I think your definition of ” 醒悟” is a paradox itself.

來源: ZoyaWashington 2013-12-01 14:18:32 [] [舊帖] [給我悄悄話] 本文已被閱讀: 次 (3051 bytes)
本文內容已被 [ ZoyaWashington ] 在 2013-12-02 10:10:26 編輯過。如有問題,請報告版主或論壇管理刪除.
Sorry I am writing in English, the truth is neither my Chinese no my English is good even enough for this kind of discussion.

I think your definition of ” 醒悟” is a paradox itself. It seems to me it takes a leap of faith, not reasoning or logic, to achieve what you called “醒悟”.
 In another word, you just need to  believe in it to achieve it.
  
Like most people, I am used to a clearly defined system, in  which everything starts a definition, and follows logics. For example, if A
then B; If not B then not A. When you apply this logic in any real situation, A  and B are both mapped to specific conditions and the path between A and B are governed by a logic that means the same thing to everyone accepts that system.Therefore, anyone can come to the same conclusion if they understand the system  without ambiguity. The method “自我投降法”   fits into this category.
 
But for the “醒悟” you talk about, if “” can’t even be defined  by words, then “我是” is a question with no answer, at least with no
 fixed answer. To understand or achieve the thinking  of “神聖的無知”, I don’t think the system I describe above will work at all. I’ve tried to use that system to reason out this concept, and the  result is a complete confusion, or as it leads to the conclusion of “ do nothing”,
since there is no beginning, no ending, any action is the same as no action. And this conclusion leads me to believe that to understand what you described “醒悟”, you need to think in a different  way, which to me feel like a leap of faith type of thinking, for lack of better
words. To use this type of thinking, you don’t need to understand and think because  you can’t, you just need to accept and believe.  At least for me,  I can’t think I understand something if I don’t even know its definition, and if there is no different between A and
B, then AA, AB, BB are the same to me. If A=“醒悟”, B=not“醒悟” , then  whether “醒悟”or not, is the same. The only difference here is all how you  think about it. I can  say I am “醒悟” even though I don’t know  anything, or I can say I am completely confused and don’t even know how to
start to think or not to think. Isn’t this a paradox?

Also, to achieve “沒有思想”, so far I only succeeded in one condition: sleep.



所有跟帖: 

不,我沒有定義任何,我僅僅指一個方向。真理是無法定義的,隻能體會。 -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 14:20:07

Yes, the less you use reasoning power, the better, Truth cannot -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 14:21:09

So it is a leap of faith then -ZoyaWashington- 給 ZoyaWashington 發送悄悄話 (38 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 14:23:29

There is no Faith. If there is a faith, there is thought -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (103 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 14:27:03

You only need to ask "Who Am I?" -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (128 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 14:30:00

或者,再簡單一些,駐在如是(STAY IN BEINGNESS)就夠了。 -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (163 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 15:14:58

放棄信仰,因為信仰是思想。思想無法悟,隻能誤解。 -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (277 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 15:03:33

可以看出,你的悟性比較高了。如果要通過思想去理解,隻有PARADOX。佛經不就是PARADOX的匯集嗎 -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 14:25:19

不要自己評判SLEEP就是靜坐的失敗,不,你不知道的,你以為的SLEEP中,你的內部已經在根本地改變了。 -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 15:22:20

如果有一天,你發現你可以觀察睡眠了,就離醒悟不遠了。 -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (94 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 15:24:15

可以觀察是好事,但不要停留在觀察,要問:“誰在觀察?”,答案:“我”,然後問:“我是什麽?”或“觀察的是什麽?” -路文斯基- 給 路文斯基 發送悄悄話 路文斯基 的博客首頁 (0 bytes) () 12/02/2013 postreply 07:26:40

太難了,不是說吃飯就吃飯,睡覺就睡覺嘛 -融融- 給 融融 發送悄悄話 (0 bytes) () 12/01/2013 postreply 23:28:16

請您先登陸,再發跟帖!

發現Adblock插件

如要繼續瀏覽
請支持本站 請務必在本站關閉/移除任何Adblock

關閉Adblock後 請點擊

請參考如何關閉Adblock/Adblock plus

安裝Adblock plus用戶請點擊瀏覽器圖標
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”

安裝Adblock用戶請點擊圖標
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”