#unknowing — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #unknowing, aggregated by home.social.
-
The Gaze.
Original artwork by Graham Bates.
#art #drawing #stippling #inkpen #pointillism #mastodonart #mastoart #elongation #existentialennui #dysphoria #grey #mysticalstate #unknowing #meditativeart #androgyny #muse #gaze #melancholia #snapseed #goddess #connection #disconnection
-
Cause and effect
Things have consequences; they are themselves consequences. Sometimes it’s easy to forget this – sometimes things seem merely to be chance, or else they are the result of someone’s action, out of their – or God’s – “sovereign will”. But those ideas are never true. The “chance” occurrence had causes. The cliff fall came about because of heavy rain falling onto fissured and unstable ground – someone was injured because they hadn’t heard the Coastguard warnings, and were walking too close to the base of the cliffs…
Fate? Karma? The will of God? What do these things mean, except attempts to explain to ourselves how things beyond our control could happen to us, or to those we care about? Karma actually seems to me to come closest: the idea that cause and effect are ineluctable – what is sown will be reaped. Karma, though, is usually more naturally understood in its human, ethical dimension:
The Buddha defined karma as intention; whether the intention manifested itself in physical, vocal or mental form, it was the intention alone which had a moral character: good, bad or neutral […] The focus of interest shifted from physical action, involving people and objects in the real world, to psychological process.
Richard Gombrich, Buddhist Precept and Practice.
The Chinese concept of the Tao – “[t]he Tao can be roughly thought of as the ‘flow of the universe’, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced and ordered” (Wikipedia) – seems to me closer to the metaphysical implications. To harmonise one’s will with the Tao, to accept the way things come to be, is to cease to swim against the current, to follow “the watercourse way” (Watts).
The Stoics frequently talked about ‘living in agreement with nature’. This, in part, means that it is within our nature to be social, cooperative beings who want the best for others, and for people around us to thrive. Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, said, ‘All things are parts of one single system, which is called nature; the individual life is good when it is in harmony with nature.’
Bridgid Delaney, Reasons Not to Worry: How to be Stoic in chaotic times.
To live in harmony with nature in this sense requires a willing abdication of knowledge and willfulness. Alan Watts again:
[P]eople try to force issues only when not realizing that it can’t be done—that there is no way of deviating from the watercourse of nature. You may imagine that you are outside, or separate from, the Tao and thus able to follow it or not follow; but this very imagination is itself within the stream, for there is no way other than the Way. Willy-nilly, we are it and go with it. From a strictly logical point of view, this means nothing and gives us no information. Tao is just a name for whatever happens, or, as Lao-tzu put it, “The Tao principle is what happens of itself [tzu-jan].”
This is of course, as I suggested in a recent post here, very close to what has been called, in Christian contexts, “quietism” – which has widely been criticised as heretical, due to its rejection of doctrines around free will and supernatural determinism.
But (and I quoted her in the linked post) Jennifer Kavanagh explains:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
The contemplative embracing of this principle is perhaps most clearly seen in the practice of shikantaza, just sitting, watching for the way to open:
Zazen or enlightenment is not about finding a particular state of mind, for all states of mind are fleeting and cannot be relied upon. When you know who is sitting, you know sitting Buddha. This expression is a bit strange; why not say sitting like a Buddha? I prefer to say sitting Buddha because there is nobody sitting like a Buddha; there is just sitting Buddha. That Buddha never stops sitting, but we must awaken to her presence–not that sitting Buddha is either male or female…
A theme I return to again and again is to just do the work that comes to you. Such an attitude is open-ended in the way that life itself is open. If you give yourself to the way, the way appears and that way is always changing.
Daishin Morgan, Sitting Buddha.
#AlanWatts #BridgidDelaney #contemplative #DaishinMorgan #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #practice #RichardGombrich #stoicism #Tao #unknowing #Wikipedia
-
Cause and effect
Things have consequences; they are themselves consequences. Sometimes it’s easy to forget this – sometimes things seem merely to be chance, or else they are the result of someone’s action, out of their – or God’s – “sovereign will”. But those ideas are never true. The “chance” occurrence had causes. The cliff fall came about because of heavy rain falling onto fissured and unstable ground – someone was injured because they hadn’t heard the Coastguard warnings, and were walking too close to the base of the cliffs…
Fate? Karma? The will of God? What do these things mean, except attempts to explain to ourselves how things beyond our control could happen to us, or to those we care about? Karma actually seems to me to come closest: the idea that cause and effect are ineluctable – what is sown will be reaped. Karma, though, is usually more naturally understood in its human, ethical dimension:
The Buddha defined karma as intention; whether the intention manifested itself in physical, vocal or mental form, it was the intention alone which had a moral character: good, bad or neutral […] The focus of interest shifted from physical action, involving people and objects in the real world, to psychological process.
Richard Gombrich, Buddhist Precept and Practice.
The Chinese concept of the Tao – “[t]he Tao can be roughly thought of as the ‘flow of the universe’, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced and ordered” (Wikipedia) – seems to me closer to the metaphysical implications. To harmonise one’s will with the Tao, to accept the way things come to be, is to cease to swim against the current, to follow “the watercourse way” (Watts).
The Stoics frequently talked about ‘living in agreement with nature’. This, in part, means that it is within our nature to be social, cooperative beings who want the best for others, and for people around us to thrive. Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, said, ‘All things are parts of one single system, which is called nature; the individual life is good when it is in harmony with nature.’
Bridgid Delaney, Reasons Not to Worry: How to be Stoic in chaotic times.
To live in harmony with nature in this sense requires a willing abdication of knowledge and willfulness. Alan Watts again:
[P]eople try to force issues only when not realizing that it can’t be done—that there is no way of deviating from the watercourse of nature. You may imagine that you are outside, or separate from, the Tao and thus able to follow it or not follow; but this very imagination is itself within the stream, for there is no way other than the Way. Willy-nilly, we are it and go with it. From a strictly logical point of view, this means nothing and gives us no information. Tao is just a name for whatever happens, or, as Lao-tzu put it, “The Tao principle is what happens of itself [tzu-jan].”
This is of course, as I suggested in a recent post here, very close to what has been called, in Christian contexts, “quietism” – which has widely been criticised as heretical, due to its rejection of doctrines around free will and supernatural determinism.
But (and I quoted her in the linked post) Jennifer Kavanagh explains:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
The contemplative embracing of this principle is perhaps most clearly seen in the practice of shikantaza, just sitting, watching for the way to open:
Zazen or enlightenment is not about finding a particular state of mind, for all states of mind are fleeting and cannot be relied upon. When you know who is sitting, you know sitting Buddha. This expression is a bit strange; why not say sitting like a Buddha? I prefer to say sitting Buddha because there is nobody sitting like a Buddha; there is just sitting Buddha. That Buddha never stops sitting, but we must awaken to her presence–not that sitting Buddha is either male or female…
A theme I return to again and again is to just do the work that comes to you. Such an attitude is open-ended in the way that life itself is open. If you give yourself to the way, the way appears and that way is always changing.
Daishin Morgan, Sitting Buddha.
#AlanWatts #BridgidDelaney #contemplative #DaishinMorgan #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #practice #RichardGombrich #stoicism #Tao #unknowing #Wikipedia
-
Cause and effect
Things have consequences; they are themselves consequences. Sometimes it’s easy to forget this – sometimes things seem merely to be chance, or else they are the result of someone’s action, out of their – or God’s – “sovereign will”. But those ideas are never true. The “chance” occurrence had causes. The cliff fall came about because of heavy rain falling onto fissured and unstable ground – someone was injured because they hadn’t heard the Coastguard warnings, and were walking too close to the base of the cliffs…
Fate? Karma? The will of God? What do these things mean, except attempts to explain to ourselves how things beyond our control could happen to us, or to those we care about? Karma actually seems to me to come closest: the idea that cause and effect are ineluctable – what is sown will be reaped. Karma, though, is usually more naturally understood in its human, ethical dimension:
The Buddha defined karma as intention; whether the intention manifested itself in physical, vocal or mental form, it was the intention alone which had a moral character: good, bad or neutral […] The focus of interest shifted from physical action, involving people and objects in the real world, to psychological process.
Richard Gombrich, Buddhist Precept and Practice.
The Chinese concept of the Tao – “[t]he Tao can be roughly thought of as the ‘flow of the universe’, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced and ordered” (Wikipedia) – seems to me closer to the metaphysical implications. To harmonise one’s will with the Tao, to accept the way things come to be, is to cease to swim against the current, to follow “the watercourse way” (Watts).
The Stoics frequently talked about ‘living in agreement with nature’. This, in part, means that it is within our nature to be social, cooperative beings who want the best for others, and for people around us to thrive. Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, said, ‘All things are parts of one single system, which is called nature; the individual life is good when it is in harmony with nature.’
Bridgid Delaney, Reasons Not to Worry: How to be Stoic in chaotic times.
To live in harmony with nature in this sense requires a willing abdication of knowledge and willfulness. Alan Watts again:
[P]eople try to force issues only when not realizing that it can’t be done—that there is no way of deviating from the watercourse of nature. You may imagine that you are outside, or separate from, the Tao and thus able to follow it or not follow; but this very imagination is itself within the stream, for there is no way other than the Way. Willy-nilly, we are it and go with it. From a strictly logical point of view, this means nothing and gives us no information. Tao is just a name for whatever happens, or, as Lao-tzu put it, “The Tao principle is what happens of itself [tzu-jan].”
This is of course, as I suggested in a recent post here, very close to what has been called, in Christian contexts, “quietism” – which has widely been criticised as heretical, due to its rejection of doctrines around free will and supernatural determinism.
But (and I quoted her in the linked post) Jennifer Kavanagh explains:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
The contemplative embracing of this principle is perhaps most clearly seen in the practice of shikantaza, just sitting, watching for the way to open:
Zazen or enlightenment is not about finding a particular state of mind, for all states of mind are fleeting and cannot be relied upon. When you know who is sitting, you know sitting Buddha. This expression is a bit strange; why not say sitting like a Buddha? I prefer to say sitting Buddha because there is nobody sitting like a Buddha; there is just sitting Buddha. That Buddha never stops sitting, but we must awaken to her presence–not that sitting Buddha is either male or female…
A theme I return to again and again is to just do the work that comes to you. Such an attitude is open-ended in the way that life itself is open. If you give yourself to the way, the way appears and that way is always changing.
Daishin Morgan, Sitting Buddha.
#AlanWatts #BridgidDelaney #contemplative #DaishinMorgan #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #practice #RichardGombrich #stoicism #Tao #unknowing #Wikipedia
-
Cause and effect
Things have consequences; they are themselves consequences. Sometimes it’s easy to forget this – sometimes things seem merely to be chance, or else they are the result of someone’s action, out of their – or God’s – “sovereign will”. But those ideas are never true. The “chance” occurrence had causes. The cliff fall came about because of heavy rain falling onto fissured and unstable ground – someone was injured because they hadn’t heard the Coastguard warnings, and were walking too close to the base of the cliffs…
Fate? Karma? The will of God? What do these things mean, except attempts to explain to ourselves how things beyond our control could happen to us, or to those we care about? Karma actually seems to me to come closest: the idea that cause and effect are ineluctable – what is sown will be reaped. Karma, though, is usually more naturally understood in its human, ethical dimension:
The Buddha defined karma as intention; whether the intention manifested itself in physical, vocal or mental form, it was the intention alone which had a moral character: good, bad or neutral […] The focus of interest shifted from physical action, involving people and objects in the real world, to psychological process.
Richard Gombrich, Buddhist Precept and Practice.
The Chinese concept of the Tao – “[t]he Tao can be roughly thought of as the ‘flow of the universe’, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced and ordered” (Wikipedia) – seems to me closer to the metaphysical implications. To harmonise one’s will with the Tao, to accept the way things come to be, is to cease to swim against the current, to follow “the watercourse way” (Watts).
The Stoics frequently talked about ‘living in agreement with nature’. This, in part, means that it is within our nature to be social, cooperative beings who want the best for others, and for people around us to thrive. Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, said, ‘All things are parts of one single system, which is called nature; the individual life is good when it is in harmony with nature.’
Bridgid Delaney, Reasons Not to Worry: How to be Stoic in chaotic times.
To live in harmony with nature in this sense requires a willing abdication of knowledge and willfulness. Alan Watts again:
[P]eople try to force issues only when not realizing that it can’t be done—that there is no way of deviating from the watercourse of nature. You may imagine that you are outside, or separate from, the Tao and thus able to follow it or not follow; but this very imagination is itself within the stream, for there is no way other than the Way. Willy-nilly, we are it and go with it. From a strictly logical point of view, this means nothing and gives us no information. Tao is just a name for whatever happens, or, as Lao-tzu put it, “The Tao principle is what happens of itself [tzu-jan].”
This is of course, as I suggested in a recent post here, very close to what has been called, in Christian contexts, “quietism” – which has widely been criticised as heretical, due to its rejection of doctrines around free will and supernatural determinism.
But (and I quoted her in the linked post) Jennifer Kavanagh explains:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
The contemplative embracing of this principle is perhaps most clearly seen in the practice of shikantaza, just sitting, watching for the way to open:
Zazen or enlightenment is not about finding a particular state of mind, for all states of mind are fleeting and cannot be relied upon. When you know who is sitting, you know sitting Buddha. This expression is a bit strange; why not say sitting like a Buddha? I prefer to say sitting Buddha because there is nobody sitting like a Buddha; there is just sitting Buddha. That Buddha never stops sitting, but we must awaken to her presence–not that sitting Buddha is either male or female…
A theme I return to again and again is to just do the work that comes to you. Such an attitude is open-ended in the way that life itself is open. If you give yourself to the way, the way appears and that way is always changing.
Daishin Morgan, Sitting Buddha.
#AlanWatts #BridgidDelaney #contemplative #DaishinMorgan #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #practice #RichardGombrich #stoicism #Tao #unknowing #Wikipedia
-
Cause and effect
Things have consequences; they are themselves consequences. Sometimes it’s easy to forget this – sometimes things seem merely to be chance, or else they are the result of someone’s action, out of their – or God’s – “sovereign will”. But those ideas are never true. The “chance” occurrence had causes. The cliff fall came about because of heavy rain falling onto fissured and unstable ground – someone was injured because they hadn’t heard the Coastguard warnings, and were walking too close to the base of the cliffs…
Fate? Karma? The will of God? What do these things mean, except attempts to explain to ourselves how things beyond our control could happen to us, or to those we care about? Karma actually seems to me to come closest: the idea that cause and effect are ineluctable – what is sown will be reaped. Karma, though, is usually more naturally understood in its human, ethical dimension:
The Buddha defined karma as intention; whether the intention manifested itself in physical, vocal or mental form, it was the intention alone which had a moral character: good, bad or neutral […] The focus of interest shifted from physical action, involving people and objects in the real world, to psychological process.
Richard Gombrich, Buddhist Precept and Practice.
The Chinese concept of the Tao – “[t]he Tao can be roughly thought of as the ‘flow of the universe’, or as some essence or pattern behind the natural world that keeps the Universe balanced and ordered” (Wikipedia) – seems to me closer to the metaphysical implications. To harmonise one’s will with the Tao, to accept the way things come to be, is to cease to swim against the current, to follow “the watercourse way” (Watts).
The Stoics frequently talked about ‘living in agreement with nature’. This, in part, means that it is within our nature to be social, cooperative beings who want the best for others, and for people around us to thrive. Zeno of Citium, the founder of Stoicism, said, ‘All things are parts of one single system, which is called nature; the individual life is good when it is in harmony with nature.’
Bridgid Delaney, Reasons Not to Worry: How to be Stoic in chaotic times.
To live in harmony with nature in this sense requires a willing abdication of knowledge and willfulness. Alan Watts again:
[P]eople try to force issues only when not realizing that it can’t be done—that there is no way of deviating from the watercourse of nature. You may imagine that you are outside, or separate from, the Tao and thus able to follow it or not follow; but this very imagination is itself within the stream, for there is no way other than the Way. Willy-nilly, we are it and go with it. From a strictly logical point of view, this means nothing and gives us no information. Tao is just a name for whatever happens, or, as Lao-tzu put it, “The Tao principle is what happens of itself [tzu-jan].”
This is of course, as I suggested in a recent post here, very close to what has been called, in Christian contexts, “quietism” – which has widely been criticised as heretical, due to its rejection of doctrines around free will and supernatural determinism.
But (and I quoted her in the linked post) Jennifer Kavanagh explains:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
The contemplative embracing of this principle is perhaps most clearly seen in the practice of shikantaza, just sitting, watching for the way to open:
Zazen or enlightenment is not about finding a particular state of mind, for all states of mind are fleeting and cannot be relied upon. When you know who is sitting, you know sitting Buddha. This expression is a bit strange; why not say sitting like a Buddha? I prefer to say sitting Buddha because there is nobody sitting like a Buddha; there is just sitting Buddha. That Buddha never stops sitting, but we must awaken to her presence–not that sitting Buddha is either male or female…
A theme I return to again and again is to just do the work that comes to you. Such an attitude is open-ended in the way that life itself is open. If you give yourself to the way, the way appears and that way is always changing.
Daishin Morgan, Sitting Buddha.
#AlanWatts #BridgidDelaney #contemplative #DaishinMorgan #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #practice #RichardGombrich #stoicism #Tao #unknowing #Wikipedia
-
2/
And I think the anonymous 14th c. #contemplative author of *The Cloud of Unknowing* understood our mind's conscious attention works that way. Attention is a kind of "mental light" that extends towards a thought or phenomenal object and illuminates it and touches it and grasps it.
And he recommended that we sometimes practice "letting go" of our grasped thoughts and mental objects.
That is what #unknowing is.
-
Atheism and quietism
Quietism is a term with an odd and surprisingly contentious history. It is used of both a tendency in philosophy and a direction within Christian contemplative thought and practice. (You can find well- linked Wikipedia articles on the philosophy here, and the contemplative term here.)
But I believe the insight underlying both these Western traditions of stillness and unknowing can be found far farther back in history.
Chao-Chou [Zhaozhou Congshen] asked, “What is the Tao?”
The master [Nan-ch’üan] replied, “Your ordinary consciousness is the Tao.”
“How can one return into accord with it?”
“By intending to accord you immediately deviate.”
“But without intention, how can one know the Tao?”
“The Tao,” said the master, “belongs neither to knowing nor to not knowing. Knowing is false understanding; not knowing is blind ignorance. If you really understand the Tao beyond doubt, it’s like the empty sky. Why drag in right and wrong?”
(quoted by Alan Watts in Tao: The Watercourse Way)
In the Zen practice of shikantaza (just sitting) there is nothing to achieve: no particular state of mind, no exercise of concentration, nothing to get rid of. In doing nothing there is perfect freedom.
None of this requires a supernatural dimension at all; that fact seems to have been one of the reasons Christian quietism was condemned as heretical. Unknowing is a fundamental admission, the very underpinning of scepticism. Stevie Wonder wrote: “When you believe in things that you don’t understand, then you suffer – superstition ain’t the way…” Jennifer Kavanagh:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
Unknowing, and the abandonment of the need to know, to possess knowledge, is in a sense the gate to the liminal lands I wrote about in my last post. It is also the starting point of the scientific method, and the heart’s defence against all kinds of creeds.
#AlanWatts #atheism #contemplative #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #Tao #unknowing #ZhaozhouCongshen
-
Atheism and quietism
Quietism is a term with an odd and surprisingly contentious history. It is used of both a tendency in philosophy and a direction within Christian contemplative thought and practice. (You can find well- linked Wikipedia articles on the philosophy here, and the contemplative term here.)
But I believe the insight underlying both these Western traditions of stillness and unknowing can be found far farther back in history.
Chao-Chou [Zhaozhou Congshen] asked, “What is the Tao?”
The master [Nan-ch’üan] replied, “Your ordinary consciousness is the Tao.”
“How can one return into accord with it?”
“By intending to accord you immediately deviate.”
“But without intention, how can one know the Tao?”
“The Tao,” said the master, “belongs neither to knowing nor to not knowing. Knowing is false understanding; not knowing is blind ignorance. If you really understand the Tao beyond doubt, it’s like the empty sky. Why drag in right and wrong?”
(quoted by Alan Watts in Tao: The Watercourse Way)
In the Zen practice of shikantaza (just sitting) there is nothing to achieve: no particular state of mind, no exercise of concentration, nothing to get rid of. In doing nothing there is perfect freedom.
None of this requires a supernatural dimension at all; that fact seems to have been one of the reasons Christian quietism was condemned as heretical. Unknowing is a fundamental admission, the very underpinning of scepticism. Stevie Wonder wrote: “When you believe in things that you don’t understand, then you suffer – superstition ain’t the way…” Jennifer Kavanagh:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
Unknowing, and the abandonment of the need to know, to possess knowledge, is in a sense the gate to the liminal lands I wrote about in my last post. It is also the starting point of the scientific method, and the heart’s defence against all kinds of creeds.
#AlanWatts #atheism #contemplative #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #Tao #unknowing #ZhaozhouCongshen
-
Atheism and quietism
Quietism is a term with an odd and surprisingly contentious history. It is used of both a tendency in philosophy and a direction within Christian contemplative thought and practice. (You can find well- linked Wikipedia articles on the philosophy here, and the contemplative term here.)
But I believe the insight underlying both these Western traditions of stillness and unknowing can be found far farther back in history.
Chao-Chou [Zhaozhou Congshen] asked, “What is the Tao?”
The master [Nan-ch’üan] replied, “Your ordinary consciousness is the Tao.”
“How can one return into accord with it?”
“By intending to accord you immediately deviate.”
“But without intention, how can one know the Tao?”
“The Tao,” said the master, “belongs neither to knowing nor to not knowing. Knowing is false understanding; not knowing is blind ignorance. If you really understand the Tao beyond doubt, it’s like the empty sky. Why drag in right and wrong?”
(quoted by Alan Watts in Tao: The Watercourse Way)
In the Zen practice of shikantaza (just sitting) there is nothing to achieve: no particular state of mind, no exercise of concentration, nothing to get rid of. In doing nothing there is perfect freedom.
None of this requires a supernatural dimension at all; that fact seems to have been one of the reasons Christian quietism was condemned as heretical. Unknowing is a fundamental admission, the very underpinning of scepticism. Stevie Wonder wrote: “When you believe in things that you don’t understand, then you suffer – superstition ain’t the way…” Jennifer Kavanagh:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
Unknowing, and the abandonment of the need to know, to possess knowledge, is in a sense the gate to the liminal lands I wrote about in my last post. It is also the starting point of the scientific method, and the heart’s defence against all kinds of creeds.
#AlanWatts #atheism #contemplative #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #Tao #unknowing #ZhaozhouCongshen
-
Atheism and quietism
Quietism is a term with an odd and surprisingly contentious history. It is used of both a tendency in philosophy and a direction within Christian contemplative thought and practice. (You can find well- linked Wikipedia articles on the philosophy here, and the contemplative term here.)
But I believe the insight underlying both these Western traditions of stillness and unknowing can be found far farther back in history.
Chao-Chou [Zhaozhou Congshen] asked, “What is the Tao?”
The master [Nan-ch’üan] replied, “Your ordinary consciousness is the Tao.”
“How can one return into accord with it?”
“By intending to accord you immediately deviate.”
“But without intention, how can one know the Tao?”
“The Tao,” said the master, “belongs neither to knowing nor to not knowing. Knowing is false understanding; not knowing is blind ignorance. If you really understand the Tao beyond doubt, it’s like the empty sky. Why drag in right and wrong?”
(quoted by Alan Watts in Tao: The Watercourse Way)
In the Zen practice of shikantaza (just sitting) there is nothing to achieve: no particular state of mind, no exercise of concentration, nothing to get rid of. In doing nothing there is perfect freedom.
None of this requires a supernatural dimension at all; that fact seems to have been one of the reasons Christian quietism was condemned as heretical. Unknowing is a fundamental admission, the very underpinning of scepticism. Stevie Wonder wrote: “When you believe in things that you don’t understand, then you suffer – superstition ain’t the way…” Jennifer Kavanagh:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
Unknowing, and the abandonment of the need to know, to possess knowledge, is in a sense the gate to the liminal lands I wrote about in my last post. It is also the starting point of the scientific method, and the heart’s defence against all kinds of creeds.
#AlanWatts #atheism #contemplative #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #Tao #unknowing #ZhaozhouCongshen
-
Atheism and quietism
Quietism is a term with an odd and surprisingly contentious history. It is used of both a tendency in philosophy and a direction within Christian contemplative thought and practice. (You can find well- linked Wikipedia articles on the philosophy here, and the contemplative term here.)
But I believe the insight underlying both these Western traditions of stillness and unknowing can be found far farther back in history.
Chao-Chou [Zhaozhou Congshen] asked, “What is the Tao?”
The master [Nan-ch’üan] replied, “Your ordinary consciousness is the Tao.”
“How can one return into accord with it?”
“By intending to accord you immediately deviate.”
“But without intention, how can one know the Tao?”
“The Tao,” said the master, “belongs neither to knowing nor to not knowing. Knowing is false understanding; not knowing is blind ignorance. If you really understand the Tao beyond doubt, it’s like the empty sky. Why drag in right and wrong?”
(quoted by Alan Watts in Tao: The Watercourse Way)
In the Zen practice of shikantaza (just sitting) there is nothing to achieve: no particular state of mind, no exercise of concentration, nothing to get rid of. In doing nothing there is perfect freedom.
None of this requires a supernatural dimension at all; that fact seems to have been one of the reasons Christian quietism was condemned as heretical. Unknowing is a fundamental admission, the very underpinning of scepticism. Stevie Wonder wrote: “When you believe in things that you don’t understand, then you suffer – superstition ain’t the way…” Jennifer Kavanagh:
Welcoming uncertainty, embracing it, does not mean commending ignorance or trying not to know; it’s not about the rejection of knowledge. It’s not about the negation of the intellect, but its enhancement. It is a recognition that cognitive thinking cannot reach everything, an understanding that the scientific and spiritual approaches are not incompatible, just different, complementary, dimensions. Not either/or but both/and.
Unknowing, and the abandonment of the need to know, to possess knowledge, is in a sense the gate to the liminal lands I wrote about in my last post. It is also the starting point of the scientific method, and the heart’s defence against all kinds of creeds.
#AlanWatts #atheism #contemplative #JenniferKavanagh #philosophy #Tao #unknowing #ZhaozhouCongshen
-
I offered in a #Zen discussion today — on the topic of Zen's "irreverence" or iconoclasm, on one hand, and Zen's calls for respect and care for the teachings and for one another, on the other — how #Socrates was seen in his day as both a "gadfly" for provoking uncertainty and #unknowing in others, and as a "midwife" for the way he nurtured and tested the life that's born out of the place of not knowing.
-
[in reply to a prompt for lovely sentences:]
The 14th c. author of *The Cloud of #Unknowing* understood that the divine, while it cannot be held in thought, can effectively hold us, in an immediate and sober and loving experience. A modern translation:
But whenever reason fails, then love delights in coming alive and learning to be in play.
The Middle English:
But ever when reason defaileth then list love live and learn for to play.
.
(from his *An epistle of discretion of stirrings*) -
The 14th c. author of *The Cloud of #Unknowing* understands that the divine, while it cannot be held in thought, can effectively hold us in immediate and sober and loving experience. A modern translation:
But whenever reason fails, then love delights in coming alive and learning to be in play.
The Middle English:
But ever when reason defaileth then list love live and learn for to play.
.
(from his *An epistle of discretion of stirrings*) -
The anonymous Christian author of *The Cloud of #Unknowing* offers the understanding that our very wish to seek the Divine is placed in us by the Divine.
I read an essay yesterday outlining what appears a similar perspective in Ayatollah Mutahhari (d. 1979):
"Mutahhari develops the argument that the creature of God is the act of God, the act of God is itself one of God’s modes and not a second entity. So God’s creatures are in fact manifestations of His effulgence."
-
I have two fav. authors—the anonymous 14th c. Christian author of *The Cloud of #Unknowing* and the 13th c. Japanese #Zen teacher Dōgen.
On opposite sides of the world and members of very different religious communities, they wrote deeply similar instructions for how to #meditate. And over time they each made revisions in their instructions—and they made the same revisions.
They were doing the same thing and making the same realizations.
Together they have helped me as a meditator. A lot.
-
2.
The anonymous 14th c. Christian author of *The Cloud of #Unknowing* uses a #Christian vocabulary:
[1]
Utterly in this practice … is all mindful analysis carried out within any of your natural senses put far behind and fully forgotten for fear of any fantasy or faked falsehood that might befall you in this life, which in this practice would defoul the naked feeling of your blind being and pull you away from the value of this practice.... -
I've been looking at Plato lately, as a #contemplative. And I'm seeing that in the Allegory of the Cave, where the person is initially blinded by the sunlight, the verb Plato uses is *aporein*, which means to be in a state of *aporia*.
And *aporia* is used for the kind of #unknowing that Socrates provoked in the people he talked with, in helping them to realize they didn't really know things they thought they did.
(I have an essay on Socrates along those lines, here—)
-
Yes. My dissertation compared #meditation/ contemplation instructions in #Zen teacher Dōgen and the Christian author of *The Cloud of #Unknowing.*
Opposite sides of the world, very different religious vocabularies, and very similar practices.
And, over time each made some modifications in their instructions — and they made the same modifications.
They were practicing, and learning, the same realization.
-
I came across a recording last night of a podcast I did a few years ago on 𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝐶𝑙𝑜𝑢𝑑 𝑜𝑓 𝑈𝑛𝑘𝑛𝑜𝑤𝑖𝑛𝑔 (~1 hour), titled "Zen and the Art of #Unknowing with Dave Collins."
I mention #Zen materials in it a few times, but it's mostly about the Cloud.
(The podcast was part of the series, "Poststructuralist Tent Revival." I'm seeing the other episodes of that series are available on Soundcloud.)