Laughter & Wisdom

A thread for all matter of wise words delivered with humor. I love this guy, he cracks me up. This is from Garbage and the Goddess (Adi Da):


BUBBA: ''Devotees cannot be an offense to one another. Only the usual man can offend his friends, but the devotee cannot be an offense to another devotee, even if he is wrong. Even if he is wrong, that is not an offense. He is just wrong, that is all, and that is humorous enough. You should be free to say anything you like to anyone here, and that should be a completely humorous affair! “Look, Smack, you are an asshole. I've been wanting to kiss your cheek, and I can't even shake your hand. I've been wondering how to love you, and you're full of shit. Forget this fucking rice and vegetable meal, let's arm wrestle.”

*

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Here's a joke from Osho:

A successful American began having difficulties with his life.  As those difficulties worsened, he began looking around for help.  He went to psychologists and psychiatrists, but they were no help.  He went to new age retreats and teachers.  They were no help.  He then learned of a wise ancient guru who lived on an isolated perch in the Himalayas.  The man set out to find this guru, and for months trekked through the harsh mountain wilderness.

Upon a day he saw him!  He approached the man and asked, panting, Master, what is the meaning of life?

The master said, life is an endless flowing river.

A: An endless flowing river?

M: Yes, my child, life is an endless, flowing river.

A, now a little irritated: I have travelled over hill and yon, sought you here on this perch in the middle of the Himalayas, and you tell me life is an endless, flowing river??

(Long pause.)

M, quizzically: You mean it isn't?

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/pre_game_coin_toss_makes

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Anything David says about emptiness.  :-)

(come on, you know it was funny!!)

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Here's one for the wisdom side of the street.

Different levels of humor:


egocentric—it's funny to me.

ethnocentric—it's funny to us.

worldcentric—it's funny to all of us

kosmocentric—it's funny to all sentient beings


e, please try for the kosmocentric sort.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

“kosmocentric-it's funny to all sentient beings”

I'd love to hear a kosmocentric joke! Got any up your sleeve, David? :)

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

:-)

We have a better chance of getting him to show us his true self!

OK you might find this humorous…I'll leave it up to David to discern the “level”.  :-)

peac e

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

That's some KOSMOCENTRIC humour right there, e!

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Yep, indeedy. After all, wasn't it Buddha who said something about all sentient beings!

Here's a lovely little email Ken sent after meeting Brian, who started this whole thing from the Zaadz days:

*                                *                               *

From: Ken Wilber
Sent: Saturday, January 28, 2006 8:18 PM
To: …
Subject: “most loved teachers….”

Hi Folks,

I thought you might get a kick out of this.  It's the zaadz site, the “hot new young community site.”  What I admire most about the younger generation is their fantastic taste, as evidenced in the section on the site called “most loved teachers.”  The more people click a name, the bigger it gets…

[then his email had a screen grab of this]

Apparently, Ken is bigger than Buddha! :) :) :) :) you've got to love the man.

Lisa

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

I'm working on that, Is.  :)


Here's a koan for you:

What's the joke that's funny to every sentient being?

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Ah, The Fonz of ducks! Was that eating banana? Wisdom right there, :) The duck was teaching us to cruise beyond ourselves!

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Word!

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

The duck was teaching us to cruise beyond ourselves!

Let's explicate that a bit. So the irony is the truck driver is a duck hunter with a dog that won't hunt ducks!! But what prevents him from seeing the irony and thus disallowing the duck to help him cruise beyond himself. He says, “I am a duck hunter”. This belief in “I am…”, in a personal ontology, blocks his entrance into Real Love. That is, because he cannot intuit I AM Not, he personifies himself and personalizes the relationship with his two wise companions and thus no irony, nor Wisdom nor Real Love (end dharma talk).

PS How do you know about the Fonz? Was Happy Days on the tele in Manchester?

PPS you all might find this humorous as well. It may not be Kosmocentric but it comes damn close!! I think the ducks and gulls would even play but they would not be using a shoe!! :-)

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

e: Because he cannot intuit I AM NOT.

Well, looks like he's half way there. I AM I am N….

The Fonz  hijacked my brain cells for many years as a youngling. Yes, it was 'happening' in my little town, down the road from Liverpool. It was fully Fonzified.


Lisa

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Here's some kosmocentric humor.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

David - that's kosmocentric! (We officially got a new expression here on the pod!)

I loved it when he was exposed to the world and how he was just like ”What — what? I didn't do anything… no… err, I wouldn't never…” *flies away*

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Don't Eat the Yellow Snow

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

…….duck was teaching us to cruise beyond ourselves! and to not
blind each other with yellow snow cones on our way there! Beautiful. It's all coming together now.

And I love that Seagull. Evolved behaviour! I was going to say, all he needs now is a wallet and the worlds his Oyster. But alas, wings, and a few decent pals to hang out with is all the doctor ordered.  

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Laughter: He got weed!

Wisdom : Don't ride with a mad woman!

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Hahahahah … that's awesome, e. :PPP

“Obey the Law.”

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

White People Can't Dance

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

loooooooooooooooool

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Laughter & wisdom, delivered Stuart Davis stylee. He is funny! His grappling for the higher ethic is hilarious.

& a couple of bonus wisdom infused tunes too

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

 
 
That’s very funny, Lisa!
 
 
 
I thought the Stuart Davis Show was very funny. Here’s Episode 4.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Cheers, he’s a priceless little soul isn’t he! As I am having an officially chilled out morning, I will get amused with that in a minute.

I particularly liked what he said about suffering in the context of his blog post - I think it’s both funny, very true & most wise! I think it catches the predicament perfectly:

”It would be easier if suffering would show up like some grotesque
victim, needing to be rescued. I wish it would stumble through the
door, disheveled and weeping, ‘I’m suffering’. But instead, it bounces
in all vibrant and alluring, and flirts ‘Whacha doin’?’.”

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Q: How many Prasangika-Madhyamikas does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

A: Four. One to screw it in, one to not screw it in, one to both screw it in and not screw it in, and one to neither screw it in nor not screw it in.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GCrrblYRwOo&feature=related

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Ha! Very evil. Loved it. :-)

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Amber Wisdom and Skillful Means.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

!!!!!!!!!!!!

I can't believe that!

I suppose it gets played out a thousand times each day around the world.

“You get absolutely nothing—nothing for Christmas! Because that's what Christmas is about, is Jesus Christ!” 

Probably wasn't very funny for the kid. What a nightmare.

That's what Ken Wilber calls intermeme carpet burn.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

We live in troubled times… Small wonder that Jesus appears more and more often to ordinary people.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JvjGIkl2yDY

'I saw Jesus in a wood paneling'  (Kurt Cobain)

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Here is one I like:

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Hey David, if you still want to know what The Matrix is about, watch closely… :P (hihi)

(Ubuntu? I'm going to learn Ubuntu?) LMAO ^_^

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Pomoboarding - very amusing (and sort of tragic!!) :) blog entry from Ross Robertson

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Yes there is something tragic here: a writer who obviously is concerned
with cultural evolution but who is so ignorant of cultural history that
he doesn't seem to know that at least since the time of Buddha people
have been “so afraid of the sins of being born with privilege that
(they'd) cut (themselves) off from one of its best and rarest
fruits—the freedom to think and care about the rest of the world…” or that culturally conservative writers have been calling universities “cesspools” of this abomination or that unholiness since the Middle Ages.  All of which
occurred before the advent of POMO. Without a historical perspective
that could have taken the author's initial experience into a much
broader and deeper cultural analysis, the author here showed that he
was coming from a limited view doctrine that bore a remarkably similar
form to that of the woman of whom he wrote. He was just on the other
side of the “green meme” aisle from her thus his content was different.

The author's dogmatism also cut him off from a more sophisticated
appraisal of the woman herself. The content of her fear may have come
from school; content like this comes and goes and is temporally contingent on the immediate environment.  But judging from the way he described her, her necessity to be fearful probably originated in the home in which she was raised and is likely there to stay.

The sad thing here is that the real tragedy, that of her upbringing,
was overlooked so a religionist could take another clichéd shot in the culture wars.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Thank you, Lisa. Funny and tragic at the same time!

Ken has said that millennials tend not to put up a fight against postmodernism but instead simply try to succeed in it.

An added difficulty is that any expression of integral that isn't in alignment with Green will generally be interpreted by Green as Amber or Orange or even Red. So there's a strong social incentive to be Green, especially on emotional issues where people appear to have a more difficult time seeing new ideas.



Steven: Yes there is something tragic here: a writer who obviously is concerned
with cultural evolution but who is so ignorant of cultural history that
he doesn't seem to know that at least since the time of Buddha people
have been “so afraid of the sins of being born with privilege … ”

Steven, I think there are some big differences between the way privilege was viewed by Amber in premodern times and the way postmodernism views it now. Jesus said something like, it would be as easy for a rich man to find God as it would be to put a camel through the eye of a needle.

He probably said that because people with all sorts of possibilities to indulge themselves are less likely to take up serious sadhana. I think there is truth to that. Someone would have to be really stabilized in a pretty high structure not to give in to temptations to indulge themsleves were they to become available.

But this is something different. With postmodernism there's for one thing a flatland view of human development, which means that all people, especially cross racially, are at equal levels of development. In the postmodern world, it is not only wrong to think that one culture is more developed than another but highly offensive.

Thus, whites of European descent got where they are today by cheating the noble savages, by robbing them, exploiting them, even enslaving them. And here they are again imposing “their elitist ideas of reality on the planet’s disadvantaged masses.” This is something different, something new. We didn't have this kind of flatland thinking in premodern times.

Postmodernism views Wilber in the same way, as you may know—how dare he tell me what my higher stages are! Doesn't he know that each person is different? How arrogant!

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

David,
I'll address your reply paragraph by paragraph and then go onto reinforce the point I was making above that the defense of a doctrine limits the perspectives and leads to an inadequate analysis.

You wrote: Steven, I think there are some big differences between the way
privilege was viewed by Amber in premodern times and the way
postmodernism views it now. Jesus said something like, it would be as
easy for a rich man to find God as it would be to put a camel through
the eye of a needle.

He probably said that because people with all sorts of possibilities to indulge themselves are less likely to take up serious sadhana. I think there is truth to that. Someone would have to be really stabilized in a pretty high structure not to give in
to temptations to indulge themsleves (sic) were they to become available.

I believe it goes against the color code teaching to suggest that because a culture has its center of gravity in puce or burnt sienna or magenta or whatever that all people living within that culture have, for example, magenta meme values. To say such a thing is to say that Ken Pandit Wilber could only be operating out of orange or green, because those are the main centers of gravity within his culture. Apparently you, though not everyone in the Integral Province, would maintain that your Pandit is stabilized in a pretty high structure. Right? Now I am assuming that there have been others before Wilber who somehow managed to go beyond their culture's center of gravity. Perhaps you don't agree or hold that same assumption. Maybe you think that Wilber was the first human to break through the color barrier, but at this point what you think is irrelevant because I'm not writing this for you but whoever might be lurking around needing some sound information. Thus I further assume that Prince Siddhartha Gautama, a highly educated lad of royal blood, and Lao Tsu, a well respected, highly educated librarian and civil servant, and Francis of Assisi, a well educated youth of a wealthy family, and (my favorite) Diogenes, the highly educated the son of a banker, were operating out of an amber meme center when they became renunciants. Now that just doesn't make sense to me. Do you think there might have been a vague possibility that these four, like Pandit Wilber, managed to break through the color barrier? Or maybe the entire color code system is faulty.

You wrote: But this is something different. With postmodernism there's for one
thing a flatland view of human development, which means that all
people, especially cross racially, are at equal levels of development.
In the postmodern world, it is not only wrong to think that one culture
is more developed than another but highly offensive.

First of all I think you should get your nemesis categories correct. The flatland folks are the reductionist scientists who hold that “higher”states can be reduced to neural activity. What we are discussing here are the radical pluralists who suffer from “aperspectival madness,” and who, for the sake of grabbing attention, are as deft as Pandit Wilber or any other evangelist, like Pat Robertson for example, in setting up straw men to heroically incinerate in front of their true believers. And this paragraph is such a transparent piece of straw man, evangelistic propaganda, it is difficult for me to comprehend that an educated man would write it. If you can show me where France's four leading Pomo thinkers, Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze and Baudrillard or their American contemporary, Richard Rorty, ever wrote such nonsense that would justify what you attribute to postmodernism, then I will apologize for being condescending. Additionally two of the main branches of pomo academics are these things called “Subaltern Studies”and “Post Colonial Studies,” in which the pivotal argument is that there is disparity between the development of imperialistic and imperialized cultures.

You wrote: Thus, whites of European descent got where they are today by cheating the noble savages, by robbing them, exploiting them, even enslaving
them. And here they are again imposing “their elitist ideas of reality on the planet’s disadvantaged masses.” This is something different, something new. We didn't have this kind of flatland thinking in premodern times.

Again we have an example of doctrinal defense in tandem with a shallow grounding in a historical perspective leading to an inadequate analysis. Of course “we” didn't have any of this flatland (sic) thinking in premodern times because the beginnings of the imperialistic movements of white Euro-Americans were  contemporaneous with the advent of modernity which many consider to have begun with the Enlightenment thinking of René Descartes. And such attitudes were soundly in place long before the advent of pomo. Here is a link to Mark Twain's ”To a Person Sitting in Darkness,” written 108 years ago, or his King Leopold's Soliloquy (1908).

Why don't you know these things?

I think I will rest my case with these three points:
1. Your reply to me was a defense of the Wilberry Doctrine
2. Your historical grounding was inadequate.
3. Your description of pomo was inadequate.
4. Your conclusions were sitting ducks.

I suspect that you will never see my perspective because you are sitting within “the truth” looking out with all the answers pre-positioned by the Pandit. I am on the outside looking all around and while I will give Wilber his due for coming up with the most ambitious faith-based cosmology I ever saw coming out the New Age (I've been reading him since 1988) it has absolutely no applicability to anything I've ever undertaken (except my continuing hobby of studying the curious psychology of the true believer) and at the end of the day it is just another addition to post-modern (the adjective, not the noun) white noise.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Well said, David. It really really makes me laugh, just how hung up we
collectively get with these things.

I don't think we have to always be politically correct in our appraisals, - for example, someone moaning about there privilege and having no right to take up their own interest & vocation is also a perfect example of how victimhood has taken root deeply in our current cultural conditioning &milieu - leaving consequences that run amok among us. :) Wrecking the view. And surely Buddha era motivations behind renunciation (of privilege) are somewhat different than a whining postmodern, as you say -  but not quite like that! I take full responsibility for that. :) And I am still finding this very largely funny.

So how do people disengage (without disconnecting) their emotion from the birth of new cool ideas then? ? ?





 

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

I think that's a good question, Lisa. I think one way to look at it is that it involves disengaging or not acting from the lower chakra emotions but instead the higher chakra emotions.

I think you raise a good point about victimhood as well. Postmodern ideas of victimhood tend to be rather absolute, not integrating other important perspectives.

Occassionally we hear people go to the opposite extreme, arguing that there are never any victims or exploitation, for whatever reason, but I don't think this is quite it either.

I think different perspectives need to be integrated and weighed when we decide issue of fairness, justice, responsibility, etc.


David

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Steven, I will answer your points. Perhaps you could also tell us what you believe in, what your position is, what you think is the “real integral,” what you think is better than Wilber?

Wilber apparently gets you emotional, so please leave him out of it. It doesn't tell us anything about your position when you rail against Wilber, so please just try to state what your position is, sans Wilber. See if you can go a whole post without mentioning his name!



Steven: I believe it goes against the color code teaching to suggest thatbecause a culture has its center of gravity in puce or burnt sienna ormagenta or whatever that all people living within that culture have,for example, magenta meme values.

Yes, of course, I never suggested otherwise.


Steven: Apparently you, though not everyone in the Integral Province, wouldmaintain that your Pandit is stabilized in a pretty high structure.Right?

Yes, I would say he has stabilized a “pretty high structure.” Apparently you have a broader idea of the “Integral Province” than I do.


Steven: Prince Siddhartha Gautama… .Lao Tsu… .  Francis of Assisi… . Diogenes… . Do you think there might have beena vague possibility that these four, like Pandit Wilber, managed tobreak through the color barrier? Or maybe the entire color code systemis faulty.

Well, so we have quite a lot in common! I think these four are magnificent as well.

By “break through the color barrier” you mean reach the top color, I imagine, right? Clear Light, Supermind?

Well, each of those four is magnificent, as I said. Buddha founded an amazing religion; his teachings have held up in an amazing way. St. Francis wrote some super-cool stuff (ever read Andrew Harvey's translations? there's nothing like them; I will copy them out if we can't find them online and you are interested).

I'm least familiar with Diogenes. But Lao Tsu, if there were one among them who may have broken the color barrier I would say it was him. But, even if we were to grant him that lofty title, we would probably have to say “broken the color barrier by the standards of his day,” right?


Steven: Or maybe the entire color code system is faulty.

So, are you to be counted as one of those who were with Wilber until A Theory of Everything and the color-code system? You couldn't have hated him like this since 1988 and been reading him every year since than, could you have?



Steven: First of all I think you should get your nemesis categories correct.The flatland folks are the reductionist scientists who hold that“higher”states can be reduced to neural activity. What we arediscussing here are the radical pluralists who suffer from“aperspectival madness.”

Wilber uses the phrase to refer to both groups. It's a little confusing, but it's a good phrase, and it applies nicely to both, doesn't it? He discusses it in a footnote in A Theory of Everything on page 160. You can also see the same paragraph here in note 12.


Steven: Pandit Wilber or any other evangelist.

In addition to the colors you don't like second face of God? But you like St. Francis … I think it would be easier if you stated plainly and simply what your position is rather than define yourself as “not Wilber.” Also, it's hard for me to tell what you mean when you call him an “evangelist.” Are you saying he believes in a traditional, mythic worldview, Blue, Amber?

Steven: If you can show me where France's four leading Pomo thinkers, Derrida,Foucault, Deleuze and Baudrillard or their American contemporary,Richard Rorty …

No one ever said that every postmodernist was a radical constructivist. Apparently Foucault wasn't toward the end. At any rate, you're not going to argue that Derrida was really integral or something, are you?


Steven: It has absolutely no applicability to anything I've ever undertaken(except my continuing hobby of studying the curious psychology of thetrue believer) and at the end of the day it is just another addition topost-modern (the adjective, not the noun) white noise.

Steven, has it ever occurred to you that you might object to Wilber's characterization of cynical, flatland postmodernism because you haven't differentiated from it yet?

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

David,
An interesting array of responses and questions and a ground rule…don't mention He Whose Name Should Not Be Spoken. I'll go along with that if you can address my main point–a defense of a doctrine limits the perspectives and results in an inadequate analysis–on its own merits without falling back on the color codes.

The weekend is busy and my response to your reply promises to be long and it will take more time than I have right now…so Watch This Space, there will be more to come.

One quick point: I do not hate He Whose Name Etc. but I often use that name as bait for the true believers. A “won't you come into my parlor said the spider to the fly” kind of thing

So until next time, thanks for dropping by.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Hi Steven, I didn't mean it in an absolute way or anything. I just want to hear about your worldview, orientation, map, values, etc., and Wilber seemed to be a bit of a distraction.

Yes, a defense of a doctrine would limit perspectives and results. But I don't think anyone is without a doctrine of one kind or another, including deconstructionists. It's just a matter of which doctrine and how tightly they are holding on to it, how open they are to new ideas.

It may seem as though I am simply defending a doctrine, but I am simply asking that criticism be:

1) informed, when nearly all the time it isn't;

 2) from an integral perspective, when most of the time it is just a matter of someone not seeing what Wilber is seeing;

3) also offering a viable integral alternative if it doesn't like anything about the map, when most of the time nothing is suggested other than one form of postmodernism or another, now bearing the name “integral,” because postmoderns must call themselves whatever the culture thinks is the best, “integral,” “spiritual,” etc. As Don Beck said, “Green looks at itself and sees Turquoise”;

4) and free of projection, gratuitous, uninformed slander, MGM personal attacks, etc.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

David,
Because my answers grew to be of more-than-usual-thread-post-length, I put the post in the blog section and it can be found at Answers For David. I hope they are satisfactory.
S.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Check this out, Chogyam Trungpa at a redneck bar:

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Hi David, he's a prize nutter isn't he! He's one that I don't know that much about - somethings I read, he just sounds like a regular asshole - not so much crazy wisdom, which when he was acting like one was his general trademark, but I see he did a lot of good, started up some cool things, influenced a lot of people for the better and whatnot. I just looked at some mildly amusing stuff from his tribute page, here is what one fellow cheeky Northerner wrote on The Chronicals of Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche: -

We are all Sakyongs and Sakyong Wangmos

We are all Sakyongs and Sakyong Wangmos
Eat the rice
Drink the milk
Swallow the teachings on white paper
Smile at the Guru
Stunned in ordinary magic
You float into the day AWAKE!
Shambhala Revolution
Give everything away in the snap of the fingers
No more green stamps!
No more Macdonalds!
No more countries, no more war!
Wave the victory banner
Eisenstein Awake!
Film the madness as we stop still and look
HO-HUM
HO-HUM
HO-HUM-
the end/the beginning
the beginning/the end
England expects every man to do his duty!
The Great Switcheroo has landed! 

by Rita Ashworth
Stockport UK

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

That's a very funny poem, Lisa.  :)

Yes, Trungpa was outrageous, wasn't he?

I am getting inspired to get some books of his. He has one called Crazy Wisdom that looks quite interesting.

Wasn't it amazing when he squirted his squirt gun at the guy who was pointing the gun at him? The whole thing makes me laugh. But it wasn't very nice for the waitress, I am sure. But here was a person who could ignore all social conventions! Of course he shares that quality with the most deranged members of society, doesn't he?

I think there might be something to this behavior in that he might teach people  not to act out of fear. There is actually a chapter titled “Fearlessness” in the book I linked, and I wonder if it is about that. But if we don't put all this in an evolutionary context we end up with madness and garbage.

Do you remember the discussion we had about David Deida and his discussion of Hinayana, Mahayana, and Vajrayana? He also wasn't putting it into an evolutionary context, wasn't seeing the evolutionary context nor seeing the evolutionary impulse, so he thought going around squirting people with squirt guns represented the most enlightened behavior (a bit of a caricature, but you get the idea).

David

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Yep, totally - I hear what you are saying. I think its very funny how he turned social conventions up in the air, we definitely need a lot more of that. I guess that is the key isn't it, the evolutionary context, and whether that context is fully apparent.

Yep, that was a funny discussion with Deida and his Hinayana, Mahayana & Vajrayana fantasy. :) In fact, come to think of it, we should resurrect it right here. It is perfect fodder for this thread! It would be interesting to sieve out the jive-mongering among any snippets of wisdom.

I may check out that book myself, I definitely think there is lots to be said for the theme of that chapter on “Fearlessness.”

I had a funny American lecturer at university in Hong Kong who would do stuff like that, not so much out of crazy wisdom, but to examine our conditioned reactions. Sometimes he cracked me up, really revealing the conditioning. However, when I look back, it amuses me to think now that even his attempt to cut across conditioning, where actually very conditioned attempts to cross that line. Too predictable. To safe, and too guarenteed to ensure a positive come-back, like a laugh. So Chogyam excelled himself, somewhat there. :)

Lisa

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Go with your gut

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Reinventing the train journey

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Lisa, that's really amazing! I think it's a beautiful, great idea. I would love it if they did it here.

I also like the sound of the artwork. There are a lot of people who would probably really like to put their paintings in subway stations and such. The el/subway trains I ride are already full of advertisements, but those messages would be great. That would really lift the culture a little bit.


David

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Yes, what a beautiful idea. Art, poetry, the lot - it is a great idea. Perfect.

Check out these pic's of the dwindling 'Indian Coffee House' - I never knew these
places really existed. I bet they have perfected the art of the masala dosa. I wonder how much longer they will actually last? What a morning ponder. :) :)

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Hi Lisa, I never knew they had coffee houses in India either! Although I have not spent that much time there. I thought they were just into tea and chai.

Yes, it does look like the place for masala dosas! It was on the very top of the food menu, as it should be!  :)

I think they have some ancient, closely held secrets about how to make those things, like how not to make them stick. Everything like that I try to make sticks like crazy.  :) They have magic griddles, no doubt, and perhaps even dosa siddhis to go along with them.  :)

David

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Brand new translation of Dr. Nietzsche's Diet guidebook: “Fat is dead”. Beware of the side-effects! ;-)

“What do you fear? By this are you truly Fattened. You must embrace your Fears, as well as your Fat, and learn to Laugh as you consume them, along with Generous Portions of Simple Salad. Remember, as you stare into the lettuce, the lettuce stares also into you.”

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

:) Very amusing Christophe.

& David: 'Everything like that I try to make sticks like crazy.  :) They have magic griddles, no doubt, and perhaps even dosa siddhis to go along with them.  :)'

Haha! Don't crack me up. :) So how do we cultivate 'dosa siddhis' then? I really want them. :) Here are some in action.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

…

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Is that a childhood photo, Is? :) Owch!

A most amusing & most wise: - Confessions of a Formally Sensitive New Age Man

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Yep, nice article Lisa. I see myself in that A LOT!

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

When keeping it real goes wrong.

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

That's a corker, David. He's a case, and really makes me laugh. :)

Here is a bit from Stu's blog: Scarier than death , beautiful! Great reminders in there. :) With a pic that finishes it off nicely:

Re: Laughter & Wisdom

Keith Martin-Smiths blog: The Gamble of a Lifetime  . Rocking attitude, wise words.