- Christopher Hitchens
(via atheism-)
(via themonicabird)
Fry sobre la falta de curiosidad…
(via themonicabird)
What I said was misleading in two respects. First of all it is inaccurate to speak of my role in the scheme of things. I am the scheme of things. Secondly, it is equally misleading to speak of my aiding the process of sentient beings attaining enlightenment. I am the process. The ancient Taoists were quite close when they said of me (whom they called “Tao”) that I do not do things, yet through me all things get done. In more modem terms, I am not the cause of Cosmic Process, I am Cosmic Process itself. I think the most accurate and fruitful definition of me which man can frame — at least in his present state of evolution — is that I am the very process of enlightenment. Those who wish to think of the devil (although I wish they wouldn’t!) might analogously define him as the unfortunate length of time the process takes. In this sense, the devil is necessary; the process simply does take an enormous length of time, and there is absolutely nothing I can do about it. But, I assure you, once the process is more correctly understood, the painful length of time will no longer be regarded as an essential limitation or an evil. It will be seen to be the very essence of the process itself. I know this is not completely consoling to you who are now in the finite sea of suffering, but the amazing thing is that once you grasp this fundamental attitude, your very finite suffering will begin to diminish — ultimately to the vanishing point.
— Citado de “Is God a Taoist?” de Raymond Smullyan, 1977
These might look like antique books, but they’re actually salvaged bricks that have been painted to look like they belong in an old library. The faux literature is the brilliant work of Daryl Fitzgerald, who transforms the bricks by stenciling them on both sides with titles of literary classics.
(via themonicabird)
