Comments on: You’re No Good if you don’t Know (!/?)

By: Christiaan

Christiaan — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 10:23:25 +0000

Hi again Ben,

I took my very first “lessons” in Zen in the summer of 2008 if I recall correct. This was a two weekend intensive in which we were instructed in how things work. As an exercise we got our first koan which was solved right there and then. It was more of an exercise in how to think (or is that, how to no-think). As the weekend came to a close I got my second koan which was a serious one that took a while to understand. I’m not working on any koan right now seeing as I don’t follow classes/training. I’m “just” an at-home-sitter although I occasionally do clash thoughts with my teacher.
Counting 1-10 is hard, very very hard. I think I’ve reached 10 only a handful of times. And of course it’s a thrill to reach ten, but that’s a thought so it’s back to one. It’s what stops me from reaching ten most times, being thrilled to almost be there. And so nine is followed by one again. *grin*

Gr, Christiaan

If you want a nice koan here is one:

What is the use of a bucket without a bottom

By: Ben Weston

Ben Weston — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 02:36:00 +0000

Wonderful! I agree, “just sitting” is one of the hardest things I’ve learned how to do.

It sounds like you’ve been practicing zazen for a while, at least long enough to have received a koan. How long have you been practicing for?

I still find counting 1-10 and looking at a stationary object enough of a challenge. I have been curious, however, on what it would be like to get serious enough to be given a koan.

By: Christiaan

Christiaan — Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:11:22 +0000

I’ve been practicing the simplest form of meditation too: zazen, I try to meditate every day for 20 minutes. “Just sit” is actually not that easy but then again, it shouldn’t be.
Trying to explain the beauty of a leaf is quite impossible. I’d just hand them the leaf en let them look for themselves. Which reminds me of the very first koan I got: It’s a bit hard to explain in text but let’s try

Take an empty glass and strike it softly
Then the koan with that is “What do you hear?”

By: Ben Weston

Ben Weston — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 22:28:38 +0000

I totally hear you about being able to enjoy looking at something as “simple” as a leaf. When I tried explaining this to other friends at the time, they thought I lost it!

I’ve mostly been practicing zazen. It’s been the simplest and most challenging for me. What about yourself?

By: Christiaan

Christiaan — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 23:36:04 +0000

It’s very liberating to meditate indeed, although a total pain when you start out on that path. Sitting still for just a few minutes is pure torture. After a while, you can even enjoy looking at something “simple” as a leaf and wondering why you never saw it before.. :)

I wonder, what type of meditation do you practice?

By: Ben Weston

Ben Weston — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:13:34 +0000

When I started meditating, a while back, it was actually extremely difficult to sit with myself. There was just so much crap going in there, that it was physically difficult to sit. Realizing, like you said, that much of what goes on in our heads are just beliefs and not things that we have truly experienced is both frightening and liberating.

I like how you said, “Shattering beliefs leaves you with the possibility to actually start experiencing and knowing.” After meditating for a while, I felt like I was truly experiencing things and not just putting beliefs upon them before even experiencing them. Just walking felt wonderful because I was seeing things as they were, not as the beliefs I had about how they should look and be.

By: MacGyver

MacGyver — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 16:04:47 +0000

Oh, I mostly agree with the rest of the sentiment, just not with putting that tag on the word. I’m a nitpicker, as you very well know.

However… I don’t fully agree. You and I are now in a world where not-knowing is, in fact, an accepted state of mind. We’re expected to have a bit of blank canvas on which to work, so that we can actually *create* knowledge, produce new things to know from old things that we know or believe to be true. And during that process, we will come to believe things, which we then test to be true. And if the test fails, we have to go back to the basis for that belief and re-evaluate.

Granted, the academic world is only a small fraction of our lives. But the process you describe in this blog-post is quite similar to academic research: Find something you don’t know, evaluate what you do know / believe, create a new belief based on this and test if it is true.

And in the academic world, not-knowing isn’t frowned upon. It’s the status quo.

By: Christiaan

Christiaan — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:45:13 +0000

You’re absolutely right Mac, although it’s not only the word, but also how it’s used. “Ignorance is bliss” but at the same time it seems that ignorance is frowned upon. Just the act of lacking information seems a lesser state to having the information. That’s the point I’m trying to make here actually. The words are just a tool:

If you do not know, you’re often seen as inferior to the person who does know. Not only in class but everywhere in life. And so you adopt the practice of keeping your ignorance hidden, while at the same time almost all things you know are actually beliefs and so you build your life on unstable ground. (We all do actually, it’s the human thing to do)

Thanks, I hope this clarifies things a bit more

By: MacGyver

MacGyver — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:27:50 +0000

Personally, I think that the word “Ignorant” or “Ignorance” in and by itself has no negative bias. Sure, “dumb” and “stupid” do, but those aren’t actual words for “lack of knowledge”; they’re words that directly refer to the (perceived) intelligence of the subject. Whereas ignorant literally means “lack of knowledge” or “lack of information”. Calling somebody ignorant doesn’t have to be negative at all.

Of course, you’re free to input some snide tone or context to make your point, so that by calling somebody ignorant you’re really saying that he’s intentionally blind to the truth, or something similar, but if you’re judging words ignorant is the most neutral way that I know of to inform somebody that they’re unaware of something.

My point is that I think that the negative bias in the word ignorant comes from the context in which it is used. The negative bias in words like dumb or stupid is inherently there.

Of course, I could be ignorant of some detail or nuance you’re using to define this negative bias. If so, please enlighten me.

Ik rust mijn koffertje ;)