> This is because the so-called self is a construct of words and memories, of fantasies which have no existence in immediate reality.
I think this is Maya.
> If, however, you can really do the thing itself -- that is, if you can learn to wake up and concentrate at the drop of a hat -- you can take or leave the trimmings as you will.
The paradox of psychotherapy for me was that it was about doing this, and very little else. All of the discussions about this or that during sessions always led back to presence in the moment, or concentration.
The author doesn’t have a good grasp of Latin. The word medicina isn’t only about treatment of disease. It can also refer to things done to maintain health. It can also refer to the health care profession generally.
To the extent the author’s point relies on the incorrect definition, it cannot be consistent or correct.
> To the extent the author’s point relies on the incorrect definition, it cannot be consistent or correct.
I don't think that a point based on an incorrect definition is automatically inconsistent or itself incorrect. It might be, of course, or it might just be insufficiently justified. And, to the extent that it is a philosophical point rather than a historical one, the truth or falsity of a philosophical claim doesn't depend on whether someone actually said it, or it is a mistranslation of something someone actually said.
Through my forty years of spirituality, I, like Watts, have found that the end point of all of religions is Daoism. Daoism is an understanding, not a religion. It is our natural state, unclouded by society, guided only by our nature.
"From their stillness came their non-action. Doing-nothing, they devolved the cares of office on their employés, Doing-nothing was accompanied by the feeling of satisfaction. Where there is that feeling of satisfaction, anxieties and troubles find no place; and the years of life are many."
And it is our knowledge that got us into the mess we are in today:
"he men of old, while the chaotic condition was yet undeveloped, shared the placid tranquillity which belonged to the whole world. At that time the Yin and Yang were harmonious and still; their resting and movement proceeded without any disturbance; the four seasons had their definite times; not a single thing received any injury, and no living being came to a premature end. Men might be possessed of (the faculty of) knowledge, but they had no occasion for its use. This was what is called the state of Perfect Unity. At this time, there was no action on the part of any one, but a constant manifestation of spontaneity."
God is the name of the blanket we put over mystery to give it shape
> This is because the so-called self is a construct of words and memories, of fantasies which have no existence in immediate reality.
I think this is Maya.
> If, however, you can really do the thing itself -- that is, if you can learn to wake up and concentrate at the drop of a hat -- you can take or leave the trimmings as you will.
The paradox of psychotherapy for me was that it was about doing this, and very little else. All of the discussions about this or that during sessions always led back to presence in the moment, or concentration.
The author doesn’t have a good grasp of Latin. The word medicina isn’t only about treatment of disease. It can also refer to things done to maintain health. It can also refer to the health care profession generally.
To the extent the author’s point relies on the incorrect definition, it cannot be consistent or correct.
> To the extent the author’s point relies on the incorrect definition, it cannot be consistent or correct.
I don't think that a point based on an incorrect definition is automatically inconsistent or itself incorrect. It might be, of course, or it might just be insufficiently justified. And, to the extent that it is a philosophical point rather than a historical one, the truth or falsity of a philosophical claim doesn't depend on whether someone actually said it, or it is a mistranslation of something someone actually said.
Through my forty years of spirituality, I, like Watts, have found that the end point of all of religions is Daoism. Daoism is an understanding, not a religion. It is our natural state, unclouded by society, guided only by our nature.
http://nothingistic.org/library/chuangtzu/chuang35.html
"From their stillness came their non-action. Doing-nothing, they devolved the cares of office on their employés, Doing-nothing was accompanied by the feeling of satisfaction. Where there is that feeling of satisfaction, anxieties and troubles find no place; and the years of life are many."
And it is our knowledge that got us into the mess we are in today:
http://nothingistic.org/library/chuangtzu/chuang44.html
"he men of old, while the chaotic condition was yet undeveloped, shared the placid tranquillity which belonged to the whole world. At that time the Yin and Yang were harmonious and still; their resting and movement proceeded without any disturbance; the four seasons had their definite times; not a single thing received any injury, and no living being came to a premature end. Men might be possessed of (the faculty of) knowledge, but they had no occasion for its use. This was what is called the state of Perfect Unity. At this time, there was no action on the part of any one, but a constant manifestation of spontaneity."
http://nothingistic.org/library/chuangtzu/chuang35.html