Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Are you wrong?
lobster
Veteran
in Philosophy
Being wrong is part of the other persons job ... wait ... I am the other person ... therefore [Lobsters thinking cap goes on] I must be wrong at least part of the time. Such is life.
Time to hang up the hang ups?
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/the-audacity-of-talking-about-race-with-the-klu-klux-klan/388733/
1
Comments
I am always wrong.
Particularly when I am utterly convinced I'm right.
That's when I an wrong the most.
From the link:
What a story. I can see the Buddha doing what this guy has done. WWBD? But no one kill this dude, we need his type around
It's actually a heavy burden to always be right.
Tell me about it...
Indeed.
It is quite humbling to be made aware of the capacity to change and be changed.
Two monks were arguing about a flag.
One said: The flag is moving
The other said: The wind is moving
The sixth patriach happened to be passing by.
He told them: `Not the wind, not the flag; mind is moving.'
Who is wrong (or right)? The monks or the 6th patriarch.
Wind, flag, mind moves.
The same understanding.
When the mouth opens
All are wrong.
@pegembara
A monks job is to cease from evil, do only good & purify the heart/mind.
The 6th patriarch was simply pointing out to them that the coffee break was over.
The right or the wrong of this story is the koan. How does the questioner
find a solution without mimicking those other two monks f..king the dog?
Letting go of the need for such mental mastication's is really the koans answer..
The ending of papanca—nippapanca—reveals the true, undivided nature of the reality we inhabit. When the proliferating tendency of the mind ceases, even for a moment, the everpeaceful radiant heart is recognized. Papanca means “to spread out,” and the word conveys the dynamic web of thoughts and concepts that create our sense of reality. Rather than illuminating reality, papanca actually eclipses the direct seeing of what is really true. Papanca endlessly separates, and nippapanca means the cessation of that. It is a profound practice, to see through thinking and its activity of concretizing the self and the world. This is done not by hating thought, but by mindfully noticing a thought, particularly its beginning and ending.
http://www.tricycle.com/practice/tangled-thought
Well I'm not even sure what or who I am so on every likelyhood I'm wrong.
Whatever "wrong" means.
If we didn't have wrong would we have right?
Haha. Have a great day guys.
After seeing @how reply above, I was thinking about this question - Who is wrong (or right)? The monks or the 6th patriarch. of this koan.
A thought came that all (both the two arguing monks and the 6th patriach) are right and also all (both the two arguing monks and the 6th patriach) are wrong. So it is a contradiction and so this question cannot be answered, because answering in contradiction does not convey anything.
@Cinorjer might also be interested in this koan.
So is this thinking about this koan in the correct direction, where this koan would like us to move toward? Please tell. Thanks in advance.
@misecmisc1 the answer is in your question.
There is no right answer to a Koan.
There is also no wrong answer.
The best answer is the answer that comes to you.
Take that answer with you, and ponder it.
There is no conclusion, except the ultimate clarity of Emptiness.
You go where the Koan takes you, and where it takes you is Right.
For you.
Intellectual answers don't work. The master will send you away. You have to answer these from beyond the mind.
Can we answer from beyond the mind?
I don't know. Can we? Do tell.....
We can answer spontaneously without any premeditation.
That's what the zen master is looking for. That you are talking from emptiness and not the mind.
"A zen master asked a student what is this branch?
The student said ummm.... Zen master then hit him with the branch"
The zen master then asked the next student, what us this?
The student said, can I look at it?
He then hit the zen master with it.
You can only be wrong from another person's point of view, and it's up to you how much that matters.
^^^ @Telly03 if you try it is possible to realise any opinion, point of view that has an opposing possibility is partial/wrong/false, including ones own. Of course I might be wrong . . .
@Lobster, you are not only wrong, but are also very naughty.
Bad Lobster! Grow Up!
Are you wrong?
Frequently
Finally the beaten monks rebel against their oppressors!
But who is judging what is wrong or false? realizing is experiencing, not judging.
I'm either wrong, uppity or cynical because I dislike cooking and reality TV programmes.
Well - I like them both. So...what DO you like? [j/k]
Hmm? Oh, the flapping flag koan.
I've read many times some variation of "there's no right or wrong answer to a koan" and that's not quite accurate. There's many wrong answers. There's no one right answer, but there is one right understanding.
Sufficiently confused? Good. There is no flag and no wind, only me sitting on top of the pole enjoying the breeze.
I am.
Realising is [insert judgement]
Now what does I experience? Nothing wrong, false, right or true or opinions, judgements, naughtiness and [insert experience] ...?
Indeed.
Take care, sir because it does not seem a very safe place to enjoy the breeze, except if you are trained in gymnastics
I think so, but I might be wrong about that too.
Nuff said
There IS no flag.
What is the sound of one flag flapping?
We always think that a person whose opinion does not match our own is wrong.
And viceversa...
So ... you going to Church with mama? Think of it as a piece of opinion drama.
Here are some important questions for Christians but not necessarily askable ...
Does God in the person of Christ have teeth? (Yes God has teeth)
Did Jesus only have DNA from his mum?
What style of wrestling does God use?
So Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him till daybreak. When the man saw that he could not overpower him, he touched the socket of Jacob’s hip so that his hip was wrenched as he wrestled with the man. Then the man said, “Let me go, for it is daybreak.” But Jacob replied, “I will not let you go unless you bless me.” The man asked him, “What is your name?” “Jacob,” he answered. Then the man said, “Your name will no longer be Jacob, but Israel, because you have struggled with God and with men and have overcome.” Jacob said, “Please tell me your name.” But he replied, “Why do you ask my name?” Then he blessed him there. So Jacob called the place Peniel, saying, “It is because I saw God face to face, and yet my life was spared.” The sun rose above him as he passed Peniel, and he was limping because of his hip. (Genesis 32:24-31)
Save the drama, @lobster: I am NOT going to Church with mama...
That's sounds rather uncomfortable.
Can you think of a better metaphor for talking about a koan? Besides, if the flagpole's sharp enough, I don't have to worry about falling off. Hee.
It still sounds like a pain in the bum.
A koan is mostly an invitation to stretch beyond our identities sandbox.
It simply asks for explorers to accept that invitation.
Unprotected from the chaos beyond
our dreams of ego security,
uncomfortableness
with your answer
is usually
a good
sign
of whether that invitation was actually acted upon or not.
Everything is a constant state of flux, so how could one be wrong( or for that matter right)...There's no room for right or wrong in the 'present' state of affairs...( The grand scheme of things )
Everything unfolds just how it is meant to unfold, moment to moment and cannot be refolded to open again in a different way ( hence no wrong or right way so to speak)..
Right...Wrong....Humbug...It's load of non sense....
I can't think of how to answer this koan's question - Who is wrong (or right)? The monks or the 6th patriarch.
I was again thinking about this koan as to how to answer this koan's question. A thought came to my mind - If a master asks the above question, then we can reply by - who is asking this question?
Any thoughts, here please.
Yup, good.
By all means, go ahead, providing you remember this is a response YOU have thought up.
Koans do not have standard, pat general 'answers'.
As we have said, the answer lies within you and whatever right answer you give, is your right answer....
I'll try to link to a discussion I once had on this very koan at the end of this.
Those of you who have read what I've written before know I was trained to approach koans a specific way. I don't put koans up on an altar and worship them as Divine Foolishness, where mere mortals cannot comprehend without the Enlightenment decoder ring. That's a different school of Zen.
Most koans, like this one, have a specific Zen point to make to the zen monk. These koans do show a genius ability to understand how the mind works and makes it difficult, but you'd expect that from Zen Masters.
The flapping flag is a mind trap. Even when I tell you to free your mind from focusing on the flag, it's almost impossible to do. Just like those two monks, your mind clings to this impossible question with no right and no wrong answer. So why are you trying to answer it? Because your mind is hooked and thrashes around, demanding your brain cough up the answer. Let me repeat, the question of whether the flag or the wind is moving has no answer, not the way the question is asked. It's like asking "How far is up?"
So what do you do, when you're asked to solve a riddle that has no answer? You look to see what the koan is actually wanting to teach you. Two monks are arguing about a flag... Stop. Two monks are arguing? What's wrong with that picture? This particular koan even has the Master point you toward the answer.
http://newbuddhist.com/discussion/22177/the-wind-and-the-flag-a-koan-discussion#latest
I don't mean to just jump in on a thread I haven't participated in, but every single time I read this thread title in the main list, I think "Usually, yep!"
Thank you sir for explaining the above thing.
I was again thinking about this koan based on your above statements. A thought came to my mind regarding what the koan is trying to teach us, so thought of sharing here - the koan says two monks are arguing, in a way the koan is teaching that it needs two to argue and also the moment it is turned into two, there is argument and in a way teaching that duality leads to confusion.
The master pointed to the monks' mistake saying the mind is moving - in a way, trying to show the root from where this argument began - in a way saying to them the moment the mind moves, there is confusion. Even though the master in saying this was himself both right and wrong, but he said this to monks in kindness because when there is sickness, the medicine is called for. This statement or a similar statement - when there is sickness, the medicine is called for or asked for - this statement I got while reading some commentaries on other zen koans.
Thanks guys [guys etymology from Guido/Guy Fawkes incidentally]
Every word, every part of our demeanour and expression is worth exploring as part of our potential unravelling.
Extreme forms of tightness or looseness may be obstacles. People are always wondering where 'the teacher' is to be found . . .
In a sense having clarity or insight into our alignments, extremes, fence sitting, love of kittens, Buddhist preferences etc shows us the monkey side of our minds.
When will it stop flapping? When will it find the still in the movement?
When you stop talking and start walking.
• An untroubled mind,
No longer seeking to consider
What is right and what is wrong,
A mind beyond judgements,
Watches and understands.
Being wrong is to grasp at what no longer is...
Maybe you can't give a right answer, but can you ask the right question?
I don't know if I'm being deep or just silly...
Yes. It is my experience that this is so. Koan is a statement which has arisen from the silent space prior to mind. They appear paradoxical because mind is rational, logical and uses language and signs to express its rationality and logical understanding of the world. The silent space prior to mind, is prior to thought, language or signs. How can one express one's knowing of this silent space using language, logic and signs of mind? Logic and rationality are created from language and signs. So if one is trapped behind the perceived barrier of mind, one Will not understand the koan. Or be able to respond with one's own koan to demonstrate one's understanding prior to mind.
This is why koans and spiritual discussions from teachers sometimes sound paradoxical. They are speaking from that silent space prior to mind. Prior to logic and rationality. The mind cannot understand this. This is why direct knowing of it personally is essential to progressing on our journey. One will never understand it intellectually. Only from living it directly can we move forward. Whatever one imagines it to be like, is not it. Because the very act of imagining is obscuring it.
Yes. When the teacher gives one a koan, if one has known prior to mind. One would respond in a similar fashion, giving him/her a koan of one's own. The koan which was given is understood non verbally. So it can only be answered by responding, in such a way, that one is demostrating to their teacher that their knowing is prior to mind. To the rational logical mind, the koan may sound like nonsense. But when heard from that silent space prior to mind, it is understood in a non verbal way. And it is understood by the teacher, that such a response could only arise if one is responding from that space prior to mind.