Evo u opstem trendu citiranja i copy-paste excercise tripova i ja da se pridruzim jer je citat bas merodavan. Govori vishe o Zen budizmu i slicnostima sa nekim od post-modernistickih filozofa danasnjice - prevashodno Fuko-om i Deridom. Teks je na engleskom pa ko voli nek izvoli:

Some thoughts on Foucault and Zen
Francis Farrell

Elsewhere in this website -- in "The brief and oversimplified intro to
Foucault" -- the following points are made about Foucault and identity:
We often talk about people as if they have particular attributes as
'things' inside themselves -- they have an identity, for example, and we
believe that at the heart of a person there is a fixed and true identity
or character (even if we're not sure that we know quite what that is, for
a particular person). We assume that people have an inner essence --
qualities beneath the surface which determine who that person really
'is'.

When I read this I was struck by the similarity to some of the ideas in
Zen Buddhism.
Zen is the form of Buddhism that developed as the result of Chinese and
Japanese influences as it spread from India. Although often classified as
a religion, it is probably more accurate to view it as a way of looking at
the world. So, for example, Buddhists are not bound to follow a set of
sacred commandments under pain of punishment. Buddha did not claim to be
God or to speak for God. In fact, he had nothing to say on the matter of
divinity. Despite the popular view that Buddhism is concerned with
entering Nirvana, it is actually concerned with how we live our lives now.
What Buddhists believe is that to be alive is to suffer.This does not just
mean suffering from the pain of illness, disease, famine etc. It
encompasses mental and emotional suffering, too. We may suffer, for
example, when a colleague is more successful than we are. Or when our
loved one doesn't live up to our expectations. Buddha explained that there
was a cause of that suffering and it lay in attachment. The suffering
could be ended and there was a means to end it: the Middle Way.
Zen Buddhists are concerned with direct knowledge of the self. Through
meditation (Soto Zen) or the study of koans, such as the famous 'What is
the sound of one hand clapping?' (Rinzai Zen) students come to an
awareness of the true nature of the self.
Now, Western thought rests on duality. First there is me and then there is
the world around me. Zen does not deny that objects exist, but does
suggest an alternative interpretation of the relationship between self and
the world. In Zen thought the self continually manifests itself in its
interactions with the external world. Each separate interaction is a
manifestation of our individual nature. Because we have memory we connect
these interactions into a series, like a line, thus creating the illusion
that there is a single self. In actual fact, in Zen, there is just a
series of individual events. In coming to understand this, and this means
not just an intellectual acceptance but something far more profound, then
the relationship with he world is changed. One no longer sees one's self
as separate with good and bad things happening to one. Instead whatever
happens is accepted as it is as the present manifestation of one's life.
For the Zen Buddhist, then, I am not a noun but a verb. It is not so much
that I am Francis Farrell but I am Francis Farrelling.
Let's look at what some Zen teachers have said, they are far more eloquent
than I am.
Taisen Deshimaru was a Japanese Zen monk who brought Zen to Europe. He
died in 1982. The following quotes are all from The Ring of the Way (Rider
1982):
Everything exists by virtue of interdependence and has no permanence, no
lasting substance.


All the phenomena of the cosmos, all the existences of the cosmos, make
up the temporary potential that exists or is manifest, actualized, in the
instant. Each existence depends upon the law of interdependence, and the
multiplicity of phenomena depends upon the multiplicity of relationships
underlying them. So although these temporary phenomena take form when
they are born, are transformed while they live, and then vanish, their
substance has been neither produced nor destroyed, has increased no more
than it has diminished.


In any event, all existences are...without substance. Everything exists
without existing, everything exists only in change and through change,
and what subtends change is potential. We must understand that..change is
eternity.

And Taisen Deshimaru in Questions to a Zen Master (Arkana 1985) writes:
I have explained that we have no noumenon, no permanent substance. The
ego changes every second that goes by; yesterday's ego, today's ego...
they're not the same... Our life is connected to the cosmic power and
stands in a relation of interdependence with all other existences...

Dennis Genpo Merzel (American Zen teacher) in The Eye Never Sleeps
(Shambhala 1991) writes:
When we look in to our own minds and observe it (sic), we begin to see
that everything is impermanent, rising and falling, coming and going,.
Nothing is really static.
Our dualistic mind causes this fragmentation, the inability to see the Way
perfect as it is in its natural state. Dualistic consciousness is created
by the thinking mind. A random thought that rises like a bubble to the
surface of the water is no problem. Even random thought after thought
after random thought is no problem...By themselves, they are not the
problem, but when we put these thoughts together, combining them into a
continuous flow, we create the illusion that there is a self, a me. Out of
this comes the concept that I exist as a separate entity apart form the
whole: there is a me in the world looking out at the world.

Branching out from Foucault, there are further similarities between Zen
and postmodern thought. Postmodernism is sometimes criticised for being
enigmatic, contradictory and irrational. For the postmodernist this may be
accounted for on the grounds that there is not a single orignator of
postmodernism, no Marx or Gospel. Consequently, it is decentralised with
the resulting variety of interpretation. In fact, it welcomes this variety
of interpretation as a resistance to a static and all encompassing 'grand
narrative'. Furthermore, it challenges the very logic and rationality
which modernist critics use in their armoury to attack it. They don't play
by the same rules. So with Zen. It often talks in terms of contradiction.
Just as postmodernists are reluctant to define the term, because to offer
a definition is to undermine the postmodernist's position, so with Zen
there is the danger of trying to define enlightenment. It can never give
an adequate explanation because to do so would be to define and to define
is to limit. But the thrust of enlightenment is to go beyond
limitations.The Zen master does not want to give the impression that this
is something that can be apprehended by the intellect alone. He wishes to
go beyond dualistic thought and normal rationality. Consequently he will
often reply to questions such as 'What is Enlightenment?' By giving a
shout, or even a blow. Or, if asked what is to be gained by the study of
Zen, the likely reply is, 'Nothing.'
Which reminds me of Baudrillard who, I believe, said that the best the
postmodernist can do is to remain silent.

Mnogi neće razumjeti tekst, jer je na engleskom.

Decky ! Može li to na naški pa malo skraćeno ?

E, moj Decky...

I, onda ti nesto zboris na Jocu... 

@ euridicat

U osnovi života leže dvije  želje, dva instikta: želja za kontrolom situacije i želja za produženjem vrste. To su takođe i dvije najsuptilnije ljudske individualne vrijednosti poslije samog zivota. Prekomjerna vezanost za zelju za uzitkom ( produzenje zivota ) usloveljena je emocijom ljubomore koja prozima covjeka na dubinskim planovima njegovog postojanja, precizno dusu. A ljubomora sama po sebi nastaje kada je kolicina uzitka koji primamo značajno veca od kolicine ljubavi koju nosimo u dusi. Ova dubinska emocija takodje je prisutna i u emotivnim odnosima ljudi kada nema dovoljno ljubavi. U ovom slucaju tu se zapaža i spoljašnja manifestacija ove emocije, koja jos moze da se pokaze kao i zavist. Zavist NIKADA ne moze nastati kada smo ispunjeni dovoljnom količinom ljubavi, ona uglavnom nice u prisustvu suvisne  prljavstine ljudskog.

Sa druge strane imamo instik koji nas podstice da kontrolisemo situaciju. Za nju nam je potreban intelekt, sposbnost. Moć, volja, vlast zahvataju sirok spektar: intelektualne sposobnosti; jaku intuiciju, ideale, nadanja, ciljeve; pa tako i samu sudbinu. Covjek koji ima snaznu volju razvija strategiju tokom razmisljanja.

Mozda ste culi izreku: “Dobrim namerama je poploćčana staza za ad.”

To znaci da su duhovnost i plemenitost, u slucaju da su svrha zivota, veoma stetni. Zivotinja ima samo tri problema: da se razmnozava, hrani i prezivi. Covjek ima daleko vise problema, ali samim tim i vise patnje. Duhovnost ne donsi samo srecu, vec i opasnost. Sto se pojedinac vise veze za karijeru, moći, sposobnosti i intelekt ( duhovne vrijednosti  ) vise sakati svoju dusu.

Prica jedne zene. Njena ćerka je zavrsila skolu za briljantnim uspjehom i dobila zlatnu medalju. Bez problema se upsiala na fakultet gdje je bila jedan od najboljih studenata. Za sve vrijeme ni jedan put nije usla u crkvu. “Nije joj se dalo.” Na trećoj godini studija ipak ju je nesto povuklo da uđe u crkvu. Kada je usla nije bilo problema, nije osjećala teskoće sem psihičke odsutnosti. Međutim, kasnije je doslo do takvog psihickog pogorsanja da je zavrsila u bolnici. Ona je prakticki postala invalid …       

Magic-  Frojd je davno uradio podele- id, ego, superego.
Zatim, tu su i motivacione sile urodjene- nazvao ih je motivima. Eros i Tanatos- nagon smrti.


Ne znam, samo zasto tvoj post nosi posvetu- upucenu meni?! 

Duhovnost i plemenitost- stetni?             
(Definitivno ne spadam u kategoriju odlicnih studeneta... Imam Ok prosek, za moj smer, al` nista spektakularno... Obozavam da sticem nova znanja, i svasta me interesuje... Ova tvoja prica je prosto neverovatna. Ta devojka, nije imala nikakav "zivot" osim ucenja...  )

Mislim da je onda- bolje- da ljudi ne idu u crkvu... Bar, oni koji imaju prosek iznad 9. Ja mogu, jos uvek... 

opcija 4 chini mi se ne postoje ni vreme ni prostor .odnosno ,vreme i prostor su kategorije chula shto bi rekao kant . prema tome postojanje ili nepostojanje hrista je sasvim nevazno 

Bf , ja sam post naslovio na euridicat , ali kad se ona ne javlja , šta ću ... Tebe bi pitao šta misliš o ovoj mogućnosti : Ako je vrijeme i prostor iluzija , kako znaš da ta iluzija ustvari nije iluzija ? To što ti furaš je mentalni ping-pong . To ti je kao da uzmeš 2 ogledala . Gledaš u prvo ogledalo a to prvo ogledalo se ogleda u drugom ogledalu . Onda slika s drugog opet ide u prvo i tako , ping - pong , nema kraja . Kolko tu ima slika ? Mnogo brate . Meni je to zbunjujuće pa ne želim tako da razmišljam .

Nešto sam razmišljao , pa bi nešto napisao Decky-ju . Evo Decky , ja sam ti po prirodi pozitivac pa se trudim da nađem zajedničke platforme kršćanstva i budizma . Mislim da je kod kršćanstva ono "požuda srca = grijeh" isto što i u budizmu "želja = patnja= grijeh ". Ja mislim da je to isto .

E sad mislim da sam našao još jednu zajedničku platformu . Ti kažeš : da bi upoznao božju volju moraš da se odrekneš svoje . Ako sam dobro shvatio .

Ista stvar ti ima kod kršćana . To se zove PREDANJE . Znači Kristov put ima 4 važna koraka .

Korak br. 1 : Spoznaja . Neko mora da ti kaže da ima stvoritelj , da ima njegov sin i da to ništa nije bezveze .

Korak br. 2 : Obraćenje . Hebreji kao drevni narod su bili što bi rekli Englezi "simple minds". Oni nisu poznavali palamudnju kao expresionističku formu . Obraćenje znači : Ideš vamo pa se onda okreneš pa ideš tamo .

Korak br. 3 : PREDANJE . To je duboka molitva u kojoj ti Stvoritelju daješ pasvord za ulazak u tvoj softver s tim razlogom da ti izbiše stare drajvere i instalira nove koji će omogućiti da čitavi softver radi u što boljem skladu s Božjom voljom . Svaki put prije nego li ti izbriše driver on te pita : "Do you want to move this driver to recycle bin ?"To je u stvari usklađivanje s Božjom voljom . Ono što ti spominješ . Jedino je razlika da kršćani ne žele sami da prčkaju po softveru nego samo daju pasvord zato jer vjeruju da ima bolji majstor .

Korak br. 4 : Krštenje .

Eto , ne želim da budem naporan pa ne bi više . Aj, u zdravlje .

e pa u pravu si sa tim mentalnim ping-pongom i to sa ogledalima cilj i jeste da se napravi nepotrebna zbrka ,da bi se prekinuo lanac misli to je zato shto se prava istina ne moze dostici diskriminatornim umom (umom u kome postojimo ti,ja,bog ,sto ,stolica i milion drugih stvari ...)

Pinot

Sva 4 koraka su u budizmu unutrasnji koraci - vezani za coveka - jedina bitna razlika sto u hriscanstvu postoji crkva kao posrednik izmedju Boga i coveka, da ne kazem kao najveca smetnja u covekovoj spoznaji Boga. Crkva okrece coveka ka sebi umesto ka Bogu - tacnije - okrece ga spolja a ne unutra. Rituali bi trebali da pomognu coveku da prepozna simboliku i zagleda se u sebe - mozda nekome to i pomogne - ali vecina ostaje megicno vezana za fiziku rituala i tu se sve zavrsava. Budisti su oslobodjeni crkve ali je zanimljivo da su mnogi budisti robovi ritualima jos i veci nego sto su hriscani. To samo pokazuje da je istina data ljudima na razlicite nacine ali da covek ko ne moze da vidi istinu zbog sopstvenih limitacija on je nece videti bez obzira u kom obliku da mu je saopste. Covek otvorenog srca ce je videti u svemu - caki da mu niko nishta ne govori.