not a weekly
Brothers, I'm sorry if I hurt you.
Presence and absence of emotions
So. "Emotion" - is a circle. "Absence of emotion" - a triangle. A cone may appear (ap-pe-ar!) both as a circle and as a triangle, not be-ing any of them! :)))
Incredible positive !!!!
I couldn't even imagine, that it's possible JUST simply to sit, to walk, to stand, to lie - and to be glad just for NOTHING! :)))))))))))) Even to shine! :)))))))))) You can't get such a positive even after watching a movie "Pokrov gates", and even after listening to the second verse of a song "Rock crystal" by Boris Grebenshikov!!! :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Maybe I write a bit roughy now, but I just can not any more fit all this into "nice" - let it better be paphosly and trival, than contracted and castrated!! :))))))))))))) HURRRAAAAAAAAAAAY!!!!! :))))))))))))))))
Completely serious - completely funny!!
I introduce into my life what you said - "look from this point - completely serious, look from that point -- completely funny!" Do you know HOW, HOW!!!!!!!!!! great it works!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)))))))))))) A real slavery is to be serious for even single minute!! :))))))))))))) It means to sell yourself into slavery with shit, to put yourself into such darkness, such a shit!!!! And the most insulting thing - there'a no point in it! :)) And looking at everything in the world from these two positions simultaneously - keepeing the serious TREATMENT, see theFUNNY thing!!! - is FREEDOM!!!! :))))))))))))))) HURRRRAAAAAY!!!!!!!!! :))))))))))))))))
There is no, absolutely no subjects, which are not funny!!!! Even bad things, even those things, where it's absolutely impossible to find anything funny - super-serious things - all they can cause WILD, CRAZY laughter!!!! :)))))))))))))))))))) I just thought - isn't that why some people laugh after smoking shit? Maybe it helps them to release their own seriousness fetters? And the funny thing, it's light!!! As a baloon! Just do not disturbe it, do not stop it up - and it will come, ah? :))))))))))))) In general, all this is so great - I have no words for it!
A bit of correction
"A real slavery is to be serious for even single minute!!" Hmm...:):) Well, well..:):) A bit of correction: "is to be ONLY serious for even a single minute!!" And the other variant: "A real slavery - is to be ONLY LAUGHING for just a single minute!!!!"
Any stupid one can be clever!
It's written on my first page - "Any stupid one can be clever!" - Not to seem, but to BE! - I pay your attention. Both with it, a skill in thinking is rare. Much more rare, than "an absence of intellect", by the way...
"In what direction to make changes?" and "What to do to cause the necessary changes?" - that's what is important!.. :)))) And the necessary changes are caused by "manipulations with physical body", by a stick hitting your head, by talks, whatever - it doesn't matter. The essentials is that the one who wants to make these changes - a Master, inner or outer (somebody or the actual person) - acted correctly... it means caused moving to correct side. Not to the opposite... :)))
A real intellect
A real intellect (a enlightened one.. as Huay-nen had, for example), which allows you to move to enlightment - appears once-twice.. and that's all.. And different plain logical sophistic-scholastic calculator, which drives a person into ass, - almost at every step. "There is intellect and intellect" - paraphrasing Lenin).
That intellect, which Huay-Nen developed, is, I suppose, the only instrument (armour), which can let you get victory in struggle with enemy forces, that close for you the way to enlightment.
For freedom you must be a perfect struggler. Otherwise, you'll talk here about freedom, and then you'll wake up and think: "What the hell for do I need this freedom.. All this is an illusion... What is freedom?.. And this food, here, near my arm... - or your family, or an iron hand hanging upon you, or whatever else... - that's concrete... That's not an illusion. And who minds that my arms and legs are tied? Who said that? "You say, I say..." There's no difference. Between freedom and slavery - where is the difference? There's no one... The fact that I'm in ass - it depends on the point of view..." - And that's all!... You swam away!... As millions before you.... Disappeared... in fog.
Lie can appear in any "form". Truth - also.
No free stuff!
"There'll be no free stuff! :))) free stuff is over!" - (as I wrote in one of letters) - "All the previous two and a half thousans years it was. :)))) That's enough! It's over!" :))))))))))))))))))
- You know... it sounds in my head more and more "I HAVE NO RIGHT!!!" ...that's why I'm talking to you.... UNDERSTAND (LISTEN TO) ME FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- Damn you!... Understand, in the end! I explain by hands to you once more!... Once more - 141 times already... ::))))
1. You'll get NO concrete and having one meaning answers for ANYTHING, being in first logic. Having a mind, based on the first-level logic. This mind affects all the conscious (??). It's in a fog of first logic. "First logic" - is what all these buddhist parrots call - "mind", "mind whicn you need to get rid of". Huay-Nen, for example, :)) calls "mind"quiet another thing and says to develop it, - for that all the buddhist parrots did not and do not love him. :)) And the ones who are not parrots - love and respect Huay-Nen. :))) Once more: You'll get no concrete and having one meaning answers, being in first logic. Having a mind, based on the first-level logic.
2. You need to learn second logic..
3. There exist only two ways: you by yourself or me. (I, by the way, say all the time - "There exist", but not "I'll teach you" or - even worse! - "I want to teach you". :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
4. When you'll possess second logic - then (and only then) all we're talking with you now (and all your questions) will be for you : 1) absolutely clear, 2) having one (and not many) meaning, 3) simple, 4) literally and 5) funny. :)))))))))))))))
5. And until then you will: 1) understand nothing, 2) when it seems to you that you understand - actually understand nothing, 3) suffer from different inner "insoluble" questions (based on the scheme: how to combine a cirle with a triangle when they (it is - obvious!) :)))) - do not combine???!!! 4) write to me - "UNDERSTAND ME, LISTEN TO ME, LISTEN TO ME FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!" and the other folk songs. :)))))))))))))))))
And that's aaaaaall! :))))))))))))))
White magic, though...
- By the way, this text suddenly stroke my eye. White magic, though... :)) By the way, do you know whAt is "white magic"? What is the difference between white and black magic? :))))))))))))))))))))
- I'm sorry for "rush" (a desire to undrestand everything at once... like diarrhea....:))), but it's time to finish with this magic... Logically - this your magic, it is when you sing a song for an hour.. two.. you plug in tape-recorder.. oh wow.. that's it!!! I with my villein mind call it "presents"... And the black one, I guess, it is when you PLUG IN TAPE-RECORDER!!!!!!!.......... oh fuck...... that's not it :)))
- What you say - is so perfect, that I even think, you're not saying exactly what I see in your words. :))))
Intelligence and a skill in thinking
- I considered that abstracts "intelligence" and "skill in thinking" belong to single category.
- No. "Skill in thinking" is equal to "skill in applying your intelligence". Well, or like that - "intelligence" - is an ability to think, "skill in thinking" is equal to "skill in applying this ability".
- Again, from my point of view it's a mess... "ENLIGHTED INTELLECT" - it seens to me to be something like "light darkness", "good evil" and so on, roughly speaking.
- One doesn't lose anything moving up (evolution) - neither his sence of humour, nor intellect. It doesn't die off and isn't amputated. More precisely, with enlightment appears something, which looks like intellect, like will, like patience, like kindness, but it is - not intellect, not will, not patience, not kindness. Exactly that's why, for instance, developing intellect (the same about will, kindness or patience), it's impossible to reach enlightment. And the mess appears only in arguementation. When it's necessary to transform 3-dimentional objects into 2-dimensional, the mess appearring not in transforming, no, :)))) - but in perception this transformed object by a consciousness, which thinks only by 2-dimensional objects.
I think, that if we replace now in my previous reasoning "3-dimensional" objects with "4-dimentional", and "2-d" with "3-d" and read it once more, the picture will become sharper. :))
That's why it is sai that the Truth can't be expressed by words. And that there's no use in reading books. But the one, who is able to express Truth, is able to express it by (using as an instrument for expressiom) everything. Including words. :)) And texts. :)))))))))))))))))))))))))))
- And dividing intellect into these and those ones, enlighted and logic - this, I think, just complicates already uneasy (for intellect) "problem of reaching enlightment".
- You, please, understand - IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT TO DO! It's important only - WHO! is doing it. If not enlighted - then "divides" he or "not divides" - doesn't matter. "Divides" like this, "divides" like that - doesn't matter. If enlightened one - then 1) whatever he does - will enlighten. Because everything he does (word, action, creation of situations, laughter, cane, etc.) - is an instrument, using which he pushes to enlightment the one who he wants to push. 2) don't criticize his way of doing it.
There is only one problem: how the uncomprehending one can identify comprehending one http://zen.ru/Vrubb.htm (in Russian). He can't see and he's afraid to believe. Because the price of mistake is using him (uncomprehending) by that uncomprehending one, whom he gave himself up, by all... very much, to be short! :)))) Instinct of self-preservation - a powerful instinct! - protests with all his might. :))))) And it does the right thing, in general... :)))) The problem is not in "proof"! (read "Details" - http://zen.ru/old/Sachar.htm (in Russian)) They are - impossible. Understand? :))))
- As light is not darkness, enlightment is not intellect. By "intellect" I mean the phenomenon of "subjective-objective reality", but not "good" and "bad" thoughts. All this "GAME", or from the materialistic point of view "reflection of objective reality". Both enlightment and intellect (in indicated meaning....) are not clean or dirty, but simply like that...
- Well, have you understood?... that all this reasoning - is absolutely not important?... :)))
Struggle with enemy forces
- "Struggle with enemy forces" on the way to enlightment - it's much far from my Zen, let it be struggle with anything, but it's still as close to enlightment as "misunderstanding", though all this, again, is - "in game".
- "Struggle with enemy forces" is a poetic metaphora.. But. When there is any movement - there is also a resistance to this movement (no matter what does it look like, this resistance). If there is resistance to movement - there is a struggle with it (no matter in what form of struggle). All this was called by me "Struggle with enemy forces". And remember - enlightened one can say anyhting - and it will be truthful and correct. And, on the other hand, - whatever not enlightened one does when enlightened one is near :))) - will be awkward and roughy. :)))))
- Now I'll try to cover one impudence with another one, I'll try to give you a piece of advice: be many-sided ("Keeping the thinnest balance - developing exactly ALL qualities, but not some ones damaging the whole, damaging the other lines. And so on" (c) Klein) read something else (Mamardashvili, Soloviev, Muraviev, Shmakov, Platon, etc.) There is the same thing!... There is only ONE idea!... Then maybe you'll stop asking "buddhists" for registration and your site will become more various and optimal (by optimal I mean that if we're talking about enlightment, the Way doesn't matter, only the principle matters. And there is only one,, according to the laws of logic - ONE.) That's it...
- Read Maha-Charger! :)))))))))) "There's the same!..." :)))) Ooooooooooooooh!!!! :)))))))))))))) I'm glad! I'm very glad! And one more thing: QUALITIES CAN NOT BE DEVELOPED BY READING! And one more: "being many-sided " :)) - is much more wide than you think. :)))))))))))))) Ooooooh! :))))))))))))
Why not hte Principle?
- Your way of thinking shows that you read a lot... Then throw away all what you said about "being many-sided" and tell me (or yourself) - why buddhism? Why not the Principle?
- You're absolutely right! I'll add only one thing: Way - means the same as Principle. The most complicated principle in the world. :))) But when you've entered the gates - you may laugh! Or do what you want! :))))))))))) OOOOOOOooooooo!!!! :)))))))))))))))))))
About the gates
- Way, Principle.. we just call it in different ways... About the gates.. It's a pity I didn't understand...
- I call it more exactly... :)))))) And the gates - it's the gates of Dharma, Buddha's gates, or that Mumonkan - Outpost without the gates. There is, it seems, something in the foreword or somewhere...
Koan from Lotos
- Klein, could you please explain what do you mean saying that "knock comes from outside constantly an simultaneously"? :)))
- I mean that the alarm clock is going to break down from ringing... :))))))
All-conquering Army Zen
The Great Charger of Army prajnia-paramita basics
- And the "charger" is cool... I'd like them at least to understand: Poisoning substances - are substances, which you can inhale once, and you don't need any more.
* * *
Mumonkan*** "OUTPOST WITHOUT GATES" ***
- Do not continue to review "Mumonkan"... You've already done a lot for the readers (isn't it for us?). Now there is a danger that we'll take only your criticizm and wouldn't let come our own (maybe also right thoughts). Then all what you're doing it for - your idea - will come to nothing. As a test try to read "Mumonkan" as a person, for whom you've done all that. Give us a bit of our own will... (I mean freedom). Then mayby there'll be a bit less of admiration, but a bit more of use (that, for what...)
- THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I'm going to do! :)))) The same day (when I wrote the last comments, there's a date in text) I wrote the LAST comment (it was a comment to the next, 25th story). It (a comment to 25th story), by the way, - strongly differs from the rest, because Umen hit the nail on the head in 25th story... :))) But still I haven't put it to the site. :)) And I wasn't going to write any more comments. :))))))) But I'm thinking of one thing... :)))))))))))))))
* * *
The Vajracchedika-prajna-paramita Sutra
Enough, enough, I strike a bargain and I promise (myself) - this - is the last, I do understand, Klein - is such a busy person, lots of projects, how does he manage to find time to sleep, and finally I can't understand, does he exist in reality or it's just a born by sick collective unconscious of web users archetype. :-)))
Klein said: Buddha - it's other way of thinking. It differs from the "usual" one as - forgive me for simplifying - the thinking of a human differs from the thinking of, for example, a cat. The difference is not in enlightment, gentleness, lightness-uncontaminatedness - no.
It (the way of thinking), in particular, differs in absence of a eternal and tying hands and legs of a "common person" question "Why?", and it's versions - "What's the reason for it?", "What will I get from this?" and "Who I am?". Somewhere in your texts, I already don't remember where exactly, that once a moment comes, when it's impossible to understand, but it doesn't prevent you from making a decision (if I quote correctly).
If I understood at least a bit from Diamond Sutra, then bodhisattva - is a decision. A clear lasting decision. Although I'd call it an Aspiration. But this definition is stupid, because you can lead to some things only by explanations what to do and how not to understand. No, even EXPLAINING nothing. Asserting. That's it, the result.
Klein said: "Another way of thinking" - it is like, for example, difference between a typewriter and a computer, or, more exactly, a difference between DOS and Windows. And lightness and uncontaminatedness - it's a function. A consequence of another way of thinking.
Aurobindo called this Consciousness. He said that he didn't want people to become lighter or cleaner or godlyer, he wanted them to become more conscious (if I quote not exactly, still I'm sure I kept the meaning).
Consciousness and self-identification (do you remember Pelevin's - identity), live in so different worlds, that it's even funny to put them together in one line. Consciousness, as Aspiration (Decision) is more simple to separate from the rest with the help of things, which are uncompatible with it. It's not correct to say "when Consciousness comes", but whtn it comes :-))), many other things we operate with, disappear. Disappear from the conceptual fild. From the language and metalanguage. The world changes.
Klein finished: Exactly realizing of two fundamentally different ways of thinking, by mean, by the way, the only one - of getting a more high way (in russian - "got it")...
A person who got it wouldn't have a thought about himself as about a one who got it or about the one who haven't got it. :-))) And it's not because he doesn't mind it. It's because even by a wild mental stress he CAN NOT get such a thought. His gills fell off. That's evolution. And that's what is calles a person who's got it.
That's how I understood Diamond Sutra. And don't judge me strictly. There's such a thing in my world as matrix (I haven't seen the film of the same name, so there are no correlations). Diamond Sutra is a matrix. When you use it with different people you get different results. With yourself - the same. But Use can be great, because matrix works with you even if you being in arrogance consider that you "understood" it. And an example of a matrix with negative work can be "Sorcerer" by Fauls. In my opinion.
Thank you, Klein, though I don't get it. Bye. :-)))
P.S. By the way, it's impossible to teach to be conscious (it's important). Without Aspiration all this is as skiing for a man who has lost legs. Remember about a Needle which left embroidery> :-))))))))
PPS. The point of this letter is to express gratitude for accsess to Diamond Sutra. :-)))))))))))))))))))
A play in one part, one author and two heroes
(people - Sergey. Klein - Alexander.)
In the morning Klein drinks coffee. People beside the window:
- Klein!!! Give us freedom!!! Hands away from Mu... Mu... Well, that thing, you understood what... Understood???!!!
Klein rises and goes to the window... There a man stands... one (I mean in singular)
Klein - Who are you? Why are you shouting?.. so early....
People - I am people... uuu...no, I'm Sergey... so in general... So... (got frightenes)
Klein - Look around...
People looked around... and it became so quiet.. beautiful.
:))))))))) And forgive me once more for disturbing.....
- Thank you! A great play! - I just haven't understood the last line. :)) But I feel pleasure from it. :)))) And in first sentence I'd change words. :)) For it'd be: "In the morning drinks his coffee Klein."
- The whole point is in the last line... people - it's me :))) so I looked around... and there is nothing!!! NOBODY!!! (It became so QUIET.... beautiful......) it's like in a cartoon with an accident - you try to cure him, but he croaks any way... sorry, dies, fuck... :))) And one more thing... Don't publish it... people, again, wouldn't understand... wouldn't understand the point (without reading our correspondence) And without it it's rubbish... And let Klein drink coffee when you (Klein) want it... :)))
Task ╣10 "Test"
A composition on the topic "My improvements achieved after I began recieving internet-magazine "ZenHelp".
Send by e-mail
Task ╣ 8 "Don't knit your brow"
Sergej jegreS firstname.lastname@example.org "Don't knit your brow" - Here you can smile. :) Knitting your brow. :))
Gleb Galkin email@example.com Knitting your brow isn't good, of course... We'll get rid of it! But what if it's for the purpose of conspiration? Well, for example, my boss wants to busy me with some uninteresting and unuseful work. While I'm busy with something interesting and useful... They come to me and I'm sittting knitting my brow (like if I'm solving some global problem). They get away at once... for not disturbing me... A war ruse :))) ????
Learn not to knit first - and then do whatever you want. :))
Arty Dubroff firstname.lastname@example.org Hi! I read your magazine and suddenly I wanted to write :-) "Don't knit your brow" I pay your attention to this task once more. This is one of the main tasks for correct zen person. If you can't learn such an easy thing - what are you good for, then?" - What do you mean by what for? As a minimum, I'm good for knitting my brow ;-)
╬K. :))) But, I think, actually - you're good ONLY for 'knitting your brow"... i.e. not for completely instinctive, uncontrolled, unconscious, half-vegetable action... but being a zen peson you should, really, stop. :))))))
passer email@example.com The task is intended on learning to be constantly aware of your actions. For example, while reading from the monitor, or typing, here, right now, when I'm writing a letter, it makes me conscious, makes me divide myself from the computer and feel that I'm here! Typing! :)) Actually, you can't do it another way, if you do it (the task) sincerely, do something, remembering to control your forehead. :)))))) I mean, there appear something like two attentions. One is writing a letter. The other - looks after it, the forehead, the feelings...
p.s. In the next Help, the task should be not 8th, but 9th?? :)))
Task ╣6 "The most useless action"
Evgeniy V. Kirsanov firstname.lastname@example.org Greetings... The Most Useless Action - is, actually, writing to you about The Most Useless Action. With respect-worship-approvement Ev.
rey email@example.com While reading for the first time replies to the task "the most useless action", I've found for myself the most useless action. It is: being a human, pretend to be an octopus, why octopus? It doesn't matter whom you pretend to be :) I'm too lazy to describe the whole chain of my speculations. Now I've just read the next letters of my mates, and they inspired me to think again and here is what came to my head this time. Any useless action is useful from the other point of view. For example what is useless for the body is useful for brain, and on the contrary. Making useless for brain and body actions, person approachs to the harmony of himself. Removing one of the groups of useless actions, person approaches to self-destruction. Proceeding :)) The most useless action is not to make useless actions. That's how! :)
- Action! In the task was - "action"! :)))) "Not to make useless action" - is not an "action". :))) Besides - "Not to make useless actions" - is not only very useful, :)))) - it is, actually, an essential feature of an enlightened one. :)))))
- You wrote it so deeply, that I can't match some facts. :) "action" = movement of body? As action I assume any flow, any change, no matter if it is body movement or thinking. A conscious inactivity, it seems, is also an action. If I understood you correctly, it is what is "very useful" for me and "an essential feature" of an enlightened one. A conscious inactivity seems to be "useless action" (very useful for conscious action). And the most useless action is, exactly, not to make "useful actions". Well :)) A complete paradox, but you understand that it's just a pun, actually there's no paradox here, it all depends on the point of view. Though there is one "but" here, I've almost got lost in my own conclusions. It means that I don't understand something.
- "Conscious inactivity" - if we build borders - frames! - "generally, in life" is "action", and often - "useful action". And in the borders - in frames! - "task" is not an action. Look, - You build borders (frames) - and get a having one meaning answer. :))) This is an example on the topic "Second logic". :))
- Exactly!!! Why didn't I understand it at once, BORDER, of course, border!
- Once more: You biuld borders - you get result. You don't build ones - you get pun. "Though there is one "but" here, I've almost got lost in my own conclusions. It means that I don't understand something". You don't understand the topic "Borders". As well as the topic "Using view borders". All this is in topic "Second logic".
- Yes yes yes, there can be no harmony between two kinds of logic, there is a border beyond which you can't carry out "rubbish". From there is my "getting lost", everything is do elementary, how dumb I am :)))
Task ╣ 7 "Doing only single action"
Gleb Galkin firstname.lastname@example.org "Does it seem to you that I'm doing nothing? But I'm very busy on the cell level..." - So, I can't completely understand how to do only one action. It's obvious for me that it's impossible to follow this literally... Lots of processes (breathing, hair growth and others run in background level simultaneously). Lots of other processes are too complicated (walking, for example) and, in turn, include a great number of subprocesses (thinking about cars' speed and trajectory, passing by pedestrians, moving legs, thinking about the deep and danger of puddles, and so on).
- Yes. The world is designed so that it's a process (a system). Every process is divided into subprocesses (system to subsystems), which divide, in turn, into sub-sub-processes infinitely. There is also an infinite amount of ways of discribing a glass. That's why, looking at the world, you should BE ABLE to build borders. You've got no choice. For acting you HAVE TO build borders. All the choice reduces to one thing: will you build them consciously or unconsciously. What is "unconsciously"?
"Unconsciously" - is, watching "Lots of processes (breathing, hair growth and others run in background level simultaneously) and lots of other processes, too complicated (walking, for example) and, in turn, including a great number of subprocesses (thinking about cars' speed and trajectory, passing by pedestrians, moving legs, thinking about the deep and danger of puddles, and so on)", not managed by brain - make a decision... - well, it's made by itself in some way (variants: 1. God knows how, 2. based on instincts, 3. based on intuition, 4. based on stereotypes, 5. as a combination of first 4 variants).
Or you can "count" the decision, i.e. - make a decisiom "based on formal logic". But as frames (borders, co-ordinates) for counting are taken only in variants 1- 5, the result of "precisely adjusted movement in chosen borders" wouldn't much differ from "well, it's made by itself in some way".
Going away from "well, it's made by itself in some way" - is a capitulation of Mind with a slogan "I can not, therefore you, other Parts of Consciousness, deal with it as you like." (a common person).
Going to "precisely adjusted movement in chosen borders" (that is just a disguised variant of "well, it's made by itself in some way") - is a disguise of capitulation. (a clever person).
Going to "impossibility of precisely adjusted movement because of impossibility of chosing borders in all that stuff" - is a disguise of disguise of capitulatiom. (zen person).
Adjusted, but not at will, building of borders based on Second logic, and adjusted movement in this borders based on First logic with correct control of Second logic - is "consciously". (wise, or Correctly zen person). :)))))
- And when I'm walking and solving some problem in my mind...
- When you say "I'm solving some problem in my mind", you ACTUALLY say "I'm solving some problem with base logic of my consciousness". If base logic of your consciousness isn't sutable for solving this problem, or, in other words, this problem can't be solved in principle by First (formal) logic instruments, you'll get either (1) exact decisions with no guarantees of their correctness, or, trying to stay in correct zone, you'll get (2) slush. Here is all the choice - "slush" or "exact, but it itn't know if it's correct".
Example 1: Make 4 triangles from 6 matches.
Example 2: What suits better for breaking nuts: a hard object or a soft one? a hammer or a pillow?
Example 3: How to breed a child: in love or in strictness? in freedom or in iron hands?
A task to the question "When you say "I'm solving some problem in my mind", you ACTUALLY say "I'm solving some problem with base logic of my consciousness"". How is the converse theorem to the Pifagor theorem formulated?
- Which ONE action should I do? Walk? Or solve the problem? It depends on what is more important this moment...
- Bor-ders. Building borders. Consciously buildong borders. Consciously building view borders for an event. Consciously building view borders for an concrete event.
- So, anyway I have to switch between processes all the time. I can't get anywhere from this. Besides, my work requires quick switches and a "correct reaction every moment".
- It doesn't matter. :))) We - wacth the borders! - speak about DOING TASK, but not that you have to learn not to be able to switch between processes. Shortly, - you need to build correct borders :)))))
- It means, when Klein says "Do only one action"
- There is no - (borders, again wrong borders!) - "Klein says "Do one action"" - there is - Klein says: "Here is a task for you: "Do only one action" - do it". Feel the difference. :)))
- I understand it as "pay maximum resources to the process, which has the most priority this moment". In other words, I'm writing this letter, listening to Jim Morrison on the background, sometimes listening to Morrison comes to foreground and gets the most priority (when the moment is very cool). While I've been writing al this user came (a nice girl) with a question... I answered the question... got back to the letter... I continue doing only one zction. :)))) Klein? Did I understand you correctly?
- "Pay maximum resources to the process, which has the most priority this moment" - it sounds good! :)))) But let's transform this statement. :))) "Priority in resources to the priority process!" Let's transform it more. :))) "Priority to priority!" Priority in resources - it's an essential feature of priority. Or it's not a priority, but only a declaration of it. :))) I say only one thing - here is a task for you. Try to complete it. :))))
* * *
I wonder, why do you write the wors "enlightment"
wih ":)))", but with small letter... :))))
When you've got an inner sincere treatment - you don't need signs. :)))
* * *
date: 30.08..99: "Dear buddhists! My wise friends! I report: In order to dessiminate Dharma today I published the Firts part of Mumonkan with my comments - a very instructive reading for all buddhists. :)).......... And remove this your demand to make everything as dull as you do - and only then you';ll let me enter your Buddhists Association."
* * *
To the reader
My dear reader! I'm - very glad! I wish you all the good and the best! Kl. :)))))
12 << 13 >> 14
Copyright ę 1999-2002 Zen.ru, ZenRu.org