Saturday, November 29, 2014

The sacred union of male & female expressed as tantric ballet



It's so uplifting just to watch this beautiful couple act out the immortal romance between Yang and Yin, Adam and Eve, Shakta and Shakti, Consciousness and Energy.

They are Vladyslav & Aiusha from Kiev and I honor them for their dedication to their magickal art of portraying the erotic impulse in its most sublime and inspiring form.

Ironic that such heavenly talent and beauty should have arisen from the Ukraine, where hell has broken loose in recent years. Never have I seen a more passionate and astoundingly acrobatic pas de deux performed to such ecstatic perfection.

[Thanks to Julia Reuter for sending me this video link!]


Friday, November 28, 2014

PRIMATE POLITICS REVISITED... YET AGAIN (& AGAIN)!

Recently a Malaysian friend residing in New York forwarded a rant from a fellow Malaysian abroad lamenting the rampant ultra-Malay racism oozing from the purulent pores of a few politicos at the Umno General Assembly (the local equivalent of the Republican National Convention). This was my email response...



Hey, don't get into fear over a bunch of chest-thumping primates and their monkey tricks. I assume everybody is a racist until they transcend the very idea of "race." Look at the Orang Asli. Lowest rung on the "economic ladder" - and even they call Indian people "Keling"! After 20 years I'm still "Cina" to them. Worse, a few dimwits have been coached by their Umno handlers to call me "pendatang" (immigrant). But they don't know any better. Most folks don't know any better until they've pulled the ethnic wool away from their eyes. The bad vision is called Cultural Imprinting.

Sure, every time I experience lousy work attitudes in corporations like Telekom or Syabas (the privatized Selangor water company) I joke about the fact that they're monoethnic (100% Melayu) outfits. Having grown up during the NEP years, it's hard not to feel miffed about racial quotas. Yet, when it comes down to interpersonal contact on a daily basis, I don't harbor negative feelings about Malays... or even the genocidal Israelis who are merely pawns of certain cynical and opportunistic elements amongst their own leadership... yup, just like the Malays!

What's been apparent to me is that among the Melayu, there's a great divide between the Anglophonic upper and upper-middle classes and the more plebeian post-kampong types. My English-speaking Malay friends are all pretty cosmopolitan and share most of my perceptions and values. However, the ones that suffer from chronic inferiority complex ultimately become aggressive as a way to compensate for their ego insecurities. Some end up holding positions in Umno - and that's when they turn into Bangsa-dan-Ugama (Race & Religion) extremists. They're really quite pathetic - no flag to wave beyond the mere fact of being born "Melayu" and "Muslim." Even so, they never question what it actually means to be "Melayu" or "Muslim." Indeed, the term "Malay" is so nebulous: the majority originate from Sumatra, some have Javanese, Bugis, and Siamese genes; others Chinese; many are descended from Arab, Turkish, and Indian Muslim traders - you won't find a more mongrelized genetic mix (except perhaps in Europe!)

That's why they cling tenaciously to the fact that the King of Melaka embraced Islam several hundred years ago (before that they were all vaguely Hindu, influence of the Srivijaya and Majapahit Empires). The same syndrome applies to the Khazars whose kingdom disintegrated around 1000 A.D., after their monarch had officially converted to Judaism in a political maneuver to sidestep Rome's imperialistic designs. Many generations later, the Khazar Jews became a widely scattered fraternity who told themselves that as Jews they were Yahweh's "Chosen" and therefore had every right to regard non-Jews as expendable and exploitable "infidels" (goyim, they called anybody who wasn't Jewish).

Interestingly, the Orang Asli have derogatory names for the Malays (originally they were all called dagang, traders): e.g., the Batek call them gob, and the Temuan, jobok. Other folks, in turn, called the Orang Asli sakai - pretty much the equivalent of nigger! That's true everywhere, people in fear label others: geeks, gooks, frogs, wops, micks, greasers, chinks, ragheads, squareheads, dickheads...

My point is: it's "normal" for insular communities to be innately or outwardly xenophobic. What do the Chinese call Europeans? That's right, Red-Haired Devils! So... why get worked up over low-grade displays of primate territoriality? That's the lowest common denominator of politics everywhere - it's the same in the UK, USA, Australia, Sweden, Germany, France.


And no matter how stupidly brutish the politicking gets, there will always be good, honest folks you can befriend who don't give a shit about your ethnicity. Let's celebrate humans who genuinely, passionately envisage heaven on earth, here and now, simply by allowing love rather fear to fill their hearts.

[First published 26 December 2006. Reposted 30 August 2012]



Wednesday, November 26, 2014

Bob McCluskey's virtual conversation with God


Bob said...

Are there ideas about the nature of God that are true and others that are untrue?

If I believe something about the nature of God that is untrue, can I get close to God?

Is truth the same for everyone?

Why is truth above every religion?

September 14, 2010 at 6:25 PM

God said...

Hi there, Bob! Nice of you to drop by and leave a comment. My feisty pal Lily has asked me to help her respond to your questions. Hard to say no to someone as delightful, so here goes...

Ideas about the nature of God... some true, some untrue? Well, ideas is all most of us have about the nature of God - and the word "God" itself is pretty loaded with all sorts of false notions (that God is male, has an only begotten son, disapproves of human sexuality, hates alcohol, spurns the flesh of pigs, the list goes on...). Let's say that some ideas about God resonate on many levels - from the cellular to the cosmic - while others are just plain ridiculous. It's really a question of maturity. When a 2-year-old says something silly, a sensible adult response would be to laugh with the kid, not at the kid. However, when it comes to institutionalized religion, we often find rabid septuagenarians ranting and raving in an utterly stupid manner - and because they have Ayatollah/Cardinal powers and can order your head chopped off or worse, people tend to keep quiet and avoid arguing with them.

The good news is: even if you believe the most preposterous things about God, it doesn't disqualify you from being as lovable as anyone else in the eyes of God. How so? Simply because God isn't caught up in semantics and exists not just as a bunch of ideas - but, indeed, as the nuclear intelligence within every atom and also as the totality of all existence itself. Whatever anyone thinks of God... God is most certainly never petty.

Is the truth the same for everyone? Definitely not! Our human apprehension of "truth" constantly evolves as we acquire experience and expand our vocabulary. A 9-year-old girl would look upon truth quite differently than a 90-year-old great-grandpa. And we're still talking about the realm of human experience and understanding - what about non-human consciousness? It's not healthy to get addicted to anthropocentrism when dealing with the nature of God. 

The Original and Ultimate Essence of Being caters to amoebae as well as nebulae - elemental, mineral, vegetable, animal, human, angelic, archangelic, deific and so on - it's All-Inclusive and All-Embracing.

Truth is just another way of valuing one's Integrity. Only those with a wholesome attitude can know the Whole and be mindful of being an integral aspect of the All-in-One and the One-in-All. As you achieve Integrity or become an Integer (instead of a Cipher) you will experience Existence as a holographic construct, and your Core Self as a perfect fractal of God. Celebrate that!

September 16, 2010 at 2:02 AM

Bob McCluskey said...

Thanks for your thorough response! Perhaps I could continue the thread of one point, because I didn't make my question clear. When I asked whether the truth is the same for everyone, I didn't mean to ask whether everyone has the same perspective on truth, but whether what is "true" for one person is true for all other people, as well.

Leaving aside the issue of natural law for now, I'll limit my question specifically to moral truth. Let's assume, for example, that it is wrong for me to dishonor my parents, whatever that means. May I assume, then, that it is wrong for everyone to dishonor his/her parents? Thanks!

September 16, 2010 at 6:57 PM

God's Secretary said...

You're a fine gentleman, Bob McCluskey. And you're doing a great job of blending faith with reason. You asked whether what is "true" for one person is true for all other people, as well...

Using the example you gave: first, it may not be true that you are "wrong" to "dishonor" your parents. In what way "dishonor"? Being unappreciative of and withholding love from them? Giving up on them and severing ties? Being rude and mean to them? 

Such behavior is certainly most unpleasant and actually unnecessary. Whether or not it's "wrong" depends on what the parents have done to trigger such a reaction in their child. A violent, emotionally unstable father or a nagging, domineering mother can drive a child to despair and deep resentment.

In effect, if you can't be sure whether what you believe to be true, is true - how can it hold true for everybody else?

Let's not miss the forest for the trees!

September 18, 2010 at 3:39 AM

[Source: http://www.seniorsaloud.com/2010/09/what-is-best-religion.html]