Six Sentence Story: Adam and Evie, First Date

When Evie and her best friend Lilith started Poof, International it was Evie’s secret apple delight recipe, inherited from her great grandmother, combined with Lilith’s secret poof formula, inherited from some distant ancestor she no longer needed to remember, that put the company on a firm enough footing to attract investor interest.

Even though they were now both gazillionaires they remained graduate students at the University of Noital so they could find their Mr. Rights, or at least Evie was looking for Mr. Right, while Lilith would have been content with a boatload of Mr. Wrongs whom she could vanish when a fresh boat docked.

While wandering through the cafeteria they noticed Adam sitting across from some guy who looked like he didn’t know he was a guy, but then they realized to their horror that this was that very Adam, that notorious, deceitful, no-good, anti-poof terrorist, who was eating from a sack lunch containing a disgusting, greasy burger with wimpy fries. Evie grabbed a plate load of poof with the intent of making the terrorist eat it all in front of her while Lilith vanished the other guy since, whatever it was, it was getting in the way of Evie having a private moment with Adam.

When Evie returned after watching Adam abruptly leave the cafeteria Lilith asked, How did your first date go? – knowing full well how it went.

Evie was nearly in tears as she said, while Lilith cooed in sympathy walking her back to their waiting limousine, I gave him the poof and told him to eat it and he refused and so I told him we were finished – THROUGH – and he said that we were NEVER together – that this was the FIRST time we ever spoke a word to each other – which was ridiculous (and Lilith agreed) – and then he lectured me (and Lilith said, “How dare he!”) and then he had the nerve to just get up and leave (and Lilith said, “Men!”) as if I – I – were the one making a scene (and Lilith said, “Poor baby!”).

______

Denise offers the prompt word “sack” for this week’s Six Sentence Stories.

Unknown's avatar

Author: Frank Hubeny

I enjoy walking, poetry and short prose as well as taking pictures with my phone.

32 thoughts on “Six Sentence Story: Adam and Evie, First Date”

  1. Two corrupt Av tuma avoda zarah teachers of Torah. 9.1.25 Maimonides and Maharishi II

    rabbielimallonRabbi Eli Mallon, M.Ed., LCSW

    Maharishi Mahesh YogimeditationspiritualityconsciousnessMaimonides

    Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Maimonides discuss the same thing —the unchanging basis of all that exists.

    Maimonides discusses this as an idea/a subject for contemplation. Maharishi discusses the same as a personal experience in meditation.

    The experience confirms the idea.
    The idea clarifies the experience.
    At the same time,
    the experience clarifies the idea;
    the idea, in its universality,
    confirms the experience.

    I

    “1. The foundation of all foundations and the pillar of wisdom is to know that there is a Primary Being who brought into being all existence. All the beings of the heavens, the earth, and what is between them came into existence only from the truth [i.e. reality] of His being.

    1. If one would imagine that He [or: It] does not exist, no other being could possibly exist.

    2. If one would imagine that none of the entities aside from Him [or: It] exist, He alone would continue to exist, and the nullification of their [existence] would not nullify His existence, because all the [other] entities require Him and He, blessed be He, does not require them nor any one of them…

    3. This is implied by the prophet’s statement: ‘And God, your Lord, is true’ 1 – i.e., He alone is true and no other entity possesses truth that compares to His truth. This is what [is meant by] the Torah’s statement: ‘There is nothing else aside from Him’ 2 – i.e., aside from Him, there is no true existence like His.” 3

    II

    “This thing that the relative is born of (the Absolute), this is to understand what is behind the relative –changing, changing, changing. [i.e. the ‘Relative’ — always changing — is born of the ‘Absolute’ — never changing]. Now we analyze what this change is and what is the ultimate value of this change. Then we know that the change is very heavy, or very gross, very clear change on the surface.

    Deep within the change is lesser change, lesser change, lesser change. At the deepest value of change there is least change. Only when we try to know what exists underneath the change, what is the reality of change, then we come to know that there is no field of change.

    This is what physics does. All these molecules and then atoms and then electrons and then the subatomic particles and then very fine particles, and high energy, fine particles are high energy and then eventually ground state, least variation. Least variation means maximum order. Order increases. Disorder becomes less and less and less and less. That means activity becomes less and less and then eventually, vacuum state. This vacuum state may be said to be Absolute, non-changing, no change, nothing. And a little, little manifest value we may say, is that ground state where the things are not moving, no activity. But the ground state itself breathes life. There is something there, very fine, relative.

    So, this is analysis of the relative which eventually locates the Absolute in an area where relativity is nonexistent, beyond the finest relative existence, Absolute. So, this is physical analysis or analysis of the activity.

    In Indian philosophy it’s called Karma Mimamsa; Karma – action.

    Mimamsa – of action, analysis of action, analysis of action. What kind of action? Gross action, subtle action, subtler action, subtlest action. Now all this on the basis of a field of life which has no activity in it, vacuum state according to physics, Absolute according to the Science of Creative Intelligence, ultimate reality.

    Now it’s like the top of the mountain, very windy and as you come along the slope the wind is less and less and less and less. You come down the foot of the hill, no wind, it’s all protected. Great activity, less activity, less activity, no activity at the foot. Just like that, top of the mountain, the top. Now what is happening you’re on the top of the mountain? You are able to see vast distances. And as you come along on the slope you see less, you see less. Vision becomes restricted, vision becomes, because the height is less. You come to the foot of the mountain and you can see only this much.

    Now, the reality of vision at the foot of the mountain is completely different from the reality of the vision on the middle of the mountain.

    And this is completely different from the reality vision from the top of the mountain. So, when a man standing on the top of the mountain, he says, “Oh I’m seeing this much”, a man at the foot of the hill says, “I’m seeing this much”, both are correct. No one is false, correct because he sees only this much, he can only see this much and he can describe only this much. So, this is the reality of this stand. A man on the middle of the mountain, he has a different level of stand. From his level whatever he sees he describes. He is capable of describing more than the man on the foot of the mountain. But still that more is much less compared to the man on the top of the mountain.

    So, it depends upon at what level of awareness one experiences the environment. In Unity one experiences the environment. One finds no differences, nothing, he has a different picture of the world. In God Consciousness, completely a different picture of the world; the world is very fascinating, it’s beautiful. In CC, it has a completely different status, it’s always changing, I’m not changing. I have great superiority over all that which…. I’m the lord of all I survey and all that… CC. In transcendence the world doesn’t exist. In waking state everything is so dear and so fine and so nice, localized values, all localized. In dream it has a different fascination. In sleep nothing exists.” 4

    III

    Both Maharishi and Maimonides are telling us that full human perception embraces both the ever-changing creation and its/our unchanging source, too. Short of that, we’re not fully developed human beings.

    Is there a Biblical model for this?

    Yes — the perception of Adam and Havah/Eve in the Garden of Eden. Afterwards, Torah describes those for whom this perception was a normal experience as ones who “walked with God.” Later, the prophets exemplify this. King David — writer and singer of the Psalms — represents this, too.

    The promise of Torah and TaNaCh is that this will someday be the norm for all humanity, forever. As the Hasidic text “Tanya” teaches:

    “This, in fact, is the whole [purpose] of man and the purpose for which he, and all the worlds, both upper and lower, were created: that G‑d should have such a dwelling place here below…” 5

    1 Yirmiyahu/Jeremiah 10:10

    2 D’varim/Deuteronomy 4:35

    3 Maimonides: Mishnah Torah/Book of Knowledge 1:1-4; see also Yesodei ha-Torah 1:1

    4 Maharishi Mahesh Yogi
    La Antilla, Spain
    March 3, 1973 (transcribed from a video tape)
    https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=10238341431783073&set=gm.2796773693840717&idorvanity=442978549220255

    5 Tanya; ch. 33

    Maharishi Mahesh Yogi and Maimonides on parallel tracks. Both of them failed to distinguish two radically different systems of law – the fundamental day and night distinction between Jewish common law from Roman statute law.

    T’NaCH\Talmudic משנה תורה Legislative review-Constitutional common law – inductive, precedent-based, always applied within the צדק צדק תרדוף “Torah Faith” of courtroom context (עדות, דינים, פרשנות). Knowledge of God (ידע), directly bound to how justice defines Faith as an eternal obligation of Israel’s acceptance of the Torah at Sinai. Based upon the precedent and testimony of Moshe and Aaron standing before the Court of Par’o and the abuse of beating Hebrew slaves.

    “Foundation of foundations” in Rambam’s Yesodei HaTorah a false codified abstraction—but in the Mishna/Gemara world, “foundation” means judicial justice; procedural rules wherein judges and common law Sanhedrin lateral courtrooms build precedent-based “Brief” wherein the prosecutor and defense attorneys – Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel argue their precedent “Briefs” before one another in court. This latter common law “foundation”, it and it alone functions as the legal bedrock יסוד, not assimilated Greek or Roman metaphysical speculation abstractions.

    Roman statute law (and Indian metaphysics) – deductive, top-down, treating truth as an absolute principle or essence outside of human courtroom process. The 8th middah of the revelation of the Oral Torah at Horev defines truth as “PATH” or “Halacha”. Both Maharishi and Rambam slip into the Greek/Roman assimilation mold; a direct Torah violation of negative commandments. Their philosophical Absolute – a static ontological given. Not a lived בניני אבות Sinai oath alliance to rule the conquered lands of Canaan with Sanhedrin common law courtroom justice; which like a korban dedicates the Chosen Cohen People to pursue tohor time-oriented commandments to pursue justice – fair compensation of damages – among our People. Both these latter day men, they replicate Catholic dogmatism – “unchanging source” – in purely ontological terms (what exists beneath existence), instead of Torah faith which defines acceptance of the Torah at Sinai as צדק צדק תרדוף.

    Maharishi frames faith in terms of direct experience in meditation (phenomenology). Whereas Rambam frames faith in terms of rational proof and contemplation (philosophy). He prioritizes gnostic knowledge above “Fear of Heaven”; meaning the walk to build and protect ones’ ‘Good Name’ reputation.

    But both of these “Latter Day Saints” bypass the Talmudic way of the Cohen worship through tohor middot; specifically applicable through the concrete practice of common law courts, precedent based “Briefs”, and justice—which strives to make fair compensation of damages inflicted by Party A upon Party B among the chosen Cohen seed of the Avot.

    If we bring the T’NaCH model of mussar-aggadic common law in properly: Adam & Havah “walking with God” does not compare to these assimilated “Latter Day Saints” mystical union. Shalom among our Chosen Cohen People within the borders of the oath sworn lands: “walking in trust” the יסוד bedrock upon which stands שלום and NOT hatred without cause among our people. Later “Enoch walked with God,” “Noach walked with God,” and Avraham – chosen “to keep the way of the Lord … to do justice and righteousness” (la‘asot tzedaka u-mishpat). The real Torah framework: knowledge of God = justice done in community to restore שלום among our divided people who always struggle with our Yatzir Ha’Rah to fight Civil Wars among ourselves.

    Contrast this with the ערב רב שאין להם יראת שמים – the assimilated Roman/Indian metaphysics = Absolute/essence/unchanging source. This נידוי narishkeit stands outside of the oath brit alliance to pursue justice among and between our people. Unlike Maharishi’s “phenomenology,” aggadah does not chase mystical states—it illustrates the human cost of injustice and commands judges to persue precedent-based בניני אבות judicial fairness. Maharishi and Rambam both speak in terms of “Absolute Being” but collapse Torah’s judicial Faith framework based upon the false foundations of Greek/Roman metaphysics. By stark contrast Torah faith = צדק צדק תרדוף. Sanhedrin common law, courtroom-precedent based legalism; fair compensation for damages inflicted, mussar-aggadic framework of walking with God by doing tohor time-oriented commandments with k’vanna.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  9. fun thing about writing… sometimes (speaking only for myself) I follow the breadcrumbs of plot direction and keep things going… but at some point (for many of us) after the characters establish themselves, the narrative kinda takes off on it’s own!

    can’t wait for the next installment

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. Thank you for mentioning the Lilith legend in some of your tales. I am hoping she will help tie things together in this series perhaps by being the bad guy (or girl). Or she just might make things worse. Blessings and thank you, Clark!

      Like

      Reply

Leave a comment