Provenance Lineage and Branding

If for example you had a couple of season’s playing premiership football at Manchester City recently, it would be a good thing to put on your CV. There would be an automatic few brownie points added mentally. Your power by affiliation to a “top” team gives kudos. People would not imagine you, a priori, a shite player. Likewise if you studied at a pukka university and did research in the group of a Nobel Prize winner, people might imagine you clever, good and perhaps competent. The CV then gives some notion of provenance. Where did you learn your trade and who taught it you? The quality of teaching may be far higher at a lower kudos university but human mind likes bragging rights. An Imperial College graduate commands top whack salary and employment in the UK. In France because of the lack of Harry Potter affiliation it is not such a big deal.

Put simply this is a form of reputational prejudice. Affiliation to brand can be paid for and claimed. Reputation, though often relied upon, is no guarantee.

I personally have interacted with an academic lineage and a martial arts lineage. Studying at a groovy place with high reputation did not make me any better. In terms of the martial arts lineage it did convey a connection with a real and lethal martial tradition. It is/was not in the ring kick boxing nor caged MMA. When the sensei says, en passant, that it was not unusual in the 1960s and 1970s for people to still die during training, or that they had undertaken a 100 man kumite, it is a different ballgame. In many senses here, the fewer words, the less show and less overt marketing the more “real” the tradition. Action speaks louder than words and need not be advertised and sold. For a westerner to be given the keys to a “Ryu” hundreds of years old, is a high honour and a mark of respect. I know that I only saw maybe 5% of what that sensei was capable of even though I was close to dan grade. I have by experience respect of the profound depth of what a direct transmission lineage might hold; I did not see it fully but I sure as hell sensed it. There was a lineage of marked lethality over and above regular combat skills. Perhaps of limited and specialised use these days.

Within a genuine lineage there can be found knowledge and skill beyond the ordinary and mundane. The preservation of this can become an obsession and not all elements are “time of man” appropriate.  The arcane knowledge is highly specialised and perhaps incredible, unbelievable to modern “scientific man”. If you have been choked out and revived on the judo mat and had an injury healed by Mr Miyagi “hands on” you may have a little more respect and less of a tendency to scoff. We do not regularly have the time for complex and extensive Vajrayana rituals in our 21st century day to day. This does not mean they have no value. They do. Though the number of skilled practitioners of such things will wane. Everything needs some kind of modernisation. Sparsity of ritual can in fact enhance the intent and power thereof.

Because of the Western obsession with advertising PR and branding, those who might be called “spiritual” practitioners have been persuaded that they need jazzy web sites and recounting of lineage back to the founding fathers. Go Daddy may even have a “guru” template to get you started. In this respect claimed Zen lineages are core to the initial marketing effort. Everyone seeking a connection back to the twirling of a flower on vulture peak. Much like the kings of England sought a bloodline back to claim their divine right to the throne. Lineage is good marketing and appeals to some would be punters / clients / devotees.

However interacting with a true lineage carries with it something extra, not bargained for. If you are susceptible and open, the thought forms and aged collected intent of the lineage has an added “dimension”. The thought forms, built by mind after mind, transmitted between minds, have a power far in excess of the face value. If you are a knob or a bellend, you will be unable to receive and/or assimilate. To put it in another way, somehow the lineage itself discerns who is a worthy recipient.

It is unfortunate sign of our times that unless the advertising or PR aligns with expectation we do not “buy” or trust. We have become prejudiced to a certain form of inane packaging. There is often a ginger and a brown person in the advert. Sometimes this is saccharin woke. Not all advice is good advice. People are forever chasing a buck and may try to persuade you otherwise.

Being of a certain age I have come up with a new service. I will offer end of life insurance to pay for it {no medical questions}, a no fuss cremation plan, the construction and positioning of a bench in a country location with your name plaque, and a vetted agent to take your ashes on a SAGA Norwegian fjord cruise there to scatter them on a wind of your choosing.

I think that there is mileage in this…the trouble is I have nor provenance or lineage for so doing. I am pretty sure that I could come up with a catchy brand and use a template design web site which I can pay to have SEO optimised.

“Blowing in the Wind” our bespoke end of life package for the discerning over 60s…

Stalking Referees and Provenance

In this day and age it is common to Google someone, almost by instinct. Type their name in and see what the font of all wisdom returns. This is not generally considered stalking though it might be a gateway drug. My name is common and unless you use other key words you won’t find me. I don’t have a LinkedIn, nor any institutionalized affiliation. There is information on ResearchGate, Google Scholar and various Patent listings. It could be said that I have low or spare online presence. My CV is not there. Yet here is a blog of ~350,000 words which might speak more. It is however unverified. Nobody can vouch for it.

There might be a desire to check up on me. What might you do? Well you could contact people at my last proper employer, near two decades ago, to see if there was anyone left alive there who might. have heard of me or vaguely remember me. You could ask me for a referee who might vouch for me and the provenance of whatever knowledge I might have. To which lineage does it belong? Who were / are my teachers?

My inability to satisfactorily comply would probably downgrade any perception that you might have of me and what I write. The likelihood of me being ignored would be enhanced because nobody can vouch for me, as I am now. There is nobody aside from the wife who could realistically and accurately comment on how I am now. There would be no comforting “blah” from another human to make you feel more secure in / with me. There would be no trail no curriculum.

This means that because the way the world is now, I am unemployable. There is nobody who could give me a reference. I have zero recent track record. My last “A” level student science tutees were 2017.

If you checked up on me you might not find much overt of use. Of course the security services could view my banking  details, ‘phone and internet use. Because of the sparsity that might even look suspicious in this day and age. Any agent would have a concocted narrative, a plausible cover story, which might bear scrutiny.  But sweet Fanny Adams? Nah, that would stick out too much.

The safest logical conclusion is that I am irrelevant and unimportant. I am a socially disconnected loner who is not “well liked” in the community. Before long I am likely to appear in the news for some unspecified heinous act, to confirm the confirmation biases about people like me held by the socially “well” adjusted.

I do have medical records. Some of which I technically wrote myself by providing the French GP with a list of stuff that has happened. There are medical records in the UK. Now I have dental X-rays so if I went missing and wound up dead, I could be identified by my dental records as the plot line goes.

———————————————————-

When you check up on someone, what is the motive for that?

If you struggle to contain the desire to stalk someone, are you prepared for what you might find?

Why might it be important to have the opinion of some other being, knowing full well that all humans are biased, prejudiced and have agendas to pursue?

Does everything in the world have to have a traceable provenance?

——————————————————–

Belief and Proof

I’ll speculate that many believe things, ideologies and religions for which there in no possibility of proof. Half of the UK “believed” that Brexit was a good idea, many were adamant even though the outcome was unknown. They professed with absolute certainty about something which had not yet happened. Some Americans chant the MAGA mantra. Exactly when was America ever a great and equal place? Bad stuff has always gone on there to some extent.

People will believe whatever it is they want to believe. The strength of belief may vary. The war in Vietnam seemed like a good idea at first. Someone thought agent orange was good.

The church had a vested interest in making people God-fearing. Bums on seats meant coins on collection plates and salaries for clergy. The gold held by the churches and all that chavvy stuff goes against my interpretation of New Testament Christianity which differs from Old Testament Torah. Yet many who name themselves Christian believe in an eye for an eye instead of turning a cheek. I personally cannot envisage any deity in human or anthropomorphic form. {With the exception of Ganesh} I was made to draw God as a white bearded white geezer at the convent school in Zambia.

People born with penises believe that they can be “women” after a few hormones and a change of clothes, a new frock.

Some of the conspiracy theories floating about are to my eyes far-fetched, yet they have their devotees. I do believe that the world is controlled loosely by rich people. The extent to which they conspire is moot. It is all about profit and the best way to get that is by being good at business and ensuring calm by means of pecuniary compliance. There is no need to do weird far-out stuff. 

Yep, some get corrupted by power and this can be expressed by abuse, sexual abuse and coercion. There are a number of ring-like groups that take advantage of those who are corruptible by promise of an easy ticket. Sometimes the cost of association to/with a powerful figure is high. Savile, Epstein, Al-Fayed. There are mini-mes of these scattered through the population, the degree of unpleasantness varies.

Between belief and proof, we might have working hypothesis. In which one tries out a framework or context to see how well it works, what the generality is like. There are “proofs” which are more circumstantial than direct.  There are things which suggest or point at an idea.

I believe in the concept of karma, there is sufficient observable causality for me to trust it as a concept, a working hypothesis. However, the subject is vast. I once did a whole blog exploring karma. The cornerstone of karma is evolution. One needs to learn from mistakes. Evolution and karma are of the same process. There is a cost associated with some actions which “the universe” wants paid. Karma not worked at in a timely fashion and with willing mood accrues karmic debt, much like a bank loan. One learns the effect of a causal action or behaviour. Sometimes people are slow learners.

The coypu no longer trouble our lotuses. Electric shock training with 0.25 Joule pulses at kilovolts works. We have a low electric fence which I installed. Cause and effect. Coypu karma.

I have had sufficient circumstantial evidence via visions and dreaming to believe in reincarnation. There is no way, on this planet, that I could ever prove reincarnation to the satisfaction of my scientific training. I could not put data into a spreadsheet and plot a graph with a fitted equation and a statistical quality of fit metric. I share the belief in reincarnation with millions. I probably believe it more strongly than most.

Karma and reincarnation as concepts are internally consistent. Karma spans lifetimes so that we can evolve. Karma is a teacher of sorts, in my world.  It takes lifetime after lifetime to learn somethings.

Is it significant that I who once was a pukka scientist at a pukka institution can remember three lives as a Buddhist monastic?

Depends upon what you think is significant. To your average common or garden UK football supporter it means nothing.  To someone who is a committed Buddhist it would not be a huge surprise, it might be tad interesting. Why not a scholar scientist and a scholar monk? It is not so different. Both have cerebral elements. To a bunch of scientists, it might be a red flag which needs disproved.

Have you noticed how science has a negation bias?

I’ll speculate that most people have a host of things which they believe which cannot be proven and moreover they do not question their beliefs or the provenance of the source from which they were obtained / picked up. Gossip and tittle tattle being a common currency which can become Gospel or God’s honest truth. “They” know and say an awful lot, do they not?

People can be very adamant about things which they have not checked or researched themselves. There is heavy reliance on hearsay. There are a lot of soap box orators both in real life and on-line. Hearsay has it that the spread of disinformation is huge and increasing.  This is consistent with what I see on Twitter. 

If you watch BBC, Sky, France 24 and Al-Jazeera the reporting on Gaza is very different. The British news is very sanitized and biased. People trust the BBC but it is reporting on a very different “war” to Al-Jazeera. Chalk and cheese. The UK right think the BBC is luvvie-socialist oriented.

People will believe whatever they want to believe. Convenience is a major factor in belief. They will believe what is the most convenient for them to believe. Inconvenient truths are generally not preferred. Coming round to an inconvenient belief takes time and is resisted, exemplified by the three individuals mention previously.  So far nobody has said a great deal about the Princess Diana – Al-Fayed relationship. That narrative is altered by recent news. Did King Charles have her bumped off? Is he still the villain or are there other factors now?

Belief is also mutable…

What you believe today is impermanent…I can’t prove it to you…I can offer it as a working hypothesis which you might see to be applicable.

———————————

How many of your beliefs are convenient?

Why did you prefer them?