sharf
so i've been thinking of the fragmentary nature of everything. when i mean everything, i mean my life. or maybe just my mind. and definately of history. and of things like encyclopedia entries. what do they think is the backbone, the outline of important things? what are their foci? how is that helpful, necessary, what is left out? is that the author's problem or the reader's? should we read things in charitable or uncharitable ways? do they have a secret agenda? is it *really* possible that everyone has a secret agenda though?
where are the gaps? who did the editing? what was their agenda in all of this? what does this say about what human beings can know about the world out there, if indeed there is a world out there? are there only texts, only discources, only rhetoric, only myths, only projections, only culturally-bounded and situated ideas?
what about the gaps? how do we fill the space? what can we learn from the bardo state ideas? how can we take something important from traditions like lineages we know to be bullshit and transcend that and still appreciate something of them? how can we honor the forms without being stuck to them?
and then: how much do i need to change about myself to be a good grad student, to get money, to get a job, to get friends, to get a woman, to live in a nice place? how much of what i give up wasn't worth giving? how do i reclaim that self when the two (or more) selves clash? how to live when there never seems to be enough time for everything? how to face my own laziness?
lots of questions, eh? yeh. it's like that. lots of movement. i feel like i've changed more in the last two months than i've changed in almost any other single time of my life. i guess i've had a few though...
ach! and how to condense this rich and complex truth into modern no-time-to-hear-it format? what good in evoking an ideal even you don't think is ideal? is my body falling apart? so many possibilities, each glimmering a millionfold in every direction and the whole thing can be thrillingly or frighteningly multitudinous. sharf!
where are the gaps? who did the editing? what was their agenda in all of this? what does this say about what human beings can know about the world out there, if indeed there is a world out there? are there only texts, only discources, only rhetoric, only myths, only projections, only culturally-bounded and situated ideas?
what about the gaps? how do we fill the space? what can we learn from the bardo state ideas? how can we take something important from traditions like lineages we know to be bullshit and transcend that and still appreciate something of them? how can we honor the forms without being stuck to them?
and then: how much do i need to change about myself to be a good grad student, to get money, to get a job, to get friends, to get a woman, to live in a nice place? how much of what i give up wasn't worth giving? how do i reclaim that self when the two (or more) selves clash? how to live when there never seems to be enough time for everything? how to face my own laziness?
lots of questions, eh? yeh. it's like that. lots of movement. i feel like i've changed more in the last two months than i've changed in almost any other single time of my life. i guess i've had a few though...
ach! and how to condense this rich and complex truth into modern no-time-to-hear-it format? what good in evoking an ideal even you don't think is ideal? is my body falling apart? so many possibilities, each glimmering a millionfold in every direction and the whole thing can be thrillingly or frighteningly multitudinous. sharf!