Regular readers might wonder when I will stop discussing Planet Of No Return so I will keep stalling for a while longer. Can we grind the "Arguments" into even finer particles? Yes, sir!
Both Avery and Lorenzen use very emotionally loaded, one-sided language. Lorenzen claims:
"'...that man crawling into his own little shell to think pure thoughts and contemplate his own navel is no longer man.'" (p. 126)
Well, yes. Despite the existence of a warp drive, Avery proposes to confine mankind to the Solar System for the next thousand years and also to limit the growth of scientific knowledge. That second proposal literally frightens me more than anything else. How can men cope with and respond to the universe if they refuse to learn about it?
But, apart from this, Lorenzen ridicules and denigrates contemplative practice. Zen is not crawling into a shell, thinking pure thoughts or contemplating a navel. In zazen, the senses remain alert while every thought, pure or impure, arises and passes so that we learn to stop identifying with them. And, meanwhile, we continue to engage with the rest of the universe while not sitting for meditation.
The next post will either be more of this or the next book!
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
I don't mind in the least how long you care to talk about QUESTION AND ANSWER!
I agree Lorenzen goes too far in his criticism of meditation or contemplation. I think we could keep in mind that might have been due to arguing with Avery in a HEATED moment. And possibly because he might think as I do, that contemplation is a means to an end, not an end in itself.
Sean
Post a Comment