Socialized Psychopath Taking Questions

[Nick]

I think my last boss was a psychopath, although not an "inherent one". I believe his environment (having to take orders from corporate and being directly involved with all the employees on a round the clock daily basis) caused him to become a psychopath due to being forced into a situation where he was always having to create a facade and perpetually manipulate people depending on corporate objectives. He gave me no sense of a genuine personality, and he always tried to relate to me as if we had been best friends my whole life. I think he skipped the fear tactics phase with me because he could sense I didn't possess some of the traditional and mainstream values within society. I was mostly non responsive to this behavior and eventually he began to take on a friendly smart ass personality with me where he would smile at me while simultaneously giving me the middle fingers. It didn't bother me, but I thought it rather odd behavior, and I could sense that it was born out of his frustration with not being able to manipulate me as easily as the other employees. Eventually he figured out the best way to manipulate me was a sort of mild shaming, enough to coax me, but not enough to upset to the point that I'd be turned off enough to quit.

Being that he wasn't an inherent psychopath, and was more or less forced into the roll because of the corporate environment, a part of him felt a separation from it which is why he was a regular bing drinker/alcoholic.

An interesting thing about this is that in the documentary film, The Corporation, they performed a sort of psychopathy test on the nature of corporations using the DSM-IV's symptoms of psychopathy as a reference. It would seem that the corporate environment is a kind of breeding ground for psychopathic behavior.

[Alex T. Jacob]

A corporation is by nature sociopathic in that it is a fictitious 'person', an economic mechanism that cannot have 'feelings', and whose object is only to generate profit. The shareholders, the 'real people' who have lives and feelings, are separate and isolated from the mechanism and usually will not insist that the mechanism behave 'morally'. When their monthly checks are at stake or the value of their share investment it is rather convenient to push to the side any moral considerations. The corporation does seem to be emblematic of sociopathology. But, the sociopath (according to the Wikipedia page on it) has been around for a long time.

An interesting question to ask, and I mention this because I see or choose to see some people who participate here as naturally 'sociopathic'---that is, that sociopathic tendencies inform their spirituality, their desire to rise above 'the herd', and also to insist on an interpretation of life and being based in distortions of Buddhist 'nothingness' principals that, I sometimes feel, can only produce a certain kind of sickness in the individual. Sickness as achievement and sickness as symptom---but I am curious to explore Lentitudo's arrival and presence here as a 'sign' or an 'omen' that speaks, in much the way that the so-called 'unconscious' 'speaks' to us through dreams, etc., directly to certain conscious attitudes that are worn here, 'donned' so to speak, layed over the individual, insisted on as being 'truth'. These attitudes derive from 'nihilism' in much the same way the modern corpration arises from the splitting off from integrated moral principals. These are emblems or symbols of symptoms of a divided world and they operate very strongly in persons. I say they operate here too, very strongly.

Is it so far fetched to make this conection? The other side of the question is, Could Lentitudo be brought into the fold? Could he be trained, educated---converted as it were---into a truth-seeking sage? His cool, calm and steady approach, devoid apparently of the contemptible 'emotionalism' that is condemned here---that certainly places him right from the start on a higher rung than many. Isn't his lack of emotionalism, his lack of emotions, a desired end in this form of 'Buddhism' that is practiced here? (by some). Might not he also evince the necessary contempt for the female of the species? He would almost by definition HAVE to be cut off from female association. But I guess we'll have to ask him about that.

Lentitudo?

Awhile back, dicussing Jung, I brought up this aspect to 'life': the way that the so-called unconscious 'sends up' messages and messengers that are similar to the Green Scarab that comes knocking on the window of the consulting room, trying to get through the 'conscious attitudes' and reveal other levels of 'truth'.

No one else see things this way? Am I really just CrAzY after all? Is it just me against 'you' pathological hordes?

[Robert]

Ripe, isn't he Alex, for a conversion experience? Oh how mundane yet predictable that would be.

[Alex T. Jacob]

The problem of the present, Robert, in all its gory dimension, is really the problem of all of us. My personal view, my understanding, is that 'the present' is such a terrible force. By 'the present' I mean culture and the way it is going, mass culture, the tyrrany of the Herds, the rabbit-holes of 'post-modernism', escapism, all of it. The present is a terrible force that 'has its way with us'. But, if we have some capability, and let us say if we are 'masculine', we reach out for life-rafts and life-savers, or weapons of defense. Sometimes without even knowing that we are drowning, or that we are being violated, or that we are being inhabited by foreign entities (one can almost get sci-fi with the descriptions and they are not far from accurate and realistic), we sometimes grab onto whatever lies close to hand and then try to collect ourselves, if we can.

Don't you think it is fair of me to say that the positions of Q-R-S have much if not everything to do with getting hold of such a 'life-raft'? Is it fair for me to say, to believe, that the act of grabbing a life-raft is an act of desperation? Is it accurate that I say that the spirituality that is practiced here---that which we all strive for, I include myself---is essentially an 'act of desperation'? Is it accurate to say that when we act desperately we cannot necessarily take into account all the fine points, the fine modifications? Isn't it true that that comes later, down the road so to speak?

It is quite possible that Lentitudo is 'ripe for a conversion experience', and what is not, at the end of the day, mundane? You see, sometimes I see the 'life-raft' you-all define as rather 'predictable and mundane'. Not all the time, but sometimes. You seem to paint yourselves as quite special, truly unique even, and there are certainly many interesting and important ideas that are presented and discussed. But I am not, myself, completely convinced it represents an apex of 'what spirituality can be' (or is).

The question is: What is the relation, speaking in general terms, between Lentitudo's 'platform' and that of the Q-R-S? Is it a valid question? Or is it one that should just be instantly dismissed? Or, perhaps better put: In what way does Lentitudo's position mirror or 'shadow' that of the Q-R-S? I am speaking here of desperate measures, by desperate individuals, in desperate times---and we all deal with this.

[Anders Schlander]

Observation; If you actually label yourself as a Socialized Psychopath, what is it that makes other, average people, less psychotic?

I'm not psychotic, you must understand that psychopathic and psychotic are not interchangeable words. Psychotics experience a break with reality, I am fully in touch with reality. Though to answer your question, the way I see things is that if anything is psychotic it is to allow a qualitative feeling towards others cloud your judgment, that is when a break with reality occurs.

Ah, Alright.

Essentially, it seems psycopaths are 'merely' doing a form of social manipulation and narcissism to a higher degree with more consciousness. How do you think of that? The trick is, if you become more conscious, then you also start losing the need for love, or narcissism, and then the act of trying to be socially manipulative becomes less of a selfish motive.

It's true that manipulation manifests itself in every facet of society so should the possibility that psychopathy is an evolutionary change? Psychopaths are becoming more and more common in today's world. Although I suppose that in order to answer this we must ask ourselves if evolution designed to benefit the entire species or solely the one who these genetic traits present in?

No, i wouldn't say it's going to benefit humans being narcissistic manipulative and egotistic, being more conscious might allow u to break free of that, unless the causes arent there for it to occur. If a psychopath has a love of being disruptive, powerful, and manipulative, then that strikes me as an emotional need, which is akin to other ways people like to satisfy their emotional needs.

The difference is that the majority of people have emotional needs that by extension makes society worth the effort, and then there are those who have a higher degree of anti-social needs.

For example; an average person is going to be afraid of death, so he'll encounter death when he sees somebody on the street being run over by a car, he feels his own idea of death on himself, thus, he feels selfishness, if he had compassion he would not feel bad himself that he saw somebody die.

Example 2. 2nd person is not the average person, but sees people as dummies that he wishes to control for power because he wants to illeviate the idea that he *lacks* control. When somebody on the street dies, he either sees the lack of control, or he simply notes that Nature is interfering with his game of control, by doing things that aren't part of 2nd persons will.


To share another persons experience isn't possible, but it is because of the common psychology that we can infer what other people might experience. If people have vastly different psychologies, then that becomes rather difficult, in the case of a psychopath and the average person. Since two psychologies may be alike, it's not hard to imagine that person B might get an experience that resembles person A, so if person A feels terrible person B might know what it's like.

But empathy is so generally used to describe being emotionally affected by another persons emotion, rather than making an educated guess on what a person may be like psychologically.

It's like a person who feeds emotionally off another, when that other person feels sad, the 1st person also feels sad because she or he is connected. That's just selfish empathy.

[

[Ryan Rudolph]

To the Psychopath,

It seems to me that this whole business of using people for excitement, and fooling them with cunning tricks is all too immature for any intellectual, psychopath or otherwise. Anyone who plays with the emotions of others, and themselves is childish in my view, and the greatest courage would be to expose the emperor naked it he is. Basically, reveal all your magic tricks like Penn And Teller, making all psychopaths powerless. That is what good science and art does, it wakes people up, and gives them self-awareness, rather then preying on their ignorance. Such a waste of energy, and your life. The more aware one becomes, the more one realizes that every moment matters.

Stop trying to derive pride from wasting your life, and realize what is important. And your hardware/software analogy is a copeout. An intellectual can alter most delusional behavior with the aid of decent software, meaning philosophy/discipline. And you pride yourself on your ability to be vile and smooth things over with people, but with a sage, they do not feel the effects of any attempt to be vile, and so there is no need to smooth things over. Smoothing things over implies a fragile ego, and so you are wasting your time, attacking weak people. The effects of such behavior is boring and trivial at best. Any mature intellectual would not derive any sort of emotional reward from such behavior, unless they themselves still possessed some degree of delusional ego.

The difference between the seducer, the psychopath, and the sage is that the sage wants to be a lone wolf, meaning a force that may devour the odd sheep, but something new is created in the process, whereas the seducer and psychopath are content being sheep dogs, meaning content running the sheep into circles, scaring and exciting them senseless.

Aim higher than the Shepherd or sheep dog, aim for the wolf.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Aim higher than the Shepherd or sheep dog, aim for the wolf.

And only after that: aim for the child.

As for psychopaths, they do reflect average reward-based 'decent' behaviour back at us, magnified. The reason why some people stand out and receive labels like 'psychopath' appears to be simple a higher addiction to (or a more intense experiencing of) the pleasure of reward, the basic pleasure of rule and control. In more social beings pleasures like dominance or plain cruelty are most often outweighed. In my opinion psychopaths are not incapable of empathy but are just too addicted to the result of whatever their action is, to even consider not doing what they're doing. Empathy after all arises in a temporary absence of our blind desire. As if the desire or will of another takes the place of our own, when it's resting.

Lentitudo, I wonder if you ever tried breathing exercises and such meditations which can trigger extensive 'kicks'. It might at least teach you that nothing else but your own mind is needed to get what you desire. And eventually even move beyond it.

[Alex T. Jacob]

See? Didn't I tell you? Lentidudo is, in fact, ripe for conversion! But, if he is true to his name (sluggishness, dullness, apathy, insensibility) he might not be bothered with such techniques since they in fact take time and effort and will. By his own admission, and by choice should we say?---or is he the perfect example of 'caused behavior'?---he is on a trajectory that glides, slowly or quickly, who knows? to death.

I wonder if there'll come a day when the sociologist, the psychologist, the social engineer, the civil psychological authority will with a simple scan be able to know a great deal about the physiological make-up of a person, including if there is a marked tendency to sociopathology. (Or what-have-you).

And then, just by feeding some instructions into the person's microchip (it almost sounds outdated and 666-ishy) by way of a tranmission system that covers the whole earth in a Grid, will bath the core of that brain in a refreshing and tranquilizing wash of chemicals that 'will make everything alright'.

[After the dose takes effect].

Doctor: (In a voice of adult talking to Child) Lentitudo. How do you feel?
Lentitudo: (As if waking from a nightmare) Oh, hi doc. Oh yeah, I feel...great.
D: I thought you would...
L: Yeah, thanks. Wow. Um, doc?
D: Yes?
L: Can I have a kitty?
D: You'd like to have a kitty? Why?
L: I dunno. To snuggle with it. To..to..care for it. I feel...I feel...
D: What do you feel, Lentitudo?
L: I feel...(Breathlessly)
D: Yes?
L: Something like...LOVE. (With that statement there is an almost orgasmic burst of delicious chemicals from within the chip. He hears the harmonies of a celestial choir! Sees burst of yellow and orange and gold colored light). That must be what it is! Oh doc, thank you! (Tears start to flow).
D: (Thinking: God I love my job!) Well, that's great, Lentitudo. That's a wonderful thing to feel. Very...human, you know.
L: Yes, love, that must be what it's all about!
D: Just concentrate on Grid and Grid will hear you! Grid will respond!
L: That's all I have to do, doc? It's that simple?
D: It's that simple, Lentitudo! Go, and sin no more!

[Dan Rowden]

The question is: What is the relation, speaking in general terms, between Lentitudo's 'platform' and that of the Q-R-S? Is it a valid question?

If you think it's a valid question then your ignorance and, frankly, stupidity, is deeper than I ever thought.

[Alex T. Jacob]

But I restated it: "Or, perhaps better put: In what way does Lentitudo's position mirror or 'shadow' that of the Q-R-S? I am speaking here of desperate measures, by desperate individuals, in desperate times---and we all deal with this."

You left out everything before and after that rather 'unfortunate' statement.

I see certain forms of pathology that operate in many people who seek the spiritual path. You have to be unwell to want to get well. There is a peculiar relationship between 'pathology' and 'spirituality'. The so-called 'healing crisis' and all that.

[Dan Rowden]

But I restated it: "Or, perhaps better put: In what way does Lentitudo's position mirror or 'shadow' that of the Q-R-S? I am speaking here of desperate measures, by desperate individuals, in desperate times---and we all deal with this."

You left out everything before and after that rather 'unfortunate' statement.

I see certain forms of pathology that operate in many people who seek the spiritual path. You have to be unwell to want to get well. There is a peculiar relationship between 'pathology' and 'spirituality'. The so-called 'healing crisis' and all that.

It doesn't matter that I left out your "qualification". There exists no meaningful comparison. If you think there does then you don't understand my philosophy at all - not one jot nor measly tittle. To distill things down to "the so-called 'healing crisis'" is blather at its blatheristishness (sic x 10). I mean, every movement from one unwanted state to another is a form of healing crisis. Changing jobs is a healing crisis.

[Alex T. Jacob]

To understand things, so many things, you can never really rely on the surface or what is presented to you. It always seems to me that the 'truth' is under the surface. Things are not always what they seem, maybe they are rarely what they seem, and this is certainly so with people.

I say this rule should apply to GF, its philosophy and its denizens. (To me also if you wish).

What you consider 'meaningful' and privelage as such may not be so meaningful for me. Maybe I am looking for more complex or more 'thorough' meanings? Looking sideways through the chinks, perhaps.

In the lives of persons, in these times and under these conditions, the idea (or the fact) of 'healing crisis' has, I feel, a good deal of relevance.

As to understanding your philosophy---well, I certainly believe that I understand it better in comparison to other times. But I am not exclusively looking, Dan, at what is presented for public consumption or public view. Sometimes that is just 'image management'. In another thread, and one I think you participated in, I mentioned the 'submerged 7/8ths of a person'. That is, unconscious factors and motivators. I also brought up 'synchronicity' and signs and omens. I see Lentitudo as a sort of omen and sign that might be interpreted. True, I am playing a little here---par for the course---but still essentially serious.

"Changing jobs is a healing crisis."

How would you know? ;-)

[Diebert van Rhijn]

To understand things, so many things, you can never really rely on the surface or what is presented to you. It always seems to me that the 'truth' is under the surface.

Ever considered this looking sideways and behind your back might be your own disorder or deformity? There's always a lot under each surface, lift any rock and bugs, not used to the light, scurry away. But to make this ones calling, ones modus operandi: running after the bugs, this must be a leftover from the psycho-analytic beliefs you're still upholding. And yes, the more you look the more you find. And there are Freud and Jung, hoist by their own petard; lost in the mazes of their over-reflecting brains, theirs and their subjects. Not a maze one should narcistically fall in love with for too long. A healing crises ends with leaving the therapist and the supplied maze, just a temporary quest to learn something, not a place to dwell in forever.

[Alex T. Jacob]

Nice one, Diebert. And throwing in the word petard. First rate.

What I am suggesting---with humorous and irreverant notes delightful to those who have fine-tuned ears, clamorous to the rest---is that we are all products of a sort of mass psychopathology. We are the products of forces and institutions of distortion. Normalcy is in a sense the symptom of distortion. And these forces and pressures produce what I call desperation, which is I think a good and useful word. So, I suggest---again with a lighthearted and really rather delightful flourish of suggestions---that intelligent, thoughtful persons could if they wanted to examine Lentitudo's arrival here as a sort of 'sign' or a 'message'. Naturally, I am following up on the (not so very well received) anectdote of Dr Jung, after hearing his patient's dream about a Green Scarab and hearing a scratching at the window and finding a beetle there, just at that moment, surprisingly, which he then hands to his patient saying, 'Here is your Greeen Scarab'. (The suggestion being---and mark this one and all---that there are Greater Forces in operation around us that can and do communicate with us; that the conscious mind is (or is it not?) just an Island floating upon something far larger; and that if this conscious mind (or conscious attitude) is fortified against the Truths that come from the Surrounding Greater, that sometimes the Surrounding Greater turns into ('must turn into') a kind of battering ram that beats on our door trying to get through to us.)

Now, you ask: "Ever considered this looking sideways and behind your back might be your own disorder or deformity?" And I would say that I have looked at many ideas and attitudes and stances as being potentially disordered and/or deformed. If I am asserting that, in so many ways, 'pathology' has produced us, why not? What's to fear?

And yet, and yet, I must admit that I find it odd to compare your assertion of pathology on my part and the raising of these questions like a kid raising rocks in the fields, to the oft-rehearsed assertion here that we should look upon all phenomena of life, including ourselves, as essential illusions, empty things, like congealed fog, with no substance, etc. To deliberately 'lay over the eyes' such a view-structure and to do it in such a way that there is no longer anything to be related to in life, might be seen (just might) as a kind of pathology worth examination. I suppose I suggest that this might be described as a desperate pathology to combat the madness of a pathological system. (Or something like that...)

[What caused Lentitudo?]

The same might be said with the Weininger lens with which the female is universally viewed, and quite a group of things really.

In short, it is not at all a bad idea to question and examine---to interrogate---and, if you wish, to lift the toga and see what is underneath.

Now, as to Jung and Freud (or Marx, old bean!), anyone with two eyes in their head and a swinging dick knows that we of the West tend to be a weeeeeeeee bit obsessive with our catagories, but if one retreats to a quiet promintory, takes a few deep breaths, and with a relaxed heart just allows the landscape to flow in and out of one, and the curling clouds, and the light, humid aromas that rise from the grass, one can for a few moments at least lift the spell of obsession.

Diebert wrote: "A healing crises ends with leaving the therapist and the supplied maze, just a temporary quest to learn something, not a place to dwell in forever."

Well, all I can say is we are all so very much in the labyrinth, isn't this true?

One should only leave an idea behind when it no longer serves.

Let's all sing along.
______________________________________

"The French used pétard, "a loud discharge of intestinal gas," for a kind of infernal engine for blasting through the gates of a city. "To be hoist by one's own petard," a now proverbial phrase apparently originating with Shakespeare's Hamlet (around 1604) not long after the word entered English (around 1598), means "to blow oneself up with one's own bomb, be undone by one's own devices." The French noun pet, "fart," developed regularly from the Latin noun pditum, from the Indo-European root *pezd-, "fart."

[Robert]

It is quite possible that Lentitudo is 'ripe for a conversion experience', and what is not, at the end of the day, mundane? You see, sometimes I see the 'life-raft' you-all define as rather 'predictable and mundane'. Not all the time, but sometimes. You seem to paint yourselves as quite special, truly unique even, and there are certainly many interesting and important ideas that are presented and discussed. But I am not, myself, completely convinced it represents an apex of 'what spirituality can be' (or is).

I think what you see as the 'special ones' is entirely an invention of your own, bound within a will to frame every word and idea expressed here as verging on heresy, like some modern day Irenaeus.

As for pétard, it also has various other uses, like "un gros pétard" can mean either a particulalry large arse, or a spliff.

And I have a suspicion that Lentitudo is actually dejavu in disguise.

[Robert]

Lentitudo is not me you gross petard.

I walked right into that one.

[Alex T. Jacob]

In actual fact I find I am in communion with many ideas, attitudes, choices and solutions offered up by Quinn, Rowden and Solway, and others here.

But if I had my choice I would rather be identified with the Prophets, say Amos. I think Diebert has an Irenaeus function as the New Religion is formed and disseminated. I feel more like a Captain Ahab.

Je vais me rouler un gros pétard. Laisse-moi rire.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

.... examine Lentitudo's arrival here as a sort of 'sign' or a 'message'.

Why not just understanding this forum attracts a steady stream of different types? Why highlight one and put SIGN on it? This is the same trick as Jung's "green scarab". It seems a disability, or disinterest on your side to deal with the random elements. Or a need to somehow forcefully insert ('ram') your idea into a discussion. The same stuff again and again.

Too much magical thought here Alex, could easily lead to paranoid schizophrenia. Watch your back! Perhaps this is why you're here at this forum, this unconscious desire to be cured of your fantasies, to sober up once and for all!

Lets not forget that a psychopath is not lacking something, some emotion or sense, he's got too much of something, some feeling, some blissful pleasure which trained him like one of Pavlov's dogs. In that sense he's in the same boat as everyone else, only a boat which doesn't jell well with social structures of trust and moral order.

In short, it is not at all a bad idea to question and examine---to interrogate---and, if you wish, to lift the toga and see what is underneath.

But there's a perversive and possibly addictive element to that quest. Often we see what we like or expect to see. In that sense it can certainly be a bad habit, to assume so much. Another habit, another Pavlovian dog!

[Alex T. Jacob]

Oh, Diebert. If I were CrAzY I wouldn't like this song so much, now would I? I be putting up that weird Bela Lagosi shit like Deja-vu.

It's not a steady stream of different types, but rather a steady stream of similar types. The key to gaining power here---knowledge that becomes power---and becoming first a Sheep Dog then a Wolf in Sheep's Clothing and then A Child, is in understanding just that.

I'm doing productive work here, Diebert.

Merde alors: Tu vas a fumer un gros joint avec nous ou QUOI?

This one goes out to Lentitudo...

[Diebert van Rhijn]

It's not a steady stream of different types, but rather a steady stream of similar types.

You mean that the overwhelming majority doesn't have the capacity, or the will, to utter some serious thought? True, it's so easy to joke, to derail, or to blather to oneself. It's to be expected and indeed holds a key to some understanding. But perhaps this is not what you meant :-)

[Alex T. Jacob]

The real trick is uttering deeply serious thought with deeply humorous thought. You get to go from Sheep Dog to Wolf when you can pull that off.

This is a canine day-care camp if you ask me.

[Ryan Rudolph]

diebert,

And only after that: aim for the child.

I suppose you should go into why you feel the metaphor of child incorporates more enlighened traits of the metaphor wolf.

Because when I think of child, I think of blind desire, impulsive behavior, boredom, desire to use others to get their own way, inability to consider the feelings of others, desire for constant attention, excitement and entertainment, and so on. Favorable qualities include being carefree, curious about the world, and without a lot of programming or conditioning.

However, wolf fits because the wolf is a loner, adapted to survive in a harsh environment, the wolf preys on others, but from afar. The wolf is not the most glamorous thing to look at, but when you examine him closer, one realizes how fascinating he is. Many Wolf species rarely travel in packs, but will if conditions warrant it. The wolf represents one of the oldest evolutionary lines of successful terrestrial mammals, which are top tier predators. They are the modern day velociraptor, akin to what the bald eagle is in the sky. I like the imagery better than the child, the child seems so needy, dependent, and underdeveloped.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Because when I think of child, I think of blind desire, impulsive behavior, ....

And a predator animal is not driven and impulsive, ruled mostly by deeper lying instinct?

However, wolf fits because the wolf is a loner,

Actually the wolf would be more famous for his preference for social cohesion and structure, the alpha, beta and omega roles in the pack. The lone wolf is an exception caused by old age, or a stage in between searching for a pack. This pack mentality makes the domesticated version, the dog, such a success to bond with people and also busy families.

There's a lot to admire in a wolf though or any predatory animal for their wits, traces of thoughtfulness, their careful, deliberate appearing action and so on.

But the portrayal of the child as a different stage has to do with developing consciousness, a curiosity and flexibility and especially the possibility to learn and evolve when put into the right environment. Not talking about the spoiled child or one with emotional scars. It's the child who can work things out and potentially dominate all the species, by merely understanding their nature and working with that.

Mostly the metaphor tries to show the transition from animal, 'blind' consciousness to a more enlightened one, a mind with a spark. The reason a child is preferred as symbol is to make it more open-ended, to stretch the need for much development even after one manages to go beyond the herd instinct, beyond the cow like existence revolving around its stomachs or the wolf like existence of never ending chase for prey and securing of hierarchical position.

[Alex T. Jacob]

The Child
The Child
The Child

Mother and Child
Mother and Child
______________________________________________________

Chance and chance alone has a message for us. Everything that occurs out of necessity, everything expected, repeated day in and day out, is mute. Only chance can speak to us. We read its messages much as gypsies read the images made by coffee grounds at the bottom of a cup. ---Milan Kundera
______________________________________________________

Did I ever tell you guys the story of Coyote and the Shadow People?

Long ago, or maybe not so long ago, Coyote was dwelled happily with his wife. But she became ill. She died. Coyote became very, very lonely and did nothing at all but weep for his wife.

Well, then there came along the Spirit of Death who said:
"Coyote, do you pine for your dead wife?"
"O yes yes, how I pine for her!"
"I could take you to the place where your wife has gone, but..."
"But what?!" asked Coyote, desperate.
"...but I tell you: you must do everything exactly as I tell you, not once are you to disregard my commands and do something else!"
"Yes!" replied Coyote. "Of course! I will obey and do everything you say! What else could I do?"
So, the Ghost told him: "Well then, prepare yourself and let us go".
"Yes, let it be so that we are going..."
And off they went [See Coyote with an uplifted outlook heading off with the Spirit of Death].

Going along, Death reminded Coyote he must do everything exactly as he said. He must not disobey. Coyote replied, "Yes, yes, friend. No doubts there. I have been pining so deeply, why should I not heed you?" Coyote could not see the Spirit of Death because he was invisible, or rather he appeared only as a sort of shadow, a warp in the air. They started out across a plain. "Oh! There are many horses" said the Spirit of Death. "It looks like a roundup! Yip-yip ya-hay!" "Yes", replied Coyote though in fact he saw nothing, just the plains grasses bent over in the wind and the hawks circling overhead. "Yes, many horses!" he said.

They were now coming near to the place of the dead. The Ghost knew that Coyote could see nothing but he said: "Look! Such abundant quantities of service berries! Let's pick some to eat! Now, when you see me reach up you will reach up too and when I pull down the limb you too will pull down a limb". "Yes" said Coyote. "So be it. Thus will I do". And the Ghost reached up to pull down a branch and Coyote did the same. Though he saw nothing he imitated the Ghost as he put his hand to and from the branch in the manner of eating. And in this way they picked and ate the berries. Coyote watched him carefully and imitated very movement, every gesture. When the Ghost put his hand to his mouth Coyote did the same. "Such good berries these are!" said the Ghost. "Yes, friend, it is good that we came upon them" agreed Coyote. "Now let us continue" said Ghost. And on they went. [See them going, over rolling hills, beside riverbeds. Feel the heat of the sun bearing down on them].

"We are about to arrive, Coyote" the ghost told him. "There is a long, very very long Lodge. Your wife is there somewhere. Just you wait here and let me go and ask someone". Coyote sat back on his haunches, panting, and waited patiently. Soon Ghost returned and he said to Coyote: "Yes, they have told me where your wife is. We are now coming to a door through which we will enter. You will do in every way exactly what you see me do. I will take hold of the door flap, raise it up, and bending low, will enter. Then you too will take hold of the door flap and do all the same". And thus they proceded in this manner to enter.

It happened that Coyote's wife was sitting right near the entrance. The Ghost said to Coyote, "Sit here beside your wife". They both sat. The Ghost added, "Your wife is now going to prepare us some food". Coyote could see nothing, except that he was sitting on the open prairie where nothing was in sight, Except that he could feel the presence of the Ghost. "Now she has prepared our food, let us eat". The Ghost reached down and then brought his hand to his mouth. Coyote saw nothing but the dust of the prairie and bits of dried grass. They ate. Coyote imitated all the movements of his companion. When they had finished and the woman had apparently put all the food away the Ghost said to Coyote: "You stay here. I must go and see some people".

[Here there will be a brief intermission. Get up, stretch, walk around a bit. Oh and Dan, I was thinking this morning: You say that I don't understand your spirituality, 'one tittle' I think is how you put it. But you know it occurred to me that YOU might not exacly understand your own spirituality. In the sense of understanding from an outside position, viewed in a wide sense. It's like you know all the lines of it, the form, but...Oh drat! The curtain's gone up. Let's watch:]

Ghost wasn't gone long. When he came back he explained: "Here, we have different conditions than those you have in the land of the living. When it gets dark here it has just dawned in your land, and when it dawns in your land, here dusk falls". And now it began to grow dark and Coyote seemed to hear people whispering, talking in undertones, a very subtle clamor of speech, all around him. Then darkness set in. OH! Coyote oll of a sudden saw so many fires in the longhouse. And he saw the many peoples. They seemed to have shadow-like forms but, yes, he could recognize the different people. And he saw his wife sitting there by his side!

He was overjoyed! He jumped on his heels, he did flips, pirouttes, and licked her all over her face. And he saw all his old friends who had died long ago. How happy he was! He would march up and down between the fires, going here and going there, talking to everyone. This he did all throughout the night. Now, he could SEE the doorway through which he had entered with his friend. He could see it there. At last, the dawn came and his friend said to him: "Coyote, our night is falling and in a little while you will not see us. But you must stay right here. Do not go anywhere at all. Stay right here and in the evening you will see all the people again". "Yes, friend" said Coyote with calm gratitude, "I will stay right here. What else could I do?"

The dawn came and Coyote found himself sitting alone there in the middle of the prairie. He looked all around, a great circle, and there he was. He spent the whole day there, justdying in the heat, parched from the heat, thirsting from the heat. But when the dusk came, all over again, a world appeared to him. And Coyote remained there for many days. He would suffer through the heat of the day but at night would make merry in the lodge.

One day his Ghost friend said to him: "Tomorrow you will go home. You will take your wife with you'. "Yes, friend", replied Coyote, 'but I like it here so much. I am having such a good time and I should like to remain here!". "Yes", said the Ghost. "Nevertheless, you will go tomorrow, and you must guard against every inclination to do foolish things. Do not yield to any queer notions. I will advise you in a rational manner what you are to do: There are Five Mountains. You will travel for Five Days. Your wife will be with you but you must never, never touch her! Do not let any strange impulses possess you. You may talk to her but never touch her. Only after you have corssed and descended from the Fifth Mountain may you do whatever you like". "Yes, friend" replied Coyote.

When dawn came, Coyote and his wife started out. At first it seemed to him he was going along alone but he was dimly aware of his wife's presence as she walked along behind. They crossed one mountain and now Coyote could feel her more definitely. Like a shadow she seemed. Then they went on to cross the Second Mountain. They camped each night at the foot of the mountain. They had a little conical lodge they'd set up each night. And Coyote's wife would sit on one side of the fire and he on the other. Her form appeared clearer and clearer.

[The Ghost of Death, far away now, thought of Coyote from time to time and counted the days since they had departed. "I hope he will do everything right and take his wife through to the world beyond!" he kept saying to himself].

So, Coyote and his wife were spending their last night, their forth camping, and he knew that on the morrow she would fully assume the character and form of a living person. They were camping for the last time and Coyote could see her almost distinctly, almost as if she were a real person sitting across from him. He could see her face and form very clearly, but he only looked and dared not touch her. But suddenly, a joyous impulse seized him; the joy of having his dead wife with him again! He jumped to his feet and rushed over to her to embrace her. His wife, horrified, cried out: "Stop! Don't!" but the warning had no effect. Coyote rushed over to his wife and just in the exact second he touched her she disappered and receded away. Gone! Returned to Shadowland.

When the Ghost of Death heard of Coyote's folly he became deeply angry. "You inveterate fool! You idiotic doer of just this kind of thing! I TOLD you not to do anything foolish. You, Coyote, were about to establsih the practice of returning from death to the world of the living. You were right on the verge of it, but now you have spolied everything and for eveyone now death will be as it always has!"

Here Coyote wept bitter, desperate tears. But he decided: "Tomorrow I shall return on my own to see them all again". He started back across the plains and as he went out he recognized the places he and the spirit had passed. He found the place where the Ghost had seen the herd of horses, and he began to do the same things they had done on their way to Shadowland: "Oh, look at the horses! it looks like a round-up! Yip-yip ya-hay!" He went on till he came to the place where the Ghost had found the service berries. "Oh, such choice service berries! Let us pick and eat some!" And he went through the motions of pulling down the invisible branch and plucking off the berries.

He went on and finally came to the place where the long lodge had stood. He said to himself: "Now, when I take hold of the door-flap and raise it up you must do the same". Coyote remembered all the little things his friend had done. He saw the spot where he had sat. He went there and sat down again and said, "Now your wife has brought us food. Let us eat". And he went through the motions of eating. Darkness rose up in the East and covered him over like a deep blue blanket with pinpricks of stars. Coyote listened for the voices, and he looked all around, but nothing appeared, and he sat there alone in the middle of the prairie. He sat there all night and for many nights but the lodge didn't appear again nor did the Ghost ever return to him.

[Lentitudo]

Looks like there's a lot here for me to digest and respond to, I'll get around to it within the next few hours.