Cumigad.Net

Whenever I come across an interpretation of spiritual teachings that claims to have gotten it right, I always get very suspicious. I realize, I'll have to take what I like and leave the rest. Since this persons opinion may not be any more correct than my own interpretation. Unfortunately I did not pick up the original teaching of the Buddha. And even those original teachings have gone through centuries of oral tradition and interpretation, each other adding their own historical, cultural context to the translation.

This book is no different. A more modern interpretation of interpretations. This was my first book with Buddhism as the central subject. I'm not entirely sure if this is the best approach to learning Buddhism. If I wanted to learn Shaolin Kung Fu, would I go to some watered down American school, or, if I had the opportunity, would I go straight to a Shaolin temple that teaches Kung Fu? The latter would seem logical.

This book, may have been just that. A watered down interpretation of spiritual text. It could have been that I've been exposed to enough books, concepts and ideas that I've formed my own opinions and am less open to some other person's opinion (I need to be aware of that. This will close off my ability to learn from teachers that come and go in my life.)

That was the biggest turn off. This was an opinion book. Somebodies attempt to explain and interpret the Buddha's teachings. I sound very critical. Only because, opinions and lessons don't mean much unless that can be made concrete through real life, personal experiences. There were some stories of people the author have met and their experiences of working through Suffering and Affliction. The author even shared his own experiences of enlightenment which seemed self promoting and a bit arrogant. Was envy my reaction? Or was it and objective assessment.

The book had some good insights. But, I didn't come across too much compelling text. I usually find some great quotes in most books, but for some reason, I wasn't compelled to write down quotes from this book. Maybe it's a reflection of my own close mindedness or overly critical attitude towards this book.

It's a good book and it was worth reading.

This book gave me a refresher in logic. It uses some basic mathematical concepts to structure arguments and gave contemporary examples on common arguments used today in politics. It wasn't life changing. At least for me it wasn't. But it was a good refresher.

Going through the book helped me to structure my own thoughts in a much more orderly fashion. Using the basic guidelines in this book, I was able to go through several personal issues that needed assessing, deliberating, and a final decision to be made. Using the tools in this book as well as learning about the various logical fallacies and mistakes, I was able to see through my own confusion in a decision I had to made.

I've also began to use some of the tools I learned in this book to listen more critically and to spot the logical errors others make in their arguments and opinions. It's not to judge them, it's to detach myself from the personal reaction I have when I hear an opinion that rubs me the wrong way.

Now I can listen objectively, without taking it personally. Errors in logic can be made by anyone. I know this, because I do this. It has helped me stay more grounded in the conclusions I make, realizing that many of the conclusions I draw are not based on facts, reality, or objectivity, but a drawn together by emotions.

Good book, but it was something I had to commit to finishing.

I haven't read a book like this in a very long time. The genre - philosophy. The subject - exploration of metaphysical rebellion in the context of historical nihilism and revolution in Europe and Russia. I won't go in to the content so much. Frankly, I didn't understand most of the book. There were too many references to other philosopher's texts and historical events.

The other reason why I didn't understand a majority of the book, is like any stereotypical philosopher, he had to take 300 pages to explain a single topic. Many times circling around multiple times to churn out one idea. Don't get me wrong, his logic, and reasoning is phenomenal. It was an exercise of rationalizing. Most chapters had to explore every possible aspect of the concept in order to refute any criticisms or strengthen any weaknesses.

Strangely enough, many of the quotes that stood out, resembled spiritual concepts and ideas that I've gleaned from other books I've read. Just take a look at some of the quotes. The concept of nihilism is strangely familiar to Buddhist concepts of emptiness. Or other spritual concepts of no ego or no self, lack of intrinsic value of the material world or even of concepts and principles.

However, many of the ideas that stuck only reinforced my current values and belief system. I'm prey to the comman trap of finding exactly what I was looking for. Gathering more evidence to support my current values and perceptions.

It was a good book. I posted quite a few quotes from The Rebel. Some, because it had deep meaning to me. Others, because the meaning was so deep, I'll have to circle back, reflect and dissect a bit more before I fully comprehend the idea that the quote represents.

Overall, a very dense and heavy book with a tremendous amount of insight in to metaphysical rebellion. Don't think I'll pick up a book like that for a while.