The Zen philosopher Zen is individual contemplation to the exclusion of all else as the only way of achieving pure enlightenment a focus on 'being' rather than 'things' or 'becoming'. Transcendental as it involves developing ideas to make problems disappear not so as to solve them but instead as a search for enlightenment. In it the ego tries to disappear to be `nothing' but is always `there'. This enlightenment is then about grasping reality directly. It involves an anti- philosophical use of Koans to point to the ultimate nature of reality. It can be conveyed in almost anything it is about the `art' of living and understanding it is about the mysterious. It is not the liberation of the self from the world that matters or an interest in words and concepts but a seeking of enlightenment as an anti philosophical poetic experience about one's true identity. Intuitive experience is what transcends our ordinary reality. This is an examination of what is beyond words, the mysterious, which only it can capture. Impermanence is the true reality before us. The past, present and future combine in moments of enlightenment. Things have no meaning other than in relation to each other. Social morality is impossible, not important as escapism takes place in the individual. Practical human relations are then not thought about. Samsara or the real world is the illusory world.
In Buddhism there are noble truths the second noble truth reveals the causal process that leads to suffering and existentially the perpetual cycle of transmigration. We are ignorant of the true nature of reality. We are conscious and explain the world in a distorted way. It is not ignorance but a problem in knowing. Our conscious is distorted if we are only interested in the pleasurable experiences of life. It is like a drug that we demand more of. The third noble truth is the way to get out of experiencing reality as constant suffering this is done by going beyond dualistic distinctions of language this is then the end of life characterized by suffering, desire and ignorance reality is not dualistic as our conscious images are like dreams not literal facts. The fourth noble truth is the eight-fold path needed for Nirvana. Right understanding, thought, speech, action, livelihood, effort, mindfulness and concentration is needed. This is not sequential but simultaneous reprogramming of our conscious minds to conform to the true nature of reality. It is not an escape but a transformation of ones own consciousness. This is so one can respond wisely and compassionately. Buddhism is a philosophy of mind. The problem of the minds deluded perception of the world. A western equivalent to a Zen master will have to retreat into a mystic's radiant wordlessness when faced with human obtuseness. Wittgenstein described how this was possible 'those who know do not speak' he said in his Tractus. This is not self-discipline but simply a turning away from conventional values that can be done by men who have a great inner resourcefulness of their own, scholars, mystics, musicians and dreamers of all kinds a technique to produce a state of comparative lack of desire. It is more Epicurean than Christian while containing ascetic elements that involve great self denial and abstinence from worldly comforts it does tend to see spiritual progress in terms of progressively increasing pleasure and well being rather than in terms of mortification and suffering. It suggests a cure for mental illness in (dukkha) peace and freedom from disturbance the opposite ideal of being possessed with desire and delighting in it. Culture is concerned with contemplation. The ecstasy remembered and recreated than what quickly passes. Contemplation is essential to art interest in the immediate present state of conscious and its affirmation/negation. What is sought is the satisfaction of the mind, one that is repeatable either in meditation or aesthetic experience. The removal of suffering as a felt imperative which Western philosophy tends to demean as a form of mysticism trying to achieve a pearl of a great price the hidden source of a rare and total satisfaction a form of esoteric thought therefore not capable of the extremes of the pedantry of useless knowledge and petty rules ruthlessly enforced to which his European counterpart may sink. Buddhism does not immediately embrace the believer. Through contemplation one may raise oneself to a mystical pitch where one does not exist as an individual. This is a need for enlightenment that is paramount although we are still stuck in Maya. We are not necessarily searching for enlightenment, but that does not have to matter. The idea that only the conscious moment exists is of significance as an escape from the will. Any state of present and immediate suffering and frustration becomes intensified into a hell. In such circumstances the vital necessity is to find a means of escape. Buddhist dialectic does this as it is that a thing is described by what it is not this also relates to the thing in itself the logic of negativity. Art is also a release from the frustration of the will. How should it be that the will should continue to be frustrated? It is because the will has ambition. The suffering of the Nietzschean is at the society around him has much to do with the ideas held. It is less in the brutal instinct that the aggression of a morality of the weak that is felt, as in the enlightened knowing subject. The Nietzschean and the Buddhist are nothing like so far apart as has seemed. For the Buddhist too have experienced disillusion he must have desired powerfully, his ideals and purposes must have been far above that of the ordinary person. Art is also a release from the conflict of wills, from the pressure of alien will. Yogachara is conscious stream of thought that is in nothing. It is constant in that one past state is the cause of this present state that is the only continuity. Instantaneous existence when I say the past me was me, what do I mean? What is now present was it caused by that which was in now in the past? There is also memory, but the past does not exist. The idea of a soul would suggest that it does, that my past belongs to me in a way that suggests it still exists. Why a soul? To show how you are the same person as you were then, but the past does not exist. All that exists is the now. I have memory indeed. One set of mental phenomena produce another set this makes Buddhists arrogant nihilists. It is materialism where there is no mind stuff. Brain processes are physical some of which are like something. There is no nothingness for inner life to be inside. To think the mind is extra to the material is to be a dualist. In the mystical the conscious is beyond human comprehension. Does the past have a form of existence? What is it that makes statements about the past true of false? It must be the relation they have to the present, to memory & to extrapolated sequences of cause and effect. Is this the reality they have a constructed reality based in the present and the theories and categories to which we adhere? Change these theories and categories a bit we can have possibility instead, something infinitely larger. Even the present is constructed. What has reality apart from my immediate consciousness? How much reality do we give the past? What other reality is there or can there be? If the past does not exist, if it is only construction and extrapolation, could we not extrapolate or construct differently? And could this not be just as true? In a world of infinite number of possible things that could be thought, why can we not think what we like or at least what we can? Why are we not Zombies creatures who are just human shells in order to escape from suffering? Suffering is about after all the nothingness or unreality of all phenomena as Kant said the thing as it appears is not its real nature. It is in the existence that is hidden not feelings or inner awareness that is subjective knowledge (xing). The hidden is the nothingness that is known in material force (qi) not objective knowledge. Does this show suffering to be unreal because all phenomena are not real? This is an immensely comforting attitude. That is if it is not disputed. There are many different points of view or aspects of truth. Phenomena have phenomenal reality but it is illusory like dream reality. The true reality is the nothing. The truth is that phenomena are merely phenomena. They may be thought away. Perceive them truly and they do not exist. They spring form illusion. Epiphenomenalism states that actions are not influence by the mental they would happen anyway. If we were Zombies the same thing would happen without the conscious mind. This is in fact a contradiction a conscious, can not, be and not be it can only be so a Zombie is impossible to materialists but seems possible. To a dualist they are possible however. Philosopher's angst is that ordinary life is just not satisfying, the imitation of others seems horribly empty the perverse will is the true will. Perversity reveals truth. Identity is freedom and truth conformism this is the lie. Zen individuality can be of value to a philosopher. A wisdom dispute is between the esoteric and exoteric. Protestants believe that heresy is wisdom as it is a search for affirmation and as such Nietzschean. Christianity, can not, deal with this so it's anti Christian. Buddhism appeals to the depressed a release from the will the same as art and nature. It is also a release from the pressure against the will as it is a reality of ones own and a rejection of tyranny. What is enjoyment? How should we enjoy being in the world? All the things there are to enjoy starting with our environment, then going all the more particularly into the details of one's own life. Enjoyment generated. I think of Heidegger on 'care' as something of primary importance for Dasein enjoyment, all present as forms of reality/unreality. If we care about consciousness it is a moral concern said Daniel Dennett. Dennett argues consciousness requires some type of higher-order thought dependent on cultural training not just biological inheritance. Before culture humans were not conscious nor are cats or dogs. Contemplative enjoyment reaches a point where it begins to seem futile. Can it to go on forever? Philosophy is to think beyond the limitations of the ordinary into the illegitimate logical and grammatical error, said Wittgenstein. But look at the value of philosophy for eighteenth century Britain- region. The culture was philosophy driven. Buddhism is profoundly philosophical. It contemplates the questions that arise. Think of all the things there are to enjoy if one knew one was dying. This is not that all we will be attached to thinking about only the unreal that is the nothing. It is that this is possibly just a small segment of what is real. One is surrounded by forms which interact on every level forms that engage the emotions. But to look in this way brings detachment. Do we want nirvana or does we want extinction? When the unreal is thought of? None of these questions will arise if one sticks to a rigidly protected common sense. Then an interesting philosophy will not arise? The Buddha's truth is older than the message. Faith is not even for a moment. It is not about understanding or the pursuit of rigorous discipline just about gaining access. No need for the constraints of religion, the world of religious understanding is before you. Particular certainly about one particular thing brings with it a great sense of confidence and joy. Is the ultimate ideal a state of activity (Nataraja) or of absolute stillness and freedom from all qualities (Nirvana) or something that subsumes and comprehends these opposite ideals? Buddhists disagreed with the Brahmins over the value to be placed upon the life force. They look for an end to willing from the point of view of suffering. A desire for the end of that suffering which the will philosopher denies exists. A will to absolute truth is permissible and satisfiable though it must be void of all particular content. As such it leaves will philosophy behind and unites Brahmins with the Buddhist. Buddhism is the only scientific religion as highly developed with respect to our conscious world as is our science with respect to the physical. Our science cannot refute, it. It fits human aspiration and purpose in the way it makes almost any western developed philosophy of life look hopelessly primitive. Perhaps Buddhism does rest on some unproven hypotheses is it born of weariness? Tathagataship is Buddhahood as an ideal worked out to express the perfections of one man a symbol of perfect enlightenment and originality an ideal to be aspired to in its own right. Acquiescence, as in the eternal recurrence is the opposite of the Buddhist craving for the cessation of pain. A Buddhist error is the wheel of birth means a perpetually renewable innocence or world- weariness is not the only possible result of conscious contemplating of all suffering. Buddhism is a rationalistic religion. Buddhist culture is descending magnificently from superb philosophical insights, an aristocratic religion and therefore capable of expressing the deepest philosophical insights. Our esoteric tradition lost in the 18th Century. Buddhism is the logical extension of the love of nature and art in our civilization. A deep interest in drugs leads naturally to a committed Buddhism. It is interested primarily in the conscious and so a very introverted religion. It leads to squalid living, conditions, as the external conditions of life do not really matter so long as peace can be secured for contemplation. In its sense the conscious has been spoiled and it would be ridiculous to think of redirecting it into more normal channels, these would seem paltry. As a way of life it is quite logical. Ch'an Buddhism is a method of conditioning in accordance with a few simple suggestions. It is the predetermination by rational thought of a predetermined end. The feeling one is reaching the sublime inner core of truth by destroying the conscious problems making then disappear. This destruction takes place in a tradition that assumes the long tradition of Buddhist culture. A way of reaching great self-assurance once accepted. A life is a destiny and a problem, having attained nirvana why rest there? It is not only nirvana that is perfect. Maybe it is if this is how we define nirvana but maybe nirvana is not necessarily a particular transcendent state of mind. Quite ordinary things may be perfect. When faced with a choice between the motionless and the moving there is no logically compelling reason why one should choose the motionless. Moreover insofar as one retains human physical and mental energies one will naturally choose the moving. For the joy of perfection one will have to lapse from perfection occasionally. Disillusion is the starting point of Buddhism. Buddhists are aware the true path of satisfaction is some kind of worldly renown. Italian renaissance had these values. However given the despotic conditions that prevailed in those days personal ambition meant courts, and courts meant cringing before psychopathic sadists, personal ambition was really dangerous. In inflicting revenge, in absolute sadism we are all instruments of karma. Sadism is the opposite of love both are based on the illusion of a separate individual soul. In Buddhism is the union of philosophy and psychology. All logical terms are equally psychological, and vice versa as religion it is sheer philosophy. Zen psychologically leaves the world as it is. Buddhist thought is analyzing experience into its constituent elements the sunyata doctrine. The void or nothing that insight or enlightenment involves is in its absence of 'spooks'. This insight is not to be obtained by some special process of meditation or preparation. You are all right as you are that the world is all right as it is that the game goes on. There is a philosophical position here. This can also lend itself to brainwashing for it can make an alliance with whatever system of belief you choose to join it to. It is good in the sense that it detaches this long quest for enlightenment from the wide range of other philosophical questions. In a sense it narrows the scope of Buddhism its foundation is paradox and that leaves you free. To use it as a philosophy rather than a helpful technique can be to misuse it. The Buddha nature is not a human nature. What is the value one is to put upon imperfection? I might look on myself under the aspect of one still playing out his karma. In the light of a bodhisattva helping the rest of humanity towards nirvana what then is nirvana? The end of suffering (dukkha) but is it not more than that a point of enlightenment or understanding? In that case it remains something mysterious, open to dispute. In understanding it how can we say what this is until we have reached it? If we have reached nirvana we are no longer here. Have I no right to judge anything except from the viewpoint nirvana? This philosophical explanation has no substance one reason why the Buddha steered so clear of metaphysics. Buddhism about spiritual philosophical religious matters we have to refer to something which we necessarily can't know and can't in fact verify for ourselves as we can enter such a state of mind we will not be able to hold it to retain it. Buddhism is a rational religious tradition concerned with philosophical speculations about reality and with an entirely honest psychology it is about wisdom, enlightenment that does not have any ultimate truth or value. To criticize a philosopher for being a Buddhist and not to be a free spirit is only an issue for the ignorant as it is not about lies but the creation of something a world of weariness as a response. In this essay Zen Buddhism is examined and found to be an examination of the consciousness as away of achieving pure enlightenment. It is transcendental so a way to make problems disappear along with the ego in order to find out about our true identity. This is intuitive an examination of the mysterious impermanence before us where past, present and future combine in moments of enlightenment. The real is the illusory the Samsara to the Buddhist. The noble truths of Buddhism are to do with the causes of suffering due to problems in knowing and the need for pleasure. Reality is a dream more than a literal fact in the third noble truth. The forth is about programming the mind to conform to the true nature of reality, so our response can be wise and compassionate. This is turning away from conventional values it can be done by scholars, mystics, musicians and dreamers of all kinds. It is done by the cultured by seeing increasing pleasure with peace and freedom as giving satisfaction. Buddhism needs contemplation to a mystical level where one is no longer an individual. Through enlightenment not necessarily searched for but found in a moment of consciousness. This intensifies suffering that is escaped from by describing a thing by what it is not, the Buddhist dialectic. This is an escape from the will it involves a release from the frustration of the will and of alien will. This can also be done with art. The Nietzschean philosopher like the Buddhist has ideas that cause suffering because of the intensity in which the ideas are held above the ordinary. Buddhists are Nihilists like Nietzschean philosophers but arrogant about it as nothing exists but the now to them. The unreality of all phenomena is a nothingness the hidden that is known so all phenomena our not real. This is comforting if not in dispute. Phenomena have a dream like reality a true reality is in the nothing. Phenomena are just phenomena they can be thought of as an illusion. Actions would happen anyway they are phenomena not part of the mental according to materialists unlike dualists. Zen individuality is of value to the philosopher. With it we can ask is wisdom esoteric or exoteric? Wisdom is heresy to the protestant so Nietzschean, a search for affirmation so anti Christian. Enjoyment as contemplation gets to a point where it seems futile. Consciousness is generated by care for Heidegger. Dennett calls it a moral concern. How long can it last then? Buddhism is profoundly philosophical and wants to question questions that arise. Thinking of the enjoyable is not to just imagine the unreal the nothing. The unreal may be a small part of the real. To think of it is to be detached. Is it extinction or nirvana that is wanted or thought about? Truth is not reliant on faith truth is an entrance to a certainty that brings joy. Is this in activity or stillness or between the two ideals? Brahams want activity a life force. Buddhists want an end to willing or suffering. A will to absolute truth unites both as long as it has no content so it is anti-philosophical. Buddhism is a science of the conscious world so it cannot be refuted and makes western philosophy seem primitive. The perfect enlightenment is an ideal worked out by one man. This is the opposite of the eternal-recurrence as it has, pain, which is not wanted. It is aristocratic so has deep philosophical insights. It also has a love of nature and art in civilization. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/S27xlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Current Book Discussion: Appreciate Your Life by Taizan Maezumi Roshi 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/
