Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 31, 2016 20:22:02 GMT -5
holy... I cannot do nicotine as my body convulses... Hot pools are fine. The emphazis was on cuban....not on cigar. There is no need to inhale the smoke. Although I do. ty, THAT i lov doing, but inhalation is a no-no. Where ever someone is smoking, i stay a while, the scent becoming. www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGESrgMDm5k |
|
|
|
Post by wei sa on Aug 27, 2016 2:31:13 GMT -5
I mentioned the father/son/neurosurgeon koan on the first page, but it hasn't been posted here yet, so I'll do that: Koan questioning is used as a meditative mechanism for seeing through cognitive illusions to the truth that underlies them. Most adults are highly conditioned to see the world in a particular way, as filtered through imagination. Koans are one way to penetrate the filter and see what is prior to conditioning and imagination. All koans have concrete answers that, seen in retrospect, are recognized to be obvious. A simple example: A father and son were involved in a terrible automobile wreck. Both were picked up by an ambulance and rushed toward a hospital. Along the way the father died of his injuries. At the hospital the boy was wheeled into an operating room, and doctors were called. A neurosurgeon arrived, took one look at the boy, and said, "I can't operate on this boy; he's my son!" Who was the neurosurgeon? It is amazing how many people cannot answer this question. Children can answer it more easily than adults because they are not yet as strongly conditioned as adults. The answer is as clear as a bell to anyone who sees-through the issue. There is only one correct answer and, once seen, the correctness is blatantly obvious. I think this is a very good introductory koan as it very clearly demonstrates something about our conditioning and thinking. When I noticed that I initially answered this koan incorrectly, and then saw the correct answer (unfortunately I saw it rather than figuring it out myself), I had some kind of mini-realization about the workings of thoughts. My trust in thinking as a problem-solving device diminished as it couldn't even immediately resolve something as simple as this, and it seems that consequently my interest in thinking reduced as well... |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 27, 2016 7:26:00 GMT -5
I mentioned the father/son/neurosurgeon koan on the first page, but it hasn't been posted here yet, so I'll do that: Koan questioning is used as a meditative mechanism for seeing through cognitive illusions to the truth that underlies them. Most adults are highly conditioned to see the world in a particular way, as filtered through imagination. Koans are one way to penetrate the filter and see what is prior to conditioning and imagination. All koans have concrete answers that, seen in retrospect, are recognized to be obvious. A simple example: A father and son were involved in a terrible automobile wreck. Both were picked up by an ambulance and rushed toward a hospital. Along the way the father died of his injuries. At the hospital the boy was wheeled into an operating room, and doctors were called. A neurosurgeon arrived, took one look at the boy, and said, "I can't operate on this boy; he's my son!" Who was the neurosurgeon? It is amazing how many people cannot answer this question. Children can answer it more easily than adults because they are not yet as strongly conditioned as adults. The answer is as clear as a bell to anyone who sees-through the issue. There is only one correct answer and, once seen, the correctness is blatantly obvious. I think this is a very good introductory koan as it very clearly demonstrates something about our conditioning and thinking. When I noticed that I initially answered this koan incorrectly, and then saw the correct answer (unfortunately I saw it rather than figuring it out myself), I had some kind of mini-realization about the workings of thoughts. My trust in thinking as a problem-solving device diminished as it couldn't even immediately resolve something as simple as this, and it seems that consequently my interest in thinking reduced as well... Yes, I had the same thing happen several years ago and I STILL get surprised sometimes at the full extent of the impact of this understanding. In some ways, we're incredibly blind. At the same time, though, we can't throw out all thought, right? I think the spirituality business is ripe for abuse particularly because of these kinds of insights. Thoughts are suspect (follow me). Thinking is not 'it' (follow me). There is a certain level and type of thought needed to navigate through the unsettled sensation of not trusting thought. People talk about following the gut/intuition and I guess that's part of the "certain level and type of thought", but I think rational mind is part of it too. At least in the seeker phase. Of course, at some point all this has to be thrown out the window, including one's self (figuratively!). But that's a whole other conversation. |
|
|
|
Post by wei sa on Aug 28, 2016 9:53:32 GMT -5
Yes, I had the same thing happen several years ago and I STILL get surprised sometimes at the full extent of the impact of this understanding. In some ways, we're incredibly blind. At the same time, though, we can't throw out all thought, right? I think the spirituality business is ripe for abuse particularly because of these kinds of insights. Thoughts are suspect (follow me). Thinking is not 'it' (follow me). There is a certain level and type of thought needed to navigate through the unsettled sensation of not trusting thought. People talk about following the gut/intuition and I guess that's part of the "certain level and type of thought", but I think rational mind is part of it too. At least in the seeker phase.Of course, at some point all this has to be thrown out the window, including one's self (figuratively!). But that's a whole other conversation. - I kind of agree with the idea that "thinking is not required for correct action" - but partly it depends on what's our definition of thought. In this context I was thinking of "thought" primarily as mental chatter (the kind that can be observed, not some potential unconscious process), and so intuition, body-knowledge (gnosis) etc was not included. I think what you said about the risk of abuse could in some cases be used as an egoic defence-mechanism for keeping self-referential thinking intact ("the world is a hazardous place, I have to remain vigilant and keep my thoughts rational and in place"). Not saying that that's the case with you, but just came to my mind. I'm more of the cynical/rigid/close-minded -type (rather than the easily surrendering gullible type), so for me at least the risk of abuse is extremely low. |
|
|
|
Post by quinn on Aug 28, 2016 10:35:25 GMT -5
Yes, I had the same thing happen several years ago and I STILL get surprised sometimes at the full extent of the impact of this understanding. In some ways, we're incredibly blind. At the same time, though, we can't throw out all thought, right? I think the spirituality business is ripe for abuse particularly because of these kinds of insights. Thoughts are suspect (follow me). Thinking is not 'it' (follow me). There is a certain level and type of thought needed to navigate through the unsettled sensation of not trusting thought. People talk about following the gut/intuition and I guess that's part of the "certain level and type of thought", but I think rational mind is part of it too. At least in the seeker phase.Of course, at some point all this has to be thrown out the window, including one's self (figuratively!). But that's a whole other conversation. - I kind of agree with the idea that "thinking is not required for correct action" - but partly it depends on what's our definition of thought. In this context I was thinking of "thought" primarily as mental chatter (the kind that can be observed, not some potential unconscious process), and so intuition, body-knowledge (gnosis) etc was not included. "Thinking not required for correct action", imo, is only applicable after the "i" is washed away. That's why I say thinking is needed if one is a seeker. If the ego is still running, even if it's only limping along, body-knowledge is tainted. Repeating egoic behavior requires no head-chatter at all. Yes, it is possibly a defense mechanism. I've heard it said that doubt is another. |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Aug 28, 2016 10:36:05 GMT -5
However, I've found it difficult to get into koans on my own, so I'm kind of looking to be shown the ropes. I've been skimming some classic koan texts - like The Blue Cliff Record - but they've seemed pretty impenetrable so far. Even the whole form of B.C.R. confuses me - in each chapter first there's a "pointer", then the "case" - which I understand to be the actual koan - then "notes" on the case, "commentary" on the case, a poetic "verse" on the case, and finally a "commentary" on the verse.  Maybe B.C.R is not really a good way to get into this whole koan thing!  A lot of those koans in the BCR are dharma combats of zen masters. And, no matter how enlightened you already are, some basic knowledge of buddhist scriptures is required or else you won't even be able to understand the context of the question. |
|
|
|
Post by wei sa on Aug 29, 2016 2:49:21 GMT -5
"Thinking not required for correct action", imo, is only applicable after the "i" is washed away. That's why I say thinking is needed if one is a seeker. If the ego is still running, even if it's only limping along, body-knowledge is tainted. Repeating egoic behavior requires no head-chatter at all.Hmm... well, one thing that a bit of koan-study shows is that even for a seeker, body-knowledge is not completely tainted, but is still available, although perhaps a bit vague and indistinct. But admittedly it's sometimes difficult to know which impulses come from body/gnosis/intuition, and which somehow still from thinking (even if from an unconscious kind), so one cannot be sure if the intuition is "trustworthy". But I don't think it's a big deal, one can just follow the intuition and see what happens. As for this - well, I wonder! One of the practical consequences of SR seems to be that the amount of mental chatter reduces significantly. Conversely, I think if a seeker was able to reduce ones mental chatter significantly - let's say, by 80-90%, I suspect the person would almost automatically SR at some point! In any case, I'm not entirely sure what's "egoic behaviour" and what's not - in the end we have preferences and other conditioning and that's fine, nothing wrong with that either pre- or post-SR. |
|
|
|
Post by wei sa on Aug 29, 2016 2:51:51 GMT -5
A lot of those koans in the BCR are dharma combats of zen masters. And, no matter how enlightened you already are, some basic knowledge of buddhist scriptures is required or else you won't even be able to understand the context of the question. Ok - maybe I'll get back to it after a couple of years and see if it seems more approachable then... |
|
|
|
Post by Reefs on Sept 5, 2016 11:04:56 GMT -5
Yeah, there's a gestation period worth paying attention to. When you get back to it you'll continue on a whole new level of understanding.
|
|
Maybe B.C.R is not really a good way to get into this whole koan thing! 