|
|
| There once was a fascinating encounter between Tao-hsin and the sage Fa-yung, who lived in a lonely temple on Mount Niu-t'ou, and was so holy that the birds used to bring him offerings of flowers. As the two men were talking, a wild animal roared close by, and Tao-hsin jumped. Fa-yung commented, --referring, of course, to the instinctive (klesa) of fright. Shortly afterwards, while he was for a moment unobserved, Tao-hsin wrote the Chinese character for on the rock where Fa-yung was accustomed to sit. When Fa-yung returned to sit down again, he saw the sacred name and hesitated to sit. said Tao-hsin, At this remark Fa-yung was fully awakened...and the birds never brought any more flowers."
Comments? | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
    
| If he was fully awakened, perhaps he had no more need to either sit on the rock nor recieve flowers from the birds. Not would he be dissappointed that he lost his sitting spot or his gifts of flowers. An awakened person would no longer be attached to things like that. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Sorry GJ, for some reason I have never been able to relate to the ZEN thing, much less Zen type people. My sister and her husband are so Zen and they are so rigid and scary to me,  | |
| | |
| Cyndi - 2005-12-23 1:12 PM
My sister and her husband are so Zen and they are so rigid and scary to me,
Sounds pretty anti-zen to me. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Which part, GJ?? The sister and her husband or the fact that I'm scared,
I'm not anti-zen, I just don't know and understand it. What I have experienced with it was not something that I felt comfortable with. Actually, the *true* Zen doesn't exists on this planet anymore, it's a lost culture and a lost way of art as far as I'm concerned. Another words the Zen that is practiced today is questionable in my mind, that's all. Of course, I could say that about a lot of other practices too, 
Oops, I guess I can't say GJ anymore huh?? Your new name is Skull Fish,
Edited by Cyndi 2005-12-23 2:32 PM
| |
| | |
| Cyndi - 2005-12-23 2:10 PM
Which part, GJ?? The sister and her husband or the fact that I'm scared,
Your sister and her husband. My understand is that Zen is supposed to break down a lot of those sort of rigid attitudes that hold people in bondage by requiring them to become more fluid, and deal with the situation as it is. OTOH, I've never met a 100% authentic Zen master.
I've been going to the local Zen center, and I ask the guy in charge about rigidity and structure. He said that they had moved away from a lot of that in their current approach, and that at one point he had been studying with a Korean lineage that required years of study, a paper, etc etc etc. Anyway, point being that it sounded incredibly structured, and NOT Zen.
But then my impressions have been formed by Alan Watts, who often claimed to be a fraud, lair, trickster, etc. His favorite title was "Hang-over Cure", since he used to have an early morning Sunday radio show.
I'm not anti-zen, I just don't know and understand it.
I really don't claim to understand it, any more than I understand Daoism. Frankly the yoga sutras a very straightforward, which appeals to me, but it's a little mechanical sometimes..... Anyway, can we really claim to understand what any of it is about before we get there?
What I have experienced with it was not something that I felt comfortable with.
Care to explain/expound?
Actually, the *true* Zen doesn't exists on this planet anymore, it's a lost culture and a lost way of art as far as I'm concerned. Another words the Zen that is practiced today is questionable in my mind, that's all. Of course, I could say that about a lot of other practices too,
Hard to say. At it's essence zen just means sitting meditation, everything beyond that is pretty much up for debate, isn't it? FWIW, "Zen" has become way overblow as a marketing term, which is interesting, since my understanding is that this sort of labeling/form/manifesting is something that it strives to avoid.
Oops, I guess I can't say GJ anymore huh?? Your new name is Skull Fish,
Call me anything but Shirely, and we'll get along fine! I just had to show my support for Pastafarians everywhere. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Shirley you didn't think I would call you that did you, Surely not....
As for expounding....all I can say is that when I was involved with the Tibetan Buddhist Temple, we had all the Buddhist temples come to our center for the Shakimuni Buddha's Birthday Celebration. It was a beautiful event and I just so happened to be one of the organizers. When I was making the arrangements I had to deal with them on a personal level. Some of the Zen groups...there were sooo many of them, I found that most of them weren't the *get up and just do it* type of people to deal with, they were very strict, rigid and difficult to deal with. I felt like I was having to work to hard to please and make them happy....especially, since I was a volunteer working my A$$ off, they just complained and acted like jerks, it was irritating and actually taught me something about myself. See, I used to think and have this innocent mindset that if you were involved or in a temple that EVERYONE had a mutual respect for each other and the practice...WRONG, it was worse, in fact, I do better in the outside world than in these kinds of organizations. Like, afterall our main teacher, regardless of whether it was Zen, Tibetan, Chinese, Japenese, was the BUDDHA. Their behaviors and attitudes were done in a subtle way like the comments here and there, the way they spoke to you with their impatient voices....not to mention they treated you like you were a complete idiot and were so above you type attitude. Then you had the ones that dressed in robes in a totally different zone. I felt like they really belonged on top of a mountain somewhere and should stay there like forever! Is that what you were looking for Skull Fish??? | |
| | |
| Cyndi - 2005-12-23 4:19 PM
As for expounding....all I can say is that when I was involved with the Tibetan Buddhist Temple, we had all the Buddhist temples come to our center for the Shakimuni Buddha's Birthday Celebration. It was a beautiful event and I just so happened to be one of the organizers. When I was making the arrangements I had to deal with them on a personal level. Some of the Zen groups...there were sooo many of them, I found that most of them weren't the *get up and just do it* type of people to deal with, they were very strict, rigid and difficult to deal with. I felt like I was having to work to hard to please and make them happy....especially, since I was a volunteer working my A$$ off, they just complained and acted like jerks, it was irritating and actually taught me something about myself.
That does sound pretty annoying. I'm surprised that you found them all to be this way. Was there any sort of historical animousity between your sect and the Zen sects?
FWIW, the locals don't seem anywhere near that bad. The Zen buddhist they had come through the local college also seemed pretty cool, lots of jokes, very easy going. So it sounds like your experience is different from mine.
See, I used to think and have this innocent mindset that if you were involved or in a temple that EVERYONE had a mutual respect for each other and the practice...WRONG, it was worse, in fact, I do better in the outside world than in these kinds of organizations. Like, afterall our main teacher, regardless of whether it was Zen, Tibetan, Chinese, Japenese, was the BUDDHA.
Reminds me of the protestants and the catholics in Ireland. Two groups with virtually identical religious background who hate each other on sight. They'd probably get along better with the Zen guys than each other.
Is that what you were looking for Skull Fish???
Sounds like an honest answer, I can understand your dislike of the situation. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | SF,
I didn't find them all to be that way, just most. I've learned something from my experiences with religion and groups, and the main aspect of all of them is this. I've decided that I do not *totally* belong to or totally relate to one particular sect of any kind of religion, organization...anything. Nothing in any of it has felt complete to me. However, there is something that is complete and that thing I'm talking about is within me. No one can give it to me or take it away from me.
Anyway, wish me luck, I'm going to my Father's church on Sunday am....it's a Baptist church. I hope the music is good, that's my favorite part, The rest I'll just have to close my eyes and do sitting meditation on a church pew. You know I practiced meditation all my life when I was a kid, growing up in the Baptist Church and School. I guess that's why I enjoy it so much to this day, I had so much practice, | |
| | |
| It's never too late to become a Jedi Knight! Fastest growing religion in the UK from what I understand. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | SF,
What you talking about...I live with Master Yodha, I am his servant. This is part of the Jedi Knight Training...you have to go to your Father's Baptist Church on Christmas Day...It's a tolerance test of my abilities,
For the record, everybody has their own individual test that they must overcome before they can be a Jedi Knight, | |
| | |
| Cyndi - 2005-12-24 9:42 AM
SF,
What you talking about...I live with Master Yodha, I am his servant. This is part of the Jedi Knight Training...you have to go to your Father's Baptist Church on Christmas Day...It's a tolerance test of my abilities,
Well at least you didn't get roped into a group prayer.... during which the second coming was touted as a good thing....
For the record, everybody has their own individual test that they must overcome before they can be a Jedi Knight,
I wonder what mine will be....
BTW, you do know that Yoda is sanskrit for warrior right? | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | SF,
Of course I know what Yodha means...Satyam named my dog before he ever saw Yoda from Star Wars. In fact, when Satyam did see Star Wars later, he freaked out and said they copied it from the Veda. It was funny,
Well, I'm back home. Yesterday's test was passed...although I did learn that the 3 enemies of human beings were this; 1)SIN 2) HELL 3) DEATH. I'm still pondering over WTF the guy meant by that. At the end when everyone was bowing their heads, he asked if everyone was saved, I happily raised my hand...cause I know I am saved - as I was never lost....just my reasons are different from their Then he added "If you been saved from Biblical terms"...all I could think about at that point was the Gita...which I could officially still raise my hand, . What a trip that was!!! The preacher does not like me cause he KNOWS my Father (they live in the same neighborhood) and he knows I'm married to a Hindu. He wants to find ways to debate with me...yesterday, I got the hell out of there very quickly, which was easy...cause' the preacher baptized someone and he was changing his clothes. Needless to say, my Father was very happy that I attended his church and heard the word of God...or the words of his preacher. That is what counts and all that mattered to me. The music was good...although they sang "Joy to the World" twice and sang all 4 chorus's - UGH!!!!
Edited by Cyndi 2005-12-26 10:37 AM
| |
| | |
| zen is neither structured, nor non-structured. discuss. 
maybe it's just that the people who are attracted to zen are rigid and freaky. that's what they're working on, and that's what zen will help. what is the sound of one hand typing? i mean, singing? Best, | |
| | |
| a belated comment, perhaps.
i've had experiences similar to cyndi's both within and between buddhist groups. i've also had the exact opposite situation. the buddhist center where i first started to practice zen was in little rock arkansas. it was actually just before it was an actual buddhist center. mostly, we met in this one church for a while in this one area. and now there's a buddhist center. At this center, many types of buddhists practice.
i was there some, goodness, 15 yrs ago. most of the practitioners were fluid between groups, people worked together to plan various events, and if a special teacher from one group was coming in to teach, then everyone would go to support their fellow practitioners.
my zen experience is rather diverse--as there are many schools of zen. it started quite by accident. First, there was that fateful translating/reading/contemplating Luke and not figuring it out and then reading a zen story and everything making sense experience. then, my mom worked at a local retreat center (christian) and a buddhist group wanted to rent the center for a retreat and so the teacher had come to ask and i was there and the board of directors was in the room and i was in the hall and the teacher came into the hall and i was sitting contemplating the Luke-zen thing. And he asked me what i was doing/reading and i shared with him. And he sparkled and then i talked to my priest and then i started going to zazen too. back then, it was on wednesdays.
and so that's how that happened.
but anyway, here was my first group of zen teachers: http://www.ebslr.org/rinzai.htm. I started in 1990-91 with Renzai Zen buddhism, but because of the other 'types' of buddhists around and how small the groups really are, there was a lot of fluidity.
once i got to college, i became interested in the teachings of Thich Naht Hanh. That was 1994 when i started with that stuff. There wasn't a buddhist group in school or in the area, but there were classes in religious studies and buddhism--so i took those. It was largely buddhist history and philosophy--a bit about the art. Very interesting stuff. Gave great perspectives on how all religions change. i had strong sense of this from studying catholic/christian church history, but many people think that the eastern ways as they are now or as they are presented now is the way it's always been. a quick study of history demonstrates that religious/spiritual and cultural thought in those religions is equally as dynamic and changing.
during college, i started an online friendship with Kobutsu Kevin Malone, also of the Renzai tradition. (http://www.engaged-zen.org/Kobio.html) He offered some online dharma talks for a while and we would chat (there was a small online chat group on mIRC). at that time, he was working in prisons and against the death penalty which was something that i also worked against as my university was very near a prison with a death row. I found him to be a very loving and out-right jolly person. I hope to visit him in maine soon.
When i moved to this area (6 yrs ago), my husband and i tried to join the local Mindfulness meditation group in the tradition of thich naht hanh. we hit a huge wall of resistance when we expressed the desire to maintain certain christian elements--me in particular because i do consider myself catholic AND buddhst and i've never had any struggle with this combination. Of couse, both challenge me greatly, but i find that they support each other greatly as well.
So, we stopped hanging with them because they were very rigid--which is ironic because you'd think that renzai or soto zen would be more rigid than the 'church of interbeing' whose founder is so pro-christianity he could easily be called 'a christian.' So, that didn't work out so well for us.
Also, along the way, i've gotten flack from all kinds of buddhists about 'not really being buddhist' if i'm still catholic, and 'not really being buddhist' if it's 'church of interbeing' or thich naht hanh's deal, and 'not really being buddhist if you're zen.' on that last count, i certanly can agree to a point! LOL
my personal favorite was one of Kobutsu's online dharma talks was some-or-other big-wig buddhist teacher who had a PhD and junk like that talked on this or that other topic. And afterwards, they would hang around for our idle chat--getting to know you stuff, and we'd continue previous conversations or covnerse about the topic of the dharma talk.
So, i basicly come out and say that i'm buddhist and catholic, and this PhD buddhist guy goes on and on about how you can't be both, you have to be one or the other, etc etc etc. I mean, forever went on about it. And i asked him "if i can't be both, how is it that i am both, and yet, neither?"
and kobutsu malone gave the old "LOL" and he said, ahhh, zen. | |
| | |
| Cyndi - 2005-12-26 10:35 AM
Well, I'm back home. Yesterday's test was passed...although I did learn that the 3 enemies of human beings were this; 1)SIN 2) HELL 3) DEATH.
You missed 4) MASS GUILT TRIP
He wants to find ways to debate with me...yesterday,
Ugh! I hate arguing with Christians. It's worst than AY's quote about arguing on the internet. No matter what happens you lose. You can't argue based on logic, because they don't accept it. You can't argue based on the bible, because they know it better, and can explain the inconsistencies. Finally, you can't hope to convince them that they're wrong because they not!
The music was good...although they sang "Joy to the World" twice and sang all 4 chorus's - UGH!!!!
The Three Dog Night tune?
ZB- What's so odd about Luke. It's been a while, but I thought that matthew, mark, and luke hung together, and john was the odd ball. Also your link isn't working.
What sort of stuff did you try to do with the mindfullness people? I generally try not to mix traditions if I can help it, and I wait until I get a feel for a place before I start making mention of the sort of things that might improve stuff. OTOH, I've also run into some strong anti-christian elements in eastern religions. (They don't call it a religious war for nothing, do they?)
So, i basicly come out and say that i'm buddhist and catholic, and this PhD buddhist guy goes on and on about how you can't be both, you have to be one or the other, etc etc etc. I mean, forever went on about it. And i asked him "if i can't be both, how is it that i am both, and yet, neither?"
I almost hate to admit I've got a master's degree after some of the idiots I've met with advanced degrees. It's almost like your brains leak out the more "education" you get. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Well SF,
I forgot to mention, the preacher did say that if you were seeking God through any other means besides Jesus Christ and the teachings of the bible. you were wasting your time and that was not the truth. So, that pretty much sums it up....like, where is the room for debate here?? There's not and its not worth the time to even talk about. It's no wonder there are so many confused people out there...not to mention the brainwashing that goes on.
TDN??? Are you kidding. When I was in the 2nd grade, I went to a public school that year instead of the Christian School associate with the baptist church we went to. On our school bus the driver played music. This song was very popular at that time and came on every time I was on the bus. I loved to sing it. "Joy to the world, all the boys and girls...joy to the fishes in the deep blue sea, Joy to you and me". Anyway, my older sister told my Father that I was singing that on the bus. Guess what?? I got in trouble for singing that song. It was a bad song according to my Father. Funny thing, I was allowed to sing the Carpenters (which I still love to this day), Olivia Newton-John, John Denver, Barry Manilow (as my ex would say, Barry Man-enough , and what the church considered *LITE* music, I really do like these artists, but I also liked so many others during that time...like Pink Floyd, Kiss, Led Zeppelin, Peter Frampton. Your talking about the Led Zeppeling Queen...like I sneeked out of the house just to go with my friends to the midnite showing of "The Song Remains the Same". Anyway, we learned how to be skillful around my Father growing up and when we moved out of the house we were free!!! My Mother supported us and would help us out by being our cover. She was so cool and knew that all that stuff was BS!
Oh yea, and SF, don't you know the famous Bible verse..."For the wages of sin is DEATH". So, you better watch your A$$ and quit sinning...you better start doing yoga twice a day, otherwise your screwed, We all are,
Edited by Cyndi 2005-12-31 10:42 AM
| |
| | |
| Cyndi - 2005-12-31 10:39 AM
I forgot to mention, the preacher did say that if you were seeking God through any other means besides Jesus Christ and the teachings of the bible. you were wasting your time and that was not the truth.
"I am the way, the truth, and the life. No man come to the father, but by me." Sorry, they're taking this out of context, Jesus was claiming to be the living example, not the absolute only way, and everybody else is going to hell, that part got added later. If you read the section where this occurs, it becomes pretty clear what he's talking about.
I also went through some serious issues with the sort of stuff I was allowed to listen to or watch. You probably have a better understand of this now, as a parent, but I think mine were overly harsh. I was NOT allowed to listen to the radio until I was 16. By that point I had thrown a number of silent rebelions where I listened to the radio anyway until they finally threw up their hands. Similar stuff with TV, and movies.  Is it any wonder when I finally got to listen to whatever I wanted I went straight to the Death Metal section of the music store?
Oh yea, and SF, don't you know the famous Bible verse..."For the wages of sin is DEATH". So, you better watch your A$$ and quit sinning...you better start doing yoga twice a day, otherwise your screwed, We all are,
I partially agree with that one. Look around and the people who are really "living it up", and see how long they live. In particular people following the "Drugs, Sex, and Rock n Roll" approach don't seem to live to 40, or 50. You can also see this with various tyrants down through history. Few of them have a long and happy reign, instead their subject get tired of them, and overthrow them. Sooner or later it all catches up with you, doesn't it? Unfortunately, they often use this as a stick to keep people in line. | |
| | |
| Ugh! I hate arguing with Christians. It's worst than AY's quote about arguing on the internet. No matter what happens you lose. You can't argue based on logic, because they don't accept it. You can't argue based on the bible, because they know it better, and can explain the inconsistencies. Finally, you can't hope to convince them that they're wrong because they not!
Actually, i find this incredibly fun. but truthfully, you have to know a lot to do it. First, you have to know the bible and your perspective of it inside and out--as well as the supporting theology. Second, you have to understand their origins and their theology, and be able to point out it's place in historical development and how it deviates from various orthodoxies, and also how those orthodoxies change over time--so what is orthodox now was not always orthodox, and that there has always been debate about scripture, application, etc, which is why we have these different schools of thought to begin with.
i also find that some other tactics are great, such as intimidation. I like to break out the greek and hebrew--most christians who want to debate you only know a few translations--the RKJV and the NIV. These are modern translations, with varying degrees of quality based on the perspective of those who are reading it and comparing it with other transations. Also, knowing the history of the biblical canon is incredibly helpful.
So, it can be really fun and also educational--particularly to what i consider to be the really unknowledgeable other side. But then, i like my research.
And, i've had years of practice. I'm really lucky in that i'm deeply connected with the jewish community, so i can always fall back on that for interpretation elements, and i'm also deeply rooted in orthdox catholic and 'eastern orthodox' theology, and also the debates within that that gave rise to the various theological schools within those churches/communities, so i can always fall back on that.
your average fundy has very little clue in light of this very basic history, and even some of the more educated pastors have very narrow visions of church history. So, you can always go back to the history--away from the bible, pointing out that the bible was developed by the church, not the church developed by the bible--which really turns them on their heads.
And then you get left alone for a while. I miss my jehova's witnesses. they used to come around far more regularly.
ZB- What's so odd about Luke. It's been a while, but I thought that matthew, mark, and luke hung together, and john was the odd ball. Also your link isn't working.
which link? the renzai or kobutsu malone's? ah well. you can try the whatever whatever .org without the end piece and get to the center in little rock from there, and whatever.
Well, nothing is particularly odd about luke. they all have their flavors. matthew is written for a deeply jewish audience. mark is written for a diasporic jewish audience, john is written for a gentile audience. luke is written for a mixed audience and has a particular social-justice based bent to it. The other three tend to focus on the larger mythological pictures of the judeo-christian culture; luke tends to focus on the nitty-gritty of christ's teachings as far as social justice goes. this is why i have such a preference for luke.
at the time, though, i was 14 and i had jsut started translating the bible from greek and hebrew. i started with luke as my greek studies because it is my favorite of the biblical canon (although, i do like sirach as well ). anyway, at 14, i started hebrew studies with the rabbi--we started with genesis and such, and greek studies with my parish priest who was also a canon lawyer (and is now a monsignor and still my confessor, though not sacrimentally. ) i'd started taking latin in school and i spent much of my spare time translating historical church documents (i've also translated the latin vulgate as well, which is a translation of the greek/hebrew texts into latin ). The project took all 4 years of high school for the greek/hebrew and well into college to finish the latin vulgate. it was a hobby.
anyway, translation is a fascinating process that invovles a great deal of introspection. so, i took the whole thing seriously. I am also deeply rooted in contemplative prayer, so this was an aspect of my translation work. I would translate some of the hebrew, then engage that in contemplative prayer. Then, i would do a bit of the greek, and do the same.
Understandably, i was also looking for the practical personal and inter-personal applications of the teachings while going through this process. So, if i couldn't quite grasp the meaning or application of something, i'd eventually have to give up, do my math homework, do yoga, and go to bed. Or listen to U2.
anyway, it probably wasn't anything too troubling or difficult, but my 14 yr old brain was struggling on a number of fronts. I was a huge social outcast and yet i was deeply interested in social justice (i felt largely oppressed by my own society in a number of ways, school being the most outward and obvious source of my oppression ). I found it difficult to connect and communicate with my fellow students--largely because they were talking about hair, make-up, and boys, and i was talking about poverty, social equality, and engaging death (through my work volunteering in the oncology ward at the hospital ). So, there was a bit of a 'disconnect.'
I struggled greatly with how to honor and care for my fellow classmates even though they were nitwits. you can see, that it's difficult to honor someone whom you generally consider a nitwit. So, a large part of my work--yesterday and today--was learning about my own self and self hatred, and how this is turned outward onto others, such that i create the oppression under which i find myself. Ah, convoluted!
anyhoot, i do not know what particular verse in luke i struggled with at that fateful time (it was a couple of days ) when i read that zen story--it's in the journals somewhere--but i know that it was luke, because i find luke deeply comforting and i continually turn there for all sorts of wisdom and inspiration, just as i would turn to buddhist stories as well.
anyway. does that answer it?
What sort of stuff did you try to do with the mindfullness people? I generally try not to mix traditions if I can help it, and I wait until I get a feel for a place before I start making mention of the sort of things that might improve stuff. OTOH, I've also run into some strong anti-christian elements in eastern religions. (They don't call it a religious war for nothing, do they?)
well, the mindfulness meditation group in our area meets once a week for sitting meditation. often, there is a little buddhist ritual before or after the whole thing. It was largely young people--people our own age--with a few who were older (but not by much, Cyndi's age and stuff ). Most everyone was very hurt by christianity in one way or another, and had experiences similar to Cyndi's that she wrote above in both the past and particularly in the present now that they were active buddhists.
we attended for a number of months, actually, and it was christmas that set the whole thing off. Now, i don't generally feel the need to tell people that i was doing yoga 4 days a week at the studio and teaching two days a week there, while attending the catholic church on saturday or sunday (or both ), and then coming to this buddhist gathering once a week. Ain't nobody's business what i do in my spare time. When i was there, i was there doing that, and that was that. No problem.
Christmas comes up--well, advent--and it's a huge season of services on specialized days (all sorts of mary-related feasts and such ), and of course vigil services, and then there are the fasting requirements and all this other great stuff--most of which i observe. There are a few that i don't observe but it's because they're considered optional and often require pilgrimages and i can't manage those, law school (at the time ), and my yoga obligations.
So, i was going to back down a bit because of wednesday mass being at the same time. my husband was going to continue to go to the buddhist meetings, and then the buddhist group wanted to plan 'children's day' which is sort of their version of 'christmas' for the kids. we didn't have many kids in the group--maybe 5 or 6--but they wanted a group celebration for christmas time, and wanted to do children's day. So, they were trying to pick a day in which 'everyone can come.'
problem is, the whole catholic thing really kicks in, and i feel strongly that i need to participate. I mean, i even go to certain st's days throughout the year which my husband says 'who what huh?" you should hear my mother in law's explitives about it. Anyway, i told them not to worry about me; i'd make it if i could, but that i have a lot of other activities during the holidays. When pressed, i mentioned that i was attending catholic services throughout the season. I brought out my litergical calendar to see what was what. Most of the days in which i would be 'free' were also fasting days, which puts a damper on holiday parties (not for me really, i can go to a party and not eat, no problem. it's not difficult when you're vegetarian. ).
so, the fit hit the shan at that point and people started to get really upset about how i'd ahve to choose between buddha and jesus and i pointed out that the very leader on which they based their organization--thich naht hanh--wrote Living Buddha, Living Christ and Christ and Buddha as Brothers, but they strongly felt that i should choose and what not.
So i chose to not hang out with them. When i went to another group--that actually meets in a catholic church--i met slightly less resistance, but they were strongly connected with the local AA meeting (one of the largest in the area ), and i found that the whole hting had a strong AA bent and that's just not my deal. I mean, more power to them, but that's not my deal.
That's why my husband and i ended up hanging with the quakers. Although, admittedly, many of them were sorta 'anti establishment' of the church, as in fact it is a response to the catholic/anglican heirarchy, but under St Hildgard, a mystic from the 800s, it is obvious that in catholicism even the heirarchy only holds so much spiritual power. Anyway, that's a digression. We hung out with the quakers because they were very 'zen' about their christianity--and just about anyone could go there. They were christo-centric, as opposed to evangelical quakers (who are very christian ) and the more liberal quakers (who can be anything from atheist to whatever else ). We hung there until we just got to dang busy for me to attend so many churches.
and this year, i've been invited to a lot of hindu services--which is a real honor--so i've made every attempt to go to every one to which i've been invited. they seem to have no problem with my wandering through catholic and buddhist circles. I've also been invited to many in-home jewish celebrations throughout the year and i feel great about that. too.
most people realize that i'm just doing my thing and most people are very cool about it. All of the jewish people whom i know love the fact that i love to come to their services and that i've studied the talmud and the scriptures in hebrew--and that i'll refer to jewish theology in regards to those texts when speaking with christians or any others.
i've also been to two muslim celebrations at the mosque in philly. really a honor to be invited.
look, i just tour around.
I almost hate to admit I've got a master's degree after some of the idiots I've met with advanced degrees. It's almost like your brains leak out the more "education" you get.
i have a JD. i was surprized at the people that they let into advanced education. Sometimes, they don't have the sense god gave a post.
my dad has a PhD. I swear if i hear another conservative rant about "the gays" or "the liberals" i'm going to have to turn him upside down and shake him. But, i can debate better than him and i understand the constitution better, which usually shuts down his frustrations/arguments, and i always ask "who are the gays? your sister is gay. is she doing this? is she leading it? is this her agenda? is there a gay agenda?" and so on like this. My dad is actually very open and loves his sister and totally and completely supports and defends her. So it doens't make sense that he goes on these weird rants about "the gays" but then i bring it back down.
my mom hates it when we debate. It's because dad gets louder--as if that's going to work--and i get quieter in tone--which is a negotiation jiujitsu method that i learned is highly effective for female debaters who aren't going to back down.
and when my dad looses and makes a complaint to my mom, she says "you raised her that way." and gets smug. | |
| | |
| zoebird - 2005-12-31 3:08 PM
Ugh! I hate arguing with Christians. It's worst than AY's quote about arguing on the internet. No matter what happens you lose. You can't argue based on logic, because they don't accept it. You can't argue based on the bible, because they know it better, and can explain the inconsistencies. Finally, you can't hope to convince them that they're wrong because they not!
Actually, i find this incredibly fun. but truthfully, you have to know a lot to do it. First, you have to know the bible and your perspective of it inside and out--as well as the supporting theology. Second, you have to understand their origins and their theology, and be able to point out it's place in historical development and how it deviates from various orthodoxies, and also how those orthodoxies change over time--so what is orthodox now was not always orthodox, and that there has always been debate about scripture, application, etc, which is why we have these different schools of thought to begin with.
Which is a small victory for them. My parents need to cram christianity down my throat has left such an ugly taste that I don't want anything more to do with, including spending a great deal of time learning more about it. Maybe it's a character flaw, but I really don't want to be a Christian. (Maybe in 50-100 years I'll out grow it, I don't know)
And then you get left alone for a while. I miss my jehova's witnesses. they used to come around far more regularly.
I find that calling upon the forces of darkness in a loud voice also works. Unfortunately the neighbors come around looking for you to hex their bosses and such.... No rest for the wicked, eh?
anyway, translation is a fascinating process that invovles a great deal of introspection. so, i took the whole thing seriously. I am also deeply rooted in contemplative prayer, so this was an aspect of my translation work. I would translate some of the hebrew, then engage that in contemplative prayer. Then, i would do a bit of the greek, and do the same.
I'll bet. I've often wondered about the ability of people to pull things from one tradition/language to another. Having done some work with translating software, and seen some of the unintentionally hilarious results, it really makes me wonder how accurate any translation is going to be.
Which is the flaw inherent in any literal interpretation of the bible. It just can't be 100% precise, because the tools aren't there.
anyway, it probably wasn't anything too troubling or difficult, but my 14 yr old brain was struggling on a number of fronts. I was a huge social outcast and yet i was deeply interested in social justice (i felt largely oppressed by my own society in a number of ways, school being the most outward and obvious source of my oppression).
Saw an interesting annology between school, particular high school, and a prison. Very deep parallels, with the lack of rights, closely control schedule, fall-in-line mentality, and the gangs/cliches.
I found it difficult to connect and communicate with my fellow students--largely because they were talking about hair, make-up, and boys, and i was talking about poverty, social equality, and engaging death (through my work volunteering in the oncology ward at the hospital). So, there was a bit of a 'disconnect.'
Most people don't want to talk about those sorts of things? What's so interesting about hair anyway, it's just a bunch of dead protein.
So, a large part of my work--yesterday and today--was learning about my own self and self hatred, and how this is turned outward onto others, such that i create the oppression under which i find myself. Ah, convoluted!
Always loved the scene in The Search for the Holy Grail where the guy in the field is going on about social justice, and various forms of government to the point that he pisses King Arthur off. At that point he starts screeming "Come see the violence inherent in the system, help help I'm being oppressed" when really he's brought it down on his own head, hasn't he?
What sort of stuff did you try to do with the mindfullness people? I generally try not to mix traditions if I can help it, and I wait until I get a feel for a place before I start making mention of the sort of things that might improve stuff. OTOH, I've also run into some strong anti-christian elements in eastern religions. (They don't call it a religious war for nothing, do they?)
so, the fit hit the shan at that point and people started to get really upset about how i'd ahve to choose between buddha and jesus and i pointed out that the very leader on which they based their organization--thich naht hanh--wrote Living Buddha, Living Christ and Christ and Buddha as Brothers, but they strongly felt that i should choose and what not.
So i chose to not hang out with them.
Which is usually the result of such ultimatums. Generally people who issue them are in a pretty insecure place to begin with, and the ultimatum just makes it uglier....
look, i just tour around.
We've given your information to the local inquistor, expect a knocking at your door right about now!
my dad has a PhD. I swear if i hear another conservative rant about "the gays" or "the liberals" i'm going to have to turn him upside down and shake him.
It's a rant. No rhyme, no reason, just somebody spouting off something they hear somewhere. It's an automatic reaction just like blinking, or 90% of the other things we do.
my mom hates it when we debate. It's because dad gets louder--as if that's going to work--and i get quieter in tone--which is a negotiation jiujitsu method that i learned is highly effective for female debaters who aren't going to back down.
Works on everybody from what I've seen. IIRC, you're also supposed to let them go on until they run out of steam. | |
| | |
| Which is a small victory for them. My parents need to cram christianity down my throat has left such an ugly taste that I don't want anything more to do with, including spending a great deal of time learning more about it. Maybe it's a character flaw, but I really don't want to be a Christian. (Maybe in 50-100 years I'll out grow it, I don't know)
i assume that studying the scriptures in more depth is a small victory for 'them' meaning christians? i suppose.
or, i could actually be personally valuable. i find though that children who weren't encouraged to question have a tendency to react as you do--feeling forced into it and then not wanting anything to do with it.
on the other hand, children who are raised christian (such as myself) but were allowed to explore and question without bounds actually tend to like the religion. i think it gets a really bad wrap because of people who get fundy about it one way or another. i really wish that people would simply say "i really value this, and here is why" rather than going into something about 'needing Jesus" and what not. I mean, sure, i think a lot of people could benefit a great deal from engaging Jesus, but i don't need to tell them that. I could say "i find a great deal of value in these practices."
And, i also liked translating, studying church history and all that other stuff. So it wasn't a victory for 'them' it was a joy for me. But then, i don't see any of this as an 'us-them' mentality. I find that when i do debate with different sorts of christians--some with more or less scholarly approaches--we end up deeply respecting each other.
On another message board, i met a professor from a bible college who taught biblical studies. we were talking about homosexual issues and he brought up the usual suspects of verses. I was able to pull from the hebrew, the talmud, the jewish thought on the matter (old, new, orthodox and reform), as well as christian thought throughout the ages. I provided references and various focal points to basicly break down all of his arguments against homosexuality (though he didn't argue against equal protection under the law and equal access to the law issues). It was quite an interesting argument, during which a reform rabbi stopped in and asked if i was jewish--and added his interpretations and understandings and enjoyed seeing the jewish perspective engaged on a 'christian board' regarding these particular verses (from our OT). It really turned out well.
What started as animosity became solid arguments that we could really discuss, and it brought a number of people in--from various rabbis, to priests and preachers of many denominations, individuals such as myself who are just lay people doing their thing, and even other academics from the school. It was pretty amazing what grew out of it--an interfaith dialogue on sexuality and religious society. And, a number of the ministers were gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgendered themselves, which added a whole new dimension to the conversation. It was really amazing.
But, you do have to be 'into it." and, you do have to be willing to engage. I feel that many people so deeply misunderstand the true beauty of christianity and what it has to offer because it isn't being handed down well by uneducated people who like catch phrases and don't allow for discussion and debate (or interfaith dialogue).
And, i personally don't have any interest in any given person being a christian, just i hope that they can see and respect the beauty of christianity. you know? i don't like being disparaged because of your parent's mistakes. Get my meaning? I don't think it's conscious, of course, but there is a problem there.
| |
| | |
| zoebird - 2005-12-31 7:38 PM
i don't like being disparaged because of your parent's mistakes. Get my meaning? I don't think it's conscious, of course, but there is a problem there.
Fair enough. If I've been doing that I apologize.
I guess most things are in how we interpret them. I've been noticing that most times when I say Christians, what I really mean is my father, and his family. They're all fundies, and there's no more point in talking to them than there is in attempt to out shout a hurricane, it's just going to wear you out, and leave you feeling frustrated.
My father can also be sarcastic and mocking, particularly of thing he doesn't like or understand. I don't want to debate various forms of religion with him because it's very near and dear to my heart, and I don't want to open my self up to the type of criticism.
So, we've got a situation where I can't change anything, and attempting to change it is going to leave me very vulnerible, and worn out. Add in the fact that they feel the need to "save" me on a regular basis (I think it comes up at least once every week or two), and it's very frustrating situation. And this is my experience with "Christianity".
It's the whip hand that held me down as a kid, and the weapon that continues to be employed against me. Not something I'm happy with, and probably not something you mean when you use the word. | |
| | |
| your experience is entirely valid and sadly common. i wouldn't say that it's the overriding experience of christianity that people have, but it is the most common because of the noise of that particularly squeeky wheel.
similarly, when a person grows up in this sort of environment, it is going to leave them sour. Spirituality is something deeply personal and it is difficult when you're harassed and mocked about it--whether you fit the mold or don't. I often don't fit the mold (christians saying that catholics aren't christian, people saying that i'm spreading heresy about the catholic church and therefore i'm not catholic, people saying that i'm not christian because i also practice yoga, etc etc), and i often get harassed. And on the flip side, when people say "christians behave in this way or that way" and i not only strive not to do that but i also abhor it among other christians, i feel the same hurt that i do when someone tells me that i need to be 'saved.'
i do totally understand where you are coming from and i am truly sorry for it. Fortunately, your dad and his expression is not the entirity of christianity. christianity is a beautiful religion that has a lot to offer (as do many other world religions) personally and socially. there will always be people like your dad--in any community, as i have found it in many communities that are not christian. but then there's the faith tradition itself, beyond the fallacies of individual humans, that may hold some truth or wisdom for you.
again, i don't need or even desire for anyone to be christian, but i would like christianity to be recognized as an important and valuable faith tradition. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | I went through hell SF...I mean you have no idea. I would venture to say that there is a reason for everything. Instead of being sour, you should just observe what happened in your life and your part in it and its relation to your Father. I am quite sure that there are several karmic issues at play here, just like in my situation with my Father. I'm not sour, angry or mad at all. I just learned how to rise above it all, by doing so, made me a bigger person. This stuff happens in all cultures and religions, not just Christianity. You should here some of the Hindu stories I hear. If you can rise above it and see it clearly for what it is and its true nature, you will see that it has no power whatsoever over you. You don't need to explain anything or do anything to justify yourself.
Besides, if you think I would waste my precious time debating with these kinds of people, your crazy....no way Jose. Like I said earlier, I got the hell out of that church while the preacher was changing his clothes...to avoid the entire scene of him trying to debunk me in front of my Father and his Wife...forget it! | |
| | |
| i think you bring up some really valuable points cyndi.
i mean, even though i've gotten lots of flack both within and without christianity, and i've decided to stay with christianity in spite of it, is because i've risen above the sort of hurt and pettiness of it to embrace the faith tradition as it is (flaws and all) and to use what is beneficial and not worry about what isn't (when it comes to personal practice). I think the same can be true of the way we engage interpersonal relationships--for all the hurt that they may be and of course how we respond to that hurt.
i also think it is important to pick whom you're going to debate with. I rarely engage in these sorts of discussions IF i can avoid them. But, IF i feel like they'd be open discussions (like the one with the prof that i mentioned before), then i'll happily engage. And, i do engage the mormons and JW that come by from time to time (usually offering them tea and cookies, because other people really treat them like crap). I prefer to open a dialogue with them, and discuss biblical issues and interpretations. The local fundamentalist church has actually sent their ministers a few times, and after a few discussions, i was actually invited to preach one sunday. That was an interesting experience (i did preach, btw, about Christ and Social Justice responsibilities). They've basicly started to leave me alone.
It is interesting though, and generally i avoid new christians and particularly stodgy ones that just freak out and start screaming at you. you can kinda tlel who they are and who they're going to be, and honestly you can only debunk those kinds of preachers with an agile knowledge of the bible. without it, forget it. they won't listen to any outside source. it becomes frustrating for everyone--and there's no need to cause that suffering. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | I have extensive knowledge of the bible. I went to a christian school for the first 8 years of my life. My interpretation of it, no matter what, will always be debunked by another christian because they have learned how to twist words according to their perception. To me, any debate like this is a waste of time...even with Buddhists and Hindu's.
The problems that are in the church and religion are not the religion itself...IT'S THE PEOPLE and their BEHAVIOR. This is what I call KARMA. You can take any church or temple, disect it long enough and find something not right, whether it be how they treat one another, how they compete with each other etc. Like I said before, the "essence" is there and you either get it or you don't. The ones that don't get it are usually the ones debating and searching for the proof that they think should exist - I call these the scientific ones. To me that is what is truely sad, but it is necessary for one to experience for enlightenment. They have to see this on their own, otherwise, it will not be true and sacred. I just can't and don't want to go to the church because of past life and childhood issues I have with them. Besides, these so-called Christians have done some pretty mean things to the environment and their hatred towards mankind is not something I feel Jesus Christ would accept and teach. Unfortunately, they can't see this. When they do I'm afraid it will be too late for most of them. I feel sorry for them..this is what I call true ignorance and what has destroyed our earth. | |
| | |
| i didn't mean to imply that you didn't have extensive knowledge of the bible, just noted thta it was necessary to have it if you're going to enter into these sorts of discussions and debates because it's their prefered touchstone. i don't think of the varied interpretations as 'twisting the words' and such, i just think that we can use different evidences to support certain interpretations, and that's what engages us in a dialogue.
but, i'm also not saying that it's necessary to do this or to go to a church, or that if you dont' do this or don't go to a church that it's problematic. i think it's entirely acceptable for you to say 'i don't want to go there/be there.' and i think it's entirely acceptable for GJ to say "yeah, i really don't want to know more about it.' this is nto because of some flaw on your part, but rather because you have moved on from it in a different way.
i think that for both of you, the real issue was transcending and removing yourself from that tradition so that you could/can engage your relationship with your parents in a deeper, more meaningful way. I think this is one of those paramount things. It is more important than whether or not you participate in the religion that they do regardless of them or even the flaws of the religion. What you have done is deeply spiritual work and deeply important work, and i don't feel that there's any particular need for you (or anyone else) to embrace that church or religion after the fact.
I was truly blessed in that my parents were and are awesome parents. I could not ask for better in any way. My parents are truly amazing. They raised me in their faith--catholicism--and they allowed me to question every aspect of it, discover things for myself, and encouraged me to explore other world religions. My parents didn't focus on the salvation of others, but rather on their own salvation, leaving the rest to the individual's relationship with God. There was no shaming or any other element in regards to natural curiousity, seeking out God in our own way, and ultimately getting to choose whether or not we wanted to be christian/catholic. Turns out, both my sister and I are--even in light of the many things that we've experienced within and without the church that are really negative.
I mean, it really begs the question, if some or even a lot of christians behave in these ways, do i really want to be christian? seriously. it's a real question. My husband ws raised in a liberal christian church (with no real sense of theology), and he really likes catholicism overall. when we discussed raising our children that way or whatever, he considered joining the club. but, his conclusion was that because catholicism doesn't support homosexuals in the way that he sees fit (the current catholic doctrine, which is both debateable and changeable says that homosexual acts are a sin, but identifying with homosexuality or considering oneself homosexual is not), he doesn't feel comfortable "joining the club." And yet, he's willing to participate in many of the practices and rituals (and forgo other practices and rituals that he cannot participate in because he is not catholic) and finds the church as a whole valuable.
I don't think that my husband is choosing wrongly. in fact, he is choosing based on his spirit and conscience. As a member of the church, i find that it is my responsibility to work within the church to change this attitude (among others). there are active organizations working on this 'front' and i do participate in them. Obviously, my husband has no real need to be catholic, and i honor that.
So, it comes back to that question. Quite honestly, i could leave christianity entirely. if a group or aspect of it isn't functional, i could leave it entirely or not participate--or simply take the essence and walk away and practice in my own way without any sort of church structure or referential aspect to the church (christianity as a whole or catholicism specificly). I think that this is also appropriate and possible with no 'ill' side effects spiritually or personally. And yet, i find that the disciplines and practices of christianity, and particularly catholicism, are deeply moving, functional, and push my spiritual boundaries and areas of self knowledge. Certainly, i could find these in any religion, in any number of practices (and obviously i do).
ultimately, i discovered, i had to reconcile the 'humanity' of the church, of christianity and catholicism, with this essence and then decide whether or not i wanted to continue to participate. I decided to continue. Others choose not to. I think that both are valid. | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | Actually, I didn't think you were implying that I didn't have extensive knowledge of the bible. I only stated that other Christians twist words around because that is how they are trained in debating...its more like competing than debating.
As for the relationship with my parents...I'm totally cool with all of it. I came to terms with my relationships a long time ago..including my parents.
My parents were very cool too!! I have no complaints about them. I'm just glad I don't have to live under my Father's rule....because he is a Dog and I'm a Dragon, I'm very close to my Father and we have a deep mutual respect for each other. We do NOT discuss religion or politics however, and that is okay. I send my Dad HH Dalai Lama quotes all the time and he can't say anything about Satyam's culture because he really does not know or understand it. Which is also okay.
Okay, I'm off to the temple today. Ya'll have a great New Years Day. I'll think about you when I'm standing in front of Balaji and Shiva. | |
| | |
| have a great time at temple. i'm going to a number of specialized cultural events that have been americanized as well this afternoon and evening. | |
| | |
| Well I really can't complain very loudly about my parent either. For the most part they're wonderful people, and I'm very blessed to be their son. What makes this particular issue really painful for me is that for the most part Christainity works, and works very well for my parents. They've both had very full and wonderful lives. They obviously have a very deep and moving faith. Any yet, it's not perfect. And yet I see these issues. And yet I find peace OUTSIDE the faith. So when my father attempts to get me to come back to the church, it's a very tempting prospect.
However, I don't think I've found a way to bridge the gap between the two. What I do is NOT Christian, at least as I understand it. When things work, they work very very well, when they don't I find myself tempted to go back because I feel that part of the problem is that I've turned my back on this tradition. Yet at the same time I do have these issues with it.
So maybe it is a matter or reconcilling the humanity of the organization with it's essence.
One of the things that I like about Alan Watt's interpretation of Zen is that it's not about the people or the places, or the rituals, or the Church, or any of the other stuff that we humans due to muck things up. It's about coming into direct contact with the Real, and dealing with it. It's the essence of religion BEFORE the coming of humanity and duty. It's about following the Tao before the establishment of cannonical law. It's about the ineffiable, a finger pointing to the moon. Church is going to a place to praise the finger, Zen is about following the finger to finally find the moon for yourself. | |
| | |
| One of the things that I like about Alan Watt's interpretation of Zen is that it's not about the people or the places, or the rituals, or the Church, or any of the other stuff that we humans due to muck things up. It's about coming into direct contact with the Real, and dealing with it. It's the essence of religion BEFORE the coming of humanity and duty. It's about following the Tao before the establishment of cannonical law. It's about the ineffiable, a finger pointing to the moon.
i also like this concept. but, it's not just true of Zen, but true of every religion. Each religion is a finger pointing to the moon. The language that is used is a finger; the rituals and disciplines that are practiced are the finger. These practices are what bring you into direct contact with the Real.
Church is going to a place to praise the finger, Zen is about following the finger to finally find the moon for yourself.
This is where there is disagreement. Zen is a discipline, a practice. Going to Church is a discipline, a practice. Both of these are fingers pointing to the moon. If you focus only on the finger--the church, it's problems, placing the value of the traditions ahead of the value of the moon, etc--then it's misguided. But, if you're using the church and it's traditions to engage the Real, then you're succeeding in practice. That's the point of most religions, from what i can tell.
| |
| | |
| zoebird - 2006-01-02 1:51 PM
One of the things that I like about Alan Watt's interpretation of Zen is that it's not about the people or the places, or the rituals, or the Church, or any of the other stuff that we humans due to muck things up. It's about coming into direct contact with the Real, and dealing with it. It's the essence of religion BEFORE the coming of humanity and duty. It's about following the Tao before the establishment of cannonical law. It's about the ineffiable, a finger pointing to the moon.
i also like this concept. but, it's not just true of Zen, but true of every religion. Each religion is a finger pointing to the moon. The language that is used is a finger; the rituals and disciplines that are practiced are the finger. These practices are what bring you into direct contact with the Real.
Well.... but the problem is that this isn't the emphasis. You have people who have been told that the finger is the whole business. The esoteric element has been lost to a great deal of Christain worshippers, and all they have is the exoteric crowd control elements.
From what Cyndi's said, this is also true of some Zen colleges. They've lost the zen.
Church is going to a place to praise the finger, Zen is about following the finger to finally find the moon for yourself.
This is where there is disagreement. Zen is a discipline, a practice. Going to Church is a discipline, a practice. Both of these are fingers pointing to the moon. If you focus only on the finger--the church, it's problems, placing the value of the traditions ahead of the value of the moon, etc--then it's misguided. But, if you're using the church and it's traditions to engage the Real, then you're succeeding in practice. That's the point of most religions, from what i can tell.
Ah but this is where it gets interesting at least IMHO. The problem is that the disciplines are all artificial. They're all inherently failed attempts to frame reality, often with larger and larger frames, but frames none the less. By engaging in the ritual or practice you miss the point, at least to some extent. People begin to associate the ritual with the Real. They mistake Zen for zen, the sound of one hand clapping with one hand clapping.
It's like if you had a dog that you fed only when you rang a bell. After a while the bell and meal time become entrenched in the dogs mind, so that when you ring the bell he expects to be fed.
So I don't think that you can really use the disciplines to get there. Most of the times when I've been most in tune with what's really going on have been time when I really wasn't doing much. I wasn't engaged in any sort of discipline. At those times the Real comes around from behind, taps me on the shoulder, and grabs me by the collar, throwing me full tilt into reality.
The best that the various disciplines can do is remove the obstructions to this happening. You spend your time cleaning the island of tonal. You spend your time removing all the distractions from the land of the Known to prepare for the coming of the Unknown.
So how can you explain this to anybody who hasn't been there before, let alone win an arguement?
Edited by GreenJello 2006-01-02 2:19 PM
| |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| It's like if you had a dog that you fed only when you rang a bell. After a while the bell and meal time become entrenched in the dogs mind, so that when you ring the bell he expects to be fed.
And I'll bet the dog also forgets what it is to be hungry or obey his inborn cues about when to eat.
The best that the various disciplines can do is remove the obstructions to this happening. You spend your time cleaning the island of tonal. You spend your time removing all the distractions from the land of the Known to prepare for the coming of the Unknown.
There is the cleaning aspect and also the aspect of replacing thoughts and brain activities which ore counter-productive with those that more aligned with the Real. When you clean the house you have a nice clean house but even though you may have put away your crossword puzzles, golf clubs and macrame string, you are probably still thinking about them. When you clean your house and put up the Christmas decorations, you are less likely to be thinking about the other activities and more inclined to think about Christmas. Which is why so many tradtions insist on prayers or other rituals several times per day - it keeps the mind turned toward God.
So how can you explain this to anybody who hasn't been there before, let alone win an arguement?
I think this is why they say you can't teach meditation. You have to experience it yourself. Swami Rama said something about hints and guesses. We give students hints and guesses and the rest they have to do themselves through practice.
| |
| | |
| Well.... but the problem is that this isn't the emphasis.
it isn't? christianity doesn't emphasize that the purpose of all of these disciplines and practices is to engage with the Divine, the Real?
I'm pretty sure that's the whole deal of christianity, and that of Judaism. The central premise of both is that we have somehow become alienated from God (true self, the Real, whatever you want to call it) and that we must find ways to overcome this and become one with God. This central theme is centered around the concept of atonement (at-one-ment!). The belief being that the origin of this alienation was sin, and that sin will ultimately lead us to death--not physical death, but the even more horrifying spiritual death.
have you seen the walking spiritual dead? have you not seen it in the eyes of people around you? not the desparate look of need--i've seen that too. for these people, the spirit is still alive and kicking, waiting for it's liberation, that can only be done through conscious choice on the part of the individual to listen to and nurture that spirit. But there are those who are already dead, long dead in the eyes, just moving through their bodies. Haven't you seen them?
I'm not saying that christianity is the answer or anything. It's an answer. there are others. Many people find it through yoga, or buddhism, or neopaganism, or just through whatever--art or music. could be anything, as long as it feeds the spirit, the soul, and sustains that vibrantly. This is what connects the person to the Real--the REal within, the Real without (same Real).
But, the central theme of christianity is union with God--not church or this or that thing. Simply, overcoming 'sin' (things that are not 'of God' and 'cause suffering') to live/experience the Real.
The esoteric element has been lost to a great deal of Christain worshippers, and all they have is the exoteric crowd control elements.
absolutely. so does every aspect of society and every religion. but that doesn't mean that christianity doesn't emphasize that 'essence.'
The problem is that the disciplines are all artificial. They're all inherently failed attempts to frame reality, often with larger and larger frames, but frames none the less. By engaging in the ritual or practice you miss the point, at least to some extent. People begin to associate the ritual with the Real.
disciplines are not to be mistaken with their outcomes. i agree that people get confused and place more value on the discipline than on the outcome. but for most people, a discipline is necessary to remind them or bring them back to the original experience/intent behind the discipline in the first place. Disciplines are useful, helpful even.
For me, it's a valuing system something like this. There's Experience (being Real), there's the disciplines (help you engage the Real such that you can be Real), and then there's the language that describes both the discipline and the Real (cosmology/mythology of the Real). What tourist mentioned about "hints" and such is what this final layer is. The problem is that many people invert this. They get stuck in the language and the disciplines (these are the fingers), and they also loose sight of the purpose and experience.
but i can't fault anyone for being human, nor can i fault a religion for having people in it who do get this messed up. most people of most religions actually get the essence, and recognize that both the language (cosmology) and the displines (practices) are to help them understand, engage, and ultimately be this essence, the Real.
It's like if you had a dog that you fed only when you rang a bell. After a while the bell and meal time become entrenched in the dogs mind, so that when you ring the bell he expects to be fed.
it's amazing how many applications Pavlov's experiment has, isn't it. In fact, even without the expectation of the meal, the dog will still salivate. That's the real interesting part of the experiment, i think. First, you have him feeding the dog. Then, feeding the dog and ringing a bell. then ringing the bell and not feeding the dog. And then simply ringing the bell at random, the dog still salivates, even if there's no 'outward' or 'expressive' expectation for food.
I'm sure that anyone who has been around a dog, or any animal for that matter, will recognize the body language of "food" but the extention of pavlov's theory is that even when the dog no longer hopes for food in association with a bell, his biology revves up anyway.
I wonder then, if i can flip your example on it's head and say that the disciplines of doing the same things at the same time--the discipline of eating for example--and then something becomes 'added' to this discipline (a bell rings--say this is the experience of the Real that comes during discipline)--and then that bell rings when there isn't food around. What if the spirit is the natural thing here, the salivation? That is, whenever the real is around, even if there's no physical obvious movement of person, that there is a dynamic expression of Real within (spirit) and Real without (the bell experience in this example). The spirit salivates, even if the body and mind don't seem to have certain expectations.
Ooh, that was a good exercise, thanks.
But, i can also see what tourist sees, which is that the dog desires to eat whenever there is a bell, and if he eats every time a bell rings, instead of eating when hungry or as necessary, that dog over eats because it's out of touch with it's innate understanding of it's physical needs. THis is often why yoga changes people so dynamicly. For so long, they've ignored the natural inclinations of their bodies--forcing meal times, increasing portions, eating unhealthy foods, not moving, etc--and when they come to discover them, their bodies and minds change so dramaticly because they're coming more in line with who they are and what they really need.
Honestly, these sorts of things can go both ways, can't they? Like, a dieter who takes on a plan to loose weight becomes in touch with their body through the discipline? or, the person who simply always eats only at meal times, whether hungry or not, and in denying themselves and their innate body-wisdom, they come into injury and unhappiness. So, i think that religion and religious disciplines can be the same way. For one person, a path to liberation because they've learned to 'tap into themselves' and for another, a way of denying the self that ultimately leads to spiritual unhappiness (and perhaps spirit-death).
So how can you explain this to anybody who hasn't been there before, let alone win an arguement?
it depends upon what we're arguing about really, doesn't it? I can argue about different theological interpretations and applications of certain scriptures from any number of disciplines (yoga, buddhist, christian, jewish, and a few muslim). This is a very different argument than trying to describe the real to someone. And in that, i don't think there can be a lot of argument, unless the person only accepts one name, which then becomes rather heated between the two--the need to convince (or win as cyndi pointed out). But in this case, it does beg the question--did this person engage or understand the essence, the Real?
I cannot describe to you the feeling that i get when i do the rosary, a daily discipline for me. it is probably something like this:
At those times the Real comes around from behind, taps me on the shoulder, and grabs me by the collar, throwing me full tilt into reality.
but there are other ways too--a rumi poem, a sunset, a sense of knowing in my bones, or whatever else.
this discipline, among others, taps me into myself, and as tourist wrote, it reminds me of where i am, where i want/need to be, and whether or not i'm living as i truly want to live (which is in union with the Real). I am reminded through these disciplines, and in that, i can live fully in the Real between disciplines. And when i'm enlightened, i won't need anything at all.
But as it is said in Zen:
"Before Enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After Enlightenment, chop wood, carry water." | |
| | |
| zoebird - 2006-01-02 4:24 PM
Well.... but the problem is that this isn't the emphasis.
it isn't? christianity doesn't emphasize that the purpose of all of these disciplines and practices is to engage with the Divine, the Real?
No, their purpose appears to be something outside of the physical universe. I'm sure Neel could tell you which of the Vedic physophies it falls under, but most Christianity appears to be that God and nature/matter are inherently different, and in some cases that being in matter is the whole problem to begin with.
have you seen the walking spiritual dead? have you not seen it in the eyes of people around you? not the desparate look of need--i've seen that too. for these people, the spirit is still alive and kicking, waiting for it's liberation, that can only be done through conscious choice on the part of the individual to listen to and nurture that spirit. But there are those who are already dead, long dead in the eyes, just moving through their bodies. Haven't you seen them?
Yes, I've met a lot of unhappy people. Whether this indicated that their spirit was in pain or just not there is another question. I've been down so far that I was pretty sure my spirit was dead, but it wasn't.
But, the central theme of christianity is union with God--not church or this or that thing. Simply, overcoming 'sin' (things that are not 'of God' and 'cause suffering') to live/experience the Real.
My experience is that the central theme is service to God, that it's not possible to have the same level of Union that the indian mystics often speak about because God and mankind are inherently different, so that there can not be a union between the two because of this.
The esoteric element has been lost to a great deal of Christain worshippers, and all they have is the exoteric crowd control elements.
absolutely. so does every aspect of society and every religion. but that doesn't mean that christianity doesn't emphasize that 'essence.'
That's not been my experience. Generally it's a lot of gloom and doom, and fall in line. They pay lipservice to the essence, but generally it appears to have been perverted to serve the needs of the clergy.
The problem is that the disciplines are all artificial. They're all inherently failed attempts to frame reality, often with larger and larger frames, but frames none the less. By engaging in the ritual or practice you miss the point, at least to some extent. People begin to associate the ritual with the Real.
disciplines are not to be mistaken with their outcomes. i agree that people get confused and place more value on the discipline than on the outcome. but for most people, a discipline is necessary to remind them or bring them back to the original experience/intent behind the discipline in the first place. Disciplines are useful, helpful even.
Yes, but at some point they become a bit like having training wheels on your bike. They're not necessarily, and they get in the way. They also have the bad side of continuing to keep the lay-people dependent upon the people involved in the ritual for their connection to god.
They get stuck in the language and the disciplines (these are the fingers), and they also loose sight of the purpose and experience.
Sure, or the disciplines obstruct the view to begin with.
it's amazing how many applications Pavlov's experiment has, isn't it.
Well, it's a generally available example of conditioning.
For so long, they've ignored the natural inclinations of their bodies--forcing meal times, increasing portions, eating unhealthy foods, not moving, etc--and when they come to discover them, their bodies and minds change so dramaticly because they're coming more in line with who they are and what they really need.
Sure, being forced to REALLY listen for a change seems to help people enormously.
For one person, a path to liberation because they've learned to 'tap into themselves' and for another, a way of denying the self that ultimately leads to spiritual unhappiness (and perhaps spirit-death).
Exactly. Or as my teacher used to say "Don't let your path of to liberation stress you out." Which is also the reason I keep posting threads about when enough is enough, too much, or not enough.
it depends upon what we're arguing about really, doesn't it? I can argue about different theological interpretations and applications of certain scriptures from any number of disciplines (yoga, buddhist, christian, jewish, and a few muslim).
Sure, you can argue the letter of the law. This is wonderful if you want to argue, because it's much more cut and dried than an experience which can't be put into words. OTOH, it's not the ineffiable, so why resort to it for such matters?
I cannot describe to you the feeling that i get when i do the rosary, a daily discipline for me. it is probably something like this:
At those times the Real comes around from behind, taps me on the shoulder, and grabs me by the collar, throwing me full tilt into reality.
but there are other ways too--a rumi poem, a sunset, a sense of knowing in my bones, or whatever else.
Maybe, but the point I was trying to make is that I never seen to get as far with a discipline of any sort, such as your daily usage of the rosary. It usually takes me by surprise.
| |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 8442
| OK, I admit I am not reading every single word of your longer posts, folks. But I still want to budge in with a couple more words
most Christianity appears to be that God and nature/matter are inherently different, and in some cases that being in matter is the whole problem to begin with.
I think this is true and I think it is one of the main differences between western and eastern relgions.
I've been down so far that I was pretty sure my spirit was dead, but it wasn't.
Spirit is very resilient - anybody who watches Oprah knows that  But seriously, I think we all know or know of someone who can illustrate that.
Yes, but at some point they become a bit like having training wheels on your bike. They're not necessarily, and they get in the way.
I think, in eastern tradition and used to be in some western societies, that when the time to take off the training wheels came, the sadhaka went to the Himalayas or got themselves to a nunnery/monastery. What are the yogic stages of life? I can't remember the names at present - but when family is grown and one has more time, it is recommended that your time be spent on spiritual matters. In North America, we somehow believe it is better to take up golf and go on cruises. My MIL is going to Reno for the umpteenth time this week and will probably pack up to one of the cheap all-inclusives in Mexico soon. On the one hand it is great, on the other hand, she is pretty bored the rest of the time - except for golf and online poker
Sure, you can argue the letter of the law. This is wonderful if you want to argue
Of course she wants to argue - remember that lawyer gene is still inside our zoebird yogini  | |
| | |
| tourist - 2006-01-02 8:24 PM
most Christianity appears to be that God and nature/matter are inherently different, and in some cases that being in matter is the whole problem to begin with.
I think this is true and I think it is one of the main differences between western and eastern relgions.
One of the Vedic philosophies follows this approach, the other is that the two are the same. I'm not really clear on this, or what the exact name of each one is, I'm sure Neel could explain it very well. I also keep forgetting which school yoga falls into, I guess I'm not that interested because it strikes me as being a lot of dry theory.
I can't remember the names at present - but when family is grown and one has more time, it is recommended that your time be spent on spiritual matters. In North America, we somehow believe it is better to take up golf and go on cruises.
Never really understood all that. I'm not a cruise or golf sort of guy, very boring.
Sure, you can argue the letter of the law. This is wonderful if you want to argue
Of course she wants to argue - remember that lawyer gene is still inside our zoebird yogini
She's very good at it too, the Law is missing out on a fine attorney. | |
| | |
| i think i want to beat my head against the wall. oh wait, i have an emoticon for that.
both christian and jewish orthodoxy is entirely about union with God. Islam is more to whit regarding the separation of man and God--such that there can be no union. but, Sufiism refutes this idea through the ecstatic experience.
and, i could give you a long list of bible verses, treatises and texts--from throughout the ages that are both christian and jewish, as well as sufi--to this point, but i don't think that you'll actually read them, so there's no point. And, they're often so contextually entertwined, that it could take years to figure out how they reflect these same ideas that we find in eastern traditions.
eastern and western esoterica are the same. their disciplines are largely the same--prayer, meditation, fasting, scriptural study (which includes debate/arguments), corporate worship or practice, and many others. their cosmologies are different based on the cultural and environmental experiences of the populations from which they arise.
this is not only my experience, but the central teachings of the churches themselves, which they clearly espouse through their language and disciplines.
Edited by zoebird 2006-01-03 4:27 PM
| |
| | |
| zoebird - 2006-01-03 4:24 PM
i think i want to beat my head against the wall. oh wait, i have an emoticon for that.
Yeah, doesn't look like we're getting anywhere does it? That's okay, I still like ya! | |
| | |
| well, i think that if people don't think or believe that christianity has that purpose of union at it's core, then there's no real way to convince them of it. The same language can be used to demonstrate the differentiation as well as the concept of unity, which makes it all the more difficult.
and then it also comes down to individual experience. Thich Naht Hanh, raised in a largely buddhist community, greatly values christianity and sees it as being basicly the same as buddhism. But, he isn't engaging it from a place of bad experiences and all that. He can have a sort of "pure approach" to it, the way that we can have to zen, because we don't necessarily have bitter experiences of Zen from our fathers or from our communities.
this is why people tend to overromanticise the eastern religions and forget the value that comes out of their own cultural experience. | |
| | |
| You are correct that a lot of this is also my experience. I've had a much better experience with Zen than with Christianity, and a lot of that comes down to my experience with my parents.
I'm also in a very bad position, because I really can't conceed too much ground here. Why? Well, I think that goes back to the battle of wills between my parents and I, and what's really going on with that. I think I'm going to need to think about that some more.
I think the other problem is that word "union" implies the joining of two into one. With mainstream Christianity the message appears to be a relationship (ie two parties) between the worshipper and God.
Then there's the fact that most of my understanding of the eastern religions involves their mystical traditions, while most of my understanding of Christianity has to do with the lay or exoteric approach. I have been enjoying reading St. John of the Cross's "Long, Dark Night of the Soul", but he's also been accused of being very Buddhist, and not very Christian.
Finally I can be a very difficult and stubborn SOB, just ask my folks! | |
| | |
Expert Yogi
Posts: 5098
Location: Somewhere in the Mountains of Western NC | zoebird - 2006-01-01 1:04 PM
have a great time at temple. i'm going to a number of specialized cultural events that have been americanized as well this afternoon and evening.
Well, my trip to the temple was not Americanized...at all. In fact, out of all those hundreds and hundreds of people, I was the only American. This is a South Indian Temple. Sunday was Navodaya. This is one of my favorite days at the temple...I like to start my new year fresh and BLESSED.
Whew!! Too much to read here. I'm sure this is a great interesting topic and I could find lots of things to say about what ya'll are talking about...but, I'm still freshly blessed. I'm going to stay out of this topic, for now anyway, Besides, I'm so tired of talking about Christianity and other religions...in fact, I'm so sick of religion period. Guess that is why I like the Hindu culture so much,
Edited by Cyndi 2006-01-03 8:30 PM
| |
| | |
| our events were "german american" "italian american" and "irish american."
so, everyone was "white." many were americans, and many were italian, german, or irish, depending upon the tradition. it was cool.
i'm glad that you enjoyed your trip to the temple and that you feel blessed. | |
| |
|
Interesting Zen Story