Friends -- fake or real?
FAKE: They go along with your lies if you go along with theirs.
REAL: Give it to you straight, and expect the same from you.
FAKE: Tell their truth, then avoid responsibility by saying "I was only joking".
REAL: Cop to their words, and the intent behind them.
FAKE: Mess up and cover up.
REAL: Mess up and go responsible for the damage they've caused. They clean up their messes.
FAKE: Pardon you when you fuck up.
REAL: Forgive you when you fuck up. They call it, then let it go
FAKE: Bail you out of gaol and tell you what you did was wrong.
REAL: Sit next to you in gaol and say "Damn, we fucked up."
FAKE: Never see you cry.
REAL: Cry with you.
FAKE: Know a few things about you.
REAL: Could write a book about you with direct quotes.
FAKE: Will leave you behind if that is what the crowd is doing.
REAL: Will be by your side when the times are tough, just in case.
FAKE: Will knock on your front door.
REAL: Will walk in the back door and say "It's only me!"
FAKE: Will agree with the person who talks shit about you.
REAL: Will give your critics no energy at all.
FAKE: Give you agreement.
REAL: Give you a second opinion, and support you anyway.
If you have at least at least 5 such Real Friends, you are richly blessed, but you already know that, don't you?
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
Monday, May 05, 2008
YOUR RIGHTS
Your rights end where another's begin. My rights end where yours begin.
It could be said that "rights" are not something we have, unless they are given. You may have right-of-way in traffic, but if someone on your left doesn't give it you, you don't have it.
In the past, kings had rights; priests had rights -- so did their mates. But ordinary "commoners" didn't have rights. The hoi-polloi had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the table to get them to give rights to people like you and me. And it was a milestone in political and social history when we got them.
The problem with anything given is that it can be taken away again. Anything that you give to yourself can never be taken from you without your permission.
It could also be said that everything is available to us, by right of being.
We have every right, and we have no right.........that's what-is. Does it matter? Only if there's something we want to be "right" about. Do you have to be right, or would you rather be happy?
Perhaps if we worried a little less about our rights, and got on with the business of enjoying what we have.
Over to you..........
The problem with anything given is that it can be taken away again. Anything that you give to yourself can never be taken from you without your permission.
It could also be said that everything is available to us, by right of being.
We have every right, and we have no right.........that's what-is. Does it matter? Only if there's something we want to be "right" about. Do you have to be right, or would you rather be happy?
Perhaps if we worried a little less about our rights, and got on with the business of enjoying what we have.
Over to you..........
THE ONLY CRIME......
The only crime is Theft.
Theft is the taking of something that is not willingly given.
Theft is the taking of something that is not willingly given.
Murder is the theft of life. Kidnap is the theft of liberty. Abuse is the theft of self-esteem and dignity, amongst other things.
Theft disempowers the thief -- always. It only ever disempowers the "victim" if he/she gives consent to the disempowerment.
Astonished, the thief did as he was bidden and turned for the door. "Don't forget to say 'thank you' ", prompted the master. The thief mumbled his thanks, and left.
The next day the village was buzzing -- several people had been robbed. When the master appeared, they asked him if he, too, had been robbed. "Why, no," replied the master. "I had a visitor; he was a little careless with his sword, but he seemed pleasant enough. We exchanged some words, I gave him some money, he thanked me and left."
The master chose not to be robbed. He chose not to be a victim.
I don't know if I could yet be that detached, but I get the point.
Theft disempowers the thief -- always. It only ever disempowers the "victim" if he/she gives consent to the disempowerment.
A Japanese master was meditating late one evening when a thief stole into his house, brandishing his sword. He threatened to kill the master unless he gave him all his valuables. "Put up your sword," the master said calmly, "you may hurt yourself. My purse is over there on the sideboard; help yourself, but please leave me some money for my rent tomorrow."
Astonished, the thief did as he was bidden and turned for the door. "Don't forget to say 'thank you' ", prompted the master. The thief mumbled his thanks, and left.
The next day the village was buzzing -- several people had been robbed. When the master appeared, they asked him if he, too, had been robbed. "Why, no," replied the master. "I had a visitor; he was a little careless with his sword, but he seemed pleasant enough. We exchanged some words, I gave him some money, he thanked me and left."
The master chose not to be robbed. He chose not to be a victim.
I don't know if I could yet be that detached, but I get the point.
Monday, April 21, 2008
Sunday, April 20, 2008
AN IDEA WHOSE TIME HAS COME
In a book titled "The Hundredth Monkey", animal behaviour researchers on a remote island off Japan were observing a tribe of monkeys who spent some time each day picking up coconuts off the beach, cracking them open on a rock and and eating them. One day a female monkey was observed to pick up a coconut, crack it on a rock, begin to eat it but accidentally dropped it into the water. She picked it up again and discovered that the water had washed the sand off the coconut. She picked up another piece, dipped it into the water, and ate it, free of sand. Within a week, several of the other monkeys in the tribe had adopted the new practice of washing the sand off the coconuts before eating them.
Remarkable behaviour in itself. But of even more interest was the fact that researchers in other areas throughout the tropics began to report the same behaviour in monkeys they were observing. But there had been no chance whatever of any contact between the different groups of monkeys. It appeared that washing sand off the coconuts was an idea whose time had come.
Perhaps the same thing happened with ideas like "fire" and "wheel" -- that they arose at around the same time in several places around the globe.
Is it possible that You are An Idea Whose Time Has Come?
Remarkable behaviour in itself. But of even more interest was the fact that researchers in other areas throughout the tropics began to report the same behaviour in monkeys they were observing. But there had been no chance whatever of any contact between the different groups of monkeys. It appeared that washing sand off the coconuts was an idea whose time had come.
Perhaps the same thing happened with ideas like "fire" and "wheel" -- that they arose at around the same time in several places around the globe.
Is it possible that You are An Idea Whose Time Has Come?
FUEL PRICES
The genius of spin who coined the term "weekly discount cycle" should be paid a whopping royalty by the oil companies for taking the heat off them. My perception is that we have a Weekly Surcharge Cycle -- 5 days of surcharge, 2 days of not-so-hefty pricing.
Whilst on the subject of fuel, I have a question that none of the motoring bodies seriously asks -- why is diesel fuel so expensive? I was brought up to believe (in the good old days when diesel was considerably cheaper than petrol) that diesel required less refinement to produce, which accounted for its cheaper price.
What happened?
Saturday, March 22, 2008
ALL FOR NOTHING
ALL (F)OR NOTHING
There’s nothing to get – and I hope you get it.
Colin Hayes
There once was a man who hated the sound of his own footsteps and the sight of his own shadow. He hit on a plan: he would run away from them. So he ran, and he ran, and he ran….but still his footsteps stayed there and his shadow followed him close behind. So he decided to run faster in order to get away from them. He ran faster, and faster, and faster…but still his footsteps were there and his shadow stuck by him. Day after day, week after week, year after year, he ran faster and faster, but still his footsteps and his shadow dogged him.
One day he dropped dead, which was a pity
Because all he had ever needed to do was –
Step into the shade
And
Sit down
Colin Hayes
When I first went into business, my partner and I decided to be “Generalists”. It came from a realisation that, in a world of increasing specialisation, experts were getting to know more and more about less and less. I figured they’d soon know everything about nothing, and that was not for me. I was happy to know less and less about more and more, even if l I finished up knowing nothing about everything. “I” considers himself to have been remarkably successful.
When you give up everything, you get it all.
There are two ways to get everything. One is to get something, then hang on to that while you get something else, then something else, and so on ad infinitum. That's what most of us do. In our search for satisfaction we grasp for more, for bigger, for better.The only problems with this plan are -- 1) That we keep dropping things we've got while reaching for something else; and 2) We realise we're not going to live long enough to get it all. So, in the face of the dwindling possibility of ultimate satisfaction we settle for gratification.
There is another way -- to give up everything until you have nothing. Nothing is a codename for infinite possibility. When you have Nothing, there is infinite space for whatever you need to show up, whenever you need it and you can be serenely content while you're not at it. That sounds to me like Abundance.
It's a paradox isn't it? To get whatever you want, you have to give up what you've got.
We're relucatant to do that because we believe in Scarcity and Lack. We're emotionally attached to the idea of a limited universe.
There's a very good reason why it won't work -- WANT. We think that if we don't want something, we won't get it. We think that the harder we want something, the more likely we are to get it. Could it be that the reverse is true? Could it be that the Wanting is the problem? Could it be that the Wanting becomes so addictive that it becomes an end unto itself? We want the Wanting, and that's what we've got? We never think to remove the Wanting, remove the desire, and create space for whatever to show up.
We say "It's either all or nothing", and we believe in that, as if the two ideas are mutually exclusive. But what if they're not? What if "All" and "Nothing" are two perceptions of the same thing -- unlimited possibility?
So let me re-state the paradox -- To get what you want you must give it all up, including the wanting.
And the rich young ruler went away disappointed (remember the one about a camel getting through the "eye of the needle"?)
There’s nothing to get – and I hope you get it.
Colin Hayes
There once was a man who hated the sound of his own footsteps and the sight of his own shadow. He hit on a plan: he would run away from them. So he ran, and he ran, and he ran….but still his footsteps stayed there and his shadow followed him close behind. So he decided to run faster in order to get away from them. He ran faster, and faster, and faster…but still his footsteps were there and his shadow stuck by him. Day after day, week after week, year after year, he ran faster and faster, but still his footsteps and his shadow dogged him.
One day he dropped dead, which was a pity
Because all he had ever needed to do was –
Step into the shade
And
Sit down
Colin Hayes
When I first went into business, my partner and I decided to be “Generalists”. It came from a realisation that, in a world of increasing specialisation, experts were getting to know more and more about less and less. I figured they’d soon know everything about nothing, and that was not for me. I was happy to know less and less about more and more, even if l I finished up knowing nothing about everything. “I” considers himself to have been remarkably successful.
When you give up everything, you get it all.
There are two ways to get everything. One is to get something, then hang on to that while you get something else, then something else, and so on ad infinitum. That's what most of us do. In our search for satisfaction we grasp for more, for bigger, for better.The only problems with this plan are -- 1) That we keep dropping things we've got while reaching for something else; and 2) We realise we're not going to live long enough to get it all. So, in the face of the dwindling possibility of ultimate satisfaction we settle for gratification.
There is another way -- to give up everything until you have nothing. Nothing is a codename for infinite possibility. When you have Nothing, there is infinite space for whatever you need to show up, whenever you need it and you can be serenely content while you're not at it. That sounds to me like Abundance.
It's a paradox isn't it? To get whatever you want, you have to give up what you've got.
We're relucatant to do that because we believe in Scarcity and Lack. We're emotionally attached to the idea of a limited universe.
There's a very good reason why it won't work -- WANT. We think that if we don't want something, we won't get it. We think that the harder we want something, the more likely we are to get it. Could it be that the reverse is true? Could it be that the Wanting is the problem? Could it be that the Wanting becomes so addictive that it becomes an end unto itself? We want the Wanting, and that's what we've got? We never think to remove the Wanting, remove the desire, and create space for whatever to show up.
We say "It's either all or nothing", and we believe in that, as if the two ideas are mutually exclusive. But what if they're not? What if "All" and "Nothing" are two perceptions of the same thing -- unlimited possibility?
So let me re-state the paradox -- To get what you want you must give it all up, including the wanting.
And the rich young ruler went away disappointed (remember the one about a camel getting through the "eye of the needle"?)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)