This has been a really interesting read. Reminds me a lot of the new Leighton book in a lot of ways, where the opening chapter says basically the same thing: that when we sit we sit as a question. Still though, and let’s really cut through the bullshit: part of the reason this post is here is to pass some judgment. Which is fine, we all need critiqued, we all need a push here and there to see some of our own shit, which we typically take for something other than shit. Still, there are a few things I’d like to, uh, question. I’m sorry, I couldn’t help myself…okay, I’m done, no more bad jokes.
As long as we’re cutting through the bullshit, it often feels like this post is saying, “I’ve got it, I’ve figured it out, most Western Buddhism/Zen has it wrong and here’s where, and in particular, Treeleaf is too soft and easy and passive.” And maybe so. Who knows. Furthermore, I mean, the entire rhetoric of the post seems delineated upon two lines: those who are doing the wishy-washy hallmark zen (though it may work for them, but they’re still “dead” spiritually, which is most of Treeleaf (these are the implications)) and those who sit at the white hot center of things, with this burning question. Which again is fine, if not somewhat like: so you’re saying you’re doing it right and we’re not. Which, at first I thought, interesting read, but I’ll pass, but then Chet jumped in to say that people are like avoiding the post’s real shit. So, the above then, that’s what I see as the post’s real shit. It’d be one thing to say, “Does anyone else think there needs to be more questioning here at Treeleaf” and kind of explain what the Great Doubt is; it is entirely another thing to say, Treeleaf is passive, most Western Buddhism seems to be, and check out how I’ve got it right. In any case, this is nothing new, either. Slavoj Zizek’s been saying it for years and it might be of interest to some:
http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/2/western.php
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2122/
Pretty interesting articles really, and I recommend everybody at Treeleaf read them. And then we lead a revolt against Slavoj. I kid, I kid.
Anyway, I realize this post is a little antagonistic. I certainly don’t mean to be a jerk, only to be honest and share my perception of what this post really feels like (which Hogen also mentioned). I mean, I don’t know you Stephanie and it seems you’ve “found” something really great for you, or whatever (I can never phrase these things well enough, apologies), but the strategies of the post and the overall purposes of it, which seem complex to me, seem suspect and worth raising at least a tiny other perspective. Others are doing this as well, but I really think it's all in how the initial post is written, expressed that has us all going "wha?", you know?
Lastly, here’s a suspicion of my own: while some people at Treeleaf discuss their personal lives, most of us don’t do this very openly (I don’t mean this negatively). I mean, we all kind of use abstracts, to some degree, and it’s rare when any of us really gets into the details, the real details of our lives. Here, we have “darkness” and “angst” and etc, and that’s fitting, because who wants to read a bunch of people’s problems all day long? Further, who wants to read a bunch of stuff about how we’ve all suffered, really suffered, and here are the details of it, and how now we’re in the light, whatever light that might be – frankly, most suffering, unless you’re a really talented writer, is actually pretty banal stuff, and is mainly self-imposed (again, I could very well be wrong here, but that was my experience of “darkness,” years and years of it, and even in the midst of years and years of it, that always nagging thought, feeling, perception: “am I just pretending somehow?”). So, for me anyway, because of the nature of the forum, we don’t all post our Question(s) mainly because they can be pretty personal. Not only that (though almost everyone here is kind beyond kind), I don’t want to bore people with my own little questions which I sit on the cushion with, because we all have them. And the Big Question, the Great Doubt, that’s just the little question, the little doubt in our every day lives (was I a dick today? Did I really say that thing, think that thing? Treat her like that? Act superior like that?) And it’s those little questions that remind us of the Big Questions, those little doubts that remind us of the Great Doubt, and the little are nothing but the Big all along, just another way of playing it. But maybe that’s just me.
Anyway, I also want to say thanks for a compelling read and for knocking us all about some, which I also see as one of the purposes of the post.
-a