Proposal Letter For Franchise Opportunity

Alteroscopio (seventh, concluded)

DGD: Textile 102 (clonografía), 2009

* *
experimental A trip made involuntarily
*

But there is another way mystical view that implies the opposite: no contempt and isolation, but the commitment and integration, without thereby falling under the influence of "Wanting and Power." He who sees this as a step beyond building a reality cerebral want without burn not shy away from the kingdom because of passion but because it has no other passion than to contemplate. This form of vision certainly belongs alteroscopio the call, and his great declaration of principles is in several paragraphs written by Bernardo Soares, the only real nickname of Fernando Pessoa, in The Book of Disquiet , and especially in this :

*

Life is an experimental journey, made involuntarily. It is a journey of spirit through matter and, as is the spirit that travels, is it where you live. There is, therefore, contemplative souls who have been more intense, longer, more noisily than others who have lived outside. The result is everything.
___ What has meaning is what has been experienced. One is given a dream job as visible. Has never lived as long as when you thought much. ___
Who is in the corner of the room with all the dancers dance. He sees everything and, because he sees everything, live it. Like everything else, ultimately, is a feeling we both better contact with a body like his vision or even the mere memory. I dance because when I dance. I mean, as the English poet, to tell you looked, lying in the grass, three reapers, "A fourth is mowing, and that's me."

* first thing
Soares does is make the danger of mystical otherwise see "so much thinking, I am and my thoughts but not me. I probed and dropped the probe alive if I am deep thinking or not, probe another look now that I sample, from clear to black hole in the mirror above, my own face I contemplate contemplated. " Then, assuming its own sense of seeing, an involvement so thoroughly, that Soares comes to exclaim:

*

Both have lived without having lived! I thought both without thinking! Hanging over me worlds of violence stops, adventure taken without movement. ___
I'm sick of what ever I have had or will have, tedious gods exist. I carry the wounds of all the battles I have avoided. My body muscular effort is ground I have not thought of doing. [...] I think I sleep, I'm walking cast, I suffer without feeling. My great nostalgia is nothing, is nothing like Sky High do not see, and I'm looking impersonally.

*

impersonal but not without a person, that is without borders between people. View which can only mean see it all: "Whoever has crossed all the seas has crossed only the monotony of himself. I have crossed seas and over all. I've seen more mountains than there are in land. I've gone through that existing cities, and no major rivers have flowed worlds, absolute, under my eyes contemplative. If you travel, find the weak copy of what he had seen without traveling. " And in a marvelous moment of revelation:
*

Anything under is considered, is a surprise or an embarrassment, an all or nothing, a road or a concern. Ever consider a different way is to renew it, multiply it by itself. That is why what the contemplative spirit has never left his village has yet to command the entire universe. In a cell or in a desert is infinity. In a cosmically asleep stone.

* This is because: "Not around these figures, with the contemplation of which I entertain, it is my custom weave any entanglement of fantasy. I see them, and their value to me is to be seen. Everything else they added the decline because decline, so to speak, its "visibility". "

* The meaning is to be "also covered the mountains and the statues, enjoying the days of books, dreaming about everything, especially to make our inner substance."

* And more, it is to see programming and consensus without telling us what to see and how it conducts what amounts to a simple action that is actually a creation : "Hopefully at this moment I'm sorry, was someone I could see this as if it had more to do with it than see it: see the whole thing as if the adult traveler arrived today at the surface of life! Not learning, from birth on, to make sense given all these things, you can view them with the words that are separate from the expression that has been imposed. [...] Look at everything first, not apocalyptic, as revelations of the mystery, but directly, as blooms of Reality. "

*

And that way be able to reach the maximum possible exclamation: "I lost sight of what he saw. I blinded sight. I feel, and with the triviality of knowledge. This, now, is no longer Reality: It's just life. "

*

The unrest of Bernardo Soares is the impulse that leads him to unravel the secrets of Reality, which is a creature ( have learned, from birth on, to give directions given to all things ) and not to manipulate or dominate, but to see ( view it with the expression that is separate from the expression that has been imposed ) and then to share fully and consciously what Reality can only be dealt with through isolated blooms: Life.

* *

Electric Tandoor Recipe

Alteroscopio ( seventh)

DGD: 136 Networks (clonografía), 2010

*

eye Virtue

* via influence the look is an old theme like few others. Ovid writes: "Looking at the eyes of a person who has bad, evil is communicated to the person looks at them and sometimes pass diseases of bodies of others "( De amoris remedy, V, 15). Hence perhaps the counterpart, and it is he who looks in the eyes of a saint or an enlightened get some of that grace but does not know or do not have direct evidence of transmission.

*

With its proverbial seriously ironic, Montaigne asserts: "The turtles and ostriches hatch their eggs in one view, evidence that they have some under eye" (Essays , Book I-XX, " force of imagination ").

* Angelus Silesius

practice a strange reversal of the "virtue eye "in aphorism 122 of the first book of his Cherubic Pilgrim, whose subtitle is" The sensuality brings suffering ":

*

A private eye ever viewing pleasure, is
entirely blind end, and is not himself.

*
The suggestion is disturbing: the pleasure of exercising the sense of sight is a trap that leads to lust and ends in blindness: the worst of them, which is the inability to see eye himself.

* Great value save that aphorism with the following:

*

In your view is blind to watch the sun, your eyes
are guilty, not the intense light.
[I, 178: It's your fault]

*
The language he wrote Silesius, German, contains a brilliant synonymy. Stern word means both "star" and "pupil of the eye." More than a misunderstanding is a trace of the oldest mystical culture, and was used with relish by the Baroque style. In English also has manifestations in the most simple of that line is the most basic of romantic metaphors, "Your eyes are like stars", but on the other end, that of greater clarity, is one of the voices Antonio Porchia:

*

Yes, millions of stars . And millions of stars are two eyes that look.

* "No need alteroscopio"
*

When the telescope appeared in the Netherlands around 1600, there was a revolution in the field of science that can hardly imagine today, for the first time the eye "naked" was able to see more and farther, and the mysteries were about be unpacked (just as did the microscope). But profound impact of this great tool was also in the field of mysticism and theology, and even the iconic, since the telescope became metaphorically, as a symbol of visual acuity and, figuratively, of knowledge deeper.

*

certain thinkers then turned against this symbol, and for example Daniel Czepko in Sexcenta monodisticha sapientum (1655), wrote: "When the telescope on the heights seeks to penetrate the stars of heaven, and this city is resplendent space, boundless realm, in his eyes and his heart, which the viewer of the wonders of God read these verses, imbued with delight and essence: you can discover God in himself, things in God, better than Galileo would be the know " .

*

Silesius Angelus also got in that car, and in aphorism 187 of the second book of his Cherubic Pilgrim said: "I do not need telescope"

*

Friend, if I can see myself at a distance: Why would
do it for your telescope?

*
is certainly a question that could be formulated by substituting "telescope" with "alteroscopio." Is it really necessary to watch the machine otherwise? First place would have to answer the wearer does not really want him to delegate his perceptual capacity, but multiplied, not trying to put the accent on the tool (the best name would be the instrument, with all its musical meanings) but exclamation of a character the Lighthouse (1927) Virginia Woolf: "I would need one to have fifty pairs of eyes to see!".

* *

A view as fast as sunlight

*

In Swedenborg Angelic Wisdom says, "The immensity of the heavens, where angels live, is so great that if man were endowed a hearing as quickly as sunlight and do not stop looking at eternity, surely not find a single horizon, where lay his eyes. " The alteroscopio is a metaphor for: no one but a man endowed with sight as fast as the sunlight "and, above all, that of a human being not stop looking and is thus "one horizon where pose his eyes, "ie, a field of view without boundaries or borders.

* Looking at the Hermetic literature, it is obvious that it describes two ways of seeing mystical. The first is related to the Buddhist rejection of the trap of desire, and certainly one of their best performances is a character The shagreen (1831) de Balzac, this is a man who has achieved a longevity lucid and both tragic: "I have come," he says, "at the age of one hundred and two years and I've become a millionaire. The misfortune has given me wealth, ignorance has instructed me. " And so says his first existential

*

The man is consumed because of two events made instinctively, that deplete the sources of their existence. Two verbs express all the ways that make these two causes of death: "Wanting and Power." Between these two terms, and human action, there is another formula which take over the wise and I owe my longevity luck. "Wanting" burns us and "Power" is destroying us, but "know" our weak body is in a perpetual state of calm. Thus, the desire or the will, has deceased in me died thinking, mobility, or power, is resolved by the operation my natural bodies. In short: I placed my life, not the heart that is broken, or senses, that is dull, but in the brain, which does not wear and survives everything. [...] I've done everything, in short, have known disdain for everything. My only ambition has been to see. See, is not perhaps know? And know, do not instinctively enjoy? Is not discover the very substance of fact and appropriate it essentially?

* And indeed, as the narrator says The shagreen to describe this character, "At the face that reveals the stoic calm of a god all-seeing or safety proud of the man who has seen everything. " In this case, seeing is seen as an isolated "genius old man lived in an area foreign to the world they lived in isolation, without enjoyment, because I had no illusion, no pain, because he knew no pleasure."

* Through its "look cerebral", this old man (not for free is an antique dealer) has reached a state similar to that of the viewer from the chair provides a complex staging:

*

My excesses have been condensed into the contemplation of seas, peoples, jungles, mountains. I've seen it all, but quietly, without exhaustion. I have never aspired to nothing, waiting for everything. I have walked through the universe, like the garden of a house of my own. What others describe as pains, loves, ambitions, setbacks, sorrows, becomes for me ideas, which turns into dreams, instead of feeling, the express, translate them, instead of letting devour my life, dramatize the development, distracted as I read novels by an inner vision.

*

Its principle could therefore be stated as disregard for safety:

*

here, "he continued, giving a slap on the forehead," here's the real capital! Step delightful days running a smart look to the past, I recall whole countries, places, views of the ocean, beautiful figures of history. I have an imaginary seraglio, which possess all the women who have never met. Often, I watch its wars, its revolutions, and the judge. Ah! How do you prefer feverish fugitive admiration for a few more or less rosy flesh, more or less morbid? How do you prefer all the disasters of their misguided will to the sublime power to call before it the Universe, the immense pleasure to move freely, without being seized by the bonds of time and by the constraints of space, all-encompassing pleasure, to see everything, leaning over the world to question the other spheres, to hear God?

* *

[ Read the conclusion of the seventh .]

* *

Watch Aubrey Xerex Miles

A text on the sanctity Tomás Segovia Keith

DGD: 135 networks (clonografía), 2010

[include here an extract fundamental notebooks of Tomás Segovia (which the author has called Weather arms, and whose second half can be read here ) these are the entries for August 31 and September 1, 1994 which can be considered a declaration of principles of work and life-inseparable entities. The interested reader may consult my text "Tomás Segovia: The Power of Thinking" by clicking here . (DGD)]

*

Hits few letters of Rilke from Toledo (English translation in a truly daunting.)

*

There is a sort of "holiness" that has evaporated in the world for at least half a century. I mean a sense (or feeling) of holiness, I mean a sense of duty, but I loathe to call it that because the idea becomes at once a Puritan and rancid odor, an echo meritorious voluntary and has no do with what I mean. It would in any case a spiritual duty and rather aristocratic, more daydreaming than control, more indolent hardworking, more secret than inspiring, more exciting than exemplary. A duty of sensitivity, attention-reflection but also of enjoyment, achievement, and to benefit and privilege. Not a way to stay in life occupied by a project, a plan, a program-even if the project or plan or program of a great idea or a supreme value, "but to be in life magnet, dragged obedience and respect for what life in drag, for the very rich and very pure magnetism of life. That is not really a moral (but in another sense, today we also lack a moral). I prefer to use the notion of holiness because maybe that attitude is not holy in itself, but is characterized with all evidence to honor the sanctity of life.

*

I admire the loyalty not only in Rilke himself but even the world around him: a world of aristocrats submissive to the genius (and talent) of large publishers with gratitude to the writers who do not provide wealth and power but that ennoble, princesses translating poetry to three or four languages, readers and amateur the creators trying not to adulation, idolatry, envy or boast, but with genuine respect.

*

is remarkable that such a thought so deep, as well as consistent and continued like Rilke, not "professionalized" in the slightest, not even a moment to become chair in lesson in doctrine or in school. And it now seems almost incredible, apparently found it perfectly natural to everyone still in 1913. Which would suggest that the boundary (arbitrary, as always) would be in the First World War.

*

Rubén Darío was thinking, which clearly belongs to this world, and suddenly remembered a story that almost droll and the first time I heard it (in adolescence, I think) surprised me a lot: measuring "scientific" Rubén Darío's brain after death to verify the conditions of a brain "superior." The surprise is that twenty or thirty years later, no one would find that superiority in the brain of an exquisite poet. In any case it might occur to someone to verify this ridiculous idea in the brain of Einstein, or Rockefeller, or Marx, but is the "divine Ruben?

* The danger of such enviable world is seen from within, the aestheticism and vulgarity, and seen from outside the privilege based on social injustice. But that does not prove that to avoid these evils necessarily have to sacrifice human value of this stamp of mind. Not true, although it looks like that to stop circulating among palaces of princesses and have Ritz stop being Rilke. Quite the opposite: I would not be so hard-not so guilty-lead a wandering life and attentive driving on Venice, Toledo, Ronda, Bohemian Paris seeking beauty, revelation, meaning, with all the necessary solitude and all the necessary communication and thus without family or landowner rentier oppressor.

* I mean, should not be so difficult. But it is. It is not that current conditions make this impossible, but in the meantime we have lost the desire. It has old-fashioned holiness. The modernization of life has its parallel in the professionalization of the spirit. A day would Rilke courses at American universities, would be interviewed by Spiegel , appear on television, signed articles on government budgets for culture or high school programs would be sworn in film festivals and maybe even participate in summer courses at the Escorial. And amid all these trips, all those encounters with interesting people, all these new experiences, never see the animal move through the eternal "a source" would not hear the chorus of angels terrible, would not see Toledo placed directly on the wilderness "with nothing in between." No because these things can not be seen on these trips, but because they travel well to travel with another spirit and no longer have eyes for them.

* I wonder even if we lack the moral could find no such sanctity. If holiness is not long before the moral, at least negatively. I mean this: holiness is not necessarily moral, it is even possible that it can be immoral. But their absence makes it impossible to all morality.

*

But I remember that I am not talking about the sanctity itself, first grade, but that other second degree is respect and obedience to holiness. That is the sanctity of the "man spirit "-and the artist, at least in his humility. That man does not want to embodied holiness, but to show, point to it, worship it and give it to worship. Be his herald. Not really the prophet is his arrogance that has driven the modern to the prophetic and far from the poetic, but its Baptist and Evangelist. His prototype is not the Messiah, but the two Johns: Baptist and Evangelist. Just have too many young messiah, messiah dwarfs would have to say, and too few large Baptists. Greatness is more alien to us is the greatness of humility.

* Just compare for instance with the Messiah dwarf Breton the humble saint Baptist Rilke. Rilke had never been head of group, head of a church, author of a program. In this century, the apostle turns our Pope, the good news of dogma, the school daze.

*

But in a sense that holiness second that reveres the sanctity first, the sanctity of life, holiness is there, the holiness that is not me, is the only true holiness. Points out the other, the Saint himself, and leaves without taking its place. Because the other is not but there both full and empty, absolutely present and absolutely unapproachable, and all holiness that is not withdrawn before the Ghost is usurpation. Every word is there holy to show the holiness of that but not in place. The sanctity of that is clearly audible but not be formulated.

*

Rilke's example also shows us the essential discretion of holiness. Rilke's discretion is not peculiar to him, there is a way of treatment he adds, but something that requires holiness, but of course that if he did not have much discretion holiness not even show it. The sanctity of life is not hidden, just the opposite: the patency thereof. But the secret is always pure patency. It is public but even that public secret that is always the source of any society. What it does, we might say a bit to Hölderlin, a village society. It can not speak in public, can only speak quietly, with friends, not among civilians. The villagers talk that always talk as friends, not as fellow countrymen, and always will be clearer from foreign friends. Among civilians is always present, even terribly present, but exact change.

*

Rilke not only itself but also its attentive and respetuosísimos correspondents had all the facilities in the world to distract, to disperse, to forget. Yet let not distract, not forgotten. That is what it is unimaginable today. A Renault 12, a television and an apartment for weeks on the beach and absorb blunt a man of today much more than a Rolls Royce, a box at the Opera and a palace in Venice, a man in 1912. As shown, which is the middle class "first world" today is not the opposite of what was in the privileged before the First War, is its replacement, the ersatz . Until the value of life is now a ersatz.

*

can say that the former widespread imbalance between rich men and poor men has been replaced by an imbalance between rich and poor countries. But it is clear that holiness is gone about y otros. La santidad encarnada, que hace su presa de un individuo y se manifiesta directamente en él, es más bien “primitiva”. Los países pobres siguen siendo pobres, pero ya no son primitivos. Simplificando una vez más, podría decirse que la era de los santos termina cuando empieza la era de las religiones. Los únicos santos convincentes son los profetas y fundadores de religiones y otros iluminados de su entorno. Los demás santos, los de las religiones ya establecidas, son todos excepciones y todos dudosos. Hoy en día hasta la Iglesia los pone en duda. Por otra parte, ya no puede hablarse de verdaderas religiones, sino de fanatismos: la religión se vuelve integrismo, totalitarismo y terrorismo.

*

But either way, the saint is clearly the order of the poor. When holiness preys on rich is to turn immediately poor. So embodied holiness is not possible in a country without poverty, but even in a world that is already rich men and poor men, but rich and poor countries. Because today's poor countries are so hypocritically called "developing", or living their poverty as a location on a continuous scale and clearly targeted, as the situation of a society that still not rich. While the poor are not primitive at all to see himself as someone who still not rich, as someone who is in the process of being rich, but just who is in the process of being holy. The rich on the other hand, if it was on track to sainthood is that poverty was on track.

* There was however unstable that rare moment in the countries that were already rich but still had poor men and rich men, a time when it was possible sainthood Baptist and Evangelist, Johan or Johannite holiness, sanctity the "man of spirit" which could be called also the kingdom of the Holy Spirit. No doubt it was necessary (or inevitable, unavoidable or did) to remove the imbalance of rich and poor. Of course, none of the proposed programs that target thought for a moment trying to reach it without choking so the kingdom of the Holy Spirit. All of them were "materialists", ie completely ignored the subject, both the meaning of the material as the material of sense. Which finally triumphed (or now) was probably the most materialistic of all.

* We are in the realm of ownership, control, consumption and destruction. Right in the realm of infringement. The technology has usurped the place of skill, technique, the place of knowledge, the dissemination of information, manipulation of seduction, propaganda that of faith. In the field of art and thought, usurps abstract art to the silence of things, theories place for meditation, contemplation critically, etc., Etc. In this environment, the santo of listening and attention, the quiet holy rilkeano almost inevitably fall into the temptation to become cynical false messiah or successful, if not shrewdly connects the two. In a world so obviously effective, where to find loyalty, resignation, discretion and elegance to quietly but actively pursuing beauty, the feeling, the evidence, visits the view that the infinite dignity holy life offers infinite respect our love?

*
*