Open Secret

[wu wei dragon]

Thought some of you people might like this. For my part I really feel that the author hits the nail right on the head. Please let me know your thoughts!

 

http://www.weiwuwei.8k.com/oscontents.html

Edited August 8, 2008 by wu wei dragon

[steve]

Thought some of you people might like this. For my part I really feel that the auther hits the nail right on the head. Please let me know your thoughts!

 

http://www.weiwuwei.8k.com/oscontents.html

Thank you for the link to this beautifully articulated discussion.

What I find fascinating is to wonder how the "knowing" occurs that this is so.

Why do some feel this to be unquestionable, experiential truth and others do not?

What occurs to lead to that transition?

If any of us has experienced this transition, would you be comfortable discussing it in this forum?

Do all methods achieve this?

Does any method achieve this?

 

I don't think these are necessarily answerable questions but they are stimulating, at least for "me"

Thanks again for this very insightful link WWD!

 

_/\_

[wu wei dragon]

Thank you for the link to this beautifully articulated discussion.What I find fascinating is to wonder how the "knowing" occurs that this is so.Why do some feel this to be unquestionable, experiential truth and others do not?What occurs to lead to that transition?If any of us has experienced this transition, would you be comfortable discussing it in this forum?Do all methods achieve this?Does any method achieve this?I don't think these are necessarily answerable questions but they are stimulating, at least for "me

 

 

 

Let me preface that I know nothing.

 

In my mind though it requires a transition in perspective. I am tempted to call it a simple transition but it really is not. When you consider the basic way you and I are able to perceive or experience "reality" there is a definite somic root. We all can only experience things from our own personal filters. This is natural. Language though is required to indicate a subject and object. Because of this people have forgotten that (epistemic justification) truth Must be derived from this somic level. The conversation we can have about other objects is limited by the perceptions we share together. This limit denys so so much.

 

With this in mind what do these bi polar oppositions become but consepts that are whole and reside inside of you or I.

 

Sorry about the spelling I'm writing from a phone and am deslexic. Really!

 

Let me end this by saying that I know nothing.

[wu wei dragon]

Now that I've reread this I really see how little I know.

[The Cloudwalking Owl]

We know - from the words of the Masters, unless from our own experience - that 'Awakening' is accompanied by the immediate, if not simultaneous, abolition of all phenomenal 'problems'. It is like knocking out the bottom of a barrel, by which all the confused, and so 'impure', contents of our phenomenal mind (phenomenal aspect or reflection of Mind) vanish. Instead of solving problems one by one, like striking off the heads of a Hydra, which grow again, all disappear simultaneously and forever (as an effect), like stabbing the Hydra herself in the heart.[ (page 5, 2nd paragraph from the bottom)

 

I had a hard time understanding what was being said, but I think I understand. (I have a Master's in philosophy, God help anyone who doesn't have the training, the language is very technical!) But I stopped reading at the point I have quoted above. (I think that this is simply too long a section to discuss usefully.) I think that Wei Wu Wei is factually wrong about the nature of enlightenment in the above passage. I have had conversations with a Zen master on this subject and she maintained that "enlightenment" is "just the beginning" and can be lost if one doesn't continue with your practice. I have read many other sources say the same thing. My personal experience would seem to also support this.

 

Westerners have a tendency to read "enlightenment" in the same terms that Protestants think of "salvation". That is, they see it as a binary process---you either are or are not. But if you read the literature of Zen, you find that people have enlightenments all the time. Moreover, people who are recognized "Masters" often make very serious mistakes in their lives that would show that whatever it is that makes them "enlightened" would seem not sufficient in itself to be able to navigate problems that make up life.

 

While it is true that when one does a lot of meditating one often has psychic experiences that are very interesting, these are peripheral to what we want. (I know a women, for example, who spontaneously started having very strong satori experiences. They were caused by epilepsy and stopped when she started taking treatment for this problem.) In actual fact, I would suggest that the enlightenment process is much more prosaic. It involves the "ah ha!" feeling that we get when we suddenly understand something in our bones. We tend to overlook this, but our creative impulses are the very core of our being. I think that this is why teachers will sometimes say things like "you are enlightened already---you just don't know it" or "the practice itself is enlightenment".

 

So while I think much of what Wei Wu Wei makes sense, I find it very dry and hard to read. Moreover, I think he is starting with a misconception about the tradition says about enlightenment. This is understandable, as I understand that he was a totally self-taught person.

[Unconditioned]

We know - from the words of the Masters, unless from our own experience - that 'Awakening' is accompanied by the immediate, if not simultaneous, abolition of all phenomenal 'problems'. It is like knocking out the bottom of a barrel, by which all the confused, and so 'impure', contents of our phenomenal mind (phenomenal aspect or reflection of Mind) vanish. Instead of solving problems one by one, like striking off the heads of a Hydra, which grow again, all disappear simultaneously and forever (as an effect), like stabbing the Hydra herself in the heart.[ (page 5, 2nd paragraph from the bottom)

 

I had a hard time understanding what was being said, but I think I understand. (I have a Master's in philosophy, God help anyone who doesn't have the training, the language is very technical!) But I stopped reading at the point I have quoted above. (I think that this is simply too long a section to discuss usefully.) I think that Wei Wu Wei is factually wrong about the nature of enlightenment in the above passage. I have had conversations with a Zen master on this subject and she maintained that "enlightenment" is "just the beginning" and can be lost if one doesn't continue with your practice. I have read many other sources say the same thing. My personal experience would seem to also support this.

 

Westerners have a tendency to read "enlightenment" in the same terms that Protestants think of "salvation". That is, they see it as a binary process---you either are or are not. But if you read the literature of Zen, you find that people have enlightenments all the time. Moreover, people who are recognized "Masters" often make very serious mistakes in their lives that would show that whatever it is that makes them "enlightened" would seem not sufficient in itself to be able to navigate problems that make up life.

 

While it is true that when one does a lot of meditating one often has psychic experiences that are very interesting, these are peripheral to what we want. (I know a women, for example, who spontaneously started having very strong satori experiences. They were caused by epilepsy and stopped when she started taking treatment for this problem.) In actual fact, I would suggest that the enlightenment process is much more prosaic. It involves the "ah ha!" feeling that we get when we suddenly understand something in our bones. We tend to overlook this, but our creative impulses are the very core of our being. I think that this is why teachers will sometimes say things like "you are enlightened already---you just don't know it" or "the practice itself is enlightenment".

 

So while I think much of what Wei Wu Wei makes sense, I find it very dry and hard to read. Moreover, I think he is starting with a misconception about the tradition says about enlightenment. This is understandable, as I understand that he was a totally self-taught person.

 

I interpreted this quote to mean that rather than trying to address the sympthoms, solve the larger problem at hand and the sympthoms go away. In other books such as Why Lazurus Laughed he likens enlightenment to a person 'getting' a joke.. that spontaneous moment itself.

 

I agree that his writings can be difficult but this was the first author that got me into eastern tradition/teachings. I used a lot of his words almost as a Koan and wrestled with them for a long time then put them in the back of my mind. As I grew in understanding, the meaning of what he was trying to say became clearer and clearer.

 

Enough about me Open Secret is good but like most of Wu Wei Wu, takes a lot of patience.

[Ian]

It may be just a word thing.

 

Experience of enlightenment is not enlightenment, if you're still there to have an experience. So that can be lost.

 

But the understanding cannot possibly be lost because it replaces you.

 

I'm told.

 

Anyone who likes wei wu wei, do yourself/ves a favour and read Perfect Brilliant Stillness. It will render so much discussion obsolete. So clear. So unrelenting.

[picnic]

I love the work of Wei Wu Wei and things have to be considered, he was having a conversation with himself and was going through a process. Through his books his ideas gradually clarify, in early books he is simply reading and interpreting masters and the later books he is becoming one himself.

 

He does often get lost in the very language he is using, he was gifted in philosophy and language and so they became traps as well as gifts.

 

You can just read and read and a picture is formed, you can not expect too much of a sequential coherence in such works that deal with ideas so deep that a suitable language does not exist for them.

 

My favourite of his books is "Ask the Awakened" and you can get tasters of all his work here on bits and pieces

 

...

Edited March 23, 2009 by picnic