Bill, Bohm (I defer to him - he's so much better at thinking/I like his thought
which explains thinking) differentiates thought from thinking. Thought is
concerned with the past and the future. It is related to time. Thinking is in
the present. Thought is mostly collective. We engage in thinking in the
moment. When I read Bohm's books or watch his video I am reading or watching
thought. I think about his thought. Then my thinking leads to my thought.
There are assumptions in those thoughts and necessities Bohm says that I can
think and dialogue about, if as you say, I don't become attached to my thought
and identify with it and defend it.
Bohm, I think, would say thought is the cause of our problems because it is
like a program. For instance, you plug in the thought - the War on Terror -
and it unfolds other thoughts, feelings, actions automatically. But thought
pretends to just be giving information even though it is really active. Bohm
would watch how thought does this.
The part about inspiration was a revelation of my thinking. Now it's become a
thought. The thinking went on in the past and I still hang on to the thought -
still believe I need inspiration. So I'm attached to that thought. When I
think about that thought I think it's probably unfolded from fear that I cannot
do this myself. If I try at some point I'll quit. So part of the whole of
that thought is fear. Another part of that thought is action. I keep on
searching for inspiration. Just looking at all that helps me to dissociate
from it and it loses its power over me. Where do I get this lack of
self-confidence? I'm an introvert so I could probably spend a lot to time
thinking about such things. Or if I'm in a zen mood on a walk, for instance,
when a thought comes up, I can just label it thought and let it go.
At some point I tie myself in knots with so many thoughts when I am thinking
zen is the way to go. And I just say to myself trying is trying - and feel
sympathy for the person who tried so hard to get A's all during her school life
and now comes across Bohm and Kristnamurti where the point is not to try hard
to get an A.
At such times I think Krisnamurti is wrong and traditional zen is right -
meditation would be a help.
But then - and this is a thought - my type is, at times, a butterfly flitting
from one thing to another and sometimes I just get sick of the whole thing and
revert to my ordinary ways.
Maybe some day I'll try again to meditate.
There is a contradiction in saying Thought causes problems, yet I like the
thought of Kristnamurti and Bohm. Is Kristnamurti and Bohm's thought an
automatic program? Probably if you don't think about it look at their
assumptions, necessities, look at the feeling it unfolds in you. But all that
is thought too. Like I say, maybe, at some point I'll try meditation.
Bonnie
P.S. - I also don't have Bohm or Kristamurti's mind (although come to think of
it they say we all participate in universal mind). Anyway, in their thought
they don't trust thought but insight and what Bohm calls sensitivity.
Kristamurti seems more consistent in that he doesn't listen to anyone's
thought, but thinks things out for himself. But then he gives his thought to
others in talks. Seems an incoherence there.
------------------------------------
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
[email protected]
[email protected]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
