Relevant textual source;

https://zenstudiespodcast.com/sandokai-1/ — Wayfarer

That's a pretty good explanation.

Indeed; and I have been at pains to point out that this is incorrect. — Banno

We're both right, you from a relative perspective, me from an Absolute one. Read Wayfarer's link. He was having a better day than I am having.

How is it possible to see the near present (tree) and the past (star light) at the same time? — synthesis

Starlight is lazy?

Hmm. Not as interesting as it might have been. Poetry only appears more apt than philosophy for this sort of discussion because it is so loose. In the end if there is any merit here it is on the practice of meditation.

Hmm. Not as interesting as it might have been. Poetry only appears more apt than philosophy for this sort of discussion because it is so loose. In the end if there is any merit here it is on the practice of meditation. — Banno

Zen (Japanese, for meditation). There is only one lesson in Zen, meditate. The words simply point to the practice and it is in the practice is where you find realization.

Yes - but it is highly contextualised and rigidly disciplined in its application. Trying to boil it down to verbal abstractions and then attempting to convey it via a Forum takes it out of that context.

I’m quite in agreement with the sentiment, but the presentation is another matter.

:smile:

Philosophy is not the tool for doing philosophy.

My point was that experience is real, fantasy (thinking) not so much. — synthesis

How do you define an experience? Experience can be interpreted into fantasy just as easily as reason and they both become partial truths. Socrates wrote of a higher quality of reason called noesis which leads to direct experience. Does satori mean the same?

How do you define an experience? Experience can be interpreted into fantasy just as easily as reason and they both become partial truths. Socrates wrote of a higher quality of reason called noesis which leads to direct experience. Does satori mean the same? — Nikolas

Experience can be had outside of conceptual thought. Getting into all the other philosophical stuff is really above my pay grade and,as well, specific questions about 'satori" and the like should be directed to a qualified teacher (of which I am not).

Experience can be had outside of conceptual thought. Getting into all the other philosophical stuff is really above my pay grade and,as well, specific questions about 'satori" and the like should be directed to a qualified teacher (of which I am not). — synthesis

A person doesn't have an experience through conceptual thought. An experience requires the simultaneous cooperation of thought, emotions, and sensations. When they consciously work together and react as nature intended, they produce an experience. When just one aspect is dominant, we live in imagination.

. An experience requires the simultaneous cooperation of thought, emotions, and sensations. When they consciously work together and react as nature intended, they produce an experience. — Nikolas

According to whom?

. An experience requires the simultaneous cooperation of thought, emotions, and sensations. When they consciously work together and react as nature intended, they produce an experience.
— Nikolas

According to whom? — synthesis

Plato's description of the tripartite soul is easiest to understand. As explained in the chariot analogy, the horse on the left refers to our lower parts which have become corrupt. How can the driver fix a sick horse which denies us the ability to objectively experience as a normal human being?

Plato's description of the tripartite soul is easiest to understand. As explained in the chariot analogy, the horse on the left refers to our lower parts which have become corrupt. How can the driver fix a sick horse which denies us the ability to objectively experience as a normal human being? — Nikolas

Nothing against Plato, I am sure he was a brilliant guy and all that, but making the pile of bullshit higher doesn't make it any more correct.

This isn't that complicated. Experience. Need more be said?

message removed, posted it in the wrong thread!

Nothing against Plato, I am sure he was a brilliant guy and all that, but making the pile of bullshit higher doesn't make it any more correct.

This isn't that complicated. Experience. Need more be said? — synthesis

It's not right to discuss the meanings of the tripartite soul and its repercussions from the corruption of our lower nature on your thread but how IYO does Zen understand resistance? Why does the human organism oppose Zen and adopt imagination to take its place? Can the struggle with imagination take place without the conscious mind acting as a purification protecting efforts of meditation from turning into imagination and the opposite of its intent?

It's not right to discuss the meanings of the tripartite soul and its repercussions from the corruption of our lower nature on your thread but how IYO does Zen understand resistance? Why does the human organism oppose Zen and adopt imagination to take its place? Can the struggle with imagination take place without the conscious mind acting as a purification protecting efforts of meditation from turning into imagination and the opposite of its intent? — Nikolas

Zen is the Japanese word for meditation. Zen doesn't understand anything. It's not about understanding, instead it's about realization through direct experience.

My own realization has told me that we cannot understand anything in its real sense. What we do understand is really not understanding, it's just that things seem to work for reasons (although unknown) seem to conform to current rationale.

It's just like science. Although science is ALWAYS changing and logic would suggest that nothing that is thought to be true today will be afforded the same privilege in the future, people still cling to contemporary scientific principles as if they were written in stone and handed down to Moses by God Himself.

Nobody knows how thinking works. Nobody really knows how anything works (although you'd never know by listening to the experts go on and on and on...). After all, even the absolute simplest of things is brought into being by an infinite number of events preceding. And this is happening each and every moment.

Why bother yourself about incredibly complex ideas such as imagination when when we can never (really) understand something elemental like why we still say, "God Bless you," after somebody sneezes!

Thinking is a tool and a rather crude one at that. Although critical to our daily functioning, people become over-dependent on it by taking 'what is' and making it into 'what isn't' (BIG time). Everything that can be known is so before your critical thinking kicks-in at which time the personal revisions begin and do not cease until you have taken what is pure and turned it into your personal fantasy (good, bad, or indifferent).

Zen is the Japanese word for meditation. Zen doesn't understand anything. It's not about understanding, instead it's about realization through direct experience. — synthesis

This an illustration of Sōtō Zen monks sitting in meditation. The meditation master carries a keisaku, a stick with which any of those appearing drowsy are struck.

Yes, I know first hand. Your point?

Just providing some context. This is a philosophy forum.

Zen is the Japanese word for meditation. Zen doesn't understand anything. It's not about understanding, instead it's about realization through direct experience. — synthesis

True, but I have two essential questions Zen by definition cannot answer. The first is the meaning and purpose of our universe and the second is the meaning and purpose of life including human life within it.

A Person may have a Zen experience but how is it used? Experience may be pure but when it begins being used interpretations set in. Humanity has a need to interpret. This is resistance. In order to DO as a normal human being, a person must become free of the dominant animal need to interpret. How does Zen protect one's being against the animal need for interpretations?

True, but I have two essential questions Zen by definition cannot answer. The first is the meaning and purpose of our universe and the second is the meaning and purpose of life including human life within it. — Nikolas

Zen, by definition, answers no questions. It is your own realization that accomplishes the task. The meaning and purpose of life becomes manifest in your actions and cannot be intellectualized.

Humanity has a need to interpret. — Nikolas

Perhaps you should take up the practice of meditation and find out why this is not the case.

Zen, by definition, answers no questions. It is your own realization that accomplishes the task. The meaning and purpose of life becomes manifest in your actions and cannot be intellectualized.

Humanity has a need to interpret.
— Nikolas
Perhaps you should take up the practice of meditation and find out why this is not the case. — synthesis

You underestimate resistance. As soon s a person begins to do something they begin to interpret or they wouldn't know what to do. If the value of the Zen experience leads to the truth, then a person has to deal with acquired resistance. Krishnamurti gave a good example concerning the power of imagination leading to resistance: “You may remember the story of how the devil and a friend of his were walking down the street, when they saw ahead of them a man stoop down and pick up something from the ground, look at it, and put it away in his pocket. The friend said to the devil, “What did that man pick up?” “He picked up a piece of Truth,” said the devil. “That is a very bad business for you, then,” said his friend. “Oh, not at all,” the devil replied, “I am going to let him organize it." Krishnamurti[/i]

That is why I prefer contemplation of contradictions rather than meditation as leading towards the Absolute

When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door. Simone Weil

It can only be resolved by a quality of mind which can place the contradiction into a higher level of reality dualism is incapable of finding the door..

We are on two different paths. Who knows, we both may end up on the Way or where the paths meet. Different strokes for different folks.

Knowing truth is unnecessary for truth to exist or for one to search for it. What is not relative and absolute is the ability to seek truth. Such a search for truth requires a measure of faith. But this search, in a sense, assumes that truth exists. Yet again, if we do not know what truth is, we do not have to know it exists to search for it. Now this makes a search for truth sound meaningless, if we are not sure it exists. But this unsure search is where relativity comes in. That is, relativity, as I understand it, is the relation between me and truth. This relativity (the relationship between me and truth) seems as absolute as truth itself. Of course this relativity might not be the Truth most seek. But it (relativity) is something to consider as truth. Although, as you say, this Relativity changes, it has a constancy in relation to humanity. And I would even say this relativity does not go away with knowledge of the Absolute but is elevated even more.

The Relative and The Absolute stand opposed to each other as that which we use intellectually (the Relative) and that which exist outside of our intellect (The Absolute) — synthesis

How do you respond to Plato given that your idea of Relative vs Absolute truth shares similarities with his theory of forms (absolute & eternal) vs the world as simply imitations of these forms? I ask because per Plato, the mind is fully capable of apprehending forms, in fact this is precisely the raison d'être of philosophy (intellectualizing).

I am sure you must know what you are talking about, but I have no clue.

You underestimate resistance. As soon s a person begins to do something they begin to interpret or they wouldn't know what to do. — Nikolas

99.99....% of what you perceive leaves no time for interpretation. Just think about how much is going on in your field of view at once (an infinite number of things). You have the ability to process (before conceptualization) all of this information in order to make your way, but there is no time for interpretation.

If the value of the Zen experience leads to the truth, then a person has to deal with acquired resistance. Krishnamurti gave a good example concerning the power of imagination leading to resistance: “You may remember the story of how the devil and a friend of his were walking down the street, when they saw ahead of them a man stoop down and pick up something from the ground, look at it, and put it away in his pocket. The friend said to the devil, “What did that man pick up?” “He picked up a piece of Truth,” said the devil. “That is a very bad business for you, then,” said his friend. “Oh, not at all,” the devil replied, “I am going to let him organize it." Krishnamurti[/i]

That is why I prefer contemplation of contradictions rather than meditation as leading towards the Absolute — Nikolas

You are hung-up on form. Things are what they are, correct? You believe you can use your ability to conceptualize to see this truth, but there seem to be all kinds of reasons this is not the case. If we were able to intellectualize the truth, it would be universally applied.

When a contradiction is impossible to resolve except by a lie, then we know that it is really a door. Simone Weil

It can only be resolved by a quality of mind which can place the contradiction into a higher level of reality dualism is incapable of finding the door. — Nikolas

I get what you are saying but the human intellect is simply not capable of taking an infinite amount of information and processing it in real time (for all kinds of reasons). Most people take forever to process one thing (and then they get it wrong!).

We are on two different paths. Who knows, we both may end up on the Way or where the paths meet. Different strokes for different folks. — Nikolas

There are all kinds of different paths. It really doesn't matter which one you are on, only that you believe in yourself 100%. Good luck to you in your quest!

You are hung-up on form. Things are what they are, correct? You believe you can use your ability to conceptualize to see this truth, but there seem to be all kinds of reasons this is not the case. If we were able to intellectualize the truth, it would be universally applied. — synthesis

"Do you wish to know God? Learn first to know yourself." - Abba Evagrius the Monk.

When I awaken to experience that I live in the prison of Plato's cave, it is natural to want to escape. I see that things are not what they are since I am creating my own reality through my corrupted emotions and imagination. I can admit that "I Know Nothing." Conscious attention and imagination are mutually exclusive. When I am governed by imagination I am incapable of conscious attention. However, the more I become capable of conscious attention rather than directed attention, I become closer to realistically perceiving the external world.

I see that if I want freedom from Plato's cave I must learn what it means to Know Thyself rather than imagine thyself. A certain method is essential since it doesn't happen by itself. Conscious attention is a higher intellectual process and not to be confused with dualistic associative thought.

"Do you wish to know God? Learn first to know yourself." - Abba Evagrius the Monk. — Nikolas

Know one thing, know everything. Understanding One-ness, understand The Absolute.

The freedom you seek is not from some metaphorical cave. Accept the limitations of being human by not being tempted to swim across the ocean, fly across in the sky, or engage in conceptual thought.

99.99....% of what you perceive leaves no time for interpretation. Just think about how much is going on in your field of view at once (an infinite number of things). You have the ability to process (before conceptualization) all of this information in order to make your way, but there is no time for interpretation. — synthesis

The process is based in prediction, it’s generally believed. For example:

The rain in Spain falls mainly on the ________.

Jake and Jill went up the ________.

You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
You can't always get what you want
But if you try sometimes, well, you might find
You get what you _______.

Chances are that your brain filled in at least one of the blanks above automatically and without your conscious consent. It is continuously making predictions in this manner. Do these predictions reflect ‘reality’? No, they are frequently wrong. Worse, they usually reflect some bias, and worse still, may trigger a maladaptive emotional response.

There are good reasons to value the mental state that your talking about but this ‘seeing reality’ business is pure fantasy.

Chances are that your brain filled in at least one of the blanks above automatically and without your conscious consent. It is continuously making predictions in this manner. Do these predictions reflect ‘reality’? No, they are frequently wrong. Worse, they usually reflect some bias, and worse still, may trigger a maladaptive emotional response.

There are good reasons to value the mental state that your talking about but this ‘seeing reality’ business is pure fantasy. — praxis

It could be a million different things. It never fails to amaze me that (the vast majority) of people simply cannot handle the notion that they have no clue. Coming to this conclusion is the first step down any reasonable path.

'Seeing reality' (or any of the other hundreds of ways of intellectualizing something that cannot be intellecutalized) is not what it is. It is just cutting yourself a break by not having to figure everything (or anything) out. Accept what we can perceive, make the best of it, and move on. OR, you can struggle 24/7/365 and make up all kinds of bizarre reasons for this, that, and the other thing. Your choice.