Original rendering by Aristo T.
of an ordinary photo from www.supermodels.nl



PAGE 6 -- WELCOME!!!

>>>>>>LINK TO PAGE 7 OF 10.
The maximum page number, then, being 10, content 
regularly reprinted in B.A.B., or Big Art Booklets,
and new articles or comments from the main section
inserted to replace earlier articles in these higher-
numbered pages of the archive section according 
to what feels appropriate to have on a longer-lasting 
display at any time; as stated several places, we
do not correct spelling or light grammatical issues
of any kind as long as meaning gets through, in
accordance with a philosophy of coherent productiveness
without meaningless stylification in a soulless manner.]]]

For copyright conditions of these archived
news articles by S Henning W B Reusch, whose
artist name is Aristo Tacoma, see the topscript
of where they first appeared, namely at the
'comments on general features of breaking
news in world economy section' of the worldwide
standard search engine Yoga6d.org (and its
various entirely identical entry-points,
which are named after many of the near-ascii
languages it is supporting, -- we use these
various entry-points so as to distribute the
traffic to this search engine. Cfr
www.yoga6d.org/economy.htm. To get into
anyone of the search entry points, click at
the 'search now' drawing at the front of
yoga6d.org, then click on the next image,
the one about 'saving humanity', and you
can search using ascii ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
(upper as lowercase are the same), optionally
with digits inside, for a selection of words
found on top at the front of most webpages.
As for how to anglify a word written in another
language, you have to try out what works -- the
rules for translation into the ascii set e.g.
from something like the rather different russian
language are simplistic and not done according
to the context in which the letters appear.
Once you learn how to work with this search
engine, and learn how to do search-within-a-page
when you get many results with the browser
'find-text-in-page' command, you will see that
your overall productivity in all areas of life
is enhanced, and the freedom from imposed
simulations of 'contexts' (such as by boolean
'AND' across a lot of the internet) essentially
turns out to be stimulating, because it is
predictable, straightforward, and honest in
a computer program mechanical way that you
can and will learn to harness.

But now, for the archive. In the archive,
we keep the same type of sequence as in the
economy.htm news section -- namely, the newest
on top. 

[[[Spelling variations are part of the
soul of writing and convey information
on its own, as does variations in lineshift
usage.]]]


[[[Once in a while we will remove something
from this archive section so the overall
quantity is at all time quite moderate;
for those who wish reprints of earlier
works they will then with some level of
probability be able to trace them as
chapters in published nonfiction books
by this author.]]]





[[[Note: THE TEXTS TO BE ARCHIVED ARE AS
A RULE PUT THERE RATHER AT THE SAME TIME
AS THEY APPEAR IN THE MAIN ../economy.htm
NEWS SECTION. THESE USUALLY HAVE FEATURES
INVOLVING FOUNDATIONAL THOUGHTS ON WHICH
MUCH THINKING APART FROM WHAT GOES ON
JUST WHEN IT WAS WRITTEN CAN BE FOUNDED.
THEY ALSO USUALLY APPEAR AS CHAPTERS IN
THE ALWAYS FRESH BOOKS EACH YEAR SIGNED
BY ARISTO TACOMA. THESE BOOKS ARE SOLD
ALSO AT PHILOSOPHICAL TALKS WITH LIGHT
SEMINARS ARRANGED THE SAME DAY AS 
SPRING/BI PAINTING EXHIBITIONS OPEN,
WITH THE CHARACTERISTIC APPROACH OF
SPRING/BI WITH A WOODEN BACKGROUND ON
WHICH BLACK AND SPRING GREEN ARE 
APPLIED WITH PLEASANTLY UNRULY LINES,
AS BRIEFLY INDICATED AT THE DICTIONARY
yoga4d.org/super.]]]















 
 


WHAT IS THE LORD MAITREYA MYTH?
-- Any large religious world movement has, just like any  
large political movement, in it a number of not quite 
compatible propositions -- the Maitreya myth is one of 
them, however it points towards a coptic christianity

[As of 2011:4:19 (afternoon, as for GMT hours)]
Author of comment can contacted at atiroal@yoga6d.org]
  
When -- if we are to believe the most sober, 
less-over-mythified historical records -- the 
prince-cum-religious teacher named, by himself, Buddha 
-- or Gotaham, or (in scholarly sanskrit), Gautama, -- 
walked the lands of that which is now India, Sri Lanka,
Nepal and Pakistan, he gave a teaching which acted as a 
political antithesis to the notion that the castes 
dividing people by brutal rules have any religious 
foundation. For the mythology at the time proclaimed a 
whole range of divine beings and a whole set of 
reincarnation possibilities to justify that 
apartheid-like indian political hinduism which were in 
place some five centuries before Christ.
  Buddha's teaching acted as an air conditioning for the 
overheated cultivation of all sorts of beliefs, and he 
suggested that, while reincarnation is correct, the 
particular forms it has been proclaimed to happen within 
is just pure poppygock. 
  A biographer of Gothama in modern days has described 
him as 'humble, but immodest'. This immodesty lies in 
the tendency of the Buddha (as it seems, now) at the one 
hand to suggest that one grounds oneself in a 
questioning attitude to all things human, while at the 
other time he spoke -- it seems -- also somewhat 
explicitly along the lines that his insights are 
entirely uncorrupt and in full contact with truth and 
essential reality.
  While it may not be that he stopped raging elephants 
by merely smmiling at them -- as one legend has it -- it 
may be -- as several stories indicate -- that he was 
politically lucky, in getting some key leaders to 
convert to his teachings, and that he had male 
disciples, who at times engaged in pretty bad quarrels 
-- even when he was present, right in front of him. The 
latter seems a bit incomprehensible, perhaps, to those 
who have the type of reverence for the buddha character 
for instance seen in present-day Thailand or 
chinese-ruled Tibet. This suggests that he had follwers 
who considered their own intellect superior to the after 
all very human and eventually also humanly ageing 
prophet called Gothama the Buddha, and who considered 
his presence no more divine than that their intellectual 
harsh discussions should go on at full speed even when 
he comes to guide them.
  Of course, as soon as Gothama died -- apparently in 
his eighties -- just as with communism after Marx, or 
with any influential and little-defined set of proposals 
-- all sorts of branches developed, some of which raised  
the Gothama character (now out of the way, so he 
wouldn't argue against it) to a divine, not human, 
presence, and some branches who introduced a number of 
new characters much along the lines of the hinduism he 
had challenged where they sought to fit the Buddha 
character into a slot they called 'bodhisattva', where 
Buddha was merely one of a whole range of constantly 
incarnating divinities. It is good that these followers 
were able to find this out, since apparently, Buddha was 
not able to find out about himself that he was thus 
divine.
  On the contrary, his teaching constituted for a large 
part that which today would have been called a 
'therapeutic psychology'. Please watch the attachments 
you are forming to each other, and to ideas, and let go 
of them, he said. Please do not over-identify with the 
body, the body will vanish, and all things are in flux. 
Please do quiten the restlessness of your thoughts by 
watching your footsteps, breathing quietly, and sitting 
still, also thinking about the big reminders of the more 
noble aspects of living. Do please remember that 
compassion is a more powerful feeling than the emotions 
born of ego, of attachments.
  But when women challenged him, asking -- you who doubt 
all of our political hinduism with its male-focus, why 
are you not allowing in women as your disciples? -- he 
seemed to have been a bit sluggish. He was, it appears, 
sticking to the thought so often found in hinduism that 
males are better off without females, and then -- 
showing a touch of positive humaneness -- gave in and 
allowed female disciples after all, in the last couple 
of years of his life.
  He taught of the universe that a mindfulness pervades 
all, that all the universe is made of but one type of 
substance, involving a kind of particle of void.
  This is a universe where -- when we go from looking at 
buddhism as psychology to looking at it as religion -- 
there is no obvious clear-cut reliable statement of any 
source of the universe from one personal male God or 
anything like that. In contrast, hinduism has -- just as 
any large political movement -- a variety of not 
compatible propositions within itself, some involving 
one personal male God who day-drams all the universes.
  Let me say here, since I use the word 'yoga' in a 
generalised indo/aryan sense, where it is seen to have 
common roots with english words such as yoke and join, 
and indicating a fluid dancing approach to wholeness, 
that a variety of teachings connected to yoga existed 
prior to Buddha and Buddha himself did some training in 
it, and yoga in SOME senses are put within the bag of 
proposals called 'hinduism'. While in other senses, yoga 
is merely a common word in sanskrit just as wholeness is  
a common word in english and as such not the copyright 
of any of these religions or nations.
  Now, then, Buddha did not declare of himself that he 
was anything much more than a prophet -- a man, possibly 
enlightened, and yet possibly -- we must add -- just 
entertaining glimpses of enlightenment here and there.
  But he did call for a questioning, intuitive, and also 
synchronistic (to use a modern word) enquiry into all of  
reality. And this was taken as a license to engage in 
all sorts of rediculous speculations over what new 
manifestations of something buddha-like was to occur. 
The notion of the same world teacher manifesting about 
every 400th year and will keep on doing so until all 
humanity is enlightened was heavily propagandised by 
some branches of buddhism and picked up in the potpouri 
of self-assure propositions by Theosophy.
  In this view, Jesus is but another prophet, and there 
are also other prophets, later.
  In contrast, just as in the completing decade of the 
modern indian thinker Jiddu Krishnamurti's life, 
Krishnamurti (his birth name, not associated with Hare 
Krishna movement) began speculating about the 
possibility of a being -- a personal being -- at the 
fountainhead of reality, and according to his biographer 
Mary Lutyen's spoke of suddenly seeing, in dreams, 'a 
face', which filled him with spectacular awe, so also 
did some of Buddha's followers speculate about a 
personal God or being, the Lord Maitreya.
  In some versions of buddhism, the Lord Maitreya became 
the blue-eyed human incarnation to come of the Buddha 
the next time it really matters, a view Rudolf Steiner 
was very aware of, and which is encapsulated in a giant 
gold buddha-state with blue jewel eyes at a himalayan 
shrine. Steiner spoke of the nordic countries as the 
place of origin of the next big prophet, leaving nobody 
around him in doubt that he considered himself pretty 
much the real stuff when it came to being a prophet of 
significance.
  In other versions, however, the Lord Maitreya is not 
just another world teacher, is not just another one who 
will come and age, but rather, along the lines of coptic 
christianity, the Lord Maitreya is a name of a total 
breaking of the pantheism-only view of the universe that 
Gothama Buddha taught. It is, rather as Krishnamurti's 
own breaking with his earlier pantheism-only view in the 
conversation book between him and the physicist David 
Bohm called 'The Ending of Time', a dramatic shift in 
perspective and in essential propositions about reality. 
Some people around Jiddu Krishnamurti at the time, who I  
talked to, and who had connection to Brockwood Park 
Educational Centre, his Hampshire Open 
University-oriented college, reflected over the 
possibility that Krishnamurti had become a bit old, as 
to this part of his last-decade teachings.
  Now Krishnamurti messed up his life on the sexual 
front, and so himself cannot honestly be said to have 
had more than glimpses of enlightenment, but he 
certainly is far more a candidate, his brown eyes 
notwithstanding, of any Lord Maitreya world teacher 
incarnation than any of the several who directly or 
indirectly have tried, and still try, to win the 
Maitreya medal for themselves.
  However the Lord Maitreya is either NOTHING BUT 
another buddha-psycho-therapeut which after all the 
world has seen thousands of -- e.g. many around Dalai 
Lama -- and many have quite as much as humility and 
quite as much as reflected conscience as they ought to 
have to do this job -- or it is a complete negation of 
the whole notion of there being any world teacher 
incarnating into a normal human ageing body at all.
  Rather, if Lord Maitreya as myth in the version of 
Maitreya being at the fountainhead of reality as God is 
taken seriously, then this is incompatible in spirit and 
in much of the approach of Gothama Buddha, whose 
psychology doesn't teach God-faith at all. Moreover, 
this Lord Maitreya, with or without blue eyes, would 
not need any such instrument as a human body with its 
normal ageing processes to manifest. The manifestation 
would be, as in the teaching of coptic christianity in a 
certain branch of it, so as to lead to a oneness of 
divine essence and human shape -- a human shape without 
human flesh.
  Since Krishnamurti aged and then died, then, in this 
view, that cancels him out. So also the other hopeful 
aspirants to the Maitreya role, who thrive mostly on 
lack of understanding of the Lord Maitreya proposition 
is really all about, -- these aspirants are but 
nut-headed gurus equipping themselves with some fancy 
words along the lines of the illusions that Gothama 
Buddha so elegantly fought in his time.


 
 
















YOU WANT TO BE MORE SLIM AND GOODLOOKING? 
-- Well, then, increase your empathy 

[As of 2011:4:14 (morning, as for GMT hours)]
Author of comment can contacted at atiroal@yoga6d.org]
  
While it is probably a very gross overstatement that 
there are only two types of people, viz., the type that 
thinks only about food, and the type that thinks only 
about sex, it is probably not a gross overstatement that 
certain chemical additions which are popular in many 
segments of the affluent world have a reputation for 
causing slimness, while in the long term they seem to do 
just the opposite. 
  It is a rather common understanding pervading large 
swaths of the U.S.A. and Europe, however, that certain 
chemical additions of this type do reduce empathy. Now 
this hasn't been related to the enormous increase in 
obesity which statistically have been reported the last 
couple of years.
  On the contrary: at least up until the global 
financial crises in 2008, it was not uncommon that 
certain types of Wall Street folks considered it almost 
ethical to be unempathic, and at the very least a 
necessary qualification to rank high as a stock trader: 
and so, their use of illegal chemicals was seen as a 
kind of 'cure' for the burdens of having too much 
empathy. With less conscience, they thought, there will 
be more subprime debt default swapping. Add to this a 
healthy sense of Zen, suitably misinterpreted: "There is 
no tomorrow anyway." Besides, as some commented, "what 
is life without risks."
  Let us trace through these imagined or actual 
comments. Risks are foolhardy. What we want, more than 
risks, are good challenges, with clearly limited risks.
  Zen buddhism, moreover, has no God and is no religion 
but it is more a psychology: and it is part of this 
psychology to assert that life is greater than the 
predictability of the mind, and so one must always be 
ready to let go of attachments -- about any concrete 
image of a tomorrow. The more subtle understanding of 
the zen-type doesn't really MEAN that there is no 
tomorrow.
  Back, then, to the question of empathy and conscience. 
Have you ever made something where you got a kick out of  
seeing how this is experienced BY OTHERS? Well, that is 
a sign that you have empathy. This, for productive 
people, can be an immense fiest of feeling, a vast 
intensity. Your capacity to have an inner engagement in 
the act of relating immediately to your own expressions 
not only enhances your smartness, but also gives you a 
boost of high-intensity feeling. This, then, is the 
enormous positive side of empathy. Lacking this, one may 
turn to that more, well, material form of feeling it is 
to eat splendid food. THAT's why.
 


















WHAT IS GOODNESS? 
-- Nobody has the copyright on the concept of goodness, 
neither sharia-law-fundamentalists, christian right-wing 
fundamentalists, nor communist-thinkers: it is the 
purest concept of energy, without which nothing exists 
-- and as such, there is no evil anywhere

[As of 2011:4:10 (morning, as for GMT hours)]
Author of comment can contacted at atiroal@yoga6d.org]
  
It is customary for weak thinkers to use the word 
'evil', just as it is customary for those who believe in 
books more than in life to speak of 'devil'. For those 
who are so engulfed in their own greed for wealth, 
power, and fame that they seek some funny kind of 
justification of it, they may try to stick to the point 
that there is no evil NOR any goodness -- that all 
morality is subjective -- OR, they may try to stick to 
the point that nothing exists without a partaking in 
both good and evil. The latter can be called dualists, 
while the former relativists, or anti-moralists.
  The reflective thinkers knows that a person or an 
article or a book may have something to it, without 
there being any much depth to the rest of it. There are 
also various relatively correct ways of drawing maps of 
the same streets -- and, by analogy, there is a music to 
how one set of words can be used in one article which 
gives them a meaning which is perhaps fully compatible 
with a meaning expressed by different words, having a 
different music -- or even the same words, having a 
different music, in another article.
  The view taken by 20th century mainstream physics was 
that the world is, in some not quite definable way, 
consisting of energy patterns. Many anti-moralists and 
some flavours of dualists have sought to make their view 
somehow connected to 20th century physics in this sense. 
  Now, in the 21st century, it ought to be clear to any 
honest thinker about science that NO UNIFIED FORMAL 
NUMERICAL THEORY OF PHYSICS WITH COHERENT IDEAS DO 
EXIST. There are strips and pieces of numerical formal 
theories which, in ways which are highly dependent on 
extremely vague and non-simple and non-tested and even 
non-intuitive ideas do sort of add up to a patchwork of 
the KNOWN MAINSTREAM data of physics, but this is 
nowhere near a unified theory of all energy along the 
lines that the best thinkers in early 20th century 
physics sought. Numerical formal physics in the 21st 
century is, ideawise, in a mess -- indeed, in a total 
breakdown.
  There is, to my knowledge, only one fruitful holistic 
theory of physics which provide an UNDERSTANDING of all 
data of physics which is although not very simple, at 
least fairly simple, and rich enough to allow for all 
the nuances, while true to thinking enough to be worthy 
of being said as having coherent ideas, and that is -- 
immodestly but honestly stated -- my own theory of 
active models, also called the super-model theory. It is 
however not put into the format of numbers, something 
which I think is ethically a necessity so as to avoid 
contributing to further reckless destructive weapon 
development. We have had enough physics of the 
conventional kind with the A-bomb and the H-bomb, thank 
you very much.
  The respectable scientists must therefore forego the 
numerical formal analysis attempt of the universe as a 
whole. Any such attempt reeks with -- indeed -- a lack 
of morality. Which is where we come into the question I 
started with, namely, WHAT IS GOODNESS?
  Indeed, what is goodness, once we understand that 
there is no set of coherent ideas so as to support a 
neutral energy vision of the world along the lines some 
20th century physicsts sought?
  By applying what I call neopopperian thinking, 
strengthened also by inspiration of the overview over 
all physics data -- with implicit predictions for very 
much more than has been measured so far -- in the 
supermodel theory, I have looked into this question and, 
as I have summarised also elsewhere, it is possible to 
come to clear-cut spiritual postulates. These I offer 
again after musing over some people's expressed thoughts 
as I have read them in news lately. 
  Firstly, it is possible to shape 'what is' without 
duality, but we need a feature more than mere similarity 
or uniformity, we do obviously also need contrast: but 
this contrast is between shapes which all partake of the 
same field, a field of goodness. 
  Secondly, it is possible to distinguish -- or see a 
contrast -- between absolute and relative goodness. What 
appears to be messy or bad or wrong is then merely 
possibly further beneath on the field of relative 
goodness. It is all the same ENERGY, to use that word.
  Thirdly, I agree with 20th century physics that time 
is not what it seems to be, but that there are many more 
dimensions (therefore also Yoga4d and Yoga6d dot org), 
with interweaving, potential future, and many levels of 
depth underneath the manifest universe of energy.
  Fourth, it is compatible with all data of physics and 
of the world of humanity to see all change as part of an 
immense mind-process of a berkeleyan kind, in which 
there is a role to something such as levels of beings 
with a reality to one deep-being of personal 
absoluteness -- but only as goodness.
  Fifth, this world as day-dreamed by such a God has in 
it a playfulness, a freedom or flux, as well as an 
immense intelligence of a subtly computerised kind, so 
as to make life push on with a mixture of insight and 
confusion, highly organised but in hidden ways.
  And, as a sixth point in this article, my neopopperian 
enquires hold it for correct that while higher and 
higher relative goodness make sense to intend, it is 
hubris to go along with book-fundamentalists of any kind 
in trying to implant absolute goodness into humanity.