Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics |
Posted by: | nj |
Date/Time: | 27/10/2003 04:41:41 |
Hello, Lewis. You wrote: (1) "I'm not interested in the practice of Zen meditation as a spiritual, religious or ritualistic phenomena. I'm simply interested in the results these practices get." OK, Lewis. If you want to make a comparision between Buddhist philosophy and New Code epistemology, then: (2) quote a widely recognized Buddhist text, preferably not a recent zen text, and another quote from WITW, and, in your reply, compare the two quotes. I wrote, "...not a recent Zen text...", in (2), because: (3) many Zen teachers pay no heed to the authority of authentic Buddhist scripture. So don't quote me the words of a Zen meditation master. You will be comparing another religious philosophy, a non-Buddhist one, with the New Code. Zen Buddhists like a few of the original Buddhist texts, so I'll accept a quote from one that Zen Buddhists recognize. If you want to compare: (4) meditative stress management techniques and (5) a state suitable for modeling then: (6) you could find every contrast between a religious meditative state, maybe one involving focused visualization, and a state of identification with a live human being in front of you. Consider, for example, Guru yoga... isn't that especially helpful to you when you enter the Bardo? I'd like my modeling efforts to let me learn something that I can apply before I die. And, of course, the efforts should be modeling efforts, not a religious meditative practice. I bet you want some benefit in this lifetime, also, because you wrote: (7) "I'm simply interested in the results these practices get, regardless of the beliefs that others may have in them." Tibetan Buddhist practices are usually targeted toward achieving states AFTER death. So maybe your nonreligious interests are in the Bardo, but not if you don't believe in the Bardo, or the cycle of suffering, or karma. Personally, I don't subscribe to those beliefs at all. -nj ps: I haven't got devotion toward Dr. Grinder and Ms. Bostic St. Clair. But I consider them proper authorities on NLP principles and practice. |
Topic | Date Posted | Posted By |
Reality / Ethics | 16/10/2003 16:51:36 | Eric |
Re:Reality / Ethics | 16/10/2003 17:56:43 | John Grinder |
Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 16/10/2003 18:38:58 | Eric |
Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 16/10/2003 22:29:50 | nj |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 17/10/2003 05:12:02 | nj |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 24/10/2003 13:07:18 | Eric |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 24/10/2003 13:41:07 | Suds |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 25/10/2003 09:10:08 | nj |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 25/10/2003 22:51:10 | Lewis Walker |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 26/10/2003 00:11:40 | nj |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 26/10/2003 18:41:01 | Lewis Walker |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 27/10/2003 04:41:41 | nj |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 27/10/2003 12:00:32 | Lewis Walker |
Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 28/10/2003 01:13:55 | Eric |
Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 16/10/2003 22:16:06 | nj |
Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 23/10/2003 05:07:57 | carrie |
Re:Re:Re:Reality / Ethics | 23/10/2003 17:49:44 | John Grinder |