please don’t tag

removed: one label

removed: one label

I don’t fall under the label religion, religion is organised. I’m not. I do and write what I want.

Related to religion, some see me as a buddhist. I’m not a buddhist. I find a lot of interesting ideas in buddhism, and a lot of interesting and open minded people. But I have also found a lot of open minded people with an islamic, a hindu or christian background. I have never read the real old buddhist writings, I do not believe in reincarnation or karma, neither in heaven or hell for that matter. Anything I write that might sound buddhist, christian or whatever, is inspired but not sourced. You could say, based on rumours.

I’m not spiritual. In fact, I have forgotten the meaning of this word. I like talking to spiritual people, but I always have the impression that many of them just made their own private self-organised religion, that they have consolidated into a concrete faith in whatever it is that they once found out and now believe. I don’t follow conventions. I adapt all the time. Whatever is written today, might be found useless tomorrow. I do not search for the sacred, I only want to know what is true. If there are true things.

Searching for truth makes me a philosopher, but a stupid one. Because I know that there are no answers to be found about the truth that lies beyond mind with the instrument of mind itself. And there my philosophy ends. Philosophy can only use the mind, needs reasoning and logic, and I posit that this is not useful to find the truth beyond reason. Metaphysics seems to me like watching stars at noon on a cloudy day, and guessing where they might be.

A psychologist? No sir, No madam. I only analyse myself. I have no reference point in doing so, and this is quite unscientific. Moreover, I need thousands of subjects and studies to define my own psychology, and I’m not interested in that. My path might inspire your track, but there it ends.

An existentialist? I have an existential attitude. But I’m not that label. I like some of the ideas written by some people on the wikipedia page on existentialism, but I also seem to disagree with a lot of what is written on that page. I don’t know how far the ‘existentialists’ went into silence. I know they wrote a lot about being, being a lonely individual, and the fear thereof. So if you see existentialism as a label to those things that cannot be labelled, I’m perhaps part of its class. But if you see it as what is written on that wiki-page, I probably have nothing to do with it either. I always feel that I go in a different direction.

No label? Not labelling people gives you a freedom to discover, without judgement, what they are, what they do, and how this interrelates to your being and your existence. The first time you meet someone you don’t know yet, your mind is already trying to label before they even have opened their mouth. If you never label, you will remain open towards the same person as long as you have encounters with her/him. Not labelling will at the same time give you an openness to an ever renewable appreciation and a discernment towards unwanted behaviour, without wearing the glasses of convention or conformism.

Advertisements

35 thoughts on “please don’t tag

  1. The mind labels everything; it’s a machine that must be replaced by awareness.
    It has been said: the outward expression of the soul is awareness.

    • Easier said than done. One needs time to investigate self and soul. Time has become just another comodity that has been taken away from us humans in our capitalist society. It has been replaced by pleasure and kicks, things we have to pay for with the money we are given to spend the rest of the time in strange places called ‘work’. Children are losing their time at a rate never seen on earth before. We send them to school, to prepare them for work, not for personal development.

  2. My fate seems to be always in the minority and comments on a low level. Labels are confining to be sure. I find your freedom from labels very liberating and worthy of emulation. But some labels, like the labels doctors give to the mentally ill, are a double-edged sword. There is the stigma of the label, yes, but there is also the explanation of heretofore inexplicable feelings and behavior. The “aha,” so that’s why I hide in the house and don’t go out or whatever (fill in the blanks for symptoms). There is comfort in knowing that you are not alone in your symptoms– that they are part of a disease. I know you are talking on a much higher level than this. Just adding 2 cents.

    • Some labels are quite useful. A bird is a bird and a bat is a mammal. Problems arise with further details and strange adjectives.
      There is a problem with tags coming from the subjective world. There usually is no problem with tags from an objectively, well diagnosed, medical condition. A second opinion does not harm here either but gravity is just that: gravity. There is no bad gravity.
      The labels from the other level that I’m talking about here, are the tags we put instantly while seeing a face, the way people dress, … When people tag me as a buddhist or an existentialist, they might not be far off, but they are not correct.

  3. arjun bagga at 4:21 pm:
    I’m glad to read this post. I see the connect clearly to your previous writing about no self. Just play of words but if we assume self in a positive and constructive perspective, this is real self.

    bert0001 at 4:32 pm ;
    great and correct thinking: in the conceptual world self is a concept to itself, in the post conceptual world, self has no more label.

    arjun bagga at 4:37 pm:
    So in layman’s term if I refer to “Great and correct thinking” as real self is incorrect but should be seen as no label. Right?

    bert0001 at 4:39 pm:
    I was preparing for such a conundrum. Once you go beyond mind the world of the paradox opens.

    arjun bagga at 4:43 pm:
    Please don’t. When I say I have limited knowledge, I mean it. No pun intended. What I intend to confirm here is the use of right term, hence I asked

    bert0001 at 4:50 pm:
    I tried to rearrange the logic hereunder – I did not understand your 4.37pm comment correctly …
    correct ‘vision’ implies no labels
    correct ‘vision’ on self implies a real self without labels
    => real self implies no label

    arjun bagga at 4:57 pm:
    Ah! Perfectly understood.
    My wordery is my problem.

  4. You have done a wonderful job at putting words to much of what I feel. I do not fall under any label, but I am also in a transitioning state, which makes me unsure about many things. It also makes me very confident in other areas. This has opened my eyes to seek out what “I” believe without judgement toward myself for doing so. I no longer put an expectation on myself in this area, I have given myself the freedom so seek, search, delve into as many ideas and philosophies as possible, enjoy my love of science, and dig deep within myself. I did not allow that freedom before because somehow I believed that was wrong.

    I did get swept up into religiosity for a period of time, but I have never been able to feel comfortable with conformity and I am too much of a skeptic to not research everything that I am told. 🙂 I do relate very much to Buddhist teachings, but I am not a Buddhist either.

    “Not labelling people gives you a freedom to discover, without judgement, what they are, what they do, and how this interrelates to your being and your existence.”

    That is the best!! Great post!

    • Thank you Angel, for this beautiful comment. Transition or transformation is a difficult and beautiful thing at the same time. A roller coaster. Those who want to stay where they are, are the ones telling us we are wrong, they are preoccupied with labels and conformity and control.

  5. Somehow I feel that it does not matter either way. Without label no non-label. But, you have to know about the label before you can appreciate the non-label. And then leave both for those still learning. I thought that I would prefer to live without labels, to realize that it is not the label that is a problem, but the labeler thinking himself different or separate from the label. ‘I’ may point, but it ‘my’ finger pointing out ‘my’ thought. So if I point out poison, then it is time to purify myself. And then move on to see what the next label can show or teach me.

    • … tags fuel prejudices. Especially the tags made in an instant.
      Equally a ‘profile’ of your wife or husband as she/he is in your coloured eyes prevents appreciation of hidden potential within the other.
      Indeed, it is the labeller who is wrong, but the power of suggestion might infect others with his/her unwanted label.

      • The suggestion that the one with a loud opinion knows best? It is this weird thing of being born into a structure that makes no sense to the infant that has to grow up to be an adult. But what adult? And how to recognize another ‘adult’? We turn 18 and get labeled adult. Pay taxes and go multiply. Is that all it takes? Of course not. So the labels of others are empty until we give it meaning. Or get bullied into adapting some empty meaning. ‘Accept my God, or else.’ Okay. I will take the ‘or else’, because I do not understand your God. To me that is an adult approach, but the bully might see it differently. So, the question is: is it even possible to agree on anything except the structure?

          • Great article. The bias to value my own opinion above that of others is not solid, but definitely present. But as long as my opinion is just a selection of other people’s opinion, it is not above the opinion of others in itself. I did not consider myself a debater until I started to reply, but I had to stop for a minute. CLEARLY, I AM. I question everything or as many things as I can, and I hold long-winded debates in my head (and in writing) to figure ‘things’ out. I seek agreement in my own mind. Yes, I am battling inner disagreement. I have managed to let go of many opinions of others, but I realize that I have taken the spot of those no longer living rent-free in my head. Maybe all my inner talking will lead to a point where talk is futile. Silence. Ah. I will need to meditate on this some more. Nice insight. Thanks.

  6. Seems to me a label is like gift wrap… it might be pretty, but you can’t see what’s inside the package…
    also seems to me the answer(s) to truth cannot be found using any single aspect of who we are… that we are gifted with different ‘senses’ so that each might provide a small glimpse of a vast greatness — mind, heart, soul, vision, hearing, touch, smell, taste, and more… thus, it seems to me that the more we use each/all of these completely, the more we tend to understand…

    • Some labels are quite useful. A bird is a bird and a bat is a mammal. Problems arise with further details and strange adjective. A bad giraffe is tagged bad, but why, because she glanced at you with an evil eye?
      Problem with tags is that they come (from where exactly – from your past experiences) before you really know something. If indeed you use mind, heart, soul, etcetera .. to find out who and what, in the end you will construct a more or less correct profile (be it of the recent past and not of the present. If you predict the weather by using today’s weather and extrapolate it to tomorrow, you might be 55% correct over all).

  7. that is why I like you Bert! That is why I appreciate you reading and commenting on my blog. I do not feel like you are labeling me. I in turn have never labeled you more than another person just looking and establishing the truth. 😉

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s