Re: What happened to this place?
I have been following this thread and would like to thank Chet and all for offering their comments. The discussion here has really caused me to reflect on the nature of my practice and the extent to which I participate in online discussion threads (very little)... I tend to lurk, and refrain from commenting because one of my challenges and "learning goals" is to listen rather than broadcast. I used to teach at the university level and really loved the attention and the sound of my voice and realised how much I was missing out on the opportunity to be educated, and benefit from the experience and perspectives of my "students." It is not a popular thing in the academy (and a Tier One research institution) to walk into a classroom and tell your students that "we are all here to learn from one another - teacher included - and that the teacher/student demarcation is often an arbitrary one.
So - a few observations from my perspective and based only upon my experience alone:
- I am a firm believer in the "hand grenade rolling around on the floor" school of provocation - provocation in the sense of encouraging people to think out of the box by making statements that challenge one's comfort zone or way of viewing the world - of course this must be done within the bounds of decorum and propriety. In this sense I value and respect Chet's approach and presence. We need to be challenged and stirred from our comfort zones. On the flip side, a simple question comes to mind as a rule of thumb for me: [i]do I spend more time reading and commenting on posts than I do sitting?[/i] This is a personal statement that applies to me alone - your experience may be very different. For years I read all about Buddhist philosophy, history, etc. and sat very little by comparison. I was not practicing - I was posturing. In the last six-eight months my cushion time has increased exponentially, and my reading decreased by similar factors. One day I will stop oscillating and find balance.
- No one else can practice for me and my practice is my own. Reading and commenting on discussion threads often helps illuminate / give perspective to my own journey and lessens the isolation I feel. Where however is the line between practice and the online sangha as an online social opportunity (sangha facebook?) that more resembles intellectual posturing or coffee house chatter? Further, at what point do those who post at length remind me of students and teachers like myself who love the sound of their own voices and skew the practice far too much in the direction of thinking instead of just sitting? Of course, if we "just sat" there would not be much in the way of lively discussion here. Obviously there is a matter of balance. And I do realize that there are many who struggle with sitting and come to this forum to find encouragement and support (I have been one of them). But posting is not sitting, and I wonder if it is practice. Is it ancillary to our practice?
- To change direction a bit - I am a firm believer in challenging our teachers, just as they would challenge us. To blindly accept a hierarchical and non-questioning environment is not consistent with the direction where Western (and specifically American) Zen Buddhist practice is headed. I sat for a bit with a local sangha where the practice leader emphasized that we were all friends and colleagues practicing together but began making pronouncements more like a stern teacher. I stopped sitting with that group.
I would argue that we all know what it is we each need. A lot of the discussion here in a general sense is directed towards self-affirmation and recognition. Don't get me wrong - I feel very close to many of you - we have never spoken, we have never met in person - at the end of some very tough days I "tune in" and listen to what you have to say and your voices are reassuring beacons. But let's do be very honest with ourselves about why we come here. Our practice would benefit immeasurably.
A very deep Gassho,
Alex
I have been following this thread and would like to thank Chet and all for offering their comments. The discussion here has really caused me to reflect on the nature of my practice and the extent to which I participate in online discussion threads (very little)... I tend to lurk, and refrain from commenting because one of my challenges and "learning goals" is to listen rather than broadcast. I used to teach at the university level and really loved the attention and the sound of my voice and realised how much I was missing out on the opportunity to be educated, and benefit from the experience and perspectives of my "students." It is not a popular thing in the academy (and a Tier One research institution) to walk into a classroom and tell your students that "we are all here to learn from one another - teacher included - and that the teacher/student demarcation is often an arbitrary one.
So - a few observations from my perspective and based only upon my experience alone:
- I am a firm believer in the "hand grenade rolling around on the floor" school of provocation - provocation in the sense of encouraging people to think out of the box by making statements that challenge one's comfort zone or way of viewing the world - of course this must be done within the bounds of decorum and propriety. In this sense I value and respect Chet's approach and presence. We need to be challenged and stirred from our comfort zones. On the flip side, a simple question comes to mind as a rule of thumb for me: [i]do I spend more time reading and commenting on posts than I do sitting?[/i] This is a personal statement that applies to me alone - your experience may be very different. For years I read all about Buddhist philosophy, history, etc. and sat very little by comparison. I was not practicing - I was posturing. In the last six-eight months my cushion time has increased exponentially, and my reading decreased by similar factors. One day I will stop oscillating and find balance.
- No one else can practice for me and my practice is my own. Reading and commenting on discussion threads often helps illuminate / give perspective to my own journey and lessens the isolation I feel. Where however is the line between practice and the online sangha as an online social opportunity (sangha facebook?) that more resembles intellectual posturing or coffee house chatter? Further, at what point do those who post at length remind me of students and teachers like myself who love the sound of their own voices and skew the practice far too much in the direction of thinking instead of just sitting? Of course, if we "just sat" there would not be much in the way of lively discussion here. Obviously there is a matter of balance. And I do realize that there are many who struggle with sitting and come to this forum to find encouragement and support (I have been one of them). But posting is not sitting, and I wonder if it is practice. Is it ancillary to our practice?
- To change direction a bit - I am a firm believer in challenging our teachers, just as they would challenge us. To blindly accept a hierarchical and non-questioning environment is not consistent with the direction where Western (and specifically American) Zen Buddhist practice is headed. I sat for a bit with a local sangha where the practice leader emphasized that we were all friends and colleagues practicing together but began making pronouncements more like a stern teacher. I stopped sitting with that group.
I would argue that we all know what it is we each need. A lot of the discussion here in a general sense is directed towards self-affirmation and recognition. Don't get me wrong - I feel very close to many of you - we have never spoken, we have never met in person - at the end of some very tough days I "tune in" and listen to what you have to say and your voices are reassuring beacons. But let's do be very honest with ourselves about why we come here. Our practice would benefit immeasurably.
A very deep Gassho,
Alex
Comment