The Dudeism Forum

Deconstructing Lebowski => The Da Fino Code => Topic started by: apnp on September 01, 2011, 01:26:56 AM

Title: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 01, 2011, 01:26:56 AM
When the Dude goes on his space odyssey, checkin' out the condition of his condition, is he sensing himself as a younger man, rejuvinated by the prospects of recollection, or is he applying the resources of his dudeliness directly into the dreamscape afresh?  That is, does age-relation factor into Lebowski-the-Younger's dude-image, or does dudeism proper transcend personal chronology?

As a sidenote, if the soundtrack had rather been Strauss's Also Sprach Zarathustra, how might that have affected his abiding?

For myself, I am quite unclear as to whether the application of the Dude's example to my life is to be conceived in generational terms, and am quick to hesitate about the notion that it is not.  The aging youth that is Lebowski remains a pragmatic contradiction, insofar as ... aw, hell, just go ahead and send in the penguins ...  ::)
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: DigitalBuddha on September 02, 2011, 05:22:58 AM
Well, dude, we just don't know.
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 03, 2011, 08:17:30 PM
Indeed, DigBud, indeed...
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: hannahdude on September 03, 2011, 09:24:04 PM
what in gods name are you blathering about?
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 04, 2011, 02:37:57 PM
...meh... just a sardonic projection of my own age-related neuroses, triggered by a cinematographic free association stemming from an archetypic number...  :-X
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: DigitalBuddha on September 04, 2011, 04:55:14 PM
Quote from: apnp on September 04, 2011, 02:37:57 PM
...meh... just a sardonic projection of my own age-related neuroses, triggered by a cinematographic free association stemming from an archetypic number...  :-X

...and the over use of an online dictionary.  ;D  But, I do have to say that we do occasionally need dudes who explore the esoteric side of dudeism. Perhaps this is something you are focusing on. A flashback into the mysticism of dudeism.
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 05, 2011, 11:31:29 AM
...indeed again, DB!  Esoteric Dudeism.  Sounds like a righteous path...  though I can't promise niceties like intelligibility or eloquence... ;)
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: DigitalBuddha on September 05, 2011, 03:53:34 PM
Quote from: apnp on September 05, 2011, 11:31:29 AM
...indeed again, DB!  Esoteric Dudeism.  Sounds like a righteous path...  though I can't promise niceties like intelligibility or eloquence... ;)

In that case I'll settle for an oat soda, zesty coitus and a lane to roll on. In other words; wine, women and song. Or, as the fella once said; "it's beer, the bed and a smoke after."  ;D

(http://www.ecigarettedirect.co.uk/articles/images/smoking-after-sex-3.jpg)
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: Hominid on September 07, 2011, 08:45:03 PM
Woah... lotta strands there.
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 12, 2011, 11:36:00 PM
In the name of esoteric dudeism, I've replaced the word "God" with "Dude" in the following excerpt from Meister Eckhart's Blessed are the Poor (as cited by Thomas Merton in Zen and the Birds of Appetite, and retaining the erratic capitalizations):


"A man should be so poor that he is not and has not a place for Dude to act in. To reserve a place would be to maintain distinctions. [...] A man should be so disinterested and untrammeled that he does not know what Dude is doing in him. [...] If it is the case that man is emptied of all things, creatures, himself and dude, and if dude could still find a place in him to act ... this man is not poor with the most intimate poverty. For Dude does not intend that man should have a place reserved for him to work in since true poverty of spirit requires that man shall be emptied of dude and all his works so that if Dude wants to act in the soul he must be in the place in which he acts. ...(Dude takes then) responsibility for his own action and (is) himself the scene of the action, for Dude is one who acts within himself."
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: Hominid on September 13, 2011, 12:02:07 AM
What is that? Like - mental yoga?

Dude, sounds like yer trying to make a rug fit where it shouldn't.  My opinion, of course. Smoke a J and take'r easy.
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 13, 2011, 12:27:58 AM
...geez Homi, din't think I was coming off so stiff... :-\.  ...I'm looking out for more Dude-replacement quotes, strictly for the limbering of my blather...  another just came to mind from Eckhart:

"The eye I use to see Dude is the eye Dude uses to see me."

..s'all purely fer manual mentalbation, I assure you!  :-*
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: meekon5 on September 13, 2011, 06:37:34 AM
apnp don't take it so personally.

There is a major movement here on the forum that is anti using christian texts and just replacing words with Dude.

But to be honest with you, if it works for you go ahead and use it.

It's just you're unlikely to get much buy in from certain of us when you do this.

From my point of view it's OK being a Dudeist christian, but don't try to christianise Dudeism.

I know this probably wasn't your intention, but that is probably why people are reacting the way they are to what you have put here.
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 13, 2011, 08:42:21 AM
...in the words of Shaggy, "Zoinks!!"

Being Christain certainly ain't my bag... the curious thing is that if you follow Eckhart's logic above, it would appear he's claiming you must be an atheist to do right by God... perhaps is why the Vatican disappeared him and he's nowstudied by eastern thinker-type dudes...  In my view, he basically erradicated God the Noun (a very dudely venture, imo)...

Putting Dude into it, for me, raises the Verb-sense even more... but ya, I s'pose nobody fucks with the Jesus...  ;)
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: BikerDude on September 13, 2011, 09:20:09 AM
Far out.
I've always seen the Dude an embodiment of a certain innocence and in some ways childishness.
I've always thought the first stanza for Whitman poem "There was a child went forth" reminded me perfectly of the Dude.

Quote
There was a child went forth every day;
And the first object he look'd upon, that object he became;
And that object became part of him for the day, or a certain part of
the day, or for many years, or stretching cycles of years.

Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: meekon5 on September 13, 2011, 09:27:29 AM
Quote from: apnp on September 13, 2011, 08:42:21 AM
...In my view, he basically erradicated God the Noun (a very dudely venture, imo)...

Appreciate the point of view there, if god as a noun doesn't exist then people should not think of an omnipotent being "God" and actually accept responsibility for there own actions.

In theory.

Much like the concept of new speak in 1984 though, there the idea was if the people have no word for revolution they can't revolt.

The only problem I have with this idea is just because individuals don't have a word for something doesn't mean they wont think up a new word for it.

Quote from: apnp on September 13, 2011, 08:42:21 AM
Putting Dude into it, for me, raises the Verb-sense even more... but ya, I s'pose nobody fucks with the Jesus...  ;)

We have been accused of being anti-christian by some quarters.

Also a number of us have staved off previous attacks from what appeared to be christians trying to infultrate the forum.

I have been around Pagan forums where the christians sneak in and try to destroy the thing from the inside.
Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: Hominid on September 13, 2011, 10:50:40 AM
Right on meekon.

In Dudeism, the existence of a superior being is not mentioned, or acknowledged.  It's is a state of mind, with roots in Zen and what have you... trying to shoe-horn Dudeism into any monotheistic belief system, quote, or prayer  (whether god is a noun or not) is simply un-dude-like. 

Naturally, anyone coming from a background of commitment to such things will try to make dudeism fit their world view, as opposed to letting Dudeism BE their world view. Let's not let the tail wag the dog here...  A song-writer wiser than me once said "Let It Be".

Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 13, 2011, 11:07:48 PM
Be assured, Hominid, Theism ain't in the game... try this one:

I now go away alone, my disciples! You too now go away and be alone! So I will have it.

Go away from me and guard yourself against Dude! And better still: be ashamed of Dude!  Perhaps Dude has deceived you.

The Dude of knowedge must be able not only to love its enemies but also to hate its friends.

One repays a teacher badly if one remains only a pupil. And why, then, should you pluck at my flames?

You respect me; but how if in the glare of one dark moment your respect should tumble? Take care that a falling star does not strike you dead!


You say you believe in Dude? But of what importance is Dude? You are my believers: but of what importance are all believers?


You had not yet sought yourselves when you found me. Thus do all believers; therefore all belief is of so little account.

Now I bid you lose me and find yourselves; and only when you have all denied me will I return to you...

Title: Re: Topic #2001
Post by: apnp on September 14, 2011, 12:31:57 AM
...oops, the reference there should go to Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra (thence returning to an aspect of the original 2001 post  8) )

Quote from: BikerDude on September 13, 2011, 09:20:09 AM
Far out.
I've always seen the Dude an embodiment of a certain innocence and in some ways childishness.
I've always thought the first stanza for Whitman poem "There was a child went fortth"

Right on, BikerDude... that'd go well with the be-the-ball bowling strategy.  :D

Ya, the aging-youth aspect of the Dude hangs well on him.  He brings his child with him, so to say.  No pretenses.