Bad comes, ok. Good comes, ok. Let each go. — synthesis

So are you saying that this is your experience and the benefit of "going for it"? If your child or loved one got diagnosed with terminal cancer, for example, you'd be okay with it and not suffer at all because of it?

Supposedly, chopping wood and carrying water is entirely exempt of suffering. Is that your experience???
— praxis

I am not a Zen teacher so I have no "credentials" to be explaining this kind of thing — synthesis

I hope you’re not suggesting that only a teacher (religious authority) can speak for your own experience.

Zen is simply every day life. Nothing more, nothing special. It is viewing life with clarity which gives rise to wisdom. That's all. Chopping wood, carry water is everyday life, nothing more. — synthesis

A nice simple balanced life. :love:

I was commenting on praxis question about the saying ‘chop wood, draw water’. As a bald statement, it means nothing much. Many of those kinds of aphorisms were taken by the popular Zen literature of the 60’s and 70’s and entered popular discourse. But outside the cultural context in which they were meaningful, they can easily be nonsensical.

In the context of Zen pedagogy, it has a specific meaning about the appropriate attitude to take towards Zen practice, i.e. not ‘idolising’ the idea of enlightenment but treating everyday activities as an expression of bodhi-mind. So the ‘context’ is not only the cultural context which makes such phrases meaningful, but also the context of the monastic life. — Wayfarer

So only after enlightenment is chopping wood an carrying water an expression of bodhi-mind? Sounds more than a little idolizing to me.

... but the later holds something very different for those willing to do the work necessary to make it back to the beginning. — synthesis

Supposedly, chopping wood and carrying water is entirely exempt of suffering. Is that your experience???

Hey I’ve got two followers :grin: but one of them is banned :sad:

Anyone that follows me should probably be banned, come to think of it.

About fifteen years ago, I took two years off and devoted myself to full-time meditation practice. I became a resident at a Zen center in Northern California (there were eight of us). Of the all the people who do this sort of thing (very, very few), a minuscule amount of the them are actually willing to do what it takes to go for it.

In my experience, most people just want to live a nice, simple, balanced life (and who can blame them) — synthesis

:razz: That’s a funny way of putting it. It suggests that those willing to “go for it” are out of balance (forsaking a nice simple balanced life), and makes me think that the those going for it are merely attempting to get where others are naturally.

Before enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. After enlightenment, chop wood, carry water. — Zeny proverb

:lol:

I asked about the value of myth in the context of religion. The value of a hammer is in its ability to efficiently drive nails, for instance, so I suppose you could say that its ultimate value is in construction. You mentioned the value of myth in religious narratives. How does it express its value?

If the mythic is removed what is left of value in a story? — Jack Cummins

What value does myth offer in the context of religion? The value of a hammer is in its ability to efficiently drive nails, for instance, so I suppose you could say that its ultimate value is in construction.

Sure, but not all stories are mythic in nature. Stories can be very meaningful without being mythic.

To find our own mythic structure of meaning seems worthwhile to me, but this might mean that we are in the minority of the extraordinary. — Jack Cummins

Why would a personal structure of meaning need to be mythic?

What happens when you follow someone, beside instantly becoming a stalker?

Anyone can watch the game between me and Hrvoje here: https://www.chess.com/game/daily/313001356

Currently it looks like this:


Hrvoje is white.

Your anti-materialism seems a little irrational at times.
— praxis

Our society presumes that materialism must be true. A lot of people don't know what the word means, and wouldn't be able to explain it if you asked them — Wayfarer

Apropos, that doesn’t make sense. You can’t assume what you don’t know or understand. Most people are religious, if that suggests anything about societal presumptions of philosophical materialism, and according to a Gallop International poll, only 13% claim to be convinced atheists.

Well, they’r considered ‘bad guys’ by me, for the reasons I’ve given. — Wayfarer

Were you beaten up by a gang of marauding Dennettians as a child or something? Your anti-materialism seems a little irrational at times.

I would disagree that you’re in the wrong place, unless what you’re looking for is agreement rather than philosophical discussion. I’ve been quietly going against the grain here for a couple of years now, and thoroughly enjoyed learning from the discussions I’ve had. I think it’s precisely when we disagree that the most fruitful discussions can be had. I’m not expecting anyone to agree with me here - I’m expecting to learn by striving to understand different philosophical positions in relation to my own.

I think your focus on materialism and neuroscience may be useful here - I’d certainly appreciate both in some of the discussions I’ve had. Are you familiar with Feldman Barrett’s work? I’m also interested in recent collaborations of science and philosophy, particularly the interaction of quantum theory with theories of consciousness. — Possibility

Well said. :clap:

Finally finished 4 3 2 1 by Paul Auster. Almost 900 pages about 4 different versions of the same characters. Great but had to take a few breaks from it and read other books.

The primary reason to abolish political parties is because it a form of group-think. Political parties are no different than a religion. — Harry Hindu

Groupthink can happen in any group where conformity is valued over dissonance to such an extent that serious errors result. Trump seemed to surround himself with yes-men, and serious errors were made in his administration.

I challenged you to a daily game (7 days). Have never played a game like that but thought it might be cool to make a well considered move whenever time allows. Doesn't need to take the whole 7 days.

By the way, there are some unanswered questions in my thread over there, what do you think about that? — Hrvoje

I think that reason is essential to moral development, and this belief is inline with stoic philosophy, if that’s at all what you’re getting at.

I normally play 10 minute but have been trying longer games lately in order to improve, as I mentioned. Would you be interested in a game at chess.com that extends to days? If so, I’ll send an invite.

I have a chess.com account under praxis11. Do you only like blitz or would you be interested in a longer game? I’ve been playing longer games lately in order to improve.

I lost only one pawn in the last two games so I don't think that'll help level the playing field, if that's the idea.

There was a recent topic that involved chess. I'll ping some participants from that topic who showed an interest in the game.

@Hrvoje
@TheMadFool
@Hanover
@Tobias
@BitconnectCarlos
@Xtrix
@magritte
@Ciceronianus the White
@god must be atheist

Checkmate. The square that my queen now occupies is a weak point in the opening game, FYI. There are various patterns to attack and defend that weak point. One reason that it's usually best to castle as soon as possible.

Check.

Your move

Your move

Your move

Check.

Your move

Your move

Your move

Your move

If we can’t get to Europe, we can bring what we love in Europe here.

Check.

Your move

Your move

Check.

Your move

Stop putting your king in front of my pieces. :grin: Check.

Your move

Check.

Your move

Check.

Your move

Your move

Your move

I didn't look that closely. — creativesoul

Indeed. I wrote that it would have been a good time to castle around that point in the game. If that were a test, my friend, you would have failed. But it wasn't a test. Let's call it a teachable moment. :razz:

Your move

That's good advice though, regarding the stage in the game at which a castle would've been advantageous. — creativesoul

Not at that exact stage though because he would have needed to deal with my knight first, which would have otherwise forked his rooks if he castled at that particular point.