|
|
Post by ouroboros on Aug 4, 2022 9:22:57 GMT -5
So you think you need to be free of self to understand what that would entail. I say I'm not and I do. That being conscious is enough for the time being. Although if necessary one should strive dilligently to live virtuously. And I nominate myself during our discourse as is only natural.
If you don't mind me being direct, I don't think you are free of self at all, and in fact consider some of the things you've said on the forum to be indicative of a particularly self-interested brand of spirituality. At times amusingly so. Which isn't gonna cut the mustard. So I colour you deluded in that respect. I don't need a test, I evaluate as I go, and fwiw I sense your next major breakthrough will have to come in the form of some sort of [self-]surrender and that that's unlikely to be any time soon. Besides I've recently come to see that this idea that self or identity view as the 'be all and end all' when it comes to suffering, is a particular Advaitan standpoint and one that contrasts from my preferred brand of spirituality. It's not about what you are or aren't, but rather what you do or don't, and that follows suit from clarity, quite naturally. Perhaps somebody might want to try to make the argument that ultimately action itself is always predicated on a false identity view and I'd be open to hearing about that. But from what I see folks generally mistake how deep that river runs. Anyway, I digress. You would nominate yourself for the job even though you don't meet the qualification of integrity specified? This is a dismissal of my requirement for conducting an effective inquiry. Corruption begins here. Violation of rule. Disregard for ethics. Our society is a mess because we are a mess. You don't consider me a qualified selfless inquirer (i.e. untainted office bearer) and admit that you are just as unclean; and yet, you would want us to embark on an inquiry into how to bring about a world of selfless commitment to each other.
You have unwittingly uncovered the root cause of our suffering in this world. We are the evil cause of our suffering.
Yes, I do dismiss your requirement for the job on the basis I think the specified criteria is misguided. I mean, I don't have to accept your specified criteria is accurate just because you say so, right. Surely I can't be expected to just take anything anyone says at face value. That would likely prove disastrous. Moreover it's only natural that folks evaluate as they go. For the most part folks couldn't really help but to form their own opinions even if they wanted to. And currently I don't even want not to! Let me explain why I think your criteria for the position is misguided. And to be clear, I didn't indicate that I consider myself 'just as unclean'. Au contraire monsieur. Imagine that I considered that I was more insightful than you. Firstly, about the way subtle egoic patterns play out in everyday life. About the momentum that these dispositions could be said to have. And accordingly, the depth to which they, at least colour, and to some extent perhaps even underpin common experience. Imagine that additionaly I considered I was 'being conscious' to an unusually high degree of those patterns as they play out in real time, so to speak. Was able to observe it happening. To just be aware of it as the eye of the storm. Now imagine that on top of all that, I considered that I was also unusually insightful about what it would entail to quell or transcend those patterns. About how that would look and play out in the great scheme of things. Yet, not only could I apply all of that to me, I could equally apply it all to you. Because the nature of those patterns is dhammic in nature and therefore effectively universal. So, I could also observe all that going on with you from my eye of the storm position. Whilst to a greater extent you are still buffeted by the winds. So in fact, simply by considering myself as more insightful, and being more conscious about these patterns playing out. I might feel that in some respects I'm actually better equipped to know what's going on with you than you are yourself. Perhaps even all the more clearly as currently there's less investment in your drama. Probably all sounds a bit arrogant, right. Funny thing is, what I'm describing is pretty much the default perspective of everyone here. Everyone everywhere for that matter. It's the natural tendency of the psyche to all think we know best. We even consider that we're aware of what we don't know better than others. But that isn't necessarily the case is it. Especially when it comes to the subconscious. So you see, I consider that don't have to be entirely no-selfing to be able to assess you. I would just have to be more insightful and more present than you to be better equipped to know what's going on with you. At least in some ways. I should say it's not an infallible process. But naturally I have a degree of faith in my own judgment. Thus, I'm content in my newly self-appointed role. |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 4, 2022 12:38:55 GMT -5
You would nominate yourself for the job even though you don't meet the qualification of integrity specified? This is a dismissal of my requirement for conducting an effective inquiry. Corruption begins here. Violation of rule. Disregard for ethics. Our society is a mess because we are a mess. You don't consider me a qualified selfless inquirer (i.e. untainted office bearer) and admit that you are just as unclean; and yet, you would want us to embark on an inquiry into how to bring about a world of selfless commitment to each other.
You have unwittingly uncovered the root cause of our suffering in this world. We are the evil cause of our suffering.
Yes, I do dismiss your requirement for the job on the basis I think the specified criteria is misguided. I mean, I don't have to accept your specified criteria is accurate just because you say so, right. Surely I can't be expected to just take anything anyone says at face value. That would likely prove disastrous. Moreover it's only natural that folks evaluate as they go. For the most part folks couldn't really help but to form their own opinions even if they wanted to. And currently I don't even want not to! Let me explain why I think your criteria for the position is misguided. And to be clear, I didn't indicate that I consider myself 'just as unclean'. Au contraire monsieur. Imagine that I considered that I was more insightful than you. Firstly, about the way subtle egoic patterns play out in everyday life. About the momentum that these dispositions could be said to have. And accordingly, the depth to which they, at least colour, and to some extent perhaps even underpin common experience. Imagine that additionaly I considered I was 'being conscious' to an unusually high degree of those patterns as they play out in real time, so to speak. Was able to observe it happening. To just be aware of it as the eye of the storm. Now imagine that on top of all that, I considered that I was also unusually insightful about what it would entail to quell or transcend those patterns. About how that would look and play out in the great scheme of things. Yet, not only could I apply all of that to me, I could equally apply it all to you. Because the nature of those patterns is dhammic in nature and therefore effectively universal. So, I could also observe all that going on with you from my eye of the storm position. Whilst to a greater extent you are still buffeted by the winds. So in fact, simply by considering myself as more insightful, and being more conscious about these patterns playing out. I might feel that in some respects I'm actually better equipped to know what's going on with you than you are yourself. Perhaps even all the more clearly as currently there's less investment in your drama. Probably all sounds a bit arrogant, right. Funny thing is, what I'm describing is pretty much the default perspective of everyone here. Everyone everywhere for that matter. It's the natural tendency of the psyche to all think we know best. We even consider that we're aware of what we don't know better than others. But that isn't necessarily the case is it. Especially when it comes to the subconscious. So you see, I consider that don't have to be entirely no-selfing to be able to assess you. I would just have to be more insightful and more present than you to be better equipped to know what's going on with you. At least in some ways. I should say it's not an infallible process. But naturally I have a degree of faith in my own judgment. Thus, I'm content in my newly self-appointed role. I reckon that people in general would say that they 'know themselves' better than other people could possibly know them, but like you, I don't think this is necessarily true. 25 years ago I was seeing a counsellor, who pointed out patterns of conditioning in me, and it took me several weeks before I could honestly see what he was seeing. During those few weeks, it confused me more than anything, I could only vaguely see what he was seeing. Of course, he didn't know whether I like chocolate, or what football team I supported....but he knew what made me 'tick'. He could see my insecurities. He knew my unconsciously held beliefs. |
|
|
|
Post by ouroboros on Aug 4, 2022 13:17:57 GMT -5
Yes, I do dismiss your requirement for the job on the basis I think the specified criteria is misguided. I mean, I don't have to accept your specified criteria is accurate just because you say so, right. Surely I can't be expected to just take anything anyone says at face value. That would likely prove disastrous. Moreover it's only natural that folks evaluate as they go. For the most part folks couldn't really help but to form their own opinions even if they wanted to. And currently I don't even want not to! Let me explain why I think your criteria for the position is misguided. And to be clear, I didn't indicate that I consider myself 'just as unclean'. Au contraire monsieur. Imagine that I considered that I was more insightful than you. Firstly, about the way subtle egoic patterns play out in everyday life. About the momentum that these dispositions could be said to have. And accordingly, the depth to which they, at least colour, and to some extent perhaps even underpin common experience. Imagine that additionaly I considered I was 'being conscious' to an unusually high degree of those patterns as they play out in real time, so to speak. Was able to observe it happening. To just be aware of it as the eye of the storm. Now imagine that on top of all that, I considered that I was also unusually insightful about what it would entail to quell or transcend those patterns. About how that would look and play out in the great scheme of things. Yet, not only could I apply all of that to me, I could equally apply it all to you. Because the nature of those patterns is dhammic in nature and therefore effectively universal. So, I could also observe all that going on with you from my eye of the storm position. Whilst to a greater extent you are still buffeted by the winds. So in fact, simply by considering myself as more insightful, and being more conscious about these patterns playing out. I might feel that in some respects I'm actually better equipped to know what's going on with you than you are yourself. Perhaps even all the more clearly as currently there's less investment in your drama. Probably all sounds a bit arrogant, right. Funny thing is, what I'm describing is pretty much the default perspective of everyone here. Everyone everywhere for that matter. It's the natural tendency of the psyche to all think we know best. We even consider that we're aware of what we don't know better than others. But that isn't necessarily the case is it. Especially when it comes to the subconscious. So you see, I consider that don't have to be entirely no-selfing to be able to assess you. I would just have to be more insightful and more present than you to be better equipped to know what's going on with you. At least in some ways. I should say it's not an infallible process. But naturally I have a degree of faith in my own judgment. Thus, I'm content in my newly self-appointed role. I reckon that people in general would say that they 'know themselves' better than other people could possibly know them, but like you, I don't think this is necessarily true. 25 years ago I was seeing a counsellor, who pointed out patterns of conditioning in me, and it took me several weeks before I could honestly see what he was seeing. During those few weeks, it confused me more than anything, I could only vaguely see what he was seeing. Of course, he didn't know whether I like chocolate, or what football team I supported....but he knew what made me 'tick'. He could see my insecurities. He knew my unconsciously held beliefs. Yeah the FBI profilers are another good example of professionals who are trained to be able to tell what's going on with you. Folks think their thoughts live in their private mindscapes and so are exclusive to them, but in truth much of that can be evident if you know the patterns to look for. If you have the 'template', (or insight), certain subtle mannerisms, behaviours and countenance can indicate all sorts of things. And so it is when folks conduct themselves in general. It's apparent enough if you know what to look for. It's also the case that we naturally assess all that anyway, perhaps largely unconsciously, or automatically as a kind of risk/reward assessment when we engage with others. It just so happens that the more insightful one is and the more present they are, the better they will be at recognising and correctly interpreting patterns. Both in themselves and in others. It’s a natural development. It's a good point that it can come through specific training too, and what I'm talking about tends to come through a combination of rigorous self-honesty, insight and being conscious/present. As an aside, in terms of woo it can be taken further. It's said the Buddha could literally know the mind of another. It's listed as one of the supranormal powers of a buddha (iddhi).
I'm reminded of the following quote;
Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your habits. Be careful what becomes habitual, for your habits become your destiny. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 13:26:21 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 13:26:21 GMT -5
I reckon that people in general would say that they 'know themselves' better than other people could possibly know them, but like you, I don't think this is necessarily true. 25 years ago I was seeing a counsellor, who pointed out patterns of conditioning in me, and it took me several weeks before I could honestly see what he was seeing. During those few weeks, it confused me more than anything, I could only vaguely see what he was seeing. Of course, he didn't know whether I like chocolate, or what football team I supported....but he knew what made me 'tick'. He could see my insecurities. He knew my unconsciously held beliefs. you can't hide from who you are and you can't help but wear your heart on your sleeve, so of course a laser focused trained eye is going to see beneath the superficial or they wouldn't get many return customers. did it help? |
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Aug 4, 2022 13:55:20 GMT -5
I reckon that people in general would say that they 'know themselves' better than other people could possibly know them, but like you, I don't think this is necessarily true. 25 years ago I was seeing a counsellor, who pointed out patterns of conditioning in me, and it took me several weeks before I could honestly see what he was seeing. During those few weeks, it confused me more than anything, I could only vaguely see what he was seeing. Of course, he didn't know whether I like chocolate, or what football team I supported....but he knew what made me 'tick'. He could see my insecurities. He knew my unconsciously held beliefs. you can't hide from who you are and you can't help but wear your heart on your sleeve, so of course a laser focused trained eye is going to see beneath the superficial or they wouldn't get many return customers. did it help? Well...I guess I'd say that the outcome of it all was more....'unexpected', than helpful. It solved some problems, and created some new ones. It set me on a path that I've never been able to turn away from for long, since then. Directly following the months of counselling, I went to work in Spain and travelled in Australia in spare months. It was an exciting few years. So that was an obvious material positive outcome of the counselling. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 15:06:08 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 4, 2022 15:06:08 GMT -5
Of course, you can. There is one provision. You can do as Jesus said if you are not living a conventional life. Look at satch. He yells at his wife. There is no way either he or his wife - in that marital situation - can do otherwise. Turning your right cheek is ridiculous in a boxing ring when the other guy is going to knock the shit out of you. And just as ridiculous is Krishnamurti's teaching when he told you to see your wife without the past in order to break that cycle of yelling.
I live an unconventional life. No wife. No boxing ring. If my country goes to war, I would leave in the same manner those guys fled to Canada to avoid the draft. Only fools would do the bidding of crazy politicians who lose sight of their duty to serve us instead of making us serve them. You are no fool, stardust. You think well in this forum. Why won't you also think well in the real world?
I stopped watching when Jesus said, Be perfect. That must have been verse 5:28. And if it wasn't clear he added, as God is perfect. You probably know well enough not to perceive Tao the way a Taiwanese Taoist priest does. I once watched that guy prancing around with a kung fu sword before an altar. He then went into a trance and scribbled Chinese characters on a slip of rice paper, set it afire, and dunk it into a glass of water for a devotee to drink. It was for curing a mental ailment. And that behavior would not deter you from reading Chaungtze or Laotze. Coarse minds exist in every culture. Practitioners of the Christian faith are no better exponents of Jesus' teaching than Taoists are at living by the principles alluded to in the Tao Te Ching. Your formative years living among Christians have made you unreceptive to Jesus' teaching. I am that way also with regard to Hinduism. Any mention of an Indian guru shuts out my receptors.
India was a shocking experience from the moment I stepped off the plane and walked into the airport at Chennai. It got worse when I got into a taxi after a tug of war among the cab drivers. Halfway into the city, my cabbie pulled into a gas station. He asked for some rupees to buy the gas. I gave him the money and he pulled out the gas cap which was a rolled up stub of newspaper and started filling up his cab. Fcking hell. I realized I was riding in a bomb on wheels. After filling up, he shoved his "gas cap" back in and motioned to me to get in the cab to resume our journey to my hotel. India stinks. This is not a figure of speech. After 2000 years or more of Twat Tam Asi, the subcontinent still reeks of human excrement and human suffering. And yet, you guys swear by the teaching of Ramana, and love stamping on Gopal.
The story of Jesus is silly. It is a distraction, irrelevant and should be discarded. The Sermon on the Mount points to the cause of human suffering. It's prescriptive tone offends the American who does not like to be told. Be perfect. This is the central teaching of Confucius: the perfect man. Laotze points to the same thing too, but in the other way round by admonishing the fool.
|
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 15:31:23 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 4, 2022 15:31:23 GMT -5
Cite me an example of this in the real world. Let's examine it.
Selfless self is an oxymoron. For now, I will keep an open mind.
I can't really, and even if I tried it would always be open to the charge that any such action always had some sort of self-interest at the heart of it. That a mother giving her life to protect her child had biological programming at its root, etc. I know the dance, so it sounds like a pointless endeavour. Feel free to disregard my comment. Maternal instinct! I can accept that. Volition doesn't come into play when a mother reflexively puts herself in danger to protect her offspring. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt with regard to the presence of the self in the fostering of a child. A mother does consciously know what she is doing. But this is not altruism,is it? The child is an extension of the mother. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 16:36:57 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 16:36:57 GMT -5
There was once a farmer in ancient China who owned a horse. “You are so lucky!” his neighbours told him, “to have a horse to pull the cart for you.” “Maybe,” the farmer replied. One day he didn’t latch the gate properly and the horse ran away. “Oh no! That is terrible news!” his neighbours cried. “Such bad luck!” “Maybe,” the farmer replied. A few days later the horse returned, bringing with it six wild horses. “How fantastic! You are so lucky,” his neighbours told him. “Maybe,” the farmer replied. The following week the farmer’s son was breaking-in one of the wild horses when it threw him to the ground, breaking his leg. “Oh no!” the neighbours cried. “Such bad luck, all over again!” “Maybe,” the farmer replied. The next day soldiers came and took away all the young men to fight in the army. The farmer’s son was left behind. “You are so lucky!” his neighbours cried. “Maybe,” the farmer replied. ------------------- "When we interpret a situation as an ‘opportunity’ or a ‘disaster’ it shapes the way that we respond. But the Taoist Farmer shows that we can never truly know how a situation is going to turn out. There are no intrinsic ‘opportunities’ or ‘threats’ — there is only what happens and how we choose to respond."I agree. Responding from within a spiral of catastrophising is bound to affect the situation. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 16:41:43 GMT -5
I reckon that people in general would say that they 'know themselves' better than other people could possibly know them, but like you, I don't think this is necessarily true. 25 years ago I was seeing a counsellor, who pointed out patterns of conditioning in me, and it took me several weeks before I could honestly see what he was seeing. During those few weeks, it confused me more than anything, I could only vaguely see what he was seeing. Of course, he didn't know whether I like chocolate, or what football team I supported....but he knew what made me 'tick'. He could see my insecurities. He knew my unconsciously held beliefs. Yeah the FBI profilers are another good example of professionals who are trained to be able to tell what's going on with you. Folks think their thoughts live in their private mindscapes and so are exclusive to them, but in truth much of that can be evident if you know the patterns to look for. If you have the 'template', (or insight), certain subtle mannerisms, behaviours and countenance can indicate all sorts of things. And so it is when folks conduct themselves in general. It's apparent enough if you know what to look for. It's also the case that we naturally assess all that anyway, perhaps largely unconsciously, or automatically as a kind of risk/reward assessment when we engage with others. It just so happens that the more insightful one is and the more present they are, the better they will be at recognising and correctly interpreting patterns. Both in themselves and in others. It’s a natural development. It's a good point that it can come through specific training too, and what I'm talking about tends to come through a combination of rigorous self-honesty, insight and being conscious/present. As an aside, in terms of woo it can be taken further. It's said the Buddha could literally know the mind of another. It's listed as one of the supranormal powers of a buddha (iddhi).
I'm reminded of the following quote;
Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your habits. Be careful what becomes habitual, for your habits become your destiny. Have you ever read the Dhammapada? buddhanet.net/pdf_file/scrndhamma.pdf |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2022 16:46:03 GMT -5
Nah, it isn't odd. A lot of them are quite painful and belligerent and that's not really a vibe you're on. Well one vibe we had was thinking we were done with new grandkids, but no! apparently three girls weren't enough, so now a couple of boys are jumping in the fray. And boys are different than girls.  Women nurture like you wouldn't believe.. but boys.. well, you tell me  Men and boys nurture too.. it just doesn't look.. so womanly, I suppose  |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 17:43:19 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 4, 2022 17:43:19 GMT -5
sdp said: I stopped watching when Jesus said, Be perfect. That must have been verse 5:28. And if it wasn't clear he added, as God is perfect.
sree said: You probably know well enough not to perceive Tao the way a Taiwanese Taoist priest does. I once watched that guy prancing around with a kung fu sword before an altar. He then went into a trance and scribbled Chinese characters on a slip of rice paper, set it afire, and dunk it into a glass of water for a devotee to drink. It was for curing a mental ailment. And that behavior would not deter you from reading Chaungtze or Laotze. Coarse minds exist in every culture. Practitioners of the Christian faith are no better exponents of Jesus' teaching than Taoists are at living by the principles alluded to in the Tao Te Ching. Your formative years living among Christians have made you unreceptive to Jesus' teaching. I am that way also with regard to Hinduism. Any mention of an Indian guru shuts out my receptors.
India was a shocking experience from the moment I stepped off the plane and walked into the airport at Chennai. It got worse when I got into a taxi after a tug of war among the cab drivers. Halfway into the city, my cabbie pulled into a gas station. He asked for some rupees to buy the gas. I gave him the money and he pulled out the gas cap which was a rolled up stub of newspaper and started filling up his cab. Fcking hell. I realized I was riding in a bomb on wheels. After filling up, he shoved his "gas cap" back in and motioned to me to get in the cab to resume our journey to my hotel. India stinks. This is not a figure of speech. After 2000 years or more of Twat Tam Asi, the subcontinent still reeks of human excrement and human suffering. And yet, you guys swear by the teaching of Ramana, and love stamping on Gopal.
The story of Jesus is silly. It is a distraction, irrelevant and should be discarded. The Sermon on the Mount points to the cause of human suffering. It's prescriptive tone offends the American who does not like to be told. Be perfect. This is the central teaching of Confucius: the perfect man. Laotze points to the same thing too, but in the other way round by admonishing the fool.
sdp said: You have not heard one word I've said. I've said fundamentalist Christians don't understand Jesus. Jesus basically said, I'm the model, Peter said it too of Jesus. But fundamentalist Christians believe Jesus did it all for them (his death), and all they have to do is believe. This is a complete misconception of what Jesus was all about. Paul didn't help any, but his teaching is misunderstood also. Jesus was about personal transformation here and now. Jesus, if you read his words carefully, was saying and showing he is the model, the individual has to do the work. Jesus was very clear, he said the things I do you can do. He also said the words I speak will be your judge. Christians don't think that refers to them. Yes, Jesus said the nice sweet things in the Sermon on the Mount, but just as important is the other part. I once wrote out the things Jesus said to do. I ended up with two typed pages single spaced. Fundamentalist Christians just ignore that, or don't even know it's there. What Jesus said to do is at odds with Christians who think they need to do nothing except believe.
|
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 17:43:32 GMT -5
Post by ouroboros on Aug 4, 2022 17:43:32 GMT -5
I can't really, and even if I tried it would always be open to the charge that any such action always had some sort of self-interest at the heart of it. That a mother giving her life to protect her child had biological programming at its root, etc. I know the dance, so it sounds like a pointless endeavour. Feel free to disregard my comment. Maternal instinct! I can accept that. Volition doesn't come into play when a mother reflexively puts herself in danger to protect her offspring. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt with regard to the presence of the self in the fostering of a child. A mother does consciously know what she is doing. But this is not altruism,is it? The child is an extension of the mother. No, I guess not. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 17:50:32 GMT -5
Post by ouroboros on Aug 4, 2022 17:50:32 GMT -5
Yeah the FBI profilers are another good example of professionals who are trained to be able to tell what's going on with you. Folks think their thoughts live in their private mindscapes and so are exclusive to them, but in truth much of that can be evident if you know the patterns to look for. If you have the 'template', (or insight), certain subtle mannerisms, behaviours and countenance can indicate all sorts of things. And so it is when folks conduct themselves in general. It's apparent enough if you know what to look for. It's also the case that we naturally assess all that anyway, perhaps largely unconsciously, or automatically as a kind of risk/reward assessment when we engage with others. It just so happens that the more insightful one is and the more present they are, the better they will be at recognising and correctly interpreting patterns. Both in themselves and in others. It’s a natural development. It's a good point that it can come through specific training too, and what I'm talking about tends to come through a combination of rigorous self-honesty, insight and being conscious/present. As an aside, in terms of woo it can be taken further. It's said the Buddha could literally know the mind of another. It's listed as one of the supranormal powers of a buddha (iddhi).
I'm reminded of the following quote;
Be careful what you think, for your thoughts become your words. Be careful what you say, for your words become your actions. Be careful what you do, for your actions become your habits. Be careful what becomes habitual, for your habits become your destiny. Have you ever read the Dhammapada? buddhanet.net/pdf_file/scrndhamma.pdfI hafta confess my attention span when it comes to reading is quite limited. What I tend to do is skim the bigger stuff, or better still, when I have a query- search out relevant passages from various sources and see what the common threads are and how that tallies with my own insight. But I rarely get into any volume of work. It might be a failing of mine, idk. It's just the way I roll. Thanks for the link though, I just had a skim and it looks like some nuggets. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 21:54:09 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 4, 2022 21:54:09 GMT -5
sdp said: I stopped watching when Jesus said, Be perfect. That must have been verse 5:28. And if it wasn't clear he added, as God is perfect. sree said: You probably know well enough not to perceive Tao the way a Taiwanese Taoist priest does. I once watched that guy prancing around with a kung fu sword before an altar. He then went into a trance and scribbled Chinese characters on a slip of rice paper, set it afire, and dunk it into a glass of water for a devotee to drink. It was for curing a mental ailment. And that behavior would not deter you from reading Chaungtze or Laotze. Coarse minds exist in every culture. Practitioners of the Christian faith are no better exponents of Jesus' teaching than Taoists are at living by the principles alluded to in the Tao Te Ching. Your formative years living among Christians have made you unreceptive to Jesus' teaching. I am that way also with regard to Hinduism. Any mention of an Indian guru shuts out my receptors. India was a shocking experience from the moment I stepped off the plane and walked into the airport at Chennai. It got worse when I got into a taxi after a tug of war among the cab drivers. Halfway into the city, my cabbie pulled into a gas station. He asked for some rupees to buy the gas. I gave him the money and he pulled out the gas cap which was a rolled up stub of newspaper and started filling up his cab. Fcking hell. I realized I was riding in a bomb on wheels. After filling up, he shoved his "gas cap" back in and motioned to me to get in the cab to resume our journey to my hotel. India stinks. This is not a figure of speech. After 2000 years or more of Twat Tam Asi, the subcontinent still reeks of human excrement and human suffering. And yet, you guys swear by the teaching of Ramana, and love stamping on Gopal. The story of Jesus is silly. It is a distraction, irrelevant and should be discarded. The Sermon on the Mount points to the cause of human suffering. It's prescriptive tone offends the American who does not like to be told. Be perfect. This is the central teaching of Confucius: the perfect man. Laotze points to the same thing too, but in the other way round by admonishing the fool. sdp said: You have not heard one word I've said. I've said fundamentalist Christians don't understand Jesus. Jesus basically said, I'm the model, Peter said it too of Jesus. But fundamentalist Christians believe Jesus did it all for them (his death), and all they have to do is believe. This is a complete misconception of what Jesus was all about. Paul didn't help any, but his teaching is misunderstood also. Jesus was about personal transformation here and now. Jesus, if you read his words carefully, was saying and showing he is the model, the individual has to do the work. Jesus was very clear, he said the things I do you can do. He also said the words I speak will be your judge. Christians don't think that refers to them. Yes, Jesus said the nice sweet things in the Sermon on the Mount, but just as important is the other part. I once wrote out the things Jesus said to do. I ended up with two typed pages single spaced. Fundamentalist Christians just ignore that, or don't even know it's there. What Jesus said to do is at odds with Christians who think they need to do nothing except believe. I heard you, but why do you care what fundamentalist Christians understand or don't understand? You read the Sermon on the Mount. What do YOU understand? That's all that matters. Why give a damn what people around you think? |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 4, 2022 22:02:53 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 4, 2022 22:02:53 GMT -5
Maternal instinct! I can accept that. Volition doesn't come into play when a mother reflexively puts herself in danger to protect her offspring. However, I will give you the benefit of the doubt with regard to the presence of the self in the fostering of a child. A mother does consciously know what she is doing. But this is not altruism,is it? The child is an extension of the mother. No, I guess not. Why don't we relate with each other the way a mother relates with her offspring? The presence of the self does not prevent the mother from caring for the child. Affection. Not altruism.
Krishnamurti said that love is when the self is not. In the case of the mother, love is even when the self is there.
We might have a breakthrough here. This is worth exploring.
|
|
Women nurture like you wouldn't believe.. but boys.. well, you tell me 
