- Have any questions?
- +61 383 766 284
- [email protected]
Another Advaita cartoon
The Advaita Show #40 – The Xin Xin Ming
September 13, 2007TPN HQ in SL!
September 27, 2007Of course we have Bob Seal who regularly draws advaita-ish cartoons. But one of my favouriate cartoonists is a guy called Hugh MacLeod. He is famous for drawing cartoons on the back of business cards. That’s his format. He puts them all up on his gapingvoid blog. Anyway, I saw this one today and thought it was pretty advaiat-ish.
12 Comments
Does that mean one moment is better than any other? I,ve lived quite a few years and I’ve found that loving the ones dearest to us is the best we can do. You can think life is either manivolent or benevolent , it depends on your circumstances. We all judge that life is better with less pain, but is that really true? Isn’t that just a physical imperative? Why does pain get such a bad rap? In conclusion , I don,t know what the fuck is going on and nobody else knows , even sister Teresa;) it’s all a point of veiw! Bye the way I’m not sadomasacistic. I prefer a good BJ to a whip!
Popdog, I took the cartoon as a lesson, teaching us that trying to re-live a moment that has past is a a waste of THIS moment.
Cameron,
I did send an email to Hugh with a link to my website!
http://advaitatoons.blogspot.com/
I like the cartoon business card idea.
Maybe your right Cameron,but can we really know the motive behind what anybody sez? The whole deal behind Mother Teresa really made we wonder who can we trust! The Catholics have been duped ,I think, who else amoung us can say we’re sure we know what we know and that’s a fact. This whole Advaita thing has made me ponder life in a differant way. Maybe I’m just too cynical.
Hi Cameron,
‘Advaia-tish’ or no this is sheer nonsense for the following reasons:
1. there is no ‘i’ that can be ‘spending the rest…’ of anything.
2. this ‘i’ doesn’t have a ‘life’ (‘long’ or ‘short’)
3. it can’t be ‘trying to do’ anything – ‘in vain’ or not
This is just a ‘story-situation’ (again drawn from the point of view of fictitious ‘i’) that just sounds plausible.
Vira
Vira, to think there is no “i” is a big mistake.
Cameron,
Here is a live exemplification of what Vira wrote about in Bob’s own words:
BTW, love your podcasts.
Simon
Sorry, no links allowed.
I was referring to Bob’s video on YouTube called ‘Don’t go there’.
Simon
Simon – links should be fine! Just paste it in. But taking Bob’s words for anything is just as big a mistake as believing there is no “i” as Vira said. Don’t believe – examine. Know. As the xin xin ming states:
To deny the reality of things
is to miss their reality;
To assert the emptiness of things
is to miss their reality.
Okay team…non-dual….not two…cannot leave room for anyone, anything, anywhere or anywhen. When that is seen or known, all is well.
Sense how silly it is for and “I” or a “me” to look for that, or do anything. Sure all the appearance appears to happen, but never to or by anyone.
It is all right there and just fine BEFORE the mind “brings up” or refers to any seperate me — read any movement, any concept about or by me. You are THAT silent stillness prior to the noise.
Have a listen to two “teachers” second to none and not two:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qt98JGKDaUI&mode=related&search=
ahhhh, so simple and “effortless” it is missed….until it is not.
love
John Wheeler was in Melbourne a few weeks ago and no-one told me? Sheesh.
“Something like 99.9% of those interested seem to assume that it is the business of an identity to persuade himself that in fact he is no-entity.
The remaining 0.1% seem to assume that it is the business of non-entity to persuade them that such is all that they as identities factually are.
But all are thereby tacitly assuming that there is non-entity, which is then the entity which they believe themselves to be.
Phenomenally there cannot be non-entity without entity, nor entity without non-entity, and noumenally there cannot be either- since both are merely conceptual objects.
What these 100% are seeking, however, is the absence of non-entity (of both positive and negative aspects of entity), but as long as they are seeking there will be an entity (or a non-entity) seeking, and they will never find the absence of what is present.
That is the whole, and only, “problem” – and it is apparent only. It is apparent precisely because they who are seeking are still identities, and identities cannot find their own absence”
Wei Wu Wei
Nuff said!