In weighing this adage for the opening statement of this
conversation, this fourth look at
sleep after transformation,
I found myself wondering what differences there are between "when
you're hungry, eat" and gluttony, and between "when you're
tired, sleep" and laziness or slothfulness.
After a while I realized there are none. There are no
differences between "when you're hungry, eat" and gluttony, and
between "when you're tired, sleep" and laziness or slothfulness
except for those differences given by the
context in which the adage is spoken.
Context is decisive.
Spoken in a non-rigorous context, "when you're hungry, eat" can
sound like it justifies gluttony. Spoken in a non-rigorous context,
"when you're tired, sleep" can sound like it justifies laziness or
slothfulness. However "when you're hungry, eat; when you're tired,
sleep" isn't spoken in just any context. "When you're
hungry, eat; when you're tired, sleep" is spoken in a
Zen
context. This
Zen
context gives rigor and distinction.
It's eating in a context of rigor and distinction which
distinguishes "when you're hungry, eat" from mere gluttony. If you
sleep in a context of rigor and distinction, that's what
distinguishes "when you're tired, sleep" from mere laziness and
slothfulness. But what exactly is "sleep in a context
of rigor and distinction"? Is it really possible to "sleep in a
context of rigor and distinction"? Furthermore, how can "sleep" and
"rigor and distinction" even be uttered in the same sentence?
Sleep is autonomic. Rigor and distinction are
choices. Rigor and distinction are distinctions
you can choose to bring to any activity in life
including sleep. It's the element of choice which
goeswith rigor and distinction (as
Alan Watts
may have said) when brought to bear on sleep even as it rules
autonomically, which transforms sleep.
|