"The Greeks had got it right, he said. Their drama was a communal act, a sacred event, in which the ancient stories of the tribe were played out, enab"The Greeks had got it right, he said. Their drama was a communal act, a sacred event, in which the ancient stories of the tribe were played out, enabling the audience to confront the deepest, most sublime and most terrible truths of human life, producing a profound, an overwhelming, release - a catharsis - which was the whole point of the drama"
Simon Callow has managed to write an entertaining and often surreal portrait of Wagner as a man. It doesn't go as deep as the work by Magee or Scruton but if you are looking for a brief book which provides an overview of his life, you've come to the right place. Callow has a tendency to believe Wagner too much though since this biography heavily relies on Wagners own biography, My life. Having said that it is incredible what a dramatic life he lead and what he managed to accomplish. He was an inveterate gambler who took enormous risks and somehow managed to come out winning in the end. I wouldn't say he was a particularly likeable person. He seems more to attract people to him by his sheer force of personality and use them ruthlessly to accomplish his own goals.
Callow focuses on Wagner the dramatist and therefore gives a shallower account of what he actually read. I suppose that you can read Bryan Magee if you want to know more about that. Seeing as how I was interested in how Wagner managed to dramatise his ideas, this was a rewarding read. I do think it is hard to understand Wagner without understanding the music as the two often go hand in hand. All in all, an entertaining read. ...more
This is the biography of a Swede who chose to live as a munk in the thai forrest tradition. I found the biography wanting, mostly because I perceived This is the biography of a Swede who chose to live as a munk in the thai forrest tradition. I found the biography wanting, mostly because I perceived its author to be inauthentic. Even though he meditated for 20 years (and lived as munk for 17), he STILL seemed to crave attention from other people. ...more
In this very short book the indian sage Ramana Maharshi goes through what is needed to become enlightened. Its quite succinct and can be summarised inIn this very short book the indian sage Ramana Maharshi goes through what is needed to become enlightened. Its quite succinct and can be summarised in the following way: For each thought arising ask "where did this thought come from?" and "Who is thinking these thoughts?". After practicing and continually coming back to the self ones thoughts begin to dissipate. When one no longer have any ego-thoughts, one is liberated. I have just recently begun practicing self-enquiry but it seems like the shortest way to break through the ego. Very exciting book! I would recommend it to anyone interested in spirituality or psychology....more
I have been interested in spirituality since I went to my first 10 day retreat and have since then meditated in the vipassana tradition. This buddhistI have been interested in spirituality since I went to my first 10 day retreat and have since then meditated in the vipassana tradition. This buddhist tradition emphasizes the "annicca" aspect of buddhism - that is to say that everything is always changing. Once you notice that nothing is rock solid you are free to realize that the "I" is an illusion which by itself allows you to let go of your craving.
This insight could however take a really long time to reach which was the main reasons I started looking for alternatives. Why can't one start by looking for the "I" and thereby seeing its illusory nature? Wouldn't that be a quicker way to enlightenment? Non-duality (or advaita vedanta) is the view that there are not two things, but that everything is One. Everything is part of consciousness. (A perspective frightfully close to solipsism).
Gary Weber is a spiritual teacher in the non-duelist tradition. He has a scientific background which helps to provide some more objective legitimacy for the subjective nature of this tradition. I was glad to read that most people who have become enlightened have had some method before arriving at there (which is something many gurus in this tradition deny as there is ONLY NOW). Mr. Weber goes through different ways to practice like singing and thought exercises (one of which I use daily).
I still have my doubts about the tradition as I find it difficult to convince myself that there are no objects in the world and that everything is a part of me. Buddhism, on the other hand, doesn't state that the world is an illusion but rather emphasizes emptiness of concepts. Of the "I". This means that concepts in themselves have no essence and that you therefore shouldn't take them too seriously. "You are real. (But you're not really real)" as one Buddhist teacher put it.
I would recommend this book to anyone with a more serious interest in spirituality. ...more
Rupert Spira is a teacher of non-duality (advaita vedanta as it is called in the East). This is a summary of Spiras talks on youtube. When reading hisRupert Spira is a teacher of non-duality (advaita vedanta as it is called in the East). This is a summary of Spiras talks on youtube. When reading his words they somehow become more flat than when listening to him answering a question. Spira lays out a clear explanation of why there is just Awareness and why the perception that there exist a subject-object relation is illusory. Awareness is simply there; we just fail to notice it most of the time which is why the book is called being aware of being aware. Thoughts, sensations, and perceptions are a part of our awareness but we these things manage to trick us into believing that the person writing this review is real. In fact writing is just happening. There is really no one doing it.
I have to admit that I have yet to fully grasp the implications of non-duality and especially the consequences it will have on my life (if it is true). I would recommend viewing Spiras talks on youtube first and foremost if one is interested in learning more about non-duality. ...more
This proved to be a frustrating read. The advantage being that it managed to illuminate many of my disagreements with Annaka and her husband, Sam HarrThis proved to be a frustrating read. The advantage being that it managed to illuminate many of my disagreements with Annaka and her husband, Sam Harris.
"Conscious" is supposed to be a 'brief guide to the fundamental mystery of the mind' but all too often ends in up simplifying complex problems. To start off her definition of what is conscious leaves one unfulfilled. She uses Thomas Nagels definition from his essay "what is it like to be a bat" wherein Nagel famously asserts that “an organism has conscious mental states if and only if there is something that it is like to be that organism—something it is like for the organism." So for example a rock doesn't have a subjective experience, whereas being a bat would give one a quite unique experience of the world. I don't mind that definition but I don't think its perhaps a strong enough definition to lend itself to deeper philosophical and scientific discussion.
Annaka then uses David Chalmers famous zombie argument to further explore what consciousness is. Chalmers says that we can imagine a world where humans do everything as we normally do but where we don't have any subjective (that is to say conscious) experience of the world. Humans in this world are philosophical zombies. Even though Annaka admits that this just a hypothetical situation, she still uses it to prove her somewhat murky views of the universe. She thinks (and uses some scientific research to prove this) that consciousness doesn't have a function: we are merely under the illusion that our subjective "I" is doing really anything at all. So why are we conscious? I must say I find this line of reasoning a tad absurd as it might well be reasonable to think that consciousness is a consequence of our evolution. As living organisms develop instincts in order to maximize pleasure and minimize pain, their brains and therefore their consciousness also increases. This seems perfectly reasonable to me. And yet, to mrs. Harris consciousness is this mysterious thing which seems to be unexplainable. I would also add that I believe that we don't really need to like the explanation for consciousness for it to be a sound and scientific one. Our brains and instincts are not adapted to understand (intuitively) the explanations which science gives us.
The author then proceeds to panpsychism. As consciousness isn't doing anything in this world and as it remains a mystery, perhaps all things have some kind of consciousness built into them. If consciousness is just complex handling of information, then surely you can argue that even tiny bacteria are conscious in some sense of the word? The author usually singles out something in the universe and then extrapolates to the nth degree. To better understand my critique of her reasoning I will use an analogy. If I build a car, then it is the sum of all the parts that is the car. The parts of the car don't have any intrinsic car-nature to them. They only become a car because I organize different parts in a specific way. Consciousness can be similar to this as it cannot be explained by reducing it to a mere microbe. Mrs. Harris has a hard time accepting that the car analogy or strong emergence (as it is called in the scientific literature) is believable. Why would something suddenly spring into existence which was not there to begin with? I am not sure have an answer to that specific question but my spontaneous answer is that this is how humans work. We see the world this way as it makes common sense. If I sit on a chair, I am not worried that I will fall through it because of what quantum mechanics tell me about the world. Is there a chair nature to the different atoms in the chair? The Swedish author Lena Andersson has written about this specific problem and her explanation of the phenomenon is that we humans use abstract ideas to elucidate reality. There is no perfect chair, but there is an idea of the chair. That doesn't make the chair any less real. (This is based on her quite interesting reading of Plato).
Another question which pops up is in what way a tiny unicellular organism has an experience? Aren't we changing the definition of the word experience in order to make panpsychism theory more sound? ...more
This is the book to read if you are wondering what the current science states on meditation and its effect on the brain. It is also the story of the rThis is the book to read if you are wondering what the current science states on meditation and its effect on the brain. It is also the story of the research around meditation and how it has gradually become more popular among scientist. The book does however attempt to dispel false myths about the wonders of meditation.
I was amazed at how they found out about the default mode network. One would think that the brain is less active when not focusing on a task but this turns out not to be true. The brain wanders easily and is actually more active when we are daydreaming (which is most of the time). Meditation trains the mind to be less active and in doing so lowers the stress hormone (cortisol). Another fact which inspires me to keep meditating is that when the scanned the brain of a man who had been meditating all his life (he was in his 40's at the time) they found that his brain was significantly younger than his actual age. The authors divided test subjects into three categories depending on how long they had meditated. The brain of the long term meditator seemed always to be in the now as one would expect and could therefore more easily focus on one task (like counting your breath). There is so much experience in life we miss because we are not paying attention!
As a seasoned meditator I would warn however against trying to measure how far you've come on the spiritual path by counting hours. This varies a lot depending on the individual and how natural you focus is. It seems, at least for my part, that I have only come a short way given the fact that I have been meditating for 2 years and have attended 6 10-day silent retreats. But, as the authors emphasize, practice is what matters. If you keep practicing, results as bound to come as the Vipassana teacher Goenka says. ...more
Too much of a hagiography for my part. Ram Dass, who can perhaps be described as the ultimate hippy, chronicles his original meeting with his guru MahToo much of a hagiography for my part. Ram Dass, who can perhaps be described as the ultimate hippy, chronicles his original meeting with his guru Mahara-ji in the 60's. The book also describes varies methods of meditations used to arrive at the Maharajis motto: Love everybody.
Because I meditate and practice vipassana meditation I often find descriptions of spirituality often miss the mark as one becomes entangled in ideals and concepts. But if one keeps this in mind then one can get inspired by the path Ram Dass has chosen. ...more
"Without demanding "give it to me!" we make and receive offerings. The world in which we give and receive is a serene and beautiful world. It differs "Without demanding "give it to me!" we make and receive offerings. The world in which we give and receive is a serene and beautiful world. It differs from the world of scrambling for things. It's vast and boundless"
Great introduction to zen thinking. Its easy to read and I'm sure I will come back to it many times in the future. The book consists of a compilation of quotes by Kodo Sawaki (the homeless Kodo) which are then interpreted by his disciple Kodo Uchiyama. If you are searching for a better way of understanding zen, this book is for you. If you just want to feel inspired by a different way of thinking, this book is for you.
I've read a couple of books on Zen Buddhism and this is by far my favorite so far. The reason I am attracted to this philosophy is that it leads to a place where you stop comparing yourself to others and instead try to understand yourself as part of the universe. All our thoughts are like bandits constantly stealing our attention from the eternal beauty of life. If you really empty your thoughts it becomes possible to enjoy every moment as it if it were your last. I find the sentiments were best explained by William Blake:
To see a World in a Grain of Sand And a Heaven in a Wild Flower Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand And Eternity in an hour...more
I hope you are fully awake when you read this because the findings in this review may change your perspective on things. The author, Sam Harris, is a I hope you are fully awake when you read this because the findings in this review may change your perspective on things. The author, Sam Harris, is a well known atheist and public intellectual whose interests are wide ranging. I've been following mr. Harris podcast for a few months as he is my kind of intellectual: honest, concise and someone who tries to have an open conversation with those who differ in opinion from him.
When I first heard the title of the book I thought it sounded like another sales pitch from an atheist. How can one be spiritual without religion? The notion seemed simple absurd. But Harris interests lie in the potential for our subjective experiences and that entails finding out more about the nature of consciousness. Mr. Harris has long been interested in understanding the nature of consciousness and has been practicing meditation with prominent gurus in India. He tries to experience nirvana but doesn't come close until he starts practicing dzogchen meditation whose goal is to experience and maintain a state of selflessness.
Thats right you read: selflessness. This is mr. Harris main point - the self is an illusion. To explain how this is possible he goes on to explore our brain. It turns out that as a result of our brains having a left and a right hemisphere its possible in theory to cut the brain in half and thereby create two different consciousnesses (provided that one part is put in some kind of body). This is but one of the arguments for the self not existing. Meditation allows us to distance us from our thoughts and to thereby be closer to reality. Mr. Harris believes that the practitioners of meditation will become happier as it is our experience of reality which decide whether or not we are happy. Put in another way; the self is window from which we view the outside world and it is this window which decides who we should be mad at or who we should love. When we distance ourselves from this perspective we no longer have to be controlled by these feelings but we can free ourselves from them. This book has changed my perspective on life and indeed I am still trying to imagine what the consequences are of having no self. Being a libertarian I see the self and the individual as an integral part of my world view; should this be seen as an existential fact and not be considered when looking at society? How would a society be governed if there there is no "I"? For now I view the insights as a way of not judging my environment and instead experiencing reality head on. This book will linger in my thoughts for weeks to come and so I view reading this book not so much as arriving at an opinion as starting another journey. Mr Harris put it this way:
"Yes, the cosmos is vast and appears indifferent to our mortal schemes, but every present moment of consciousness is profound. In subjective terms, each of us is identical to the very principle that brings value to the universe. Experiencing this directly - not merely thinking about it - is the true beginning of spiritual life [...] Open your eyes and see" [p. 206]...more
I picked up this book the last day of my trip to California. I have a strong interest in Zen and its implications. The story revolves around a german I picked up this book the last day of my trip to California. I have a strong interest in Zen and its implications. The story revolves around a german professors attempt to understand zen through the art of archery. The best zen archer is the one who can send an arrow without noticing that the arrow has been sent. It is explained in the following way: "If one really wishes to be a master of an art, technical knowledge of it is not enough. One has to transcend technique so that the art becomes an 'artless art' growing out of the Unconscious". Sure. But is the payoff enough to spend 6 years practicing? Perhaps for herr Herrigel but thats not for me in any case.
To put this in perspective. Compare the insights Herrigel got from these 6 years with someone who uses those 6 years to practice dzogchen or vipassana meditation. In this training one not only learns how to relax at a much deeper level but also gain meaningful insights about the nature of mind and what it means to not have a self. I would take the dzogchen meditation any day of the week. But then again maybe that is just my judging and subjective ego making that decision.
I suppose my critique of Zen is that it is very hard to get any ethical guidelines from it except that one should live in the moment. This in itself is a road, but one that can lead down many treacherous paths.
Nevertheless, this book is a good starting point for those who are curious about Zen. ...more
Loading...
