- Lid sinds
- 12 nov 2002
- Berichten
- 1.035
- Waardering
- 1
Waarom stel je deze vraag?
Jaren heb ik hier aan besteed. Dit soort vragen en mogelijk antwoorden. Ik kwam er, net al velen voor en na mij, niet uit. Tot ik meer te weten kwam over Zen. Hierin liggen zeker niet alle antwoorden, maar de noodzakelijkheid van het stellen van vragen viel voor mij weg. Hierdoor kreeg ik een hoop extra antwoorden............klinkt vaag en tegenstrijdig.
Plat gezegd komt het hierop neer...... was, ben, wees en je zult zijn.
De hele discussie hier over het bestaan van vrije wil en alle factoren daar omheen, aangekleed met zogenaamd moeilijke woorden, is zoals ik het zie een vraag naar de kern van het bestaan. De hoe, wat en waarom vragen.
Leuk in een psychologische/fysiologische/sociologische/filosofische context plaatsen en niemand die er meer uit gaat komen zonder de woorden "ik ben van mening" of "gevoel" te gebruiken. En het leidt dus iedereen verder van de kern vandaan, want de vraag is helder en zuiver en bestaat uit werkelijke onwetendheid in het bewustzijn.
Er zijn verschillende bekende koans Uitleg Koandie deze chaos veel duidelijker maken en inzicht kunnen geven in de chaos, of het accepteren van de chaos mogelijk maken.........ligt eraan hoe je er mee omgaat.
Punt is dat deze discussies eindeloos zijn, omdat er altijd nieuwe argumenten te vinden zijn. (= verder van de kern) De Koan stelt je in staat bij de kern te blijven................zal voor de meesten hier wel weer niet empirisch genoeg zijn, en een boek lezen is natuurlijk veel makkelijker.
Dus TS, waarom stel je deze vraag?
Aanvullende uitleg Zen en de relevantie tot dit onderwerp
Zen treats all thoughts as delusions, as being more or less tangential to reality. They can't be repaired or shored up, though most press releases and religious doctrines are an attempt to do just that. This means that most religions lead to an inner conflict between their doctrines and our sense of the truth. Zen offers freedom by going the other way, into the midst of paradox and doubt.
Such an embrace is not confined to Zen. The renowned anthropologist and social scientist Gregory Bateson was tremendously aware of the nature of paradox and the double binds of the thinking mind. Ilya Prigogine formulated the theory of Dissipative Structures to describe certain chemical reactions such as those involving chemical clocks. In these reactions, when a system has fallen out of equilibrium and drifts further toward instability, there is the sudden appearance of a new level of order instead of escalating chaos. This is a pretty good metaphor for the way Zen is supposed to work. Someone who spends time with a koan goes deeper into the puzzle of reality rather than seeking a quick return to a previous equilibrium.
The mind believes its own thoughts, its own hypotheses about what is real, and the Zen koan undermines this belief by showing the paradox involved. Sometimes a koan makes a thought seem absurd by suggesting that the opposite proposition might be just as useful. A koan might run everything backwards. For example:
In old China someone gave the Governor a rare fan made of rhinoceros horn--an expensive, useless object. The Governor handed it off to the local Zen master and it was forgotten. One day, the Zen master remembered it and asked, "Bring me the rhinoceros fan."
"Umm, it's broken," said the secretary.
"In that case, bring me the rhinoceros."
People spend so much of life trying to mend the broken fan. You thought you had a job or a partner or good health or were rich and suddenly you don't and you aren't. Well, that's familiar. Or it can work the other way. You thought you were unhappy but you look and suddenly you are not. It's this last discovery that Zen depends on--a flip that applies to other areas of life as well. The creative breakthrough is waiting for you as soon as you stop trying to save your old theory or mend the fan.
You are not enlightened, goes the thought, and, according to Buddhism, that is why you suffer. But what if you run that thought backwards? What if, at this very moment, you are happy? As long as you don't think something is missing, nothing is missing. Everyone knows that there is no security in life, and nothing to rely on.
This is why shopping malls were invented--as a consolation prize. But what if instead of having faux security, you start relying on the insecurity? Paradox is generated when we try to rely on what we can conceive of about reality. Unfortunately, anything really interesting, such as love or quantum mechanics, has a large portion that is outside what we usually conceive of. The point about koans is not to make that inconceivable area conceivable, but to operate while resting in the openness of uncertainty and doubt.
The Emperor's next question to Bodhidharma was,
"Who are you, standing in front of me?"
Bodhidharma responded, "I do not know."
Jaren heb ik hier aan besteed. Dit soort vragen en mogelijk antwoorden. Ik kwam er, net al velen voor en na mij, niet uit. Tot ik meer te weten kwam over Zen. Hierin liggen zeker niet alle antwoorden, maar de noodzakelijkheid van het stellen van vragen viel voor mij weg. Hierdoor kreeg ik een hoop extra antwoorden............klinkt vaag en tegenstrijdig.
Plat gezegd komt het hierop neer...... was, ben, wees en je zult zijn.
De hele discussie hier over het bestaan van vrije wil en alle factoren daar omheen, aangekleed met zogenaamd moeilijke woorden, is zoals ik het zie een vraag naar de kern van het bestaan. De hoe, wat en waarom vragen.
Leuk in een psychologische/fysiologische/sociologische/filosofische context plaatsen en niemand die er meer uit gaat komen zonder de woorden "ik ben van mening" of "gevoel" te gebruiken. En het leidt dus iedereen verder van de kern vandaan, want de vraag is helder en zuiver en bestaat uit werkelijke onwetendheid in het bewustzijn.
Er zijn verschillende bekende koans Uitleg Koandie deze chaos veel duidelijker maken en inzicht kunnen geven in de chaos, of het accepteren van de chaos mogelijk maken.........ligt eraan hoe je er mee omgaat.
Punt is dat deze discussies eindeloos zijn, omdat er altijd nieuwe argumenten te vinden zijn. (= verder van de kern) De Koan stelt je in staat bij de kern te blijven................zal voor de meesten hier wel weer niet empirisch genoeg zijn, en een boek lezen is natuurlijk veel makkelijker.
Dus TS, waarom stel je deze vraag?
Aanvullende uitleg Zen en de relevantie tot dit onderwerp
Zen treats all thoughts as delusions, as being more or less tangential to reality. They can't be repaired or shored up, though most press releases and religious doctrines are an attempt to do just that. This means that most religions lead to an inner conflict between their doctrines and our sense of the truth. Zen offers freedom by going the other way, into the midst of paradox and doubt.
Such an embrace is not confined to Zen. The renowned anthropologist and social scientist Gregory Bateson was tremendously aware of the nature of paradox and the double binds of the thinking mind. Ilya Prigogine formulated the theory of Dissipative Structures to describe certain chemical reactions such as those involving chemical clocks. In these reactions, when a system has fallen out of equilibrium and drifts further toward instability, there is the sudden appearance of a new level of order instead of escalating chaos. This is a pretty good metaphor for the way Zen is supposed to work. Someone who spends time with a koan goes deeper into the puzzle of reality rather than seeking a quick return to a previous equilibrium.
The mind believes its own thoughts, its own hypotheses about what is real, and the Zen koan undermines this belief by showing the paradox involved. Sometimes a koan makes a thought seem absurd by suggesting that the opposite proposition might be just as useful. A koan might run everything backwards. For example:
In old China someone gave the Governor a rare fan made of rhinoceros horn--an expensive, useless object. The Governor handed it off to the local Zen master and it was forgotten. One day, the Zen master remembered it and asked, "Bring me the rhinoceros fan."
"Umm, it's broken," said the secretary.
"In that case, bring me the rhinoceros."
People spend so much of life trying to mend the broken fan. You thought you had a job or a partner or good health or were rich and suddenly you don't and you aren't. Well, that's familiar. Or it can work the other way. You thought you were unhappy but you look and suddenly you are not. It's this last discovery that Zen depends on--a flip that applies to other areas of life as well. The creative breakthrough is waiting for you as soon as you stop trying to save your old theory or mend the fan.
You are not enlightened, goes the thought, and, according to Buddhism, that is why you suffer. But what if you run that thought backwards? What if, at this very moment, you are happy? As long as you don't think something is missing, nothing is missing. Everyone knows that there is no security in life, and nothing to rely on.
This is why shopping malls were invented--as a consolation prize. But what if instead of having faux security, you start relying on the insecurity? Paradox is generated when we try to rely on what we can conceive of about reality. Unfortunately, anything really interesting, such as love or quantum mechanics, has a large portion that is outside what we usually conceive of. The point about koans is not to make that inconceivable area conceivable, but to operate while resting in the openness of uncertainty and doubt.
The Emperor's next question to Bodhidharma was,
"Who are you, standing in front of me?"
Bodhidharma responded, "I do not know."
Some plan...
) waarom geeft dat mijn leven dan niet per direct zin? Het geeft pas zin als ik ook daadwerkelijk een ('juiste') keuze maak. Maar die zou ik ook maken, mocht er geen vrije wil bestaan. 