A Critique of “Stillness of Mind”

reply to post by Itisnowagain


Then why call it a disease?

NiNjABackflip
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

Then why call it a disease?

The total belief in 'should' or 'should not' is dis ease.

If laughter arises at the sounding of these words ('should'/'should not') then that is ease.

reply to post by Itisnowagain

The total belief in 'should' or 'should not' is dis ease.

If laughter arises at the sounding of these words then that is ease.

I too have an aversion to such forms of idealism. However, "should" and "should not" are merely expressions, incapable of doing anything. I don't think attacking a specific set of words is getting at the root of the matter.

The problem I have with the whole "stillness of mind" is that I find people are demonizing and then suppressing and resigning from themselves. The question I seek an answer for is can one utilize the "noise" rather than attempt to quiet it, and in the process utilize himself rather than quiet himself.

reply to post by TheSubversiveOne


Yes this is a good verse. This is doesn't however mean to hide the faith or truth.

NiNjABackflip
reply to post by Itisnowagain

 

The total belief in 'should' or 'should not' is dis ease.

If laughter arises at the sounding of these words then that is ease.

However, "should" and "should not" are merely expressions, incapable of doing anything. I don't think attacking a specific set of words is getting at the root of the matter.

They are expressions - words - but if it is believed that something 'should not' be then that is arguing with what is - that is insanity. Conflicting with 'what is' is dis ease.