RE: [Meditation Society of America] Re: Question about the Eightfold Path and "catharsis"
For Right Speech:
For the rest of the eightfold path, see links within the one above. And of course, it all hinges on meditation.
In email@example.com, "Arya" <ranand61@...> wrote:
> Big question arises What is right thinking/right action/right speech !
> Can we look into whether right thinking/action/speech to be dependent on logical thinking/religious/scientific etc
Perhaps right thinking/action/speech could be thought
about logically, religiously, scientifically, etc.
But "IT" comes perfectly well spontaneously in Silence.
Peace and blessings,
> --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "walto" <calhorn@> wrote:
> > Hi, folks.
> > I was wondering if any of the mavens here would be willing to provide their thoughts on whether they think there's any conflict between the "Right Thinking/Right Action/Right Speech" portions of the Eightfold Path and conventional views according to which it is healthy for unconscious thoughts (even angry or mean ones) to be brought to consciousness and perhaps even expressed. If some anger is being repressed, can it be conducive to well-being to "keep it bottled up"? (I take it a Primal Scream isn't Right Speech.)
> > Also, is this an empirical question, do you think, so that the best way of answering it is to see what works (or what has been shown to work in properly designed studies), or do you take it rather to be something that is deducible from one's view of the mind? For example, do you think that the benefits of following the Eightfold Path are simply deducible from the concept of dependent origination? That is, can one agree with the latter without accepting all of the former?
> > Any thoughts on these matters are welcome. Thanks!
> > Best,
> > W