INDEPENDENT or DEPENDENT

[horizon_mj1]

Friend horizon,


True but would you agree that when that energy used is the individual's own then surely it is his own choice and independent for that moment.

Your opinion?
Love & rgds

Yes absolutely. The only thing that would prove different is not having access to the energy needed for the action. You mentioned earlier a "still mind"; this reminds me of physical coma.

 

[Mr.yadda yadda]

Friend horizon,


True but would you agree that when that energy used is the individual's own then surely it is his own choice and independent for that moment.

Your opinion?
Love & rgds

yes,but not if its an involuntary movement.

 

[atanu]

Friend Atanu,

Agreed and not denied; however even if the mind is considered is the act independent?? is the question.
As we are in any act, we are dependent of outside influences but in the act itself a point of independence comes when the individual himself acts out of choice, provided again must add that the individual is capable of choosing; or else it is just a mechanical act dependent of the energy provided from outside.

Your views!
Love & rgds

Well. I was coming from a different perspective altogether. Probably I did not understand at all.

In this case, for the blue highlighted part, there are both possibilities. Some may consider their choice to be free but I have difficulty with that. Ego-mind is always bound to preferences and choices are not independent but contingent upon many factors. OTOH, for a sage there is no choice to be made -- spontaneity and doubtless natural acting takes place -- without the sage assuming any ownership.

Anyway that is my understanding.

What I had in mind was something else. Suppose someone throws an abusing sentence at me. Now words are meaningless in themselves. If I allow that abusive sentence to interact with my own emotions/values/thinking then my action will be reactive and dependent. OTOH, if a plain listening takes place and even if the abuse is recognised but there is nothing for it to react with, my action would be free.

 

[zenzero]

Friend Atanu,

Sorry for the circuitous route of this thread.
Possibly lack of clarity in expressing the inexpressible; however finally what was trying to convey is that humans are born with a mind which needless to state the birth itself is out of a state of no-mind.
However normally a soon as the child starts to breathe in the mind starts functioning and then the mind starts from where it had left but to be independent in thoughts is to be conscious and this independence is a pre-requisite for being religious or to walk the path/way.
Those who are blind followers and dependent in thoughts are not conscious and so not walking the path in the true sense but only as a herd member.
To read, understand and then to know and realise what the scriptures state needs independence of thoughts to verify the same by walking the way for verification or to intellectually understand what the writer meant and then then choose a suitable path independently to transcend that very mind and reach the state of oneness.
In oneness it is neither independent or dependent as the opposite does not exists to compare.
Yes, a sangha helps tremendously in creating an environment to be independent out of dependency.
And finally the above is only a mind chatter which is best ignored.
Love & rgds

 

[zenzero]

Friend horizon,

Yes absolutely. The only thing that would prove different is not having access to the energy needed for the action. You mentioned earlier a "still mind"; this reminds me of physical coma.

Yes possibly one without such an experience could say so but a still mind is most responsive to the environment and acts spontaneously and that is what all zen masters are trying to show. The martial masters too are trying to reach to such states of spontaneity.
Love & rgds