4 of 12
4
Buddhism as a model?
Posted: 10 July 2007 05:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 46 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1632
Joined  2006-09-23

[quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]If the rattlesnake is on the trail, and you’re paying attention,

I am wondering what it is about religion that seems to require good people to think up bad analogies.  Perhaps they are parables.  I’m not going to m-w.com today.

I’m thinking back to my math and chemistry and physics classes and trying to remember anything equivalent.  Analogies (parables? maybe just examples is the word I’m looking for) must have been used to help us understand, but I’ve forgotten them along with most of the math and chemistry and physics as well.  What remains, though, is the immortal “Convince yourself…”

I haven’t forgotten the way it feels when you do “convince yourself”, either.  That’s been my only experience of enlightenment.  It is reliably reproducible too, something no one can claim for religious experiences.  Here we see the adopters of Sam’s manual for operating the human mind gibbling just as much as medieval scholastics ever did.

Not gonna draw any conclusions.  Wouldn’t be prudent.  We all know what the plural of anecdote isn’t.  Still, it’s pretty disheartening.

 Signature 

“I will tell you with the utmost impudence that I esteem much more his Person, than his Works.”

  (Dryden, St. Euremont’s Essays, 1692.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 05:42 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 47 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27

mainly learned from Panikkar, who has experienced it

I think this gets back to the issue of statements that are unsubstantiated. How does ol’ Raimundo substantiate being anything but a consummate flim-flam artist? It is you who do the substantiating for him, because, I’ll tell ya, m, he doesn’t do it for me.

One problem and one problem only. There’s no “you” there to do it, at least so you say.

You were asked by h for your sources. You give us the Panic-Car. Be sure to wear your seatbelt.

The two facts - that there is Samsara, duality and multiplicty - and there is Nirvana, Unity, Truth, are seemingly contradictory, but must somehow be reconciled because we are confronted with both at the same time.

Contradictory? Well, boo-fuçking-hoo. Or should that be woo-fuçking woo?

I think all this “must be reconciled” bs bumps heavily up against the ol’ Wu-wei.

Who is writing these posts?

Why are they being written?

Better yet, who’s driving the Panic-Car?

The car that is the Panic-Car is not the car that may be driven.

Holy Hill, Batman! Just up Euclid Street and around the bend. I’d see you when you get there. Except that there is no “there” there, Bay Area Buddhistas. I never got farther than LaVals.

 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 05:51 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 48 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1632
Joined  2006-09-23

[quote author=“mahahaha”]The fact is that Asian rituals and culture do not translate well into western culture.

This is why the Dalai Lama discourages Westerners from trying to become Tibetan Buddhists.  He says to stay in your own faith tradition.  For one, every tradition is as good as any other.  For another, you can more easily recognize a charlatan in a familiar environment.

I could argue with the latter—Christians seem to be duped every day—but I see what he means.

 Signature 

“I will tell you with the utmost impudence that I esteem much more his Person, than his Works.”

  (Dryden, St. Euremont’s Essays, 1692.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 05:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 49 ]  
Administrator
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  480
Joined  2006-12-16

[quote author=“mahahaha”]
  Plenty of Aussies and Canucks here along the the Yanks.

The answer is that Truth somehow includes both simulateneously.  Monism is not the case; Dualism is not the case.  Non-dualism is the case.  Truth is Not-Two.

I can say all that, but I haven’t experienced it.  Until I do, it’s all speculative, mainly learned from Panikkar, who has experienced it.

Speaking of Panikkar, his book on Buddhism is another must read:

The Silence of God: The Answer of the Buddha

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0883444461?tag=worldcat-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0883444461&adid=09GGRP3Z4C5WDNBF0JZ4&

Sorry about that ‘United States of America’ reference, I was thinking of myself, as usual. One thing I really like about this forum is hearing from Canada, Norway, etc.
Maha, your continuing interest in Panikkar and non-dualism, just the fact that you are willing to write ‘Truth is Not Two’ without adding something sarcastic or ironic tells me that some kind of experience is there. Otherwise, why even speculate?
I think this is where faith comes in, and maybe even a bit of belief. We read someone like Panikkar and think ‘Yes, I believe that is true.’ It just has that ‘ring of truth’ about it, so we know without knowing that this is important. Actually, I’m quite sure that your interest in Panikkar is based upon the personal contact much more than the books. It’s in the personal contact that transmission can occur without our even being aware of it. It reveals itself over time, because something about that person is so haunting.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 06:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 50 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27

It reveals itself over time, because something about that person is so haunting.

Part Bonnie and Clyde, part Barnum and Bailey. Did you know there is now a “legitimate” (at least, popular) academic inquiry known as “hauntology”? Google it and see. Even the academic stuff is a circus. And a bank robbery.  :D

 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 06:00 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 51 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  390
Joined  2006-10-12

[quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]Maha, your continuing interest in Panikkar and non-dualism, just the fact that you are willing to write ‘Truth is Not Two’ without adding something sarcastic or ironic tells me that some kind of experience is there. Otherwise, why even speculate?

Alas, it only intellectual and logical, not truly experiencial.  Even on acid.  Well, maybe a tad on acid, but that was a long time ago.

Actually, I’m quite sure that your interest in Panikkar is based upon the personal contact much more than the books. It’s in the personal contact that transmission can occur without our even being aware of it. It reveals itself over time, because something about that person is so haunting.

This is true.  But I haven’t seen the man in over 30 years, and I’ve been reading the texts during that period.  Many times each.

 Signature 

“Believe those who seek the truth; doubt those who find it”—Andre Gide

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 06:16 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 52 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  390
Joined  2006-10-12

[quote author=“Salt Creek”]I think this gets back to the issue of statements that are unsubstantiated. How does ol’ Raimundo substantiate being anything but a consummate flim-flam artist? It is you who do the substantiating for him, because, I’ll tell ya, m, he doesn’t do it for me.

Well, to quote a great internet sage, “boo fucking hoo.”  Or another one, “BFD.”

One problem and one problem only. There’s no “you” there to do it, at least so you say.

Your mixing me up with unsmoked and not paying attention.  What a surprise.

Contradictory? Well, boo-fuçking-hoo. Or should that be woo-fuçking woo?

I think all this “must be reconciled” bs bumps heavily up against the ol’ Wu-wei.

Ya do?  More lack of attention.  Wu-wei is another paradox, just as one-many and even good old wave-particle.  All contradictions.  You don’t think there’s a connection between complemtarity and non-dualism?  Nah.  You wouldn’t.  You are incapable of thinking outside the box.

 Signature 

“Believe those who seek the truth; doubt those who find it”—Andre Gide

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 06:27 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 53 ]  
Administrator
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  480
Joined  2006-12-16

[quote author=“Salt Creek”]
I think this gets back to the issue of statements that are unsubstantiated. How does ol’ Raimundo substantiate being anything but a consummate flim-flam artist? It is you who do the substantiating for him, because, I’ll tell ya, m, he doesn’t do it for me.

One problem and one problem only. There’s no “you” there to do it, at least so you say.

Holy Hill, Batman! Just up Euclid Street and around the bend. I’d see you when you get there. Except that there is no “there” there, Bay Area Buddhistas. I never got farther than LaVals.

You must come to Ashland, except that you might die laughing!

Old Raimundo is 100% credible to me because I recognize what he is trying to express. It can’t be substantiated because it is not material, it is not substantial.

The thing about the no ‘you’ there? That means ‘separately existing entity’ and neuroscience is in complete agreement that there is no there there in the nervous system - it just feels like there is a central ‘actor’. Really, there’s just action. That’s not particularly woo, is it? Yet it is completely Wu. Wei Wu Wei - actions without an actor.
See Daniel Dennett:  ‘Consciousness Explained by One of Your Favorite Atheists.’

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 06:37 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 54 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1632
Joined  2006-09-23

[quote author=“Salt Creek”] I never got farther than LaVals.

From a Bay Area restaurant review : “La Val’s women’s bathroom has the rarely seen condom machine AND a sex toy machine.”  And well priced at only 50 cents. 

Alas: “Since it was only 50 cents, some friends of mine and I decided to try our luck, and the machine fucking stole our money! Thinking that no one would ever want to complain to the management about it because of the embarassment of using a sex toy machine, and that this machine might well have been broken for months or years, I decided I would be the one to bring it to their attention. It’s pretty anticlimactic to say the manager refunded my 50 cents and that was it.”  Ah, Berkeley.  Unisex bathrooms, bathrooms with sex toy machines, people having their money stolen by sex toy machines—my madeleines.

But she’s talking about the LaVals on Durant.  Still, next time I’m in Berkeley visiting Northside favorites, I will check the bathroom.

 Signature 

“I will tell you with the utmost impudence that I esteem much more his Person, than his Works.”

  (Dryden, St. Euremont’s Essays, 1692.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 07:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 55 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1632
Joined  2006-09-23

[quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]The thing about the no ‘you’ there? That means ‘separately existing entity’ and neuroscience is in complete agreement that there is no there there in the nervous system - it just feels like there is a central ‘actor’. Really, there’s just action. That’s not particularly woo, is it? Yet it is completely Wu. Wei Wu Wei - actions without an actor.

It just feels like there is a central actor?  Well, yes, it certainly does feel like that.  It feels so much like it that it really sucks to know that someday that illusion-producing process will stop.

You can dress it up in saffron robes, genuflect to it, or paint it black—it all comes down to the same thing.  You happen to be using an unremarkable fact about consciousness to further a personal need.  Others use different things toward the same end.  We see what’s silly about the ways other people pursue their forms of denial, but have a blind spot about our own.

(Did you know that “silly” originally meant “blessed”?  It’s true!

Silly is [from] the German selig (blessed), whence the infant Jesus is termed “the harmless silly babe,” and sheep are called “silly,” meaning harmless or innocent. As the “holy” are easily taken in by worldly cunning, the word came to signify “gullible,” “foolish,” (See SIMPLICITY.)

Dictionary of Phrase and Fable , a typo corrected.)

 Signature 

“I will tell you with the utmost impudence that I esteem much more his Person, than his Works.”

  (Dryden, St. Euremont’s Essays, 1692.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 07:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 56 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27

“La Val’s women’s bathroom has the rarely seen condom machine AND a sex toy machine.”

I knew there were better reasons to frequent LaVal’s than the pizza and beer. My typical haunts were on the Northside, but I occasionally made the pilgrimage past Sproul to the gamier side of campus.

Though I did not always have the patience of a saint, I was always willing to help new comers study the instruction manual for those things. If you really want to understand not-being, mahahaha, you need the intimation of superfluity brought on by being in the presence of a woman with a sex toy.

 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 07:24 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 57 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  390
Joined  2006-10-12

[quote author=“Salt Creek”]If you really want to understand not-being, mahahaha, you need the intimation of superfluity brought on by being in the presence of a woman with a sex toy.

Boy, where I come from, the women don’t need no stinkin’ sex toys. 

British Columbian weed, a few glasses of California Chardonnay, Diana Krall on the box, and massage oil work every time.

Which brings me to a point:  did it ever occur to any of you that sexual orgasm is an experience of non-being?

Man, has this thread degenerated.

 Signature 

“Believe those who seek the truth; doubt those who find it”—Andre Gide

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 07:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 58 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2927
Joined  2006-12-17

[quote author=“M is for Malapert”][quote author=“Pat_Adducci”]The thing about the no ‘you’ there? That means ‘separately existing entity’ and neuroscience is in complete agreement that there is no there there in the nervous system - it just feels like there is a central ‘actor’. Really, there’s just action. That’s not particularly woo, is it? Yet it is completely Wu. Wei Wu Wei - actions without an actor.

It just feels like there is a central actor?  Well, yes, it certainly does feel like that.  It feels so much like it that it really sucks to know that someday that illusion-producing process will stop.

You can dress it up in saffron robes, genuflect to it, or paint it black—it all comes down to the same thing.  You happen to be using an unremarkable fact about consciousness to further a personal need.  Others use different things toward the same end.  We see what’s silly about the ways other people pursue their forms of denial, but have a blind spot about our own.

But what leads you to think that all people are pursuing denial?  Life gets far more intense and enjoyable with acceptance.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 07:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 59 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1632
Joined  2006-09-23

[quote author=“burt”]But what leads you to think that all people are pursuing denial?  Life gets far more intense and enjoyable with acceptance.

I could answer this, but I’d start sounding woo.  And you know I don’t approve of that.

 Signature 

“I will tell you with the utmost impudence that I esteem much more his Person, than his Works.”

  (Dryden, St. Euremont’s Essays, 1692.)

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 July 2007 07:43 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 60 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5404
Joined  2006-09-27

Which brings me to a point

“Don’t get cocky, kid”, as Han said to Luke.

Did you know that one German word for “orgasm” is “Hohepunkt”? Climax. Do you know about the town of Climax, Colorado, and the Climax Molybdenum Company? Did you know that molybdenum is useful as an industrial lubricant in some applications?

Just doing my bit to fully degenerate this thread, which should be dead, but isn’t.

 Signature 

INVEST in cynicism!

Profile
 
 
   
4 of 12
4
 
‹‹ How are we born?      Different Models ››
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed