From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott Tue Mar 24 09:55:17 EST 1992
Article 4420 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!ists!helios.physics.utoronto.ca!news-server.ecf!utgpu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!ames!haven.umd.edu!darwin.sura.net!convex!constellation!a.cs.okstate.edu!onstott
>From: onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Subject: Re: mean,meaner,MEANING-est/ intention-and-self the buddhist way
Message-ID: <1992Mar12.010517.23690@a.cs.okstate.edu>
Date: 12 Mar 92 01:05:17 GMT
References: <1992Mar6.183228.6118@a.cs.okstate.edu> <1992Mar10.004000.8828@norton.com>
Organization: Oklahoma State University, Computer Science, Stillwater
Lines: 91

In article <1992Mar10.004000.8828@norton.com> brian@norton.com (Brian Yoder) writes:
>onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu (ONSTOTT CHARLES OR) writes:
>> In article <1992Mar06.011801.8699@norton.com> brian@norton.com (Brian Yoder) writes:
>> >silber@orfeo.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric Silber) writes:
>
>> >>  According to the Buddhist tradition of analysis of the self, it is 
>> >>  the absence of intention which allows the self to be fully present.
>> >>  Also, the deepest understanding, in the buddhist view, comes when
>> >>  one is freed from intentionality.
>
>> >Which undoubtedly explains the vast achievements of Buddhist societies.
>> >I realize that they claim that you get what you want when you stop going
>> >after it, but what in the world makes you think that's true?  There is 
>> >certainly such a thing as "trying too hard", but that doesn't mean that 
>> >lack of striving is the way to achieve your goals.  It's mystical nonsense.
>
>>   Of course your western interpretation of this claim distorts its purpose.
>
>Oh geez.  What about YOUR western interpretation?  I am interpreting the words
>I see on the screen in the english language.  If there is some other way of
>interpreting them, please explain and defend it.  Don't just discount my
>comments because I'm a westerner.  If anything, my western outlook ought to be
>a good reason to consider my comments.
  The point still remains in tact, regardless of your rhetoric, that you
can not understand the Buddhistic system if you must go on thinking of it
in terms of an industrial society.  When Buddhism was first born, there was
no such bird.  To ignore the culture elements of interpretation, is to chunk
hermeneutics out the window and walk over eggshells with clump feet.  Of
course, you can come to the conclusion, as a westerner, that Buddhism is
not for you.  But becareful, there is plenty of comparitive literature available
that will show you where you have gone wrong.  Please review that material
before you discount the importance of societal influence.

>
>> I don't think that Buddhist's meant that you could get what you want if you
>> quite striving if you assume that material things are the things you can get.
>> The idea here is to stop searching for the self--in so doing you are
>> distorting the self. 
>
>They do say that, but they also say that this is a general rule for 
>or accomplishing anything.  Perhaps you ought to study the nature of the 
>"buddah-mind they are supposed to strive for.  George Romero couldn't have 
>better!
  The first tennant of Buddhism to remove suffering. How is this accomplished?
In part, by removing desire.  Desire for what?  For becomming and for
material possesions.  Why do we remove desire?  To remove suffering and to
clear the mind.  Get it right.

>
>> Being locked in a western society 
>
>"Locked in"?  Come off it.  Westerners have freedom to think and discover 
>whatever they want.  It is the non-westerners (and I am using 'westerner' in
>the intellectual, not in the geographic or ethnic sense) who suffer from being
>unable to understand or express ideas unpopular among their countrymen.  Or 
>do you feel "caged by the unceasing demand for reason" western society 
>promotes?
  Of course westerns have the freedom to think and discover what they want,
but you have a responsibility to realize that western thinking can, in fact,
distort proper interpretation.  If you want to ignore this, fine as I will
simply chuckle at your clumsyness when dealing with such matters.

>> >Hey, I have an idea.  I'll fill up my machine's memory with NOPs and a JUMP 
>> >to the top at the end.  That would be the ultimate Buddha-Mind AI program
>> >with "total enlightenment" right?
>
>>   Yeah, right....
> 
>Everyone keeps just pooh-poohing this, but I was half serious.  This is exactly
>what the buddhists would say is the ultimate in human mental development.
>It would be thorough mental blankness of the kind an embryo has before it's
>nervous system develops.  Do you deny this?
  I will leave this to the masters to decide.  I have never read an account
of "what is supposed to happen" or "what you are to feel" or anything like
this.  Of course, this sort of goal orientation is extremely western and
can be read into an eastern text if you insist on distorting it.

BCnya,
  Charles O. Onstott, III


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Charles O. Onstott, III                  P.O. Box 2386
Undergraduate in Philosophy              Stillwater, Ok  74076
Oklahoma State University                onstott@a.cs.okstate.edu


"The most abstract system of philosophy is, in its method and purpose, 
nothing more than an extremely ingenious combination of natural sounds."
                                              -- Carl G. Jung
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


