Topic: Famous Pictures

[tangerine dream]

That photo made me feel sick to my stomach.
 

[Michael]

Cerelia, google Aghora.

[tangerine dream]

to whom nothing is terrible

The extreme offensiveness of what they do in their different rituals is purposeful, and intended to break all cultural taboos. The aghoris seem to me to be “anti Brahmin” or at least a lot of what they do goes against what a God fearing Brahmin is supposed to practice. Sex with women of lower caste during their menstrual periods, eating dead bodies i.e. what’s considered most unclean to a Brahmin; no food taboos are all what aghoris practice. Typically these taboos are so ingrained that we’re likely to find it very difficult to accept the meaning behind what the aghoris are doing. That’s the fascination of being with the aghoris and the challenge it presents as well. It’s also what makes the path the aghoris have chosen strenuous and complicated.

[Taimyr]

I like this picture of a crawling child because i feel somekind of emptyness in it. Like the humanness has fallen and then there's just emtyness or death. Face to face with reality, no human games.

[tangerine dream]

Yes, I see that, too.

But what bothered me was that a photgrapher would seemingly rather get a good shot (o a Pulitzer Prize) than help a starving frightened child.  That's very sad to me.

Just as it is when, during a hurricane or natural disaster the camera men and newsreporters sit by and do nothing so they can get their story.

I don't agree that's all.


(course I don't know what happened when the camera was off, I like to think somebody picked up the child and hugged him and got him some help)


Even so, for the sake of entertainment...?

[Michael]

I am fascinated by scientists who have a common law that you never interfere with nature - observe but leave to own devices. Time and again I have heard this from them.

But I know that journalists/photographers differ. They often intervene and yet still take their photos or stories. As a result they end up in all sorts of tacky situations.

In this case, what happened after the photo event, may be known somewhere, but just realise this is happening somewhere in the world right now, with no camera. And the person dying is you.

[erik]

Same girl in 1985 and 2002:

Here is the bare outline of her day. She rises before sunrise and prays. She fetches water from the stream. She cooks, cleans, does laundry. She cares for her children; they are the center of her life. Robina is 13. Zahida is three. Alia, the baby, is one. A fourth daughter died in infancy. Sharbat has never known a happy day, her brother says, except perhaps the day of her marriage.

Her husband, Rahmat Gul, is slight in build, with a smile like the gleam of a lantern at dusk. She remembers being married at 13. No, he says, she was 16. The match was arranged.

He lives in Peshawar (there are few jobs in Afghanistan) and works in a bakery. He bears the burden of medical bills; the dollar a day he earns vanishes like smoke. Her asthma, which cannot tolerate the heat and pollution of Peshawar in summer, limits her time in the city and with her husband to the winter. The rest of the year she lives in the mountains.

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2002/04/afghan-girl/index-text

[Jahn]

"Afghanistan" Steve McCurry

That one was a cover on National Geographics. What eyes, stone staring awareness!

[Jahn]

Nuba, Leni Riefenstahl

Que?

So the Nazis front lady in film and propaganda made that shot? Interesting. It is much power in that woman, and she is black.

[Muffin]

So who's the vulture now?

[tangerine dream]

Okay, I have a question just to ease my own mind.

Does anyone else feel anything when looking at these pics?  The lil child starving to death and the chickens about to be slaughtered?

I can't be the only one here that is troubled by our lack of compassion toward other humans (babies even) and animals.


Right?


(I mean I understand that it is what it is and life goes on, people die, we need to eat etc.  So I can rationalise these feelings away, (somewhat)  but does everyone do this?  And if so... why?)

[Muffin]

Rationalize this:
we (humans) beat horses to run in circles and jump over obstacles. Then if one falls and breaks his leg we shoot him in the head.

I stopped to feel anything about the world at large a long time ago.
Besides I have enough stuff of my own to figure out.

[Jennifer-]

We are all deeply rooted animals.. it just is what it is.. beautiful in a very primal and perfect way.

May you walk in beauty.. in balance, in light and love, Jennifer

[Josh]

Does anyone else feel anything when looking at these pics?  The lil child starving to death and the chickens about to be slaughtered?

I can't be the only one here that is troubled by our lack of compassion toward other humans (babies even) and animals.

To me, what you are describing is disingenuous.  You lack the ability to fully fathom the suffering of the world.

If so, you would be asking about all the murders, rape, slaughter, torture, disease, pain, starvation, orphans, widows, etc. etc. etc.  that is happening RIGHT NOW at this very moment.  Thats NOW, as in, at the same time you are currently reading this.  People are dying in horrible ways, children murdered in front of their mothers, as well as other untold tortures and atrocities by the millions.  This is not something that is only happening when you cast your eyes on a picture of it - it is happening continuously, every second.

You see, if you were truly troubled by the lack of compassion in every single one of these events - you would likely have a psychotic breakdown.  These atrocious events are always happening.  You would not be able to be troubled one minute, then go have pancakes and laugh at cartoons the next.  Of course this is possible, but to me it is not being truly troubled at all - but rather only when it suits the circumstances, and only in a way which does not interfere with your comfortable routines, except as a show of some kind.

For instance, someone feels no pain when another person unknown to them dies, but when someone close to them does - then they feel pain.  Is this compassion?  No, it is simply the selfish mind that cannot let go.  One cannot weep for someone elses sake, it is only a placation of one's own suffering that is projected onto the world.

People make excuses for this kind of compassion, and say "well, what i dont see cant trouble me".  This excuse does not create genuine compassion.  Its only an excuse for an image that society deems appropriate.

If you truly care, the only way to deal with it is to simultaneously truly not care - that is, to see the big picture.  To realize the dust in the wind.  There is no need for any complaints at this point, only the actions which flow from your nature.

[Michael]

Each has to find their own answer, or rather find it their own way.

The whole point with all these pictures, not just those last two, is to feel them.

The great task of the being who's sensitivity has been opened, is how to extend towards the beautiful and not be flooded by the harsh, the horrific and the sad. There were some famous photos I left out - the man being shot by the police commander in Vietnam, the naked napalm child in Vietnam, and some others. I just didn't feel like going there, but I have been there.

The first and foremost answer is to find one's way past the reaction. If you look carefully you will see that these reactions are about the suffering of others. We unconsciously place ourselves in their shoes. We feel their anguish as ours.

The task asked of us is to arrive at the point where nothing matters. That is our only escape. And with each situation it is different, and I can talk about each situation and how I personally made my way through their prison of pain to come out to the only point of absolute freedom. Each is different, but the way out is always the same.

Don Juan said: when I see something painful, I simply switch my eyes.

But he didn't always switch his eyes ... he disliked overcast days and loved poetry.

When each of these pictures no longer upsets you, when you can switch your eyes, then your compassion has value, and then you can read poetry in the sunlight.

Was a time I decided to face this once and for all - I stood in the street in India one day for a very long time looking at a cow with a mangled bloody leg, whom no one tendered nor cared for. The cow looked at me. I knew I could not go on till I had answered. Sure I could have taken up a life of being Mother Therese - she was not the only one, there are many people in that country and mine who have devoted their life to the relief of suffering, and I have only the highest praise for them, but that was not the question.

The question was how could I go on knowing this pain existed. What if I had walked down a different road, would the pain be any less. If I just 'don't want to know', will that answer the question?

Finally I answered the question, but it was no answer really. It was that pain exists - no point in hiding or denying. We live with pain. It was okay. It didn't need healing.

When I heal now, it's not because I need to, it's because I choose to, for no reason ... its my way of living.

So when I look at these pictures, I feel the beauty, and I feel the agony. And much agony is not known except by those who are free. That was Buddha's compassion - not for the suffering, but for the fact people didn't know the answer to suffering. That point is commonly misunderstood.

So I no longer hide from the pain. I don't enjoy it, but I enjoy life, and pain is part of life. I don't seek it, but when I see it, I feel it, and I accept it first, before I seek a remedy. As Jahn would say, I own it.