--- chris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> What made you choose to reply to this particular
> post? Is it really
> possible to be free from choosing? Just because Hsin
> Hsin says so
> doesn't make it true. Though I believe if you look
> close you'll see
> that what it's saying not to be identified with one
> thing, setting
> youself up on one side and imagining that you are
> seperate from everything else.
This is a very timely question, which perfectly
addresses the practice outlined in the text we're
discussing.
I know that this group is mostly allergic to any
explanations, and that I'll be reviled for speaking
up. Those who know, don't speak, those who speak,
don't know.
Also, the Buddha spent 49 years walking up and down
the banks of the river Gangis, delivering sermons, but
at the same time he hadn't uttered a single word of
teaching.
All these things are very well known, absorbed and
internalized. And yet, as Katagiri roshi used to say,
'you have to say something'.
What we're looking at here is the difference between
the Eastern civilizations and the Western
civilizations. Several thousand years ago, the Western
civilization took a turn and became obsessed with
perfecting the machine. Today, we're enjoying the
fruits of thousands of years of labor focused on
serving and polishing the machine. And, of course,
today our efforts to perfect the machine have only
increased in resolve, commitment, and magnitude. If we
think that we've seen the pinnacle of what the
machines can do, we haven't seen nothing. The best is
yet to come.
Meanwhile, the Eastern civilizations have remained
focused on perfecting the human. In that regard,
they've been considerably ahead of the Western
civilizations when it comes to understanding the
intricacies of the human functioning.
Only in the past 100 years or so have we, the
Westerners, managed to make some inroads into the
areas known to the Easterners for thousands of years.
Today, we are very fortunate to be the part of that
advanced forefront of the most exalted Western
teachings. What I'm talking about is the findings of
Bertrand Russell, Allan Whitehead, Kurt Goedel, etc.
Back in 1911, Russell and Whitehead published their
seminal "Principia Mathematica". That was a
breakthrough event. A new territory had been broken
into, which enabled all kinds of new research to stem
forth.
Most importantly, for our course of study, this
breakthrough enabled us to better grasp the teaching
of one Shakyamuni Buddha.
2,500 years ago, the Buddha alerady knew the things
that Russell, Whitehead, Goedel, et al discovered some
2,400 years later.
What "Principia Mathematica" opened the doors for here
in the West is the awareness of the special case of
*self-referential thinking*. This then got elaborated
and brought to fruitiion by the incredible findings of
the German mathematician Kurt Goedel.
I won't even attempt to go into the enormously complex
technicalities associated with these findings. This
forum is the last place where one should cosider such
things. However, I'd like to take the opportunity to
elucidate some of these concepts to those who wish to
edify their intellect.
I'll keep things extremely simple and non-technical,
for the purposes of this discussion. In a nutshell,
what these new findings are talking about is this:
Suppose we have a chair. It's an object that could be
qualified, determined by some of its characteristics.
One of the characteristics of a chair is that people
can sit on it (that may be its main determinant,
separating it from the table, the lamp, the giraffe,
and the square root of two, for instance).
Suppose now we have several chairs. They all share
this main determinant (i.e. people can sit on them).
Suppose now we go more abstract, and formulate a
*class of chairs*. This class talks only about chairs,
but is it a chair? Can we sit on a class of chairs?
This anomaly arises due to the fact that a class of
chairs is self-referential. What this new discipline
of cognitive sciences is saying is that whenever we
have a self-referential phenomenon, strange, irregular
things start emerging.
Goedel took this notion to the ultimate level, but I
won't tire you here with his line of reasoning. Those
of you who wish to penetrate it, should be able to
easily do so by paying a visit to the local library.
Getting back to the example at hand: having a
phenomenon of picking and chosing is of a *different
logical order* than having a phenomenon that
*reflects* on picking and choosing. Reflecting on
picking and choosing is NOT picking and choosing. This
is what Russell, Whitehead, Goedel et al discovered
here in the West, independently of the Buddha's
discovery in the East.
In more general terms, being aware of a certain view
is not a new view. This self-referential principle is
incredibly powerful, once you get to fully understand
it, because it liberates us from falling into the
infinite regress. This is what the Budha discovered
upon attaining his unexcelled enlightenment. How to
get liberated? -- by being self-aware.
Your question: "Is it realy possible to be free from
choosing?" can in this light be answered positively.
Yes, it is possible to be free from choosing. How so?
By being aware that one is picking and chosing, one
becomes free from it.
This awareness of picking and choosing is not in
itself a choice. It is merely a reflection. It is
devoid of any content, and it does not bring anything
new into the picture.
Thus, we can attain liberation. We only need to adopt
the self-referential awareness, being able to reflect
on the world of phenomena. The moment we fully do
that, the world of phenomena disappears to give way to
the world of ultimate non-determined reality.
Alex
=====
No karma was produced during the composition of this letter
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Meet the all-new My Yahoo! - Try it today!
http://my.yahoo.com
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar.
Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/S27xlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Noble Eightfold Path: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action,
Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration, Right Livelihood
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZenForum/
<*> 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/
