Yeah, I'm sure that the latest research in bro science says just that.

I found that studying Tae Kwon Do while getting divorced is a quick way to get cut because you're exercising like crazy, but not eating. I guess the Auschwitz look comes next, but I never got that far.

Ignore-ance at your own peril...bro...

:-}

You know that you can die from over training? If too much of the contents of muscles gets into your blood stream, you can die. In lower amounts, and some amounts of course will get into the blood stream, it's still rough on the kidneys and liver, and makes you feel unnecessarily, and especially like shit. What were the benefits you never mentioned?

Yeah everyone's cut if they're lean enough. What's more interesting is where you hold your fat, which is indicative of your posture. If it isn't fairly evenly distributed, it's indicative of a postural asymmetry.

I like the idea of understanding the story as a wake up call. The student crassly helping the master, to realize the error of his attachment to the book.

I don't know if his crassness was necessary.

Maybe the student had to defy, to debase his master's legacy, to negate his master's value system, as one which he knows, that he is immersed in, and one that he needs no book to practice. The story as a negation (burning) of traditional values (book). His rebellious action as his first steps in a new direction.

To have a final state misreads the point. No-one has a final state. By death they are gone, before death they have not ended. So called "transcending the self" is really aiming to access one's significance that's not dependent on any particular state of the world-- the logical expression of one existence.

Or in Sartre's terms the existence which "proceeds" (or perhaps "is regardless") of essence.

The problem is that it's not about transcending the self. It's just approximating fiction. Rather than realise that infinite expressed by the self, it supposedly given over to some other act or idea-- God, a tradition, buying stuff, freedom, evolution, etc., etc. Even Sartre made this mistake, offering freedom as transedence of self, despite his identification of the infinite of self.

What is sought is not a final state, but a realisation of the self regardless of states. As such it's not really about one's tradition (e.g. religious, atheist, reductionist, idealist, etc.,etc.), but one's awareness of infinite self along with what one happens to be doing.

It may not be the intention of the story to focus on the issue of book-burning, but nonetheless, a book is burned; and I don't see how that can be irrelevant the import of the story, and to what we might think about the characters. — John

Point conceded.

Willow of Darkness, I have read your words - and yet I doubt them! Seems to me you're simply affirming egotism. But long and hard experience has taught me that whatever words I send your way will simply go into the blender. :(

Note the qualifier: "overtraining". Having acknowledged that over-training could be detrimental to health and counterproductive for the goal of strengthening muscles, I will ask how many people have you heard of who are documented to have died, or even suffered serious detriments to their health, from over-training?
Google 'health benefits of strength training' and educate yourself a little if you are actually interested in the subject beyond issuing uninformed proclamations.
Alternatively if you can provides links to any research that has found that strength training as such is harmful to health, then please share them.
Also note that within the discipline two or three sessions 30 - 45 minutes in duration of moderate intensity muscle training, or one 10-15 minute session of high intensity training per week is commonly considered to be the optimum level for muscle strengthening and benefit for general health.

I see that you just misunderstood me. You can do a google search of death from over training. I heard of an entire basketball team being hospitalized from it.

So, you are admitting that moderate strength training may be beneficial to health?

As long as you admit that not all pigeons are in on it.

There is a strong link between Asian Buddhism and martial arts, quite aside from the Bushido culture and the incorporation of Zen into Japanese militarism. I did karate training for 18 months in my early twenties - sucked at it - but it sure worked you out, and I really appreciated the cultural disciplines that came along with it. There's a particular kind of sensibility that it embodies.

By the way I googled 'death from over-training' and all the articles I could find dealt with excessive cardio-vascular training, which is not the subject under dispute. The latest research-informed current thinking is that heart and general health is benefited by a very moderate weekly number of short sessions of high-intensity cardio-vascular exercise (such as hill-sprinting) and not long sessions of moderate intensity exercise, (such as jogging) and the potential negative effect of the latter is greater the more weekly sessions there are, and the longer those sessions are.

Factual matters are not really something that require arguing. If you are now saying, as you appear to be, that rhabdomyolysis cannot be, or never is caused by extraneous muscle exercises, then all I can say is that's certainly not what I've read. I did not read all of the articles I could find from "death from over-training", as there were seven million results... but I guess that I must be mistaken, but I encourage everyone to look into it.

Agreed, I have always been interested in martial arts and have practiced Tai Chi for many years on and off. I have always enjoyed physical activities such as gymnastics (when I was younger) and bushwalking (still) (although I loath the 'tribalism' of team sport). Lately I have gotten into strength training for general health and particularly to enable me to continue working in landscaping (my only means of livelihood) for as many years to come as possible (I am 63 this year and still healthy, strong and fit).

I have certainly not been saying anything about rhabdomyolysis, the first thing that comes to mind is that I have read there is some evidence it may be caused, in a very small percentage of people, by statins.

On Medline Plus (the first site that appeared on a search 'rhabdomyolysis') I found this:

Problems that may lead to this disease include:

Trauma or crush injuries
Use of drugs such as cocaine, amphetamines, statins, heroin, or PCP
Genetic muscle diseases
Extremes of body temperature
Ischemia or death of muscle tissue
Low phosphate levels
Seizures or muscle tremors
Severe exertion, such as marathon running or calisthenics
Lengthy surgical procedures
Severe dehydration

This thread has become very off-topic; but that seems somehow appropriate for a thread about Koans.
:)

Oh yeah, you remember reading about that within the last ten minutes...

Still trying to say that it has nothing to do with it, but is all about cartiovascular problems... what is "rhabdomyolysis"?

I expected as much, for the self is the most vile, worthless thing in according to the "religious" texts and ideas you suggest are the requirements for wisdom and insight. What could be more unwise than selves that matter?

Nothing, to such religious thought, for it renders the religious thought and associated traditions unnecessary for a fulfilling life. If the self means, ones does not need a new idea or tradition that promises fulfilment. Transcending the self is not required-- that book of tradition may be burnt.

What I spoke about is certainly compatible with egoism. There are Egoists who are aware of their infinte self (just as there are people from all sorts philosophies and faiths). Their mistakes about ethics don't mean their life is somehow less fulfilling. Just as the fictional nature of "transcending the self" doesn't undo how fulfilling it is to someone who believes in it-- what they believe might be a fiction, but their fulfilled self is not.

If you are referring to the 'statin' thing I remember reading about it some years ago, because my father has been on statins for over thirty years and the tendons of both his biceps had some time before my reading about statins and rhabdomyolysis torn away from the bone on the upper side, and out of concern I did a bit of 'google' research.

I don't understand your last sentence...but to answer the question there (despite that I don't get the purpose of it); rhabdomyolysis is a muscle-wasting disease.

the self is the most vile, worthless thing in according to the "religious" texts and ideas you suggest are the requirements for wisdom and insight. What could be more unwise than selves that matter? — Willow

But it's not, actually. Why do you think Christians say that Christ died for sinners? Why do Mahayana Buddhist vow not to enter Nirvāṇa until all sentient beings are awakened?

Transcending the self is not about reviling or denigrating it. It is more a matter of seeing through the self's illusions about itself.

Because they don't believe the self matters unless saved by Jesus-- follow or you are worthless unrepentant sinner.

Mariner had a great thread on the PF before the crash about how Christianity expects a violence world because it lays bare the scapegoating of the individual and shows how absurd it is.

The essence of Christianity, however, is to scapegoat. God, in sacrificing Jesus, used the ultimate scapegoat. While this is great for showing absudity, it is also the ultimate example of what it's critiquing.

If scapegoating is mindless violence, then the sacrifice of Jesus is entirely unnecessary for sinners to be worthwhile-- God is the prime example of the problem.

Sinners ought not have to pay for their sin to be worthwhile. The violence committed in response to past sin cannot undo it. It would just be a scapegoat to appease the powerful. (God in this case).

To be a sinner AND to matter (as is true of all of us) is the most truthful position. The only one unburdened by the illusions past misdeeds can be paid for through death of a scapegoat.

Christianity cannot stand this idea- the love of the sinner not as someone to be saved, but as the self who has sinned. To the Christian the self of the sinner must be degenerate-- they need to be saved by Jesus.

A similar relationship to self exists in Buddhism, though tends not to be predatory. It offers a set of traditions and practices which are, on some level thought to required for better the self. The idea someone already matters in themselves is alien to them. Almost everyone supposedly needs to take steps to achieve Nirvāna. The idea there are many people who have already achived Nirvāna, who are going about the world with a self that matters is considered absurd and rejected as basis of the belief.

"Transcending the self" is about seeing through an illusion of the self. All those beliefs are about having a fiction about the self which removes the illusion of the worthless self. Jesus' sacrifice turns the degenerate self into something worthwhile by taking away our sin. Taking steps towards Nirvāna quells our frustration with ourselves.

But each leaves a fundamental illusion of self intact: the worthless self. Like we did before adopting an idea of "transcending the self," we still think our self is worthless-- why do you think we are so desperate to transcend it? " We posit our worth in terms of following an idea, text or tradition, rather than in terms of the self. Even as we break the illusion we don't matter, we are still caught under the spell that our selves are worthless.

But each leaves a fundamental illusion of self intact: the worthless self. Like we did before adopting an idea of "transcending the self," we still think our self is worthless-- why do you think we are so desperate to transcend it? " We posit our worth in terms of following an idea, text or tradition, rather than in terms of the self. Even as we break the illusion we don't matter, we are still caught under the spell that our selves are worthless. — TheWillowOfDarkness

Awesome post, Willow. I could write for a while giving examples of how what you're saying is true of both Christianity and Buddhism. I don't think it's quite the whole truth, though.

The symbolism behind a Gothic cathedral is that when entering, you shed your unique, earthly identity and enter the protected sanctum of the House of God. In the same way voting is a symbol of the establishment of the voice of the people, just walking into a Gothic cathedral is a symbol of unification with God. It would appear that the self must be pretty awesome to be worthy of blending with God. Bernard McGinn, an expert in Christian mysticism, explains Eckhart's teaching. It's that down deep inside, God was always there. It's the foundation of your being. We're all like dandelions growing out of the same spot. Each dandelion face rises up to peer into other faces, not realizing that every face is a facet of the same thing. By this scheme, transcendence of self is not exactly loss of self. It means realizing that you are me. Losing isolation, I guess.

Losing yourself is going beyond ego. Easy to say but very hard to enact, especially in a culture which puts ego at the centre of everything.

The anecdote goes against its (at least by your reading) own point. — TheWillowOfDarkness

The story comes to us from a book; it is a teaching story. It seems to teach that the story, nor the book are valuable, but that the value is elsewhere. It relates to the story about the finger pointing at the moon - don't worry about the finger, look where it is pointing. The finger does not reach the moon, or transmit the moon; forget the finger, look to the moon.

"If the book is such an important thing, you had better keep it," Shoju replied. "I received your Zen without writing and am satisfied with it as it is."

"I know that," said Mu-nan. "Even so, this work has been carried from master to master for seven generations, so you may keep it as a symbol of having received the teaching. Here."

The book, the story, is a 'symbol', a pointing finger. It does indeed work against itself; it points away from itself.

At the risk of creating another valueless story, I will pontificate about the moon.

The sage lets go of that and chooses this. — Lao Tzu

The influence of Chinese philosophy has already been mentioned. Central to this is the notion of flow, first expounded in the I Ching, and later in the Dao and continued by Chang Tzu. Letting go of that is letting go of the past, and in letting go of the past one lets go also of the future because the future is the projection of the past. This connects directly to the Buddhist tradition because it forms the structure of desire. Desire consists of an image from the past which one seeks to achieve in the future. It gives rise to suffering because it makes the present unsatisfactory. This is the present; this is the moon.

It is a challenge to Western tradition, steeped in original sin and the work ethic and self-improvement and the life of the mind as thought. It is a challenge to every tradition, including itself. The challenge is to understand that life is now - to understand immediately. As the parrots in Huxley's Island say, 'Be here now.'

It requires letting go of all that which is everything one thinks one is or was or ought to be or will be; letting go of the valuable tradition.

I obtained not the least thing from unexcelled,
complete awakening, and for this very reason it
is called 'unexcelled, complete awakening.

Siddhartha Gautama,from the Vajracchedika.

"just as a man would tie to a post a calf that should be tamed, even so here should one tie one's own mind tight to the object of mindfulness"

Hi Punshhhh glad to see you! That is from the Sathipattana sutta, I believe.

Hi wayfarer, it's nice to see familiar faces again after the other forum caught a cold.

Yes I think it is from the Satipathana sutra, (I am no scholar) I was thinking of the Ox herding pictures. This has been the most meaningful teaching for me from Zen.

From an article by Dr.Walpola Rahula

" This bhikku’s mind (i.e. the meditator’s mind),/which was for a long time scattered among such objects as visible forms (rupadisu arammanesu) does not like to enter into the path (street) of a subject of meditation (kammatthana-vithi), but runs only into a wrong path like a chariot yoked to an untamed (unruly) bull. Just as a herdsman, who desires to break in an untamed calf grown up with all the milk it has drunk from the untamed (mother) cow, would remove it from the cow, and having fixed a big post on a side would tie the .calf to it with a rope; and then that calf of his, struggling this way and that, unable to run away, may sit down or lie down close to the post."

I expect that at the front of the book which was thrown on the fire were some illustrations of tethered oxen, so that aspirants might ponder their task. Without the book the teaching may become lost.

@ TheWillowOfDarkness

I agree, like the tethered calf, the self is a being, an animal, a living entity, a soul, a creature. Something which exists, we know this because there are selves which don't have minds (in the sense we as humans experience mind).

So one can annihilate the self in our thoughts, our ego, our mind and we will still exist, we will still be here, (while our body lives). Infact little will have changed.