Questions of Zen: Is there any scientific proof or evidence for Zen? Also was is the difference betw

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Until you find the no 'thing', you will be lost in 'things'. All that you will know is 'things', you 'think' you are a 'thing' and you 'think' you see 'things'. When you are a 'thing' living in a world full of 'things' you will know suffering, and life will be miserable.
You have to find out that you are 'not' a thing.
When the the word 'nothing' is used people don't want to be 'nothing', they resist the truth. So be a 'thing' and hurt.
If you can recognize that you are 'not' a thing, not a concept, life transforms into peace and joy.
Self realization is the realization that you are 'not' a thing, you are nothing.

Yes. People don't want to be nothing. The teaching of modern societies, especially the American model, is that you are born as a nothing, as a nobody who has the potential to become a somebody. This is achieved by an untiring effort in observing economy and profitable and non-profitable principles. It is also achieved by progressively moving from a trust-based model of awareness towards a doubt based model, thereby overcoming the "intrinsic" fault of the childhood state.

Should you fail, you will be pronounced a loser (one who has lost some-thing), a crumb (one who possesses only the fundamental particle of the full loaf or slice) a schmuck, not the full penis, but a disposable part of it or simply a nobody - an inconsequential person.

Standing upon this conditioning, who can author and investigation into what Zen is or isn't?

Zen is not a philosophy it is the realization in and participation of the atomic moment. This is not a thing to be worked towards like wealth, power and prestige. It is not the outcome of knowledge or debate. It is the fulfillment of failure, a total failure....a failure to be such and such and so and so. And a celebration of that failure, as that failure is a killer joke. Just like the killer joke from Monty Python, no-one has lived to tell after hearing it. At least not in the language of the realm.

Zen is just a form of Buddhism. Buddhism is total bull#. On his deathbed the "original" Buddha said, " I have searched my entire life and still don't know the truth.". Now, believers of what is known as Buddhism believe everything said by this guy is truth. This is my definition of rediculous.

reply to post by yamammasamonkey


That's the whole point. Buddha said to seek truth it doesn't matter who says it.

reply to post by yamammasamonkey


I had not heard this before in regard to Buddha's final words. Do you have a source for this? this has the potential to put a different spin on things

reply to post by Tasmanaut


no it doesnt...... it puts into perspective the human condition........ thomas edison said " we know one billionth of one percent of nothing"

born of complete ignorance, we can spend our whole lives searching for "truth" and in the end what do we have for ourselves?

reply to post by Golden Rule


People might 'think' they are something, but they are nothing, deep down they 'know' this. They try to make themselves into something by having material possesion or a good career but is that what you are? Really?
When alone, are you peaceful, content? When in company are you at ease? Are you ever at ease?
The human disease is dis ease, never feeling at home.

Competition with winners and losers make the world such a struggle, so ugly, so painful. What is the prize? 'Oh, no one will beable to say i'm a loser'.

Joy, peace and contentment is the ultimate prize.

I have no scientific explanations for you. But, to me Zen (as far as I know about it) is about potential. The emptiness is potential. An being able to rise above your own being filled to become empty and to potentially select an option.

reply to post by arpgme


Your literal version of the verse from Tao Te Ching is translated by who?

Here is my attempt to translate:

The Tao is non conceptual, it can not be named, it is beyond the mind.
There is only 'this' (what is happening presently), 'this, which is unnamabe' is all that is real.
The naming of 'things' (from human mind) is what makes 'things' seem real.
Only the Tao is eternal, real.
When the wanting and naming cease, the peace, the emptiness, the stillness is found.
Wanting and naming, you see only the manisfestations, the 'things', material, content.

The manisfestations is what is seen/experienced - the sound, the colors, the movement.(things)
The mystery is the seer/knower/experiencer of the manisfestations.(not a thing)

The manisfestations (the seen) and the mystery (seer) arise from the same source, darkness.

reply to post by Itisnowagain


once again I agree with a lot of what you say....................."They try to make themselves into something by having material possesion or a good career but is that what you are? Really? "


but you do understand that humans need to reproduce to have the opportunity to live and live at peace...... careers and culture are what humans have fallen into as a means of aiding reproduction,,,,

it is not perfect or right,,,, but it is our engine of reproduction,,,, the process cannot stop,, because that means no human life....... there are many ways to perform the process,,,,,,,

reply to post by ImaFungi


Humans have been programmed to compete, it's fun for the overlords to watch. The Colosseum with gladiatiors. It's also very productive, it makes the slave work harder if he is trying to out do his collegue, good for consummerism too. Winners and losers make the rich richer and the poor poorer, which side are you on?
Competiveness is fed to us young and it is what drives this insane world.
Wanting is a disease, wanting is the uneasiness.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by arpgme

 

Your literal version of the verse from Tao Te Ching is translated by who?

It doesn't matter who the author is, it is a literal translation and if you don't believe you can get a Chinese-English dictionary and see for yourself.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

Here is my attempt to translate:

The Tao is non conceptual, it can not be named, it is beyond the mind.

How do you get this from these characters:

道 (way) 可 (able to) 道 (speak), 非 (not) (常) constant (道) way.

This is what I mean by people putting their own words in to the Tao Te Ching which doesn't actually exist in there. The "mind" was not mentioned and it is not saying that the Tao can not be named, it's just saying that the way/tao able to be spoken is not the CONSTANT way/tao.

Let's look at your next so-called "translation"...

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

There is only 'this' (what is happening presently), 'this, which is unnamabe' is all that is real.

This must be a line that you added into the text yourself that wasn't originally there. This is called a forgery...

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

The naming of 'things' (from human mind) is what makes 'things' seem real.

This line says nothing about whether things are real or not. It simply says that the given name is not the constant/eternal name.

名 (name) 可 (able to) 名 (name) ， 非 (not) 常 (constant) 名 (name) 。

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

Only the Tao is eternal, real.

Bad translation, if it even is one:

無 (without) 名 (name) 天 (heaven) 地 (earth) 之 ('s) 始 (start) ﹔
有 (have) 名(name) 萬 (10,000) 物 (thing) 之 ('s) 母 (mother) 。

萬物 (wan wu) probably means "all" but I only put it exactly as the characters meaning so you can see that your translation is very far from what was written.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

When the wanting and naming cease, the peace, the emptiness, the stillness is found.

故 (so) 常 (constant) 無 (without) ， 欲 (desire) 以 (so as to) 觀 (see) 其 (its) 妙 (wonder)﹔

Nothing here about naming, and this verse is connected to the other hence the 故 (so, therefore) character.

Also, notice there is a comma and THEN the word "desire" appears.

therefore ever without it, the desire is to see its wonder. This is more literally accurate than your translation.

I added no interpretation just the literal words.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

Wanting and naming, you see only the manisfestations, the 'things', material, content.

常 (constant) 有 (have) ， 欲 (desire) 以 (so as to) 觀 (see) 其 (its) 徼 (boundary)。

Again, it is saying when you constant have something - whatever that something is - there is a desire in order to see its boundary.

If you want to equate "boundary" with "material" that's fine, but it's not OK if you are claiming that it is an accurate/literal translation...

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

The manisfestations is what is seen/experienced - the sound, the colors, the movement.(things)
The mystery is the seer/knower/experiencer of the manisfestations.(not a thing)

此 (this) 兩 (both) 者 (side) ， 同 (same) 出 (arise) 而 (with) 異 (different) 名 (name) ，
同 (same) 謂 (meaning) 之 ('s) 玄 (black/mystery) 。

Again, what you did was NOT a translation at all. More like your interpretation OF the Tao Te Ching.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

 

The manisfestations (the seen) and the mystery (seer) arise from the same source, darkness.

edit on 27-2-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Um, no.

玄 (mystery) 之 ('s/of) 又 (also/again/both) 玄 (mystery)， 眾 (many) 妙 (wonder) 之 ('s) 門 (gate) 。

It's sad how many people can't just translate something and leave it alone. They have to throw in their own interpretation in order to mess up what the original text was saying. Isn't that the whole point of Taoism, to keep it simple?

Maybe I should translate it since most translations are corrupted.

Yes, there are similarities between Taoism and (Zen) Buddhism, but you can't use the Tao as "emptiness" when it is clearly not that... It is more like, a force which flows through everything and that is always changing. This is not what Zen teaches...

reply to post by arpgme


When i wrote 'This is 'my' attempt at translation', i mean it is the way i personally read it (sorry, the word interpretation did not come to mind) from this;

Tao Te Ching
Written by Lao-tzu
From a translation by S. Mitchell.

The tao that can be told
is not the eternal Tao
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.

The unnamable is the eternally real.
Naming is the origin
of all particular things.

Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.

Yet mystery and manifestations
arise from the same source.
This source is called darkness.

Darkness within darkness.
The gateway to all understanding.


Please state where you got your 'literal translation' and on what it was based.
Thank you for your patience.

The "nothingness" refers to not just empty space where there is no matter or energy, but also where space and time also does not exist. Absolute non-existence.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by ImaFungi

 

Humans have been programmed to compete, it's fun for the overlords to watch. The Colosseum with gladiatiors. It's also very productive, it makes the slave work harder if he is trying to out do his collegue, good for consummerism too. Winners and losers make the rich richer and the poor poorer, which side are you on?
Competiveness is fed to us young and it is what drives this insane world.
Wanting is a disease, wanting is the uneasiness.

edit on 27-2-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

the concept of competitiveness and competition far preceded the human and its ways....... competition/survival of the fittest/natural selection is the natural process of life producing the highest caliber of quality it can,, and that striving for new areas of actuality is what pushed the bounds of what is possible,, evolution.......

i dont like this, but i will not ignore its prevalence........ it is a lesson,,, to strive to achieve the best you can,,,in the wild world out operate your predator and you are not prey..... it is what is check and balance,,, an arena where the top competitors remain..... i didnt make these rules,,, and i understand there are ways around them/... but competition doesnt need to be cut throat..... competition is a way to better ourselves,,, to sharpen our tools against each others, for mutual benefit ( no homo) its the social darwin competition is the name of the game so winners and many failures are expected ,,,, that is not good,,,,, for civilization and humanity was created to escape the unjust and uncontrollable rules of the wild

Originally posted by Itisnowagain

Please state where you got your 'literal translation' and on what it was based.
Thank you for your patience.

edit on 27-2-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

I translated those few lines myself by looking at the meanings of the characters. It wasn't based on anything but on the original Chinese writings itself.

Taoism is very big on keeping it simple, so I find it ironic that people would put in their own interpretations into the book instead of just translating what was ACTUALLY written.

reply to post by arpgme


Are you chinese?
There are many 'translations' of the Tao Te Ching but i have never heard the chinese version you produced.

The Tao Te Ching has been translated into Western languages over 250 times, mostly to English, German, and French. According to Holmes Welch, "It is a famous puzzle which everyone would like to feel he had solved." (Quoted from Wiki).

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by arpgme

 

Are you chinese?
There are many 'translations' of the Tao Te Ching but i have never heard the chinese version you produced.

Now that is really sad, it just goes to show you how corrupt a text is if you can't even find a version of it with no interpretation and just the translation of the words AS IS.

Originally posted by Itisnowagain
reply to post by arpgme

 

The Tao Te Ching has been translated into Western languages over 250 times, mostly to English, German, and French. According to Holmes Welch, "It is a famous puzzle which everyone would like to feel he had solved." (Quoted from Wiki).

edit on 28-2-2012 by Itisnowagain because: (no reason given)

Not true at all, there is no mystery in translation something....

If you see the word "道" [dao] and it means "way" or "path" , there is not reason to be translating it as "emptiness".

If you see the word "徼" [jiao] and it means "boundary", there is no reason to be translating it as "material world".

You are not supposed to be adding in YOUR interpretation when translating, you are just suppose to be translating what it actually says. If you want to interpret "boundary" as "material world" fine, but don't go changing the words of what it actually says, that is being dishonest. When working on the translation you are supposed to keep it as close to the original work as possible.

What we need is an honest translation of the tao te ching.

reply to post by arpgme


The Tao Te Ching is written in Classical Chinese, which can be difficult to understand completely, even for well-educated native speakers of modern Chinese. Classical Chinese relies heavily on allusion to a corpus of standard literary works to convey semantic meaning, nuance, and subtext. This corpus was memorized by highly-educated people in Laozi's time, and the allusions were reinforced through common use in writing, but few people today have this type of deep acquaintance with ancient Chinese literature. Thus, many levels of subtext are potentially lost on modern translators. Furthermore, many of the words that the Tao Te Ching uses are deliberately vague and ambiguous.

Since there are no punctuation marks in Classical Chinese, it can be difficult to conclusively determine where one sentence ends and the next begins. Moving a full-stop a few words forward or back or inserting a comma can profoundly alter the meaning of many passages, and such divisions and meanings must be determined by the translator. Some editors and translators argue that the received text is so corrupted (from originally being written on one-line bamboo strips linked with silk threads) that it is impossible to understand some chapters without moving sequences of characters from one place to another. (Quote wiki)

reply to post by Itisnowagain


There's a big difference between trying to translate something from an old language and intentionally changing words which are obvious they do not mean in order to suit one's own interpretation...

reply to post by arpgme


It's a free world.
Your version, my version, neither is right.

There has never been a true word spoken.
The real, the true, can not be put into words.