rock-and-rollism

Rock and roll doesn’t necessarily mean a band. It doesn’t mean a singer, and it doesn’t mean a lyric, really. It’s that question of trying to be immortal.

— Malcom McLaren

I'm no rocker. This quote appeared in some newsy box on a webpage because MM passed away today. But it echoes what I read in B's.Ts. yesterday, and related to an artist friend who echoed back that most artistic manifestations are sheer narcissism.

"In concluding my present tale about contemporary terrestrial art, I might as well mention yet another of the many specific characteristics of those beings of contemporary civilization who devote themselves to this famous art.

"This specific characteristic of theirs is that whenever one of these beings notices some 'lawful illogicality' in the productions that have come down from ancient times and begins to work in his branch of art in quite a new manner, perhaps in order to make this lawful illogicality clear to himself in practice, most of the beings around him occupied professionally in the same branch at once become his followers and begin doing supposedly the same thing, but of course without either aim or sense.

"And it is owing to this 'specific' characteristic of the psyche of the representatives of contemporary art that, on the one hand, what are called 'new movements in art' are constantly springing up among your favorites, and on the other hand, those movements which were somehow rightly established by preceding generations, even though only after a fashion, are constantly dwindling.

"Although this phenomenon exists among the representatives of all branches of contemporary art, for some reason or other the beings occupied in the branch they call 'painting' are most susceptible to it.

"Hence it is that at the present time there exist among these professionals a great many 'new movements in painting' which have arisen in this way and have nothing in common. These new movements are known there by names such as 'cubism,' 'futurism,' 'synthesism,' 'imagism,' 'impressionism,' 'colorism,' 'formalism,' 'surrealism,' and many of her such names also ending in 'ism.'"

* * *

At this point of Beelzebub's tales, he was given a "Leitoochanbros," that is, a special metal plate on which is recorded the text of an etherogram received from somewhere or other, the addressee having only to hold it to his perceptive hearing organ to hear everything communicated in it. When Beelzebub had in this way heard the contents of the Leitoochanbros handed to him, he turned to his grandson and said, "You see, my boy, what coincidences occur in our Great Universe. The contents of this etherogram concern just your favorites in connection with these terrestrial beings I have just mentioned, that is, ..."

triangulation du jour ... pythagoras' two legs to stand on

on Monday i was perusing this in the NYT - http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/14/square-dancing/?scp=1&sq=pythagorean&st=cse (March 14, 2010, SQUARE DANCING, By Steven Strogatz).

partly i looked at it b/c i was told how lame and lazy the intellect is. but the article quickly dispelled misgivings, discussing how geometry engages intellect and intuition, and illustrates pythagoreanometricly proof that a2+b2=c2 (c2 being the square on the hypotenuse).

by coincidence, on the same day I also read "As we are we are like two thirds of a triangle, a negative side and a positive side, but no base connecting them so there’s nothing to let them flow, work together. What takes the place of real “I” in us now is personality and personality constantly changes, never stays put, so we can’t really use ourselves for any real tasks. When we replace personality with individuality based in essence, then we will be able to do." -- recounted from a 1973 meeting with Annie Lou Stavely (d. 2001).

In the common presence of every being existing merely on the basis of itoklanotz, there is 'something' similar to the regulator in a mechanical watch, and this 'something' is called 'iransamkeep,' which means 'not-to-give-oneself-up-to-the-associations-resulting-from-the-functioning-of-one-brain-alone.'

the NYT article indicates that the pythagorean theorem is less about lengths than areas. i can't help but reflect that pythagoras is given due recognition in B'sTs (apart from G's derision of other "philosophic" greeks' pouring from the empty to the void), and also to consider the fourth way tenet that everything is matter. and i associate the discussion about shocks, that the nature of the first conscious shock is self-remembering, and the nature of the second conscious shock is more difficult to describe but related to emotion and the efforts of not identifying and not expressing negative emotion, etc..

i particularly appreciated this article. there's something experiential. as though the exponent "squared" is indeed weilding, even with subtle expertise, "levers."

how to grapple with an unknown quantity - unknown in length certainly, but perhaps also in dimension? well, first of all, there's whatever it is that's sucking all my attention, what i'm identified with - that's a given, how i live my life ordinarily. along comes something that might expand my attention - for instance, if i'm "identified" with writing some argument, perhaps some bodily irritation or remembering to sense my body might invite another center to participate within my field of attention. although bodily irritation might inform my experience, it might automatically engage personality; but perhaps a work effort would be an invitation to something more essential to participate.

setting out to identify a2 and b2 to derive c2 (and perhaps ultimately the root of it all - "I") seems a tall order. yet ouspensky's frontespeice to tertium organum includes cites Paul theApostle, The Epistle to the Ephesians, III, 17-18, saying "That ye, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height."

but just one other thing about this, about trigonometry and "wiseacring" -- once I accompanied an architect who was surveying where a building was planned. with stakes and a string we charted out the land -- i don't recall the procedure, but i think what we did was some primative triangulation (although it might have been rudimentray measuring (perhaps haskel duke will find this blog and refresh my memory)). similarly, i've got this notion that with the tools at my disposal, i should be able to discern something on a larger scale. but even so, just as the NYT suggests that there are areas hiding behind lengths, what will enliven my sensibilities to register such expanded impressions?

in any case, it is both my disposition as well as my purpose that by pondering or simply mashing up these ideas i might somehow distill or otherwise make something for myself. maybe i'll even stumble upon something in the upturned soil. meanwhile, like the forbidden room in a fairy tale, i take license and even invitation in G's "warning" (c.f., “Never forget that every stick has two ends. The devil can lead you to paradise, and God, directly to Hell.” — G.I. Gurdjieff ). Moreover, G. himself indicates regarding iransamkeep:

If only such an idea would occur to them and they were to carry on their usual wiseacrings with it, they would then perhaps discover onevery simple 'secret.' I am sure that somebody would stumble on this 'secret' because, in the first place, it is simple and obvious, and in the second place, they discovered it long ago and have often put it to practical use.

wiseacrings/hiatus, revisited

"So that you may be able to put yourself in the place of that sympathetic Assyrian, I shall also explain to you that in general on your planet, then in the city of Babylon as well s at the present time, all the theories on such a question as they call it of 'the beyond,' or any other 'elucidation-of-details' of any definite 'fact,' are invented by those three-brained beings there in whom most of the consequences of the properties of the organ Kundabuffer are completely crystallized, in consequence of which there actively functins in their presence, that being property, which they themselves call 'cunning.' Owing to this, they consciously - of course consciously only with the sort of reason which it has already become long ago proper for them alone to possess - and moreover, merely automatically, gradually acquire in their common presence, the capacity for 'spotting' the weakness of the psyche of the surrounding beings like themselves; and this capacity gradually forms in them data which enagles them at times to sense and even to understand the peculiar logic of the beings around them, and according to these data, they invent and propound one of their 'theories' concerning this or that question; and because, as I have already told you, in most of the three-brained beings there, owing to the abnormal conditions of ordinary being-existence established there by them themselves, the being-function called 'instinctively-to-sense-cosmic-truths' gradually atrophies, then, if any one of them happens to devote himself to the detailed study of any one of these 'theories,' he is bound, whether he wishes or not, to be persuaded by it with the whole of his presence."
-Fifth Flight, pages 333-34.

triangulation du jour

Maybe I was ten or eleven when my twin brother won a raffle. Had someone I was less identified with won, a particular distinction might not have been set into relief - something I had only known tacitly, but then recognized, was that I don’t win things.

Around that time I experimented with another notion - very reservedly I’d toss coins and guess whether they would be heads or tails, always guessing against my inclination, and to my recall I was surprisingly "on the money."

I reflect also how, not being a deadhead, I used be amazed that hippies would set themselves on the way to hitch a ride to some destination in the morning and arrive in the evening, while for me it would take two days of uncertainty. It is not difficult for me to recall my vain mindset, "please please please" or "relax, and wait" or "soon, soon," or even imperatively "NOW!"

I was reading a blog where someone discusses B’s Ts thematically. There’s definitely a place for that. Except it sometimes seems I can practically dispense with themes and read B’s Ts mathematically, the higher and the lower actualize the middle, or vice-versa.

Apes, for instance. Even though my life isn’t characterized by ruin, per se, many important aspects of my life are riddled with problems. I know that’s not unusual, except I find myself living in some vague netherland that’s neither one thing or the other. And I wonder if my excited reasoning ("please please please" or "relax, and wait" or "soon, soon," or even imperatively "NOW!") really achieve nothing? If my hyperactive emoting takes the lead, and my mind or body follow suit, perhaps that lawfully results in a state that is vague, as well as dreadful, a netherland that’s neither one thing or the other.

I bear in mind that gurdjieff did say "work as if everything depends on work; pray as if everything depends on prayer," but recognize that my pathetically imploring the universe might not constitute "prayer." I don't mean this to be idle speculation - to put this to the test, I'll work on myself while exiting my apartment and fully expect a roast pigeon to fly into my mouth. Postage included.

planet of the apes

i overheard a couple of men discussing what seemed an intense taoist retreat - though i'd consider that perhaps it was only the kind of spiritual retreat that a privileged mystical bent of wholistic gay guys, present company included, fall into, i did find it interesting.

a little later i asked another similarly-typed guy what hit tattoo was, thinking it was some mystical arabic inscribed in a circle but he said it was the first letter of the tibetan alphabet. upon commenting about that mandala he asked if i had meditative interests. it didn't take long for me to express distrust of lots that parades as "esoteric," including my relating that i had just overheard interesting details about an intense taoist retreat but questioned not only the trustworthiness of that program (mostly who purports to direct such a retreat) but what could be the purpose. he expressed a sentiment which surprised me, that one has to already have attained a certain maturity to know what one wants, to choose a path. as opposed to the usual "all paths lead to the same place."

i'm reading B'sTs, the apes chapter. B descends from mars because he and very learned essence friend wonder about the ape question, a matter which from time to time excites the interests of three-brained earthlings; from there B outlines different "results." the misbegotten ape species resulted from the combination of uncurbed passion along with the passive taking the role of active in relation to a lower force, which product is likewise given to titillation, and that result is even to this day misperceived by some earthlings as sacred. another result, though sterile, is much better than uncurbed passion, and that's the charting of the galaxy through what has devolved into astronomy. an alternative result is the relatively unchanging thought forms created by the beings of atlantis ...

i found the ape discussion remarkably meaningful for reasons i am not including here. but reflecting that, with regard to the relative unknowability of the prospects of any particular path, at least here G seemingly outlines that in some instances "by their fruit (result) you will (can) know (recognize) them."

hiatus

hiatus should not connote inactivity. what is the nature of the shock which fills an interval? my questioning has been about a theoretical underpinnings to experiences. am i learning that now? the arch-absurd point being that

"Although the beings of that ill-fated planet arose, according to conventionally objective time-reckoning, many decades ago, not only have they not as yet any being-sensation of cosmic phenomena such as it is proper to all three-centered beings of the whole of our Universe to have, but there is not in the Reason of these unfortunates even an approximate representation of the genuine causes of
these phenomena.

"They have not an approximately correct representation even of those cosmic phenomena that proceed on their own planet round about them."

see you soon.

on having no teeth

a bit disjointed perhaps. here's from Let Us Now Praise Famous Men by James Agee and Walker Evans:

The light in this room is of a lamp. Its flame in the glass is of the dry, silent, and famished delicateness of the latest lateness of the night, and of such ultimate, such holiness of silence and peace that all on earth and within extremest remembrance seems suspended upon it in perfection as upon reflective water: and I feel that if I can by utter quietness succeed in not disturbing this silence, in not so much as touching this plain of water, I can tell you anything within realm of God, whatsoever it may be, that I wish to tell you, and that what so ever it may be, you will not be able to help but understand it.

This echoes a familiar spiritual vista, terrain, landscape. Here's something from Ravi Ravindra's Heart Without Measure:

There is something so entirely sane, normal and lovable about Madame de Salzmann. She is overflowing with love, but there is nothing sentimental in this. She has an enormous common sense and makes room for everything and everybody – in their right place. By contrast, Krishnamurti – clearly a person of very high being – seemed to be so correct, so good, almost pious. There is such a partiality in his insistence that process must be excluded, that traditions are only traps, that thought at all levels breeds fear, that one must not have anything to do “with money, sex and all that.” I told Madame de Salzmann about a conversation I had had with Krishnaurti. I had said to him that just as a diver needs to be loaded with some heavy material to go lower down in the ocean, he should put on a belt of lead in order to come down to our level; otherwise, he is too light and cannot be in contact with the Earth, where we are.

He asked me, “What do you mean, sir? What kind of belt?” I replied, “Krishnaji, … a little meat and sex.”

He found it amusing, but refused to engage with the idea, and said, “Sir, you are too clever for your own good.”

Madame de Salzmann was characteristically generous: “You can see the inner freedom Krishnamurti has. But he does not have a science of being; Mr. Gurdjieff brought a science of being.”

While Madame de Salzmann was sitting there, Michel said, “As far as I am concerned the best advice I can give you is to stay in my mother’s darshana as much as possible.” I was struck by his use of this Sanskrit word, commonly used and understood in India; he was advising me to remain in her sight and presence, to abide near her.

the "fourth way" doesn't own enlightenment. whereas a fakir has to work for a lifetime, perhaps a monk and yogi don't have to work quite as long, and perhaps someone on the fourth way might opt for one pill, or the other. but it all queries lead back to questions of Will, Higher Bodies, and Stupid Saints. from Thomas Merton's Chuang Tzu, xxii. 3:

Nieh Chueh, who had no teeth,
Came to Pi and asked for a lesson on Tao.
(Maybe he could bite on that!)
So Pi began:
First, gain control of the body
And all its organs.
Then control the mind.
Attain one-pointedness.
Then the harmony of heaven will
comedown and dwell in you.
You will be radiant with Life.
You will rest in Tao.
You will have the simple look of a
new-born calf. O, lucky you,
You will not even know the
cause of your state.
But long before Pi had reached this point in his
sermon, the toothless one had fallen asleep.
His mind just could not bite on the meat of doctrine.
But Pi was satisfied. He wandered away singing:
His body is dry
Like an old leg bone,
His mind is dead
As dead as ashes:
His knowledge is solid,
His wisdom true!
In deep dark night
He wanders free,
Without aim
And without design:
Who can compare
With this toothless man?

an interesting parenthetical: "(Maybe he could bite on that!)." but alas, he has no teeth!

on having no head

an acquaintance has an ornamental buddha head on a shelf. for a while i've been feeling that not all of me is such a mess, just that my thoughts are like that zen monkey bitten by a scorpion - wildly out of control. if only i could be rid of the head i'd be ok. like this fellow here – a good start!

Carbon is the New Black / esoteric titillation

it's been a while. one of the benefits of having the same conversation over and over always is that i don't need to type, just copy and paste. for instance, rumi said about "the many wines" (translated by Coleman Barks):

God has given us a dark wine so potent that,
drinking it, we leave the two worlds.

God has put into the form of hashish a power
to deliver the taster from self-consciousness.

God has made sleep so that
it erases every thought.

God made Majnun love Layla so much that
just her dog would cause confusion in him.

There are thousands of wines
that can take over our minds.

Don't think all ecstacies
are the same!

Jesus was lost in his love for God.
His donkey was drunk with barley.

Drink from the presence of saints,
not from those other jars.

Every object, every being,
is a jar full of delight.

Be a connoisseur,
and taste with caution.

Any wine will get you high.
Judge like a king, and choose the purest,

the ones unadulterated with fear,
or some urgency about "what's needed."

Drink the wine that moves you
as a camel moves when it's been untied,
and is just ambling about.

thousands of wines. the reason that is relevant here is just an odd and mounting suspicion that people in any groups think their group leader has "it" and that others are far afield. this divisiveness is sometimes engaged in by group leaders as well, and sometimes, i dare say, with good reason! but the notion of relativity comes to play. thousands of wines. perhaps if you've been educated on merlot then both a pinot noir and lancers seem off. perhaps if you've been educated on lancers ... the same but worse!

from VFTRW:

[the make-believe writer of Glimpses says] i saw indeed that this possibility existed. although not yet knowing what it was, i saw that it was there. i find it hard to put into words what became more and more understandable. i saw that the reign of law, now becoming apparent to me, was really all-inclusive; that what appeared at first sight to be a violation of a law, on closer examination only confirmed it. one could say without exaggeration that while "exceptions prove the rule," at the same time they were not exceptions. for those who can understand i would say that, in pythagorean terms, i recognized and felt how will and fate - spheres of action of providence - coexist, while mutually competing; how, without blending or separating, they intermingle. i do not nurture any hope that such contradictory words can convey or make clear what i understand; at the same time i can find nothing that is better.

"you see," mr. gurdjieff went on ["went on" irritates this blogger], "that he who possesses a full and complete understanding of the system of octaves, as it might be called, possesses the key to the understanding of Unity, since he understands all that is seen - all happenings, all things in their essence - for he knows their place, cause and effect.

"at the same time you see clearly that this consists of a more detailed development of the original scheme, a more precise representation of the law of unity, and that all we have said and are going to say is nothing but a development of the principal idea of unity. that a full, distinct, clear consciousness of this law is precisely the Great Knowledge to which i referred.

"speculations, suppositions and hypotheses do not exist for him who possess such a knowledge. expressed more definitely, he knows everything by 'measure, number and weight.' ..." (source)

is there a practical value to that? i think it's a tease. i don't know if anyone's got some singular unifying vision. some group leaders met gurdjieff, some follow in the footsteps of people endorsed by gurdjieff, or de salzmann, some have a holy presence even, some follow the teachings to the letter, and some follow where the teachings have migrated. i'm not denigrating any of these - relative to my station they are all higher, as though they are all gems. figure in to that process that regardless of whatever truth they may represent or express, inasmuch as they have become representatives of a higher level than me, our interaction may elicit titillation, suggesting to my susceptible reason that the messenger who elicited the experience must be IT.

"Tell me anything you wish, my dear Grandfather. Anything you tell me will be the greatest joy for me, if only because it is you who relate it."

"No," objected Beelzebub, "you yourself ask what interests you most of all. It will give me at the present moment much pleasure to tell you about just whatever you particularly wish to know."

it is a tease because, as gurdjieff said, we simply can't see the higher, let alone measure it - i take that to mean that we can't differentiate between a sapphire, a ruby, and a diamond - i seemingly don't quite have the wherewithal to "Be a connoisseur, and taste with caution. Any wine will get you high. Judge like a king, and choose the purest, the ones unadulterated with fear, or some urgency about 'what's needed.'" does Beelzebub leave the decision to Hassein because Hassein's individuality will ask for what it requires, or will Hassein's questioning elicit a particular reply, or does it really not matter what Hassein asks about, Beelzebub certainly has an agenda regardless ...

still, avoiding any stumbling block, bennett advised:

the only practical question is whether or not we shall go on trying, supposing that i have no guarantee that my efforts will be rewarded - am i for that reason to give up trying?

this was one of the things that gurdjieff most insisted upon in his personal teaching. he reduced the whole teaching to a very simple proposition:

"a man must have an aim." he may not, can not, see beyond this life, therefore his aim in a concrete sense cannot go beyond his death. but he can set himself the aim to die honorably, that is to say, not to give up. he reiterated this whenever he spoke about aim, and he spoke about it nearly every day. the whole point is that the aim to keep on trying, to work on oneself, admits of no doubt. all philosophical and even religious questions can remain open for us but as to whether it is better to go on trying or to give up, there can be no doubt. therefore the practical issue for us does not concern what is beyond death; it concerns the approach to the moment of death. how shall i die? (source)

einie minie minie moe ... nah, you choose.

a retreat experience

sitting. noticing sensations, energetic. activity here, there. a spot in me, maybe in my chest ... how to say - it wasn't luminous or magnetic or gyrocopic or crystalline or blue, as those connotations presented themselves before being dismissed.

i remembered hearing "when it appears it is undeniable." of course i tried to test the hypothesis. but it is made of "yes."