I believe Peter Lamborn Wilson's pamphlet on Chuang Tzu is called "The
Chaos Linguistics of Chuang Tzu", and it was published last year at that
annual anarchist gathering in Wisconsin, whose name I can't remember. Perhaps
dropping a line to Wilson at Autonomedia would secure a copy. I heard PLW
deliver a series of three lectures on anarcho-taoism last year that were
just extraordinary: mostly they involved a reading of the Chuang Tzu, but
also Taoist drinking songs, taoist anarchists during various revolutionary
periods in China, the importance of chaos in taoism (linking chuang tzu to
prigogine and pals). PLW has certainly read Deleuze, as has his co-conspirator
Hakim Bey, in his "temporary autonomous zone".
I'm glad my friend from the Tiger Team Buddhist Network (what is that exactly?)
mentioned Milarepa, the great Tibetan buddhist saint. The thing that amazes
me about Milarepa is how his incredible asceticism and austerity results in
"a hundred thousand songs". It's worth repeating that Tibet is full of
plateaus. A reading of Alexandra David-Neel's "Mystery and Magic in Tibet"
has excellent descriptions of some of the states of intensity which the
terrain (notoriously harsh) brings forth. The meditations to produce
internal heat in ice cold weather, and the trance walking practices carried
out by certain monks, to cover great distances. Tibet brings nomadology to
buddhism from the deserts of Kham in NE Tibet - and with it, horses and
shamanism.
A final note on zen, buddhism and deleuze. One of the basic concerns of
buddhism is breaking down the distinction between self and other. That's
what enlightenment is: an infinite, open unity. (I hope that doesn't sound
too casual!) I believe this is one of D&G's concerns. Basic to their
critique of doctrinal psychoanalysis is the possibility of organizing the
psyche, and developing different, far healthier models of the psyche than
the freudian one. Their critique of the dialectic is similar to what one
might find in buddhism: not the negation of negation, but a kind of
inbetween thought. I struggle with this in buddhism quite a bit, since at
first glance (maybe second too), buddhism can seem VERY dialectical. But
I believe that buddhism destroys the dialectic not necesarily through
transcending it, but through a kind of material unity. And then, there are
types of buddhism that stress multiplicities: tibetan for example. But I
don't entirely feel sure of myself saying this.
I'm going to be out of the country for a few weeks, so alas i won't be able
to continue this thread, but perhaps it will have exploded into a thousand
new buddhas by the time i return.
Marcus Boon
------------------
Chaos Linguistics of Chuang Tzu", and it was published last year at that
annual anarchist gathering in Wisconsin, whose name I can't remember. Perhaps
dropping a line to Wilson at Autonomedia would secure a copy. I heard PLW
deliver a series of three lectures on anarcho-taoism last year that were
just extraordinary: mostly they involved a reading of the Chuang Tzu, but
also Taoist drinking songs, taoist anarchists during various revolutionary
periods in China, the importance of chaos in taoism (linking chuang tzu to
prigogine and pals). PLW has certainly read Deleuze, as has his co-conspirator
Hakim Bey, in his "temporary autonomous zone".
I'm glad my friend from the Tiger Team Buddhist Network (what is that exactly?)
mentioned Milarepa, the great Tibetan buddhist saint. The thing that amazes
me about Milarepa is how his incredible asceticism and austerity results in
"a hundred thousand songs". It's worth repeating that Tibet is full of
plateaus. A reading of Alexandra David-Neel's "Mystery and Magic in Tibet"
has excellent descriptions of some of the states of intensity which the
terrain (notoriously harsh) brings forth. The meditations to produce
internal heat in ice cold weather, and the trance walking practices carried
out by certain monks, to cover great distances. Tibet brings nomadology to
buddhism from the deserts of Kham in NE Tibet - and with it, horses and
shamanism.
A final note on zen, buddhism and deleuze. One of the basic concerns of
buddhism is breaking down the distinction between self and other. That's
what enlightenment is: an infinite, open unity. (I hope that doesn't sound
too casual!) I believe this is one of D&G's concerns. Basic to their
critique of doctrinal psychoanalysis is the possibility of organizing the
psyche, and developing different, far healthier models of the psyche than
the freudian one. Their critique of the dialectic is similar to what one
might find in buddhism: not the negation of negation, but a kind of
inbetween thought. I struggle with this in buddhism quite a bit, since at
first glance (maybe second too), buddhism can seem VERY dialectical. But
I believe that buddhism destroys the dialectic not necesarily through
transcending it, but through a kind of material unity. And then, there are
types of buddhism that stress multiplicities: tibetan for example. But I
don't entirely feel sure of myself saying this.
I'm going to be out of the country for a few weeks, so alas i won't be able
to continue this thread, but perhaps it will have exploded into a thousand
new buddhas by the time i return.
Marcus Boon
------------------