|
Post by David on Jul 20, 2010 8:10:03 GMT -5
The concept of metanarrative was introduced and criticized by Jean-François Lyotard in his work, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (1979). In this text, Lyotard refers to what he describes as the postmodern condition, which he characterized as increasing skepticism toward the totalizing nature of metanarratives and their reliance on some form of "transcendent and universal truth":[2]
Simplifying to the extreme, I define postmodern as incredulity toward metanarratives. This incredulity is undoubtedly a product of progress in the sciences: but that progress in turn presupposes it. To the obsolescence of the metanarrative apparatus of legitimation corresponds, most notably, the crisis of metaphysical philosophy and of the university institution which in the past relied on it. The narrative function is losing its functors, its great hero, its great dangers, its great voyages, its great goal. It is being dispersed in clouds of narrative language elements—narrative, but also denotative, prescriptive, descriptive, and so on [...] Where, after the metanarratives, can legitimacy reside? —Jean-François Lyotard
Lyotard and many other poststructuralist thinkers have viewed this as a positive development for a number of reasons. First, attempts to construct grand theories tend to dismiss the naturally existing chaos and disorder of the universe. Second, metanarratives are created and reinforced by power structures and are therefore not to be trusted. Metanarratives ignore the heterogeneity or variety of human existence. They are also seen to embody unacceptable views of historical development, in terms of progress towards a specific goal. The latent diverse passions of human beings will always make it impossible for them to be marshalled under some theoretical doctrine and this is one of the reasons given for the collapse of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.
Replacing grand, universal narratives with small, local narratives
According to the advocates of postmodernism, metanarratives have lost their power to convince – they are, literally, stories that are told in order to legitimise various versions of "the truth". With the transition from modern to postmodern, Lyotard proposes that metanarratives should give way to petits récits, or more modest and "localized" narratives.[citation needed] Borrowing from the works of Wittgenstein and his theory of the "models of discourse",[3] Lyotard constructs his vision of a progressive politics that is grounded in the cohabitation of a whole range of diverse and always locally legitimated language games. Postmodernists attempt to replace metanarratives by focusing on specific local contexts as well as the diversity of human experience. They argue for the existence of a "multiplicity of theoretical standpoints"[4] rather than grand, all-encompassing theories.
Is poststructuralism a metanarrative?
Lyotard's analysis of the postmodern condition has been criticized as being internally inconsistent. For example, thinkers like Alex Callinicos[5] and Jürgen Habermas[6] argue that Lyotard's description of the postmodern world as containing an "incredulity toward metanarratives" could be seen as a metanarrative in itself. According to this view, post-structuralist thinkers like Lyotard criticise universal rules but postulate that postmodernity contains a universal skepticism toward metanarratives; and this 'universal skepticism' is in itself a contemporary metanarrative. Like a post-modern neo-romanticist metanarrative that intends to build up a 'meta' critic, or 'meta' discourse and a 'meta' belief holding up that Western science is just taxonomist, empiricist, utilitarian, assuming a supposed sovereignty around its own reason and pretending to be neutral, rigorous and universal. This is itself an obvious sample of another 'meta' story, self-contradicting the postmodern critique of the metanarrative.[citation needed]
Thus, Lyotard's postmodern incredulity towards metanarratives could be said to be self-refuting. If one is skeptical of universal narratives such as "truth", "knowledge", "right", or "wrong", then there is no basis for believing the "truth" that metanarratives are being undermined. In this sense, this paradox of postmodernism is similar to the liar's paradox ("This statement is false"). Perhaps postmodernists, like Lyotard, are not offering us a utopian, teleological metanarrative, but in many respects their arguments are open to metanarrative interpretation. They place much emphasis on the irrational, though in doing so apply the instruments of reason[citation needed].
But of course, that is only from a modernist perspective, since such an argument against postmodernism is an attempt towards making a totalizing metanarrative of postmodernism, an attempt to deconstruct postmodernism using totalizing criticisms of a supposed a priori of postmodernism, assuming that postmodernism follows the linear categorical logic of modernism, when postmodernism really uses the categories of logic in a contingent fashion, in an incredulity while taking in account of the multiplicitous nature of language-games and their limitations in ascent to a discovery of a higher truth of paralogy.
|
|
|
Post by Jonathon Doyle on Jul 20, 2010 14:19:32 GMT -5
So is there a point there David? I suppose the question from that then is, does the practice here have a 'grand narrative' behind it?
Does the ecstatic Buddhist practice strategy have certain implicit assumptions about it that shape and define the meaning of leading a 'contemplative life'.
I think practice strategy is the key word here, its a way to reduce and eliminate suffering and bring a wonderful sense of peace and equanimity to your life, the Buddha doesn't ask us to follow him, is there if you want to try it.
Anything else?
|
|
|
Post by jhananda on Jul 20, 2010 16:20:47 GMT -5
Hello Chris, if I recall the anthropological studies that concluded that hunter-gatherer societies are healthier, more intelligent, have lower stress, and the people are more satisfied and least worked, was based upon a number of studies that included archaeology of ancient societies, ethnographies of recently past societies, and anthropology of the few existing hunter-gatherer societies.
Also, the general opinion in anthropology is the advent of agriculture was in most cases caused by a need to have more grain and/or fruit for fermenting beer and wine, and not for feeding more people. It might be inferred that the increased need for intoxicants might have followed the decline of mysticism in ancient societies.
Yes, retreating into the wilderness for two weeks each year while I raised my children for 25 years, then for longer periods since I took up the mendicant’s life has certainly enriched my spiritual journey, which included stimulating mystical experiences, which was not at all simulating or pretending to have such experiences. I need only point to the level of lucidity in my writing as evidence that my spiritual experiences were authentic and not pretended.
There were many aspects to my wilderness experiences that I found aided my spiritual life. First, the silence and solitude drove me into myself for self-discovery. Secondly, the silence, especially at School House Canyon in Southern AZ in the spring of 2000, was so quiet there that I could hear my own heart beat. That silence stimulated charismatic hearing that had become so loud there that I thought I would go deaf from the loud auditory charisms.
Frequently sleeping under the stars over the last 4 decades has also stimulated my spiritual experiences, because I found that meditating while lying on my back and gazing upon the stars at night produced communication with the heavenly realms (akasha-loca). In these experiences I flew out of body into space where I found the stars in space are also beings who communicate through singing songs of loving kindness and compassion. I also traveled to the moon and planets and stars and met the planetary deities (devas) of those domains (locas).
On a more mundane level, I found foraging for food helped me hone my spiritual instincts for sensitivity to all of the charisms. How this worked is, one who forages for food has to develop an instinct to find food quickly and effortlessly. Thus, I found I could just take a hike while leaving my eyes out of focus. Food plants and animals would be instantly recognized by me. And, while thus engaged in this defocused movement, my foraging was aided by keeping my awareness upon the charisms, or jhana-nimitta.
Yes, the system of feeding mendicants in Asia should produce more mystics, but for some reason when I was in Asia it seemed to only produce more indolence and pretentiousness among people who grow their hair matted, but smoke hashish all day, while impressing naïve western tourists.
Jonathon, the Ecstatic Buddhist practice strategy indeed has an implicit assumption about it of producing bliss, joy and ecstasy in the here and now, which shapes and defines the meaning of leading a 'contemplative life'. That is to say, our practice strategy is leading a rigorous contemplative life, which is intended to produce bliss, joy and ecstasy in the here and now. And, if we get it in the here and now, then the implication is we are going to then have it in the there and then of the after life. We reason, how can we presume to have bliss, joy and ecstasy in the after life, if we do not have it in the here and now?
Best regards, Jhananda
|
|
|
Post by Chris White on Jul 21, 2010 15:46:27 GMT -5
No I wasn't suggesting that your experience was simulated, but just that you used the word 'simulate', which I suppose when making a conscious choice to 'retreat' these days is a kind of 'simulation' (with all the camping gear that is needed, and that we are 'aware' that we are going out 'into' the wilderness, as opposed to having always been there).
Its amuseing to watch your utube video in which you are sitting beside a tranquil stream, in a very natural looking environment, and then you reach over and pull out a laptop! Presto, back to civilization. But the difference today is that we can bring 'civilization' with us isn't it?
There must have been quite a number of mystics who were 'consumed' by nature, given the dangers that would have existed then, or even today? As you have indicated they most likely would have been alone.
gazing upon the stars at night produced communication with the heavenly realms (akasha-loca). In these experiences I flew out of body into space where I found the stars in space are also beings who communicate through singing songs of loving kindness and compassion. I also traveled to the moon and planets and stars and met the planetary deities (devas) of those domains (locas).
When OOB are you perceiving the above in the same way as we 'see' reality in waking life? Except that you are in an astral body? The way you describe it, it sounds like an everyday 'experience', which to most people is going to make it sound like nonsense, or a poetic way of talking about what cannot be talked about. But is it really an 'experience', or simply pure 'awareness' that you have to then 'translate' into experience when back in your body? Are you 'aware' of your body sleeping when OOB, and can you come back if you choose to? And generally what is your perception of time OOB?
Does our 'reality' appear 'illusory' to you? Does David Bohm's conception of reality as a 'hologram' make 'sense' to you?
|
|
|
Post by Jonathon Doyle on Jul 21, 2010 15:56:42 GMT -5
We reason, how can we presume to have bliss, joy and ecstasy in the after life, if we do not have it in the here and now?
I'm sorry what was the reason?
I was under the impression that we are all suffering (do you suffer?), because of our 'body', and with death ends suffering.
Are you in a particular Jhana all the time? I mean, is your 'base' existence at '3rd Jhana', for example, or does it vary?
|
|
|
Post by Julie on Jul 21, 2010 17:37:07 GMT -5
Its amuseing to watch your utube video in which you are sitting beside a tranquil stream, in a very natural looking environment, and then you reach over and pull out a laptop! Presto, back to civilization. But the difference today is that we can bring 'civilization' with us isn't it? ...and then bring 'nature' back into 'civilization' for 'world wide' instant replay on utube...what kind of retreat is that? You were making a movie for christs sake! Haha...its interesting though talking about this in the context of 'simulation', which fits well with Baudrillard's concept of 'simulacrum'. What do you think Michael? It's very hard to contest your experience Jeffrey, but it is a leap of faith, whatever anyone says, we do have to 'believe' you; which is no different than the faith of billions of people the world over who 'believe' the craziest things imaginable. And they believe the craziest things imaginable because of some inner need to 'believe' in something 'greater' than themselves. Do you see that as being one of your functions creating the GWV on the web? (I certainly hope so because you're a terrible actor... ;D) I know you are aiming for the 'natural' look (which you certainly have ) I think for us less accomplished mystics, that is really the most difficult element to over come, that virtually no one can believe in something they have never experienced, and the moment you say you are a 'contemplative, they think you are some new age hippie full of shit. Then again I feel the same way when going into these kind of GWV forums, when you do get support, you think, great! but what a boring old hippie! Do you know what I mean?
|
|
|
Post by Jonathon Doyle on Jul 21, 2010 17:55:14 GMT -5
Well i dont think Jeffrey is aiming for Hollywood celebrity status Julie. These are grass roots DIY projects with very little funding, let's see what you can manage under the same conditions shall we?
|
|
|
Post by jhananda on Jul 21, 2010 20:12:54 GMT -5
Hello Chris, Jonathon and Julie, and thank-you all for posting your comments. Yes, I suppose it is a bit surreal to be sitting in the middle of nowhere on retreat, which we were in Perkinsville, AZ, and then pull out a computer, and video the conversation. You might Google the location to check how remote we were. However, we did just drive up to our campsite and unload the car and walk about 50 feet to the edge of the Verde River.
Yes, I brought a laptop and a digital camera, and since they are battery operated, I could use them until the batteries were exhausted. This is why there is only one 90-minute video for a five-day wilderness retreat, because the batteries all got used up on the second day.
Yes, we all have to believe, or have faith, in the story of any mystic; however, we have the freedom to engage in the methodology that the mystics claimed worked for him or her to become a mystic. I further support my revelations and attainments by referring to the writings of past mystics, to show their experiences were rather similar to mine.
I have also had a number of students engage in the methodology that was successful for me, and they have had some success with it. Michael Hawkins has taken the practice strategy more seriously than any of my other students, and consequently he has greater fruitful attainment. So, you can ask him about his attainments, and whether he feels that my instruction was valuable, and whether he believes any of my revelations and attainments are valid. You all can also verify my findings by engaging in the methodology that worked for Michael and I, and see if it works for you.
Chris, when I am out-of-body sometimes the perception of reality is similar to the material existence, and sometimes it is absolutely otherworldly. It just depends upon the domain that one is in, and what is taking place then. However, most often there is a deep intuitive level in which I might be aware of subliminal communication with the subject that I am in contact with, or I might be aware of other dimensions, or lifetimes at the same moment.
No, when I am out-of-body I am hyper aware of the domain I am in, and completely unaware of my physical body and its surroundings. Yes, I can go anywhere and when I wish to when out-of-body, and I can return to the body at will. If there is any threat to the body, then I am brought back immediately to it.
When out-of-body there can be extreme time-space dilation. For instance I once recalled a previous lifetime when out-of-body. So, I flew back in time and space to a lifetime as a poor farmer living in a one-room adobe hut with my wife and our children. I actually relived the entire lifetime from birth to the death of my wife, then, who loved me more selflessly than anyone I had ever had a relationship with in any lifetime to the present.
I was weeping over her body, when I heard the meditation bell ring in this lifetime. The meditation bell was by the head of this body and a moth had flown into it causing it to ring.
When I returned to this time-space domain I was completely overwhelmed by having relived an entire lifetime in the short period of a night’s rest. At that point I could not tell which lifetime I was in, or whether the next moment would take me to another time-space dimension where I might watch a galaxy bloom like a flower, which I have also observed when out-of-body on another occasion. Or, on another occasion my body became the entire galaxy, and all of the beings in it. So, that was space dilation.
While, on one level these out-of-body-experiences certainly make all of the dimensions that are possible, make life seem like just a hologram; nonetheless, I find no evidence to support of a belief that the physical universe is a hologram that we can manipulate at will. However, we, as spirit beings, can travel through time, space and domain effortlessly, as mystics, and we can manipulate the astral domain at will, which makes for a holographic reality; however, I have found we can not manipulate the material reality no matter how hard we try, except through the sweat of our brow and the brawn of our hands.
Jonathon, the first of the 4 Noble Truths states that suffering exists, but it does not state that suffering is a necessary requirement for life in a physical body. If you examine the suttas that describe jhana you will find that the answer to the fourth Noble Truths is the attainment of the fourth jhana, where we are free from suffering (adhukkha). Yes, this requires being able to walk around in the fourth jhana. Yes, I walk around saturated and suffused in the fourth jhana. Michael can also provide anecdote that he too walks around in some level of jhana all day long every day. Michael and I have found that by leading a rigorous contemplative life that produces jhana every day, causes us to be saturated in whatever level of jhana we experience every day, several times a day, so that we have that jhana all day long.
Julie, I lead Ecstatic Buddhist wilderness retreats for rigorous contemplative who are intent upon enlightenment in this very lifetime.
My purpose in building the GWV and my presence of the web is to show that the ecstatic and charismatic experiences of the mystics is real, accessible, and anyone who wishes to engage in the process to get there can have those experiences.
May you all be enlightened in this very lifetime, if you want it,
Jhananda
|
|
|
Post by Chris White on Jul 22, 2010 14:39:30 GMT -5
Chris, when I am out-of-body sometimes the perception of reality is similar to the material existence, and sometimes it is absolutely otherworldly. It just depends upon the domain that one is in, and what is taking place then. However, most often there is a deep intuitive level in which I might be aware of subliminal communication with the subject that I am in contact with, or I might be aware of other dimensions, or lifetimes at the same moment.
Is this a perception that one may encounter in our reality?
People often talk about the idea of meeting a 'soulmate', or experiencing dejavu, or even my own experience of entering 3rd Jhana has brought on the sense of everything becoming 'hyper-real', where I feel like I am in a film, watching myself.
Or at times my 3rd eye has opened, sometimes the result of meditation, sometimes self arising, and I feel that I have 'telepathy', but not in the usual sense of actually being able to read another's thoughts, but that I feel a deep sense of connection and empathy with that person who I am looking at. Oddly, on one or two occasions the people whom I looked at, suddenly, would also look at me, as if I had 'called' them.
I'm guessing that the feeling of being starred at (because it was close to a state of non-perception), and the fact that I felt no inhibition to stare at people, they also happened to look at me, which then appeared to me as strange being in a hyper sensitive mode of awareness?
When out-of-body there can be extreme time-space dilation. For instance I once recalled a previous lifetime when out-of-body. So, I flew back in time and space to a lifetime as a poor farmer living in a one-room adobe hut with my wife and our children. I actually relived the entire lifetime from birth to the death of my wife, then, who loved me more selflessly than anyone I had ever had a relationship with in any lifetime to the present.
That is very touching. Do you wonder why you happened to relive that particular lifetime? Is there any meaning in asking questions like that? Was it better the 2nd time around? Interesting that the women who loved you the most, was in a context that many would find hard to believe that such love could exist (I mean living in a single room adobe hut, working hard as a farmer). Do you know what nationality you were? Have you met that wife again?
When I returned to this time-space domain I was completely overwhelmed by having relived an entire lifetime in the short period of a night’s rest. At that point I could not tell which lifetime I was in, or whether the next moment would take me to another time-space dimension where I might watch a galaxy bloom like a flower, which I have also observed when out-of-body on another occasion. Or, on another occasion my body became the entire galaxy, and all of the beings in it. So, that was space dilation.
These ideas sound like familiar themes in modern literature, (Borges, Thomas Pynchon, many many) and art in general, and I guess the concept of 'parallel universes' from quantum physics? What is the 'relationship' (if I can ask that) between these domains? The sense of not knowing what reality you are in, or where you may 'wake up' next? Is that blissful or disorienting?
|
|
|
Post by Ron on Jul 22, 2010 16:50:36 GMT -5
Was it better the 2nd time around?
How did you know it was the 2nd time round? That life sounds like it was better than the one you got now! So our lives don't get progressively better, thats a shame...
|
|
|
Post by Julie on Jul 22, 2010 16:57:01 GMT -5
a moth had flown into it causing it to ring. That must have woken up the moth too...wonder who that was?
|
|
|
Post by jhananda on Jul 22, 2010 19:19:19 GMT -5
Hello Chris, Jonathon and Julie, and thank-you all for posting your comments. Chris, the recollection of the ideal love I experienced as a peasant farmer living in a one-room mud hut happened to follow upon the demise of my last relationship, which came to an end in the spring of 2000. After the recollection of that lifetime, I felt no desire for a relationship, because I had already had a full lifetime with an ideal love. So, why would I want another one?
I am not sure what you mean by “Was it better the 2nd time around?” When I relived that lifetime it was as if for the first time. When it was occurring I was wholly unaware of anyother lifetime. At the time it was the only lifetime that I was aware of.
Yes, it is hard to imagine that love could even exist under the toil of being a peasant Hindu farmer about 1,000 years ago, but pre-industrial farming is not as difficult as it sounds. One just does not produce much. Maybe 40 acres are under till with one oxen and one farmer. But, that still produces more food than one family can eat in a year. They sell their surplus and purchase, or trade, for a few other necessities. The thing to get about such a life, it is simple, with few wants.
Yes, I have met that wife again; however, it was a moment in time that cannot be repeated in another context. Wanting it to repeat some decades ago nearly drove me mad. However, as I have experienced, it can be relived. But, why relive it again, and again? I relived it once in this lifetime.
That day I could not tell whether I should be still grieving the death of that loved one, or continue with the demands of this lifetime. It meant that I could not depend upon what reality I was in, or where I may 'wake up' in the next moment. The realization was not blissful at all. It almost shattered my psyche, when I saw how flexible reality is when out-of-body. It was utterly disorienting and the realization nearly broke my mind.
Yes, Julie, who, or what, was that moth? How did it know to ring the bell at that precise moment? While I do not believe in a benevolent creator-god who intervenes in our lives by buying us a new Mercedes Benz, just when we need or want it; nonetheless, there are certainly divinely inspired moments when something insignificant, like a moth bumping into a meditation bell, shatters one world and opens another one.
Love to all, Jhananda
|
|
|
Post by Michael Hawkins on Jul 23, 2010 13:28:47 GMT -5
Julie, you wrote: ...and then bring 'nature' back into 'civilization' for 'world wide' instant replay on utube...what kind of retreat is that? You were making a movie for christs sake! Haha...its interesting though talking about this in the context of 'simulation', which fits well with Baudrillard's concept of 'simulacrum'. What do you think Michael? Baudrillard's "simulacra" idea was central in the making of "The Matrix" movie, as you probably already know -- and "The Matrix" makes clear that we as a human collective have agreed upon a consensus reality that barely scratches the surface of what's really going on. Baudrillard says that consensus reality is actually made up of countless layers of memory, shared experience, repeated discoveres, mass-media repetitions and so forth -- all of it adding up to a post-modern world in which there is literally no such thing as an original thought or idea. We are all rehashing archetypal themes that have become so embedded in collective consciousness that, in some way, we are all going through automatic motions based on expectations and motivations beyond our individual ability to discern. Jeffrey, in utilizing a mass-media tool like YouTube, seeks to cut through the simulacra in order to point the way to a state that is independent of The Matrix, connecting us to a contemplative pathway back to the original Source (or maybe the path leads to ultimate release from the whole question of existence, beyond thoughts, feelings and perceptions...?). Baudrillard himself, in publishing all those books and going on French TV to debate other philosophers and so forth, is harnessing a powerful engine of simulacra in order to achieve some sort of objective viewpoint on the nature of The Matrix. If he had jhana, of course, his viewpoint would be more complete -- but perhaps that's something for another lifetime...? In any case, this complicated existence is the one we're living in, and I do believe we can use these "powerful engines of simulacra" to assist one another in transcending chaos and suffering. Blessings, Michael
|
|
|
Post by Michael Hawkins on Jul 23, 2010 13:55:34 GMT -5
Hello everyone, As I read through these thoughtful and interesting replies, a particular author keeps popping into my mind. Have any of you gotten into Rene Guenon? Jeffrey has seen me frequently suggest the book Reign of Quantity & The Signs of the Times, which has been very influential in helping me to bridge the gap between so-called "scientism" and religious tradition (which, according to Guenon, who was a Sufi practitioner, should offer a path to individual experience of that which was revealed by a given progenitor -- although Guenon would be the first to expose the corrupting influence of the priestly class, just as Jeffrey has been doing in his teaching). It is a brutal and difficult book in some ways, but also one that is hard to put down. No matter what we think about religious tradition, he makes many profound points about the need to move beyond certain rational frameworks in order to access deeper states of being -- which, in turn, produce direct connection with the Divine. Here are some back cover quotes from my copy: According to its author, The Reign of Quantity is directed to "...the understanding of some of the darkest enigmas of the modern world, enigmas which the world itself denies because it is incapable of perceiving them although it carries them within itself, and because this denial is an indispensable condition for the maintenance of the special mentality whereby it exists." and The Reign of Quantity is a brilliantly sustained and excoriating attack on modern civilization.... The book is a controlled and dispassionate but devastating razing of the assumptions and values of modern science. At the same time it is an affirmation of the metaphysical and cosmological principles given expression in traditional cultures and religions.
Kenneth Oldmeadow and Many of Guenon's books, notably The Reign of Quantity, are such potent and detailed metaphysical attacks on the downward drift of Western civilization as to make all other contemporary critiques... seem half-hearted by comparison.
Jacob Needleman Have any of you read Guenon? Any thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Jonathon Doyle on Jul 24, 2010 23:52:51 GMT -5
Michael, thanks for your intriguing points.
Guenon's last work (I believe), The Multiple States of Being, is interesting in how it emphasized that the human state is in reality only one small state of manifestation among countless others. He describes how there are an unlimited number of levels in the hierarchy of degrees of existence, and that the human state occupies no privileged place in the ensemble of universal existence- the human state being in no way "metaphysically distinguished" in relation to other states. It just happens to be the state where most of us find ourselves at the present. That is all it is. He says that if there is anything "special" about the human state, it lies in that spark of the Divine that lies at the heart of all of us, where the divine ray intersects with gross matter; and this intersection can occur at any point on the vertical axis of creation. He also suggests that nonhuman, never human, entities share this creation with us.
As 'new age-y' as it sounds, this is pre-1950's, though I think we can find at work problem's involving what David has pointed out as problems involving 'grand-narratives', and Guenon's search for a more 'authentic' narrative in Islam. The Buddhism-as-practice-strategy approach seems to nicely dispose of this problem...
|
|