GAS and Buddhism

[Tuolumne]

After looking at Nick De Marco's photos of "The Novices of Luang Prebang", I searched around the Web for more information on Buddhist monks and Buddhism. I found this on Buddhanet on the Realm of the Ego, which I thought was the best description of GAS I had ever read. Can you be a Buddhist and a member of RFF at the same time? I wonder...

"If ego decides it likes the situation, it begins to churn up all sorts of ways to possess it. A craving to consume the situation arises and we long to satisfy that craving. Once we do, a ghost of that craving carries over and we look around for something else to consume. We get into the habitual pattern of becoming consumer oriented. Perhaps we order a piece of software for our computer. We play with it for awhile, until the novelty wears out, and then we look around for the next piece of software that has the magic glow of not being possessed yet. Soon we haven't even got the shrink wrap off the current package when we start looking for the next one. Owning the software and using it doesn't seem to be as important as wanting it, looking forward to its arrival. This is known as the hungry ghost realm where we have made an occupation out of craving. We can never find satisfaction, it is like drinking salt water to quench our thirst."

/T

[shimo-kitasnap]

I am......

was a monk for 2 weeks last december, standard procedure for Thai men at age 20.

Since being a monk, i've realized that I don't need nearly as much as I had. I've simplified everything to one body, 3 focal lengths.....wide, fast normal, short tele. That's it. I feel much better about myself and enjoy actually taking pictures again instead of worrying about what it might be like to use that body with this lens or this and that and such and such........

[Kevin]

Khun Shimo, one advantage to having tons of gear is that you can take what you feel are the best tools for a particular assignment.

[noimmunity]

Can you be a Buddhist and a member of RFF at the same time?

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3295/2418676126_65d911d831.jpg
one corner of my home altar...

[chikne]

Since we know that craving for something is actually more important than actually being in possession of it, we just need a way to maintain the crave without actually consuming anything.

So how can this be achieved?

[xayraa33]

I say it all does not matter.

[Arvay]

Silly question maybe, but what's GAS??

[chikne]

Silly question maybe, but what's GAS??

It's an acronym for Gear Acquisition Syndrome =)

[ClaremontPhoto]

GAS is some people here buying and selling cameras instead of using them.

They say GAS is 'Gear Acquisition Syndrome'.

Some of us just let them them play with themselves.

[Nikon Bob]

Anyone who has been divorced knows how simple life can get very quickly in a sort of monk like way. You learn to enjoy what you got left and can have GAS without it costing you a thing.

Bob

[Arvay]

chikne (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=5787), ClaremontPhoto (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=3436)

Thanks! Had no idea reading and was too shy to ask :)

[noimmunity]

Too materialist, let it go.
My altar.

Your altar is very nice!

I like that picture of the clouds very much, because in Tibetan Buddhism we have a practice called "sky practice". But to tell you the truth, the first reaction I had to that picture was to laugh at the humorous way it implicitly connects GAS to gaseous white clouds (in Japanese, for instance, white mist or fog in the mountains is called "gas").

On a more serious note: As many respected teachers would remind us, Buddhism ought not to be understood simply as a call to ascetic anti-materialism. Even in the refusal of materialism we still find subtle forms of materialism--what has been called "spiritual materialism".

I had assumed this thread was asking about a relation to Buddhism, but I now see that it is really about the anxiety some people feel in the face of consumerism and possessive individualism.

Surely it is necessary to come to terms with the problems of consumerism on a personal level. But the problem cannot be fully dealt with simply as an individual moral issue. It is also a social, economic, and political issue. We need critical knowledge and social cooperation.

[Rey]

I think that it is a danger to use GAS as a path to happiness. As the quote indicates, attachment and possessiveness provide only fleeting results. That said, I often go through GAS, and I have several camera kits. Yes, the intitial rush I get with a new camera or lens does fade, but the knowledge I gain from using these cameras will not. I came late to photography and a large part of my GAS is the experience of using classic cameras.

[BillP]

GAS is simply sugar-rush satisfaction. Quick burn, short high, followed by pangs of regret. A bit like eating tiramisu. Where many go wrong is to mistake material wealth for personal happiness. Making yourself feel better through "retail therapy" does not address the root cause of your dissatisfaction. Until you can face up to your own shortcomings, and be happy in yourself, you will waste time, money and effort in meaningless, self-gratifying retail gestures.

Regards,

Bill

[chikne]

So what's on ebay.....

[Martini]

Camera equipment does not give me the sense of satisfaction
and well-being that creating a good image with it does.

[tripod]

Bill, I think you need to find religion. You seem lost and directionless. ;)

[BillP]

My money, my time, my effort, and I decide if if my 'self gratifying retail gestures' are 'meaningless' or not.

So many people want to tell me how to properly run my life. So few will ever get that opportunity.

Bill, I have no desire whatsoever to tell you how to run your life. Whatever floats your boat. But I find happiness in more sustainable ways.

Regards,

Bill

[back alley]

ok, everyone sing along...

just give me that old time religion!

no, huh?

[MikeL]

just give me that old time religion!



You mean moonshine?

[Tuolumne]

Since I am the OP, I will say that I intended this post entirely in a philosophical vein, not targeting even practicing Buddhists. I thought the quote I found while learning more about Buddhism was a remarkable phenomenological description of how lust for things ("just waiting for the mail" thread, for example) feels and works. What you want to make do with it in your lives is entirely up to you.

My personal experience is that every time I have lusted for and acquired a new camera, it hasn't exactly satisfied what I was looking for. My first real camera was a Minolta X-700 in the early '80s. I really loved that camera and took some wonderful photos with it. I thought, if this camera is good and helps me take great pictures, just imagine how good/what fun I'll have with the much better "Camera X from Manufacturer Y". In my case that was a Nikon FE, followed by an FE2, followed many years later by an FM3a, followed shortly later by a host of rangefinder cameras.

You know what. Those are great cameras but they never captured the joy I felt in using that X-700. I try to remember that every time I want a new photo goodie.

"The more possessions, the more worry." - Pirke Avot

/T

[shimo-kitasnap]

happiness is a warm.....camera

[xayraa33]

Since I am the OP, I will say that I intended this post entirely in a philosophical vein, not targeting even practicing Buddhists. I thought the quote I found while learning more about Buddhism was a remarkable phenomenological description of how lust for things ("just waiting for the mail" thread, for example) feels and works. What you want to make do with it in your lives is entirely up to you.

My personal experience is that every time I have lusted for and acquired a new camera, it hasn't exactly satisfied what I was looking for. My first real camera was a Minolta X-700 in the early '80s. I really loved that camera and took some wonderful photos with it. I thought, if this camera is good and helps me take great pictures, just imagine how good/what fun I'll have with the much better "Camera X from Manufacturer Y". In my case that was a Nikon FE, followed by an FE2, followed many years later by an FM3a, followed shortly later by a host of rangefinder cameras.

You know what. Those are great cameras but they never captured the joy I felt in using that X-700. I try to remember that every time I want a new photo goodie.

"The more possessions, the more worry." - Pirke Avot

/T

I know the feeling, my first good camera was a Praktica with a 50mm Zeiss Tessar lens.
I always got the impression that my later cameras were no better than that Praktica.

[georgef]

My money, my time, my effort, and I decide if if my 'self gratifying retail gestures' are 'meaningless' or not.

With four "my's" in that sentence, your point is clearly received :)


Interesting post Tuolumme by the way...I got the chance to read extensively His Holiness' teachings this past year which has turned my outlook (and in-look if thats a word) to a very clear understanding of my life in general. I cant say I am a practicing budhist, but it does reflect my core ideology quite well; maybe one day.

My personal point here (and I am NOT telling anyone how to live theirs) is that in the past year I have gotten rid probably about 20 pieces of camera equipment between DSLRs, glass etc. and am now "down" to my RD1 and four lenses....and I have taken more pics this year than many in a long time!:):)

[williams473]

I think this was a really good original post - the fact that so many of us can directly relate to this "GAS" syndrome (which I too have!) shows me that it is a real problem, and I agree with the OP, that it probably reflects a lack of meaningfulness in life for many of us.

I mean, come on, if we're honest, how many times have you been having some beers with your best friend and gone down the "what's the point of all this" discussion? Me - lots of times.

I find I indulge my GAS on Ebay at work mostly, which points to the fact that I feel that what I do (computers) is in the end, pretty pointless. When I'm at home with my kids and wife, or hiking or fishing, I don't feel I need anything. That's because those activities put me in touch with those I love, and God/Nature - both of which don't breed unhealthy, unnatural habits. you show me someone truly close to God, whether it's a Buddhist or a Baptist, and I'll show you someone who is fairly satisfied and at peace.

[oscroft]

I mean, come on, if we're honest, how many times have you been having some beers with your best friend and gone down the "what's the point of all this" discussion? Me - lots of times.
Since I came to accept the utter pointlessness of it all, never - it was a liberating realisation.

[sliceoflight]

Good point, Matt. I struggle with the desire to acquire and test out new toys on the one hand, and focus on photography as a means to interpret and become more deeply involved with life/nature/God on the other. Ultimately, I think I know which one brings me more peace and satisfaction.

By the way, the pictures in your gallery prove your heart's intentions. They are impressive.

Ming

[Tuolumne]

I don't mean to lecture or tell anyone what to do, I did intend this as a "think about this" thread, but for myself, I shudder when I read in the Wall Street Journal, NY Times, etc. that the US and therefore the global economy depends on the spending of the US consumer. I am tired of spending, and not just because I am out of money. I am tired of my house filling up with unused or less-than-half used junk. I am tired of installing stuff on my computer and spending hours making it work. I am tired of lusting after things that make me miserable when I don't have them but don't make me happy when I do. I am tired of being manipulated by advertisers, even the nice ones here. And... I am an avowed capitalist, former venture investor, and start-up advisor. I am still tired of it all.

Can it really be true that my future economic well being depends on the endless treadmill of consumer acquisition? Because if consumers stop spending, now in the US, soon in China and India, the economy will fall apart and everyone except hedge fund managers, doctors and lawyers will be out of work!?

I don't know...I don't know. Stop the world - I want to get off.

/T

[tripod]

I'm not sure that capitalism is an environmentally sustainable system. Certainly not in its present form.

It is so entrenched, that I fear that a significant "market adjustment" is necessary.

Our limited and finite global oil supplies will force a change eventually.

[Al Patterson]

No, *I* find happiness in more sustainable ways.

One can argue with the meaning of the word "sustainable", since this is a philosophy forum.

I know that for some it means use almost nothing. I prefer to think that as long as I can sustain my lifestyle on my income, I needn't change. Although I do have way too many books laying about. I need to plant a few acres of trees to even things out a bit.

[Nh3]

Subconsciously we feel that by addressing a desire we better our life. That's why we indulge in GAS, go for a holiday or in the case of Spitzer seek the service of pricey call girls.

Unfortunately as well all know the pleasure is temporary and soon the novelty wears off and we begin looking for the next thrill.

Suffering comes with desire.

[tripod]

Spending money on an experience is sometimes better than on another thing.

[BillP]

Spending money on an experience is sometimes better than on another thing.

Quite.

For the price of a lens I can travel somewhere I have never been before, see things I have never seen before. Experience a different culture. Be intrigued, engaged, refreshed and rejuvenated. Be stimulated to shoot, and make the most of what I have. Feed my mind, and my soul.

I can sell a lens. I cannot sell a memory.

Regards,

Bill

[williams473]

That is so true - and with the price of fuel going through the roof this summer, it truely will cost me the price of a lens to go on some of my wilderness expeditions :)

[edrodgers731]

I have always suffered with GAS.. (sounds funny when you say it like that.)

I have been using my new M8 for a month now with only one lens, and barely thought about any other camera. I keep it with me whenever I go out. I have really enjoyed sinking myself into it. Now I have gone and bought a second lens which arrived last night.

So leaving the house this morning I felt a bit of pain. Which lens do I bring?

It's only interesting to me because this is the first time I have felt that pain since the 80s when I only had one camera and one lens at a time.

Since then, I've always had several bodies and several lenses, and I got used to bringing a case along with a good selection of lenses and flashes, etc.

It's as if buying this new system has simplified my life because it temporarily eliminated choices. So, if I can just keep this system to a minimum, I think it will actually clear my head a bit and let me concentrate on making photographs. For a while.

I love keeping things simple, but unfortunately, I also love new experiences. There's always that pull to see what another camera is like. I wonder what I could do with an 8x10 camera? :)

[back alley]

i like simple and i also like to try different things when it comes to gear.

i don't need to be an expert but i do like to speak from some experience.

my gear now is in 3 seperate kits that rarely co-mingle, it helps keep me sane.

i don't follow any religion or organized philosophy. i prefer to keep thinks simple and sane and i do so except for when i lose my temper...then all bets are off.

gear does not make me happy although i do enjoy using it.

being organized with my gear makes me happy though.

joe

[georgef]

I'm not sure that capitalism is an environmentally sustainable system. Certainly not in its present form.

...just llike cancer: it drives itself until total organism anihilation...
"...there's nothing new under the sun..."

I think we need another forum: PHILOSOPHY NON-PHOTO!

[tripod]

So you’re really serious, you really gonna quit?
“GAS”? Most definitely.
So if you’re quitting the GAS, what will you do?
Basically I’m just gonna walk the earth
What do you mean, walk the earth?
You know, like Caine in kung fu. Walk from place to place, meet people, get into adventures.

...take only memories and leave only footprints.

[Tuolumne]

It does, since very few of you are farmers I assume? Unless you create your own wealth, you must sell something to someone else that they may or may not need.

How else do you expect to live? What are you planning on trading the farmer and the oil driller for his products? Photographs?

The subsistence farmers shall inherit the earth. They will. I read it in New Scientist.

/T

[noimmunity]

Is this another thread in which the people living in the global North gain an inkling of awareness about the voraciously predatory nature of the social formations in which they live?

Just one example among many we could cite: one country with but 5% of the global population accounts for 30-40% of annual consumption of irreplaceable fossil fuels...

If you look around the world, what mets your eyes is really an updated version of classical imperialism in the age of the knowledge economy, where intellectual property laws and IMF-guaranteed loans are used to extract profits from a global ‘South of the Border’.

Taking the question of consumerism as an exclusively moral question for the individual (to GAS or not to GAS?) means that we still haven't abandoned selfish concerns. I submit that in addition to this moral awareness ('less is more'), it is also high time for people in the North and other centers of accelerated consumption to begin imagining an entirely different future, a turn awy from war, social inequity, and ecological collapse. And if it’s impossible to use old institutions for anything but intellectual exclusion and self-fetishization, then it’s time to start up new ones, where there’s some room to think among the debris of the future.

[noimmunity]

What are you planning on trading the farmer and the oil driller for his products? Photographs?

Funny you mention that. There has been quite a bit of study about the relation between images, including photographs, and capital accumulation.

Guy Debord's "Society of the Spectacle" (1967) is but one of the famous examples...

[BillP]

America is not the only consumerist nation in the northern hemisphere.

Far from it, sadly.

Regards,

Bill

[BillP]

You say that like its a bad thing.

Quite.

Regards,

Bill

[BillP]

I enjoy it? I am having trouble experiencing feelings of guilt for enjoying my life.

That will be a great comfort to my son's generation when they are dealing with the consequences of your enjoyment today.

Regards,

Bill

[xayraa33]

I enjoy it? I am having trouble experiencing feelings of guilt for enjoying my life.

Enjoy your life to the fullest Bill.
Enjoy it more than a Buddhist KofC :)

[Tuolumne]

And if it’s impossible to use old institutions for anything but intellectual exclusion and self-fetishization, then it’s time to start up new ones, where there’s some room to think among the debris of the future.

This worked really well in the last century, didn't it. :p

/T

[xayraa33]

Shh, don't tell people I'm a Knight. They think I only care for myself.

I am sorry Bill, I should have kept my mouth shut.

[Tuolumne]

I hate like hell to agree with Bill (just on principal) but the planet will survive, maybe without humans, but someone will pop up to replace us in the next few million years.

To quote a famous philosopher: "I'd like to share a revelation that I've had during my time here. It came to me when I tried to classify your species and I realized that you're not actually mammals. Every mammal on this planet instinctively develops a natural equilibrium with the surrounding environment but you humans do not. You move to an area and you multiply and multiply until every natural resource is consumed and the only way you can survive is to spread to another area. There is another organism on this planet that follows the same pattern. Do you know what it is? A virus. Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet."

LoL. I know who said that: Norman Vincent Peele in "The Power of Positive Thinking"!

/T

[Al Patterson]

I find it amusing to think that we humans think we can destroy the planet. True, we may take ourselves out of the picture, but at some point the planet will remove a lot of the evidence that we were ever here, and start over again.

Until then, I'm going to live my life as I see fit. No guilt. If you feel guilty, modify your own life.

[xayraa33]

I find it amusing to think that we humans think we can destroy the planet. True, we may take ourselves out of the picture, but at some point the planet will remove a lot of the evidence that we were ever here, and start over again.



Very true, the Green Man is one powerful entity.

[Al Patterson]

Very groovy, Al. After all, we're long past due for another extinction event in the form of a meteor or comet doing the horizontal bop with old Gaia. Anything could happen, but we might also live happily ever after. And wouldn't that make some folks steamed?

Sure, and maybe that steam can hold off the next Ice Age...

;)

[Al Patterson]

This planet WILL be better off once WE have gone, but Should we sit in our own filth while waiting for the end?

I'm not sitting in filth either. It is true we have a way to go, but the rivers and air are much cleaner in large parts of the USA now than they were 30 years ago. And I hope that trend continues.

[Al Patterson]

Works for me, but frankly, I'm hoping some of that Global Warming gets going pretty soon. Land is cheap up north, and it will become the new temperate zone if we melt those polar ice caps and flood the coasts. Hey, I say Global Warming: It's about time!

Well, if the southern part of New Jersey were to flood, my house in North Wilmington could end up as beachfront property...

[xayraa33]

Works for me, but frankly, I'm hoping some of that Global Warming gets going pretty soon. Land is cheap up north, and it will become the new temperate zone if we melt those polar ice caps and flood the coasts. Hey, I say Global Warming: It's about time!

The family has got a few acres just north of Hearst Ontario that might interest you Bill.
Lots of good hunting and fishing up there in G_d's country.

[xayraa33]

I'm thinking U.P., myself. Nothing against Canada, you know, but I likes me them Stars and Stripes.

Oh I understand, remember, we always gave refuge to our American cousins,Eg: if they ever wanted to avoid serving in an unpopular war, or not spend seven years in the gaol for enjoying a marihuana cigarillo.

[back alley]

whats u.p.?

[Nikon Bob]

whats u.p.?

As a guess, I think Bill means Michigan's Upper Peninsula.

Bob

Just a hair late I see, sorry.

[xayraa33]

You can have those guys. I served and proud of it, and have managed to keep my mind-altering substances limited to the adult beverages. Everybody makes choices, mine was loyalty to the country where I was born and have thrived. Everybody else's country is cool, no problems - I just like mine and want to stay, is all.
Yep
Those guys are ok too.
it was the right choice they made for themselves.
Like it was the right choice for those that served and still serve their country.
http://archives.cbc.ca/war_conflict/vietnam_war/topics/348/

[xayraa33]

I don't have any problem with those who went to Canada, save one - I don't think they should have been let back in again. Choices. They made theirs, and good on 'em. Hope they have long and happy lives. But stay gone. I really disliked the amnesty. Please understand - not personal. I would have a beer with any of those guys - in Canada.

I understand Bill, someone who served their country would find it hard to accept the ones who fled north, then returned back home years later.

Ah, but if one has a daddy that can help one avoid that stigma to a certain degree, things will go ok.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyFdZqWDn3c

[xayraa33]

Don't make presumptions like that, please. I'm not a fan of the current US president. My objection to draft dodgers who fled and then returned under the provisions of amnesty remain clean - I do not make excuses for fortunate sons, they have as little of my respect as I can manage.

GWB is certainly no Ike, but these things will always happen.

[tripod]

Your view of the big picture may be different Bill, if you had children. Having children makes one less selfish and more thoughtful of the future. Parents and grandparents naturally have a greater investment in the future.
Time for bed.

[tripod]

Be that as it may - I have no children and never will. For a being who is ultimately selfish, I actually chose not to inflict my DNA on the world. How's that square with your world-view?

Many thanks, Bill! ;)

[xayraa33]

Yes, the 'greater evil' argument. Sorry, that's a logical bugaboo - it doesn't fly.

To me, that's akin to saying let's forgive all the muggers, there are rapists out there. No. Muggers are bad too. I forgive - I am not angry - but I believe in my heart that those who chose to leave should have stayed gone. They made a choice and turned their backs on our nation, and there is a price for that.

Alot of the Indochina war evaders did alright with their lives up here in Canada and are Canadian citizens now.
BC has more of them than Ontario.
It is more of a laid back crowd on the west coast.

[Russ]

Gas-X pills, from any local Supermarket, will help immensely.

Russ

[itf]

I don't have any problem with those who went to Canada, save one - I don't think they should have been let back in again. Choices. They made theirs, and good on 'em. Hope they have long and happy lives. But stay gone. I really disliked the amnesty. Please understand - not personal. I would have a beer with any of those guys - in Canada.

I wonder if any of the abandoned South Vietnamese troops feel/felt the same way about foreign Vietnam veterans visiting their country.

[Rey]

Wow,

I miss a thread for one day and it develops from the dangers of GAS to happiness, to the dangers of mass consumerism, to the dangers of capitalism, to probable human extinction, to a global waistland, then, somehow, to Canadians and draft dodgers, and who is more patriotic. The times we live in! Kudos to the orginal question though. I'm not trying to preach to anyone, and I don't think the original question indicated that.

[myoptic3]

Having many cameras and lenses is no problem. Being attached to them is the problem. Desiring more cameras and lenses, if yours do a fine job, is also a problem. If you were to get rid of that which you desire, do you think you would eliminate desire?

Buddhism is something (who can say what?) that is practiced, not rationalized. Better to sit zazan (in meditation) for 15 or 20 minutes a day.

[Tuolumne]

Wow,

I miss a thread for one day and it develops from the dangers of GAS to happiness, to the dangers of mass consumerism, to the dangers of capitalism, to probable human extinction, to a global waistland, then, somehow, to Canadians and draft dodgers, and who is more patriotic. The times we live in! Kudos to the orginal question though. I'm not trying to preach to anyone, and I don't think the original question indicated that.

Rey,
Just another day on RFF! :angel:

/T

[kuzano]

for a while, and with exception to camera gear. I became disillusioned with all the Krap that was limiting my mobility. I sold off everything. My rule at that time was that if could put it in my car and take it with me, I would own it. Also, regarding larger personal property, like furniture, I would only keep whatever I could lift by myself, without assistance from any other person or mechanical device (cranes and such).

That rule has allowed me to live in more places around the country than before that time, and also allowed me to create income more than sufficient to live my modest life style, without worry about economic conditions of the country, or region I lived in. Approaching retirement now, I will be able to sustain my life style without financial worry and without setbacks in that style.

I sold all my real property at the time of that decision and have never worried myself with real estate ownership since. It's not like I am going to take a couple of acres and a home with me when this is all over.

Simplicity is Freedom-Freedom is Simplicity

Well, except for the camera gear.

[Tuolumne]

for a while, and with exception to camera gear. I became disillusioned with all the Krap that was limiting my mobility. I sold off everything. My rule at that time was that if could put it in my car and take it with me, I would own it. Also, regarding larger personal property, like furniture, I would only keep whatever I could lift by myself, without assistance from any other person or mechanical device (cranes and such).

That rule has allowed me to live in more places around the country than before that time, and also allowed me to create income more than sufficient to live my modest life style, without worry about economic conditions of the country, or region I lived in. Approaching retirement now, I will be able to sustain my life style without financial worry and without setbacks in that style.

I sold all my real property at the time of that decision and have never worried myself with real estate ownership since. It's not like I am going to take a couple of acres and a home with me when this is all over.

Simplicity is Freedom-Freedom is Simplicity

Well, except for the camera gear.

Kuzano,
I want to sit at your feet and be your disciple. Teach us, Master.

/T

[M. Valdemar]

In the winter I'm a Buddhist.
In the summer I'm a nudist.

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/bangkok4818.jpg (http://xs.to)

[Al Patterson]

for a while, and with exception to camera gear. I became disillusioned with all the Krap that was limiting my mobility. I sold off everything. My rule at that time was that if could put it in my car and take it with me, I would own it. Also, regarding larger personal property, like furniture, I would only keep whatever I could lift by myself, without assistance from any other person or mechanical device (cranes and such).

That rule has allowed me to live in more places around the country than before that time, and also allowed me to create income more than sufficient to live my modest life style, without worry about economic conditions of the country, or region I lived in. Approaching retirement now, I will be able to sustain my life style without financial worry and without setbacks in that style.

I sold all my real property at the time of that decision and have never worried myself with real estate ownership since. It's not like I am going to take a couple of acres and a home with me when this is all over.

Simplicity is Freedom-Freedom is Simplicity

Well, except for the camera gear.

You could teach us many things. I've thought of trying to simplify, but I have a hard time parting with things that belonged to my father befoe he passed away. Maybe you should write a book...

[M. Valdemar]

Grasshopper, seek out these venerable Masters of the Universe and ye shall learn the secrets of true happiness and dissolution of the self into the ecstatic void. Merely ask, and all shall be revealed:

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/secret824.jpg (http://xs.to)

[williams473]

"for a while, and with exception to camera gear. I became disillusioned with all the Krap that was limiting my mobility. I sold off everything. My rule at that time was that if could put it in my car and take it with me, I would own it. Also, regarding larger personal property, like furniture, I would only keep whatever I could lift by myself, without assistance from any other person or mechanical device (cranes and such).

That rule has allowed me to live in more places around the country than before that time, and also allowed me to create income more than sufficient to live my modest life style, without worry about economic conditions of the country, or region I lived in. Approaching retirement now, I will be able to sustain my life style without financial worry and without setbacks in that style.

I sold all my real property at the time of that decision and have never worried myself with real estate ownership since. It's not like I am going to take a couple of acres and a home with me when this is all over.

Simplicity is Freedom-Freedom is Simplicity

Well, except for the camera gear."


I find I am at my most creative when I am living simplest. I've had a number of times in the past few years when I had NO money after all the bills were paid and was still in the red - I had my car repoed - all that fun - but strangely, since I had bulk rolls of film laying around (stocked like a squirrel before Winter) I could still take out my camera and shoot, and it was a much simpler, enjoyable experience. GAS wasn't an issue because I couldn't buy something even if I wanted to. Now, since my credit is pretty much ruined, the only time I can buy something is when I sell something. I love it - I hope I never have to be owned by creditors again. Well anyway, I was inspired by your post - maybe once the kids grow up and out I can follow a similar path...

[Roger Hicks]

Buddhism is something (who can say what?) that is practiced, not rationalized.
Funny, I'd say the exact opposite. Well, not exact, in that there is a difference between rational thought and rationalization. In my view, the teachings of the Buddha -- the Middle Path -- are as close to rational as you can get in any non-material realm. But then, as the old saying goes, "A thousand monks, a thousand religions."

To return to the original post, the realms of existence are (from memory) as given below. Each realm is a reward (or punishment) for the previous realm.

The Hot Hells: everything returns to hurt or haunt you. Holgas, perhaps, or the Zone System?

The Cold Hells: you realize you don't need the Hot Hells and graduate to a point-and-shoot. It's still not much use but it's better than the Hot Hells.

The Realm of Animals: you understand that some things are better than others, and buy a camera you can control, such as a Zorkii.

The Realm of Hungry Ghosts: you then buy more and more second-rate cameras, but none of them satisfies your cravings.

The Precious Human Rebirth: you realize that life is not perfect, but resolve to make the best of it. A Voigtländer Bessa-R-series or second-hand Leica, perhaps.

The Realm of the Jealous Gods: you have all that anyone could want, but are paranoid about losing it: maybe a nice M-outfit that you are too frightened to use in case it gets scratched up or stolen.

The Realm of the Gods: everything seems to be perfect, but but you do not realize that because you are still in the realms of duality or illusion, this 'perfection' cannot last.

Sooner or later, in the Realm of the Gods, 'the garlands of flowers around your neck begin to wilt and your armpits begin to smell' -- and your new MP starts to feel rough. You fall back into:

The Realm of the Jealous Gods. You realize what you have lost; get paranoid; and fall back into the Precious Human Rebirth...

... and so on, eventually back down to the Hot Hells. Of course you can fall back into any lower realm at any point, without progressing to a higher one.

All of us are in one of these realms of existence. By definition, we are all in the Precious Human Rebirth at the moment (the most auspicious for recognizing the nature of illusion, balanced as we are between pleasure and pain) but within each Realm we can also perceive each other Realm, i.e. think of how you feel now and how you have felt in the past, in this lifetime. Don't you remember being in the other Realms of Existence? Yesterday, maybe? Or last week? Or last month?

I apologize to any fellow Buddhists who think I am being flippant, and still more to those who know more about Buddhism than I and may have spotted a missed Realm; but I hope the examples may help a few people...

Cheers,

Roger

[M. Valdemar]

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/sun586.jpg

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/life178.jpg (http://xs.to)

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/dolls803.jpg (http://xs.to)

http://xs226.xs.to/xs226/08164/baby495.jpg (http://xs.to)

[vincentbenoit]

Since we know that craving for something is actually more important than actually being in possession of it, we just need a way to maintain the crave without actually consuming anything.

So how can this be achieved?Easy. Only crave stuff you can't afford. (And refrain from stealing).

Vincent

[Rey]

Very nice photos Valdemar! I especially like "This American Life". But I think that you need some more gear. Don't we all?

[M. Valdemar]

I think so too. I don't need some LSD-addled mid-life crisis former gas-guzzler driving suddenly enlightened puritanical schmageggie instructing me on what I should possess or not.

Besides, everything is just a holographically simulated Boltzmann Brain.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/science/15brain.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all&oref=slogin


.

[georgef]

I find it amusing to think that we humans think we can destroy the planet. True, we may take ourselves out of the picture, but at some point the planet will remove a lot of the evidence that we were ever here, and start over again.

...and all that will be left is cockroaches and working LEICAs :D:D:D

[Roger Hicks]

The three poisons (attachment, aversion and indifference) that are described in some schools of Buddhism are wonderfully illustrated in this thread and indeed throughout the forum. Some people seem to nourish a surprising degree of hatred towards people who don't agree with them.

Cheers,

R.

[BillP]

The three poisons (attachment, aversion and indifference) that are described in some schools of Buddhism are wonderfully illustrated in this thread and indeed throughout the forum. Some people seem to nourish a surprising degree of hatred towards people who don't agree with them.

Cheers,

R.

Quite.

Regards,

Bill

[BillP]

Let me try this a different way.

Bill, if we were on a boat together, with others including children, on a long journey, with a finite supply of food and water, would you expect to eat and drink what you wanted, when you wanted? Would you make a mess and leave it for others to clear up? Would you help to crew the boat, or would you just be along for the ride?

Regards,

Bill

[georgef]

The three poisons (attachment, aversion and indifference) that are described in some schools of Buddhism are wonderfully illustrated in this thread and indeed throughout the forum. Some people seem to nourish a surprising degree of hatred towards people who don't agree with them.

Cheers,

R.

an evident, sad state of mind...:(
respect and cheer up!

[georgef]

Who says I don't care for what I have?......

...its OK B, dont feel bad. I have heard this state of mind is fairly common to all visitors to this planet at first. :bang:

[Al Patterson]

You're wasting your time BillP.

It's no use knocking when there's no one home.

So because Bill has a different view of things, it's OK to insult him? Accuse him of having a drinking problem, and insulting his intelligence?

(rest of mesaage redacted to keep the mods from deleting my account...)

[Al Patterson]

Let me try this a different way.

Bill, if we were on a boat together, with others including children, on a long journey, with a finite supply of food and water, would you expect to eat and drink what you wanted, when you wanted? Would you make a mess and leave it for others to clear up? Would you help to crew the boat, or would you just be along for the ride?

Regards,

Bill


Ah, situational ethics games. If you believe the world is so fragile and so tiny, and economics is a zero sum game, then maybe you are right. I don't happen to agree with you.

[Rey]

The arguments in this thread have gotten a little absurd. First, by speaking of non-attachment as a path to happiness, most of us are speaking of our PERSONAL philosphy. Buddhism is non-proselytizing, so this is our philosophy, you may choose to do what you like. Several RFF's here must have guilt or anger issues, because they immediately viewed the question as an attack on their consumption. Second, purchasing a few classic lenses or cameras will not end the world as we know it, far from it, it could be viewed as a form of reuse. After all, these cameras are still out there and most of this discussion is not about purchasing several new Leica M8's or Hasselblads. So, everybody, lighten up!

[BillP]

@ Al

Al, I have absolutely no quarrel with you. I defend to the last anyone's right to have a different viewpoint to my own, and to express that viewpoint. Where I have a problem is where that viewpoint and the actions taken as a result adversely affects or influences me or mine.

We are all on the same planet. It's the only one we have.

Regards,

Bill

[Roger Hicks]

Buddhism is non-proselytizing, so this is our philosophy, you may choose to do what you like.
Well, sort of. Except that if one is working for the good of all sentient beings, it is legitimate to surprise the more recalcitrant, truculent or self-righteous on occasion; cf Drugpa Kunley. This is as close as I can see mainstream Buddhism coming to proselytizing today.

Admittedly it can be interesting when considering some people to reflect on the nature of 'sentient'.

Cheers,

R.

[rover]

Obviously, this is straying way a field here. I have no issue with debate or philosophical discussions, but cannot allow members to insult each other. Bill has offered an opinion and just as he has said he has respected everyone else's. Please everyone offer the same respect to each other.

[tripod]

Understood, Rover!
I can't respect Bill's opinion, but I won't call him names.

[Rey]

bmattok,

Keep having fun! I can't see that you are damaging anything, unless you are accumulating toxic waste on the side.

RHicks,

I hate to see Buddhism begin to proselyetize, its great strength is that it allows people to make a choice on their own, rather than employing the recruitment tactic

[Nh3]

bmattock (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=6):

I read your posts and although you seem to relish in your so called "enlightened selfishness", but reading your posts carefully shows your despair and angst in coping with human responsibilities. I'm sorry to say this but you're a nihilist.

[xayraa33]

Bill M is right, there is nothing more polluting than kids, who later become more of us consuming adults.
this is happening at earlier ages too.
one is indoctrinated at an early age in the largest religion on earth, consumerism.

[Roger Hicks]

Bill M is right, there is nothing more polluting than kids, who later become more of us consuming adults.
this is happening at earlier ages too.
one is indoctrinated at an early age in the largest religion on earth, consumerism.

True, but we can't live without 'em. Unless there are young people, the old must work until they drop (no-one to fund the pensions...)

Cheers,

R.

[visiondr]

bmattock (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=6):

I read your posts and although you seem to relish in your so called "enlightened selfishness", but reading your posts carefully shows your despair and angst in coping with human responsibilities. I'm sorry to say this but you're a nihilist.

Perhaps more of an Objectivist a-la Ayn Rand:

"...individuals must choose their values and actions solely by reason, and that "Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others." According to Rand, the individual "must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life." Because she held that faith is antithetical to reason, Rand opposed religion." Wikipedia

[Gabriel M.A.]

We can never find satisfaction, it is like drinking salt water to quench our thirst

If I had said this, people would complain about my "flawed analogies" :)

I believe it's true. Or at least it can be.

Awareness is one of the many steps needed towards enlightenment. Like the frog who is bathing in that saucepan, we must realize when those bubbles are about to become our undoing.

Perhaps they should change the message to something more palatable: "we can never find satisfaction, it is like eating Ex-lax -laced popcorn to quell our hunger."

[Gabriel M.A.]

True, but we can't live without 'em. Unless there are young people, the old must work until they drop (no-one to fund the pensions...)

Apparently, in your side of the world they haven't mismanaged your equivalent of what here (the U.S. of A.) is called "Social Security". It was turned into a complicated pyramid scheme back in the early 80s.

*we* the younger slice of the pie, are supporting a big chunk of the current SS retirees/pensionees/etc.ees

Once the population becomes "older", it'll all come crashing down.

It's all in line with the "pass the credit card bill buck" philosophy.

I should disclose, though, that I am not an Economist and kids and home should not take my statements as scholarly footnotes :eek:

[Roger Hicks]

I realize that the esteemed Roger Hicks feels I know little of Buddhism, but as I stated - I know more than he thinks I do.
Dear Bill,

I do not find this hard to believe, but you are sometimes the victim of your own rhetoric. You have dismissed others as 'bleeding hearts' or 'people . . . easily manipulated'; you have been downright rude ('goofy glasses'); you have referred to the Dalai Lama as a 'dictator', apparently without realizing that the last two Dalai Lamas have been in the forefront of political reform, struggling against the establishment. Such words can easily give the impression that you are shallower and more egotistical than you are.

Cheers,

Roger

[Gabriel M.A.]

Errata:

Roger -- I just realized I became a victim to my lysdexic-prone (yes) speed-reading. I overlooked the important "unless".

So. Ehem. Nevermind. :o

[Roger Hicks]

*we* the younger slice of the pie, are supporting a big chunk of the current SS retirees/pensionees/etc.ees

Once the population becomes "older", it'll all come crashing down.

It's all in line with the "pass the credit card bill buck" philosophy.

Frighteningly true. But with or without the cock-ups, those in work, of whatever age, are still needed to grow food, work in factories, etc., in order to produce anything at all.

A reduced working week and raised retirement age could spread the load -- but most people prefer more money and more STUFF to more time off when they are young. Then they're either worn out by 60, or convinced that the world owes them a living. And, of course, employers prefer compliant (= frightened) full-time workers.

Cheers,

R.

[oscroft]

Who says I don't care for what I have? I have no children. I didn't ask you to have any. That's your problem and your lookout.

I love this - people have children like crazy, let them run wild, raise them to be criminals, and then tell me it's my job to leave the world a better place for them. Your kids - your problem.
It'll be a bit of a bummer if the Buddhists turn out to be right and you keep getting reborn into a worse and worse world ;)

[Roger Hicks]

I wonder what would happen if I considered having children along the same lines as people currently trade 'carbon credits'. That is, my lack of producing children should earn me something, because my progeny will never exist, and hence, will never consume earth's valuable resources.
Dear Bill,

Unfortunately for you (and me -- I have no children either) the same argument can be reversed. Because we have no children, to produce the goods we consume in our unproductive old age, we should be taxed higher, to support those who are selfless enough to breed. This is, in fact, what seems to have happened for the last 100 years or more.

Which demonstrates the dangers of over-simplifying arguments.

Cheers,

R.

[oscroft]

I am more of a neo-Objectivist. I have no opposition to religion, because I recognize that reason itself requires faith as well. I am Catholic.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that - "I have no opposition to religion" sounds like a bit of an understatement for a Catholic. Do you mean something like you are culturally Catholic but not a follower of Catholic religious beliefs? Or something else?

[PS: Excellent thread - I'm enjoying reading it]

[Nh3]

I differ from nihilists in many ways. You might want to look up the definition of 'nihilism'.

I take elements that interest me from philosophical systems such as Epicureanism, Objectivism, neo-Objectivism, Eclecticism, and so on. Furthermore, I am more interested in the classic branches of philosophy such as metaphysics, epistemology, and logic, less so in ethics. Not to say that ethics are not interesting or important, but to say that I find them difficult to read.

What I relish, my friend, is my life, which I strive to fill with pleasure - not pleasure at the expense of another's pain, but simply pleasure for its own sake. I have always failed to grasp the concept of self-enforced asceticism as a route to a 'better' happiness than the one I experience by indulging myself as and when I can.

I realize that the esteemed Roger Hicks feels I know little of Buddhism, but as I stated - I know more than he thinks I do. And I do know what nihilism is - I have exhibited none of its characteristics that I am aware of.

Unless, of course, you are using 'nihilist' as a pejorative, in which case, for shame. Nihilism is a perfectly acceptable philosophical system - just not one to which I adhere.

I usually use the word nihilism because its the best way to bring out those "pseudo philosopher" out of their shell and show that their opinion is merely regurgitation of someone else's thoughts and in the process let them throw around some philosophical jargon - and eventually reaffirm the old adage that, "little knowledge is dangerous". :)

Its not your fault, its those books that you have read...

[Rey]

A dictator is an absolute ruler who takes power, usually by force or subterfuge. A dictator is, usually, a brutal leader. There are very few benign dictators, if any. The Dali Lama is a leader of a theocracy. He was chosen at birth by other religous leaders who had no blood or economic ties to his family. I'm afraid Roger is right on this one, your rhetoric gets you in trouble.

[literiter]

GAS-Gear Acquisition Syndrome:

The most harm must come mostly to ourselves. (The term "hungry ghost" comes to mind. ) The reason we try to find joy in possessions may be because we find little joy in anything else. To possess becomes a spiritual quest in itself, in the place of what we cannot see.

The quest is endless because to possess is not really satisfying in itself, but this must be found out personally, in unique ways. Unique to us individually.

I think bmattock will come to this conclusion eventually (perhaps he has already). His postings are brilliant in many subtle ways, he can figure this out. Let him be.

[visiondr]

It'll be a bit of a bummer if the Buddhists turn out to be right and you keep getting reborn into a worse and worse world ;)

Damn, now that's funny!

[Rey]

Websters definition of "dictator" is: "a person ruling absolutely and often brutally and oppressively" Brutal and opressive are in the dictionary description because that what dictators usually are. "King" is described as a male soveriegn, there have been brutal kings, but the term is not loaded like "dictator". You can squirm all you want on sematics, you and the Communist Chinese Government are likely the only people on earth who think of the Dali Lama as a dictator.

[Roger Hicks]

Ah, but if we accept that argument, then we are back to consumerism being seen as a good thing.
Dear Bill,

No.

There is a difference between growing food and, let us say, making mobile telephones or designer trainers.

A body of people in work, who have not retired yet, is required to grow food, make shoes, cut and weave cotton. The old must necessarily either rely on the young (whom they must support until they reach their productive years, as well as breeding them in the first place) or work until they drop.

I'll go for the former, thanks all the same.

Cheers,

R.

[Rey]

This is useless. Have fun in your little world of semantics. We all know your intent.

[Roger Hicks]

An absolute ruler is a dictator - what other word would you have me use?
Dear Bill,

There is a major difference between the theoretical powers that can be exercised by a monarch (and His Holiness is ex officio King of Tibet, though he was not happy with the title when I discussed this with him) and the powers that the monarch can exercise in accordance with a constitution.

It is you who are obfuscating and conflating, not I. You wish to define a monarch as a dictator. Have you ever looked at the theoretical powers of the British monarch? Would you therefore call Elizabeth II a dictator? Because if you did, you'd be a laughing stock.

The Dalai Lama has tried, and continues to try, to reduce the secular or temporal reliance others place in him (there's not a lot he can do about the spiritual reliance). To this end, he sponsored the constitution. Is this the action of a dictator? Or of a constitutional monarch?

Cheers,

R.

[Roger Hicks]

Agrarian subsistence living? Where does photography come into play here? Shall we abandon our electrons and our chemical romances and retreat to the yurts?

I can appreciate those who choose such an existence, but I like McDonalds too much to give it up. And all that that implies.

Dear Bill,

You are cutting the ground from under your own feet.

The old rely on the young in a subsistence economy, and rely on them still more in a consumer economy.

The penalty for not having children should therefore be much more severe in a consumer economy than in a subsistence economy. The more rabid the consumerism, the higher the penalty must be. You may wish to be even more highly taxed in order to create more consumer rubbish; again, I prefer the other route.

Cheers,

Roger

[Rey]

Funny, based on the quantity and quality of the contributors to this thread who have told you that you are wrong, I would assume that you are losing the "argument". You are alone here, when arguing this matter. Your malevolence is visible to us all, in spite of your sematics.

[oscroft]

I am a devout Catholic, and further, I am an active member of the Knights of Columbus, who dedicate themselves to charity.

I freely accept that my beliefs could be wrong - and I certainly don't have any desire to press them down upon others. Religion is based on faith and free will. Compelled faith is no faith at all.

So when I say I have 'no opposition to religion', I am saying that religion - all religion - is perfectly acceptable to me if a person claims it as their personal philosophy. Pure Objectivism finds religion to be false, based on lack of proof.
Ah, OK, thanks for the explanation

[Roger Hicks]

The Dalai Lama is not monarch, he is absolute leader.

Dear Bill,

He is not a monarch? Why not? Monarchs can succeed in many ways, including election or recognition as a reincarnation. The value of monarchs or the means of their succession is irrelevant to their status as monarchs.

Your understanding of his constitutional position is not the same as his, or mine, or of the Tibetan people, or of the vast majority of writers on Tibetan politics and history.

There are also absolute monarchs, I hasten to remind you. In fact, most monarchs start out that way; it's practically part of the job description.

Then, they are either forced to give up part of their power (from Magna Carta in 1215 to King Gyanendra in Nepal recently) OR they voluntarily relinquish some of those powers (Tenzing Gyatso, XIV Dalai Lama, springs for some reason to mind).

Cheers,

Roger

[Rey]

Ah,

You have a Galileo complex, now I understand. Regarding your recent statment of support, many, including me, supported you when you legitimately argued for your right to GAS. Many others, me included, support you in your right not to have children. Now, regarding your promotion of the Dali Lama as a dictator. Any takers?

[oscroft]

Hi Rey,

Funny, based on the quantity and quality of the contributors to this thread who have told you that you are wrong, I would assume that you are losing the "argument". You are alone here, when arguing this matter. Your malevolence is visible to us all, in spite of your sematics
Philosophical discussion isn't about winning or losing, and not about who tells whom they are wrong. And I think it is unconstructive (no, downright rude) to dismiss another person's viewpoint as "malevolence". I personally disagree with much of what Mr Mattocks has said, but I'm grateful for his openness and honesty in sharing his opinions with us.

[Rey]

Funny, Had I said that the Pope was a dictator, I'm sure I would receive alot more negativity than Mr Mattocks has received. By the way, I did not say he was evil, but I do beleive that is views on the Dali lama are self evident

[Al Patterson]

Funny, based on the quantity and quality of the contributors to this thread who have told you that you are wrong, I would assume that you are losing the "argument". You are alone here, when arguing this matter. Your malevolence is visible to us all, in spite of your sematics.

I know where the malevolence resides, and it is NOT all coming from Bill. Most of it has been directed towards him. Just because he doesn't share your elitist view of the world, you must pound him into submission.

[Al Patterson]

I wonder what would happen if I considered having children along the same lines as people currently trade 'carbon credits'. That is, my lack of producing children should earn me something, because my progeny will never exist, and hence, will never consume earth's valuable resources. Like shutting down polluting factories in exchange for money that others would pay me for the right to pollute in my place.

If I presume I would have had four children (I come from a family of four children, and two of my three sisters had four children - one had two children AND I am Catholic), then by not reproducing, I have saved the world the consumption that at least four humans would inflict.

Furthermore, my gift keeps on giving exponentially. My sister's children are themselves producing children at this point. So I can presume that any children I might have had would likewise produce more than their fair share.

Four children having four children is 4+16 or 20 people in just the second generation. The third, in say 100 years, would be 16*4 or 64 + 16 + 4 or 84 humans!

I have saved the world of the consumption of 84 humans in the next 100 years. I am going to buy a new lens to celebrate. And some would say I have too many lenses.

Frankly, I think I'm giving back on an unprecedented scale, regardless of my level of consumption.

Well said! Funniest thing I've read in quite some time...

[Rey]

Ok,

I don't think that you are an evil person. Having a malevolent intent towards one thing or one idea does not make a person evil. If you believe that my intent was to cast you as an evil person, it was not, and I don't think you are. I have malevolent thoughts all of the time, especially concerning certain politicians in this country (USA). But I do not understand such intent towards a practicioner of peace.

[Roger Hicks]

Now, knowing that the esteemed Roger Hicks used to take tea with Galileo in the hills overlooking Rome while astride bejeweled arabian horses, he will of course claim that Galileo was actually quite firmly of the belief that the sun revolved around the earth.
Dear Bill,

You really should make more effort to control your weakness for hyperbole and oblique personal insult. And yes, that is a prescriptive statement; one with which, I think, many on the forum would agree.

I'd also draw your attention to the omitted middle, relating to another part of the same post. Merely because those who are right are not always supported by others, it does not follow that those who are unsupported by others are always right.

Sometimes, in fact, they may be wrong; and even if they are not totally and indisputably wrong, they may risk making fools of themselves by pursuing frankly desperate lines of argument, such as denying the negative connotations of 'dictator'.

In any case, to describe the Dalai Lama as a dictator in his role as Head of State is legally nonsense. He has done his best (and has continued to do his best) to ensure that his word is not regarded as law (the primary definition of a dictator) by promulgating the Tibetan Constitution. I am sure that there are quite a lot of things he could not do, and retain his position as lawful King of Tibet.

More importantly, as a guest of India he can hardly be an absolute ruler: he is subject to the laws of India. You could at best call him an ex-dictator, and that would still betray certain lacunae in your knowledge of Tibetan politics.

Cheers,

R.

[Rey]

Then we are in complete agreement

[Rey]

I accept Mr Mattocks last statement as truth. I think that he made that clear, at least to me.

[tripod]

Thank you.

Would it help if I told you (and I swear it is true on a stack of Bibles) that I harbor no ill will towards the Dalai Lama, that I'd love to meet him sometime, and that I think he is one of the most highly regarded practitioners of peace of our times?

I am not a Buddhist - this must be obvious. But I respect Buddhism as a religion and a philosophy, though I do not agree with it.

Likewise, I feel for the plight of the Tibetans, and if they wish to be free, then I hope that they find a way to become free - in the other thread, my only argument was that it is not the business of the USA to tell China what to do with regard to Tibet.

I do not long for a simpler, less materialistic way of life - I like my life as it is. I do not denigrate anyone who chooses a simpler life - but I do object to being told that it 'would make me happier' when no one but me knows what makes me happy.

And that's really it. No anger, no hatred, no evil thoughts towards anyone, Dalai Lama included.


Considering the affairs of other governments that the US does stick its nose into, intervening for Tibetten human rights is not such a bad reason .... but, there's just no oil there, right?

Never wrestle with a muddy pig. You can't win, you only get dirty, and the animal enjoys itself.

This is just a saying. I would not call anyone a pig.

[Roger Hicks]

I have never heard of a King or Queen elevated to their status due to reincarnation, your pronouncement to that effect is news to me.

If there is another example of an absolute ruler referred to as a monarch because they are thought to be the reincarnation of the previous monarch, I will be willing to accept your definition of the Dalai Lama as a monarch.
Dear Bill,

Why do you need another example?

The only reason I can think of is your self-professed ignorance: you've never heard of one example before, and you don't like it because it doesn't suit your argument.

You can't have been listening very hard for the last few decades, though: I'd have thought the term 'God-King' (more accurate in the latter than in the former) was quite widely known. .

Even so, look up Bogdo Gegen and you'll find another example (in Mongolia). And of course there are some interesting means of transferring kingship in Chapter 24 of The Golden Bough.

Cheers,

Roger

[Rey]

I didn't see anyone in this thread arguing that Iraq was the correct thing to do. I feel that we should provide political pressure where possible, and denounce human rights issues in China. But I can't see going to war for it now. We should have acted 50 years ago, when they invaded.

[Roger Hicks]

But every time we cross swords, Roger, you immediately presume yourself to be better-versed, better-educated, and better-equipped to argue a point than myself.
Dear Bill,

This is perhaps because I have seen so little evidence to the contrary.

Yes, I have been wrong on many occasions, and freely admit it when I am. As, to your credit, you did earlier on the subject of taxation and child credits.

As for 'name dropping', I'd have thought that an acquaintance with His Holiness -- indeed, having written an authorized biography of him, and worked for the Government in Exile -- might be seen as evidence that I have some knowledge of both the Dalai Lama and Tibet.

If you will forgive me, I find this tiresome. I do not think there is much doubt who has made the better case, and I do not believe that either of us can say a great deal more that is useful. If you wish to have the last word (as I am sure you will), then do; perhaps I shall put you on ignore for a while.

Cheers,

Roger

[Gabriel M.A.]

A body of people in work, who have not retired yet, is required to grow food, make shoes, cut and weave cotton. The old must necessarily either rely on the young (whom they must support until they reach their productive years, as well as breeding them in the first place) or work until they drop.
Wait, basically, anybody who is not growing or making something themselves is a Parasitical Citizen (tm)?

I knew them feudal lords was'em up to no good...

[Roger Hicks]

Wait, basically, anybody who is not growing or making something themselves is a Parasitical Citizen (tm)?

I knew them feudal lords was'em up to no good...

This has exercised me for many years. A book or a magazine is a made thing, and as a writer, photographer and journalist I am an essential part in the production of that made thing. But somehow it's not like growing food, smelting metal or making a knife.

By the time we get to speculative currency trading and designer labels, I have no difficulty in dismissing even some of the people who 'work' as parasites: selling a $20 pair of jeans for $120 certainly involves some parasitism somewhere in the chain.

The real crunch is retirement, though. Forty years of unproductive life -- quite possible, retiring (or being thrown on the scrap-heap) at 50 and living to 90 -- is, in the long term, an intolerable burden on any consumer economy. It's all very well to say that a rich man, with enough savings, can afford to do it; but someone still has to grow his food, make his clothes, and grind his camera lenses as well as performing those same services for those who are working.

This is what I see as the real crisis of global capitalism. When you can no longer export low-cost jobs from America to China or Vietnam, because the Chinese and Vietnamese want a bigger share of the money, and you can no longer import cheap labour from Poland to Britain, because the Poles can live better for less in Poland; that is when the midden hits the windmill.

To be sure, the history of capitalism is the history of the substitution of labour for capital, but all this means in many cases is the production of more cheap consumer goods, not of necessities. A friend summed it up beautifully a few months ago: 'How often do you buy a refrigerator? And how often do you buy a loaf of bread?'

A few weeks ago I was in northern Spain (Aragon and Navarre) and there is a LOT of land there that until recently was cultivated but is no more. This is because it's tiny terraced fields that are very labour intensive; it's cheaper to import your rice from India or the United States, your meat from Argentina, and so forth.

The era of cheap food is over, though, and I can't see how people are going to adjust to paying a fortune for food, and next to nothing for a microwave to cook it.

There are no conclusions or even suggestions in the above: it's just something I've been thinking about.

Cheers,

R.

[hans voralberg]

I heard a crazy story about German grown potatoes being trucked to Morocco to be washed by cheap Moroccan labour.
The potatoes are then trucked back to Germany to be sold.
Madness.

I cant see anything economic benefit in that lol

[MikeL]

Hey, my koan that included buddha and shampoo was deleted. I thought it added a lot to the thread. :p

[BillP]

Tell you what.

I've been out for the evening, enjoying a splendid dinner and the theatre in the company of a beautiful woman. Tomorrow I shall relish the spring sunshine and finish a roll of film. In the great scheme of things I am marginally less religious than the average cuff-link but right now my karma is nicely topped up.

Can I suggest that all those who have spent their evenings bouncing backwards and forwards on this thread step away from the keyboard tomorrow and do something to put a smile on your face?

Just a thought.

Regards,

Bill

p.s. Goodnight, and may your God go with you.

[Gabriel M.A.]

Can I suggest that all those who have spent their evenings bouncing backwards and forwards on this thread step away from the keyboard tomorrow and do something to put a smile on your face?
A *schedule* for putting a smile on my face?! Sheez, how urbanite is that?!

I do that in the morning, in the afternoon, and the evening.

But just to contradict myself: Tomorrow I'm having a Karmic afternoon with a few friends, then off to a Nirvaniish evening listening to one of Mozart's Oboe Quintets (the one that was transcribed from his String Quintet that was transcribed from a Serenade for Winds -- if that's not life-hopping for aetherial constructions of a human intellect, I don't know what is).

I manage to "bounce backwards and forwards" in here to get a break from reality :D


p.s. Goodnight, and may your God go with you.
aka Zeus, Amon, Ra, Jupiter, etc. etc. etc. Peace.

[monochromejrnl]

Tell you what.

I've been out for the evening, enjoying a splendid dinner and the theatre in the company of a beautiful woman. Tomorrow I shall relish the spring sunshine and finish a roll of film. In the great scheme of things I am marginally less religious than the average cuff-link but right now my karma is nicely topped up.

Can I suggest that all those who have spent their evenings bouncing backwards and forwards on this thread step away from the keyboard tomorrow and do something to put a smile on your face?

Just a thought.

Regards,

Bill

p.s. Goodnight, and may your God go with you.

maybe those involved in this thread derive pleasure and a smile from it... don't ask me how, i'm just saying... ;P

[literiter]

It is an interesting supposition, but imagine if the reason we seek possessions is precisely for the reason we first imagine - that they do, in fact, give us pleasure?


Kind of a dull life, (I'm sure it isn't) but OK.

Why are you the arbiter of my happiness?

I am just curious.
Odd that you would think I was trying to be the arbiter of your happiness. I'll try to word things more carefully.

You accept that we must each find our own path individually, but you do not accept that what makes me happy might not be what makes you happy? Does that seem logical to you?
Here we are again. I am using the "we" in my previous post, a universal sense, it is clearly not necessarily referring to you. I've been around too long and seen too much to assume anything about your or anyones happiness.

I do observe however that you protest too much.

[Nh3]

bmattock (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=6), you glow with attention like a teenage girl.

[ZebGoesZeiss]

This was one weird thread. As for the original post (does anyone remember that), I found a lot of wise things there. So, a "Thank you" is in order.

Also, I finally found out what that ignore button was all about.

[Gabriel M.A.]

A trait I am noted for the world over. In fact, I am able to carp, <snip> whine, and beef in several languages, with perfect inflection and respect to the current contretemps

I love a good Saint-Emilion Grand Cru with my fillet mignon and a fumé blanc with either carp or escamoles.

When I can't pronounce a thing I just order water ;)

[Gabriel M.A.]

No Gabriel,

We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune, and we take it in turns to be executive officer of the week. But any decisions made by that officer have to be ratified at a bi-weekly meeting in the case of purely internal affairs.........etc etc.

Is this where I say "oh there you go, bringing class into it again"? :o

[elude]

Can you be a Buddhist and a member of RFF at the same time?

Sir,
Being a member of RFF doesn't involve GAS. Being a buddhist involves the respect of values and the slow murder of Ego.
It seems compatible.

[georgef]

Ah, you had me with your intelligence until that Steely Dan quote LOL

[georgef]

bmattock (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/member.php?u=6), you glow with attention like a teenage girl.

there are not enough :D:D:D:D:D in the world for this one! you made my day!

[savantcreative]

I am......

was a monk for 2 weeks last december, standard procedure for Thai men at age 20.

Since being a monk, i've realized that I don't need nearly as much as I had. I've simplified everything to one body, 3 focal lengths.....wide, fast normal, short tele. That's it. I feel much better about myself and enjoy actually taking pictures again instead of worrying about what it might be like to use that body with this lens or this and that and such and such........

I agree with your point. Less is more but even less is too much.

Best regards