Obsession with old, dead guys...

[ralis]

I am posting this article by Rabbi Geoffrey Mitelman in hopes this will inspire a more rational discourse with Vajraji.

 

My point is, all religious beliefs must be made current and beneficial for our time, as opposed to the clinging to outdated cultural belief systems.

 

 

 

My link

Edited June 22, 2011 by ralis

[steve]

The use of metaphor is beyond you I guess? Of course there is no literal ocean of Samsara. Samsara is defined as merely the mis-cognition of the moment, leading to actions that reflect this ignorance, leading to realms where there is a majority of the effects caused by the actions of ignorance. Due to the Earths friction, it is mostly the effect of ignorant actions, but also the effect of beautiful thoughts and actions as well. There are higher, "more perfect" realms. I use the term "perfect" relatively, so please.

 

Your problem, much like ralis, is that you read into my statements what you wish to see in order to make yourself seem right. You completely misunderstood the intent of my first couple posts here and just rambled on based upon this initial mis-cognition.

 

Like I said... What you're not seeing is the paradox I am explaining to you. Which is this; the more attached one becomes to the Buddhas teaching, the less attached one is to a "self" that attaches to the thought that there is a teaching to be attached to, to begin with. Or the thinking and attachment that there is a "self" that can even take refuge to begin with. The Buddhas teaching, though structured, clear and straight forward, is like a mirage that teaches the nature of all other mirages. But, since reality is all just mirages and relativity anyway, without an ultimate self standing nature, it is the ultimate mirage as it shows you your own mirage-ness as well as it's own while you are viewing it. As well, it's so good and clear, that once you yourself have seen everything for what it all is, it's a mirage that you hone and master in order to show others.

 

Buddhadharma is not a teaching you burn, or kill. What one kills is ones own pre-conceptions concerning the teaching as well as oneself. The dharma itself as a raft is still worth carrying around, but as a gift to others, not as a form of bondage.

Yeah, I'm not very smart.

I also interpret electronic communication very concretely because it is a very sterile medium.

And I'm slow.

So my approach is to empty myself so that there is nothing interfering with Dao doing the dance.

Because I just get in the way anyway.

I'll try it a little right now, I think.

 

 

Here are words by an old dead guy -

Refrain from artificially exalting capable persons,

so that people shall not strive for fame and credit;

Refrain from presenting things that arouse desires,

so that people's hearts shall not be disturbed.

Therefore, Sages manage things as follows:

Cleansing people's hearts of the abundance of desires,

Replenishing the Lower Dantian with Qi,

Making people's hearts become peaceful and tolerant,

thus, strengthening their physical constitutions naturally.

 

Maybe there is something to it after all...

 

[Vajrahridaya]

Maybe there is something to it after all...

 

 

There is, being obsessed though... eh. There is a difference between a feeling of great respect and straight up obsession. Isn't there?

 

Anyway... I'm also a work in progress my brother. Maybe someday we'll be old dead guys that people quote as inspiration? Not that this is a goal... but, alas, if we haven't helped inspire someone besides ourself in a positive way, what use is our life?

[gendao]

You may just be on to something there.

I definitely have never fully worked out where things stand with my mommy and I do miss my grandmommy.

There certainly may be some personal projection but I always find it telling that most indigenous and shamanic cultures show an enormously greater level of respect to the female than do most of our current traditions - that's really what is was referring to and I was implying nature as our mother.

Hehe, makes me wonder how much various posters in here are really just projecting out their relationships with their own parents/mothers??

 

For example, by that theory, Vajrahridaya might have fairly good relations with his while ralis might be estranged?

 

As far as there being more male gurus - I think also that some males tend to be more prone to chasing their dreams with total abandon to the extreme - than women. This is still rare amongst both genders - but there are a few more exceptions amongst men. I mean, in many of the Eastern traditions...saddhus, yogis, Taoist adepts, etc will just sacrifice the lay life and dedicate every day to their spiritual pursuit. These guys may be celibate, live a life of poverty and meditate 4-10 hours/day in relative solitude.

Sure, there are some women who choose this path too - but I don't think nearly as many...

 

For example, just look at the membership on this site. It's arguably 99.5% male. Even though there is nothing discouraging or discriminating against women from joining. The interest is just not really there to begin with.

[markern]

Hehe, makes me wonder how much various posters in here are really just projecting out their relationships with their own parents/mothers??

 

For example, by that theory, Vajrahridaya might have fairly good relations with his while ralis might be estranged?

 

As far as there being more male gurus - I think also that some males tend to be more prone to chasing their dreams with total abandon to the extreme - than women. This is still rare amongst both genders - but there are a few more exceptions amongst men. I mean, in many of the Eastern traditions...saddhus, yogis, Taoist adepts, etc will just sacrifice the lay life and dedicate every day to their spiritual pursuit. These guys may be celibate, live a life of poverty and meditate 4-10 hours/day in relative solitude.

Sure, there are some women who choose this path too - but I don't think nearly as many...

 

For example, just look at the membership on this site. It's arguably 99.5% male. Even though there is nothing discouraging or discriminating against women from joining. The interest is just not really there to begin with.

 

I think one reason for the difference might be this. Many tribal societies are not monogmous but either practice various forms of partner sharing or serial monogamy with some casual sex on the side. This allows the females hypergamous instincts to play itself out to a large degree without the tribe falling apart because fatherhood is either seen as shared between all the men sleeping with a woman or irrelevant as all the men take care of all the kids or see all the kids as their children or the important male figure for any child is the brothers and cousins of the mother not whoever fertilized her. On the other hand in very large societies that aim for life long monogamy there is a need to curb female hypergamy to avoid society falling to pieces or

else one ends up with similar social problems of black america. Single mothers and alpha males disconnected from families without the support of a large group of males as in the tribes. This leads to womens most basic instincts and tendencies being seen as something detrimental to society that needs to be controlled and from that starting point respect for women in general fall.

 

Related to this one can see it as a tribe vs civilization thing. In a tribe connectedness, familial bonds, conservatism, preserving that which is rather than entrepenurial spirit, and very importantly feeling based judgment rather than principled law, cold logic and bureaucracy and close bonds rather than formalistic relationships are key values. The values connected to tribalism are more female. The values connected to large civilizations are much more male. I don`t think it is much of an accident that with feminism women have moved towards becoming more masculine rather than fighting to make femininity important. It is because success in a modern society requires a base in a lot of typical male things like I mentioned plus testosterone qualities like assertiveness, being goal oriented, being driven etc. If you have feminine qualites on top of those male qualities you can succeed very well but you need some basic masculine attributes. I generally think women have an easier time developing male attributes than men have developing female ones. Maybe because yin is more adaptable but I think it is also a survival based thing because in many rough societies women need to yang up a lot in order to survive and so the possibility of yang has evolutionary been important for women although normally having it has not.

Edited June 22, 2011 by markern

[Vajrahridaya]

I think one reason for the difference might be this. Many tribal societies are not monogmous but either practice various forms of partner sharing or serial monogamy with some casual sex on the side. This allows the females hypergamous instincts to play itself out to a large degree without the tribe falling apart because fatherhood is either seen as shared between all the men sleeping with a woman or irrelevant as all the men take care of all the kids or see all the kids as their children or the important male figure for any child is the brothers and cousins of the mother not whoever fertilized her. On the other hand in very large societies that aim for life long monogamy there is a need to curb female hypergamy to avoid society falling to pieces or

else one ends up with similar social problems of black america. Single mothers and alpha males disconnected from families without the support of a large group of males as in the tribes. This leads to womens most basic instincts and tendencies being seen as something detrimental to society that needs to be controlled and from that starting point respect for women in general fall.

 

Related to this one can see it as a tribe vs civilization thing. In a tribe connectedness, familial bonds, conservatism, preserving that which is rather than entrepenurial spirit, and very importantly feeling based judgment rather than principled law, cold logic and bureaucracy and formalistic relationships rather than bonds are key values. The values connected to tribalism are more female. The values connected to large civilizations are much more male. I don`t think it is much of an accident that with feminism women have moved towards becoming more masculine rather than fighting to make femininity important. It is because success in a modern society requires a base in a lot of typical male things like I mentioned plus testosterone qualities like assertiveness, being goal oriented, being driven etc.

 

Good synopsis that I've seen to be true as well.

It's interesting that since women have entered the male work force, they're rate of cancer and other diseases have increased.

Edited June 22, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[gendao]

I think one reason for the difference might be this. Many tribal societies are not monogmous but either practice various forms of partner sharing or serial monogamy with some casual sex on the side. This allows the females hypergamous instincts to play itself out to a large degree without the tribe falling apart because fatherhood is either seen as shared between all the men sleeping with a woman or irrelevant as all the men take care of all the kids or see all the kids as their children or the important male figure for any child is the brothers and cousins of the mother not whoever fertilized her.

What tribal societies practice this and how well does it really work for them? I know this is how many African societies "work"...but look at their results there, lol. To each their own, but not really the ones I seek in a society...

 

And this is also basically what's destroyed Black American society over the last 50 years due to liberal anti-beta male policies here - as you note below:

On the other hand in very large societies that aim for life long monogamy there is a need to curb female hypergamy to avoid society falling to pieces or else one ends up with similar social problems of black america. Single mothers and alpha males disconnected from families without the support of a large group of males as in the tribes. This leads to womens most basic instincts and tendencies being seen as something detrimental to society that needs to be controlled and from that starting point respect for women in general fall.

80% of Black American babies are now born to single moms. And if you look at Black hoods here or most of Africa - I don't think this strategy is working out too well anywhere. And neither does it lead to more "empowered" women or female spiritual gurus. In fact, more like far the opposite...(see any rap video)

 

But I think that is actually the underlying secret society goal here. If you replicate this "African" strategy...you will replicate "African" results here in the US. Which then leads to a nanny state wholly dependent upon the UN/NW0 for bare survival.

Edited June 22, 2011 by vortex

[ralis]

Hehe, makes me wonder how much various posters in here are really just projecting out their relationships with their own parents/mothers??

 

For example, by that theory, Vajrahridaya might have fairly good relations with his while ralis might be estranged?

 

 

Talk about a judgment with no facts to base it on!

[ralis]

What tribal societies practice this and how well does it really work for them? I know this is how many African societies "work"...but look at their results there, lol. To each their own, but not really the ones I seek in a society...

 

And this is also basically what's destroyed Black American society over the last 50 years due to liberal anti-beta male policies here - as you note below:80% of Black American babies are now born to single moms. And if you look at Black hoods here or most of Africa - I don't think this strategy is working out too well anywhere. And neither does it lead to more "empowered" women or female spiritual gurus. In fact, more like far the opposite...(see any rap video)

 

But I think that is actually the underlying secret society goal here. If you replicate this "African" strategy...you will replicate "African" results here in the US. Which then leads to a nanny state wholly dependent upon the UN/NW0 for bare survival.

 

 

I think you making racist stereotypical remarks here and that is not appropriate.

[markern]

What tribal societies practice this and how well does it really work for them? I know this is how many African societies "work"...but look at their results there, lol. To each their own, but not really the ones I seek in a society...

 

And this is also basically what's destroyed Black American society over the last 50 years due to liberal anti-beta male policies here - as you note below:80% of Black American babies are now born to single moms. And if you look at Black hoods here or most of Africa - I don't think this strategy is working out too well anywhere. And neither does it lead to more "empowered" women or female spiritual gurus. In fact, more like far the opposite...(see any rap video)

 

But I think that is actually the underlying secret society goal here. If you replicate this "African" strategy...you will replicate "African" results here in the US. Which then leads to a nanny state wholly dependent upon the UN/NW0 for bare survival.

 

Yes I agree entirely (except for the conspiracy part though). If you apply matriarchy in some form in a large civilization it will be the downfall of that civilization. I`m no expert and I don`t remember precise tribal names etc. just that when I have read about this it seems many such tribes functioned rather well. However, what works as a tribal structure does not necessarilly work in a large metropolis. We have no adequate way of replacing the father with male relatives. Women today don`t have five brothers and twenty five male cousins and they don`t live together. THe state can provide some money but hardly provide love and be a male role model etc. We have no way of ensuring sex get distributed so betas get a bit as well so they will eventually turn away from society as they are now doing to some extent in the west and to a larger extent in Japan where some young men now have understood that they won`t ever get a girl and because of that have lost their motivation for work and just want to play. Read the blog of the PUA roosh and you will see what happens when a man undestands he can get pussy like a rock star while living in his parents basement. He will remain living in his parents basement. THis means neither betas nor alphas will be productive memebers of society and the alphas will escalate tehir internal competion in an ever increasing race of machismo that leads to them becoming more and more problematic for society. Everything goes to hell.

 

What I think will make things work is Karezza/tantra. It makes monogamy, even with betas, a pleasurable, harmonious and not so difficult thing. Actually betas are in many ways more suited for it, women get more interested in betas by practicing it and men get more yang by practicing it so a lot of bad aspects of a beta gets naturally corrected. Since this is kind of a feminine form of sex and it also ensures monogamy in large civiliszations it allows the civiliszation to function while at the same time opening up a room for apreceating the female and yin in general and for a harmonious understanding of yin yang dynamics that stems directly from experience.

Edited June 22, 2011 by markern

[Vajrahridaya]

What tribal societies practice this and how well does it really work for them?

 

The Tibetans do. The women are allowed to marry multiple men, and the whole family shares in the responsibility of raising a child. The marrying of multiple men many times has to do with land, but sometimes with shared love too. At least so I've read.

[ralis]

I thought this thread was about long dead masters. Somehow, it has turned into a discussion of cultural anthropology.

[suninmyeyes]

If you apply matriarchy in some form in a large civilization it will be the downfall of that civilization.

Nonsense,large civilazation need more matriachal society to balance out.

It is crucial and the only way to survive for much longer.Just look around you and the state of affairs that century after century of patriachy brought up.

I liked and agree with much of what you have said in previous post.As you have said women have had to use more masculine force when it comes feminisam and that is true.

 

Unfortunatley women and womens group subconciess mind are scarred ,they are in pain due to being opressed for so long.So is the earth.That is why women need to be able forgive and much nurturing and rebalancing needs to be done by both males and females.

[mYTHmAKER]

I thought this thread was about long dead masters. Somehow, it has turned into a discussion of cultural anthropology.

 

We need more meditation to stay focused

[C T]

We need more meditation to stay focused

Nah... me thinks we need more focus to stay meditated.

 

(sorry M!)

[mYTHmAKER]

.

Edited June 22, 2011 by mYTHmAKER

[mYTHmAKER]

Nah... me thinks we need more focus to stay meditated.

 

(sorry M!)

 

[gendao]

Talk about a judgment with no facts to base it on!

Exactly - hence it was a question, not a statement!

 

So, are you saying that Vajrahridaya (and other "holy authority" figures) do not remind you of your father, perhaps? Which might explain the irresistible attraction, yet repulsion, towards him?

No...?

Edited June 23, 2011 by vortex

[Vajrahridaya]

Love the Starwars reference!

Edited June 23, 2011 by Vajrahridaya

[ralis]

Exactly - hence it was a question, not a statement!

 

So, are you saying that Vajrahridaya (and other "holy authority" figures) do not remind you of your father, perhaps? Which might explain the irresistible attraction, yet repulsion, towards him?

No...?

 

 

Parental projections are irrelevant. Whenever someone is a religious fanatic, I will question their veracity!

[Enishi]

In a Native American anthropology course I took in my final semester at college I was quite surprised to learn how many tribes here in N.A. were matrifocal.

 

I also agree that such a setup really doesn't mesh well with a large bureaucratic technological civilization. You can't force the two to merge, one has to evolve into the other or be crushed outright. It's quite ironic that such an attempt actually resulted in western women becoming LESS happy. I can really only see it working if permaculture farms and overunity devices become widespread, thus allowing matrifocal families/tribes to become more economically self-sufficient once again.

Edited June 23, 2011 by Enishi

[Enishi]

We have no way of ensuring sex get distributed so betas get a bit as well so they will eventually turn away from society as they are now doing to some extent in the west and to a larger extent in Japan where some young men now have understood that they won`t ever get a girl and because of that have lost their motivation for work and just want to play. Read the blog of the PUA roosh and you will see what happens when a man undestands he can get pussy like a rock star while living in his parents basement. He will remain living in his parents basement. THis means neither betas nor alphas will be productive memebers of society and the alphas will escalate tehir internal competion in an ever increasing race of machismo that leads to them becoming more and more problematic for society. Everything goes to hell.

 

Even when one is able to get a girl, other factors can also lead to one avoiding marriage/family. Reading about events like those in the article below is absolutely terrifying to me and makes me want to run out and get snipped as soon as possible. O.o No wonder birth rates in western countries are so low.

 

When the State Breaks a Man

Edited June 23, 2011 by Enishi