S:C

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    516

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by S:C

  2. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat
    incomplete & add on

    14 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

    Lets just say it takes a special kind of person to read about the amazing Daoist wizards of old and say "nah, I'd rather go for dependent origination and impermanence."

    (bold by me)

    Maybe those kinds of persons who are afraid of or fleeing responsibility that might be more that those can handle? 


    Further development might come with obligations to handle the acquired well in deeds also. Not everyone might be adequatly equipped or feel so.

    14 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

    the promise of multiple orgasms, superhuman fighting skills, and immortality. 

    (bold by me)

     

    It does seem a bit extreme, no?

     

    But then again so does:

    14 hours ago, liminal_luke said:

    dependent origination and impermanence.

    (bold by me)

     

    Not exactly 'middle way', - is it?

     

    Afaik the Buddhists don't have a deontological ethic, but a consequentialist one, is that true? Might that be one of the core differences in how they handle 'things' compared to Daoists?

     

    8 hours ago, old3bob said:

    Steve hits the nail on the head with, "...What has happened is that emotional reactivity is seen in context, with less personal identification,

    Less engagement, and thus less action with consequences (sound of unstruck silence wise ideally?) - while diverting emotional reactivity away to - - dissolution, impermanence and dependent origination, - but no avoidance mode?

     

    3 hours ago, Apech said:

    Beyond this there is another question as to whether what we experience as happening is really happening, or are we just seeing it wrong.  But that's really another stage.

    What do you mean by 'wrong' here? - -

    does this question help when dealing with conventional 'truths'? Doesn't the average human need an ideal to strive for in conventional life - other than 'emptiness of ultimate truth' or 'originating light ground of possibilities' , which for most is dangerous as it is before conceptualization (... before thoughts, before emotions happens but recurringly) without clear defined boundaries and gives those seeking no direction?

     

    On 11.9.2020 at 12:42 PM, Apech said:

    When faced with this there are probably three stages of response.  Firstly trying to stop or control the emotion.  Then wanting to transform them into something better.  Then lastly waking up to precisely what is going on and why.  The first two are ok and natural but not really much use.  It's the last one where emotions become the path.

     

    This does not mean that your individual feelings are particularly important.  They are just patterns of movement of energy.  So for instance, you might feel particularly angry about something and want to express it.  But that is missing the point.  If you are just indulging in the strength of yur feelings you aren't learning anything - even if there might be some temporary feeling of liberation.

     

    It is in the emotional field where this 'pushing away' is occurring which is blocking your ability to see your true nature, duality is being generated through it.  One reason for cultivation is to create a unified and coherent being - one pointed focus - which can form the basis.  On different levels and different ways conflicting emotional states are being generated - for instance by holding together essentially contradictory ideas about ourselves and the nature of reality.

     

    Unfortunately for most of us we have a huge baggage of emotional content and experiences to work through.  It can seem overfacing.  But nevertheless this is the work.

    (bold by me)

     

    does this mean that in a way - this emotional equilibrium is this ideal for you (you mention Mahamudra in your opening post, I fail to make the connection to emotions here still… ), the ideal you strive for; - and does that count even in ethical questions? how would you deal with those (- on regards to emotion, - wouldn't that be a view of extreme subjectivity... am I confused! )?

     

    On 11.9.2020 at 8:10 PM, steve said:

    The single most powerful and practical energetic movement in our experience to work and play with is emotional.

    (italic by me)

     

    Intriguing thought. :blink:

    There again, the old daoists seem to have an intersting sliding scale for the phenomenon of emotions and their changes in time (sadness to wisdom, fear to excitement etc. etc. - might be interesting to try that out, no? might that be a path in itself, not fully probably...? oh I’ve come to so not like my guessing games here…).

     

     

     

  3. Posted · Edited by S:C

    Quote

    "Nothing that is of an imagined nature exists, but what has a dependent nature is not nonexistent."

    Nagarjuna, Main Verses of the Middle Way - -  quoted by K.D. Mathes - Maitripa p. 41.

     

    How do you differentiate conceptual illusions of the own mind from that?

    But can one get any results when being constant circle of self-referentiality?

     

    What is the intent or purpose of a conceptless ultimate truth? What is the use of conventional truths, - structure?

  6. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat

    Hello there text study fellows,


    for whatever reason I got curious on why and/or under which circumstances lying is deemed acceptable and is not opposing the precepts. 


    My forgetful brain reminds me there must have been a discussion, where Mahayana Buddhism sided for lying being acceptable while the other branches sided it being unacceptable no matter what. 
     

    Now, does anyone know which author wrote about it or at which time or circumstances this was debated? 
     

    Answers to this matter I would be very much appreciated! Thanks!
     

  7. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat
    Click link for picture now

    Spoiler

    Expansion, Half Life  
    Bronze with Electricity | 28 x 35 x 17 in | 71 x 89 x 43 cm

    From the moment we are born, the world tends to have a container already built for us to fit inside: A social security number, a gender, a race, a profession or an I.Q. I ponder if we are more defined by the container we are in, rather than what we are inside. Would we recognize ourselves if we could expand beyond our bodies? Would we still be able to exist if we were authentically 'un-contained'?

    Paige Bradley

     

    https://paigebradley.com/sculpture-single/metamorphosis/expansion-half/

     

    • Like 2

  9. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat

    and I suppose it might be the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā but I am not sure. It is about his arguments against the metaphysics of his time why reality cannot be grasped by ideas and concepts.

    If that is correct, which of the fifteen translations would be most helpful for an understanding? Neither Sanskrit nor English is my first language, and I look for a version that has the arguments rather clear, not one that draws parallels to greek thinking or offers other interpretational specialties. 
    Thanks!

  10. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat

    I suppose it might be the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā but I am not sure. It is about his arguments against the metaphysics of his time why reality cannot be grasped by ideas and concepts.

    If that is correct, which of the fifteen translations would be most helpful for an understanding? Neither Sanskrit nor English is my first language, and I look for a version that has the arguments rather clear, not one that draws parallels to greek thinking or offers other interpretational specialties. 
    Thanks!

  15. Posted

    2 hours ago, Taomeow said:

    time in between in captivity, it loses 100% of that special quality.

     

    That is fascinating! 
     

    And what you wrote about Raja yoga too. It’s not something you can get a hold of at your local yoga studio, I suppose. Sad, but sounds amazing, from what I gather… even while being sure that I ain’t even getting the gist of it…
     

    • Like 1

  17. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat

    37 minutes ago, Nungali said:

    Individually its about 'your path' ,

    That is a troubling point: how can it be about autonomy if everywhere one‘s moving one steps unintentionally on someone’s toes e.g. causes suffering? Unavoidable!?
     

    What is a correlation or the relationship between autonomy and Dharma?

    Anyone else has a strange feeling of the two being unfitting? It seems immoral to strive for autonomy, no? It‘s like reaching for the Promethean fire or flying to close to Ikarus‘ Sun, grasping for the moon, making the gods envious… will stop because nothing of use will follow, but it is so annoying that I cannot state the problem more clearly, I suppose it is not understandable?

  21. Posted

    On 29.1.2023 at 11:26 PM, Nungali said:

    . Evidenced by  practice , observation and results .   " Let success be thy proof

    What you mean is, you don’t feel the ‚karmic backlash‘, that is experienced on the emotional level (as remorse, different causal chains thereafter, nightmares etc.) as the effects going against the perceived moral precepts? Or am I wrong here?

     

  22. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat

    On 29.1.2023 at 11:26 PM, Nungali said:

    This is like the idea behind one of my projects ; tracking teachings backwards through history

    If you look for „the secret teachings of all ages“ you might have known that someone from your ‚brotherhood‘ Mr. Hall, I believe, has done that already a few years back, but I cannot comment on the quality,  I stay away of brotherhoods and their papertrails, makes me nervous, but it might be of interest to you.

     

    Still, I wonder how we came there from the question of morals. Strange… probably I just consider „brotherhoods“ and cults immoral, maybe because of the hierarchy of power. and because they seem to always interpret higher laws to their advantage, am I wrong here?

  23. Posted

    On 29.1.2023 at 11:29 PM, Nungali said:

    The you quickly abandon your simple dualistic views  ;) 

    I did, didn’t I? I‘m not sure I understand what I did here.

     

    Once again, thank you, those further two lists were interesting! 
     

    Not aimed at anyone in particular, but what is it that makes a precept moral? 
    Relations to a higher power?

    What is it that gives some decisions the quality of immorality even if they are based on values, like for example autonomy if set as an absolute?

     

     

    And please, could anyone explain „Dharma“ in more detail? @old3bob or anyone? I seem to be missing out on something valuable here…

  25. Posted · Edited by schroedingerscat

    21 minutes ago, old3bob said:

    seeing dharmic principles in action could bring about one's own understanding and variation of same...

    Dharmic principles as in the Indian - rather Hindu - than Buddhist sense of the word? 
     

    From what I gather “dharma” in that sense gives each living being its own set of tasks. And how well the humble individual being solves those with its means given has consequences due cause and effect relations? So the rules apply  not for everyone in the same way but depending on previous karma?   

    Is that what you meant?


    What are the guidelines then or aren’t there any? When would one detect to be on a “slippery slope”?