[Buddha-l] Re: Where does authority for "true" Buddhism come from?

[Jim Peavler]

On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:39 AM, Benito Carral wrote:
>
>    Carl  Gustav  Jung  said  that  senselessness is the
> general neurosis of our time, so you are probably lucky
> enough  and don't need to know what a "meaningful life"
> means.

Well, I don't equate senselessness with meaninglessness. My life, by  
in large, has been quite a wonderful experience and filled with  
surprises. The only times I get really unhappy are when I spend to  
much time planning something, develop expectations of the outcome,  
and miss the mark completely (which is just about any time I plan  
much). Therefore, my life has been primarily as a drifter, and I have  
the good fortune to have married a brilliant and amusing woman who  
loves to drift too.

But, meaning? What is the meaning. Meaning suggests to me that  
something, in order to mean, has to somehow transcend the mere  
experience and tie a bunch of experiences together in a way that can  
be "interpreted" to have significance. When I was reading Jung (and I  
think I must have read nearly all of his works in the Princeton  
editions) I got so every little act, every little word, every thing  
anybody said or did, any silly idea that came into my head was rife  
with significance. I filled notebooks with analysis of all my most  
petty experiences. Sometimes it took me all day to write down a  
description and analysis of a dream I had. Too damned much meaning  
for me.

So, I began to relax and live my life and not to interpret it or  
analyze it. I have been quite happy any I don't think particularly  
neurotic. I think sitting meditation has had a strong influence in my  
life changes. I have become a connoisseur of chaos.
>
>
>>> One  approach  would  be  trying  to destroy all the
>>> copies  of the US constitution. Other approach would
>>> be  trying to delegitimize it. Then it could also be
>>> possible to write a new one.
>
>> Now  your straw-man is getting taller and fatter than
>> mine!
>
>    They  are  not  straw-men  at all. If you change "US
> constitution"  for "Buddhist teachings" in the context,
> you  will  easily  understand  that  I'm  talking about
> historical facts.
I consider your suggestion that I burn the Constitution, and then  
saying that is a terrible thing to be a straw man. Perhaps my use of  
the term is a bit too loose.
>
>    S