Quote:
Originally Posted by Campestral  do we really need a past and a future? |
while an art of being in the moment might be worth achieving, yes we need a past and future. not least because the present is senseless without the past being understood as its condition...and because, i would say, metaphysically the past haunts the present. likewise, virtual futures haunts the present.
socially, its precisely the lack of an ability to think in terms of futurity- of a future that is not an extension of the present- that has lead to the 'naturalisation' of capitalism.
futher to that, denying the aspect of futurity entails that we surrender to the idea of the end of history, but as history keeps onfolding we're in a bind. a future that isn't a future, a history that isn't a history... the end itself ends and so everything remains trapped in a static excitement.
and anyway, buddism is what might be termed a 'process philosophy'... a metaphysics which reflects the impermanence of things, the flux that underlies all states, and the metastability of presence itself (that it is haunted.) as such, buddism doesn't really recommend an abandoning of temporality but produces a 'weirding' and deepening of time.
a general question; is it actually possible to be a 'western buddist' or are you always removed from authenticity? does it even matter?
