Whether the punishment should always be adequate to the offence?

The owner of the first logic: Punishment should always be adequate... If, for example, a child has lied a little or got a little dirty, - then the punishment should be light, and if he has told a big lie or got very dirty – the punishment should be stronger...

The owner of the second logic: Punishment should always be adequate... If the child has lied – it should be rather severe. And if, for example, it has got dirty as a pig - that can be punished a little, but better not...:))))

Klein klein@zen.ru

The delightful excerpts from Sutras

Sutra Mahamangala
The highest Protection

http: // zen.ru/old/Dharma.htm

- while one has no knowledge – one instinctively fills the vacuum of his personal " bag of goals " with every possible pseudo-why - " social/cultural/family/financial custom ".

- Mind, that in contact
With customs of the world,
Is unshakable, sorrowless, irreproachable, quiet:
Is the Highest Protection.

* * *

The Noble octal way

http: // zen.ru/old/Dharma.htm

- one who follows Zen correctly, who follows correctly... - What is he? He is an absurdity. What is correct in general? In comparison with what is it correct?

Buddha (having stopped):

- Noble octal way is correct determination, correct speech, correct action, a correct way of life, correct effort, correct consciousness, correct concentration...

* * *

Ra-Hari
Beginner’s meditation manual http: // zen.ru/old/Ra_Hari.htm

- " you were set up and have lost all your money " (beginner’s meditation manual) that can happen, you decide for yourself whether to tear you know what on a German cross for the sake of any skirt or to relax.

- everyone gets what he has deserved. Coming MMM will die from MMM. And so on.:)))

Automatic environments, models and analogies

- greetings, Klein!! Could you please comment on something which gets me every time.:)) (if possible, comment on my "brain" condition, what is happening to me??)... I am reading "Zen Help", I am "rummaging" in correspondence... It came to my mind that almost everybody (including me, certainly), writes that they Have understood that here, and that there. They write with such confidence, but, you see, for example, as it happens - I read, for example, a question, or a simple phrase, a statement, and.... if in my "database" there exists a proper reaction on the perceived info, then at once I think ... - Ha! I know that.... then tape recorder (that is included) plays that " I know that"... So, WHERE here is understanding?? This is more like a comparison of similarity!

- very interesting and complex question.:)) Well, - let's try to go through it step by step...:))))

So.:))))))))) - Questions. – What is understanding? What is "understanding" in the sense that is of interest to us? What is " comparison of similarities "? What is " comparison of similarities " in the sense of your use of these words in the above question? And in other questions.:))

1. " if in my "database" there is a proper response on the perceived info "- under the word "adequate" you, very likely, mean "reflexive".:))) Certainly, in your consciousness there are reflexive reactions. And in consciousness of other people.:))) The higher is your level of enlightenment and understanding connected with it:)))) – only this kind of understanding:)))) of what interest are the other kinds to us?:))) - the less your consciousness is polluted with " reflexive reactions ", complete sets of which make up " automatic environments " - robots, whose task it is to stop the information from reaching the depth of your consciousness, thus reducing time delay of your reaction to this information. Reduction of time delay when reacting to external irritation is necessary to increase the survival rate of a biological organism. In animals this is insured by means of instincts (" rough iron robots "), and in biological organisms, allocated with reason, it is solved by means of combining: a) instincts, the quantity of which is smaller, compared to that of animals and the influence of which on consciousness is appreciably weaker; and b) behavioural and perception stereotypes – that are "not-quite-instincts", " instinct substitutes ". So the balance is found between freedom of will and instinctive-reflexive protective programs. The deviation to one side is a deviation towards "god", the deviation to the other is a deviation towards "animal". So the balance between development - expansion and conservation on the present level is found. Balance between " a crane in the sky " and " a titmouse in hands ".

When consciousness in due course:))) "gets used" to " automatic environments ", " becomes one with them " - it starts to identify itself with them. People turn not only into automatically working puppets, but also – into automatically speaking and – automatically thinking puppets. All this automation - I would like you to pay attention!:))) - is adjusted to fit the environmental framework and a certain way of life. When this framework is suddenly destroyed, these automatic devices perish or decay. Also – as another consequence!:))) - the control mechanism of automatical reaction will send a signal: "Intrusion! Misbalance!" every time when there happens to be a shift in the reaction automatism. This signal is sent to again an automatic " regulator of a level of automatic reaction " with the purpose of fixing the breakdown and to establishing a normal level of automatic reaction ASAP.:)) Among other consequences.:)))))))))

So, enlightenment - is a displacement of balance in a direction from "animal" to "god". The Path - is a process of this displacement. " To get to the bottom of " nature of Buddha " " or, in other words, to the " base of consciousness " means " to remove all " automatic devices " ". Is that clear?:)))))

The Second logic is a comprehension of the fact that our choice of cogitative reactions is made automatically. I shall explain: Cogitative reactions, be they arranged as effectively as possible – are nothing if their choice is not consciously controlled, i.e. not consciously made. So, even if you have perfect tools at your disposal, they will not help you if you do not control their choice. Yes, - in standard situations you can manage with making a choice automatically. But outside this framework of habitual situations you are completely defenceless.:)))) Or as a variation: when environment changes- your field of expertise disappears. All your "experience" instantly goes up in smoke. And only automatism of "thinking" blows into your ears vigorously " You do understand! " - (that is one of its basic functions - " protection of consciousness’ integrity by masking a breakdown ") – and allows you to be defined as belonging to the class of functioning automatic devices!:)) To gather cotton on cotton fields from charred cotton bushes.

Further. About understanding "the tape recorder (included) ". It is- in this case! – a wrong analogy. Not supervising the choice of analogy, i.e. automatically having chosen the wrong tool for the given specific task, - you go on further to concrete considerations of the process - automatically (have chosen a track you stay on it), and the unsatisfactory results that you receive, you take for characteristic features of the process, and not for a natural consequence of incorrectly chosen track-analogy. And you don’t even know anything about the correct forms of process consideration...:)))) Thinking that you are examining - always!:)))) – the process... though actually - always!:))) – you examine only one of casually chosen branches of consideration tree.:))) Remember, in the second logic:))) – depending on how you will define the limits – you will examine and as you have examined - so you will see, the way you see – the way you will act upon it, and depending on how you act - you will receive such and such results. As you will clap - and so you will eat...:))))) Always!:)))))))))) That is what the Karma Law refers to.:))))

There is no " tape recorder " included, there is something more complex.:))) But again - warning! Remember that " all analogies are limp " means, that all analogies have limits of application. As soon as you cross that limit - they start "to limp".:)))) for example: Take a sheet of a paper of A4 format. Hold it by the opposite edges and pull in the opposite directions until the sheet bursts, until it tears up.:))) Did it burst? Good.:))) That was an analogy for behaviour of a crystal and its reactions to breakage. Now say aloud: " But crystals, you see, are transparent... " – Have you said it? Well.:)))) The thing is that you have now overstepped the bounds of a model, crossed the border of a particular analogy. Do you understand? Good.:))) And all this was a model for " exceeding the limits of analogy ".:)))) Have you understood?:)))) Excellent!:))) Now – on to the " tape recorder analogy".:)))

So.:))) a more appropriate analogy would be - have you seen a whole wall of bank safes? A lot of reserved deposit boxes - a a huge number of them?:))) all locked up? You have a bunch of keys – a lot of them, but not so much.:))) Every key has a label.:))) On these labels there are numbers.:))) when you find a safe-box with a number that is the same as one on the key label, you are doing " a comparison of similitude ". And when you open the door and you see, that in this box there lay gold coins, that is an understanding.:)))) And when you open it and see, that it’s empty, that is a MISUNDERSTANDING.:))) The matter is that these safes are magical. In each of them there are gold coins. But they are hidden.:)))) Invisible.:))) Because thy are alive.:)))) And these treasures of the Mistress of Copper mountain (or any other gnome) - will not be shown to just everyone. Not even to someone who has keys.:))) With labels.:)))))) That is similar to" reading the words, but seeing nothing except the words".:))) the safe-box IS empty.:)))))

Well, it is clear that the Full understanding is there when you can see gold in all safes. (Warning: " Full understanding " in this framework – within limits! – of our analogy!:)))) Analogy under the name (the label!):)))) " A wall of deposit boxes"!):))))))

Coming once again to: "..the tape recorder (that is included)... - So, WHERE here is understanding??" This "comparison of similitude!" - within the framework of the model (analogy) can not give you any other result.:))) Having said "tape recorder", you have thereby determined, that result – which you will come to in one step!:)))) – is a " comparison of similitude ". So there is " comparison of similitude " and there is a "tape recorder", ok? Where there is a "tape recorder" there is " automatic record and reproduction ". Do you understand?:))) i.e. you, having looked at the phenomenon, have burped out a final model – a "tape recorder", and then by simple topological manipulations transformed this model by " comparison of similitude " to be the same, but under another label, and after that you are asking - " So "understanding " is not present here in any nature? ". Am I being clear?:))))

-.. or, for example, they carelessly quote the beautiful words that they have recently read... Like, oh! This is, like ... indulgence.... And, this is, like.... here and now...

- the people who do that - the will receive what they deserve.:))) do not worry about that.:)) do not spend your energy and time given to you for understanding them.:)) Worry about yourself only. Spend energy and time, given to you for effective understanding.:)) And if they are not doing the careless quoting, and it is you – you are seeing an empty safe? - take that into consideration and spend your energy and time for even more effective understanding.:))

whAt do you want from me?:)))) Do you want me to criticise someone together with you?:))) Or what?:))) Or do you want me to see how you can take part in " the opportunity to talk - to " shine " – everybody’s showing off – proving something and looking smart... " like a profi :))) Is that it...?:))))))) Greetings to you!

The Homework

Exercise № 10 " Examination: my improvements "

Exercise № 7 " To do one thing "

Correspondence with Readers

Yes, probably. I have blurted it out without thinking it through.

Thank you. I do not erase your previous lines for the reason, that - here, on this screen, in this e-mail that embodies fugacity, instantaneousnesses and transitional nature of human actions, their insignificance and negligibility in view of the infinity of universe and God, - presence here of such good words - improves our world.

* * *

Strange, but it seems that the citations from the letters, included in the magazine, are all about the authors . Everyone describes only their achievements, and nowhere is it mentioned, what kind of reactions have the people surrounding them. Or have I read inattentively?

You have read inattentively. Yes.:))) But not this time.:))) If people write to me something personal, like things concerning people close to them, - why I should put that in the magazine? For everybody to see?

* * *

To reader

Dear reader! Are you conscious?:))) All of the best to you! But take care!...Klein.:))

14 << 15 >> 16

Home

Copyright © 1999-2002 Zen.ru, ZenRu.org