The Dream of Life - Alan Watts

a reply to: Panartisis

I don't think so. I suppose if I were living in the 1970s and discovered that the world was quite probably an illusion and that I wasn't what I thought, I'd have reached for a cold one too.

a reply to: FreeOrigin

You're welcome.

a reply to: Panartisis

I've no proof he died of alcoholism. But I have heard he died where he chose to. On a mountain in peace in his sleep.

Just like he wanted.

originally posted by: PillarOfFire
Alan Watts is one of my favorite philosophers, delivering a higher truth to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

Alan Wilson Watts was a philosopher, writer, and speaker, best known as an interpreter and populariser of Eastern philosophy for a Western audience. Born in Chislehurst, England, he moved to the United States in 1938 and began Zen training in New York. Pursuing a career, he attended Seabury-Western Theological Seminary, where he received a master's degree in theology. Watts became an Episcopal priest in 1945, then left the ministry in 1950 and moved to California, where he joined the faculty of the American Academy of Asian Studies.

“All the past vanishes, the future has not yet arrived, and there is only one place to be, which is here and now. And there is no way to be anywhere else.” - Alan Watts

“When you find out that there was never anything in the dark side to be afraid of … Nothing is left but to love.”
― Alan Watts

“only doubtful truths need defense.”
― Alan W. Watts, The Wisdom of Insecurity

“You’re under no obligation to be the same person you were 5 minutes ago.”
― Alan Watts

He is one of my favorites as well! If only he could have practiced some of what he preached though! Sad to dilute oneself from fear of what they tell everyone they believe.

a reply to: MiaBandetoh
What did he 'preach'?

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: MiaBandetoh
What did he 'preach'?

Expressed, Shared whatever you like to say. He was married multiple times because he was often not a kind person and a womanizer. Yes he spoke truths but he wasn't genuine in living them. But surely that just makes him all the more human and If you get what you need from his lessons then he did what he set out to do.

a reply to: PillarOfFire

Yes, thanks for this. Back in the 70s I read several books by Alan Watts. I particularly liked The Book On The Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are.

Listening to Alan Watts on YouTube has been crucial to my "spiritual" development. Its always good to come across more of his material!

originally posted by: MiaBandetoh

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: MiaBandetoh
What did he 'preach'?

Expressed, Shared whatever you like to say. He was married multiple times because he was often not a kind person and a womanizer. Yes he spoke truths but he wasn't genuine in living them. But surely that just makes him all the more human and If you get what you need from his lessons then he did what he set out to do.

Did the video in the OP get heard?

No one chooses what occurs in the dream.......no one chooses what shows up as life.

At the start of the clip it is stated that you may have chosen dreams that last 75 years of just pleasure many times and then at some point you decide this:

'Lets have a surprise'.
'Lets have a dream which is not under control'.

And truth cannot be lived.
What is actually happening is the truth......but no one can do what is actually happening........because apparent people are appearing to happen.

originally posted by: MiaBandetoh

He is one of my favorites as well! If only he could have practiced some of what he preached though! Sad to dilute oneself from fear of what they tell everyone they believe.

He didn't practice some of what he preached ?
How do you know that ?

He was 'diluted' from fear of what he told everyone he believes ?
How did you come to know this ?
And what do you mean by 'diluted' ?

a reply to: Nothin
What did he actually 'preach' that could be practiced though?

Can spontaneity be practiced?

a reply to: PillarOfFire

I was hoping someone would come in with,That was a CIA psychological operation "yes Alan Watts was never an alcoholic, that was the result of a disinformation campaign to steer folks from his dangerous thinking" We cannot have people changing the society we have took so long to build. Tupac-Changes... i dont think so, he has to go. Bob Marley-Redemption song??... Nope dangerous man, the sheep cannot think like that. John Lennon, Imagine..... AAArgghhh no, we are trying to destroy human imagination, blow his fking head off...

The truth will never die, they know this, but it can be covered in hot steaming poo so nobody goes near it.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Was wondering the same as you, LoL !!

Perhaps Panartisis is right, and it was just rumours from the arsehole deceivers ?

Don't matter to me, either way.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Panartisis
a reply to: PillarOfFire

Hey love the content you bring, but the thing that puzzled me about Alan Watts is, he was like the man for out the box thinking, with so much substance in his words, really enlightening stuff, then i found out he died young because of alcoholism.

I mean i looked up to him after reading his views etc, then i found out alcohol beat him, so kinda takes a bit of shine from him you know.

Still think hes a legend though.

cheers

Yeah I thought the same thing. I suppose he had all these ideas that seamed so straight-forward and true, but he may not have actually put them into practice himself, despite how easy he made it sound in his lectures.

Listen to Alan Watts explain why self-improvement is a hoax:

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: Panartisis
It only takes the shine off because you have preconceived ideas about alcohol......and a right or wrong way to live life.
Alan Watts most likely would not have been writing the stuff he did if he had not drank.......

While drinking “a little wine” may be agreeable, the abuse of alcohol is a serious problem. (1 Timothy 5:23) “Wine is a ridiculer,” warns the Bible, “intoxicating liquor is boisterous, and everyone going astray by it is not wise.” (Proverbs 20:1)

Describing the symptoms of drunkenness, the Bible states: “Do not look at wine when it exhibits a red color, when it gives off its sparkle in the cup, when it goes with a slickness. At its end it bites just like a serpent, and it secretes poison just like a viper. Your own eyes will see strange things, and your own heart will speak perverse things.” (Proverbs 23:31-33) Excessive drinking bites like a poisonous serpent, causing sickness, mental confusion, even unconsciousness. A drunkard may see “strange things” in that he may hallucinate or fantasize. He may also be less inhibited in expressing perverse thoughts and desires that are normally suppressed.

Immoderate use of alcohol exposes one to many dangers​—both physical and spiritual. Among the diseases caused by alcohol abuse are cirrhosis of the liver, alcoholic hepatitis, and such neural disorders as delirium tremens. Prolonged misuse of alcohol can also lead to cancer, diabetes, and some diseases of the heart and the stomach.

As mentioned, immoderate drinking hurts people not only physically but also spiritually. “Wine and sweet wine are what take away good motive,” states the Bible. (Hosea 4:11) Alcohol affects the mind. “When someone has a drink,” explains a publication by the U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse, “the alcohol is absorbed through the digestive system into the bloodstream and reaches the brain quickly. It begins to slow down the parts of the brain that control thinking and emotion. The person feels less inhibited, freer.” In such a state, we are more likely to ‘go astray,’ to take liberties, and to be exposed to many temptations.​—Proverbs 20:1. Also, who wants to become the victim of alcohol? Who wants to see unreal things and speak twisted talk? Who wants to become insensible to how others mishandle one, to have a long time in getting awake to one’s senses and to keep seeking to satisfy an overwhelming craving?—Prov. 23:27-35.

Is that truly wisdom? Enlightenment? Or could it be a hinderance to such as the Bible explains and teaches?

Proverbs 1:20-25

True wisdom cries aloud in the street.

It keeps raising its voice in the public squares.

21 At the corner of the busy streets it calls out.

At the entrances of the city gates it says:

22 “How long will you inexperienced ones love inexperience?

How long will you ridiculers take pleasure in ridicule?

And how long will you foolish ones hate knowledge?

23 Respond to my reproof.* [Or “Turn back when I reprove.”]

Then I will pour out my spirit for you;

I will make my words known to you.

24 Because I called out, but you kept refusing,

I stretched out my hand, but no one was paying attention,

25 You kept neglecting all my advice

And rejecting my reproof,

a reply to: whereislogic

What do you think about Alan Watts writings or talks? Do you consider them twisted and perverted?

Would you like to comment on this particular quote?

“All the past vanishes, the future has not yet arrived, and there is only one place to be, which is here and now. And there is no way to be anywhere else.” - Alan Watts

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: whereislogic

What do you think about Alan Watts writings or talks? Do you consider them twisted and perverted?

I don't think I'm familiar enough with them for that sort of evaluation. I can say, that after reading the description on his wikipage, "philosopher, writer, and speaker known for interpreting and popularising Eastern philosophies of Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism for a Western audience", that I'm familiar with the type. I've never seen philosophers promoting these type of Eastern philosophies (for a Western market/audience) teach or promote anything truly beneficial, insightful or enlightening on a regular basis (there may be some incidental exceptions, but on the whole, the majority of what they emphasize, say and teach, doesn't appear very useful to me; that's what I mean). Even though that's how these Eastern philosophies are marketed (they are supposed to help with the subject of enlightenment, which is a key subject in Eastern philosophies).

Seeing the popularity of these sort of gurus (religious teachers with an emphasis on Eastern religious philosophies) I am often reminded of 2 Timothy 4:3,4:

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.”

So in order to avoid falling into that trap of misdirecting my attention towards that which isn't going to benefit me, or enlighten me to the truths that matter most* (which is related to the concept of 'Babylon the Great', long story), I try to take this recommendation to heart:

“So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.” (Ephesians 4:14)

*:

Would you like to comment on this particular quote?

“All the past vanishes, the future has not yet arrived, and there is only one place to be, which is here and now. And there is no way to be anywhere else.” - Alan Watts

Doesn't sound very profound to me. A bit empty in the sense of being devoid of anything profound enough to care about it, or to be enlightened concerning anything important. A bit like being told that the sun rises in the morning and sets in the evening... 'yeah so?' How is that information going to help me become a better man? Or enlighten me to something crucial that I need to know to function in society (in a positive manner)?

Some people have the amazing ability to make many things they say sound very sophisticated, profound and enlightening, intriguing and impressing their potential audience, but is it truly comparable to the "beneficial teaching" spoken of at 2 Timothy 4:3? Which was referring to teachings such as these:

“All things, therefore, that you want men to do to you, you also must likewise do to them.”​—Matthew 7:12.

THOSE words were spoken nearly two thousand years ago by Jesus Christ in his famous Sermon on the Mount. In the centuries since, much has been said and written about that simple statement. Among other things, it has been extolled as “the very essence of Scripture,” “a summary of the Christian’s duty to his neighbour,” and “a fundamental ethical principle.” So well-known has it become that it is often referred to as the Golden Rule.

The idea of the Golden Rule, however, is by no means confined to the so-called Christian world. Judaism, Buddhism, and Greek philosophy all expounded this ethical maxim in one form or another. Well-known, especially to people in the Far East, is a statement by Confucius, who is venerated in the Orient as the greatest sage and teacher. In The Analects, the third of the Confucian Four Books, we find the thought expressed three times. Twice, in answer to queries from students, Confucius stated: “What you do not want done to you, do not do to others.” On another occasion, when his pupil Zigong boasted “What I do not want others to do to me, I also do not want to do to them,” the teacher responded with this sobering rejoinder, “Yes, but this you are not yet able to do.”

Reading these words, one can see that Confucius’ statement is a negative version of what Jesus later said. The obvious difference is that the Golden Rule stated by Jesus requires positive actions of doing good to others. Suppose people were to act in harmony with Jesus’ positive statement, caring about and taking steps to help others, living by this code daily. Do you think that would make today’s world a better place? Undoubtedly.

Whether the rule is stated in the positive, the negative, or any other form, what is significant is that people in different times and places and with diverse backgrounds have put much stock in the idea of the Golden Rule. This simply shows that what Jesus stated in the Sermon on the Mount is a universal teaching that touches the life of people everywhere in every age.

Ask yourself: ‘Would I like to be treated respectfully, fairly, honestly? Would I like to live in a world without racial prejudice, crime, and war? Would I like to be in a family in which everyone showed concern for the feelings and welfare of others?’ Actually, who would say no to such possibilities? The grim reality is that very few enjoy these conditions. For most people, it is almost too much to hope for such things.

Golden Rule Tarnished

Throughout history, there have been cases of crimes against humanity in which the rights of people were totally ignored. These include the slave trade out of Africa, Nazi death camps, forced child labor, and brutal genocides in one place or another. The horrifying list could be much longer.

Today, our high-tech world is self-centered. Few people think about others when their own convenience or supposed rights are at stake. (2 Timothy 3:1-5) Why have so many become selfish, cruel, unfeeling, and self-centered? Is it not because the Golden Rule, though still widely known, is being brushed aside as unrealistic, a moral relic? Sadly, this is the case even among many who claim to believe in God. And judging by the way things are going, people will only become more self-centered.

Therefore, the vital questions that must be considered are: What does living by the Golden Rule involve? Does anyone still live by it? And will there ever be a time when all mankind will live in harmony with the Golden Rule? For the truthful answers to these questions, please read the following article.

Source: The Golden Rule—A Universal Teaching

The Golden Rule​—It Is Practical

While most people view the Golden Rule as a moral teaching enunciated by Jesus, he himself stated: “What I teach is not mine, but belongs to him that sent me.”​—John 7:16.

...

Selfishness Took Over

...

An Example to Imitate

Jesus Christ, on the other hand, not only taught the Golden Rule but also set the finest example in following it. He genuinely cared for the welfare of others. (Matthew 9:36; 14:14; Luke 5:12, 13) ...

a reply to: whereislogic

I don't think I'm familiar enough with them for that sort of evaluation. I can say, that after reading the description on his wikipage, "philosopher, writer, and speaker known for interpreting and popularising Eastern philosophies of Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism for a Western audience", that I'm familiar with the type.

It's a shame that you refuse to even listen to one of his talks but judge them anyway.

Throughout history, there have been cases of crimes against humanity in which the rights of people were totally ignored.
These include the slave trade out of Africa, Nazi death camps, forced child labor, and brutal genocides in one place or another. The horrifying list could be much longer.

Today, our high-tech world is self-centered. Few people think about others when their own convenience or supposed rights are at stake.

Out of interest..... do you think that people should take the jab to protect others? Otherwise they be considered selfish?

originally posted by: whereislogic

I don't think I'm familiar enough with them for that sort of evaluation. I can say, that after reading the description on his wikipage, "philosopher, writer, and speaker known for interpreting and popularising Eastern philosophies of Buddhism, Taoism, and Hinduism for a Western audience", that I'm familiar with the type.

originally posted by: Itisnowagain
a reply to: whereislogic

It's a shame that you refuse to even listen to one of his talks but judge them anyway.

Which part of my comment did you interpret as 'judging them anyway'? Is it the 2nd sentence that you quoted from me in your response? Didn't my first sentence make it clear that I hadn't done so and wasn't planning on doing so in spite of your somewhat leading question: "Do you consider them twisted and perverted?" Perhaps nudging me towards that direction for your intended follow-up comment about 'refusing to even listen to one of his talks but judging them anyway'.

Leading question is a type of question that pushes respondents to answer in a specific manner, based on the way they are framed. More than often, these questions already contain information that survey creator wants to confirm rather than try to get a true and an unbiased answer to that question.

Source: 1st link from google (questionpro.com)

A leading question is a type of question that prompts a respondent towards providing an already-determined answer. This type of question is suggestive as it is framed in such a way that it implies or points to its answer(s).

Source: Leading Questions: Definitions, Types, and Examples

Out of interest..... do you think that people should take the jab to protect others? Otherwise they be considered selfish?

Is it truly just interest that prompts you to ask such a question? Seeing your previous somewhat leading question looking like a trap that was sprung in spite of my response not being a good reason or excuse to spring that trap, so to speak (figuratively, I didn't actually put my foot into the trap but you sprung it anyway, ending up with an empty sprung trap).

Be mindful that perhaps because of trying to read some kind of condemning judgement or to you an objectionable opinion into my commentary you don't end up appearing to mimic the behaviour of these people:

“Then the Pharisees went and conspired together in order to trap him [Jesus] in his speech.” (Matthew 22:15)

I wonder, if I'm just not interested in something does that count as outright refusal to look into it? I already responded to the Watts quotation you used as an example of something he said, possibly with the implication it was worth thinking about and responding to ( a highlight of his "talks", something worth emphasizing). Likewise, I don't find your question about vaccinations in relation to selfishness very interesting to answer, does that count as a refusal? I'm quite willing to give at least my recommendations or opinions concerning vaccinations, but I don't really see the point cause I'm not gonna say that 'people who don't get vaccinated are selfish' anyway. Anyone who does that sets themselves up for being condemned as being (too/excessively/unreasonably) judgmental.

Besides, it's probably a bit too far off-topic.