home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   talk.religion.buddhism      All aspects of Buddhism as religion and      111,200 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 110,747 of 111,200   
   noname to Tang Huyen   
   Re: Not knowing (was Re: By the Numbers)   
   20 Nov 16 20:37:39   
   
   XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: invalid@invalid.invalid   
      
   Tang Huyen  wrote:   
   > On 11/20/2016 7:19 AM, dagnabit wrote:   
   >   
   >> "{:-])))"   
   >   
   >>> noname:   
   >   
   >>>> Some of us go beyond GIGO to AIGO.   
   >   
   >>> I'm blanking on what the A stands for.   
   >>>   
   >>> - in the real world   
   >   
   >> abracadabra in   
   >> gestalt out   
   >   
   > It is sometimes piquant to me that some Korean Son (Chan)   
   > followers, including Oxycontin, promote "not knowing mind"   
   > as the panacea. Not so much the idea itself, which I accept   
   > on some conditions, but the definition of it, as in JayLo's   
   > blanking out above. If your mind draws a blank, which merely   
   > means that you don't know something, does that mean "not   
   > knowing mind"? Does that qualify as "not knowing mind"?   
   > IOW, is not knowing something specific the same as not   
   > knowing in a general sense, a total absence of knowing,   
   > which I take to be a total absence of judging?   
      
   If you don't know a fact it's an absence of information.   
   If you don't know how to ski that's an absence of skill.   
   If you don't know anything you're a turnip.   
   If you don't remember how to know until you need to know, maybe that's   
   something else.   
      
   >   
   > As to my conditions, "not knowing mind" presupposes   
   > success, and offers no guardrail against failure. This   
   > becomes clearer when it is taken to be "not checking your   
   > mind", which is a frequent equivalent motto of it, as often   
   > used by Oxycontin. If you fail, you will never know it, for you   
   > don't turn your mind back to check on itself. You give   
   > yourself an automatic free pass. More specifically, if you   
   > practice it with an innocent mind free of ulterior motives   
   > (this is the presupposed success mentioned above), you're   
   > good to go, but if you have ulterior motives, like hiding your   
   > self-hatred, it won't work. IMO, of course.   
   >   
   > Tang Huyen   
   >   
      
   Some of us don't need no steenking mind, mine just wanders off half the   
   time and I wave and smile and get back to what I wasn't doing.   
      
   --   
   email: noname.1234567.abcdef@gmail.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca