japlady@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rebecca Radnor) (05/07/91)
Why do we accept authority? In this country there are many teachers, centers, etc, who/which offer advice for our spiritual good. I'm sure they can influence us for the better either through their words and/or actions; many years if not decades of meditation, etc. no doubt produces a certain level of insight into living. I do not wish to question the wisdom of any teacher, but I wonder what their insight has to do with our ignorance? If we must depend upon another in order to become more 'awake' or 'pure' is this not another security blanket? To learn how to meditate, or even speak with those who have spent much 'time' being mindful can be beneficial, but can we be aware of the difference between listening to someone and being conditioned by him/her? If we assume their wisdom i.e. project an image of 'enlightenment' upon them do we not do violence to them and ourselves? And if true listening is possible why must we listen to some and not to others? Do you see the point? Actual listening in which our stream of thoughts has come to an end needs no authority. A dog barking, a car passing, the sounds of fingers upon a keyboard, all speak the dharma. Of course, the question pops up, "how can we attain this 'listening?" Our minds love to play these tricks-- just examine the question; have you not 'painted' the picture of a self who will attain this listening at some future date? If only I could find the right teacher, or meditate long enough then I will become wise. Authority says, "follw me, then you shall be delivered." Is this not the problem? Isn't our automatic response to thought that we are not aware of the cause of our confusion? Our conditioning locks us into a pattern of thought--our prison-- and instead of examining this whole process of conditioning we ask someone else for answers. The stream of our ignorance continues; the specific contents may change, e.g. from christian to hindu etc. but the pattern remains. So the 'pattern' is the issue to be investigated, which questions the very notion of authority, even the authority of our own experiences. Projecting the words of some famous guru and projecting our own opinions, perspective etc. is the same thing. Even (especially!) these words I am typing "must" be abandoned, or else conditioning sets in-- more acurately non abandonment is conditioning. Can we be open to the present moment no matter how painful or pleasurable? It's the only "time" we have. J. Cha c/o Japlady
johnw@ready.eng.ready.com (John Wheeler) (05/07/91)
In article <1991May6.192055.13637@nas.nasa.gov> japlady@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Rebecca Radnor) writes: > >Why do we accept authority? Interesting article, but it raises a few questions. These are questions I always wanted to ask Krishnamurti, but since he's dead let me ask you. >I do not wish to question the wisdom of any >teacher, but I wonder what their insight has to do with our ignorance? What do you concieve to be ignorance? >Actual listening in which our stream of thoughts has >come to an end needs no authority. A dog barking, a car passing, the >sounds of fingers upon a keyboard, all speak the dharma. People often assert that when "thought" subsides, pure experiencing takes place and that this has something to do with the highest truth or dharma. I never understood this. Are not the barking dog, etc. also thoughts? You might say that if you listen to the dog without any other intervening thoughts this is somehow a mystical state. Perhaps you are only listening to a dog without thinking about anything else. Tell me, what has this to do with the Dharma? >Our conditioning locks us into a >pattern of thought--our prison-- and instead of examining this whole >process of conditioning we ask someone else for answers. Krishnamurti was fond of the term "conditioning." Again, I have trouble understanding this. Apparently "conditioning" is the cause of ignorance. But what is conditioning and who exactly is conditioned? Since neither the Buddha, nor any enlightened sage that I know of taught anything remotely resembling this idea of "conditioning," I wish you might explain it a bit. johnw
kirby@mammoth.cs.unr.edu (Stephen Kirby) (05/08/91)
In response to a search for knowledge: DON'T FOLLOW WHAT A TEACHER SAYS! If a teacher tells you something don't just mindless accept, ask yourself if what he says appears true. If it appears true then attempt to uncover possible effects this realization may have upon your life. If it doesn't make sense, look at it again, try to be open. If it STILL doesn't make sense approach him/her and explain your dilemma If no satisfactory answer comes up ... oh well, don't use or apply that rule, and keep listening. Repeat until dead. ;) Steve
travers@iWarp.intel.com (Jim Travers) (05/09/91)
In article <1991May7.174426.15297@nas.nasa.gov> kirby@mammoth.cs.unr.edu (Stephen Kirby) writes: >> >> >> In response to a search for knowledge: >> >> DON'T FOLLOW WHAT A TEACHER SAYS! >> >> If a teacher tells you something don't just mindless accept, ask >>yourself if what he says appears true. >> If it appears true then attempt to uncover possible effects this >> realization may have upon your life. >> If it doesn't make sense, look at it again, try to be open. >> If it STILL doesn't make sense approach him/her and explain your dilemma >> If no satisfactory answer comes up ... oh well, don't use or apply that >>rule, and keep listening. >> >> Repeat until dead. >> >>;) >> >> Steve Steve, The problem with your method is just that--it's a method. What difference does it make whose method we are following? All methodologies are based on some systematic way of looking. As soon as you follow a method you are trapped in a ritualized way of seeing--you are seeing through the interpreta- tion of the ritual--not just seeing. The question may be, How can we just look and see what's in front of us, what's inside of us, without all the barriers? Jim