bill..i think it is nuts that are getting thrown around..who is a nut and who is not a nut?.... merle
Bonnie, Thanks for your thorough reply. There are parts of your post below that are IMO very close to zen. For example the approach that there in reality there is only now. Past is a memory and future a projection. You talked about the differences between 'thinking' and 'thought'. If you substituted the word 'experience' for 'thinking' that would be very close to the way I talk about zen (the experience of Buddha Nature - or what I sometimes call "Just THIS!". Anyway I hope you can weave you way through the current egg-throwing that's going on. It's not typical of this forum but certainly not unknown. We are very liberal here and encourage discussion...up to a point. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Bonnie Calcagno <bonlcal@...> wrote: > > 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. >
