Sangha of the Smurfs
Well, this is awfully cozy. Far be it from me to bust up a great big fuzzy group hug. If Walt Whitman and plenty of affirmation is what you want, God love you.
It's odd, though. You guys have read a book by a punk who said, question everything ... doubt everything ... test everything ... take nobody's word for nothin', but find out for yourselves what's so. Bash and crash and take the big adventure. Presumably that attracted you, and here you are. And some among you are willing to be challenged, and others are not. Not everyone can be or wants to be or should be. Okay.
But don't pretend that Big Questions have nothing to do with Zen. What is man? Is there will? How do we define tolerance? Is Zen materialist, or not? Is Buddhist compassion anything like love, or not? Some of you dismiss such questions as mere posturing, just argumentative crap. But these questions have everything to do with Zen, and everything to do with how I can practice and how I can live my life, and I'll apologize to nobody for delving into such things.
If that's not your cup, fine, there's always Stevie Nicks. But such things have mattered to a couple of millennia of Buddhists so far, and I'll ask you to take my word for it that they matter intensely to me. Not that a poem-of-the-day forum is the place to discuss them.
Poetry may be the highest aesthetic achievement of mankind, and in the form of pop music it has an emotional grab that nothing else can match. But don't kid yourselves. It isn't Zen.
Lyric verse is a celebration of the world and the things in it. A good poet sees particulars, he notices things in themselves, he is attached to the wild variety in this world and is drawn to the uniqueness of this because it isn't that.
I love lyric poetry and in the past I've lived my life by it. I've published a bit of it in good journals -- not much, but some. Poetry is a celebration of this world in all its gorgeous, chaotic concreteness.
But this is exactly what Zen tells you isn't real. It's a celebration of the attachments from which Buddhism wants to release you. It's a love affair with the world that Zen calls an illusion. It's fine to tell yourselves that there's "crossover" between poetry and Zen, but so sorry, there is not. Not unless you debase both poetry and Zen to mere sentimentalism, and to do that is to commit two crimes at once.
Two crimes, guys. Because poetry is no more cuddly than Zen is. A while back, I mentioned that I had first met my wife while doing battle over each other's writing. Well, the writing in qestion was our poetry. Poetry is a lifetime endeavor and it has its own calculus. It's not all subjective: there's much to critique, to debate, to brawl about, much in it that can be done right or wrong. To read Seamus Heaney and go, "Ooh, hey, nice," is to miss everything.
So if Zen is too hard, and you want to get away from thinking, then poetry is really no escape. Just thought I'd mention it.
As for myself, I'm fine in any case. There are serious people around me, both online and IRL, so if the smurfs take over Flapping Mouths, eh, no problem.
posted by Anonymous @ Monday, March 13, 2006
17 comments
17 Comments:
Dear Smurf Killa (rot-13):
Hopefully, this will remain a collaborative, evolving project. There is a long list of folks who are registered as contributors, including yourself (rot-13). So if it seems to be moving in a direction you do not like, it is a result of your own inaction.
I like your post as to what is zen and what is not. Regarding the questions you pose ("What is man? Is there will? How do we define tolerance? Is Zen materialist, or not? Is Buddhist compassion anything like love, or not?"), I would love to read your take on any one of these questions, and open it for discussion.
Please continue to post new topics on the main board, and help evolve this forum.
I enjoyed Rot-13's critique of the Flapping Mouths blog. Although, let's face it, there is some absurdity in his (or her) overarching statements about what Zen is or is not. Neither Zen nor poetry can be neatly pinned down.
Zen, in particular, means different things to different people.
To some it is a religion, to others a practice, to others it connotes a state of mind.
Poetry, when written a certain way and read a certain way, has at least as much chance of knocking our consciousness into the present as "the big questions." Or a koan.
I'd argue that the "big questions" that Rot-13 alleges have been discussed throughout the ages, are exactly the kinds of topics that go nowhere and create lots of wheel spinning and useless knowledge.
It is, supposedly, attention to the present and an intimate understanding of moment to moment experience which will allow us to see, if anything, the pointlessness of those kinds of discussions.
Personally, I find the poetry boring and the arguments more interesting.
However, I am not going to make excuses about how Zen it is to argue philosophy. If you are present when you argue, or read, or take a shit, than I suppose it is Zen....
-Aaron
Rot.. No one really has any idea about how to carry on without Brad around to steer things. As far as the big questions go, they do matter and we all ask them. But there are very few people around here now who have any business even trying to answer them. And if they do they better be ready to go to war over it. Even Brad seemingly tired of that after a while.
So where do we go from here?
We can criticize others for not keeping us entertained with worthwhile topics, or we can write something "serious" ourselves and post it up for consideration.
I see your name up there on the contributors list..
Go for it. :)
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I dont know that Brad steered things better than anyone else. But he certainly wrote better and had much more interesting things to say than most.
It could be (and seemed to me) that he also perhaps had some actual, experiential knowledge that went a bit beyond what the average Zen buffoon throws about. You know, the usual clichés that keep popping up regarding shedding of the ego, or someone talking about how all thoughts are “just thoughts.”
Or on the other side, the clichés of how important it is to practice “right action” and so forth.
The most interesting writers on spirituality, in my stoopid opinion, say things in a different way and Brad did that. He communicated with humor and irreverence, and at times, the things he said might bring me into the present for a moment. That is always how I judge the worth of this kind of writing.
The fact that no one here is currently doing that (much) is expected. What is lacking is more along the lines of imagination and actual knowledge.
Myself included most of all.
rot-13, rock on. I'm not sure if I have your email address or not. Let me check...
Rot-13
Good points all around and well made. You're right, most Zen scholars would probably agree with you that taking a shit and paying attention is not Zen.
Yet, when you get those goofy Zen stories about the master answers the question of what is zen with: "when hungry eat, when thirsty, drink, when tired sleep" or whatever.
Meaning, of course, just be present.
So, i guess I can say that as far as i am concerned (for now), I would rather learn Zen from the guy who is HERE and paying attention NOW than the guy who can describe to me in intimate detail all of the foundational, theoretical aspects of the religion.
Some people learn Jazz by listening to the music and playing, and some learn it by being taught theory at Berkeley School of Music.
I'd rather sit down with Coltrane or Miles Davis and jam with the masters, personally.
But Zen is inescapably abstract, and it's just false for any Zennie to smirk about "dry philosophy" and then recite the Heart Sutra.
I didn't "smirk about dry philosophy," nor did I suggest it was without value. I simply wanted something more direct in addition to the abstract. Poetry.
You can keep trying to put words in my mouth all day long. It is getting pretty old, though. Maybe you should try to read more carefully.
I never suggested this blog should only be about poetry, and was there something I said that made you think we should only post pretty, flowery poetry? Look at my profile. If you would like to post System of a Down lyrics here, I'm all for it, they're one of my favorite bands.
Steve Hagen roshi commented on the Whitman poem I posted earlier, "There was a Child Went Forth," and suggested he thought Whitman may have been an awakened being, just based on the perspective demonstrated in that poem. I'm sorry you didn't like it, but maybe it had some value for someone else.
You seem to think Buddhist compassion amounts to trite words and fake pasted-on smiles. The result of brainwashing, or at the very least unthinking, uncritical acceptance of flowery dogma. That's fine, but I'd suggest that you consider the possibility that to some extent, your cynicism and aversion to "cuddliness" is also the result of conditioning.
Yes, cuddliness can get annoying if it's overdone. But so can rude, overly assertive posturing. We recently had a little swing from one extreme to the other. Hopefully we can stay a little more balanced from here on out.
Poetry is a celebration of this world in all its gorgeous, chaotic concreteness.
But this is exactly what Zen tells you isn't real. It's a celebration of the attachments from which Buddhism wants to release you. It's a love affair with the world that Zen calls an illusion. It's fine to tell yourselves that there's "crossover" between poetry and Zen, but so sorry, there is not. Not unless you debase both poetry and Zen to mere sentimentalism, and to do that is to commit two crimes at once.
No.
Zen is a finger pointing at the moon. Poetry is another finger pointing at the same moon. Zen doesn't call the world an illusion. The world is real. Your ideas about the world are illusion, and you haven't yet realized the extent to which you confuse those ideas with reality. Neither have I, for that matter. But I'm working on it.
I think it would be a momentus occassion if Rot-13 and Jules could admit that this little "back-and-forth" argument type thingy they are having is caused by BOREDOM.
And not paying attention.
I can say for nearly certain that these kinds of discussions (fun as they are) are a direct result of NOT wanting to pay attention to the moment.
I say, let's acknowledge that before we continue the discussion.
Now THAT would be profound.
Aaron
And yes, I wasn't paying attention when i wrote that last post, for the record.
I think I was paying attention. And there shouldn't be any more back-and-forth, I've said all I needed to say.
Jules, no offense meant by my last posts by the way. Most of what I write is either half-joking, or at least with the underlying premise that I don’t really know WTF I am talking about.
On the other hand, I think that mini-exchange between you and Rot-13 as well as a lot of the exchanges that went on in Brad’s blog are indicative of what is going on in the world and in our heads.
We are bored, and uncomfortable (and yes, afraid) so we create little miniature dramas to draw our attention away from the discomfort.
People’s insistence on proclaiming their argument, views or statements as “important” rather than acknowledging the sheer unimportance and silliness of it all keeps the whole thing going.
But one of the hardest things to do is really look at ourselves and laugh at the absurdity of our discussions, views, arguments, opinions. We are all so damn intelligent and it is a point of pride for most of us, myself very much included.
Anyway, just thought I would throw that out there and see what others think.
Aaron
I agree, and no offense was taken.
gniz: "Anyway, just thought I would throw that out there and see what others think."
Fully agree. Conflict is fun. Games are usually based on competition, play fighting, and mock domination. Probably much more so for men than for women, though.
Action, mystery, and horror are very popular in movies and books. Because they entertain. The most popular video games are violent.
CNN had the highest viewership ever when covering the war. "Gee, that looks fun!"
Soft slow love making can be very fulfilling and satisfying, but at some point, you want to throw in some wrestling moves!
Little boys will play "nice" with toy cars for only a brief period before they start crashing the cars into eachother and imagining spectacular devastation and fiery carnage.
In talking to or counseling neurotic acquaintences with tons of "problems," I sometimes get the distinct impression that much of the neurosis and problems are self-indulgent. Self-created entertainment.
Rot 13,
You said: Nope, Aaron, sorry, can't do it. The idea that dialog and debate just boil down to dicksizing? -- that's just an absolutely soulkilling notion.
I don’t think I stated that all discussion and debate is a form of “dicksizing”, as you put it. If you read my posts, I say that certain types of discussion and argument/debate are caused by boredom and discomfort. Now, maybe that is not true for YOU. I can’t say what is true for you, I can only speak to my own experience and what I observe when watching people engage in these kinds of discussions.
It’s interesting that in the abstract, all the Buddhists and spiritualists will discuss ego in all of its forms with such expertise and insight. But you try it—ask any of these expert talkers to ADMIT when they are actually engaging their ego in some respect, or feeling discomfort or fear—they’ll never f’ing admit it.
NEVER.
Okay, I’ll say that I am feeling discomfort RIGHT NOW. I would rather type these nonsense words than actually relax and pay attention to my breath and so forth. Yes, I could do both. I could write stupid words AND pay attention. But normally, I find that when I pay attention and relax, I don’t need to engage in arguments/debate/pissing contests, if that’s what they are.
Maybe you are different. Maybe the whole world isn’t running on self-importance and denial.
You tell me.
Aaron
About the "whole world running on denial and self-importance", that is probably a rather broad and innacurate statement on my part. It may be, but I have no idea.
However, you put those "big" issues that a lot of activist, New Age types get riled up about such as poverty, hunger, human rights, I am going to go out on a limb and say that much of the discussion in these areas is fueled by the very same stuff that fuels internet flame wars.
I think Brad was trying to say something similar (and got flamed for it). I happen to feel that I have observed it in others and directly experienced it myself. So there!!
Hehe
Aaron
JUST TO FURTHER MY POINT, HERE'S A BIT FROM THE GOSSIP COLUMNS...
Clooney's blog spat with Huffington: After a post signed by George Clooney appeared on Arianna Huffington's blog on Monday, Clooney has been trying to make it clear he didn't actually write the post himself -- and things have gotten heated between the two. The post was a compilation of Clooney quotes from the Guardian and "Larry King Live" put together by the Huffington Post, and while Huffington says she had explicit permission to run it, Clooney claims his words were taken out of context without his approval. "Arianna asked for permission to use the quotes and he gave it to her. What he didn't give permission for was the use of his quotes without source attributions to make it appear that he wrote a blog for her site," says Stan Rosenfield, Clooney's rep. Huffington is calling the whole thing an "honest misunderstanding," but Clooney's not entirely comforted. Huffington "said some things that I won't share," Clooney told Lowdown, "but she did tell me that this could be bad for me -- bad for my career. Well, screw you! I'm not going to be threatened by Arianna Huffington!"
Post a Comment
<< Home