"The most incomprehensible thing about the world is that it is comprehensible."
Oh what did he know??
"The World As I See It"
by onacruse 48 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
frankiespeakin
-
onacruse
jgnat :
A man can do what he wants, but not want what he wants
I interpret the second want as ?need?, as in ?A man can do what he wants, but not want what he needs? . Am I reading too much in to this?
I've been looking for the context of Einstein's quote of Schopenhauer, but no luck (yet).
However, as I understand it, what he (S.) is driving at is that we don't "want" what we want, independently of the conditioning (including culture and its associated language) that is imposed upon us before we become "cognizant" beings.
-
zen nudist
Yes Zen, of course this is where the no self thing comes in. Self in this context as you know is really just being in bondage, the best example for a forum like this would be the JW self. Any identity, including Christian would be the same stagnant, idolatrous existence.
sense of self has always been something the so called spiritual have sought to erase... perhaps there is some value in this, but often it only means the shepherd seeking to manipulate the sheep...making it easier to fleece them.
this notion that we should strive to be enlightened be transcending the illusion of the self... sounds like it may have merit, but it could also be the oldest con game in the world...something leaders discovered to make their followers more manageable. which seems to me borne out by much history.
-
frankiespeakin
On,
However, as I understand it, what he (S.) is driving at is that we don't "want" what we want, independently of the conditioning (including culture and its associated language) that is imposed upon us before we become "cognizant" beings.
So there really is no free will,,only what "appears" to be free will. We have an illusion of free will,,that if one looks at things more deeply,,the illusion vanishes.
Nudist,,
I tend to agree with you here:
sense of self has always been something the so called spiritual have sought to erase... perhaps there is some value in this, but often it only means the shepherd seeking to manipulate the sheep...making it easier to fleece them.
I agree,,I think the ego is basically good and works with the unconscious mind for our good,,it's just that the ego is often very cowardly,,and fearful,,which is not bad just needs to be balanced some how to enjoy life more,,and go with the flow of life.
this notion that we should strive to be enlightened be transcending the illusion of the self... sounds like it may have merit, but it could also be the oldest con game in the world...something leaders discovered to make their followers more manageable. which seems to me borne out by much history.\
I think you may be right,,,
I'm inclind to striving for a "middle way",,and dropping all this you need a guru bullshit,,as better raod to travel.
Have you ever thought of makeing an imaginary guru or wizard,, to draw from yourself wisdom??
-
zen nudist
Have you ever thought of makeing an imaginary guru or wizard,, to draw from yourself wisdom??
I have been following a zen path which is a mixture of many things I have studied and experienced.. it basically goes like this
accept all experiences.
challenge all beliefs that arise from experiences.
try to find a minimum of three different explanations, theories, or beliefs for any experience to prevent false certainty from dominating the mind.
using the best judgement availible gamble on the option most likely to lead to peace of mind in the present moment.
challenge the standard for all judgements... where did they come from, what has verified their usefulness?
hold nothing sacred and beyond question, see the sacred in the perfection of the moment.
accept that all I know is within me and a part of me no matter how seperate it may seem and treat it as such... harming anything is a form of harming myself.
Trust in the ultimate nature of reality to be exactly what it must be... accept the wisdom intrinsic within it as well as the insanity.
accept everything and everyone as my teacher, but challenge everything and be skeptical as all beliefs are partial and incomplete to some degree.
-
Markfromcali
Hi Zen:
sense of self has always been something the so called spiritual have sought to erase... perhaps there is some value in this, but often it only means the shepherd seeking to manipulate the sheep...making it easier to fleece them.
Yes, after all if there is no such self in the first place, any effort to erase anything is only coming from a confused idea about self, the spiritual seeker is created and then trying to get rid of self, whereas that created identity is the false self. The true teachers are not trying to get followers for themselves, they are essentially turning away confused seekers by trying to get them to see they have misunderstood all along, or turning them to their true self-nature if you will. There is nothing wrong with a sense of self, you just become confused when you believe in that sense as a solid entity.
this notion that we should strive to be enlightened be transcending the illusion of the self... sounds like it may have merit, but it could also be the oldest con game in the world...something leaders discovered to make their followers more manageable. which seems to me borne out by much history.
It's not about shoulding anything, if there is no such thing - if it is illusion in the first place who is there to do anything? But transcending is transcending, and if you only react to it out of fear and insecurity, that it could be a con game and so on, then you have not seen through it. You suspect, but you do not know this. If the illusion is that there is any enlightening, any kind of trascendence at all, then transcend that. By being leary and staying away from it you never face it and find out for sure. If you don't really need to know, then great. As far as I'm concerned someone who is enlightened doesn't need other people to even want to know the truth, why would they need anything? But there is a question of suffering, and that is where if one becomes sensitive enough to the result of ignorance a truly wise and compassionate one is there to meet them where they are, but not violently push them.
-
zen nudist
Yes, after all if there is no such self in the first place,
IN MY VIEW this is the worst horse manure spiritual people have ever come up with... while the self you may know may not be your true self, to say that no self exists is just plain stupid.... if there were no selves,then you would not be discussing this with me.
often overlooked in buddhism, the buddha said there is no self, but he also said there is no no self either.... and my understanding is that we are like a dreamer who has never known a waking life, the only things we do know are our own minds inventions, symbols, dreams... so anything we know of our self is not our real and true self...only the symbol of it... and the accuracy of the symbol to the reality is not testable. The fact that you experience and feel and care is more than sufficient to show you have a true self.... but not one that you can know any true nature about.
any effort to erase anything is only coming from a confused idea about self, the spiritual seeker is created and then trying to get rid of self, whereas that created identity is the false self. The true teachers are not trying to get followers for themselves, they are essentially turning away confused seekers by trying to get them to see they have misunderstood all along, or turning them to their true self-nature if you will. There is nothing wrong with a sense of self, you just become confused when you believe in that sense as a solid entity.
this is the core of the con... the religious mystic has had some experience and a belief about that expeirence and is now passing it off as KNOWLEDGE...and because he is CONfident about it, others tend to admire him and accept his pronouncements even if they violate anything that has ever made sense.... The true teacher is one who can show you that you never needed him, a false teacher ensnares people like a shepherd ensnares sheep...making them feel comfortable while doing them overall violence in the end. -
Markfromcali
Yes, after all if there is no such self in the first place,
IN MY VIEW this is the worst horse manure spiritual people have ever come up with... while the self you may know may not be your true self, to say that no self exists is just plain stupid.... if there were no selves,then you would not be discussing this with me.Thanks for fleshing it out.
Right, I'm sure you know many, online if nothing else that just basically use this as an excuse for being idiots basically, (well there's no self anyway, so la la la) which is really just a matter of indulging in the false self with the idea of no-self. It's one thing to say it is not the true self, but the absolute of no self period is something else.
often overlooked in buddhism, the buddha said there is no self, but he also said there is no no self either.... and my understanding is that we are like a dreamer who has never known a waking life, the only things we do know are our own minds inventions, symbols, dreams... so anything we know of our self is not our real and true self...only the symbol of it... and the accuracy of the symbol to the reality is not testable. The fact that you experience and feel and care is more than sufficient to show you have a true self.... but not one that you can know any true nature about.
"Knowing" is by nature relative as it is a function of the small mind, you can only be that true nature - which of course you already are. The only question is if there is a recognition of that, which is about as good as it gets. If it is about experience and being, then it isn't about any intellectualization at all. Of course, this is it too, all this intellectualization that we're exchanging - but is in itself not it, if you catch my drift.
I imagine your first message might be an effort to be subtle, maybe due to the context of this board, but if not I wanted to be 'encouraging' for lack of a better word. Sometimes the only thing that stands in the way is that hinderance of doubt, but it doesn't have to be.
-
zen nudist
then it isn't about any intellectualization at all. Of course, this is it too, all this intellectualization that we're exchanging - but is in itself not it, if you catch my drift.
that captures the essence of Zen nicely sort of .