Komentari

ludlud.blog.hr

Dodaj komentar (22)

Marketing

  • sagittariusclassic

    ...mmmm, dobar angažirani tekst, jutros smo malo frustirani ha?...:)

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (07:04)    -   -   -   -  

  • ludlud

    Pa i ne baš, Sag, palo mi na pamet odgovorit Zmajki, ali ispalo predugo za u komentaru... ;))

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (07:28)    -   -   -   -  

  • pametni zub

    ili ono : "Pogleč ljiljane u polju, nit siju niti žanju, a imaju najlepšu obleku."

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (08:00)    -   -   -   -  

  • ludlud

    @Zub: E, da! btw, hvala na sličici, iako je ovdje premala da bi se skužilo "opiumlije". :))))

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (08:23)    -   -   -   -  

  • Nino

    Dobro si to izanalizirao.

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (10:15)    -   -   -   -  

  • Hrvatska do Zemuna

    ....citajuci tvoje postove postao sam bogatiji i smireniji....

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (18:06)    -   -   -   -  

  • zmajka

    Jesi, hvala ti.
    Odmorila sam uz tvoj tekst, poamlo umornu dušu, bar na trenutak.
    Jer i sama mislim da je "bogatstvo obična iluzija, a da je istina stvarna, i u nama, i dohvatljiva istog trenutka kad se probudimo iz omamljenosti i pogledamo stvari kakve jesu. "
    (Ne zamjeri, tvoja kratka priča ili kakav moćan stih kojeg ostaviš tu, mene vuče da te pitam za još.)
    A sad, idem pročitati još jednom, neka pegla pričeka!

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (18:52)    -   -   -   -  

  • milord55

    Slažem se: bogatstvo, ono pravo, obilje pravih vrijednosti, dostupno je svima. Valjda je i pravedno raspoređeno. Ne znam baš, ljudi se oko toga i ne spore. Premnogi se ne osječaju baš siromašni duhom. Nisam ni ja dovoljno skroman od ovoga često uzimati.
    Oko onog drugog, čiju bi varavu i nedoličnu masu bilo pravedno prerasporediti, sporovi su češći. Pogotovo što i u biti i ustvari i uistinu i nikako nije dobro niti je pravo niti pošteno da bolji i primjereniji samo nagađaju po slici, a gori i drugi po slici samo nagađaju.
    Za jedne siromašan za druge bogat, ja vjerujem da bogatstva, ni pravog ni nepravog, nema bez puno rada i bez sretnog trenutka. Sretni trenutak je nešto u što, na sreču, rijetki izgube pouzdanje, gotovo jednako rijetki koliki ne ustraju pouzdati se u ono drugo: rad.
    Koja zbrka: bogato siromaštvo a siromašno bogatstvo? Nema tu zbrke: točno znam o čemu govorim? Koje su lopate dobre za zgrtanje? Dolazi li to sve iz milosti i uz ljubav, ili kao iskušenje i teret? Jesam li samo licemjer ili iskreno tako kažem? Pričajmo malo i o tome.
    Oprosti, ako uopće pomisliš da oponiram, samo sam htio podražati te i nastaviti tvoje hrabro djelo.

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (19:49)    -   -   -   -  

  • ludlud

    @zmajka: peglu kroz prozor! Provjeri prvo... ;)

    @milord: hvala na komplimentu. I na podršci. Da, pričajmo malo o tome... ;)

    avatar

    09.03.2008. (23:35)    -   -   -   -  

  • ja

    slažem se..lova daje lažnu sigurnost..
    i neznam zašto nasjedamo na to kad se vrlo lako možemo uvjeriti da nas ipak ne može spasiti ...

    avatar

    10.03.2008. (00:20)    -   -   -   -  

  • Viola (sul palco)

    laznu sigurnost, ali ipak sigurnost.
    vlastita kuca je na neki nacin ipak garancija da ne moras spavati pod mostom, pa barem mozes zaspati. makar i lazno

    avatar

    10.03.2008. (10:38)    -   -   -   -  

  • ludlud

    @Viola: vlastita kuća nije višak, kako sam i napisao. Biti bez stana i posla nije dobro, kako sam napisao. Lažna sigurnost nije sigurnost, jer te laž kad tad lupi po glavi, pa ako lažeš samome sebi da si siguran, a nisi, nevolja te samo može još jače opaliti. Što se redovito događa i čemu svaki dan svjedočimo. Lažni san je san u grču, pa je bolje i ne spavati. Ideja je da se prestanemo grčiti. To je potpuno realno i moguće, ali iz nekog razloga to ne radimo. Ne znam kako sam to mogao napisati jasnije.

    avatar

    10.03.2008. (10:59)    -   -   -   -  

  • zmajka

    U vilenjakčkom kraljevstvu bih znala živjeti. Mada sam se prilagodila i na ovaj tu život.
    Ali dok pišemo-postojimo (valjda!!!)

    avatar

    10.03.2008. (13:48)    -   -   -   -  

  • mala sapa

    imati ili biti - pitanje je sad

    avatar

    10.03.2008. (20:30)    -   -   -   -  

  • ludlud

    @mala sapa: tek kad jesi možeš i imati. Ili: dok nisi nemaš. Dakle, jesi li ili nisi, pitanje je sad. Ostalo će ti se osigurati. ;)

    avatar

    11.03.2008. (00:13)    -   -   -   -  

  • mala sapa

    Are you talking to me?

    avatar

    11.03.2008. (18:21)    -   -   -   -  

  • ludlud

    @mala sapa: A, e! ;))

    avatar

    12.03.2008. (04:20)    -   -   -   -  

  • Reader

    What is wealth?

    In the material sense, wealth is the process of accumulating a surplus which individuals generally don't need (I say "accumulating" and not "creating" deliberately). So somebody has a home. Of course we all know that "has" does not mean somebody else lives in your house but there is some kind of paper where it is written that it is his house and the general consensus assents that it is really as written in this and similar papers. The real status are the buildings in question and that paper, but the virtual fabrication in our minds is the arrangement is just how something belongs to that individual. Of course living in your own house is not any kind of excess. On the other hand, this same man may have another house, or three, or five. He does not really need your house, since he can only live in one, but the papers of virtual consensus say he can do with it what he likes, because it is his. Dark and gaping void. Which is also mostly an accident.

    The main drawback, whether weakness or error of the system ("structural error") is that individuals are forced to accumulate unnecessary surplus because that is the only way that they can feel somehow secure enough. If somebody behaves according to that principle, the principle of wealth, he can easily fall into poverty. To be without a job, home and above all money is inconvenient and frustrating, particularly if one has some skill at one's disposal. To see how the system in some area of life readily abets somebody blown in by the wind without your skills, and how he abets the system, is the little hell of a million people on our planet.

    avatar

    13.03.2008. (12:10)    -   -   -   -  

  • Reader

    The defect and the burden on the individual in such a system is the self-deluding feeling that security is achieved, that greed is justified and that solidarity is an illusion. Both rich and poor have this target: to get rich, or to get even richer. And that is a vicious circle. One of the newbaked rich, a vulgar person from the street in over-expensive clothes with too much fat on his bones, talked on some occasion on TV, completely sincerely, about how he had a difficult and poor childhood and how wealth brought him "dignity". What kind of dressed-up donkey is that? I could only pity him, this idiot who thinks he can buy dignity. I have seen more dignity in the faces of people in queues outside public kitchens than in his self-satisfied mug.

    After all, that is well known, all that excess develops the fear of loss, discontent, laziness, hauteur, depending on the person. Of course there are also noble people who are rich, good, generous, and whatever you like, but the problem is that they all stay inside the system, a system with structural defects, and nobody will want to abandon it.

    The only real characteristic of the riches and wealth is that is it is deceptive. So maybe it is also diabolical, since it fits the nature of the "Prince of Lies". His one and only characteristic is that he reflects the illusions in the heads of people of how the papers of ownership really mean what people agree that they mean, and that goes on to produce its consequences: sickness and unacceptable relationships between people based on the fictitious ownership of various kinds of surplus. Wealth is thus nothing but a mass delusion.

    avatar

    13.03.2008. (12:56)    -   -   -   -  

  • Reader

    In this world the words of the Gospel sound entirely different: "It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to enter the Kingdom." Whether it is called the Kingdom of Heaven, the Elven Kingdom, or whatever name is dear to us,those who do not see and do not hear cannot enter by any means. This saying is not about some moral code, or "the evil rich won't get int o Paradise", (since they are all in fact realists, and paradise is a fabrication to console incompetents) but rather a saying about the all-embracing lack of reason, really madness, of those who do not see that riches are a common illusion and that true reality is in ourselves, and attainable in the very moment we wake from our slumbers and see things as they are.

    I spoke easily about material wealth, but the story extends to the immaterial sphere. It's only necessary to listen to the New Age prophets and prophetesses who lure with tales about the undreamed of wealth of experience and spiritual evolution in undreamed levels of light which just wait for us to reach them and grasp when we snap our fingers our divine, rather than any other, nature. But for that we need to pay completely vulgar, material money. In fact, just like before the altar. Really it's not necessary to be a zen master to see how that works.

    And on this track we quickly come to another saying: "Blessed are the poor in spirit". But that is for another time, although it is obvious, which is obvious.

    In truth, wealth is nothing but a mirage which is so much mercury that people kill and die for it and by its will.

    Sheesh, I hope I answered the question.

    avatar

    13.03.2008. (13:42)    -   -   -   -  

  • mala sapa

    Sve nešto razmišljam: pa nije moguće da misliš prizemno, samo o materijalnom i ostvarenju na taj način.
    Ili ovako nekako: onaj koji je u tijelu (samo) ne može se svidjeti Kristu,
    odnosno nema li tko Duha Kristova, taj nije njegov.

    avatar

    13.03.2008. (16:09)    -   -   -   -  

  • mala sapa

    Ma ovo drugo je

    avatar

    13.03.2008. (16:14)    -   -   -   -  

  •  
učitavam...