouped together quite mechanically and quite semantically and congealed on several, quite distinct when seen, hidden when not, "points of view" - which are little sub-reflections, subversions, clones of the sun-point. And when one or another temporarily transits "into your view", you think it and believe it's you thinking.

The bodies, or planetoids, or concepts you can still remember (in this mental solar system) - mechanically deposited sensations in memory - are constantly smashing into each other, apparently non-destructively as in argument and debate and everyone talking at once, but also, at times, quite destructively as in real "learning" and "realization", and especially "new-realization" - leaving particle trails of broken phrases and tangled twisted logic-strings that get all knotted and clotted. These amorphous yet coherent threads are the ever-tightening asteroid belts that literally separate and sometimes strangulate the larger bodies, or concepts.

Sunday, January 16, 2005

The poet and the philosopher

If you put a poet and a philosopher in a ring together, who would win: 1) in a fight to the death, over "what is truth?" 2) in a fight to the death, over "what is beauty?"

Yes, those terms, truth and beauty, are arbitrary, and other similar words could be used, but does a poet, or a philosopher have a built-in advantage over the other?

Specifically, does thought have an advantage over feeling, or feeling over thought? And if so, in which realms, or is it, all realms - where men call home?

Questions, like these, and countless others - meaningless in themselves - are metaphors only, fictions with a temporary life, like atomic rods in a nuclear reactor: at the heart of consciousness is a question, and at the heart of the question, is a paradox. If there is anything resembling a native passion to the mind, then it's curiosity, and if curiosity was an atomic reactor, then The question at the core is the fuel rods.

Saturday, January 15, 2005


Humans have only two possibilities in life, he said dogmatically: 1) to participate in the process, 2) to become the results of the process. (And it's pointless to argue, there is no process, are no results - just look around, at your CRT, etc., results of process.)

This imaginary division can be seen in only one way, by his speech. Humans become the results of their words, expressed either to themselves alone, or to others. Never silent, humans are the result of the process.

Someone "experiences" something they note as being "something" substantial enough to comment upon, and express their comment: they have become the results of the process. Never silent, he is the result of the process.

This is the source of the notion, often expressed as, a man is known by the company (of words) he keeps (speaks); and, as one thinks (of words), so does one become (speaks).

Humans, only (not non-humans which can't speak to us), exist in a never-neverland, a fiction, between Process and Results-of-process, like a fence-rider, eternal, unchanging, willing.


In my youth, to reach the city, I walked along the pasture separating our farm from the city road, which was bounded by the most wonderful fence stretching miles, and it was just wide enough to support me the full distance from our farm to the small city we called, Our Town.

While riding that fence, twice a day, I realized that falling was always a possibility, but the outcome always uncertain. That is, I always, "could" fall, but equally - since I hadn't yet - "into what", "landing where", "then what", remained as before, wholly uncertain. That is, I was literally straddling the edge of Infinite Eternity in all dimensions. As far as that little fence-rider, me, was concerned, I was at the center of reality, and non-reality.

This, for me, enlightened the muse of spirituality as distinct from the muse of externality/materiality - themselves straddling the fence by signifying one side or the other of my, narrow fence of possibilities. That is, from the pursuit of worldly fame, money, in the city I was forever travelling to, began the pursuit of spirituality.

It was simply staying on the fence, until I jumped down.

While walking, walk. When done, stop.

Friday, January 14, 2005


Everything that mankind thinks and believes about what's going on - inside him and outside him - are cave paintings on the wall. All his theories, stories, fictions, analyses, regarding things immaterial, things he can't touch, fondle, take apart and put back together, from theosophy to philosophy, from psychology to anthropology, are nothing but cave paintings on the wall.

The more paint he applies to that wall, the smaller becomes his little cave, but at least he has some pretty pictures up there to while away the long hours between meals and sex.

He does not realize that there are people outside his particular cave, nor does he even realize what is the cave, nor where is the cave, but it sure has some soothing, comforting pictures up there on the walls.

If someone should happen by the opening to his cave, and shout out some words of encouragement to the cave-dwellers within, they are instantly cursed and told to go away, and the door which was open only a crack anyway, is pushed closed.

Thursday, January 13, 2005

An experiment you can do at home

How do you make the cockroaches and kitchen mice come out into the open...

Well, it's simple as pie, and you don't really have to DO anything. Just wait for the sun to go down, turn off all the lights in the house, and if you want to see them and prove to yourself the experiment works as advertised, put on your night-vision goggles (since, as you know, you can't see in the dark), and voila! in just a little while, depending upon what kind of house you keep, cockroaches and kitchen mice galore, having their nightly party in your abode.

Let's just suppose, for the sake of argument, that the several "terms" used in the description of the experiment were symbols for something else. (cockroach, mice, abode, light, goggles)

Let's just suppose, for the sake of argument, that your consciousness could operate in a darkened environment, and think two things at once, without identifying.

What do you suppose the symbols represent, and the bigger/better question, how do you make the cockroaches and kitchen mice go away?

Too obvious, eh?

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

How belief holds on for dear life

It's not, believing you have a personal life, and then believing that your personal life is an example of anything at all, that's so confusion-producing in the one engaged in that mechanical process of self-delusion, it's that your thinking can't determine how to intercede, and where necessary put a stop to it.

Could you do that, think about what's going on in there - mechanically - you could intercede, in realtime, and become "more" enlightened than you already are, at least in that one endarkened area of belief.

To wit: and this is funny. People get away with saying any damn thing they want, because they realize (incorrectly) that they don't have to back any of it up. They can't (and so don't) cite proof.

So, they say there IS a god, and no one can say to them otherwise, because they can't cite proof and >>believe<< they don't need to, they "believe it", it's part of "their life experience", so... it must be true.

They say there IS a problem with such-and-such a person, for something they did or said, but their memory is so faulty (and apparently their time so valuable) that they don't/can't cite proof, and so continue believing any damn thing they want.

If your own consciousness would NOT ALLOW you to say things, for which you could not cite proof, then you would say a lot less than you do, and you would not continue believing most, if not all, the unprovable claims you make.

Consider that over dinner, if you've got nothing better to do.

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

Mixing metaphors for fun and profit

Ask anybody, even yourself right now: When you are not *thinking* (there are no perceptible words coming out of your mouth, or onto your keyboard, or banging around inside your head so that you can *hear* them - which means you are NOT watching tv, listening to the radio, reading a book or email, just sitting there, not *thinking* about anything) what's going ON in there?

Do you immediately reply something like, feeling, or sensing, or whatever is left of you, in there, when you are not thinking?

Fact is, there IS no time when you are not thinking, except thinking is the wrong word here, it's a huge mixed-up metaphor.

That is, the metaphor, "thinking" is used by 99% of the planet to describe as best they can their inner mental chattering, daydreaming, etc. But they've totally mixed up their metaphors.

That is, there is a word that much more precisely describes what is going on in there, and if people would only start USING >>that<< word, instead of the >>wrong<< word (thinking), they'd discover a new reality.

But, sitting around thinking about what that *other* word is, or waiting for someone to actually tell you the word, is precisely like opening your mouth and waiting for a roast pidgeon to fly in it.

Good searching, er, uh, thinking... yeah that's the ticket.

Monday, January 10, 2005

The fallacy of 'friendship'

People don't want 'friends' - in fact, that's the last thing they want.

What they really want, is "yes- men" (and "yes-women"), people who will tell them exactly what they (their personality, their "ego") want to hear, that is, not to ruffle feathers but to smooth them.

As soon as you tell, what you consider to be, your friend, that they "suffer from" (are subject to) one or another self-limiting feature -like, they drink WAY too much for their own good, or they smoke too much, or they chatter too much - you run the real risk of losing that person as your friend.

No, people only want "enablers" of their addictions - and those addictions are many, and involve all parts of their nervous system, from instinctive addictions, moving addictions, emotional addictions, and intellectual addictions. Non-friends, strangers, will rarely tell another person of their perceived addictions, not knowing how they will react, and not really caring about them either way anyway. Only supposed, so-called, "friends" will do that, but people do NOT want friends, they want enablers.

All the foregoing is not the TRUTH, it is not even a theory, it is merely a viewpoint. Do you actually HAVE any Real Friends, who won't be your constant enabler, who won't be satisfied with the continual displays of your addictive personality?

Do you even want friends like that?

Or, like most people alive today, do you only want stranger/acquaintances? People who never get to know you well enough to tell you off, tell you the truth as they see it about the way you are?

Welcome to the Über-Mommy,

You KNOW who your best friend is? Right?

Sunday, January 9, 2005

A Definition of Sleep

People are asleep, not ordinarily awake, not conscious of themselves or their actions, and CERTAINLY not of what's being pumped through their automatically-running-on- overdrive brain, that they continually identify with, become identified with - they actually BELIEVE they are the author of the words that they write, the thoughts that they "think".

You are asleep, as in a waking dream. And waking up, or trying to wake up, is becoming aware of what's being pumped through that organ, at all times - not once an hour, not once a day (if you're lucky), but at all times, AND calling a non-conscious act, an instance of being asleep... YET AGAIN, like so, so many times before (can you say, >>all the time<

But, hey, people don't LIKE to be told these things, because they BELIEVE they're above such facts, especially when told to them by someone they don't like, or don't know, and/or BELIEVE must be a fool on wheels for having stated it so directly.

Knowing what's going on is being awake. Believing you're awake is being sound asleep.

Saturday, January 8, 2005

Baby talk

Some people say they believe that "eventually we find out that we were born fully perfected and that was our clue, to try and return to that condition when we were first born."

This is incorrect from the get-go.

Sorry if that pops any balloons.

Many people think it, and it has been bandied about for centuries, but "going back to the source" is devolution, not evolution. Returning to the more simplistic childhood of mankind is not the direction a sane, thinking man would choose, if he understood that the true direction is toward a more complex existence, and especially a more complex intelligence.

Man is more complex in all things today than 500 years ago, and that is right order. Mankind is not naturally reverting to the jungle, and nobody in their right mind would choose that.

People were born fully perfected sheep in a herd of similar sheep - capable of staggeringly complex machines and medicine and other things - but to stay a sheep when more is possible is stagnation - which is all ordinary humanity can expect, and therefore most find some kind of bogus religion or teaching to support this idiotic viewpoint. It's tantamount to, rationalized justification (in their own minds) of ***giving-up*** - or, dying before your time.

Friday, January 7, 2005

Teachers and their flocks

Or, if you like, Students and their mentors.

But, that duality does not exist, though everybody thinks just exactly otherwise, and "I can prove it!" they say, "Just lookee over here... and over there... SEE?".

But, they can't prove it, because if they understood something, they'd already know, there ARE no students, only teachers. (Now, obviously, we're not talking about teaching someone with a blue thumb how to grow vegetables, or build bridges out of trees, or catch wildboar on the hoof with only a knife - that's a different "animal" (punny, huh?). No, we're talking ONLY about that internal, mental world of talk, men are so well known for all around the planet - well, by those who can talk of course - such wholly intangible subjects as morality, love, justice, enlightenment, liberation, waking up, etc.)

In those intellectual pursuits - reading and talking about that reading, which 99.99999% of the time is the order these things occur - EVERYONE is the Teacher, and there are no students, period!!

(You know what I'm referring to here, right? So I don't need to elaborate on this, right?)

Ok, ok, someone needs more "proof!"

Everybody - bar none, including you (if you needed that itsy-bitsy qualifier) - is a Teacher, period, and there are no "students," period, because in all things mental, thought-based, intellectual, regarding non-material matters, and non-survival matters, everybody is ONLY talking about their own consciousness' point-of-view regarding whatever they're talking about. That is, there is no one on the planet who has more direct access, in realtime, to the "conscious part of the brain" (in your own head) that thinks those thoughts running around in there, some of which reach your lips and fingers. No one.

Therefore, you are Teaching everybody you come into contact with, either verbally in person, or via an email message, something about your own inner world, viz. the "conscious part of the brain" that uttered/wrote those sentences. Top to bottom, YOU are the teacher of yourself, and there is no "student" out there, per se, just other teachers of themselves.

Now, there is only one leeeeeetle problem with all this, and you know what that is, right? In general, nobody realizes this situation, in realtime, and as such, there's nobody home when the Teacher is "in session", thus all that brilliant material just literally goes up in smoke, helping no one.

Well, there it is. My bit of teaching about "my" conscious part of the brain as it was compelled to teach it this time. Hopefully, for me, the next one will as interesting for me, as this one was. As for you, well, don't you think it's time for YOU to start teaching yourself?!?

ps- instead of constantly, and continuously referring to everybody else on the planet as, "people I admire and learn from" yada-yada-yada, or (as more usual) "people I don't admire and disdain" yada-yada-yada.

Thursday, January 6, 2005

Where's Waldo?

Hey, Waldo, answer up dude.

What's the most precious thing in the world to you - not counting other humans, because that's kind of an unfair question, self-sacrifice "being what it is" - more precious than your car, your job, your bank, even more precious than your left foot, more than your right arm, more than both legs, even more than both arms?

Well, Waldo, are you still considering, or did you know the right - and only - answer instantly?

What if you were confronted with the decision, whereby you'd either become a quadraplegic for the next 20 years, minimum, but could keep that "most precious thing", OR, lose that "most precious thing" forever, while keeping all your limbs for the next 20 years, minimum.

Well, Waldo, which onea doze?

Are are you still trying to figure out what is your "most precious thing"?

By the way, the right - and only sane - answer consists of one word, already known to you, and one which you use frequently (no, silly, not necessarily "the word" - which you do use, of course - but what it signifies.)

Hey, Waldo, answer up dude.

ps- oh yeah, for all those (most) who pass this question by without even a moment's further consideration, or who do not pass it by, but reject it out of hand, or who do not reject it but are confused by, or argue with the premise ("Me, I ain't GOT no damn 'most precious thing'"), consider this: if you didn't get the right - and only -answer, instantly after hearing the question "What's the most precious thing in the world to you?" then, well, Waldo, you're hopeless.

Wednesday, January 5, 2005

The unwanted houseguest

Everybody has one, arrived quite some time ago, most can't even remember when, but herein have they stayed, eating your food, wearing your clothes, speaking your words, thinking your thoughts, feeling your emotions, and experiencing your life, such that you - dear one, completely unaware of this enforced partnership - remain confused, conflicted, and never satisfied.

Rather than, "simply" (as if, eh?) ask/demand the houseguest to leave once and for all time, you tolerate his existence in your house, consuming your energy reserves, and the final "insult," calling himself YOU, such that now, you're not sure who's Who, and what's What!

"Who me!?!" you say, doubting even the possibility, let alone the actuality.

Yes, you, or... haven't you suspected this all along?

Tuesday, January 4, 2005

E.T.: The Extra-Territorial

Everybody (almost, except those who aren't - ain't it always the way?) is an extra-territorial. Always so damned concerned about the lives - expressed in actions and words - of other people, outside the territorial limits of their rightful jurisdiction, that it literally consumes their every waking moment (in the ordinary sense.)

And, when they don't have other people to be concerned about (including those on tv, radio, movies, in books they've read and are reading, and of course, email lists) - which occurrence is beyond rare indeed - they are concerned about themselves, who (because they are essentially, an extra-territorial) are in fact, also as much outside their legitimate (in the extra-ordinary sense) area-of-concern, as everybody else.

Thus, does E.T., the extra-territorial, justify and rationalize his meager existence here on ol' terra-firma, giving advice and consent (or criticism and complaint) to every living creature, whether it is asked for or not.

Why, because E.T. has no clue what the most precious thing in the world really is, and even when asked, still can't address the question, full-frontally and without fear.

Monday, January 3, 2005

Name change

I was thinking about "gurus" for a couple seconds a while back, and it suddenly occurred to me, that, as a group, they are long overdue for an official name change.

Why? Glad you asked. (as if...) There is too much negative association surrounding the term, that's why. Many people, sophisticated, educated, reasonably aware people hear the term and have an almost immediate negative guttural reaction - you know, "uuhhggh." So much has been written about the shenanigans of so many of these fakes, phonies, and freaks, that even if someone was properly interested in the idea of enlightenment, the thought of having to find a "guru" turns many, if not most of them off, forever.

Therefore, they need an immediate, and universal name change.

I propose the following - you are welcome to your own: "Personal Enlightenment Theorists," or, you gueesed it: Pets.

Yup, that's the ticket. Pets. And we all know the proper relationship one should have with their pets. Personal enlightenment theorists are no different.

Sunday, January 2, 2005

Endless chatter... good for the world-soul!

Yes, believe it or not, endless, mindless, frittering away of unnecessary neurons (not to mention the time it takes to do so), occupying hundreds or thousands per chat, burning off all those useless neuropeptides (peptides released by neurons as intercellular messengers) not otherwise needed for more creative thoughts, and building up due to the constant barrage of local- and world-events you can't help but be an individual garbage-pail for, is good for the world-soul!

It cleans out the tubes, unclogs the synapses, like an enema for the brain. Even though it almost always leaves you feeling (if you can feel it) rather spent, having accomplished absolutely nothing at all (if you can realize it), there is another feeling which builds up instead, you could call 'community', or 'sharing', or 'reaching out', or 'participation', or 'doing-your-part' for the world-chatter, which of course is the bedrock of the world-soul.

Let's hear it for >>endless chatter!!<<