Your network blocks the Lichess assets!

lichess.org
Donate

Chess Enlightenment

Wow Ono. This was one helluva blog post. I will probably need to read it again, but it really resonated. Thanks for taking the the time (and then some!).

Wow Ono. This was one helluva blog post. I will probably need to read it again, but it really resonated. Thanks for taking the the time (and then some!).

@DreamLearnBe said ^

Wow Ono. This was one helluva blog post. I will probably need to read it again, but it really resonated. Thanks for taking the the time (and then some!).

Appreciate the kind words, certainly has a word count haha!

@DreamLearnBe said [^](/forum/redirect/post/jw507dJp) > Wow Ono. This was one helluva blog post. I will probably need to read it again, but it really resonated. Thanks for taking the the time (and then some!). Appreciate the kind words, certainly has a word count haha!

This is a great post. Thank you, Ono!

This helped me as I've had a bit of a motivation dip recently - paradoxically, as things are going really well in terms of OTB results, but I haven't been happy with my play.

I think it's interesting to think about how taking the 'observer' role in our own mind relates to the skill of looking at the board impartially. That is, trying to think just as much about your opponent's possible moves, ideas, strategies as much as you think about your own. When I do post-mortems with stronger players, I usually find they are more objective than me in this sense. It's hard to feel as interested in what they can do compared to what you can do with your own pieces. But this is, I think, a kind of egoism, and it tends to produce blunders which result from not thinking about what they can do.

This is a great post. Thank you, Ono! This helped me as I've had a bit of a motivation dip recently - paradoxically, as things are going really well in terms of OTB results, but I haven't been happy with my play. I think it's interesting to think about how taking the 'observer' role in our own mind relates to the skill of looking at the board impartially. That is, trying to think just as much about your opponent's possible moves, ideas, strategies as much as you think about your own. When I do post-mortems with stronger players, I usually find they are more objective than me in this sense. It's hard to feel as *interested* in what they can do compared to what you can do with your own pieces. But this is, I think, a kind of egoism, and it tends to produce blunders which result from not thinking about what they can do.

Thought you might mention more about Swami Vivekananda (Narendranath Datta), who was as avid chess player as a child. From a Vedic view (likely origin of the game), chess is about self-realization, self-improvement and self-awareness. Simply, the purpose of chess is to become a better person. If playing chess does not make you a better person, you are doing something wrong, it is not about rating or winning, but becoming a better person.

Also Swami Vivekananda was an accomplished FreeMason, and an exploration between FreeMasonry and chess would be interesting. The current secular and competitive nature of the game of Chess, belies Chess' Hindu origins and greater purpose to help people achieve enlightenment.

Thought you might mention more about Swami Vivekananda (Narendranath Datta), who was as avid chess player as a child. From a Vedic view (likely origin of the game), chess is about self-realization, self-improvement and self-awareness. Simply, the purpose of chess is to become a better person. If playing chess does not make you a better person, you are doing something wrong, it is not about rating or winning, but becoming a better person. Also Swami Vivekananda was an accomplished FreeMason, and an exploration between FreeMasonry and chess would be interesting. The current secular and competitive nature of the game of Chess, belies Chess' Hindu origins and greater purpose to help people achieve enlightenment.

@DIAChessClubStudies said ^

Thought you might mention more about Swami Vivekananda (Narendranath Datta), who was as avid chess player as a child. From a Vedic view (likely origin of the game), chess is about self-realization, self-improvement and self-awareness. Simply, the purpose of chess is to become a better person. If playing chess does not make you a better person, you are doing something wrong, it is not about rating or winning, but becoming a better person.

Also Swami Vivekananda was an accomplished FreeMason, and an exploration between FreeMasonry and chess would be interesting. The current secular and competitive nature of the game of Chess, belies Chess' Hindu origins and greater purpose to help people achieve enlightenment.

I did come across the fact that Swami Vivekananda played chess when I was writing! But I didn't find out too much about it and certainly didn't know he was a big player. I'd love to get some more information on it. If you have links to articles please DM them to me, love to take a look.

@DIAChessClubStudies said [^](/forum/redirect/post/R6qWQnlX) > Thought you might mention more about Swami Vivekananda (Narendranath Datta), who was as avid chess player as a child. From a Vedic view (likely origin of the game), chess is about self-realization, self-improvement and self-awareness. Simply, the purpose of chess is to become a better person. If playing chess does not make you a better person, you are doing something wrong, it is not about rating or winning, but becoming a better person. > > Also Swami Vivekananda was an accomplished FreeMason, and an exploration between FreeMasonry and chess would be interesting. The current secular and competitive nature of the game of Chess, belies Chess' Hindu origins and greater purpose to help people achieve enlightenment. I did come across the fact that Swami Vivekananda played chess when I was writing! But I didn't find out too much about it and certainly didn't know he was a big player. I'd love to get some more information on it. If you have links to articles please DM them to me, love to take a look.

@FODonovan said ^

This is a great post. Thank you, Ono!

This helped me as I've had a bit of a motivation dip recently - paradoxically, as things are going really well in terms of OTB results, but I haven't been happy with my play.

I think it's interesting to think about how taking the 'observer' role in our own mind relates to the skill of looking at the board impartially. That is, trying to think just as much about your opponent's possible moves, ideas, strategies as much as you think about your own. When I do post-mortems with stronger players, I usually find they are more objective than me in this sense. It's hard to feel as interested in what they can do compared to what you can do with your own pieces. But this is, I think, a kind of egoism, and it tends to produce blunders which result from not thinking about what they can do.

This is a great point Fionn, I think you are spot on there. I notice this egoism taking over. I have blundered in the past against lower rated opponents with this flawed, egoic approach probably the main factor.

@FODonovan said [^](/forum/redirect/post/8cZfKI3W) > This is a great post. Thank you, Ono! > > This helped me as I've had a bit of a motivation dip recently - paradoxically, as things are going really well in terms of OTB results, but I haven't been happy with my play. > > I think it's interesting to think about how taking the 'observer' role in our own mind relates to the skill of looking at the board impartially. That is, trying to think just as much about your opponent's possible moves, ideas, strategies as much as you think about your own. When I do post-mortems with stronger players, I usually find they are more objective than me in this sense. It's hard to feel as *interested* in what they can do compared to what you can do with your own pieces. But this is, I think, a kind of egoism, and it tends to produce blunders which result from not thinking about what they can do. This is a great point Fionn, I think you are spot on there. I notice this egoism taking over. I have blundered in the past against lower rated opponents with this flawed, egoic approach probably the main factor.

Swami Vivekananda in America: New Findings Hardcover (2008) by Asim Chaudhuri has some great research, including meeting with Tesla in 1896 and discussing relativity theory (mass an energy equivalence). There are a few accounts of Swami Vivekananda playing chess on his trip to America, be an interesting area of research if the actual games could be recreated. But would not be surprising if in many of the conversations and meetings with prominent Americans occurred over a game of chess.

Swami Vivekananda in America: New Findings Hardcover (2008) by Asim Chaudhuri has some great research, including meeting with Tesla in 1896 and discussing relativity theory (mass an energy equivalence). There are a few accounts of Swami Vivekananda playing chess on his trip to America, be an interesting area of research if the actual games could be recreated. But would not be surprising if in many of the conversations and meetings with prominent Americans occurred over a game of chess.

Here is a direct chess quote from 1895 private letter to an American supporter Mary Hale, that actually mentions a chess teaching from Ramakrishna who also played chess, and based lessons off chess.

https://vedantasociety.net/blog/spiritual-maturity

In an example of how to:
'Learning to observe without judging

The first factor is the ability to observe things without reacting immediately. It is easy to react, but difficult to withhold judgment and reaction. When we react to what is happening outside, we inevitably get involved in it. A detached witness sees things differently than someone who is involved in a situation. Sri Ramakrishna gave the example of people playing chess and others observing them. The observers can often see things that the players themselves do not. '

Blessings, with more time and others with similar interests, I have special interest in the history of chess as a method for spiritual enlightenment, especially Hinduism and Judaism.

Here is a direct chess quote from 1895 private letter to an American supporter Mary Hale, that actually mentions a chess teaching from Ramakrishna who also played chess, and based lessons off chess. https://vedantasociety.net/blog/spiritual-maturity In an example of how to: 'Learning to observe without judging The first factor is the ability to observe things without reacting immediately. It is easy to react, but difficult to withhold judgment and reaction. When we react to what is happening outside, we inevitably get involved in it. A detached witness sees things differently than someone who is involved in a situation. Sri Ramakrishna gave the example of people playing chess and others observing them. The observers can often see things that the players themselves do not. ' Blessings, with more time and others with similar interests, I have special interest in the history of chess as a method for spiritual enlightenment, especially Hinduism and Judaism.

timely (for me). i've been working on this problem slightly differently. but i kinda forgot about that duality paradigm. i'm glad i read this and that you reminded me.

timely (for me). i've been working on this problem slightly differently. but i kinda forgot about that duality paradigm. i'm glad i read this and that you reminded me.