Its a congruence test.... a simple neg follwed by a DHV and him and the monkey will live happily ever after....

_________________
True happiness comes from being exactly who you aspire to be

Ok this has been fucking around with my mind for a while now and my opinion is that there is no definite answer.
Every person is different and has different reasons to do things. I cannot tell which is going to be the answer for everyone because i am not them, i am me and can therefore only tell what I can do and accept the possible consequences.

I hope that any of this makes sense in english, but i have found my personal answer at last.

Its just a shit test, and how do we deal with shit tests? Ignore it

_________________
Its a numbers game, but try to have the numbers in the quality section

Notice how everybody is still either stuck with 1 or 2? (1. I'll just do what ever the hell I want to do or 2. What anybody does is up to them and it's good for you and it's good for me.)

This is just a silly little story so whether you put any effort into it is up to you. But if you're willing to write something about it, you've already put more effort into it than necessary to achieve 3.

I thought meditation was about simply clearing your head and not thinking about anything whatsoever (at least attempt to do so)? In that case, how can it help you come to any realizations if you're not even using the brain actively? . . .

The way I understand it, there are more than one ways to meditate in terms of mental processes. There is the "stare at one point and think about nothing", there is the "listen to music and focus on one instrument" and there is the (similar to first one) "close your eyes and think of nothing".

I assume any chosen way is acceptable to reach the same kinds of realizations? Since I started meditating, I've been looking through different sources of information but never really got the grasp of whether the different ways of meditating actually gives you different results, or if they are just a matter of preference.

Very helpful! What is the best one to use when solving basic level koans?

Fixed...
@Hobbit... Nice links, I intend to read some of those in my free time.

@Little panda, your avatar is kinda funny but reminded me of something. [Some people might perceive this as being a clue I'll leave it to the reader to make up their own mind] but I was watching Disney's Kung Fu Panda a couple of months back, and I immediately thought of Monkey Mind and quietly smiled to myself.

_________________
*Justice renders the WEAK his due*
My Journal
here-vp445642.html#445642

I get it. I am the monkey! This whole thread is about ME.

Easy.
I will look into this, thanks

Ok this is sort of how I've understood it . . .

Based on what was written earlier - before even attempting to solve this, the focus should be put on coming to realizations based on the Zen guidelines:

1. You are you, I am me.
2. You are me, I am you.
3. You are you, I am me.

In addition, ego should be eliminated.

So . . .

The story cannot be changed or altered. The written words are valid and should stay the way they are.

So . . .

The obvious part is that the parents will die nevertheless. It's inevitable.

The boy and the monkey, despite the ability to show love and respect for one another - are two separate entities. However, with this in mind, the boy will act according to the consequences of shooting the monkey - which are greater than the consequences of not shooting the monkey.

Both the boy and the monkey have an influence on the world, just as the world has an influence on them.

Both of them have an influence on each other too, as they have the ability to share feelings. The boy shares empathy with the monkey as well as the consequences that follow. He will therefore not shoot the monkey?

But if he doesn't shoot him, his father will die . . .

I feel that I'm on a too basic level and can't get past the surface of this thing.

My parents are going to die another day, I`m going to die another day. But the monkey is going to die after the moment I decided to go hunting with the bow.

Monkey`s voice is only a distraction, it sets up your brain and thoughts start to pop up when I was hungry at the first place. Or I simply wanted to hunt.

If I must think before my every action I`d rather be dead, it`s ok to act on my emotions at times; it`s human.

I shoot the monkey down.

Has anyone heard of schrodinger's cat?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOYyCHGWJq4

Basically, it is a paradox describing a situation in which there is a cat in a box filled with explosives. The explosives are wired to have a 50/50 chance of exploding.

Meaning the cat is either going to be dead or alive, depending if the explosive went off... But because the cat is in the box you actually don't know if it is either dead or alive. The act of opening the box defines the cat's state. Before checking the box the cat is in BOTH a dead and alive state.

What's this got to do with Monkey Mind?

Well imagine something that no-one has thought off so far in the discussion. Imagine if the boy BOTH shoots the monkey and NOT shoots the monkey at EXACTLY the same point in time. But you don't actually know the outcome until a casual observer checks what he's done.

In other words both states exist... Your mother is both alive and dead and so is your father... Both alive and dead.

The only thing that matters here is checking what you did... Checking determined the outcome, much like taking action is really the only thing that matters here.

Do you shoot the monkey or don't shoot the monkey.

'This is all a load of baloney.' I hear you say. How can something exist in both states. It's purely hypothetical - NO in fact it's not.

Such a paradox exists in our real world and has been scientifically proven by experiment. It's called Quantum mechanics. An electron particle can be rotating BOTH clock-wise and counter clockwise at exactly the same point in time.

It's state is only determined upon checking... Mind-fuck or what?!

_________________
*Justice renders the WEAK his due*
My Journal
here-vp445642.html#445642

Well, the quantum states are the only things that are "truly" random. However nobody really know if that is still true for macroscopic systems. The basis of the cat setup is that as soon as you observe, the particle decides in which state it is and the randomness is gone. Now that is only if you only see one observer. But the cat is an observer as well. And the explosive that is operated by the state of the particle is too. Meaning, it has already been observed by a macroscopic system and thus not random anymore, as soon as it affects something on a macroscopic level, it has been measured and has decided what state it is in.

_________________
I'm not trying to be a dick Ezo, but you're being a Pick Up Snob in my opinion.

bbardot: you just reminded me about porn

Can the boy ever make a good choice?
Can he tell the monkey to not harm his family?
Can he hunt jackrabbits instead?
This story only generates more questions...

Can he assume his father is alive as he hears these things? Should he run back home and tell his father to help out with the hunt? Or will his father be dead by then?

He has stopped, and is thinking. He has fulfilled the monkey's request and now he can continue as he pleases -- as both consequences are inevitable?

This isn't helping me finish my homework.

I swear I'm never going hunting