>IMHO Sitting is one form of doing. Meditation is another. And so is
>thinking.
> Or even fishing. I think and agree that U.S. Americans seem more prone to
>being deliberately busy than being busy with deliberation. But buddhists are
>not, to the best of my knowledge, against action.
>
>What I'd like to offer is a view of meditation from activity theory -- whether
>sitting in meditation, and focussing on breathing -- or walking in meditation,
>and focussing on the rhythm of putting one foot in front of the other -- it is
>the rhythm, deliberately doing something at the level of operations, that
>frees
>the mind at the level of action. Concentration on what is normally routine
>moves the routine to the level of action, makes the day-to-day and the moment
>by moment adjustable, and to some degree, controllable. The degree of control
>is a matter of not trying, the more one tries, the less control one has. The
>beautiful contradiction is that letting go puts it in your hand. At the
>bottom
>of this slippery slope is balance. This lesson can transfer to other
>actions.
>But a lot of the time it does not.
>
catholic monasticism has always maintained a tension between being able to
contemplate and meditate, and being available in an active way in the
world. these issues are imbedded in their rules and practices, and might
be worht examining...
two interesting places you might start
the rule of st benedict -- note the blend between practical issues and
spiritual matters
one version (a bit archiac in its language alas) is readily available at
http://www.benedictine.edu/abbey/site2/rule.html
the most radical form of benedictine monasticism is the carthusian order,
where monks live together as hermits. you can take a virtual tour of one
of these monasteries at
http://www.Parkminster.org.uk/
enjoy :-)
gary
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 01 2001 - 01:02:04 PST