|
|
Post by ouroboros on Aug 5, 2022 16:00:16 GMT -5
Ha! I could probably make an argument for it, but it's largely beside the point. Ah okay. Well this may come as a shock to you, Mr empty boat, but not everything I write is exclusively for your benefit. I tend to have half a mind on the spartans. Anyway, I suggest you take what you can from my words and discard the rest. It's not possible to put a figure on it, but there's something to be said for not trying to run before we can walk. Although I can certainly understand the minds propensity to want to skip to the ending to see if the book is worth reading. You won't be able to employ someone to wipe your backside on this one though. Ya know why. Coz in many respects it's not about the destination it's about the journey.
I swear I read that somewhere. It would be good to talk to a living person. Talking to you guys is like talking to written books. I know you folks are well read and all that, but can you folks speak directly from the depth of nothingness? Personally i probably couldn't be less well read ... but I like me some adages.  |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 5, 2022 16:00:45 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 5, 2022 16:00:45 GMT -5
Am I free of the self? Yes. I will take any lie-detector test conducted by members here. The problem is, who knows what is what unless the tester is also free of the self? Are you free of the self? If not, who will you nominate to test me? Most of you guys are just throwing muck at each other instead of seriously authenticating findings of universal value to everyone. 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. Ok, let's get to work here. I have been wanting to respond to this when I first read it.
I don't mind honest observations; and I like your coming to the point. There is nothing wrong with stating what you see, and you see me as deluded. What does this mean? Doesn't your conclusion say not only that I am deluded but also that you know what freedom of the self is? How could you tell that I am deluded?
Do you know that you are deluded? If you do, then that would be the benchmark of delusion to judge my condition by. But then, if you know what delusion is, then you are free of the self.
Am I making sense here? Can you or some smart guy looking at this sort this out?
|
|
|
|
Death
Aug 5, 2022 16:03:30 GMT -5
Post by ouroboros on Aug 5, 2022 16:03:30 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. Ok, let's get to work here. I have been wanting to respond to this when I first read it.
I don't mind honest observations; and I like your coming to the point. There is nothing wrong with stating what you see, and you see me as deluded. What does this mean? Doesn't your conclusion say not only that I am deluded but also that you know what freedom of the self is? How could you tell that I am deluded?
Do you know that you are deluded? If you do, then that would be the benchmark of delusion to judge my condition by. But then, if you know what delusion is, then you are free of the self. Am I making sense here? Can you or some smart guy looking at this sort this out?
I'll come back to this as I'm shutting down for the night here. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 5, 2022 16:09:15 GMT -5
Post by stardustpilgrim on Aug 5, 2022 16:09:15 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. Ok, let's get to work here. I have been wanting to respond to this when I first read it.
I don't mind honest observations; and I like your coming to the point. There is nothing wrong with stating what you see, and you see me as deluded. What does this mean? Doesn't your conclusion say not only that I am deluded but also that you know what freedom of the self is? How could you tell that I am deluded?
Do you know that you are deluded? If you do, then that would be the benchmark of delusion to judge my condition by. But then, if you know what delusion is, then you are free of the self. Am I making sense here? Can you or some smart guy looking at this sort this out?
If you are free of self then have you been disingenuous in many posts here? |
|
|
|
Post by zazeniac on Aug 5, 2022 16:13:29 GMT -5
Ok, let's get to work here. I have been wanting to respond to this when I first read it.
I don't mind honest observations; and I like your coming to the point. There is nothing wrong with stating what you see, and you see me as deluded. What does this mean? Doesn't your conclusion say not only that I am deluded but also that you know what freedom of the self is? How could you tell that I am deluded?
Do you know that you are deluded? If you do, then that would be the benchmark of delusion to judge my condition by. But then, if you know what delusion is, then you are free of the self. Am I making sense here? Can you or some smart guy looking at this sort this out?
If you are free of self then have you been disingenuous in many posts here? Sree is MI7. Propaganda. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2022 16:23:59 GMT -5
Because that would infantilse a developing species. A good mother relating to her adult children, is a promising direction of growth. Abscissa, I am not suggesting that we breastfeed each another and change each other's diapers.
A mother's relationship with the child is a natural bond. An instance of two separate bodies, one protecting the interest and safety of the other. This is a phenomenon to behold. If it can happen in that instance, then such a connection is possible between and among all bodies. No distinction. Like ants and bees. Together in the interest of all.
What's the wrong with you, absicissa? Is your question protecting the interests and safety of me? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 5, 2022 16:41:34 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2022 16:41:34 GMT -5
Yeah each chapter dicusses an aspect of being and the mental terrain of it from a variety of perspectives. Good stuff. I think it was in here that we talked about the time span of Siddhartha's teaching compared with Jesus's. Siddhartha had decades to refine what he wanted to say whereas Jesus never got the time to have feedback sessions, where people could explain their interpretation and Jesus could have rephrased his words, where necessary. Yes, it's also interesting to note that apparently there was no writing during the time and place of the Buddha. So there was particular emphasis on the fact that everything was transmitted verbally and committing it all to memory. That's perhaps one reason why a lot of it is quite formulaic. Purposefully constructed, and probably refined over time as you say. In both instances the teachings are said to have only been committed to writing some time later, albeit supposedly by those in a direct chain or lineage to the original teacher. In any event I guess we just have to consider them on merit and take what we can from them. Yeah, nice one. I never thought to do some research on it. It's origins are in the Khuddaka Nikāya. An interesting work, thank you. |
|
|
|
Post by someNOTHING! on Aug 5, 2022 16:53:33 GMT -5
I kind of agree about the Confucius and Laotze takes. Confucianism was more about 'creating a harmony between heaven and earth' in society, while Laotse was more about negating a lot of the influences that cloud one's view of what heaven/perfection might be. There was a reason why the story has him writing the Tao Te Ching as he was leaving. It's interesting what peeps do with the teachings to mold them to their own world views and agendas. I also see how they resonated together to blossom in the intermingling with Buddhist thought. Notice how their stories kind of point in the directions of piercing through social norms (or leaving society altogether), but, once spotting and then riding the ox, returns to society. It can be pretty cool juxtaposing how the Far Eastern cultures, the South Asian cultures, etc approach, value, and express the realization of what is ultimate and undivided. There are nuggets in them to be harvested, but can be quite hard to acknowledge in the state of confusion and ignorance. As such, SR/TR 'appear' quite radical when one is searching for what it could be.
You seem to focus a lot on appearances and to express a lot of assumptions at times. That's OK, as it is part of the searching and inquiry. I get more curious in seeing what happens when you occasionally give up on that endeavor and your attention is on the substrates of the thinking, assumptions, and attachments. Undermining the validity of one's beliefs is what dissolves one's delusion. Perfection is not about such 'outward' appearances or conditioned perceptions, but THAT in/from which they appear. I do like this post of yours. It invites serious conversation.
What do you mean by your observation in bold above? You supposedly have figured out or realized something. But I'm not really aware of what has happened and/or where you're coming from, what it is you have figured out or are trying to clarify, nor what any of this means to you. Which part are you not understanding?  The evidence is all in your posts, so I'm not sure what your asking. Is there something you're not telling that you want others to figure out about you? What is it you want to bring to the board? I'm an odd bloke, but your approach to the board is odd in a way that seems more designed to prod and troll as ways of asking for attention. Does that sound like a reasonable observation? Why/why not? |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 6, 2022 9:01:29 GMT -5
Post by zazeniac on Aug 6, 2022 9:01:29 GMT -5
 Three things.
So are you saying that your parents where Sikh, and not Hindu? Were you taught and/or otherwise indoctrinated into Sikhism? As to our apparent mutual interest on the topic of Christianity and other spiritual traditions: The Romans either erased or co-opted as much of the old pre-Christian religion and other culture of north western Europe that they could. That continued long after the Empire collapsed through the influence of the Church. As an interesting digression, that explains why what I wrote about here is relative to Ireland, where the evidence suggests they never went in any significant military force, and, ironically, it was Irish monks who restored many of the classics that formed the basis of the Renaissance. The peculiarities of Patrick's church would form the basis for yet another potentially interesting digression. Now, one reason for that digression was for context in response to your allegation of defamation by ouroboros.  Much of that pre-Christian culture survived despite the best efforts of the Romans and their successors. Billy Shakes expressed quite a bit of it in his work. Much more survives in the form of old folksy aphorisms. Some cultural artifacts cast the shadows of existential truth, you know, like on the wall of Plato's cave? The better these follow the outlines of that truth, the harder they are to erase completely. so, to the extent that you're not joking in your complaint of injury as to having allegedly been called a liar: One of these old cultural artifacts is essentially a nursery "rhyme" for children: "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me". Is my English that bad? I am a yank: my mother is Italian and father is Anglo-Saxon with some Viking ancestry. My affinity for Sikhs developed in Port Dickson, a town on the Malacca Straits. Hargit is a Sikh woman I hired to help in the kitchen of a cafe restaurant. I set up that eatery on a lark. My boat was in the marina where yachties would moor when they came through on their way to Thailand. Having a place in town to gather with them gave me an opportunity to embed within the local culture. An Irish expat, who had an apartment at the marina, came in a couple of times a week for lunch. She thought I was a CIA asset, while I suspected her to be MI5. Anyway, Harjit gave me a view of how Punjabis live among themselves. Her husband, Jagjit, worked at the oil depot. Sikhs gather in their temple once a week where the women would cook lunch and the men chatter. If I had the power, I would ship American women to Punjab for spiritual training.
As for Christianity, are you saying that Christian ethics have nothing to do with Judaism? I would agree. Christianity, as I see it, is not an Abrahamic religion. I go by feel when I read spiritual teachings from any tradition.
As for being called a liar, I wasn't joking at all. I did say I was free of the self. I know it sounds preposterous. It is, even to me. Jumping to conclusion that I am the bad guy because I am a threat to the status quo is what Americans are doing these days. It like W. Bush saying, "If you are not with us, then you are against us." Not good, man.
An Italian.mother. That explains a lot. I used to visit my cousin in Middletown, New York. All his friends were Italian, great soccer players. Second generation. They spoke the language. I remember every house I visited the mom offering me food. I never ate so much in my life. Grapes, pasta, bread, cheese. It was none stop eating. And they were so persistent. In their eyes I was too skinny. Poor sree. Plus all that Catholic religion. All that guilt. I get it now. Don't get me wrong, they were the nicest people. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 6, 2022 9:15:40 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2022 9:15:40 GMT -5
Three things.
So are you saying that your parents where Sikh, and not Hindu? Were you taught and/or otherwise indoctrinated into Sikhism? As to our apparent mutual interest on the topic of Christianity and other spiritual traditions: The Romans either erased or co-opted as much of the old pre-Christian religion and other culture of north western Europe that they could. That continued long after the Empire collapsed through the influence of the Church. As an interesting digression, that explains why what I wrote about here is relative to Ireland, where the evidence suggests they never went in any significant military force, and, ironically, it was Irish monks who restored many of the classics that formed the basis of the Renaissance. The peculiarities of Patrick's church would form the basis for yet another potentially interesting digression. Now, one reason for that digression was for context in response to your allegation of defamation by ouroboros. Much of that pre-Christian culture survived despite the best efforts of the Romans and their successors. Billy Shakes expressed quite a bit of it in his work. Much more survives in the form of old folksy aphorisms. Some cultural artifacts cast the shadows of existential truth, you know, like on the wall of Plato's cave? The better these follow the outlines of that truth, the harder they are to erase completely. so, to the extent that you're not joking in your complaint of injury as to having allegedly been called a liar: One of these old cultural artifacts is essentially a nursery "rhyme" for children: "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me". Is my English that bad? I am a yank: my mother is Italian and father is Anglo-Saxon with some Viking ancestry. My affinity for Sikhs developed in Port Dickson, a town on the Malacca Straits. Hargit is a Sikh woman I hired to help in the kitchen of a cafe restaurant. I set up that eatery on a lark. My boat was in the marina where yachties would moor when they came through on their way to Thailand. Having a place in town to gather with them gave me an opportunity to embed within the local culture. An Irish expat, who had an apartment at the marina, came in a couple of times a week for lunch. She thought I was a CIA asset, while I suspected her to be MI5. Anyway, Harjit gave me a view of how Punjabis live among themselves. Her husband, Jagjit, worked at the oil depot. Sikhs gather in their temple once a week where the women would cook lunch and the men chatter. If I had the power, I would ship American women to Punjab for spiritual training.
As for Christianity, are you saying that Christian ethics have nothing to do with Judaism? I would agree. Christianity, as I see it, is not an Abrahamic religion. I go by feel when I read spiritual teachings from any tradition.
As for being called a liar, I wasn't joking at all. I did say I was free of the self. I know it sounds preposterous. It is, even to me. Jumping to conclusion that I am the bad guy because I am a threat to the status quo is what Americans are doing these days. It like W. Bush saying, "If you are not with us, then you are against us." Not good, man.
Chritianity and Islam both are offshoot of Judaism. God of Jesus is God of Abraham and likewise God of Muhamad Nabi is the God of Abraham. Their way of salvation is different. |
|
|
|
Death
Aug 6, 2022 14:44:35 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 6, 2022 14:44:35 GMT -5
Abscissa, I am not suggesting that we breastfeed each another and change each other's diapers.
A mother's relationship with the child is a natural bond. An instance of two separate bodies, one protecting the interest and safety of the other. This is a phenomenon to behold. If it can happen in that instance, then such a connection is possible between and among all bodies. No distinction. Like ants and bees. Together in the interest of all.
What's the wrong with you, absicissa? Is your question protecting the interests and safety of me? No. On the contrary, you are the evil that must end, abscissa. Living is dying, said Krishnamurti. You are an illusion that must fade out. Human energy is toxic. The source of this poison is the self. The reason why our world is so messed up is because there are abscissas everywhere. |
|
|
|
Post by sree on Aug 6, 2022 15:09:49 GMT -5
Is my English that bad? I am a yank: my mother is Italian and father is Anglo-Saxon with some Viking ancestry. My affinity for Sikhs developed in Port Dickson, a town on the Malacca Straits. Hargit is a Sikh woman I hired to help in the kitchen of a cafe restaurant. I set up that eatery on a lark. My boat was in the marina where yachties would moor when they came through on their way to Thailand. Having a place in town to gather with them gave me an opportunity to embed within the local culture. An Irish expat, who had an apartment at the marina, came in a couple of times a week for lunch. She thought I was a CIA asset, while I suspected her to be MI5. Anyway, Harjit gave me a view of how Punjabis live among themselves. Her husband, Jagjit, worked at the oil depot. Sikhs gather in their temple once a week where the women would cook lunch and the men chatter. If I had the power, I would ship American women to Punjab for spiritual training.
As for Christianity, are you saying that Christian ethics have nothing to do with Judaism? I would agree. Christianity, as I see it, is not an Abrahamic religion. I go by feel when I read spiritual teachings from any tradition.
As for being called a liar, I wasn't joking at all. I did say I was free of the self. I know it sounds preposterous. It is, even to me. Jumping to conclusion that I am the bad guy because I am a threat to the status quo is what Americans are doing these days. It like W. Bush saying, "If you are not with us, then you are against us." Not good, man.
An Italian.mother. That explains a lot. I used to visit my cousin in Middletown, New York. All his friends were Italian, great soccer players. Second generation. They spoke the language. I remember every house I visited the mom offering me food. I never ate so much in my life. Grapes, pasta, bread, cheese. It was none stop eating. And they were so persistent. In their eyes I was too skinny. Poor sree. Plus all that Catholic religion. All that guilt. I get it now. Don't get me wrong, they were the nicest people. My grandma was a devout Catholic. She went to church everyday to attend morning mass and ate her wafer (body of Christ). She always carried her rosary in her hands; and whenever I visited her, she would hug and kiss me, and made the sign of the cross...using her thumb to touch my forehead, right shoulder, left shoulder, and my chest. My grandma was a wonderful woman, an excellent cook, a matriarch who gave strength to and held the family together. Joe Biden should have his ass kicked for making fun of his own religion.
Religion is important to people. Without it, life would be too hard to bear. Hedonism, which is destroying our country, has become the religion of America.
|
|
|
|
Death
Aug 6, 2022 15:17:32 GMT -5
Post by sree on Aug 6, 2022 15:17:32 GMT -5
Is my English that bad? I am a yank: my mother is Italian and father is Anglo-Saxon with some Viking ancestry. My affinity for Sikhs developed in Port Dickson, a town on the Malacca Straits. Hargit is a Sikh woman I hired to help in the kitchen of a cafe restaurant. I set up that eatery on a lark. My boat was in the marina where yachties would moor when they came through on their way to Thailand. Having a place in town to gather with them gave me an opportunity to embed within the local culture. An Irish expat, who had an apartment at the marina, came in a couple of times a week for lunch. She thought I was a CIA asset, while I suspected her to be MI5. Anyway, Harjit gave me a view of how Punjabis live among themselves. Her husband, Jagjit, worked at the oil depot. Sikhs gather in their temple once a week where the women would cook lunch and the men chatter. If I had the power, I would ship American women to Punjab for spiritual training.
As for Christianity, are you saying that Christian ethics have nothing to do with Judaism? I would agree. Christianity, as I see it, is not an Abrahamic religion. I go by feel when I read spiritual teachings from any tradition.
As for being called a liar, I wasn't joking at all. I did say I was free of the self. I know it sounds preposterous. It is, even to me. Jumping to conclusion that I am the bad guy because I am a threat to the status quo is what Americans are doing these days. It like W. Bush saying, "If you are not with us, then you are against us." Not good, man.
Chritianity and Islam both are offshoot of Judaism. God of Jesus is God of Abraham and likewise God of Muhamad Nabi is the God of Abraham. Their way of salvation is different. No, my friend. Christianity and the teaching of Jesus are not the same thing. Christianity was invented by early Christians. It's the same confusion in Buddhism which was invented by the monks. Spirituality and superstition. I come to this forum to point out the difference.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2022 15:21:17 GMT -5
Is your question protecting the interests and safety of me? No. On the contrary, you are the evil that must end, abscissa. Living is dying, said Krishnamurti. You are an illusion that must fade out. Human energy is toxic. The source of this poison is the self. The reason why our world is so messed up is because there are abscissas everywhere. Interesting perspective.. and what instrument are you using to assess this possibility? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Death
Aug 6, 2022 15:23:11 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Aug 6, 2022 15:23:11 GMT -5
Chritianity and Islam both are offshoot of Judaism. God of Jesus is God of Abraham and likewise God of Muhamad Nabi is the God of Abraham. Their way of salvation is different. No, my friend. Christianity and the teaching of Jesus are not the same thing. Christianity was invented by early Christians. It's the same confusion in Buddhism which was invented by the monks. Spirituality and superstition. I come to this forum to point out the difference. Ahh.. good to see you've found another purpose in your life. Bravo. |
|
Three things.