It's driving me mad. My thinking is very associational, so a whole paper-chain of thought can collapse if I forget one of the associations. There's something I've been thinking about recently, and because I've mentally misplaced one of the associations, I can't remember what the whole thing is. Anyway, I'm going to put the associations that I can recall down here, in the hope they will jog my memory:
The Cave Of The Unborn
Thomas Hardy
I rose at night and visited
The Cave of the Unborn,
And crowding shapes surrounded me
For tidings of the life to be,
Who long had prayed the silent Head
To speed their advent morn.
Their eyes were lit with artless trust;
Hope thrilled their every tone:
“A place the loveliest, is it not?
A pure delight, a beauty-spot
Where all is gentle, pure and just
And violence is unknown?”
My heart was anguished for their sake;
I could not frame a word;
But they descried my sunken face
And seemed to read therein, and trace
The news which Pity would not break
Nor Truth leave unaverred.
And as I silently retired
I turned and watched them still:
And they came helter-skelter out,
Driven forward like a rabble rout
Into the world they had so desired,
By the all-immanent Will.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skepticism#Philosophical_skepticism
Something's missing…
Hell it could be anything – your mind is probably deeper than mine – so starting with my knowledge of Hardy – is it social constraints, is it events in life and their effects or as I loved the clip with Bob Mitchum, is it the simple but effective demonstrations of the basics of life – good and evil – although that’s how the God fearing used to see life … I just don’t know but perhaps that’s your point – I enjoyed the puzzle …Rob
There’s a specific puzzle piece like the ones above – something I read or watched – which to me relates to and links all of them. But I still can’t remember what it is. Without it, I’m not sure how I relate the above pieces, although there are some apparent themes.There is, in fact, something to do with ‘love’, but I can’t for the life of me remember what it was.
My thinking is also associational. I was diagnosed with a learned disability as a child. Basically, I tend to remember things best in relation to other things. And, because of this, I spend a lot of time looking for interconnections. There are two problems with associative thinking style. As you say, one missing link can undermine the entire context of meaning or make it a bit vague. The other problem for me is that I’ve learned to connect any new thing to that which I already know. This can lead to new insights, but it also means I’m incapable of thinking about anything in isolation on it’s own terms.This thinking style was not so useful for school learning. I can’t do rote learning without finding some way to force the data in to a pattern. As an adult, I’ve found improved ways to use my mind’s natural thinking style. Internet has been a great boon as I can follow a line of clues to rediscover a lost link in the chain, but it can take great effort sometimes. Most often, I’ll eventually remember a particular association.In your post here, I can sense the connections. There are the dualities of life and death, beginning and end, love and hate. The common theme is one side of the duality taking precedence or gaining victory over it’s opposite. The first video is of a more Eastern perspective and the last video is of a more Western perspective.You say there is something to do with ‘love’. I’m reminded of Sufism and Gnosticism (e.g., Gnostics such as Valentinus and Marcion). In particular, I’m reminded of a line from A Course In Miracles: “The opposite of love is fear, but what is all-encompassing can have no opposite.” Which reminds me of Tara Singh who knew both the scribe of ACIM and Krishnamurti. In ACIM, fear and not hate is the opposite of love. In the video of Krishnamurti, he is saying that death isn’t opposed to life.Here is something interesting I came across. The author compares some ideas found in Japanese culture and in some Western poets.http://www.theosophy-nw.org/theosnw/arts/ar-mclk2.htmThat article is from the Theosophical University Press which leads me to another main connection. The Theosophical Society was a major influence in the late 1800s and early 1900s and was the point of intersection for Eastern thought in the West. Thomas Hardy was aware of the Theosophosists, but I don’t know how influenced he was by them. In the biography by Florence Emily Hardy, Hardy is quoted as saying he met a Hindu Buddhist who was the coach of the Theosophical Society.Of course, Krishnamurti played a major role in Theosophy before he went his own way. After Blavatsky died, Theosophy lost its influence causing spiritualism and new thought to develop independently. It was in the new thought and new age communities that ACIM became popular.BTW are you familiar with U.G. Krishnamurti? He came out of Theosophy and was well acquainted with J. Krishnamurti. Ligotti has spoken a bit about him in one interview and maybe elsewhere.
Hello.Thanks for that link. That’s interesting. I’ve always liked torii. Shrines have the torii, but temples tend to have the two guardian stone lions. In my experience, one of these has its mouth open, and one has its mouth closed. I can’t find an example of this in Google images for some reason. In Japanese, anyway, these are ‘ah’ and ‘un’, I believe, for open and closed respectively. To pass between these lions is therefore to pass through and go beyond opposites.I still haven’t remembered what the missing piece was, though. Perhaps it’s lost for good.I do know of U.G. Krishnamurti, yes. My impression of the broad differences between the eastern and western traditions are that the eastern is concerned with acceptance and extinction while the western is concerned with evangelism and procreation. For someone like myself, at first glance, the eastern appears more sophisticated and mature, but I’ve long felt that it lacks something, and that feeling culminated recently in my ‘rejection’ of Buddhism. In particular, I do not like Buddhism as it is associated with India. Zen Buddhism seems interesting and lively to me. The story of Buddhism in India and the primary teaching derived from that, while they have some power and value, seem to me to be ultimately anti-life. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Ligotti has been more drawn to Buddhism than any other faith or philosophy. However, I find the ‘anti-life’ attitude far more palatable in the work of Ligotti than it is in Buddhism, because in Ligotti it’s an anti-life message that still belongs to an individual, however illusory, and therefore it does not have a pious superior tone, as Buddhism has. Buddhism seems to me like pious nihilism.I’ve just watched this:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3azqF_OMu4Hmmm. I watch this kind of thing and I think, well, yes and no. I kind of think, actually, that I don’t get on with ‘India’ (I haven’t been there, so can’t say for sure), but I’m not really impressed by U.G. Krishnamurti. I could mouth the kinds of things he’s saying here all day, and so what?For instance:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zw26nOMENdAI don’t even have to assert, “I am not here to free mankind”. Why is he making that assertion here? It’s out of context, of course, but why has he become famous for saying, “I’m not interested in making you free. Don’t listen to me.” Etc.? He comes across to me as very superior. I would feel arrogant saying such things in conversation. “I am not here to save you. Go away.” Etc. I mean, this is basically what J. Krishnamurti seems to be saying, too. The difference between them is that U. G. says it all in a slightly more irritable way. A chat with your friends is as good as or better (better, I’d say) than a talk with U.G., because your friends are not constantly disavowing their ability to save you in an irritable and angry voice. I notice his forceful rejection of nostalgia and sentiment, too. This is something that’s always used as a stance of ‘honesty’ or something, but I don’t see anything particularly admirable about it.
“For someone like myself, at first glance, the eastern appears more sophisticated and mature, but I’ve long felt that it lacks something, and that feeling culminated recently in my ‘rejection’ of Buddhism.”That describes me. I never thought of becoming a Buddhist, but I was strongly attracted to Buddhism at one time. I studied it and had a meditation practice for years. I sense there is some insight that can be found in Buddhism, but also a lot that isn’t worthy or not all that interesting to me. As you say, “Buddhism seems to me like pious nihilism.”As for India, there is much that I can’t relate to. As a Westerner, I can understand the mindset of Islamic culture but the Indian mindset feels alien to me. But it is a very interesting culture.I respect India because it’s the only major henotheistic society that managed to survive into modernity. The Western world would be very different if early Christians had accepted the Roman henotheistic society that allowed them to flourish in the first place. The ironic thing is a religion like Christianity was only possible because of the mixing of cultures that Hellenistic henotheism encouraged.I respect henotheism in general. Henotheism seems to give more space for storytelling. And the extreme forms of polytheism (especially of the animistic variety) really give space for storytelling. Henotheism is impressive because it allows for the development of a large civilization while holding on to some of the more interesting elements of tribal polytheism.”The difference between them is that U. G. says it all in a slightly more irritable way.”Yep. U.G. is more irritable, but both at times can act a bit superior… is that a common attribute of the Indian guru role?It would be funny to see a “discussion” between U.G. and Ayn Rand.”This is something that’s always used as a stance of ‘honesty’ or something, but I don’t see anything particularly admirable about it.”I don’t find it admirable. I find the two Krishnamurti’s interesting, but that is about it. I did read Jiddu when younger until I realized he didn’t have much to say and just repeated himself.BTW good luck on finding the missing link to your thoughts. It can drive me batty sometimes when I can’t quite remember something, especially when it’s something central connecting other ideas.
I’ve just looked at a few more U. G. Krishnamurti clips. Here’s one in which he boasts of being a very influential man:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxCIS-RJ3ZsHere's one in which he derides love in a way that kind of mirrors (is the same but opposite to) why G. K. Chesterton prefers Christianity to eastern religions:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBx9IDMZfIAI've heard it said that India is a country that gave itself over to spiritual experimentation in the way that the west pursued physical/scientific experimentation. The guru system is something that India specialises in, and when you specialise in something all kinds of things are going to turn up in the area of your specialisation that people outside of that specialisation would not have expected. My impression is that U. G. is just one of the things that turned up in that area of specialisation. He was obviously knocking around in the guru system for a long time. He knows the language, the routines, and so on, but for whatever reason, was also pretty angry. I don’t find what he says to make a lot of sense (someone has commented under that second clip that he always makes sense). It’s just a kind of fragmentation of various bits of guru jargon. He has credibility because he derides other people, and this is considered badass and therefore authentic, hardcore, etc. He has a few things going for him – he speaks with conviction, what he says is ‘unusual’ and therefore attention-grabbing, and… that’s about it, actually. Your average drunken down-and-out can speak with as much conviction, in just such an attention-grabbing way and make as much sense (sorry if that sounds like I’m dissing down-and-outs – I don’t mean to). For some reason, however (presumably because he’s been knocking about in the guru system) there seemed to be plenty of people willing to crowd round him and lap it all up, and it looks like he was invited to parties in affluent homes and so on. I wrote a post a while back about the Buddha being a cynic (before even the original cynics). Here’s the post:http://my.opera.com/quentinscrisp/blog/2009/09/23/gautama-the-cynicU.G. seems to be in the same mould, though a degraded form of it. I read, some time back, something he is supposed to have said about kicking his mother. Ah, here we are:At the time I was born, when my mother introduced herself to me as “I am your mommy” and hugged me and kissed me, I apparently kicked her; and she died in seven days after I was born. When they put me into the frame of an enlightened man, they said that the mother of such a child can never have any more children or sex, and that she would die. Actually she died of puerperal fever, but not because she gave birth to an enlightened man. They have to put such people into that frame of giving birth to an enlightened man.
An enlightened man can never have sex because he cannot reproduce another one like him. Once an interviewer on television asked me, “Can’t we take your sperm and make a woman pregnant?” I answered, “There is no sperm anymore.” Anandamayi stopped having her periods when she was twenty-one, after whatever had happened to her. She was a nice lady. She was a genuine article. http://www.ugkrishnamurti.net/ugkrishnamurti-net/SWAN_SONG.htmI find this pretty unpleasant. I mean, in a roundabout way he’s boasting about killing his mother. It’s the same misogyny that was implicit in Buddhism from the start – the same anti-life, anti-sex thing about not having sperm, etc. It’s no wonder that U. G. despises what sociologists call ‘affective bonds’ (his rejection of sentimentality, etc.), but personally I distrust those people who have no need for such bonds (I’ve long been aware of this tendency in myself). After all, why should I trust them? I remember reading studies about children who did not become genitally developed. They were actually lacking in skills of empathy. Sex is a vulnerability that allows you to be sensitive to others. U.G. seems to lack that vulnerability and that sensitivity.All this seems typical to me of a kind of rigid iron morality that I have sensed in certain Indian cultural artefacts, and which I don’t like.But I agree with what you say about henotheism and polytheism.
Just thought I’d add that U.G.’s Wikipedia article makes him sound quite attractive (more so than the clips I’ve seen of him, and things I’ve read previously that he’s said):http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U._G._KrishnamurtiIn one clip he says to the people gathered, dismissing, I suppose, their ideas of healthy living, “I drink a whole glass of cream every day.” I liked that.In a similar vein, from the Wikipedia article:He then left London and spent three months living in Paris, using funds he had obtained by selling his unused return ticket to India, during which time he ate a different variety of cheese each day.This is the kind of thing that could make me warm to the man.
In case you hadn’t noticed, your mention of U.G. Krishnamurti has reignited my interest (I suppose that’s what it is). The other day I consulted my Oblique Strategies cards with the simple question, “U.G. Krishnamurti?” The answer I received, when I split the deck was:”Only a part, not the whole.”There are at least two ways of taking this. The first way (the way I took it), whatever one may think about the intrinsic merits of consulting a deck of cards, seems, when taken on its own merits, to the point and irrefutable, that is: U. G. is not everything, just one small part of a large and incredibly complex world.Someone else to whom I mentioned this interpreted the answer in a different way, that U.G. is someone who mixes truths with lies, and therefore only a part of his ‘teaching’ is valid, not the whole.That seems fair comment to me, too.Related to this (I feel) is the following:Recently I’ve been thinking about the question of whether human lives really are important. I even wrote to someone, using the word “important” with regard to the concerns of the individual soul, yesterday. This morning I resumed my reading of Closer to the Light and found this account of a near death experience:…As I reached the source of the Light, I could see in. I cannot begin to describe in human terms the feelings I had over what I saw. It was a giant infinite calm, and love, and energy, and beauty. It was as though human life was unimportant compared to this. And yet it urged the importance of life at the same time it solicited death as a means to a different and better life.Again, one doesn’t have to believe in a literal interpretation of the near death experience to extract meaning from this. I suppose I would say that the feelings of unimportance have been emphasised historically in Eastern culture, while the feelings of importance have been emphasised historically in the West. There has been some crossover with East and West in science, with some people of a Buddhist background (for instance) indentifying with the materialism that makes humans unimportant (U.G. Krishnamurti being one of these).
Your response to U.G. is more or less like my own. I noticed your mention of the post you wrote about the Buddha being a cynic. I did read that a while back and it was an interesting post. I guess I could see U.G. as some kind of modern cynic.He was a strange dude. I read about his enlightment experience many years ago. The only part I remember is that his mind supposedly became empty like that of a baby and he had to relearn everything. I feel sorry for the person who had to change his diapers. I was just now recalling where I first came across U.G. Krishnamurti. It was in a book that my dad owned which he had inherited from his father who was a Christian minister. My grandfather was interested in other religions, but I don’t know if he had read this book or if he had read the section about U.G.It is funny to think of a minister mentioning in a sermon an anecdote from U.G.’s life. My grandfather had a weird sense of humor, but I’m sure he would’ve resisted shocking good Christians in such a manner.For some reason, your use of Oblique Strategies cards reminds me of Philip K. Dick’s use of the I Ching in writing his novel The Man in the High Castle. Have you read that book? It’s about an alternative universe where Germany and Japan won WWII and are occupying most of the US. Here is an interview where he talked about this novel and the I Ching:http://www.philipkdickfans.com/frank/hour25.htmHe also talked about some other novels he wrote. I thought you might like this comment about A Scanner Darkly:”And one of the things that I wrote was this funny suicide scene. I really think there should be more funny suicide things. I think that it’s a topic of great humor.”And this comment about Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? being made into the movie Blade Runner:”I read the screenplay that they wrote for Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep? And it was a combination of Steve Reeves and Maxwell Smart. And I said, the producer, Robert Jaffe, Herb Jaffe’s son, flew down to Fullerton to talk with me about it, because I didn’t think it was a final shooting script. I thought it was the rough draft. And I, he, I says I’m going to beat you up right here in the airport, I says you’re going to drag me down with you guys and ruin my career if you make a movie out of my book. He says, you mean it’s that bad? And I said, yeah, and we went on. Finally he says, you mean you wrote that book seriously? He says, you science fiction writers take your writing seriously? I says, seriously enough to throw you right out of my car.”
Originally posted by MarmaladeINFP:In your post here, I can sense the connections. There are the dualities of life and death, beginning and end, love and hate. The common theme is one side of the duality taking precedence or gaining victory over it’s opposite. The first video is of a more Eastern perspective and the last video is of a more Western perspective.Did you work out what was missing?Reading Marmalade’s response, how so is it that we link dualities in a particular order? Why do we have a resistance to saying ‘death and life’, ‘end and beginning’, ‘hate and love’? Intellectually we might view life chronologically ahead of death and beginning ahead of end. But does love inevitably come before hate?Does it make any difference emotionally when we reverse their order?
He was a strange dude. I read about his enlightment experience many years ago. The only part I remember is that his mind supposedly became empty like that of a baby and he had to relearn everything. I feel sorry for the person who had to change his diapers.Especially if he was barking at them the whole time in his characteristic way, although maybe he was taking a break from that.For some reason, your use of Oblique Strategies cards reminds me of Philip K. Dick’s use of the I Ching in writing his novel The Man in the High Castle. Have you read that book? It’s about an alternative universe where Germany and Japan won WWII and are occupying most of the US. Here is an interview where he talked about this novel and the I Ching:I have read and enjoyed it, and I thought it was a fascinating idea to use the I Ching to plot a story. I’ll have to read that interview (haven’t read it yet).”And one of the things that I wrote was this funny suicide scene. I really think there should be more funny suicide things. I think that it’s a topic of great humor.”I agree. He says, you science fiction writers take your writing seriously? I says, seriously enough to throw you right out of my car.I’d love to say this to some Hollywood person attempting to adapt a story. Unfortunately, none of them are attempting to adapt a story of mine (not that I’m aware of, anyway), and I don’t have a car, so it might confuse them, more than anything, if I said that.Did you work out what was missing?No, I think it’s gone.Reading Marmalade’s response, how so is it that we link dualities in a particular order? Why do we have a resistance to saying ‘death and life’, ‘end and beginning’, ‘hate and love’?It is interesting that the part of the pairing generally considered positive is the one that comes first.Whether hate or love comes first might depend on whether you have a golden age view (like the Chinese generally do, I think) that things started out great and have gradually got worse and worse (actually, I have a lot of sympathy with this view), or whether you take the slightly more Western view that we are progressing towards some ideal society, and away from barbarism.
Originally posted by quentinscrisp:or whether you take the slightly more Western view that we are progressing towards some ideal society, and away from barbarism.I kind of still have the Western outlook, even if it’s been a bit modified into the 21st century by various events. I do notice that not all peoples are on the same page, there being an apparent reversion to barbarism in quite a few countries presently.’Golden age view etc’, the view we adopt might also depend on whether we have an inbuilt inclination to be optimistic or pessimistic. On a national level the Chinese possibly have had a lot to be pessimistic about (so I thought) but when I google ‘China today’ the images are upbeat, progressive, modern (that was kind of I Ching of me, wasn’t it :p).No flags, maps or military weapons like when I google Israel today.Australia today, lots of Aussie flags and token totems, a kangaroo and a koala, a shark, cricket, Aussie maps, Rudd under an umbrella, bush scene, a pub, wine, the word Australia, the handgun in Australia … America today, Miss America, a whole new take on ‘Gulliver’ with him nude (prone but erect) covered in tiny nude women, ‘America Today’ signs, need a job today, place like America, discovering America, cartoons – legs in chains, economies falling, an American flag in front of which is ‘tumbled’ an army uniform and equipment entitled Patriotic America.Googling China and America a decade ago, do you think that would have told a much different tale? Oz I think would have been much the same.
That’s an interesting game. The first image that comes up for ‘Britain today’ is this one:http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/02/thesun1302_415x534.jpgHere's the whole lot:http://images.google.co.uk/images?hl=en&um=1&sa=1&q=britain+today&btnG=Search+images&aq=f&oq=&start=0It's a kind of grotesque montage of financial scandal, agricultural problems, obesity, hedonism without aestheticism, self-conscious multi-culturalism and lingering cultural ghosts in the Queen upon her throne and the vaulted ceiling of a cathedral.http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/images/2008/08/05/britain_today_2.jpg
Hehe, how many men does it take to dig a holeYOUR ~ http://conservativehome.blogs.com/centreright/images/2008/08/05/britain_today_2.jpgafghanistan today – sadhttp://images.google.com/images?hl=en&um=1&sa=1&q=afghanistan+today&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&start=0funniest comic today:spock:
Chernobyl today (some quite upsetting footage here):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvAJ_u3Q0Hw