| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Tang Huyen
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2003 6:23 pm Post subject: No mind-games (was Re: Mere mind games) |
 |
|
Ulrich Topf wrote:
| Quote: | That is an interesting point (to turn the conversation
back to what really matters). Buddha means the Awakened,
right? And Buddhism is all about awakening. Then why
does it have and use so many hypnotic elements? Why
this focus on rest and peace, gentle smiles and gestures,
reassurring rituals and soothing metaphysics inducing you
think that everything is all right or that your in good
hands? Shouldn't everything be done to constantly awaken
people? They are expecting this? them give them that to
make them jump!
|
Hey, I make people jump with mere words on the screen, all
right!
Buddhism makes the distinction between voluntary adhesion
(adhimukti, adhimoksa) and reality or the real thing
(tattva, bhuta-artha).
The former includes all methods in which one makes believe
to oneself that one has turned the whole universe into
some one thing that it is not, for example in the Four
Divine Abodes one turns the whole universe into friendliness,
compassion, sympathetic joy, equanimity, or in the
Totalisations (which includes the Four Divine Abodes) one
turns the whole universe into red, or blue, or space, or
fire, or water. Nothing happens out there, the universe has
not changed, even less turned into the object of one's
make-believe-to-oneself (adhimukti, adhimoksa), but one
has merely made believe to oneself that it has, during the
session of one's meditation.
These methods are largely looked down on in the early canon
with regard to their power to awaken its practitioner. They
do not lead to arhat-ship, except equanimity, in which one
abandons affection and aversion. They merely serve as
launching-boards for one to concentrate one's mind (in a
hypnotic way, perhaps), and when that is done, then one
contemplates impermanence, suffering, absence of self.
These will lead to awakening, namely arhat-ship.
Reality (tattva) or the real object (bhuta-artha) is what
one perceives as it truly is on its own side, and it is what
one perceives when one does not impose one's interpretation
(and the Totalisations represent massive, monolithic
interpretations that one imposes en bloc to the whole
universe). In mindfulness/awareness one cognises what goes
on, as directly as possible, with as little as possible of
one's interpretation. Which is why mindfulness/awareness is
highly regarded as a means of awakening, and it is promoted
as leading to arhat-ship, directly and all by itself. One
can also use it in addition to the contemplation of
impermanence, suffering, absence of self, on top of one
another.
If you go into Chinese temples, a lot of sutra-recitation
or mantra-recitation seems hypnotic, may well be hypnotic,
as a mass of people recite in unison something the meaning
of which is not actively taken into consideration during
the recitation (mantra-s have no meaning or little meaning,
anyway). It could be calming, but in a sleeping way, not in
an awakening way.
Awakening doesn't need the metaphysics, soothing ot
otherwise. It does away with all metaphysics, for example
the Buddha says that awakening does away with deed and its
return. Chinese Chan is famous for its jarring methods, its
confrontational exchanges, but in mindfulness/awareness, or
in the contemplation of impermanence, suffering, absence of
self, one confronts oneself with oneself, if one does them
right. One discards all the stabilisations that one has
used to reassure oneself about life, and confronts oneself
head on, fearlessly, discarding all those stabilisations and
awakening to what happens.
They are not mind-games, they do away with *all* mind-games.
Awakening means that one has abandoned all mind-games, with
others and with oneself. Though if one wants to test others,
one may use mind-games, as in some Chan exchanges. In some
Chan exchanges the interlocutors get *directly* to each
other's understanding, without mind-games. They see right
through the mind-games, of themselves and of others, and cut
right through them to communicate without them standing in
the way. That's about as far away from hypnosis as anyone can
get.
Tang Huyen |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Tang Huyen
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2003 7:40 pm Post subject: Re: No mind-games (was Re: Mere mind games) |
|
|
Ulrich Topf wrote:
| Quote: | If I look at this like someone who doesn't know anything
of Buddhism and all its little fratricide hobbies, then
I would say "Sutra recitation or mantra-recitation", one
story, "No mind-games, direct communication", another story.
How can you prove yours is not just another story in order
to convince yourself that what you are doing is real.
Remember Robinson Crusoe or Gullivers Travels, they start
with a preface stating that the story we will read is real
one. It is simply a trick to get a bigger kick out of it.
Same thing for your "That's about as far away from hypnosis
as anyone can get."
|
Didn't you read the quote from Lucian's True Story that I
posted recently?
In Buddhism it is said that one has to experience in oneself
what is taught, and I don't claim to have experienced all of
it yet, surely not the loftier stuff. I'm a beginner, and
my faults and errors are mine, and there are plenty of them.
But you can try to kick me with words to see whether I have
hypnotised myself into any hypnotic state or not. Of course
not to hypnotise oneself is still not awakening, and I don't
get anywhere near the latter yet. On these boards we can only
hope to share experience, supposing that it not be fake, and
we can test for fakery.
But if you want to apply your epithet "simply a trick to get
a bigger kick out of it", then there are lots of candidates,
like mountain-climbing, religions of all kinds, guru devotion,
mob psychology, etc., some of which are practiced regularly on
these boards.
The way I understand Buddhism, it is a method to life life as
it is, not to make it bigger or smaller than it is. It is a
way to live as openly and honestly as possible, without games,
mental or otherwise, without blessing or curse from anywhere
else.
But if you do find something that doesn't fit your epithet,
please let me know, whatever it is.
Tang Huyen |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Tang Huyen
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:12 pm Post subject: Bigger kick (was Re: No mind-games) |
|
|
Ulrich Topf wrote:
| Quote: | It is simply a trick to get a bigger kick out
of it. Same thing for your "That's about as far
away from hypnosis as anyone can get."
|
The following is borrowed from a classcial music NG.
At the following URL you will find a table of "rock
deaths" compiled by a rock fan:
http://rockdeaths.mybravenet.com/rdl/rlistN.html
It lists the causes of death of what appears to be a
comprehensive list of dead rock stars, by name, date,
cause, etc. Of the 556 deaths listed on this page:
60 are due to drugs (10.8%)
50 are suicides (9%)
31 are homicides (5.6%)
12 are due to alcohol (2.2%)
All in all, over 1/4 of the rock stars listed died
violently or via some form of substance abuse (not
including lung cancer, btw). Over 1 in 5 died by
their own hand (suicide or substance abuse). The
table covers 39 years of rock history.
Bigger kick? Hypnosis, even on a mass scale?
Tang Huyen |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Tang Huyen
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2003 8:26 pm Post subject: Re: No mind-games (was Re: Mere mind games) |
|
|
Ulrich Topf wrote:
| Quote: | Tang Huyen:
But if you want to apply your epithet "simply a trick to get
a bigger kick out of it", then there are lots of candidates,
like mountain-climbing, religions of all kinds, guru devotion,
mob psychology, etc., some of which are practiced regularly on
these boards.
The way I understand Buddhism, it is a method to life life as
it is, not to make it bigger or smaller than it is. It is a
way to live as openly and honestly as possible, without games,
mental or otherwise, without blessing or curse from anywhere
else.
Ah! Then what is the link with the Buddha, people in robes,
certain scriptures etc. ?
And why are you and me here? :-)
But if you do find something that doesn't fit your epithet,
please let me know, whatever it is.
:-)
|
The Buddha, whoever he was and whatever his life was, is dead.
He left his teaching (dharma), which is all I care about. And I
have to subject that etaching to rigourous thrasing before I
could arrive at a coherent synthesis of it -- make sense of it.
He effaced himself in favour of his teaching -- we can forget
the person (pudgala) and rely on the teaching (dharma), which
is impersonal.
To the best of my knowledge, Buddhism and Stoicism are the two
best methods (or groups of methods) to help one awaken. Many
Christian mystics are actually Stoics who have to dress up what
they say in Christian garb, but what they say is transparently
Stoic. Gregory of Nyssa and Fénelon are amongst them. Read in
a certain way -- not literally, of course -- they come close to
being Buddhists. To me many Stoic sages are Buddhist saints,
up there with the best that Buddhism produces.
As the Buddha says, who sees the dharma sees him, so there is
no need for any intermediary of whatever kind, not even any
knowledge of Buddhism. No games needed, like shaving one's
head, wearing the saffron robe and begging for food. Just
plain-Jane living, true to what happens and open to what
happens.
Tang Huyen |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Lee Dillion
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 31, 2003 9:18 pm Post subject: Re: No mind-games (was Re: Mere mind games) |
|
|
Tang Huyen wrote:
| Quote: | To the best of my knowledge, Buddhism and Stoicism are the two
best methods (or groups of methods) to help one awaken. Many
Christian mystics are actually Stoics who have to dress up what
they say in Christian garb, but what they say is transparently
Stoic. Gregory of Nyssa and Fénelon are amongst them. Read in
a certain way -- not literally, of course -- they come close to
being Buddhists. To me many Stoic sages are Buddhist saints,
up there with the best that Buddhism produces.
|
Even the stoics seem to need to dress up in fancy structure for the
pleasure of stripping. A lot of building up that never leaves, even as
the content supposedly floats away. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
