|
Ped
Interested In Your Brain



Registered: 08/30/99
Posts: 5,494
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 7 years, 1 month
|
|
>> Once again not talking about making errors. If Watts was never enlightened then he is not fit to talk about it. If he is teaching 'living in the now' and finds alcohol as the means to that end rather than meditation and awareness then he is a dangerous teacher.
Why should we remain hushed about freedom until we are free? That's so severe.
You are looking outside yourself for examples of some sort of static enlightened ideal. That is the "moral violence" of which you accuse me of being "high and mighty" about. When you build up expectations of others, you put yourself in a place of discordance with your experience, and the question of ethics becomes a violent one. The point I have been trying to make, if you're willing to listen to me instead of the imagination you have of me, is that the only real lesson to be gained form Alan Watts is to be taken in the context of your own life. You can see that alcoholism is not a place of liberation. You can see the kind of suffering that comes from it. And so from your point of view, these are wisdom's emphasized through the life and example of Alan Watts. From your perspective, this makes Alan Watts a qualified teacher. And for that matter, it makes any homeless drug addict on the street a qualified teacher.
The point I'm trying to make here is that spiritual life has to be kept humane, down to earth, in the here and now. If you insist on putting people into these boxes, constantly comparing their words with their behaviour, it is inhumane, and you will always, always find contradictions. As a result, you will never, ever have enough faith in anybody to gain any meaningful insights from them. Because it is an exploration guided by receiving feedback from imposing, it deserves the description "violent".
My spiritual guide has been a monk for 15 years, and he makes many mistakes. Sometimes he behaves in ways that are opposite to his message. But that doesn't matter. What matters that his heart is sincere, his discipline is genuine and dynamic, and he is journeying just like I am. He has faith in me, and I have faith in him, and in that open space we have the freedom to to grow, to smooth out our own rough edges, and to develop a good heart toward others.
By the same token, if we can have faith in everybody -- that is to say, if we can search with an open heart for the path to liberation in their words and example -- suddenly everyone becomes our spiritual guide. Because we see everyone as our spiritual guide, all we see is kindness. We are able not only to learn from everyone, but also to meet others exactly where they are, and to guide them from their own painful places as well. This is real kindness. It is kindness with ourself and others. When we are constantly critical of others, always searching for some kind of perfect integrity, we never have the opportunity to connect with them in a genuine and meaningful way, and the lessons we gain come with agitation and turbulence. This is what I mean by "moral violence."
--------------------
Dark Triangles - New Psychedelic Techno Single - Listen on Soundcloud Gyroscope full album available SoundCloud or MySpace
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
Re: Alan Watts [Re: Ped]
#5641588 - 05/17/06 11:31 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
This is an advanced perspective IMO, and is a good example of this subject. I adhere to your perspective and often advance it in these forums but at times am unable to follow my own advice.
To me it's all part of the step by step process of growth and without my failures and foibles growth does not happen for me.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Alan Watts seems more like a scholar than a spiritual teacher.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
A pundit for sure. Almost everyone is.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
koppie
astral projectile


Registered: 07/23/04
Posts: 2,653
Loc: cloud hidden
|
|
I agree broadly with the article you quoted. While I love listening to Watts, and his interpretations of life, he firmly remained a western scholar with a slightly simplified concept of zen. The zen-lunatic from Kerouac's Dharma Bums comes close to this concept, while mostly ignoring the ideas of duty, kindness and humility in zen that need to go hand in hand with spiritual development for it to be of any value. But then his books and lectures probably wouldn't be as popular as they were.
But to condemn him as a hypocrite for his alcoholism is going a bit far.
One zen saying is that small attachments are transformed to small satori while great attachments will be transformed into great satori.
Some of the greatest masters in the Soto Zen tradition, for instance the early 20th century reformer Kodo Sawaki and his student Taisen Deshimaru were alcoholics. Zen takes people as they are with all their flaws. Zen masters aren't saints. They were often rogues. Condemning them for not conforming to an essentially Christian idea of righteousness is projecting the values of one culture onto another and in my opinion inappropriate. If Watts lived by zen philosophy, then you should judge his success of failure by zen criteria.
Watts' mission was to popularize eastern philosophy in the West, and he succeeded remarkably, but his books and lectures are only an introduction into the subject and he never claimed they were anything else, if you want to have a real understanding of Zen or Hinduism or Daoism then you have to read the books by active practitioners in the field both ancient and contemporary.
|
Sporetacus
Swashbuckler

Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 152
Last seen: 17 years, 8 months
|
Re: Alan Watts [Re: koppie]
#5646599 - 05/18/06 02:48 PM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Condemning them for not conforming to an essentially Christian idea of righteousness is projecting the values of one culture onto another
Escapism from The Now through alcohol has nothing to do with the Bible. Who is the one projecting here? *holds up mirror*
-------------------- I'm Sporetacus!
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Sporetacus said:
Quote:
Condemning them for not conforming to an essentially Christian idea of righteousness is projecting the values of one culture onto another
Escapism from The Now through alcohol has nothing to do with the Bible. Who is the one projecting here? *holds up mirror*
How do you know he was "escaping from the now"? Maybe he just wanted to be shitfaced while in the now. Really. How do you know? Maybe some are using racketball to escape from the now. Whatever the fuck that means.
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Sporetacus
Swashbuckler

Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 152
Last seen: 17 years, 8 months
|
|
Quote:
How do you know he was "escaping from the now"?
Because genuine masters have said that alcohol is not compatable with Zen.
-------------------- I'm Sporetacus!
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Everyone knows those who drink alcohol cannot study or write about Eastern thought.
|
hot48yearolds
Dharmakaya

Registered: 09/21/04
Posts: 705
Loc: lazy river road
Last seen: 14 years, 5 months
|
|
Alan Watts was not a buddhist guru himself, he was simply the the bridge between eastern thought and the western world. Basically everything that you guys are arguing about is pointless because he was not meant to practiced what he thought. His purpose was to teach people who couldnt speak japanese the philosophies of zen. You guys need to get your heads out of your asses. peace
-------------------- "Truth is more in the process than in the result." - J. Krishnamurti "We ourselves are not an illusory part of Reality; rather are we Reality itself illusorily conceived." Wei Wu Wei
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said:
Quote:
MushmanTheManic said: How much Alan Watts have you read?
Well, Mr Sporetacus?
|
koppie
astral projectile


Registered: 07/23/04
Posts: 2,653
Loc: cloud hidden
|
|
Quote:
Sporetacus said:
Quote:
How do you know he was "escaping from the now"?
Because genuine masters have said that alcohol is not compatable with Zen.
Please provide names and references. As I said in a previous post, some of the greatest minds both within and without zen were alcoholics. While I wish they weren't, the reality is that despite this weakness they were admirable human beings and great creators and I refuse to look down on them out of a protestant puritanism.
Of course the eight precepts frown on intoxication, and monastic rules prohibit alcohol. And of course it's hard to realize that zen isn't a miracle cure for all the flaws in life. It's a disappointment when you see that even the most enlightened of beings still succumb to the lowest human weaknesses. If people who have devoted forty years of their lives to zen still can't control their urges, how is a mere beginner like me supposed to benefit?
As master Deshimaru once said, you don't need the ancient koans in books like the Gateless Gate to practice zen. Daily life throws up enough bewildering koans for us to ponder. The greatest advantage of this is that there isn't a book where you can find the official answers. You'll have to work it out for yourself.
|
gettinjiggywithit
jiggy


Registered: 07/20/04
Posts: 7,469
Loc: Heart of Laughter
|
Re: Alan Watts [Re: koppie]
#5648934 - 05/19/06 02:21 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
As master Deshimaru once said, you don't need the ancient koans in books like the Gateless Gate to practice zen. Daily life throws up enough bewildering koans for us to ponder. The greatest advantage of this is that there isn't a book where you can find the official answers. You'll have to work it out for yourself.
Beautious!
-------------------- Ahuwale ka nane huna.
|
Lakefingers

Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Loc: mumuland
|
Re: Alan Watts [Re: koppie]
#5649058 - 05/19/06 03:28 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
koppie said:
Quote:
Sporetacus said:
Quote:
How do you know he was "escaping from the now"?
Because genuine masters have said that alcohol is not compatable with Zen.
Please provide names and references. As I said in a previous post, some of the greatest minds both within and without zen were alcoholics. While I wish they weren't, the reality is that despite this weakness they were admirable human beings and great creators and I refuse to look down on them out of a protestant puritanism.
Of course the eight precepts frown on intoxication, and monastic rules prohibit alcohol. And of course it's hard to realize that zen isn't a miracle cure for all the flaws in life. It's a disappointment when you see that even the most enlightened of beings still succumb to the lowest human weaknesses. If people who have devoted forty years of their lives to zen still can't control their urges, how is a mere beginner like me supposed to benefit?
As master Deshimaru once said, you don't need the ancient koans in books like the Gateless Gate to practice zen. Daily life throws up enough bewildering koans for us to ponder. The greatest advantage of this is that there isn't a book where you can find the official answers. You'll have to work it out for yourself.
Maybe a beginner like yourself can't practice zen. Perhaps the reason why it "worked" for the drunks is because their lives were a thousandfold more nightmarish than your own and that is why they needed the ideology of zen.
I have a friend that is going to start going to psychotherapy at the university. His psychotherapist is going to be a 24 year old grad student that had perfect grades (perfect grades are needed to get into the program) and probably had a very sheltered, stable life in a richer part of town. How is this person going to understand my friend, his broken, suicidal, passive-aggressive, manipulative, ad nauseum, family? How can the grad student understand the importance of beauty, art and the good life, for my friend, who might as well die without the meaning of these things to work for, with and against in his existence?
|
Deviate
newbie
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 4,497
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
|
|
this thread raised several interesting points which i would like to comment on. first of all in reguards to alan watts, i agree with those who stated that he was more of a scholar/translator of eastern disciplines than a spiritual teacher himself. this was the impression i got from the small amount of his work which i have read and he was quite gifted with language.
secondly id like to discuss the issue of whether a spiritual teacher must always practise what they preach. like ped said, this idea causes you to expect others to conform to some preconcieved ideal of how an enlightened being should behave and will always result in contradictions even when the teacher does practise what he preaches. in fact this very tactic is what swami would use over and over again in his attempts to invalidate spirituality and make people look foolish. for instance every time a certain spiritual teacher was mentioned (ram daas, deepak chopra anyone?) , swami would choose some aspect of their behavior or event from their past which didn't fit with his idea of how an enlightened being should act and claim this was proof they were a fraud, their teaching was invalid and their only motive was to sell books. in reality, a spiritual teacher (or organization) doesn't need to be perfect and doesn't need to never make mistakes in order to be effective. in fact there are many individuals like swami who will go to great lenghts to discredit any teacher or organization in existence.
that said, its still important to use disgression when selecting a spiritual teacher or teaching. ped gave the concept that everybody can be your spiritual teacher and while i agree with this, like icelander said, it is an advanced concept and depending on your level of spiritual growth you might benefit a lot from selecting a specific teacher. the fact that ped's teacher happens to be a monk shows that he believes in selecting a spiritual teacher based on merit, or at least believed this at one time. generally speaking, the higher the level of attainment of your teacher, the higher your teacher can help you rise too. afterall, why would you need a teacher if you had more attainment then your teacher? so it is perfectly valid to wish to select a teacher who practises what they preach, at least to a higher degree than alan watts did.
Quote:
This thinking is so black and white that I wonder how you yourself can believe it. You're talking about superman right? The perfect man. You can take your statement to ridiculous extremes. One bad moment or slip and it's all shot because for that one second the teacher did not follow his teaching. No one is perfect at all moments. You're talking about Gurus and Gods and I thought you didn't believe in that nonsense.
he didn't say he would only accept superman as his teacher, just someone who practises what they preach. this is by no means an unreasonable request. if you wanted to learn time management and good study habbits, would you observe your roommate who has both of those qualities or the guy down the hall who claims to know a lot about them but rarely actually studies?
Edited by Deviate (05/19/06 05:02 AM)
|
ninjapixie
newbie


Registered: 02/06/04
Posts: 417
|
|
I think Alan Watts is like the gateway drug to eastern philosophy. He made it easy to understand such difficult concepts. He also liked to call himself an 'entertainer' rather then a guru.
'The Wisdom of Insecurity' is by far my favourite book of his. Unfortunately he preaches against alcoholism in that book which must put into question whether or not he believed what he said. I think he did at the time, but this puts into question the rest of his work.
Having listened to nearly all his lectures and read a few books, I got the impression that he never believed in the concept of 'enlightenment,' or at least not the concept of enlightenment people have before they get into eastern philosophies i.e. a permanent state of bliss/heaven/nirvana etc.
To me, he seemed to be saying that 'true' enlightenment is the realization that there is no enlightenment. I think knowing this belief of his puts a different perspective on his alcoholism.
Anyway, I think Alan Watts has been a great help to me in understanding eastern wisdom. Another great thing about him is he was absolutely hilarious.
Wow this is my first post in years. I really just had to give my opinion on Mr. Watts
-------------------- Put that monkey back in the oven.
|
Icelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
|
|
Quote:
Sporetacus said:
Quote:
How do you know he was "escaping from the now"?
Because genuine masters have said that alcohol is not compatible with Zen.
WTF is a genuine master? Can you name one and prove that he is a genuine master? And what do you or I know about what is compatible with Zen?
-------------------- "Don't believe everything you think". -Anom. " All that lives was born to die"-Anom. With much wisdom comes much sorrow, The more knowledge, the more grief. Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC
|
Lakefingers

Registered: 08/26/05
Posts: 6,440
Loc: mumuland
|
Re: Alan Watts [Re: Deviate]
#5649430 - 05/19/06 08:58 AM (17 years, 8 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Deviate said: this thread raised several interesting points which i would like to comment on. first of all in reguards to alan watts, i agree with those who stated that he was more of a scholar/translator of eastern disciplines than a spiritual teacher himself. this was the impression i got from the small amount of his work which i have read and he was quite gifted with language.
secondly id like to discuss the issue of whether a spiritual teacher must always practise what they preach. like ped said, this idea causes you to expect others to conform to some preconcieved ideal of how an enlightened being should behave and will always result in contradictions even when the teacher does practise what he preaches. in fact this very tactic is what swami would use over and over again in his attempts to invalidate spirituality and make people look foolish. for instance every time a certain spiritual teacher was mentioned (ram daas, deepak chopra anyone?) , swami would choose some aspect of their behavior or event from their past which didn't fit with his idea of how an enlightened being should act and claim this was proof they were a fraud, their teaching was invalid and their only motive was to sell books. in reality, a spiritual teacher (or organization) doesn't need to be perfect and doesn't need to never make mistakes in order to be effective. in fact there are many individuals like swami who will go to great lenghts to discredit any teacher or organization in existence.
that said, its still important to use disgression when selecting a spiritual teacher or teaching. ped gave the concept that everybody can be your spiritual teacher and while i agree with this, like icelander said, it is an advanced concept and depending on your level of spiritual growth you might benefit a lot from selecting a specific teacher. the fact that ped's teacher happens to be a monk shows that he believes in selecting a spiritual teacher based on merit, or at least believed this at one time. generally speaking, the higher the level of attainment of your teacher, the higher your teacher can help you rise too. afterall, why would you need a teacher if you had more attainment then your teacher? so it is perfectly valid to wish to select a teacher who practises what they preach, at least to a higher degree than alan watts did.
Quote:
This thinking is so black and white that I wonder how you yourself can believe it. You're talking about superman right? The perfect man. You can take your statement to ridiculous extremes. One bad moment or slip and it's all shot because for that one second the teacher did not follow his teaching. No one is perfect at all moments. You're talking about Gurus and Gods and I thought you didn't believe in that nonsense.
he didn't say he would only accept superman as his teacher, just someone who practises what they preach. this is by no means an unreasonable request. if you wanted to learn time management and good study habbits, would you observe your roommate who has both of those qualities or the guy down the hall who claims to know a lot about them but rarely actually studies?
No one should be held to a consistent standard or norm, we are humans and we are in flux. We have no internal soliloquoy, our psyches are complex. Yet, as Nietzsche wrote, a philosopher must set a good example, else what is his philosophy but something that has nothing to do with the life we live -- then the philosophy is just more Christian/transcendentalist/ascetic/life-denying monomania.
Also, swami was very clever in his analytical approach, but he couldn't get beyond that -- not even to see how he contradicted himself according to the system of logic he held others to. However, none of us that care about open debate pay attention ad hominem attacks, unless we already dislike the person being attacked. And in such case we'll do anything to rub discredit in the face of those that believe the words of the attacked. And what's that? It's an attempt to discredit others based on name-calling and personal attacks; it is ressentiment.
|
Sporetacus
Swashbuckler

Registered: 04/19/06
Posts: 152
Last seen: 17 years, 8 months
|
|
Some here still don't quite understand the difference between a valid and an invalid ad hominem.
Invalid ad hominem: Physicist X's theorem is suspect because he was an alcoholic. In this case the theorem should stand or fall on it's own merits.
Valid ad hominem: Writer X' view on how to achieve inner peace and contentment is suspect because he was an alcoholic. In this case how the writer actually lived (and died) is a valid test of his theorem.
-------------------- I'm Sporetacus!
|
dblaney
Human Being

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 7,894
Loc: Here & Now
|
|
Invalid ad hominem: Physicist X's theorem is suspect because he was an alcoholic. In this case the theorem should stand or fall on it's own merits.
Peace and unrest are both physical phenomena (that is, arising out of the physical elements). Therefore, any suggestions aimed at achieving inner peace could easily be considered a theorem dealing with a physical phenomenon. So by this logic, a view on how to achieve inner peace and contentment should stand or fall on it's own merits, which means the practitioner tries out the techniques or suggestions and evaluates them to see if there is improvement.
-------------------- "What is in us that turns a deaf ear to the cries of human suffering?" "Belief is a beautiful armor But makes for the heaviest sword" - John Mayer Making the noise "penicillin" is no substitute for actually taking penicillin. "This country, with its institutions, belongs to the people who inhabit it. Whenever they shall grow weary of the existing government, they can exercise their constitutional right of amending it, or their revolutionary right to dismember or overthrow it." -Abraham Lincoln
|
|