Which Half??

The matter of " which half" is one of the most vital step in one's spiritual growth, in which most of people would never pass or they pass half ass, never completely, therefore they would never arrive anywhere near enlightenment in their lives:

My mentor, a lady, often left two pieces of very well prepared and delicious fish on the pan one for me and one for her who ate later. And I was always facing the dilemma all alone in the kitchen , nobody watching me, to which one to take. Slowly I realized that if , as always, I grant the bigger fish (1) to myself I would satisfy my tummy but my soul would shrink because of greed and selfishness. In the other hand choosing the smaller one I had to leash my temptation and greed and broaden my tolerance and consequently my soul, by disappointing my eyes, my belly and my body. So I learned the law of opposite: """"taking the bigger piece makes you smaller"""" and vice versa
I noticed that the nagual woman taught me so clearly that the choice as always in life, is right in front of me: which half would I choose, my body or my soul?? And the other thing: that there is a lesson in every act.

==

(1) it seems having a bigger fish is important for some people: like my mum always gave the bigger piece to her children except fish, that she always made sure that she gets the biggest piece.

Hmm, if there is a bigger portion and a smaller portion, can I still call each of them a half?

Edit: This reminded me of the times I used to wonder, why my dad had a bigger plate than me. ( I was around 6 years or so) Then one day there weren't any other small plates available, so my mom gave me a bigger plate but with the same amount she would put in the smaller plate or so. At that moment, I wondered why my plate wasn't filled up like my dad was. Then as I started eating, I realized that I was already full with the amount my mom gave me.

I'd take the bigger piece every time. Why? Because it would be eaten fresh and the smaller piece...left in the pan for later, whether eaten cold or reheated would have a smaller ratio of possible contamination than the larger piece and, therefore, my conscience (not my soul)...would be looking out for my friend's wellbeing and, in doing so, (taking the larger piece)..I'd be looking after my body by satisfying my belly.

Full Belly...no guilt....no worries.

These responses are accurate, and hilariously so.

I'd take the bigger part, because I know if I took the smaller, I'd just be doing it so that I could think about what a good person I am.

~~

Okay lets put all these to perspective without going to the psycho analysis detail of everything you all said.
for the first: The bigger half is a phrase widely used and if it is correct or only correct oxymoron-ly, is not the concern of this argument, as long as you understand the purpose which was bigger "piece" here. You have tendency to let sidetracks to distract you even in your sometimes ingenious pieces. but I know you were genuine in your question.

In the Hellon part I would never doubt for a second that you would do something otherwise or God forbid sacrifice for the sake of others. Everything is always about you. But for the sake of the argument what would you say, if the subjects were very fine pieces of chocolate for example. your so "hilariously" called "accurate" response would so "hilariously" collapse. Or let me see how would you justify your avarice tendency for the bigger piece this time?? hmm let me see.....okay: I ( you) would take the bigger piece of chocolate as an act of devotion because the chocolate is not good for the other person. What if it is the bigger favorite fruit...?? there is always a justification for every thing wrong or right in the whole world; nobody would ever say I am taking the bigger piece because I am a greedy sun of a gun.
Abby where do you measure these accuracy, In your lab??
Siby I guess anyone could justify anything with your kind of logic, for example: I cheat on my partner because if I do not I'd just be doing it so that I could think about what a good person I am.
I guess what is "hilarious" about us is that we think so, but logic is not our fortes!!

Usually in this situation, I insist the other person pick first.

I would do that too if I really want something. It is revesing the situation hoping the other be either the bigger person or the greedy bustard. Deluding yourself that in either one you would win forgetting that you would also equally lose.

I think I generally have trouble making choices, and when someone saves me the trouble, I'm rarely displeased with the results.

Then again, I automatically take the smaller half when I'm aware my "familiar" has a bigger appetite, i.e., my boyfriend :)

Finally someone
(( has bigger heart))
or at least for the sake of argument.

Hmm, if there is a bigger portion and a smaller portion, can I still call each of them a half?

^ actually, with this I was thinking... about love.
You know how people say or dream to find their second "half." Well, I was thinking that if I go with the above logic and I call them a half then that could sort of explain why in a marriage, there seems to be someone giving more than the other in order for the relationship to last... or to be a whole

Meaning, that if a half starts to slack off the other half needs to do more in order for the relationship to be a whole. But if both halves start to slack then they are no longer a whole. They slowly become cero.

I know I'm probably deviating from the topic... but but but that's kind of interesting.

My comment seems to have piqued you, ddavidd.

Your earnest life lesson juxtaposed with Everlasting's mathematical botheration and Hellon's no-nonsense practicality... I found this delightful. I like all honest and interesting answers. If everyone said "I would take the small piece in order to bless others and myself" - well, obviously it's very good and righteous, but it's a bit odd to go ahead and write about your own saintliness - the act itself is at odds with their inherent goodness.

Most of the people I know would offer to take the smaller piece because of this thing: social decorum - the fear of your fellow people judging against you, just as you labelled Hellon with avarice. Or they're on a diet. Or, as Sibby said and like you, they want to feel good about themselves. Generally, I have noticed that men feel more entitled to bigger portions and women feel inclined to sacrifice their portions.

I would take the big piece, but leave a bit of it with the small piece in the pan, creating two actual halves. I try to be fair to others and myself wherever possible. Otherwise, I'd take the small piece.

No it did not pique me. You are okay. I was jus trying to emphasis on "hilarious" part, because were used superficially without even glancing into the depth. Things smilingly smart ass said, most of time are so superficial.
Once my friend Paul ( who recited my poems)in London was asking the guy who was in the office in place of his friend, the owner of the farm, where we go pick some fruit and weigh and put the money on the counter, if he (Paul himself) needed some change, (meaning should he find some change before going to the farm or there would be some change on the counter for him to pay the exact money.) The gentleman maliciously laughed at my friend and said:" how should I know if you need change or not?" a few other random people who heard his comment found it hilarious too and laughed. My friend Paul who is a gentleman and a distinguish professor (former) in Oxford, gave the guy piece of his mind and told how stupid he was thinking his smart ass comment hold any hiding or obvious meaning at all in any shape or angle, in a very eloquent way, and proved it, that the guy was only a bubble head who rejoice in mocking people, not knowing it was him who were reviling his hilarious nature, but unfortunately only in eyes of the real meaning not random passer-by.

creating two equal pieces shows that you are well balanced.

"Siby I guess anyone could justify anything with your kind of logic, for example: I cheat on my partner because if I do not I'd just be doing it so that I could think about what a good person I am."

Nah, there are plenty of reasons why I wouldn't cheat on my partner. I wouldn't -not- cheat solely so that I could feel good about myself. But when it comes to taking the smaller fish half (outside of one party being hungry, whatever), a sense of ego seems to be the motivator. It's not always healthy to get too caught up in your own sanctity.

There is at least one large logical issue with my answer, but that would probably not be one of them.

"I wouldn't -not- cheat solely ... "
I know you are thinking mathematically two negative make a positive, but your sentence sounds so clumsy dear Siby.
The mathematics goes shaky here though in the last sentence: one thing "That", could not be ONE OF a single thing " at least one" even though you left the possibility of others "at lest", but the point of emphasis was the one and you changed it at the end and that is clumsy as well. At least in the logic of grammar.

I understood your general point though, but you by saying this, reveal that you are already "caught up in your own sanctity" which perplexes you from choosing the right cores of action, and that is abandoning the self in account of your friends, to make sour that you are not doing it for the wrong reason.

It depends. What kind of fish is in the pan? This question is only relevant if the fish is salmon or tuna, otherwise I'm stocking up on the salad.

UNACCEPTABLE RESPONSE, NARPH. WRONG.

If I were hungry, I'd take the larger half & thank them.

Not so hungry, leave it for them.

I don't generally over-think food.

"I understood your general point though, but you by saying this, reveal that you are already 'caught up in your own sanctity.'"

DING DING DING. Didn't know if you'd get there. I do very much over-think my own actions and motivations, which leads down a rabbithole of moral ambiguity that gets nowhere. There's no choice that would leave me convinced about whether I was acting selfishly or selflessly.

...Which lead me to give an answer that's not quite true. Thankfully, we have cultural social codes in place that give us roles to follow in these scenarios. External factors aside, an acquaintance gives you a choice between portions, you take the smaller. It's just polite. Maybe we have that rule so that we don't have to over-think it.

I was mostly just feeling impish, and wanted to provide a counterpoint to a thread that seems to have been created so you could instruct us all on how to be good people.

In the Hellon part I would never doubt for a second that you would do something otherwise or God forbid sacrifice for the sake of others. Everything is always about you

^^^

I take offence at this comment Ddavidd. You asked for opinions and I gave an honest reply. I wasn't the only one who chose the larger piece so I don't know who you singled me out here? Perhaps it's the fact that I'm not so easily swayed with your philosophical statements/beliefs as some of our younger members and perhaps it irks you somewhat that I think more in a logical way than you...still, that's no reason to make false accusations about me. If you can't accept that not all people will have the same beliefs as you and will be willing to put them out there if asked then you should stop asking these questions and stop trying to ram your beliefs down other people's throats when they have the 'nerve' to disagree with you.

Anyway...didn't I read in the baking thread that you're a vegan?

I either choose the smaller piece or cut the bigger piece in half, leaving two small pieces instead of just one. It can then be somebody else's problem to ponder over. Lol

Haha You where the only one actually going "straight" there with a funny "twist" that you do it for their own sake. I knew you would get offended if I give you a full-fledged psychoanalysis of what you said, because you are not, but you try to act, that kind of person who have, that freedom of mind. It was a time that I did that for whole site, in the thread called : "dare to sake". But I know you would not dare. But I could give you a hint for you always are blunt and sometimes rude to me.
About making the falls accusation part: It would have been quite easy, if I did, which I did not, because you are the person who two times falsely accused me and were quite rude about it and the second time even lied about the occurrence of the first time. So it is not so bad a little taste of your own medicine .
About Philosophy part you are wrong again. The mare reason of having a philosophy is to try to convince other Philosophies. Of course I would defend my position and discuses it with opponents. Whit you I did it only a bit bluntly though, first because you are always blunt with me and even passed the threshold of being rude sometimes. Even few times you confess to it while commenting on my poems. But I did not mine it provided by that at least you could endure half of what you inflect . And of course your accusation. But It seems that you do not like the taste of your own medicine even if it is way milder bitter than yours. So stop prescribing them then!!

Dear Larry what if you know the person who is coming right after you is as , or even more, hungry than you?
I like your answer that everyone should act according to their needs provided by that that others needs are treated equally with our own. In that case your answer would be the best, even better than mine, not for the personal growth but for the sake of society.

We all over think food though. Most, more then 60%, of all men do is for food. Everyone tries to get the bigger pie piece even though they do not even need it. Since I turned raw vegan I realized how consuming is the preparation of simple meals tree times a day for a family. Preparing, cooking, washing, shopping , working to gain the money for that shopping. Even going to restaurant we have to over pay with the money we gained while working. Never mind the real wars for food , economic wars agricultural, animal husbandry. Commercial in TVs. They are all obsessed about food. How could we not??

Dear H.L. if true it is good that you are able to do that. But In the journey of self discovery one should just solve her own and simplifies others worries instead of adding to them or complicating them more.
In the final analysis one is only facing his/her own conscience.

Dear Siby i am glad that we have that understanding now that I understood you from the beginning.

You try to analyse people...that's your hobby it would seem...somehow I fall short of whatever it is you're looking for so I have become someone of 'interest' to you it would seem? Rude? I have never been rude to you or anyone else on here intentionally...hey..you post a poem on here...you make a new thread...please do not expect your ego to be stoked by me on either occasion..you get the truth...that's NOT being rude, it's being honest. Let's look at our comments status...I have a platinum...you have..what? So...although my comments may be blunt (or, in your opinion rude) they are obviously appreciated by members who realize I am being honest/helpful not rude...hey...how many times have I pm'd you telling you of spelling /grammar errors because I realize you cannot face it to be in a comment, but....yeah...I guess it all abut me....

Anyway...off into the forest of Korea tomorrow...

Edited
We all analyze one another: when we call someone pretentious, easygoing... so and so. It is the matter of identification, of how we identify with others distinctions and of our wrong and right interpretations of them. Without that we could not even function.

You have platinum I got nothing. but almost all the active members got it. If that is your pride I am glad. I help people poetry in other ways that do not appear in the eyes allured by prides of colours and prizes.
you can have mine too. Non of those boxes really matter to me, they all are trivial. People are matter to me in which one is you who often regardless, were a supporter of my works. So here we go I give you a real platinum one from the heart.
You do not remember in two occasion you changed your comment because finding them rude which made me delighted because I did not find them bothersome.
Two or three occasion I remember you pm ed me regarding my spelling. and few time commented under my poems in which neither of them bothered me and I always were appreciative. So again you are untruthful.
Ask everlasting she always criticize me. I explain myself but never get offended.
I GET OFFENDED ONLY IF SOMEONE WRONGLY ACCUSES ME!!
I did not even mind your rudeness I thought it was a bound between those who have more tolerance, but I do mind one way roads!!

Haha
he who know who you are
I asked you a question
and you did not answer
you, who, he does not know
that we cant afford to!!

^^^^

Are you talking to me? I don't see any question marks in the post you made directly below mine so...I'm not sure who you're addressing here?

Anyway...if it is me your talking to, I posted that I was going into the forest and would not have internet for a few days.