--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, t3rinity <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, nablusoss1008 <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > Again, I think we're back to the issue of you not valuing > > > > "I don't know" and both Curtis and I valuing it a lot. We > > > > find some of our inspiration *in* not knowing. You seem to > > > > be more inspired by the belief that you *do* know certain > > > > things. > > > > > > A surprising, interesting and initially frustrating thing > > > for me was taking some retreats with SSRS -- and his ample > > > use of the phrase "I don't know". Coming from the TMO, > > > "home of all knowledge" view, SSRS was "shocking", at > > > first. But he gets very exited about the Mystery > > > of It All. And that bewildered awe is a perfectly > > > acceptable, appropriate response. > > > > > > He also says "So What!?" a lot. Which if used in ones own > > > personal affairs, can be quite cleansing. To both "good" > > > and "bad" events. > > > > > > I Don't Know. But So What! > > > > SSRS is a fake, no ? > > I don't know. So what? > > This is one of my all-time favorite jokes. One person asks > the other: "What do you think is worse in our society today, > the general level of ignorance, or rather the pervading > disinterest." > The other person answers: "I don't know, and I don't care."
Ah, "ignorance." As opposed to...uh...what? "Knowledge?" Here's the rub with "knowledge," as I see it. It's a value judgment. Knowing this (whatever "this" might be) is valuable in life, as opposed to not knowing this, which is ignorance. Value judgment. If the question in the joke above had been asked of the Buddha, he might have replied the same way. Master Chao-chou might have replied (as he did to the question, 'Does a dog have Buddha-nature?'), "Mu." Both answers are really a way of saying, "Thank you for inviting me to play this odd game with you, but I'd rather not. I'm on my way to the beach volleyball tournament right now. Maybe some other time." (The Buddha was a big fan of beach volleyball.) The magic of "I don't know" is that one can know a great number of things and still say the words "I don't know" about the things one doesn't know. A lot of people can't. Have you ever heard Maharishi utter that phrase? I never did. He had an answer for everything, and even a credo built *around* having an answer for everything: "Every question is a perfect opportunity for the answer we have already prepared." A lot of other spiritual teachers are like this. However much they *may* know, it's as if they are reluctant to admit that there are things they *don't* know. It's as if they're playing to that expectation that students brought with them that teachers (or at least the enlightened ones) "should" be omniscient, and know everything, and have an answer for every question. I have no such expectations of the teachers I run into. I expect them only to be who they are and know the things that they know. So I tend to like it when they are honest about their limits, and 'fess up to the things that they don't know. It's just a preference.
