that this post will make almost no sense.
“Nothing is more precious to the thinking man than life itself;
yet in spite of this, the greatest voluptuary is he who best practices
the difficult art of making it pass quickly.
It is not that he wishes to make life briefer;
Rather, he wants amusement to make him unaware of its passing.”
--Giacomo Casanova
Yes, that comes from the infamous ladies’ man himself. It turns out that that cat knew a lot of things about stuff. In the seventeenth century, the Church replaced the vague sin of "sadness" with sloth, which ought to explain a lot of things from the simple fact of its is-ness. When idle, the mind and body have all sorts of recourse to experience those things which it would much rather not: investigation into itself (which naturally reveals nothing but perpetual isolationism). This one fact tends to make the self sad, which is why sloth actually gets at the heart of the matter.
I don’t know what people do with their days. What do they think about? What are they invested in investigating? Do they investigate anything? What do they think about? How is a day in the life of an average human being passed?
“Ulysses” is one of my all time favorite books, because it is simultaneously a day in the life of average men and un-average men. These are just guys doing their work, getting paid, and trying to make it through as best they can; however, it is not generally in the scope of your average guy’s day to stay away from home all day in order to allow your wife to have an affair; similarly, it is not in the average guy’s day to find the apparition of a savior in the man who has stayed away from home all day to allow his wife to have an affair (and, almost simultaneously, masturbate to a lame girl sitting on the beach while hiding behind a bush).
Or, is it rather that this is exactly what happens to us every day without our full comprehension of it?
I have spent most of my day contemplating the question: “What is time?”
I don’t know how many people do this every day, but today it happened to me, and any time this question pops up (which it sometimes does with surprising, disturbing frequency), I find myself face to face with a fundamental, unanswerable question.
It should also be understood at the outset here that these fundamental, unanswerable questions are essential to existence—in my view of things, and it is not the answering of them that matters, but rather the attempt. There is no way to describe in words what time is because it is something that is experienced, combined with something measured. There is no way that words can touch that: the impotence of my chosen career suddenly becomes manifest.
But, looked at in terms of some of my own definitions of things, Time, then, illustrates a certain truth. Time is the theory that things succeed each other in simultaneousness. There is no way, except for in the world of comic books and science fiction that two times can exist simultaneously. There is no way that 2010 and 2009 can exist, especially for me, at the same time. It is precisely this sequential habit we have of dealing with time that forms its reality as infinite and singular. In practice, it occurs as moment to moment. The moment that I am currently involved in gives way to the moment that will follow it, and this has been so much the historical case with me that there is absolutely no reason to believe that at some point the moment I am experiencing now will be followed by the moment that immediately proceeded it. That is absurd. I will be the first to admit that absurdities are fun, but when dealing with things in earnest, absurdity ought to play a very insignificant part.
What is the difference between the idea of a thing and the thing itself?
To answer this question, it is probably most appropriate to look at the nature of inter-human relationships.
The idea of the relationship I have with my significant other is often far, far more appealing that the actuality of it—whether we choose to acknowledge this fact or not. Sensual and emotional comforts are very appealing, and when the choice is between having physical/emotional comfort and dealing with the pain of aloneness. In the sage like wisdom of Bradley Nowell:
“Sleepin’ by yourself at night can make you feel alone.”
However, the idea of being able to share the pain of being a human being (“He who makes a beast of himself gets rid of the pain of being a man.”) is sometimes not a technically effective remedy for the maladies of the relationships itself: constant verbal battles, physical confrontations, emotional drainage, etc. Even still, the mind most frequently, almost consistently errs on the side of combating its reality with a cohort. What is that about?
Perhaps Casanova had it right: it’s not that we devalue life because of its necessarily fleeting nature, it pains us so intensely to understand fully—all in a moment—the monumental reality of that which is passing us by.
And perhaps that’s where time comes into play: we wanted some kind of way to be able to measure the experiences of the human character. Then, after reflection, we found this measure flawed: like attempting to divine which line was greater, the longer one or the shorter one. They are both simply degrees of the same thing. They are both lines and there is no way to decide with one is greater. There is only the possibility of applying an artificial title on one such as “longer” and the other as “shorter.” Even here we run into trouble because we are dealing with comparisons and there is nothing intrinsic about these delineations—which sort of automatically renders them derivative. There is nothing about line A in particular that makes it longer. It is only in comparison with line B—a measurable distance shorter—that this distinction is even possible, which makes it an artificial designation.
For example, take two line segments. One of them is four inches long. The other is two inches long. Which one is greater? Perhaps neither, they’re both lines after all. Which one is longer? Artificially, the one that’s four inches long. Introduce into this situation a circle whose circumference is five inches. Which is greater? That’s apples and oranges! What is a circle but a continuous but measurable line? It is line that is five inches long surrounding a space. What’s incredible here is that the distance from one side of that space to the other is less than two inches (line B). Which is greater? Which is longer?
These are the questions that plague my days.
In short, I think that Casanova is right; however, I think it deserves an amendment in the form of direction. Perhaps man may seek amusement in order to avoid the fact that the most precious gift he has been given is slowly, steadily wasting away in front of his eyes; however, it ought to be noted that the particularities of the amusements are more important than the amusements themselves. Consider if you will the state of two men who have been similar disposed to amusements, but one finds his in the digital imaging of the television and the other in the quest for an understanding of the self that he is through personal experience and investigation of what others have written. Can you imagine which one is going to actively seek out new and varied instances of personal growth and development? Can you imagine which one will probably develop a kind of eating disorder and tendency towards sloth?
I have seen the former and I have seen the latter.
From personal experience I urge you to seek out those amusements that develop the understanding of the self. I fail to see how American Idol induces this urge. Who among us, in this day and age, is actually attempting to understand how we understand ourselves?
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Monday, March 22, 2010
Let Them Come
Flow comes to mind here. At no point should expectations be raised. Co-ordinate desire with the pleasures of the flesh? Is this possible? No. Desire is, by definition, a non-physical entity.
Who would guess that I waded through the cold uphillness of the path to get here?
Make up words and write them over top of other words. Do it Now!
Essential freedom of thought in this place.
Can a pink melodica change the face of things? Maybe it can. Accept the reality of that possibility.
Keep contained within yourself the seeds of greatness, and trees cannot coagulate into full-grown entities.
Compositionally speaking: the human character is perpetually separate.
Hopeless recombination!!!
Can you re-consult oracles?
Will they tell you something different? Or
can they? Are they forced to tell you consistencies?
Do words have to be linear, or is it simply to aid in comprehension.
It’s funny the power music has. Start a tune. Maybe people don’t know it, maybe they do. It turns out that I can play “Caress Me Down.”
Convince yourself that which isn’t… is. Consultations are free
in Birmingham.
“Love of mine, someday you will die, but I’ll be close behind, and follow you into the dark.
No blinding light, or tunnels to gates of white, just our hands clasped so tight, waiting for the hint of a spark.”
“The light wraps you in its mortal flame, abstracted pale mourner, standing that way against the old propellers of the twilight that revolves around you. Speechless, my friend, alone in the loneliness of this hour of the dead, and filled with the lives of fire, pure heir of the ruined day. A bough of fruit falls from the sun on your dark garment. The great roots of night grow suddenly from your soul and the things that hide in you come out again so that a blue and pallid people, your newly born, takes nourishment.”
Misunderstood significance runs rampant here. Does it mean? Yes. What does it mean? Recognize the fleeting and let it be fleeting. I hate Coldplay. I love having a pen in my hand… comfort. Free play meaning fluid. This place is where you learn to accept the fleeting reality that is human existence.
Obvious, isn’t it, the radical shift in tone?
Brainwaves have this way of jumping around, especially when channeling the sub-conscious that is entirely unpredictable—a bit like the path of a tornado. I think only the consciousness is allowed to concentrate. It would probably defeat the purpose if our sub-conscious was allowed to concentrate. Its job is to move quickly and file everything. It is the most efficient secretary ever conceived. Then, when everything is filed, it turns itself around and around like an enormous rolodex, speed reading everything over and over and over, faster than it is possible to comprehend, until it comes to understand whatever it is it’s possible to understand.
It throws the trash away into dreams—or at least the stuff it doesn’t want to deal with anymore—which is why dreams are usually so entertaining and useful.
It makes people pop into your head at precisely the moment they are supposed to. Over a week ago I received an email from a very dear friend that lives in New York City. It was an important email. It had a lot of information in it, and it certainly required a response, but not immediately. Time wears on, and a couple of days ago, for no reason whatsoever, her name popped into my head as if the sub-conscious was done sorting through whatever it had needed to sort through and the appropriate time for a response was now.
What is that about? How can we get more in touch with this mysterious brain process? Can we? It’s probably not worth it. We would never be able to understand it anyhow.
Let it be what it is. Those simple words are all too difficult sometimes, aren’t they? It is almost human nature to want to mold things, shape things into an image of our own, but the reality is that things, left to their own devices, are usually better off without human interference. Most endangered species wouldn’t be endangered in the first place, and nature has this funny way of knowing which animals ought to survive and which oughtn’t that is so outside the scope of human knowledge that…
A thought: can humans be said to be a part of nature? We are the only animal that attempts to mold nature to our own will. We keep people alive that, in the natural order, would die. We mow down trees and plants to build ghastly metal structures. We destroy the beautiful to erect the disgusting. Perhaps this is the essential fallacy of humanity: we ARE a part of nature. We have just spent so much time attempting to convince ourselves that, somehow, we can win. There are ways to defeat little bits of nature here and there, but nature likes to give us little warning signs like hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes, tsunamis and volcanoes that ought to illustrate how quickly Mother Nature could tear us down to our real size (which is pretty puny if you think about it) if she so desired. To her, time is nothing. The average human lifespan doesn’t even register as a blip on the surface of her history or her future. The sun is going to die. OK… IN FIVE BILLION YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!! Some quick math: what’s 5 billion, minus 100 (and we’re being VERY generous with a human lifespan here)?
499,999,999,900. That is a very big number my friends.
No. Humanity won’t last that long I’m afraid. All is pointless, hopeless, and fleeting. BUT THAT’S ITS BEAUTY!!! That’s where the beauty comes from, not this immortality everybody thinks they want. In immortality, all is pointed, hopeful and enduring. If only for the fact that, to me, living in a state of hope forever sounds like the worst torture anybody could endure, it seems like the dread of the knowledge, the truth, that things will come to an end, seems like a far, far better thing than living in the dream world of hoping that they won’t. So let them come, whatever they be. Let them go, whatever they are. Let them do whatever they will.
Who would guess that I waded through the cold uphillness of the path to get here?
Make up words and write them over top of other words. Do it Now!
Essential freedom of thought in this place.
Can a pink melodica change the face of things? Maybe it can. Accept the reality of that possibility.
Keep contained within yourself the seeds of greatness, and trees cannot coagulate into full-grown entities.
Compositionally speaking: the human character is perpetually separate.
Hopeless recombination!!!
Can you re-consult oracles?
Will they tell you something different? Or
can they? Are they forced to tell you consistencies?
Do words have to be linear, or is it simply to aid in comprehension.
It’s funny the power music has. Start a tune. Maybe people don’t know it, maybe they do. It turns out that I can play “Caress Me Down.”
Convince yourself that which isn’t… is. Consultations are free
in Birmingham.
“Love of mine, someday you will die, but I’ll be close behind, and follow you into the dark.
No blinding light, or tunnels to gates of white, just our hands clasped so tight, waiting for the hint of a spark.”
“The light wraps you in its mortal flame, abstracted pale mourner, standing that way against the old propellers of the twilight that revolves around you. Speechless, my friend, alone in the loneliness of this hour of the dead, and filled with the lives of fire, pure heir of the ruined day. A bough of fruit falls from the sun on your dark garment. The great roots of night grow suddenly from your soul and the things that hide in you come out again so that a blue and pallid people, your newly born, takes nourishment.”
Misunderstood significance runs rampant here. Does it mean? Yes. What does it mean? Recognize the fleeting and let it be fleeting. I hate Coldplay. I love having a pen in my hand… comfort. Free play meaning fluid. This place is where you learn to accept the fleeting reality that is human existence.
Obvious, isn’t it, the radical shift in tone?
Brainwaves have this way of jumping around, especially when channeling the sub-conscious that is entirely unpredictable—a bit like the path of a tornado. I think only the consciousness is allowed to concentrate. It would probably defeat the purpose if our sub-conscious was allowed to concentrate. Its job is to move quickly and file everything. It is the most efficient secretary ever conceived. Then, when everything is filed, it turns itself around and around like an enormous rolodex, speed reading everything over and over and over, faster than it is possible to comprehend, until it comes to understand whatever it is it’s possible to understand.
It throws the trash away into dreams—or at least the stuff it doesn’t want to deal with anymore—which is why dreams are usually so entertaining and useful.
It makes people pop into your head at precisely the moment they are supposed to. Over a week ago I received an email from a very dear friend that lives in New York City. It was an important email. It had a lot of information in it, and it certainly required a response, but not immediately. Time wears on, and a couple of days ago, for no reason whatsoever, her name popped into my head as if the sub-conscious was done sorting through whatever it had needed to sort through and the appropriate time for a response was now.
What is that about? How can we get more in touch with this mysterious brain process? Can we? It’s probably not worth it. We would never be able to understand it anyhow.
Let it be what it is. Those simple words are all too difficult sometimes, aren’t they? It is almost human nature to want to mold things, shape things into an image of our own, but the reality is that things, left to their own devices, are usually better off without human interference. Most endangered species wouldn’t be endangered in the first place, and nature has this funny way of knowing which animals ought to survive and which oughtn’t that is so outside the scope of human knowledge that…
A thought: can humans be said to be a part of nature? We are the only animal that attempts to mold nature to our own will. We keep people alive that, in the natural order, would die. We mow down trees and plants to build ghastly metal structures. We destroy the beautiful to erect the disgusting. Perhaps this is the essential fallacy of humanity: we ARE a part of nature. We have just spent so much time attempting to convince ourselves that, somehow, we can win. There are ways to defeat little bits of nature here and there, but nature likes to give us little warning signs like hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes, tsunamis and volcanoes that ought to illustrate how quickly Mother Nature could tear us down to our real size (which is pretty puny if you think about it) if she so desired. To her, time is nothing. The average human lifespan doesn’t even register as a blip on the surface of her history or her future. The sun is going to die. OK… IN FIVE BILLION YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!! Some quick math: what’s 5 billion, minus 100 (and we’re being VERY generous with a human lifespan here)?
499,999,999,900. That is a very big number my friends.
No. Humanity won’t last that long I’m afraid. All is pointless, hopeless, and fleeting. BUT THAT’S ITS BEAUTY!!! That’s where the beauty comes from, not this immortality everybody thinks they want. In immortality, all is pointed, hopeful and enduring. If only for the fact that, to me, living in a state of hope forever sounds like the worst torture anybody could endure, it seems like the dread of the knowledge, the truth, that things will come to an end, seems like a far, far better thing than living in the dream world of hoping that they won’t. So let them come, whatever they be. Let them go, whatever they are. Let them do whatever they will.
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Static
Sometimes we become static, and the thing about static is that seems to be moving, but it’s reality is stationary: all those lines on the TV ARE moving, but they’re moving no farther than the screen will allow them; all those sounds are moving around, but they’re confined to the space the headphones will allow them; all those feelings between people exist only so long as they’re allowed to exist. The essential irony of static is that it seems to be something much more than it is. It pretends to take up all this time and space, but it’s pulling a French Drop and you’re missing the whole point.
Life can get very caught up with the static is involved in, and this causes the person who is in the unfortunate position of dealing with the static the sense that they’re dealing with something truly important; however, when it becomes possible to step back, the affected person sees clearly that what they were dealing with was bullshit.
I suppose that what I’m talking about here is the liberation that comes from turning off the TV, putting down the headphones, and letting those feelings go. It turns out that the scope of complication to which we subject ourselves is precisely our own doing.
Ancient practitioners of the phrase “first, take care of the self,” would practice three things in the attempt to develop the self and understand how much of our mental anguish is brought on us by ourselves.
First, they would test themselves. These tests would take the form of deprivation and exercise in poverty. For example, one documented test of the self was to develop a hunger through doing sport, present oneself with a table full of delicious and savory foods, then turn away and be content (if not happy) having the same food as the slaves. Granted, the people giving themselves this test were usually well-off men of some station in society, but could you imagine the aristocracy or the upper sector of the bourgeoisie in America practicing poverty in this way? The question would come up: why should I? The answer would come back: “We shall be rich with all the more comfort, if we once lean how far poverty is from being a burden.”
Second, they would interrogate themselves. Interrogate has a lot of negative connotations, but what it means in this context is more like cross-examination—although that particular word seems to be AS loaded with negative connotations as the other. Essentially, it means that when you wake up, you ask yourself what you plan to get accomplished that day in terms of the development of the soul—not just a list of chores that need tending to. How will you expand your understanding of truth? How will you find your way to that which is consistently good? How will you move gently correct your brother who has gone astray? Once you have prepared yourself for the day, go through your day with these goals in mind, and before you go to bed, review. What did I do today to help develop my soul? What did I do today to expand my understanding of truth? What bad habit have I cured today? What fault have I resisted? In what respect am I better? The facts of human reality are that we are the only creature capable of developing itself into something better. Birds do not try to be better birds. Dogs, left to their own devices, will only seek out food and the occasional hump. Humans are in the unique position to become better humans through the development of their character.
Finally, they would focus on the labor of thought with itself as goal. This is related to the fact that man is the only animal that is capable of thinking about thinking. In other words, if you take the unique structure of human consciousness, it allows for this metacommentary of thought. It is the consistent check-up on the representations we have in our minds. When we see something, it represents something else to our minds, and is that secondary image appropriate, unbiased, tuned to the development of the good? The best example is money. In the time before money was as standardized as it is and there were variations in coinage—the nascent stages of money—a vendor would spend a long time verifying that a coin was what it was claiming to be. They would bite it, they would throw it in a metal bowl and listen to the sound, and they would take as much time as necessary to ensure that what they were getting was the genuine article and not something derivative. The same care ought to be taken with the thoughts that course through us. Is this something wholesome? Is it derivative information? Where does the image that I’m forming actually come from? Am I simply repeating a formulaic seeming-truth given to me from outside, or am can its veracity be determined through my combination of theory and experience.
These practices were taken very seriously by those who chose get involved with them. After all, if you’re going to be a great runner, then you should probably take care of your feet and exercise often. If you’re going to be a great wrestler, then you should practice frequently and take care of the body. If you’re going to be a great man, then you should develop the soul daily, and take care of the mind.
It is precisely at this point that static comes back into play: we live in a society of spectacles, distractions from a reality that is possible to develop. What happens when we choose to focus on the spectacle nature of society is that we delve balls deep into the static, we leave the TV static running at a very loud volume, we turn up the headphones, and we take our gaze away from the development of the self.
I don’t know why, but I feel like it is important here to state that this development of the self is in terms of the society that the self is inside. It is every man’s duty for the development of the society to develop the self. This is very different from the selfish ambitions of those who would radically attempt to take charge of their lives and thereby take control of others—I guess I’m thinking of Smith’s stupid hand and all those ruthless business bastards whose only goal is making money…this is not the development of the self for the betterment of society. I hate you Adam Smith. At what point did you forget that the reason humans have to develop themselves is because they essentially suck at living.
I guess what I’m here to advocate is the turning off of the TV—in a literal and metaphorical sense, the taking off of the headphones—is that a gasp of horror from iPod advocates everywhere that I hear, and returning the gaze to the development of the self. Take back control of your life by cutting through the bullshit static that seems to expand the more we allow it to gather. It is almost as if, once we give it a foothold in our life, the complacency and laziness that comes with unessential drama mushroom clouds until it is all we see. The point is, of course, to not let things get that far. Start practicing selfness now. Start waking up and making sure that you have a plan for making yourself better.
If you don’t know how, take some advice from the ancients, because the development of the character of the self necessarily involved reading, writing and physical activity. Start up a simple regiment of thinking in the morning. Find a good meditation book like “The Art of Living” or “The Tao Teh Ching” or “The Art of War” and start your day off by thinking about HOW you can make yourself a better human being… just thinking. That goal being accomplished (and it shouldn’t take any more than fifteen or thirty minutes), watch one less TV show and use the time to go running. If you can’t run, go for a walk. Join the gym. Start a yoga class. The body is the seat of the mind and a healthy body aids in the health of the mind. Finally, do some writing at the end of the day and recount what you did to make yourself better. Recall the words from the book you had read earlier. Write about the things you thought as you walked. Were they wholesome? Were they directed to the essential challenge of nature for the human being: how can I be better at being? Follow this simple regiment for one month and see if anything comes of it. Put down Dan Brown and pick up Epictetus. Turn off American Idol and go for a walk. Write.
Life can get very caught up with the static is involved in, and this causes the person who is in the unfortunate position of dealing with the static the sense that they’re dealing with something truly important; however, when it becomes possible to step back, the affected person sees clearly that what they were dealing with was bullshit.
I suppose that what I’m talking about here is the liberation that comes from turning off the TV, putting down the headphones, and letting those feelings go. It turns out that the scope of complication to which we subject ourselves is precisely our own doing.
Ancient practitioners of the phrase “first, take care of the self,” would practice three things in the attempt to develop the self and understand how much of our mental anguish is brought on us by ourselves.
First, they would test themselves. These tests would take the form of deprivation and exercise in poverty. For example, one documented test of the self was to develop a hunger through doing sport, present oneself with a table full of delicious and savory foods, then turn away and be content (if not happy) having the same food as the slaves. Granted, the people giving themselves this test were usually well-off men of some station in society, but could you imagine the aristocracy or the upper sector of the bourgeoisie in America practicing poverty in this way? The question would come up: why should I? The answer would come back: “We shall be rich with all the more comfort, if we once lean how far poverty is from being a burden.”
Second, they would interrogate themselves. Interrogate has a lot of negative connotations, but what it means in this context is more like cross-examination—although that particular word seems to be AS loaded with negative connotations as the other. Essentially, it means that when you wake up, you ask yourself what you plan to get accomplished that day in terms of the development of the soul—not just a list of chores that need tending to. How will you expand your understanding of truth? How will you find your way to that which is consistently good? How will you move gently correct your brother who has gone astray? Once you have prepared yourself for the day, go through your day with these goals in mind, and before you go to bed, review. What did I do today to help develop my soul? What did I do today to expand my understanding of truth? What bad habit have I cured today? What fault have I resisted? In what respect am I better? The facts of human reality are that we are the only creature capable of developing itself into something better. Birds do not try to be better birds. Dogs, left to their own devices, will only seek out food and the occasional hump. Humans are in the unique position to become better humans through the development of their character.
Finally, they would focus on the labor of thought with itself as goal. This is related to the fact that man is the only animal that is capable of thinking about thinking. In other words, if you take the unique structure of human consciousness, it allows for this metacommentary of thought. It is the consistent check-up on the representations we have in our minds. When we see something, it represents something else to our minds, and is that secondary image appropriate, unbiased, tuned to the development of the good? The best example is money. In the time before money was as standardized as it is and there were variations in coinage—the nascent stages of money—a vendor would spend a long time verifying that a coin was what it was claiming to be. They would bite it, they would throw it in a metal bowl and listen to the sound, and they would take as much time as necessary to ensure that what they were getting was the genuine article and not something derivative. The same care ought to be taken with the thoughts that course through us. Is this something wholesome? Is it derivative information? Where does the image that I’m forming actually come from? Am I simply repeating a formulaic seeming-truth given to me from outside, or am can its veracity be determined through my combination of theory and experience.
These practices were taken very seriously by those who chose get involved with them. After all, if you’re going to be a great runner, then you should probably take care of your feet and exercise often. If you’re going to be a great wrestler, then you should practice frequently and take care of the body. If you’re going to be a great man, then you should develop the soul daily, and take care of the mind.
It is precisely at this point that static comes back into play: we live in a society of spectacles, distractions from a reality that is possible to develop. What happens when we choose to focus on the spectacle nature of society is that we delve balls deep into the static, we leave the TV static running at a very loud volume, we turn up the headphones, and we take our gaze away from the development of the self.
I don’t know why, but I feel like it is important here to state that this development of the self is in terms of the society that the self is inside. It is every man’s duty for the development of the society to develop the self. This is very different from the selfish ambitions of those who would radically attempt to take charge of their lives and thereby take control of others—I guess I’m thinking of Smith’s stupid hand and all those ruthless business bastards whose only goal is making money…this is not the development of the self for the betterment of society. I hate you Adam Smith. At what point did you forget that the reason humans have to develop themselves is because they essentially suck at living.
I guess what I’m here to advocate is the turning off of the TV—in a literal and metaphorical sense, the taking off of the headphones—is that a gasp of horror from iPod advocates everywhere that I hear, and returning the gaze to the development of the self. Take back control of your life by cutting through the bullshit static that seems to expand the more we allow it to gather. It is almost as if, once we give it a foothold in our life, the complacency and laziness that comes with unessential drama mushroom clouds until it is all we see. The point is, of course, to not let things get that far. Start practicing selfness now. Start waking up and making sure that you have a plan for making yourself better.
If you don’t know how, take some advice from the ancients, because the development of the character of the self necessarily involved reading, writing and physical activity. Start up a simple regiment of thinking in the morning. Find a good meditation book like “The Art of Living” or “The Tao Teh Ching” or “The Art of War” and start your day off by thinking about HOW you can make yourself a better human being… just thinking. That goal being accomplished (and it shouldn’t take any more than fifteen or thirty minutes), watch one less TV show and use the time to go running. If you can’t run, go for a walk. Join the gym. Start a yoga class. The body is the seat of the mind and a healthy body aids in the health of the mind. Finally, do some writing at the end of the day and recount what you did to make yourself better. Recall the words from the book you had read earlier. Write about the things you thought as you walked. Were they wholesome? Were they directed to the essential challenge of nature for the human being: how can I be better at being? Follow this simple regiment for one month and see if anything comes of it. Put down Dan Brown and pick up Epictetus. Turn off American Idol and go for a walk. Write.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
