the underground man

[David Quinn]

Those are great quotes, Kelly. I was particularly taken with this one:

Somewhere in a psalm it tells of the rich man who painstakingly amasses a fortune and "knows not who will inherit it from him."

In the same way I will leave behind me, intellectually speaking, a not-so-little capital. Alas, but I know who is going to inherit from me, the character I find so repulsive, he who will keep on inheriting all that is best just as he has done in the past — namely, the assistant professor, the professor.*

[*And even if "the professor" happened to read this, it would not stop him, it would not prick his conscience — no, he would lecture on this, too. And even if the professor happened to read this remark, it would not stop him either — no, he would lecture on this, too. For the professor is even longer than the tapeworm which a woman was delivered of recently (200 feet according to her husband, who expressed his gratitude in Addresseavisen recently) — a professor is even longer than that — and if a man has this tapeworm "the professor" in him, no human being can deliver him of it; only God can do it if the man himself is willing.]

But it is part of my suffering to know this and then quite steadily go ahead with the project which will bring me toil and trouble and the yield the professor in one sense will inherit — in one sense, for in another sense I will take it with me.

— Kierkegaard

These words are so tragic, so comedic, and so very, very true.

-

[David Quinn]

If you had more familiarity with your own intellectual and religious heritage---and the Bible generally---you wouldn't have to ask that question. The Judeo-Christian tradition is very different from the Zen tradition. It is a 'unique genius' if that blows your tunic up. It is really a disservice to 'abstract' one figure from the matrix...and then have them appear in some ecumenical panel. It is just one of a group of huge errors (in reasoning) you make, but it is a very significant one. Let me know if you ever want to explore it and talk about it.

I don't see any point in discussing that kind of thing. I come from a Catholic background and I am pretty familiar with that kind of mentality. I agree that it is a unqiue kind of mentality, one that is very different most other traditions. But I see it as a self-contained universe that is more or less divorced from reality. It's good at plunging people into great dramas, guilt trips and absurd story-lines, but not so good at helping people become aware of greater truth. Only Jesus, Kierkegaard, Eckhart and few others provide the Christian tradition with a connection to reality, which is what causes them to overlap with other sages from other traditions.

More to the point, your knowledge of Catholicism, however extensive it might be, doesn't change the fact that you are completely tone deaf to the real music of Jesus. And yet, like the assistant professor in Kierkegaards' quotes, you don't even seem to realize this lack inside you. There is a level of consciousness which is missing. It is this which makes meaningful discussion impossible between us, at least from my perspective.

But hey, forget all that. Give us something witty!

-

[Kelly Jones]

Robert, can't you rest during these philosophical discussions?

You'd probably like this quote from Hakuin:

Don't misdirect your effort by chasing around looking for something outside yourself. All you have to do is to concentrate on being thoughtless and doing nothing whatsoever. No practice. No realization. Doing nothing, the state of no-mind, is the direct path to sudden realization. No practice, no realization, is the true principle - things as they really are. The enlightened buddhas of the ten directions have cllaed this supreme, unparalleled, right awakening.

What say you? Did he hit the nail on the head?


...

[Talking Ass]

• 18 Woe to you who long
  for the day of the LORD!
  Why do you long for the day of the LORD?
  That day will be darkness, not light.
  
  19 It will be as though a man fled from a lion
  only to meet a bear,
  as though he entered his house
  and rested his hand on the wall
  only to have a snake bite him.
  
  20 Will not the day of the LORD be darkness, not light—
  pitch-dark, without a ray of brightness?
  
  21 "I hate, I despise your religious feasts;
  I cannot stand your assemblies.
  
  22 Even though you bring me burnt offerings and grain offerings,
  I will not accept them.
  Though you bring choice fellowship offerings,
  I will have no regard for them.
  
  23 Away with the noise of your songs!
  I will not listen to the music of your harps.
  
  24 But let justice roll on like a river,
  righteousness like a never-failing stream!
  
  25 "Did you bring me sacrifices and offerings
  forty years in the desert, O house of Israel?
  
  26 You have lifted up the shrine of your king,
  the pedestal of your idols,
  the star of your god—
  which you made for yourselves.
  
  27 Therefore I will send you into exile beyond Damascus,"
  says the LORD, whose name is God Almighty.
  
  ---Amos 5:18-27

__________________________________________________

Oh goodness, things are really moving here on GF!

Kelly, it would have been so interesting if YOU could have been the one to have met with Kierkegaard in his moment of loneliness and when no one understood him. You really seem to be the most gifted hermenuet(a) on a forum of gifted hermeneutae.

The problem in entering into---even a facsimile of ---a 'discussion' with you is that you will inevitably drag it down into the pit where you 'reside'. You should know, then, that the only creative solution is to avoid that fate, and to that end I have developed a group of different strategies. The pit that you are in, is not the pit I want to crawl down into with you. I know that sounds harsh, and perhaps it is, and as I said before it will take you years from this point to process what we are now dealing on, so you must see I am looking toward a horizon that simply does not appear on your radar.

The question for you in regard to all those Kierkegaard quotes is what you do with them in your life. I suggest (now you have made me self-conscious about my 'I suggests') that anyone who encounters Kierkegaard or Nietzsche or Amos or Jesus will have to encounter meaning and let 'meaning' go to work in him. Meaning is offered to us by a force beyond and superior to our own consciousness. I think you would agree that, in this taking-it-to-heart sense that that is what Kierkegaard did, and that is likely the primary reason you find his 'stored-up treasures' valuable (riffing of his use of the parable of the foolish rich man), and you desire to do the same thing yourself.

• "The symbol for the merely human, for mediocrity, the secular mentality, dearth of spirit, is: both-and, also.

I think we all react against that and I think we all try to come up with a program for ourselves to avoid 'a fate worse than death'. You must know by now, because I repeat it so many times (and yet it does not enter your consciousness it seems) that in essence the basis of a grand difference of opinion has to do with values and what values are privelaged and held to. As you know, there is a rather vast group of values from the Judeo-Christian revelation that pretty much altogether do not appear in your discourse. Not in yours and never on this forum. So, in a sense, and using as an example the Parable of the Foolish Rich Man (Luke):

• He spoke a parable to them, saying, "The ground of a certain rich man brought forth abundantly. He reasoned within himself, saying, ‘What will I do, because I don’t have room to store my crops?’ He said, ‘This is what I will do. I will pull down my barns, and build bigger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods. I will tell my soul, "Soul, you have many goods laid up for many years. Take your ease, eat, drink, be merry."‘ "But God said to him, ‘You foolish one, tonight your soul is required of you. The things which you have prepared—whose will they be?’ So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God."

I would question the 'use of the ground' and the nature of the produced 'crop' when it comes to the QRS 'program'. (Though I am aware that, originally, it was said 'Here, there is no 'program' just conversation about Wise Things', I think anyone can see the degree to which it is now dominated by rhetoric and a dogmatic program). I would also suggest that, at least in some way (and taking your amassing of Kierkegaard quotes as an example of a certain trend), that you have the mentality of one who is storing up goods in an expanded barn. True, you and Quinn could never be said to be taking your ease, nor 'drinking' nor 'merry', but still one might ask (and I think it is a very good question): What are the essential values that you deal in? The whole point in referring to Kierkegaard (on my part) is not to demonstrate that I am a Kierkegaardian chela but to suggest that the values of Christianity are the values he most wants to express in his zealous life. What he did with his zealousness is what he did with his zealousness. But what YOU DO with your zealousness, or what David does, or Diebert, or me or anyone---that is another issue completely.

David, from all I have read of his strange ideas, has no way to talk about 'God' or Jesus as the outcome of Judaism (if one accepts that), nor the Gospels or the Epistles nor really ANYTHING that essentially defines Judeo-Christianity. I say this most emphatically. But Kierkegaard DID. He spoke from this 'matrix' and did not seek to escape from it, remake it, deny it, nor to abstract it and blend it with other traditions and turn it all into a ridiculous parody. Do you see? You-all have a very, very strange 'project' you are undertaking in all this, I actually think it is quite devious and that it stems from a core 'self-deception'. There is a very essential thing that you are working to DESTROY but I don't think you can cop to it, perhaps because you just don't see it.

Living God, living truth, living spirit and relationship to 'the flesh' of humanity is how I would describe what you must deny. One can really only 'suggest' (heh heh) that this is so.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

K...did not seek to escape from it, remake it, deny it, nor to abstract it and blend it with other traditions. You-all have a very, very strange 'project' you are undertaking in all this, I actually think it is quite devious and that it stems from a core 'self-deception'.

The "project" in itself is actually quite common and not strange at all, apart from the question if one agrees with the approach or not. For example the whole school of Hermeticism, Perennial philosophy (see also Huxley), the mythology of psycho-analysis, clearly Ken Wilber with his "Integral Spirituality", the whole school of Theosophy, Anthroposophy etcetera.

Escaping, protesting, remaking, abstracting and blending with others lies at the core of any living tradition and can also be found in the early history of all the traditions you claim to know. Even right now, inside the congregations and local establishments of various religions as well as the theological institutes are many processes like this going on, slow and painful and perhaps not often in any fertile direction.

Of course, here exactly lies the problem of mainstream Judaism and the fundamentalist institutions of Christianity it has been infecting for so long. They don't know how to end themselves, their own reinterpretation is not happening, apart from a watering down to a feeble nothingness.

[Talking Ass]

• "A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me?"
  
  I cannot reveal at this moment why it is important for everyone to listen to this extremely potent Mantra, but it is, and you must: Capt. Beefheart, Pachuco Cadaver (this one goes out to Stephen Coyle)

___________________________________________________

Diebert writes: "The "project" in itself is actually quite common and not strange at all, apart from the question if one agrees with the approach or not. For example the whole school of Hermeticism, Perennial philosophy (see also Huxley), the mythology of psycho-analysis, clearly Ken Wilber with his "Integral Spirituality", the whole school of Theosophy, Anthroposophy etcetera.

You are a Mystic Dancer now! Now you are going to trumpet a hyper-modern 'project' where all tradtitions are broken down, disassembled, reassembled, energized and set loose on the land!

So, these are elements that Quinn incorporates into his Truth Teachings?

• Hermeticism
• Perennial philosophy (see also Huxley)
• The mythology of psycho-analysis
• Ken Wilber with his "Integral Spirituality"
• Theosophy,
• Anthroposophy

Diebert: "Escaping, protesting, remaking, abstracting and blending with others lies at the core of any living tradition and can also be found in the early history of all the traditions you claim to know. Even right now, inside the congregations and local establishments of various religions as well as the theological institutes are many processes like this going on, slow and painful and perhaps not often in any fertile direction."

Absolutely no doubt of this, and nothing I have yet even commented on, in fact. I have been speaking almost exclusively of all that is left out of the QRS synthesis.

At the same time, in case it isn't obvious, I am 'working an angle' or 'preferencing' the Judeo-Christian traditions (in all their variety) as against the 'Eastern' teachings. If you want to know why I do this or anything else about it, just ask!

[Diebert van Rhijn]

It seems you just don't know when you've been sliced and diced, Black Knight! It's the same really with the "Judeo-Christian tradition", although the failing artificial-spiritual-life-extension project doesn't stop there. Perhaps you should take first a few years off exploring your "angle" further and there are many interesting places on the Web where the dialog between J-C and H-B traditions is taking place with the ass. professor approach you seem to prefer. But yet, you like to remain here, in the "pathological pit of self-deception". So we can safely assume you're not actually and seriously exploring anything high-brow like that angle, and actually every time you write "just ask" there's behind it a mumbling: "must mask".

[RobertGreenSky]

Kelly,

'Rest during'? I have to 'get it up' for these things, or better, 'come down from the mount' - :D

Thanks for the Hakuin quotation. Hakuin was a major proponent of using koans, and koans are, sadly to note, practice.

The most important and influential teaching of Hakuin was his emphasis on, and systematization of, koan practice. Hakuin deeply believed that the most effective way for a student to achieve insight was through extensive meditation on a koan. The psychological pressure and doubt that comes when one struggles with a koan is meant to create tension that leads to awakening. Hakuin called this the "great doubt", writing, "At the bottom of great doubt lies great awakening. If you doubt fully, you will awaken fully". Only with incessant investigation of their koan will a student be able to become one with the koan, and attain enlightenment.

Hakuin's systematization of koan practice brought about a major revolution in Zen teaching. In the system developed by Hakuin and his followers, students are assigned koans by their teacher and then meditate on them. Once they have broken through, they must demonstrate their insight in private interview with the teacher. If the teacher feels the student has indeed attained a satisfactory insight into the koan, then another is assigned. Hakuin's main role in the development of this koan system was most likely the selection and creation of koans to be used. In this he didn't limit himself to the classic koan collections inherited from China; he himself originated one of the best-known koans, "You know the sound of two hands clapping; tell me, what is the sound of one hand?". Hakuin preferred this new koan to the most commonly assigned first koan from the Chinese tradition, the Mu koan. He believed his "Sound of One Hand" to be more effective in generating the great doubt, and remarked that "its superiority to the former methods is like the difference between cloud and mud".

- Wikipedia, Hakuin, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hakuin_Ekaku

What I like about Hakuin are his artworks. If no-mind means no-practice, doesn't it also mean no-thinking? No-mind is (I believe) wu-hsin and I don't think it means what you think it does. However, indulge yourself while I relax.

Far more important is Alex TA's link to Pachuco Cadaver. Let a Kierkegaardian pick the Beefheart and things will fall apart. Let a Nagarjunian pick the Beefheart and things will be well, Ice Cream For Crow.

[Kelly Jones]

Robert,

Thanks for the Hakuin quotation.

You're welcome.

If no-mind means no-practice, doesn't it also mean no-thinking?

Yes, you're quite right. That was Hakuin's view of no-mind also. No-mind means no-thinking. He makes it quite clear that no-mind, no-practice, no-realization is no-thinking. You might be interested to read more of this passage. So I'll type up some more.


......

The teaching Zen priests today are busily imparting to their students sounds something like this:

"Don't misdirect your effort by chasing around looking for something outside yourself. All you have to do is to concentrate on being thoughtless and doing nothing whatever. No practice. No realization. Doing nothing, the state of no-mind, is the direct path to sudden realization. No practice, no realization, is the true principle - things as they really are. The enlightened buddhas of the ten directions have called this supreme, unparalleled, right awakening."

People hear this teaching and try to follow it. Choking off their aspirations, sweeping their minds clean of delusive thoughts, they dedicate themselves to doing nothing but keeping their minds complete blanks, blissfully unaware that they are, in the process, doing and thinking a great deal.

When a person who has not experienced kensho reads the Buddhist scriptures, questions his teachers and fellow monks about Buddhism, or engages in religious disciplines, it is all unenlightened activity, and it demonstrates abundantly that he is still trapped in samsara. He tries constantly to remain detached in thought and deed, but all the while his thoughts and deed remain attached. He endeavors to be doing nothing all day long, and all day long he is busily doing.

But let this same person experience kensho, and everything changes. Now, though he is constantly thinking and acting, it is all totally free and unattached. Although he is engaged in activity around the clock, that activity is, as such, nonactivity. This great change is the result of kensho. It is like snakes and cows drinking water from the same cistern: it becomes deadly venom in one and milk in the other.

Bodhidharma spoke of this in his Essay on the Dharma Pulse:

"If someone without kensho makes a constant effort to keep his thoughts free and unattached, not only is he a great fool, he also commits a serious transgression against the Dharma. He winds up in the passive indifference of empty emptiness, no more capable of distinguishing good from bad than a drunken man. If you want to put the Dharma of nonactivity into practice, you must put an end to your thought-attachments by breaking through into kensho. Unless you have kensho, you can never expect to attain a state of nondoing."


Zen master Ch'ang-tsung Chao-chueh of Tung-lin, a Dharma heir of master Huang-lung Hui-nan, used to tell his students: "Senior priests Hui-t'ang and Hsin-ching, fellow students of mine under master Huang-lung, were only able to penetrate our late teacher's Zen. They were unable to attain his Way." Master Ta-hui said:

"Chao-chueh said that because, for him, attaining the Way meant remaining as he was and doing nothing all the time - keeping thoughts, views, and the like from arising in his mind, instead of seeking beyond for that wondrous enlightenment. He constructed a teaching out of the Dharma gate of kensho, the true sudden enlightenment of buddha-patriarchs such as Te-shan, Lin-chi, Tung-shan, Ts'ao-shan, and Yun-men. He took what the Shurangama Sutra says about mountains and rivers and the great earth all being manifestations that appear within the inconceivable clarity of the true mind, and rendered it into words devoid of substance - they were mere constructions erected in his head. In fabricating his Zen from profound utterances and wondrous teachings of Zen masters of the past, he blackened the good name of these Dharma ancestors - and he robbed later geneerations of students of their eyes and ears. Not a drop of real blood flowed beneath his skin. His eyes possessed not a shred of strength. He and men like him infallibly get things turned upside down. Then they forge on, totally unaware, into ever-deeper ignorance. What a pitiful spectacle they are!"



[my italics and embolded text]
.

[Kelly Jones]

True, you and Quinn could never be said to be taking your ease, nor 'drinking' nor 'merry', but still one might ask (and I think it is a very good question): What are the essential values that you deal in?

Truth, honesty, and courage.


Which reminds me:

Dan or David, are you able to change the banner of the forum? From the ezy-Board days, there were values listed, like "thinking, truth, honesty, genius, courage, masculinity, wisdom". There were also links to the Thinking Man's Minefield, David's website, and a couple of other sites. I'd like to see those features returned. Kevin is away, or I'd ask him.


.

[RobertGreenSky]

Kelly,

Thanks for typing all that although I think Hakuin was being a bit of a chatterbox. A new favorite:

A monk asked, “What is the point of ‘Bodhidharma came from the west?’"

Chao-chou said, “It is the leg of the chair.”

The monk said, “That is what it is, isn’t it?”

Chao-chou said, “If that is what it is, you may remove it and take it with you.”

[Kelly Jones]

Do you think that Hakuin was talking idly and senselessly when he said that one can have kensho and be thinking all day long?

That's what you mean by chatterbox, isn't it? Basically, you reckon he was lying, and that Bodhidharma was also lying.


Your response, by the way, is what he was warning us about Chao-chueh, who regarded thoughts, views, and the like as blockages to enlightenment, and things to be prevented. The passage goes on to say:

.....

"These days priests everywhere latch on to phrases such as "everyday mind is the Way," and set them up as some sort of ultimate principle. You hear that "Heaven is heaven", "Earth is earth," "Mountains are mountains," "Streams are streams," "Monks are monks," "Lay people are lay people." They tell you that long months last thirty days and short ones last twenty-nine. The fact of the matter is, not a single one of them is able to stand on his own two legs. They flit about like disembodied spirits, clinging to trees, leaning on plants and grasses. Unawakened, blinded by ignorance, they plod their blinkered one-track ways.

Confront one of them and suddenly ask, "Why does this hand of mine resemble a buddha's hand?" and he says, "But that's your hand."

Ask him, "How is it my foot is just like a donkey's?" "That's your foot," he retorts.

"Each person has his own circumstances of birth. What are yours, senior priest?" "I am so and so," he responds. "I'm from such and such province."

Now what kind of answers are those? They proceed from a mistaken understanding that should never be allowed. But these people still insist that all you have to do is make yourself one-track like them and remain that way through thick and thin. This, they assure you, is attainment of the final state of complete tranquillity. Everything is settled. Everything is understood. Nothing doubting. Nothing seeking. There is no questioning at all. They refuse to venture a single step beyond this, terrified that they might stumble and fall into a hole or ditch. They tread the long pilgrimage of human life as if blind from birth, grasping their staff with a clutch of death, refusing to venture forward an inch unless they have it along to prop them up."


.



[edit: One more passage.... In big text, just in case you missed it the first time.]



There is yet another type of obstructive demon you often run up against, the ones who teach their followers:

"If you want to attain mastery in the Buddha Way you must, to begin with, empty your mind of birth and death. Both samsara and nirvana exist because the mind gives rise to them. The same for heavens and hells; not one of them exists unless the mind produces them. Hence there is one and one thing only for you to do: make your minds completely empty."

Falling right into step, students set out to empty their minds, make them utter blanks. The trouble is, though they try everything they know, emptying this way, emptying that way, working at it for months, even years, they find it is like trying to sweep mist away by flailing at it with a pole, or trying to stem the flow of a river by blocking it with outstretched arms. The only result is greater confusion.


.

[RobertGreenSky]

Do you think that Hakuin was talking idly and senselessly when he said that one can have kensho and be thinking all day long?

- Kelly

I just love your interpretations of my intent! When I wrote Hakuin was being a chatterbox I meant only it was a long passage. I included the Chao-chou mondo to remind your readers that 'getting it' isn't very easy. Again, and as you're ignoring, Hakuin relied on koan meditation, as does his school of Zen, Rinzai (Linchi = Linji). I am myself more sympathetic to Soto Zen. :D

[Kelly Jones]

If you realise that one can be thinking, conceiving of ideas, mentally active, and intellectualising all day long and be enlightened, why did you ever say anything to the contrary?


.

[RobertGreenSky]

Kelly,

You're misinpreting both sides of it. You can't run off at the brain and have that be the end of it. Where is the stillness of a mind at ease? What you're suggesting sounds a little like mania, or perhaps logorrhoea. You've found a quotation from Hakuin you like and you're ignoring the purport of all the other quotations we've brought in. You can certainly do that; I'm not going to argue it ad infinitum but one quotation from Hakuin when Hakuin supported koan meditation anyway doesn't do you much good. What is the sound of your tongue flapping?

Second, we've openly said we must think and communicate so we certainly never said (somehow) put an end to all thinking. Do be fair about this.

[AlyOshA]

Thank you Kelly, I sincerely appreciate the Kierkegaard PDFs, you provided way more than I was expecting and hopefully I will get a better sense of what he has to offer.

Sorry, I know I should avoid kinship and pleasantries around here because some consider it a weakness. I used to tournament fight in college because the challenge of getting my ass kicked inspired me to perform harder (key word “used to”). I loved the sting of another’s punch because it “awakened” me; it was in itself a “different” form of love. This forum employs that form of love philosophically. I see the seeds of Kierkegaard’s auditing going on and many of you think that ultimately auditing is more “loving” because it leads one to truth. But does anyone see that this is just as masturbatory as altruism, kindness, and kinship? Now you will ask me to find “proof” for that statement. The proof is in the pudding; if I point it out to you, I become engaged in the masturbation process... It is obvious that I already am.

In the cycles of the infinite, things loop around and where one thing dies another begins. The Auditor is starting from where they die and bringing them back to where they begin through the process of negation (auditing). The Apostle starts from birth and brings one back to death through the process of creation. Non-duality exists beyond, within, and without birth and death. How does the Auditor leap from birth to the unborn? How does the Apostle leap from death to the undead? What happens when reason leads one to the alpha/omega of reason? Is it possible to go further than reason? Reason implies that something needs to be explained, answered, understood, or justified. If your conclusion is A=A then it just “IS” and you no longer need a “reason”.

Talking Ass have you heard about the Ape of Thoth? In the heavens the gods were warring and on earth nature is in constant battle. Thoth, the god of wisdom, has the answers that will stop all of the wars in heaven and on earth. The problem is that wherever he goes he is followed by the Ape of Thoth. Whenever Thoth speaks his wisdom to the gods in battle or to mankind during their wars, his words are repeated in a mocking fashion by the Ape. Thoth says, "Truth and reason will bring you to non-duality and the delusion of warring will cease to be". Then the Ape repeats in a shrill and mocking voice, "Turds will bring you to constipation and the poop will cease to be". Because of this comic repetition the gods in heaven and the men on earth never listen to Thoth's wisdom but only laugh at the Ape.

Robert:

David's position apparently amounts to, wipe the mirror long enough and you'll hypnotize yourself into believing you're enlightened.

Nicely put.

you are still being taken in by duality

Although the following examples you provided are well put and express an important element of truth, by stating them, it is obvious that you are "being taken in by duality".

I mentioned Jesus because he was very assertive, and some would say, aggressive in his attacks on various people and groups in his society. He was also often accused by his contempories of being arrogant and lacking humility.

Even though the nature of God can be fully understood, one can never cease exploring His nooks and crannies, which are countless in number. And one can never cease developing a deeper and more intimate relationship with Him.

In the end, the core barrier that exists between ourselves and reality is conceptual in nature, and it is only through the sustained application of reason - that is to say, reasoning with heart - that this barrier can be broken down.

It is in this almost inhuman push to the very extremes of rationality

How is the sustained application of reason any different than wiping the dust off the mirror? How is the almost inhuman push to the very extremes of rationality any different than wiping dust off the mirror?
How can you logically justify assertive, aggressive attacks on various people and groups in society, as being the quality of one who's obtained non-duality?
Why would one need to develop a deeper more intimate relationship with God when their understanding of truth cannot be surpassed? Can you not see how grossly contradictory these statements are? Contradiction by its very definition is the quality of duality.

You haven't properly explained this:

It is the one kind of dualistic activity that leads to the end of all dualistic activity.

What’s especially interesting is that you referenced my quote of the Kasha Upanishad as your example of my “being taken by duality”. The Upanishads are among the earliest examples of non-duality and the Katha Upanishad nicely expresses that philosophy. David, have you read it in it’s entirety and given it some serious thought? If not and you are interested, I can provide a much better translation of the Upanishads than the one I quoted and can send it to you as PDF?

If you read the Katha Upanishad you would be amazed to find that your quotes:

As Jesus said, "Those who want to save their life will lose it, but those who lose their life for me [for Truth] will find it."

"Empty yourself of everything and let the mind rest at peace", said Lao Tzu.

Could have just as easily come from that profound document...

Infinity^-3,-2,-1,Zero,+1,+2,+3^Infinity: A=A

There is no Bodhi-tree,
Nor stand of a mirror bright.
Since all is Empty,
Where can the dust alight?

'Beyond the senses there are the objects, beyond the objects there is the mind, beyond the mind there is the intellect, the Great Self is beyond the intellect.'
'Beyond the Great there is the Undeveloped, beyond the Undeveloped there is the Person (purusha). Beyond the Person there is nothing--this is the goal, the highest road.'

You're still conceiving the goal as something to be attained ("super-consciousness") by performing certain actions ("stilling the mind" or "dissolving the I").

Yes it is something to be obtained but it is not necessarily the obtainment of duality. Explain to me how dissolving the "I" into the "Infinite" or how aligning Infinity, Zero, and Now - is the process of "being taken in by duality"? Are you implying that Infinity/Zero are dualistic? Of course there is still a +1,+2,+3... But by experiencing the Rider (inherently non-dualistic) in the Charioteer, Reins,Chariot, Horses, and the Road as we wander along the "Way" of +1,+2,+3 "exploring His nooks and crannies, which are countless in number... never cease developing a deeper and more intimate relationship with Him." So now I am sounding repetitive because I've already stated this several times before. Unless you provide some new insight I am going to drop this conversation all together and enjoy the silence :)

[Talking Ass]

Kierkegaard wrote:

• "At det Nye Testamente skal laeses som et kaerligheds brev ell. Et brev til den elskede."
  
  "That the New Testament is to be read as a love letter or a letter to the loved one."
  
  "Saa villig er han, den uendelige Kjerlighed, saa villig til at indlade sig med et Menneske, derfor er det han har skrevet os til Kjerligheds-Breve i sit Ord, og friet til os, og sagt kom kom....".
  
  "So willing is he, infinite love, so willing to become involved with a person that he has written love letters to us in his Word, has proposed to us and said: come, come..."

I am curious, Kelly, to have your opinion of this. I assume you would take it out of the personalist context and render it 'objective'...'rational'...and would skip over all that is suggested with the word 'love' and 'loved one'.

What is the role of love in your philosophy? What is the role of love in your spirituality? What is the role of love in your life?

For general interest:

• Kierkegaard's name is pronounced: Søren 'Sir' as in Sir John Gielgud, 'ren' like the bird wren (Sir-ren), and Keer-ker-gaw 'Keer' like 'beer', 'ker' like 'fur' with a k and 'gaw' like 'more' with a g. His middle name is Aabye [O-boo (the O a light O) is the nearest in English]. The reason for the difficulties with the name is that with the 'gaard' part of the surname the aa is not an 'a' but what is now written in modern Danish as the letter å (a with a ring over it). There are three extra letters in the Danish alphabet Ø (slash O), AE diphthong, and AA now Å. How these letters are pronounced can vary a bit according to where they come in a word. In the U.S. and a number of countries outside Denmark the name 'Kierkegaard' is often pronounced with the 'gaard' part as if it is 'guard' as in lifeguard. This is a long-standing mistake because people thought the aa was an a. Contrary to popular belief, Kierkegaard's name does not mean 'Churchyard' or 'Cemetery' but 'Church Farm', because the name originates from the Church Farm of which his father's family were tenants in Saedding, Jutland. 'Kirkegård' also means 'churchyard' or 'cemetery', because the word 'gaard' ('gård' in modern Danish) can mean a number of things.

???????...(Thanks Robert. Ice Cream for Crow was great).

• don't shake my hand
  give me your claw

The Ass of Thoth
made me think of applesauce.

[Kelly Jones]

Where is the stillness of a mind at ease? What you're suggesting sounds a little like mania, or perhaps logorrhoea.

No. There is no where that is not Suchness.

Is that so hard for you to grasp?

You've found a quotation from Hakuin you like and you're ignoring the purport of all the other quotations we've brought in.

I haven't ignored them. I am pointing directly to why it is that an enlightened person can be reasoning yet never grasping to any concept as if it contains Suchness.

one quotation from Hakuin when Hakuin supported koan meditation anyway doesn't do you much good. What is the sound of your tongue flapping?

In your ears, I believe there is a lot of noise created by trying to escape the sound that is in all things.

Second, we've openly said we must think and communicate so we certainly never said (somehow) put an end to all thinking. Do be fair about this.

I am glad that you have no problem with thinking, and are not promoting that anyone stop doing it.

Possibly, you wanted to convey the idea of ending erroneous cognition? False thoughts? Those kinds of thoughts that are attachments?


.

[Unidian]

Egotistical ones would by my target, personally.

And what are egotistical thoughts? Any which try to substitute some concept, belief, idea, or figment of the imagination in place of immediate reality.

As observed in the case, for example, where "A=A" is substituted for A. Or where "A" is substituted for what "A" is pointing to, which is none other than that which is. And what is "that which is?" No answer will suffice but silence.

[David Quinn]

David, from all I have read of his strange ideas, has no way to talk about 'God' or Jesus as the outcome of Judaism (if one accepts that), nor the Gospels or the Epistles nor really ANYTHING that essentially defines Judeo-Christianity. I say this most emphatically. But Kierkegaard DID. He spoke from this 'matrix' and did not seek to escape from it, remake it, deny it, nor to abstract it and blend it with other traditions and turn it all into a ridiculous parody.

Kierkegaard was confined to the insular world of 19th century Denmark in which everyone was a Christian. It was therefore natural for him to utilize the Christian tradition and its various concepts for his higher purpose, which was to stimulate people out of their delusions and encourage them to value truth.

In this, his project was essentially identical to mine. Only the outer clothing differs. Nowadays, it would be inappropriate and counter-productive for me to confine myself to the Christian "matrix", or to any other matrix. We now live in a global environment where postmodernism/science rules, which therefore means that an entirely different set of concepts are needed. Christian concepts no longer hold any credibility with most people in the modern age.

In many ways, the work done here on Genius Forum is superior to what Kierkegaard did, precisely because it is global in nature and can cut through any tradition. And this globalness or universality means that it will continue to be relevant in the long-term future, regardless of what new traditions arise.

Having said that, Kierkegaard's work has unqiue value for those who have been brought up in the Christian tradition and still find it believable. He can reach inside to these people more effectively than I can.

Do you see? You-all have a very, very strange 'project' you are undertaking in all this, I actually think it is quite devious and that it stems from a core 'self-deception'. There is a very essential thing that you are working to DESTROY but I don't think you can cop to it, perhaps because you just don't see it.

You still don't understand. I don't value anything that you value. None of it.

It's not a case of my deviating away from the same page that you and I are both working from and that if I were to just include the elements that you favour then I would be brought back, as it were, to the center of the page again. No, my focus is upon ripping up the page completely.

"I have come to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already kindled! "

At the same time, in case it isn't obvious, I am 'working an angle' or 'preferencing' the Judeo-Christian traditions (in all their variety) as against the 'Eastern' teachings. If you want to know why I do this or anything else about it, just ask!

You do it in order to bring things back into the realm of the convoluted and the superfluous, which would allow you to gain control of the conversation again. The eastern teachings are too cold and sterile for you; you're like a fish out of water there. Judaism and Christianity are full of the complexities that enable you to keep distracted and provide the materials for you to dazzle others with.

-

[David Quinn]

Egotistical ones would by my target, personally.

And what are egotistical thoughts? Any which try to substitute some concept, belief, idea, or figment of the imagination in place of immediate reality.

As observed in the case, for example, where "A=A" is substituted for A. Or where "A" is substituted for what "A" is pointing to, which is none other than that which is. And what is "that which is?" No answer will suffice but silence.

*Whack!*

-

[Kelly Jones]

Thank you Kelly, I sincerely appreciate the Kierkegaard PDFs, you provided way more than I was expecting and hopefully I will get a better sense of what he has to offer.

Welcome.

Sorry, I know I should avoid kinship and pleasantries around here because some consider it a weakness.

No, I appreciate that you're aware of the effects of your requests on others. That's a courteous kind of consciousness of causation, and I like it.

I used to tournament fight in college because the challenge of getting my ass kicked inspired me to perform harder (key word “used to”). I loved the sting of another’s punch because it “awakened” me; it was in itself a “different” form of love. This forum employs that form of love philosophically. I see the seeds of Kierkegaard’s auditing going on and many of you think that ultimately auditing is more “loving” because it leads one to truth. But does anyone see that this is just as masturbatory as altruism, kindness, and kinship? Now you will ask me to find “proof” for that statement. The proof is in the pudding; if I point it out to you, I become engaged in the masturbation process... It is obvious that I already am.

If by masturbation, you mean an activity designed to gratify the ego, then no. Auditing is not that, by definition. But this is something a person needs to identify for themselves.

In the cycles of the infinite, things loop around and where one thing dies another begins. The Auditor is starting from where they die and bringing them back to where they begin through the process of negation (auditing). The Apostle starts from birth and brings one back to death through the process of creation. Non-duality exists beyond, within, and without birth and death. How does the Auditor leap from birth to the unborn? How does the Apostle leap from death to the undead?

It's a little simpler than that.

The Apostle is the one who can point authentically to the truth, in an innocent and simple way. This is possible when the ego hasn't developed all kinds of defenses and hiding-places, that co-opt truth-consciousness. If we look at human society as a single ego, then the age of the Apostles would be a long, long time ago, when humans were a lot more idealistic, innocent, simple, and honest. The Apostle points directly to nirvana, the truth beyond birth-and-death.

The Auditor is the one who knows all the escape routes, false detours, delusional habits, ego-defenses, cunning subterfuges, and alternative interpretations used to avoid truth-consciousness. The first Apostles, or founders of religion, set out the truth plainly and simply. But purely human notions of personal advantage seeped into their legacy, distorting and corrupting their message. There have been far more Auditors than Apostles, since every new "school" develops primarily to correct false teachers. The Auditors have to unravel teachings that enmesh people in samsara.

What happens when reason leads one to the alpha/omega of reason? Is it possible to go further than reason? Reason implies that something needs to be explained, answered, understood, or justified. If your conclusion is A=A then it just “IS” and you no longer need a “reason”.

Reason creates problems and explanations, but it doesn't follow that not-reasoning brings enlightenment. Otherwise rocks and galaxies would be wise.

There is either ignorance or wisdom. The distinction is very real, and it is still true that most people are ignorant. Not only that, but there's a huge distrust of reason and intellectualising in people these days. So the use of reason is needed to bring about truth-consciousness.

Also, there are problems, AlyOshA. Problems and solutions are real. The trick is to engage in thinking, and problem-solving, without presuming to come to the end of Reality with the conclusion. One ought to be able to see God in the midst of activity.


.

[Unidian]

*Whack!*

A concise description of the nature of your little world here, although you might have added a few more whacks. You're not such a young man anymore, and I'm doubting they dispense Viagra to Enlightened sages.

[David Quinn]

In the end, the core barrier that exists between ourselves and reality is conceptual in nature, and it is only through the sustained application of reason - that is to say, reasoning with heart - that this barrier can be broken down.

It is in this almost inhuman push to the very extremes of rationality

How is the sustained application of reason any different than wiping the dust off the mirror? How is the almost inhuman push to the very extremes of rationality any different than wiping dust off the mirror?

It differs in that the whole process of attempting to wipe dust off the mirror is abandoned. In other words, a whole swathe of dualistic activity is dropped.

If we want to be strict about it, then yes, we can categorize this abandonment as a form of wiping dust away. That's fine with me. The important thing, though, is actually learning how to do it. It is vitally important to reach the stage where the act of wiping dust away, in whatever form, is no longer occurring.

Yes, the process of reaching that stage is dualistic in nature, but as I say, it is the one form of dualistic activity that puts an end to all dualistic activity. For it is only when that stage is reached that one realizes that there has never been any dust to begin with and that one has been fully in nirvana all along. In a very real sense, from the beginning of one's search for enlightenment to the final success, nothing ever really happens at all.

How can you logically justify assertive, aggressive attacks on various people and groups in society, as being the quality of one who's obtained non-duality?

Because others are stuck in duality. The sagely realization that nirvana is all there is doesn't mean that others suddently cease to be imprisoned in samsara. In the language of Buddhism, the enligthened person returns to the world in order to help others.

Why would one need to develop a deeper more intimate relationship with God when their understanding of truth cannot be surpassed? Can you not see how grossly contradictory these statements are?

"Understanding the truth" is like knowing where Rome is and how to get there, while "developing a deeper more intimate relationship with God " is like exploring all the little cafes and side-streets of Rome.

What’s especially interesting is that you referenced my quote of the Kasha Upanishad as your example of my “being taken by duality”. The Upanishads are among the earliest examples of non-duality and the Katha Upanishad nicely expresses that philosophy. David, have you read it in it’s entirety and given it some serious thought?

I have, but it's been a while.

If not and you are interested, I can provide a much better translation of the Upanishads than the one I quoted and can send it to you as PDF?

Yeah, that would be good. I would be interested in looking over them again. Thanks.

<davidquinn000@optusnet.com.au>

-

[Kelly Jones]

Alex,

What is the role of love in your philosophy? What is the role of love in your spirituality? What is the role of love in your life?

These are all one question to me. Erotics, the study of love, plays a very big role.

It was also so with Kierkegaard, and unsurprisingly, his auditor-master Socrates was also a devotee of the study of love, as his speech in the Symposium showed (and also many of his other dialogues).

Erotics is the study of love in all its forms, mainly because of how the psychological movements of love can bring one close to a psychological sense of the Absolute. The reason for this is that people enjoy love so much. They are willing to let their entire psyches, their entire lives, be dominated by the experience and influence of love. It's perhaps the only time in a person's life that they access a sense of Wholeness or Oneness. Their entire perception is altered, and their usual egotistical imagination (the boundaries, like: I-them, me-other, not-mine/mine) melts under the desire for everything to give glory and power to the boundlessness of their love.

It doesn't matter what the object of love is, the kind of love (ie. agape, eros, platonic love, etc.), or how one expresses it, so much as the psychological impact of that love.

So, while it's not enlightenment (and not at all anything to do with Enlightenment, the one who is utterly free always of ego), love is a psychological approximation of enlightenment. It's very powerful for this reason, and, for those without a strong connection to reason and truth, it can be extremely harmful. The powerful sense of "Wholeness" is an altered state that will inevitably feeds the ego, because of the feeling that one is much bigger and more powerful. For a person who has little faith in reason, and lacks a keen, penetrating mind, they will become addicted to the feeling of "completeness" and "self-fulfilment", and keep chasing those altered states. That is, the samsaric mind is greatly aggravated by an awareness that there is something much, much bigger than their "little me", but, lacking reason and the ability to understand how the "little me" really exists, they are frightened into wanting the "big me" only.

But if such a person suddenly finds an angle of thought into the experience of love, and - - - instead of getting lost in the dreamy feeling of "interconnection with all things" - - - they have a deep and intellectually-solid realisation, then the concept of love will take on an entirely different colour. For such a person, love comes to mean understanding of the changeless nature of the Absolute. It is no longer an emotionally-transported altered state of consciousness, but truth-consciousness.



---

Since you're interested in general data, Soren comes from Severinus.


.