I've decided to post some of my email conversations on the blog in case someone wants to hear them. I apolozie for the plentyful typos and mistakes.
Sorry for the late response.
I've always been interested in how dreams work and what truly happens to us when we dream. Best as i've been able to figure out there are some culturally specific, or perhapse more accurately, knowledge specific codes that your subconcious can use to send you information. If you read in a book or know via the subconcious that the dream symbol of a train falling on you means you must slow down and someone is trying to betray you. Then the subconcious mind can try to us this to communicate with the concious mind. It can utilize the memory of the meaning as understood by the mind and use it to reach a level of communication it cant normally. Atleast not without the help of concious effort by the mind to reach the subconcious.
I could recommend barbara ann brennan. Tho that you've probably heard already, i would recommend anything about psychology and cognitive psychology. There really is no one clear answer to everything you simply need to study different theories and most importantly, you need to do the exercises and practices. If a book tell you "this is how the mind works" always test it. If you see a fault in the logic, try to figure out if you did wrong or the book is in the wrong and never throw the baby out with the bathwater. One error in a theory does not invalidate everything in the theory. Always remain open but methodical and if something dosnt work never be afraid to discard it and move on.
I myself have spent the last week or so pondering the nature of suffering and how it effects the human mind. I've thought about writing a new book when "the shit hits the fan" or in other words. When i'm in jail or in exile. It would give me some time to ponder and formulate my thoughts for this time hopefully a more coherant book.
I've also been trying to establish if the universe is truly a good or a bad place. Or rather, if the nature of life is truly about suffering or not. While some buddhist teachings make it clear that the nature of life is suffering. Thus all the various rules about or rather, the guidelines about the concepts behind suffering. The 4 noble truths abotu suffering for example. And how they apply to life and if they are true int he grand scale or true only in the context that the students asked buddha. They are undoutably true if one truly seeks to escape all of life and ALL of suffering then the only way to do so is to relinquish all attachments to life as that would be the only way to be "free of life. Same as saying that the only way to be free of gravity is to go to a place with no gravity. But if the reason of life is ultimately to reach a certain point where movement stops then Wu, or enlightenement, or nothingnerss as described in buddhism as i understand it is the key but this only applies if the universe is linear. If the purpose of life is truly to end. Or in other terms. If the purpose of life is truly to go to the end of life, Purpose of existance to stop. if the purpose of life however is not linear and that the end is the goal only when nothing else is left to experience then what buddha said suddenly has a whole new meaning. If the students asked him "how can we be liberated from this suffering" and buddha answered "to be liberated you have to relinquish all attachments" then that is true. But only for that linear question. Linear question can only have a linear answer. but if after reaching enlightenement is not to be enlightened but to do somethign with that enlightenement. If the goal itself is only a goal for those who seek that specific goal and once they reach it they would have another goal. Similar to a marathon. The goal is the goal only when you are in that particular race. Once that race ends the goal is something else. And if that truly is the point of life and the nature of suffering. Obstacles created to make it dificult. To make the race worthy of being a race.
When i think about the words of buddha regarding the question of suffering as i just pointed out i cant help but think that it is too linear. It is too linear to say that all of life is nothing but suffering. But once understands that for those seeking this particular goal, to be free of life, then all of life is suffering as it would lead to more of what they are seeking less. And suddenly the words of buddha stop being linear and constrictive and as viewed from a non linear perspective "evil". And they turn to being the pure mirror they are meant to be. Mirroring what the student asked in a level that the student can understand. Those seeking to be buddhas can never be buddhas because to be a buddha is not to seek. Is to have no attachments and to have no yearnings. To quote a chinese buddhist i read of some time ago.
A student comes to a master and says "i am willing to study, what should i do" the master replies " you must throw all away" the student following his masters words goes back home and donates everything to charity and comes before the master again joyful and says "i have thrown it all away and i have no attachments, what must i do now." the master replies, simply. "you must throw all away". The student was clinging to the notion of not clinging. Having attachments to the thought of not having attachments and was as much a prisoner of his physical life as he was when he was rich.
You can be the richest person on the planet, physically speaking and still have no attachments and vise versa. You can live in a monastary in france, have no money and devote your life to helping others and acting well and still have attachments enough to bind to galaxies together. :)
Hope some of my ramblings help you. I apologize if i am of little help.
No comments:
Post a Comment