Right now, I am dealing with a store chain called “Woo”. I must determine the proper light levels and color temperature to properly and safely illuminate Woo and make it attractive to Woo-seeking customers. So. I talk woo now with my workmates and I try not to giggle. “What color is woo?” “When can we expect to see woo?”
I shouldn’t burst in like an unwelcome charging hippo on every damn thread. Not on its first page anyway.
I am not an expert on Buddhism nor am I a total novice. Maybe somewhere in the middle. Here’s my take:
Buddhism is a narrative. A Buddha-mind is an ever-stable Mr. Flashlight on an indestructable bridge. Emotional detachment is easy for Mr. Flashlight as he perceives only the aftermath of emotions an instant after they are felt. Like other disciplines, Buddhism has some sophistication in that it trains one not to write their emotions into their narration as if their entire being were having them. Without that discipline, it is easy to become trapped in the rules of the narration… like, anger must lead to vengence or one must save face and avoid humiliation at all cost.
Mr. Flashlight does two things- he reads the nyeep flow and he writes NEXT cues. When he does these together, that’s a narration. The next trick, once “detachment” is achieved, is to peacefully stand on the bridge and write no cues.
Normally, when the narration stops, the bridge stops too, or collapses and plunges the “driver seat” back into the flowing nyeep pool. For some, unless one is in full-blown conscious narration, Mr. Now is the pinnacle of organization and emotions are experienced “live”. To be Mr. Flashlight without narrating is not easy.
The Buddha stands silently on the bridge and watches the flow. There are rhythms and patterns in the flow that are way beyond the Chunk Limit and if the would-be narrator would just shut up for a while, he may notice them.
This view never goes over well. Is this take on it really less sexy than anyone else’s?