“Without such an understanding I doubt if many
viewers of the video-clip would understand your values and commitment
from just watching
the video. But I may be mistaken and my doubt could be inappropriate.”
Your response was not unexpected and in a way I am glad that you did
respond as you have. It leads me to the issues that I am worried about
concerning how we see and what we see. When I worked in my healing
research with indigenous healers of different countries ( South
America, Mexico, the first nation peoples, ) I did not know the history
or the language other than what my culture had fed me. I had no terms
of reference and no pre conceived ideas about what I would or should
see/feel spiritually. The shaman, healers, priest and medicine men do
not give formal teachings as they expect your spirit to teach you. In
this way your questions, actions and insights, give a good indication
to the teacher of you understandings and awareness. It is the same in
Japan. In traditional Buddhist teachings very little formal teaching is
given as it is for the individual to find there way towards,
enlightenment. Each different sect of Buddhism has its own philosophy
and thinking from which it builds it traditions and rituals. Over time
these become formalized and the meanings of the original thinking that
gave rise to the rituals are lost in the dogmatic teaching of the
knowledge in the box.
My concern with western forms of understand is the idea of immediacy
and one where there is a knowledge giver and a knowledge receiver and
that knowledge has to be within a set of pre set conditions and the
context has to be known. This I feel is the main and crucial difference
between the analytical, lets understand the box , what the box is made
of, how to use the box and what is in the box thinking and that of;
well, lets see the space that the box has created in space and see
what the box brings to both its internal and external space.
I deliberately did not include a textual narrative as the idea was to
give and insight to practice. I had hoped that such questions and
observations would be evolve of the nature: what do I feel as I look?
what do I hear as I listen? I wanted the visuals to be virgin as it
were and then the questions that arise form engagement by inclusion
would be the meeting ground to understand .For me I believe that you
have set out the conditions you need in order to understand.
I am different to you, with my understandings, I need no words as I
give space to the space. In the ideas of Alan’s excluded middle I am
comfortable with having no terms of reference other than thinkable and
unthinkable. Brian talks of esoteric words and thinking and how to
hold on to them. If you preset your viewing by context in the claim
that it is the only way to understand Then from the very beginning you
are not allowing your self to engage in a form of inclusional
communication offered. If I use my understandings of my senses, with
the idea that the only truth that has any relevance is that; I know
there is much I do not know, I can expand the boundaries of my
ignorance because they are fluid in their dynamics of conscious open
enquiry. Often I have to unlearn how I have been taught to see and the
blindness of expectations is shown for what it is, that of cultural
conditioning.
I took a risk in offering insights to my practice as a mountain
Buddhist monk, knowing that many would have no terms of reference to
understand its context. I had hoped that some would be able to identify
the values even if they did not know the context. I am intrigued to
know if love and compassion can communicate non textually across
cultures. It seems so far that I have failed in that endeavor. smile.
I hoped that it would stimulate some questions that would indicate a
willingness to explore rather than set conditions under which the
communication can take place. What interests me as I know through our
friendship that we have on occasions been in different worlds, is that
your ground breaking work will lead you to having to become more
comfortable with having less control over your boundaries of learning
within a space and allow the space to teach you by reflecting back to
you.
The most positive part of your response was that related to the
technology, which is used to create the box in cyberspace. Rather than
any engagement with what you felt about what you saw or did not see.
Interesting stuff other peoples’ worlds.. smile. If I was the sensitive
type of individual the silence to the posting could stop me trying
again as the time and effort to create, edit, post the clip is
considerable and the responses negligible. However I believe that it is
part of my learning to understand myself through the reflections of
others that continues and will continue to fuel my passion to
communicate. What our dialogue is showing is the difficulty and
complexity of forms and conditions of knowing. That is an exciting
challenge..
Love and respect, grasshopper
Je Kan
Rev Je Kan Adler-Collins
Associate Professor of Nursing
Fukuoka Prefectural University Faculty of Nursing
Tagawa City
Fukuoka Prefecture
Japan
|