Message from @Arthur Konrad
Discord ID: 426769802582032384
I was more thinking on the translation of Zen spirit into the ethical and aesthetic, that is to my comprehension more mature
In fact, from the position of pure aestheticism, Doric style and Zen style are essentially manifestations of one and the same
But from the perspective of the beauty of feelings and the comprehension of vital energies translating into social complexes such as love and romance, Plato was almost on par with Dostoevsky in his idealism.
Geriatric aesthetes for sure ! The extent to which they refuse to deal directly with ugly things at all in their writings. To them, maintenance of only pure, noble, soft and elevated "forms" at all times was almost like a necessary nutrient
Diogenes was the best Greek
ZEN IS DEFINITELY A SINGLE IDEA
NO MATTER HOW MUCH IT CLAIMS OTHERWISE
I FIND IT KIND OF SIMPLE ACTUALLY
IT IS A CERTAIN TYPE OF REALISM
BASED NOT ON TRANSCENDENTALISM BUT TEMPORALISM
SORT OF LIKE HINDUISM CROSSED WITH SHINTO
Mahayana -> chan + Shinto = zen
CLOSE ENOUGH FOR ME
👍
DIOGENES WAS FUN BECAUSE HE WAS A LITERALIST
REALISM IS A BIT MORE IDEALISTIC
IN THE SENSE OF GERMANIC IDEALISM
BUT I LIKE HIS GROUCHINESS
"HUMANITY... FUCKIN' BLIGHT"
Zen isn't realism, certainly not Shinto and even much less temporalism
Zen is derived from early Tantrism, originates from India, touches "Shinto" only on the plane of appearances, much like Tibetan or Mongolian folk touches Vajrayana. Zen decidedly IS transcendentalism, but unfortunately, its method is not widely understood, and is somewhat impenetrable for philosophy and dialectics
Zen places so much emphasis on the "unsayable" (Zen koans illustrate this well), that any polemical Zen is almost impossible to conceive of
Mahayanism is a much wider definition than Zen, so Zen does not derive form it, but it can be included in Mahayanist tradition, but then again, it can also be included also in Tantric tradition, but emphasis is slightly more contemplative and meditative
TRANSCENDENTALISM IS INHERENT
THE "UNSAYABLE" IS JUST A RIFF ON NIHILISM
COMMUNICATION DOES NOT EXIST
Absolutely not
Transcendentalism is connected to what defies the world of opposites
In that sense, Zen is intensely connected to going beyond the opposites
As such it does not belong to naturalist "realism", which is a Nietzschean domain
Language itself is inherently connected to the world of appearances, and hence "realization" cannot be spoken of in any definite terms, I mean this is the alphabet of transcendentalism
THAT IS MORE TROPE THAN PHILOSOPHY
IT WILL END UP AT BACKDOOR DUALISM ANYWAY
Cultivating non dual experience via meditation alone or meditation + koans. Predominantly
Yes, but the dualism and monism also belong to the same category
Even monism, in philosophical terms, does not represent any genuine realization in itself, it is a mere plane of philosophy
The Atma, the Brahman, it also has its own backdoor, which is Naturalism
I'm not a great fan of introducing concepts of non-dualism and dualism in general, because these are merely polemical devices that do not really help
Non-dualism and dualism could in fact easily be explained as one and the same
And then also not - the fundamental problem of philosophy
it's true they don't