Zen wisdom of the moment
ordosclan
tootsie roll lolly pop?"
I reply: "Is the pop hitting the tongue, or is the tongue hitting the
pop?"
A zen master would think when licking a lolly pop: "What is the lolly
pop?" He continues to lick, till there is nothing left. The idea of
pop has fallen away. He tosses the stick aside. The lolly pop has
become him.
You see, one may erroneously attach meaning to the lolly pop, but when
the pop has dissapeared, the stick is meaningless... We throw it
away. Why not eat the stick part? Because we are no longer attached
to it.
When we burp, we often retaste what we "just ate". Yet we do not
enjoy it the same. Food is unlike whiskey, which tastes as good
coming up, as it does, going down.
When we eat the sub sandwhich, we remove the tootpick before eating.
Where does the importance of the toothpick go without the sandwitch?
It falls away, as meaningless. Without the sandwitch, the toothpick
is meaningless. But the sandwitch without the toothpick, is just "a
mess".
When I eat something disagreeable, am I passing gas or is gas passing
through me?
MTV: Whats the obsession people have with watching live dance music
being played on a video, done by cartoons?
hal
>Someone asks: "How many licks does it take to get to the middle of a
>tootsie roll lolly pop?"
That is not nearly as meaningful to life as knowing just how many
woods a woodchuck can chuck, that is, if a woodchuck really could
chuck wood.
>
>I reply: "Is the pop hitting the tongue, or is the tongue hitting the
>pop?"
neither, they are meeting in the middle
>
>A zen master would think when licking a lolly pop: "What is the lolly
>pop?" He continues to lick, till there is nothing left. The idea of
>pop has fallen away. He tosses the stick aside. The lolly pop has
>become him.
He sucks. Therefore the lollipop sucks. But the question remains,
does he really suck the pop, or does the pop suck him?
>
>You see, one may erroneously attach meaning to the lolly pop, but when
>the pop has dissapeared, the stick is meaningless... We throw it
>away. Why not eat the stick part? Because we are no longer attached
>to it.
No, because wood tastes really bad. And you get splinters in your
tongue.
>
>When we burp, we often retaste what we "just ate". Yet we do not
>enjoy it the same. Food is unlike whiskey, which tastes as good
>coming up, as it does, going down.
It does? Man, you need to try some whiskey that doesn't taste like
vomit.
>
>When we eat the sub sandwhich, we remove the tootpick before eating.
>Where does the importance of the toothpick go without the sandwitch?
>It falls away, as meaningless. Without the sandwitch, the toothpick
>is meaningless. But the sandwitch without the toothpick, is just "a
>mess".
The toothpick is just a piece of wood. Remember, wood tastes bad.
And don't forget the splinter things.
>
>When I eat something disagreeable, am I passing gas or is gas passing
>through me?
Neither. Your physical self is passing around the gas.
>
>MTV: Whats the obsession people have with watching live dance music
>being played on a video, done by cartoons?
Sex. It's all about sex. Just like lollipops.
Hal
Herbert Cannon
promise to stay on your medication?
ordosclan <ordo...@china.com> wrote in message
news:50800ec5.01102...@posting.google.com...
speaks to animals
rec.martial-arts.
Hi there.
ordosclan <ordo...@china.com> wrote in message
news:50800ec5.01102...@posting.google.com...
YoJimbo
>
>And a big warm alt.philosophy.zen welcome to all our friends at
>rec.martial-arts.
>
>Hi there.
Ohhh nooooo!!!
Don't you guys get involved in this, we've already got enough wackos here.
Yes, I realize Turyian cross-posted this.
That's why we're gonna beat him up.
JS
Shuurai
>
>Someone asks: "How many licks does it take to get to the middle of a
>tootsie roll lolly pop?"
The answer, according to the all-knowing Mr. Owl, is three.
>I reply: "Is the pop hitting the tongue, or is the tongue hitting the
>pop?"
The answer is "yes" to that question.
>A zen master would think when licking a lolly pop: "What is the lolly
>pop?" He continues to lick, till there is nothing left. The idea of
>pop has fallen away. He tosses the stick aside. The lolly pop has
>become him.
No, the lolly pop has simply been dissolved by the friction created by the
masters tongue, along with the digestive qualities of his saliva. It still
exists as a thin and sticky syrup coating his tongue and throat, and mixed
with the acids of his stomach. The sugar from this fliud will be absorbed
by his body to produce energy, the rest will be likely be excreted later.
A real Zen master would not "toss the stick aside", he would do the honorable
thing and take the stick to a trash can and dispose of it properly.
Shows what you know about Zen.
>You see, one may erroneously attach meaning to the lolly pop, but when
>the pop has dissapeared, the stick is meaningless... We throw it
>away. Why not eat the stick part? Because we are no longer attached
>to it.
Why is the stick meaningless? Are you suggesting that the stick only has
meaning when it suits a human being? The stick has meaning in and of itself,
as a stick. It has served its purpose and is no longer needed.
We don't eat the stick because the stick is paper and therefore not very
good for eating. We COULD eat the stick if we wanted to.
>When we burp, we often retaste what we "just ate". Yet we do not
>enjoy it the same. Food is unlike whiskey, which tastes as good
>coming up, as it does, going down.
I don't know where you're getting your whiskey from, but I suggest you try
another brand.
When we burp, we are tasting what we ate but it is mixed with strong stomach
acids and it is changed by the digestion process.
>When we eat the sub sandwhich, we remove the tootpick before eating.
Obviously.
>Where does the importance of the toothpick go without the sandwitch?
It's still a toothpick, and could easily serve in the same manner that it
has always served. It could be used to hold another sandwich together, or
to pick ones teeth. Even without a person to utilize it, it would still
exist as a toothpick. The fact that we do or do not acknowledge the toothpick
as being a toothpick does not change what the toothpick is.
>It falls away, as meaningless. Without the sandwitch, the toothpick
>is meaningless.
No, the toothpick does not rely on you to acknowledge it as a toothpick in
order for it to be what it is. The term "toothpick" is just a name for a
concept that we have for a small thin piece of wood. It would still be what
it is regardless of what we called it, or if we called it nothing at all.
>But the sandwitch without the toothpick, is just "a mess".
Wrong. It's still a sandwich. Some sandwiches become messy without a
toothpick, others do not. It depends on the skill of the sandwich maker and
the size and type of sandwich.
>When I eat something disagreeable, am I passing gas or is gas passing
>through me?
You are turning food into gas by way of your digestive system.
>MTV: Whats the obsession people have with watching live dance music
>being played on a video, done by cartoons?
If it's on MTV it's all about sex.
YoJimbo
>
>
>"YoJimbo" <Jim.S...@Uchsc.edu> wrote in message
>news:9r9a16$u7$1...@Crestone.UCHSC.edu...
>> In article <9r804c$d25$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk>,
>Spea...@totallyphoney.com says...
>> >
>> >And a big warm alt.philosophy.zen welcome to all our friends at
>> >rec.martial-arts.
>> >
>> >Hi there.
>>
>> Ohhh nooooo!!!
>> Don't you guys get involved in this, we've already got enough wackos here.
>> Yes, I realize Turyian cross-posted this.
>> That's why we're gonna beat him up.
>> JS
>>
>
>here...and don't think we can't see through your reverse-psychology trick.
>
>We once had a guy who cross-posted complete drivel for months just to pull
>over the weak egos who wanted to help. I think we could probably still see
>Karl Seniors' remains on alt.consciousness.4th-way.
Heh
While we're on the topic, you know why internet buddhism groups suck big time?
Well, it's the fact that they're typical internet groups-
lots of well-meaning but completely clueless individuals, looking for some
good feelings with like-minded folks who will quickly agree with whatever
silly notions they put out. It's a bit like group psycho-therapy sessions
for lonely people.
And the current crop of books, by-and-large, supports this self-indulgence.
Supposed "certified" teachers write pop osychology like "you're okay, just as
you are" and "ordinary life is the way" and the pop crowd eats it up.
You can tell there's a serious problem with pop buddhism just by comparing
the current crop of material with some of the classic golden-age stuff.
It's as big a difference as night and day.
These things are the things you guys in these groups *should* be discussing.
JS
mdschwers
"things" (the lollypop, the stick, and the tootsie roll center) as finite
definitions of "things" and not "events". Although it should not be
considered a "mistake", our structured system of oral and written
communication neatly defines all things, to include out even our own past
live events as singular articles, void of the fluid events of our lives that
created them. It is upon this premise that Zen choose not to collectively
organize Zen as an individual "religion". Western Culture chooses to define
events, things, persons, organizations, etc in finite and concrete terms.
We rely on these definitions as a source of constant assurance that we are
able to maintain control (or at least the appearance thereof.) Zen offers
to enlighten the mind and open human thoughts to definitions of living
events rather than simply "being".
Rather than ask "How may licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll
center of the tootsie pop?", ask instead: "What lies at the center (other
than the tootsie roll filling) of the tootsie pop and what motivates us to
find it.?
"Shuurai" <nos...@newsranger.com> wrote in message
news:k3YB7.285$xS6...@www.newsranger.com...
Gleason Pace
> self-indulgence.
> > Supposed "certified" teachers write pop osychology like "you're okay, just
> as
> > you are" and "ordinary life is the way" and the pop crowd eats it up.
This is, of course, a very popular message. It is amazing how much money
you can make telling people this sort of thing. You can do even better telling
folks with middle class guilt that it is ok to have money.
Not that it isn't ok to be ordinary and have money. It is when you start needing
somebody to tell you that it is ok, and you become willing to spend significant
sums to hear this message that things become kinky.
> > You can tell there's a serious problem with pop buddhism just by comparing
> > the current crop of material with some of the classic golden-age stuff.
> > It's as big a difference as night and day.
Absolutely. The kinky stuff begins when we start wanting people to tell us that
there really is no difference, our pablum zen is just the same as ancient zen
used to be, and where it is different, why it is even better.
> > These things are the things you guys in these groups *should* be
> discussing.
> > JS
Why discuss it? We can be as we like, as long as we are not pretending
to be what we aren't, and seeking reasurance.
>
> Your post was well-meant but typical of unlike-minded folk.
How do you know it was well meant? Actually, I thought it was fairly untypical.
Noah Sombrero
genein
"Gleason Pace" <somb...@home.com> wrote in message
news:7ACC7.1838$ib.10...@news1.sttln1.wa.home.com...
*stand back people* allow a certified noah tamer to take over....as soon as i
"suit-up" that is.....and don't do this at home kids......
g.
Gleason Pace
> >
>
> *stand back people* allow a certified noah tamer to take over....as soon as i
> "suit-up" that is.....and don't do this at home kids......
You mean that Noah is somehow no longer tame after your last session with him?
Ha. Seems to me it is the tamer that ends up in the cage when tamer meets Noah.
Um, was there something you wanted to say, g?
Noah Sombrero
speaks to animals
Gleason Pace <somb...@home.com> wrote in message
news:7ACC7.1838$ib.10...@news1.sttln1.wa.home.com...
> > self-indulgence.
> > > Supposed "certified" teachers write pop osychology like
"you're okay, just
> > as
> > > you are" and "ordinary life is the way" and the pop crowd
eats it up.
>
> This is, of course, a very popular message. It is amazing how
much money
> you can make telling people this sort of thing. You can do even
better telling
> folks with middle class guilt that it is ok to have money.
>
you can also make lots of money and power - and this is a time
honoured tradition - by proposing a tough road of guilt and
penance for sins.
s
speaks to animals
mdschwers <mdsc...@email.msn.com> wrote in message
news:OD1V9tnXBHA.1428@cpimsnntpa03...
> >
> Rather than ask "How may licks does it take to get to the
tootsie roll
> center of the tootsie pop?", ask instead: "What lies at the
center (other
> than the tootsie roll filling) of the tootsie pop and what
motivates us to
> find it.?
>
Surely, rather, the question we should be asking is "What the fuck
is a
tootsie pop?"
s
genein
> > > Noah Sombrero
> > >
> >
> > *stand back people* allow a certified noah tamer to take over....as soon as
i
> > "suit-up" that is.....and don't do this at home kids......
>
> You mean that Noah is somehow no longer tame after your last session with
him?
> Ha. Seems to me it is the tamer that ends up in the cage when tamer meets
Noah.
as all zenners know there is no in or out so what could it matter....
>
> Um, was there something you wanted to say, g?
not really...i notice this newsgroup was becoming a bit dead so decided to poke
a stick into some of the cages..... :-)))
? when did we pick up rec.martial-arts?
g.
>
> Noah Sombrero
>
>
>
Gleason Pace
>
> not really...i notice this newsgroup was becoming a bit dead so decided to poke
> a stick into some of the cages..... :-)))
From my perspective it looks like the stick is poking out of the cage. Spose a person
could poke the world with a stick and get a response?
> ? when did we pick up rec.martial-arts?
A blessing from the great crossposter in the sky.
Noah Sombrero
Gleason Pace
> honoured tradition - by proposing a tough road of guilt and
> penance for sins.
Seems to me that there are some genuinely spiritual sorts who
have gone that way. But the way is difficult, so that path is
loosing popularity.
The pablum path is a snap so modern folks love to travel there.
But genuinely spiritual types are don't go that way.
Noah Sombrero
Shuurai
>
>You're making the classic western "mistake" of categorizing/labeling the
>"things" (the lollypop, the stick, and the tootsie roll center) as finite
>definitions of "things" and not "events". Although it should not be
>considered a "mistake", our structured system of oral and written
>communication neatly defines all things, to include out even our own past
>live events as singular articles, void of the fluid events of our lives that
>created them. It is upon this premise that Zen choose not to collectively
>organize Zen as an individual "religion". Western Culture chooses to define
>events, things, persons, organizations, etc in finite and concrete terms.
>We rely on these definitions as a source of constant assurance that we are
>able to maintain control (or at least the appearance thereof.) Zen offers
>to enlighten the mind and open human thoughts to definitions of living
>events rather than simply "being".
You're making the classic Zen mistake of over-analyzing things that really
need no analysis whatsoever. A stick is a stick. There is nothing more to
it, other than what we use it for. This, by the way, is not in any way meant
to be a "zen" argument - it's merely MY argument about something that may or
may not be related to Zen.
>Rather than ask "How may licks does it take to get to the tootsie roll
>center of the tootsie pop?", ask instead: "What lies at the center (other
>than the tootsie roll filling) of the tootsie pop and what motivates us to
>find it.?
To ask that question would be absurd. The goal does not matter with the
tootsie pop - it is the journey that is important.
speaks to animals
Perhaps you don't go that way - that is up to you - but who knows
who is genuinely spiritual and who is not?
genein
> > > Um, was there something you wanted to say, g?
> >
> > not really...i notice this newsgroup was becoming a bit dead so decided to
poke
> > a stick into some of the cages..... :-)))
>
> From my perspective it looks like the stick is poking out of the cage.
very perceptive of you....
Spose a person
> could poke the world with a stick and get a response?
......but this is our world right here in this moment and it seems i did get a
response.
> > ? when did we pick up rec.martial-arts?
>
> A blessing from the great crossposter in the sky.
i will offer the usual sacrifices when i am done posting.....
g.
>
> Noah Sombrero
>
>
GOU RONIN®
<Spea...@totallyphoney.com> scribbled with their crayola:
>but who knows who is genuinely spiritual and who is not?
I do.
GOU RONIN® - The Unforgiven...
ICQ# - 49024165
AOL IM - GouRonin
mIRC - #americankenpo - On Dal.net
http://members.tripod.com/~kenpo_ronin/houseofronin.html
YoJimbo
>
>> > And the current crop of books, by-and-large, supports this
>> self-indulgence.
>> > Supposed "certified" teachers write pop osychology like "you're okay, just
>> as
>> > you are" and "ordinary life is the way" and the pop crowd eats it up.
>
>This is, of course, a very popular message. It is amazing how much money
>you can make telling people this sort of thing. You can do even better telling
>folks with middle class guilt that it is ok to have money.
There's a lot of that; middle-class guilt being addressed by the current crop of
middle-class "zen teachers", yes. Yups with cars and houses that nonetheless are
personal wrecks. Hell, it's the story of the American middle and upper class.
Of course, the American "zen teachers" come from largely the
same background.
>Not that it isn't ok to be ordinary and have money. It is when you start needing
>somebody to tell you that it is ok, and you become willing to spend significant
>sums to hear this message that things become kinky.
Well, having money never was the main problem anyway. Poor people are just as
screwed up perceptually as rich folk. The problem with the middle-to-upper-class
crowd is that now they've accumulated all these possessions and their lives
are still a train wreck. Traditional churches don't work for many of 'em, so
they turn to the pop new-age culture for some answers.
>> > You can tell there's a serious problem with pop buddhism just by comparing
>> > the current crop of material with some of the classic golden-age stuff.
>> > It's as big a difference as night and day.
>
>Absolutely. The kinky stuff begins when we start wanting people to tell us that
>there really is no difference, our pablum zen is just the same as ancient zen
>used to be, and where it is different, why it is even better.
Yeah, I'm sure many will tell you it's even better!
The truth is, there's very little appreciation of the backdrop of the old
classic zen teachers, which was a thorough grounding in mahayana metaphysics.
Until somebody has taken the time to ground themself the same way, there's
no possible way to be on the same page with the old dudes.
Coming to "zen" via american pop culture is a violent wrenching out of context.
That's precisely why the current crop of zen books is largely worthless.
There's no ground. People take an old classic saying like Baso's "ordinary
mind is the way", and they think he's talking about their regular thinking
being a-okay, if they'll just realize it :-))))). Unfortunately, "ordinary mind"
is a technical term in ancient zen culture; it has nothing to do with these
new-age speculations. You'll find a lot of references about "dying and coming
back to life" in ancient buddhism (similar to Christianity and other world
religions, BTW) which bespeaks of something a bit more fundamental in a perceptual
shift than merely learning to appreciate how to "live in the now" or "be ordinary".
Hell, people have tried these things and still fall on their faces.
The pop stuff sounds good but it's just fluff.
>> > These things are the things you guys in these groups *should* be
>> discussing.
>> > JS
>
>Why discuss it? We can be as we like, as long as we are not pretending
>to be what we aren't, and seeking reasurance.
Heh
Yip, sounds like the titles to a couple books I could name.
Pitiful.
This is probably the last post I'll address on this topic.
You sound like a sensible guy, but damn, round your friends up and
herd their butts back to the alt.zen groups, will ya?
I see a bunch of alt-zenners are here now and it's cluttering up the group.
We've already got more than our share of idiots in rec.martial-arts, thank you,
we certainly don't need a big influx from other groups.
Later,
JS
Gleason Pace
> Perhaps you don't go that way - that is up to you - but who knows
> who is genuinely spiritual and who is not?
Oh, good. The old "how dare you think you know anything" argument.
The truth is that we all dare. But some of us don't dare say so.
Noah Sombrero
Gleason Pace
>
> I do.
Except this guy. See the difference?
Noah Sombrero
Gleason Pace
> You sound like a sensible guy, but damn, round your friends up and
> herd their butts back to the alt.zen groups, will ya?
> I see a bunch of alt-zenners are here now and it's cluttering up the group.
> We've already got more than our share of idiots in rec.martial-arts, thank you,
> we certainly don't need a big influx from other groups.
Actually, we at apz are, for the most part, very much in agreement with your desire
to squash the crossposters. We just rid ourselves of a massive crossposting infection
in a trial by fire. Funny thing, as soon as we got the fire going, the crossposters
disappeared. Not sure how this thread got started.
The other flavors of alt.Zen, Taoism, etc. are a different story. If you have an infection,
try starting a fire.
Noah Sombrero
speaks to animals
Glad to have brought some pleasure to your otherwise miserable
life. Happy to do so.
However, the argument you choose to argue against has very little
to do with the statement I wrote in. We all can and do dare to
imagine we know something. Nature of thinking I believe.
But do we really think we can determine other people's spiritual
conscience? That we can from a distance say 'yes' to one - you
have passed our spiritual test, and 'no' to another, sorry you
have failed our spiritual test?
The aunt sally you choose to present does not take into account
the intensely personal nature of spiritual development.
s
Gleason Pace
> conscience? That we can from a distance say 'yes' to one - you
> have passed our spiritual test, and 'no' to another, sorry you
> have failed our spiritual test?
It is a tricky thing to get right. How do we give ourselves credit for
the 23 things we know without seeming to claim knowledge of all
3,275,933 things available to the person who can know them all?
Certainly the things we are able to know about this world do not
mean we can or have determined (created, established, specified)
anything.
Noah Sombrero
Robert Epstein
Gleason Pace wrote:
sorry I forgot to get rid of the rec.martial-arts the first time.
wha's up with that?
Robert
Robert Epstein
Gleason Pace wrote:
The sad truth is that even those who thought they could get there the
'quick way', if they really want an end to suffering they figure out
that they're not there yet, and then we're on the long path, the real
path, whether we liked it or not.
Robert
Gleason Pace
> wha's up with that?
We had a flurry of spontaneous cross posts with them for a while.
They decided they don't like crossposting and went away.
Noah Sombrero
Robert Epstein
Gleason Pace wrote:
check.
Robert