Seeing, Recognising & Maintaining One's Enlightening Potential

[C T]

18 minutes ago, silent thunder said:

Fascinating but I can't imagine the disconnect to be involved in such a study.

 

Such diversity in humans.  I go to work and build things... These folks induce heart attacks in anesthitized critters... and study their dying brain functions. 

 

"Welcome home honey!  Good day?  How did work go?" 

The key point is intent and motivation, more so than the action itself. 

 

[silent thunder]

true enough... this brings me to a point again that constantly asserts itself in my mind pond... it does seem life feeds on life, no matter the form and this is seems utterly natural, though intention in the act seems paramount.

 

A shift in my relationship to decay has been coming on strong for several years now, but the last half year intensively.  That life is seems at its core, a greedy, acquiring, grasping and attaining/acquisitional process... life is seems always to be grasping to maintain its inertia, while decay sings to me of loving, releasing, nurturing openness in totality. 

 

The utter release and giving away into the all in all.

 

Decay and death takes us all eventually, because it seems to be love.  Life is seems more like avoidance.

Edited October 20, 2017 by silent thunder
edited to strike out use of the word "is" and replace with 'seems'. These things seem like truths to me, but not a definitive.

[cold]

4 minutes ago, C T said:

The key point is intent and motivation, more so than the action itself. 

 

 

So the ends justify the means? No matter how nefarious the means?

Morally wrong actions ( morally wrong in my eyes) are ok, if my motivation is strong and intent clear, and no higher authority to judge exists. For example manifest destiny , where might makes right?

 

 

 

 

[C T]

21 minutes ago, cold said:

 

So the ends justify the means? No matter how nefarious the means?

Morally wrong actions ( morally wrong in my eyes) are ok, if my motivation is strong and intent clear, and no higher authority to judge exists. For example manifest destiny , where might makes right?

 

 

 

 

Its a very complex subject, and rather sensitive too. 

There are simply too many considerations and factors at play, therefore, to dwell on this matter of whether ends justify means would require a blanket that stretches back lifetimes, and since i am not able to look back that far, I'd rather not make speculations in this area. 

 

All I can say from personal experience is that there may be times where it appears to work that way. 

 

In following the Buddhist path, it is very clear that all forms of killing should be avoided. But at the same time, Buddhism does not subscribe to the concept of divine retribution and punishment of sins. So, the individual, ultimately, have to answer for his or her motives and subsequent actions, and most importantly, how aware or ignorant an individual is with regards to knowing whether those motives and actions carry any potential for greater harm in future, or perhaps, from the view of awakening, whether those motives and actions contain seeds of personal liberation by way of inducing great regret at some point in his or her life, enough to bring about a complete inner transformation, for example, like Milarepa. 

 

There was a little story about two Buddhist monks who came upon a distressed woman at a swollen river who is unable to get to the other side, whereupon one of the monks offered to help her across by indicating that she can be carried on his back. Are you familiar with this tale? 

 

 

[manitou]

Going to the extreme end of this subject, isn't the Buddhist goal to not make moral judgments at all?  To live in the is-ness of the situation without ascribing good or bad to it?  To see the void within everything?

[C T]

10 hours ago, manitou said:

Going to the extreme end of this subject, isn't the Buddhist goal to not make moral judgments at all?  To live in the is-ness of the situation without ascribing good or bad to it?  To see the void within everything?

I think one of the chief aspirations of practicing Buddhists is to maintain a reasonable balance between hopefulness and hopelessness, strive to remain in equipoise, and mindful of conduct that is potentially beneficial to others, and whereby such conduct be aligned in such a manner as to promote a conducive environment for further causes of liberation to arise with greater ease. 

Edited October 21, 2017 by C T

[C T]

 

[C T]

Padmasambhava's Bardo Thodol ~ Great Liberation through Hearing in the Bardo 

 

 

 

 

(repost)

[C T]

 

The realization of the nature of emptiness within which effortless compassion arises like heat arising from fire. Compassion is inherent in emptiness as an innate quality, and if one has realized emptiness it is simply impossible that compassion would not be there.

~ Yangthang Rinpoche ~

 

 

Edited October 22, 2017 by C T

[Jeff]

43 minutes ago, C T said:

 

The realization of the nature of emptiness within which effortless compassion arises like heat arising from fire. Compassion is inherent in emptiness as an innate quality, and if one has realized emptiness it is simply impossible that compassion would not be there.

~ Yangthang Rinpoche ~

 

 

 

Excellent quote. Thank you. But it seems to say that emptiness is not empty.  

[rene]

2 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

Excellent quote. Thank you. But it seems to say that emptiness is not empty.  

 

The emptiness Rinpoche speaks of, isn't. (-:

[manitou]

2 hours ago, Jeff said:

 

Excellent quote. Thank you. But it seems to say that emptiness is not empty.  

 

Could this not include the law of attraction, inherent in all phenomena?

[C T]

6 hours ago, manitou said:

 

Could this not include the law of attraction, inherent in all phenomena?

That is an interesting proposition. I'd be interested to hear how this 'law of attraction' works in such a way that makes you say it is inherent in all phenomena.

[manitou]

Gravity.  The thing that binds protons and neutrons to the nucleus.  I see the void and all the thought-stuff it contains as a quantum physics thing - both a particle and a wave of probability.  The void is the wave of probability.  The phenomena are the particle aspect.  Dreams?  I don't know.  Maybe a combination of the two interacting differently somehow.

[C T]

22 minutes ago, manitou said:

Gravity.  The thing that binds protons and neutrons to the nucleus.  I see the void and all the thought-stuff it contains as a quantum physics thing - both a particle and a wave of probability.  The void is the wave of probability.  The phenomena are the particle aspect.  Dreams?  I don't know.  Maybe a combination of the two interacting differently somehow.

Gravity is very interesting when viewed under classical physics where theoretical evaluations can clearly be deduced in relation to particles, but where its principle relates to quantum field theory is still inconclusive. 

[Jeff]

13 hours ago, manitou said:

 

Could this not include the law of attraction, inherent in all phenomena?

 

I see compassion in this context and the law of attraction as different things. Compassion is sort of like an inherent desire to grow/expand or realize. And with the realization of emptiness, it is more like a one way (or outbound) radiance. Where with the concept of the law of attraction, it is more like is attracted to like. Compassion is sort of flowing with the absense of desire, law of attraction is more like accomplishing (or finding the intended) desire.

 

In Daoism, you could say that the law of attraction is based in the nature of the “Two” that emerge from the “One” (or yin-yang), and the compassion mentioned is based in the Dao.

[manitou]

2 hours ago, C T said:

Gravity is very interesting when viewed under classical physics where theoretical evaluations can clearly be deduced in relation to particles, but where its principle relates to quantum field theory is still inconclusive. 

 

I wonder if we'll ever really know

[silent thunder]

hmm... here's a fun thought

 

if compassion is an attribute of emptiness...

perhaps gravity is an attribute of this compassion.

 

that which draws phenomena together

<shrug> rather silly, but fun to ponder as my tea cools

[manitou]

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

 

I see compassion in this context and the law of attraction as different things. Compassion is sort of like an inherent desire to grow/expand or realize. And with the realization of emptiness, it is more like a one way (or outbound) radiance. Where with the concept of the law of attraction, it is more like is attracted to like. Compassion is sort of flowing with the absense of desire, law of attraction is more like accomplishing (or finding the intended) desire.

 

In Daoism, you could say that the law of attraction is based in the nature of the “Two” that emerge from the “One” (or yin-yang), and the compassion mentioned is based in the Dao.

 

 

My personal take is that all things arise from desire, even sentient life.  Inanimate created objects are ideas that a sentient being once had, but because time is really an illusion, it's all here and now; therefore the creator of the desk or chair is still here.  However, even within the void, which permeates all, there is a shelf life, whether animate or inanimate.

 

Personally, I think there is a comparison between the law of attraction and compassion, or an agape type of love.  I think it is this agape love that spins the planets, spins the atoms, and is the underlying current in everything.  I agree with you that compassion is an inherent desire to grow, expand, or realize, and that it is an outbound radiance.  I think that is the crux of creation.  I don't think compassion needs an object, as the agape love doesn't need an object.  They are both an inherent radiance.

[Jeff]

3 minutes ago, manitou said:

 

 

My personal take is that all things arise from desire, even sentient life.  Inanimate created objects are ideas that a sentient being once had, but because time is really an illusion, it's all here and now; therefore the creator of the desk or chair is still here.  However, even within the void, which permeates all, there is a shelf life, whether animate or inanimate.

 

Personally, I think there is a comparison between the law of attraction and compassion, or an agape type of love.  I think it is this agape love that spins the planets, spins the atoms, and is the underlying current in everything.  I agree with you that compassion is an inherent desire to grow, expand, or realize, and that it is an outbound radiance.  I think that is the crux of creation.  I don't think compassion needs an object, as the agape love doesn't need an object.  They are both an inherent radiance.

 

I would agree with your point on Agape love and compassion being pretty much the same thing (depending on cultural/framework differences). I would also agree with your concept that everything arises based upon desire.  But in that specific framework, compassion would be like "pure desire" (without attachment), and the law of attraction would be like "attached desire" (and hence part of the two that emerge from the one).

 

[silent thunder]

hmm...

 

compassion and agape as fundamental conditions...

they radiate through emptiness/awareness (reality) as naturally as heat and light radiate from stars?

 

[C T]

Compassion, within the framework of buddhist thought, has 2 aspects: relative and absolute - in order for discussions to gel, it will be good to know which aspect is being referenced.

[C T]

Now 

 

 

I live in what is called a moment

but rarely am I there...

 

This place called 'Now'

is not more dignified, nor divine

than my regrets and longings

my hopes and fears

 

Let whatever takes me

hold me, and let me go

into where the waves, the tears, and time

are no longer bound

by these seams of identities.

 

 

 

~ Cloth of Stillness ~

kien chu

[C T]

Words of advice from HE Dzogchen Ponlop Rinpoche for Western students

 

 

 

[manitou]

That was a wonderful interview, and great food for thought for the mind of a westerner.  I loved what he said about genuinely trusting the path.

 

It occurred to me when he was asked the question of whether there was compatibility between the western seeking for 'having fun' and the Buddhist way, that the difference he didn't speak of was the nature of 'having fun'.  It seems that our western way often involves artificial things, like more drinking, drug taking, owning bigger boats - a constant monster named Having Fun that requires more and more food to stay satisfied.  It seems to me that the Buddhist version would be a more childlike basis, a return to our childlike nature.  Two opposites, actually.

 

His basic premise for the possibility of merger of the cultures and his own drive to do so is very encouraging and motivating.  Thank you, CT