The process of psychotherapy (psychoanalysis especially) is supposed to reveal to the patient the cause(s) of their mental suffering, and in so doing, demystify the mental habits (attachments) the patient has been perpetuating.
Self-reflective meditation does the same exact thing. The methodology is different, and the scope of Buddhist aspirations tend to be broader and further-reaching, but they can both be useful tools towards each-others' ends. As for philosophy, its impossible to draw a direct relation to Zen. Philosophy as a subject is too broad. Depending on the school, philosophy can guide you as close to, or as far away from the Zen path as possible. However, there are nuggets of Zen wisdom to be found in the words of wise men who had never heard of (or in some cases, predate) Buddhist wisdom. In fact, there's a Socrates quote I draw inspiration from, and use for regular inspiration in my development of a Zen practice. "The only true knowledge is knowing that you know nothing." I'm not saying that philosophy, psychology and Zen are all one and the same. I'm saying that they all have elements of each other. Anyone seeking to seriously study either of these fields would have nothing to lose by finding a solid foothold in understanding the perspectives of the others. SPROCKET --- [email protected] wrote: > ------------------------ 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 > --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> > > > There are 2 messages in this issue. > > Topics in this digest: > > 1. Re: Is Philosophy Neurosis? > From: kahtychen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 2. Re: Is Philosophy Neurosis? > From: Ian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 1 > Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 09:03:59 -0800 > From: kahtychen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Is Philosophy Neurosis? > > Freud was interested in ushering the miserably > neurotic to a place of simple > human suffering. Buddha devoted his life to > examining the truth of > suffering, its causes, prognosis and treatment. > Philosophers present > proposals relating to the nature of existence > (problems) for debate (in > language), in much the same way that scientists > publish findings to be > reproduced. > > Suffering, problematics and neurosis don't share the > same couch, > categorically. Can one use philosophical musings as > a means of attaching to > suffering? Sure. Can one use the terms of > philosophical problematics to feed > misery and neurosis? Sure, but then, I could also > use my fountain pen to > weed my garden. > > I can frame Buddhism spiritually (surrendering into > the cosmic big S self), > philosophically (as a system of understanding the > nature of reality and > lived values), or psychologically (as a tool to form > (in)effective > behavioral responses to emotional stimuli). > > I am new to the list, rather new to dharma studies, > and have been sitting > off and on for around 10 years. I recently joined a > sangha in Los Angeles, > and am just beginning to work with teachers. Thanks > to all of you for your > provocative writings :-) > > Regards, > Kahty (yes, it's spelled correctly) > > * My working definitions: > > Philosophy is the study of ideas, literally "love of > wisdom." Philosophy is > concerned with examining truth, knowledge, morality, > beauty, and the nature > of reality. > > Neurosis can be described as a distressing mental > disorder that that does > not interfere with one's rational thought or ability > to function (as opposed > to psychosis) and that is an inefectual coping > strategy borne of > overwhelming emotional experiences. > > Problems (problematics) can be described as > unresolved topics of thought. > > Buddhist "suffering" refers to the self generated > disatisfaction that > results from the various forms of attachments. > -- > ~say beautiful things to yourself~ > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been > removed] > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > Message: 2 > Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 12:17:25 -0600 > From: Ian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Is Philosophy Neurosis? > > At 09:03 AM 12/6/2005 -0800, you wrote: > >Freud was interested in ushering the miserably > neurotic to a place of simple > >human suffering. Buddha devoted his life to > examining the truth of > >suffering, its causes, prognosis and treatment. > Philosophers present > >proposals relating to the nature of existence > (problems) for debate (in > >language), in much the same way that scientists > publish findings to be > >reproduced. > > > >Suffering, problematics and neurosis don't share > the same couch, > >categorically. Can one use philosophical musings as > a means of attaching to > >suffering? Sure. Can one use the terms of > philosophical problematics to feed > >misery and neurosis? Sure, but then, I could also > use my fountain pen to > >weed my garden. > > > >I can frame Buddhism spiritually (surrendering into > the cosmic big S self), > >philosophically (as a system of understanding the > nature of reality and > >lived values), or psychologically (as a tool to > form (in)effective > >behavioral responses to emotional stimuli). > > > >I am new to the list, rather new to dharma studies, > and have been sitting > >off and on for around 10 years. I recently joined a > sangha in Los Angeles, > >and am just beginning to work with teachers. Thanks > to all of you for your > >provocative writings :-) > > > >Regards, > >Kahty (yes, it's spelled correctly) > > > >* My working definitions: > > > >Philosophy is the study of ideas, literally "love > of wisdom." Philosophy is > >concerned with examining truth, knowledge, > morality, beauty, and the nature > >of reality. > > > >Neurosis can be described as a distressing mental > disorder that that does > >not interfere with one's rational thought or > ability to function (as opposed > >to psychosis) and that is an inefectual coping > strategy borne of > >overwhelming emotional experiences. > > > >Problems (problematics) can be described as > unresolved topics of thought. > > > >Buddhist "suffering" refers to the self generated > disatisfaction that > >results from the various forms of attachments. > >-- > >~say beautiful things to yourself~ > > Hi Kahty > > From a Dharma study perspective - the Buddha said > > "All conditioned things are impermanent" > "All conditioned things are dukkha" > "All dhammas are without self" > > Just wanted to bring that up, as it relates to big S > Self in Buddhism and > the translation of "dukkha" as "suffering." A very > clear explanation of > that is chapters II and VI of What The Buddha Taught > by Walpola Rahula. > > Ian > > > > > ________________________________________________________________________ > ________________________________________________________________________ > > > Current Book Discussion: Appreciate Your Life by > Taizan Maezumi Roshi > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Yahoo! Groups Links > === message truncated === __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------ 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/
