”Don’t Judge”

It is not about being not judgemental: it is about judging more the sin than the sinner.

Some people want free borders but are so attached to their „identities“ that they are killing the whole history of western ideas, reinterpretating then just for the advantage of a spirit of war, ugliness and rage.

Love and Atraction (Ontologically)

Attraction happens by opposition; love by similarity. 

      But each one, the opposition as much the similarity, can be accidental or substantial, and with or without each other.  And the qualities of the main types of relationships ( the familiar, the friendship, the erotical, and others) is ruled by this configuration. Furthermore, for some oppositions are obviously destructive or  simple doesn't cause attraction by its nature so its a certain kind of opposition what maters:

the opposition in therms of a complementation  

 the opposition in therms of a creative conflict, 

 the opposition in therms of a hierarchy

 the opposition in therms of gender

and so on.

  They appear in general as fullness and lack of something. So it is not enough the existence of difference; it is necessary that the difference manifest itself as a opposition, and that such opposition is related as fullness and emptyness of something in common, that is, something to share. 

  If some opposition is just intended as absolute appearance and empty expression, this "game" shows in fact a similarity between those who are related in the attraction, or it shows a complementation of the differences between then: that is the common play of lovers, to play as if, and so opposition and underlying similarity seems to increase at the same time. The attractive opposition is a opposition between appearances and sensitive manifestations: that is why it provoke emotions faster, although not always everlasting emotions. For the same reason a difference can be source of repulsion when felt as a certain and threatening opposition.

   In the other hand a similar quality can be also attractive, but its sensitive manifestation affects more the reason and judgement. So it matters for the attraction if the sensation of similarity is predominant of good or bad things, but namely in the sense that just one or other its seem. An attractive similarity is attractive if it shows the good qualities and hides the bad ones.

   

  However, the similarity, as a universal category for everything that exists, not a certain sensitive manifestation to the feeling, is more essential, because it sets a condition to think what is different, and so to re-think and judge what is opposed; not less evident it is some similarity by itself, taken beyond the reactions to feelings of attraction or repulsion, condition of love. Condition, but not cause yet: not because two things are similar in some aspect we can perceive then as related in love.  

   It is necessary that they recognise the whole shared similarity, not its short appearance to the sensibility "as only bad or only good", and accept (i.e. don't fear) the emotion parallel to this recognition (the love). Recognition is here not meant as a process of thought, although a spiritual act (a mental act). It is the "second cognition": the reflex over the felling.

   Recognition of the similar condition in a precedent universal similarity is then the cause of love, and love a kind of unmixed  gender of emotion above half-conscious feelings based on sensations. It requires a mind capable of conceiving a whole that goes beyond itself.  So you love the Creation, your cat, or even your cup of tea in the proportion of the similarity that you can recognise between you and then, but also in proportion to the similarity you both have with what is precedent and universal to you both.

  

          It is therefore not hard to see a important difference between love and attraction: 

         attraction happens at a subconscious level, but for love is required awareness.

 That is why love and hate are properly human/spiritual things, and animals are just attracted (or repulsed) to each other: they never love or hate.

          But their world are not so apart from ours at all: 

   It is a world constitued of causal reactions or indiference, where a value that connect such events is missing.

A good piece of music does self-analysis and expresses self-knowledge: it is a meaningful existence.

A very hard obviousness:

Before you acquire a certain thing in your life, you need to acquire it in your mind. 

A bad teacher teaches only his student; a good teacher teaches all the next generations.

When you realise that there is music for everything you understand that the world of music is far more interessant than the music of a certain world.

The Abstract God

1.

    It is a priceless gift that we have from the judish-christian Tradition: to set God as absolute pureness and so to establish the capacity to think it out of the world and so to think it abstractly.  However...what many catholics don't understand anymore is how to catch the meaning of God expressions in the nature. Events like a total eclipse of the sun at the day light, or virgo in full moon at the beginning of autumm does mean nothing to then...I asked the priest:

"Which Sunday is this on the liturgical calendar?" 

and he answered:

" Nothing special, is just the twenty-third Sunday" in ordinary time.  

   So why a "employed of God" speak about the Heaven quite every Sunday if the Sky passes absolutely meaningless to him by ?


 Something is missing there.

2.

God would be absurd if God would stay uncommunicated in itself. Only in its expression God is absolute. 

No instituted religion can extinguish the infinite interpretation of his expression. 

3.

No one is replaced by God without replacing oneself in the m o v i n g order of Creation.

The spiritual parameters of your placement are the parameters given by the meaningfulness of your concrete limits.

4.

 Only through limits you go beyond.

It doesn't matter if you had bad or good teachers: what you need are some very good lessons, for you get stronger against the infinity of bad ones. 

Its very important to pay attention on the fact that the “Big Bang” was such that: a) it creates life, b)it creates consciousness c) and the planets NEVER colide with each other,  for you can appreciate and recreate things in the glory for all that.

The neurotical vanguardist is a person who cannot relate past, present and future to each other; they cannot bring it togheter in a new symbol for an actual human experience of the same and eternal reality. 

Charity and Manipulation

If one is not asking for help, helping too much can be manipulation. 

That is why charity is something so rare: the person who cares for another person, another person out of its intimacy,  does it not only because one don't want nothing in change for that, it does also paying the price of being possibly perceived as a manipulator.

Devemos amar o próximo; mas é muito difícil amar o próximo demais.

Analysis without Synthesis

At every university you can find people doing analysis of something. And everywhere they are satisfied with the identification and never do the step of interpretation and comparation. Also many students don’t know about the theory behind such analysis and are confused , thinking that  the set of names and symbols employed there are already this theory.  In some cases it seems to me that is even for the master very hard to know what is behind a established analytical praxis because he forgot to ask where he came from. In such cases, asking the question is already the victory.

How good can be something so bad?

Musical Paradigm

Dear composer, I need to teach you that: a musical style is not a historical period! The negation of that is a simplification and serves just to a busy teacher of music history or composer who is neurotic with progress.

Music is the game of gods, and a musical style is a very special game, not a historical paradigm.  Like a game that a child don't want anymore to play, cultural paradigms can come back and even stronger. 

If nothing come back and different it would be impossible to open a new ("original") paradigm. 

Essentialy, there is only three principles on the background of this historical motion: affirmation (conservation), negation, and discovery.  One just need to embrace those three principles on the same creation. 

What is called revolution is often misunderstood in two manners: sometimes it means just negation, sometimes just discovery. But of course just negation and just discovery are a impossibility!

And just conservation is again a death: negation of life.

We  b e l o n g  to something better than ourselves. 

If hierarchy is a “construct”, or “ilusion”, what else could we espect from emancipation?

Social media is the new  and ultimate challenge for envy people.