tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3719024566754743654.post3694684215935480389..comments2009-02-06T06:50:33.022-05:00mikehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10978313265796058909noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3719024566754743654.post-89923088374917848982009-02-06T01:54:00.000-05:002009-02-06T01:54:00.000-05:00Thanks for the thoughtful reply and complement. <BR/><BR/>Your particular brand of incessant blathering is a joy. I hope to see this style of blog gain traction vs the short-attention-span formula that is so prevalent. As I slog along with my blog, I’ll be looking for more blogs like yours to highlight and generate comic ideas from.MonkMojohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03223386168778373505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3719024566754743654.post-17567765621534598732009-02-05T16:01:00.000-05:002009-02-05T16:01:00.000-05:00It does seem the ego has consigned some activity be outside of its purview as controlled by the body and this attests to the ego's love-hate relationship with the body (I speak from personal experience). Yet, some Tibetans have learned of ways to take that egoic control back (or so they say).<BR/><BR/>There is no control of hunger, but if I eat anything other than grass or tree bark, then ego's taking some control and asserting a choice. <BR/><BR/>And yes, it does seem the ego revels in choice, which contrasts with its rejection of choice in many instances such as bodily functions. I cannot choose hunger, but I can choose what to eat. It seems the whole paradox is that the ego needs you to be weak, while at the same time allowing strength in other areas. I suppose that's what we call 'suffering' and it's what keeps us so deeply tied into our ego ways.<BR/><BR/>Thanks MJ!<BR/>mikeS<BR/><BR/>(PS: I enjoy your site immensely and I'm glad I found it. I love irreverence and your caricatures are an entirely unique way of presenting this 'awakening' thingy (as opposed to my incessant blathering). I sense you will go far with that technique!Mikehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10978313265796058909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3719024566754743654.post-61246430911908866082009-02-05T15:36:00.000-05:002009-02-05T15:36:00.000-05:00mikeS, do you choose to be hungry?<BR/><BR/>I suppose you can beat the paradox by starving yourself to death. (game over)<BR/><BR/>The mindblow for me is that I choose to eat when I’m not hungry. Am I out of control or do I make the choice simply because there is a choice?<BR/><BR/>Ps – having a great time reading through your blog!MonkMojohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03223386168778373505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3719024566754743654.post-78336797568894191502009-02-02T01:09:00.000-05:002009-02-02T01:09:00.000-05:00Interesting thoughts, Mike!<BR/><BR/>The idea of playing less seriously reminds me of Bradford Keeney. Keeney became a shaman with the Kalahari Bushmen, who see all words and concepts as an expression of the "trickster." Indeed, we so easily get tricked into believing our words, eating our menus instead of the meals that could nourish us, and arguing over which map (or theory of everything) "correctly" describes the territory.Duffhttp://twitter.com/duffmcduffeenoreply@blogger.com