Spiritual Reorientation 10: The Art of Life

a reply to: philosopheroftruth

What I was saying earlier was that you talk of things (like Buddhism) like you have studied them when you obviously have not studied them enough.

I'm not interested in the trivia of Buddhism. There is always more trivia to know, more concepts to get wrapped up in, more wiki pages to read. I already know its heart, and that's good enough. I don't expect you to believe that.

I'm glad you found a framework for interpreting your extraordinary experiences that is compatible with your psychology, and I hope it continues to work out for you.

originally posted by: b3l13v3
I suggest anyone in this thread read the book "The Power of Myth" by Bill Moyers and come back and reevaluate your statements if you're opposed to what Aphorism is saying.

Not only does it seem as though he's expanding upon Joseph Campbell's work, he's bringing a mighty refreshing perception, a somewhat(not to downplay you Aphorism) novel perspective on spirituality, mythology and metaphysics.

I don't know how much of Campbells work you've read, but I've read most of it and Aphorism is NOT expanding on it. Campbells work is about comparing myth and religion systematically to uncover the cross-cultural subtext, and then applying the subtext to your own life in an empowering, positive way. YOU are the hero with a thousand faces.

Aphorisms work is about reducing myth and religion to mere imagination and then throwing it all away, bathwater, baby, and all, and leaving only materialism and common sense in the form of his philosophy of the body.

a reply to: b3l13v3


Although I would agree with you about the OP, I think much of the discomfort that arose had more to do with Aphorisms continuing activity in this thread, which in some cases, became of a different nature, much more provocative, disparaging, and bashing.

a reply to: Bluesma

It must be my need to find an outlet for my competitive alpha drives, or to possess knowledge and superiority over others. Even my aura seems negative. I have said nothing against you, bluesma. But you have continually tried to diminish me by turning the topic at hand to my writing conduct. You do not have to read it.

Look at the ones who allow themselves to be provoked, who allow themselves to be disparaged, and allow themselves to be bashed. They allow words to alter their feelings. I cannot be blamed for how they feel when confronted with words.

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Bluesma

It must be my need to find an outlet for my competitive alpha drives, or to possess knowledge and superiority over others. Even my aura seems negative. I have said nothing against you, bluesma. But you have continually tried to diminish me by turning the topic at hand to my writing conduct. You do not have to read it.

Look at the ones who allow themselves to be provoked, who allow themselves to be disparaged, and allow themselves to be bashed. They allow words to alter their feelings. I cannot be blamed for how they feel when confronted with words.

Not once did I say "your aura seems negative"- never even mentioned the word "negative" until correcting your paraphrase of what I said. I specified that I see nothing negative about your posts.
I also clearly corrected your assumption that my usage of the word aura had anything to do with woo-woo magic energies- it was a description of my own subconscious associations- I take full responsibility for those, and shared it in the spirit of being honest and forthwith on possible things that could influence my perception falsely.

I find it insulting to twist my words and meanings as if I am not talking about serious and real events and experiences.
I am basically a down to earth person, and don't have beliefs in "fleeing the darkness and negativity" or the "colors" of peoples auras.

My participation in this thread was not based on defending such beliefs either- it was spirituality as introspection, self analyzation, and exercises which can be of aid in becoming more 'in this world' ultimately.

It is easy to say, "if you don't like it, don't read it" I started out liking it ... so of course felt drawn to continue reading it and participating. I did not expect the way it turned. Perhaps you felt insulted, not understanding what I wrote, and it was a reaction to that- I tried to correct that. I apologize if you felt insulted. It was not my intent.

ETA- crap I used the word "spirit"- it was NOT refering to an immaterial entity, it was used with this sort of meaning-

a : a special attitude or frame of mind
b : the feeling, quality, or disposition characterizing something

I cannot be blamed for how they feel when confronted with words.

Not into "blame" , myself, but into the most realistic observation as possible. An observation on what specific behaviors, actions or words stimulated other behaviors, actions, or words, is what I meant to point out. I think your OP was not as provocative as some of the other posts you made. I was adding an observation to one made that I think did not include those in the conclusion they presented.

a reply to: Bluesma

I do not feel insulted, so no need to apologize. Sometimes trying to psychoanalyze another does help, but the distance between us doesn't allow such conjecture to find any truth.

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: Bluesma

I do not feel insulted, so no need to apologize. Sometimes trying to psychoanalyze another does help, but the distance between us doesn't allow such conjecture to find any truth.

That is why I tried to expose what was inside my head, so you didn't have to guess. It was a self psychoanalyzation, my admittance to my subconscious associations. Not an attempt to blame or accuse.

I don't think your twisting of my meanings was purposely done either. But it reinforced the idea that a hammer looking for nails will not recognize a screw in front of it.

ETA- god now that could be heard as a sexual reference! I think I will stick to my earlier choice of staying out of this discussion. Effective communication isn't happening between us.

originally posted by: Aphorism

Look at the ones who allow themselves to be provoked, who allow themselves to be disparaged, and allow themselves to be bashed. They allow words to alter their feelings. I cannot be blamed for how they feel when confronted with words.

So you're trying to troll mystics either because you hate them, or because you're a student searching for a guru who you can't provoke, disparage, or bash. Maybe a bit of both.

I don't say no to the experience of provokation, bashing, fighting. They are part of life, and so are trolls. I say bring it on.

a reply to: Bluesma

That brings up a good point. Sexual references and sexuality is utterly taboo in traditional spirituality. Sensuality in General is frowned upon, at least until we find no reason to fear what people think of us. Is it less so in the overall spirituality of France? Being of a sensual nature myself, I wouldn't mind a certain honesty towards our sexual and playful natures. But since the last thousand years of morality has been a refutation of Epicureanism and pagan sexuality, this honesty becomes difficult.

You've noticed I use the word spirituality quite sparingly. I try to speak of the spirituality of ages and my own interchangeably. This does confuse things, but I think it helps the reader to tackle their own spirituality.

a reply to: BlueMule

If you feel trolled, so be it.

originally posted by: Aphorism
a reply to: BlueMule

If you feel trolled, so be it.

So which is it? Do you troll merely because you hate, or are you just a frustrated student lost in turbulent waters?

As with art being a subjective, completely personal thing, so is one's spiritual orientation and (if required) reorientation (hopefully not continually reoriented).