SirPalomides

Insults are truly a branch of the poetic art, and I can't disagree that Americans are quite impoverished in that department (except maybe in the field of battle raps/ diss tracks). I've seen some videos showcasing Nigerian insults which really illustrate how beautifully devastating the English language can be with the right mindset. I also have an acquaintance from Romania who shared some deliciously blasphemous and over-the-top profanities from his country. We can all do better.

I remember a ton of posts about Christians being minions of the Annunaki and stuff like that, dude was bonkers and not in a cool way

Le Mort D'Arthur by Sir Thomas Malory The Bloody Chamber, by Angela Carter Fifteen Poets of the Aztec World by Miguel Leon Portilla Grimm's Fairy Tales Les Chants de Maldoror by Lautreamont Mirror of the Marvelous, by Pierre Mabille The King of Elfland's Daughter, by Lord Dunsany The Stars my Destination, by Alfred Bester The Palm-Wine Drinkard, by Amos Totuola Poems of Joyce Mansour Poems of Laurence Weisberg The Complete Stories of Leonora Carrington The Master and Margarita, by Mikhail Bulgakov Clark Ashton Smith's short stories The Monk, by Matthew Lewis What is Surrealism? by Andre Breton, ed. Franklin Rosemont

Basically I find it awkward when I'm directed to an Ultimate/ Absolute reality without characteristics, with the corollary that phenomena, words, thoughts, and the whole variety of experience, are somehow illusory or at best tools to be dispensed with once the other shore is reached. Now I understand why things are framed this way- the danger of clinging to a set of concepts and other artifacts without moving on to their full significance is real. But it's just with these things- books, words, art, ceremony, poetry, the flowers, birds, stars, etc.- that this transcendent world is manifested to me, that liberation is communicated. Someone might say I'm too attached to provisionals but it seems to me the provisionals are indispensable. So I appreciate an approach like Tiantai that telescopes the raft and the shore, or the fish trap and the fish in Zhuangzi's terms. And Zhuangzi, often presented as suspicious of language, also puts forth a more exalted view of language in his discussion of "goblet words".

I'm currently reading Brook Ziporyn's book Emptiness and Omnipresence which gives an overview of Tiantai Buddhism and its approach to emptiness which, for now at least, I do find more satisfying than the usual Madhyamaka explanations, and maybe you will too. Ziporyn also authored the Stanford encyclopedia article on Tiantai Buddhism so this might be a good starting point: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/buddhism-tiantai/ It seems that the Tiantai perspective arose in part from a certain ambiguity in the Chinese translation of Nagarjuna- their view might be seen as a misreading by more orthodox Nagarjunans. On the other hand I read that the Geluk scholar Thuken Losang Chokyi Nyima had a high opinion of Zhiyi so maybe the views are compatible.

As quoted here: It is a defining feature of Zhunti practice, beginning with the Tang translation of the Cundī Dhāraṇī scriptures, that devotees are encouraged to use a mirror – "as an altar" (wei tan), some of the texts say – to facilitate visualization. Gazing into a mirror while reciting the dhāraṇī, one is to visualize both the image of the deity and the mystic letters that embody her. In time, the small disc-shaped bronze mirrors used for this purpose came to be commonly imprinted, on the back, with the deity's iconic form, according to the canonical description, and, on the front and/or the back, with the inscribed dhāraṇī. It was not unusual to have the Sanskrit version of the spell embossed on the outer edge of the front or reflecting side of the disc, and to have the transliterated Chinese version embossed on the circumference of the back. The effect is of an image of the goddess encircled by "garlands" of sacred syllables, as though to reinforce the claim that the goddess and the incantation were inseparable, perhaps even mutually constitutive. And, of course, as the instrument in question is a mirror, the fusion of goddess and spell is further fused with the practitioner's own reflection. Sometimes, to emphasize the theme of communion between devotee and deity, the goddess's image is imprinted on the back of the mirror, facing backwards, so that someone viewing the rear of the mirror would see the back of the goddess and could therefore easily imagine, when gazing at his or her own image in the front of the mirror, that it was the goddess herself, in the guise of one's own visage, who is gazing back

You know. The mirror thing.

So does anyone do the thing with the mirror?

For a long time, there were only two kinds of people admitted to the liturgy: catechumens (those formally enrolled into Christian instruction) and baptized. At a certain point in the liturgy, the deacon comes out and exclaims "Catechumens depart!" meaning that only the baptized can remain at the service. This exclamation can still be heard today in Eastern Orthodox liturgies, even though it is no longer enforced (at this point I once saw the priest's wife lean over to an actual catechumen and jokingly say "get out!"). This, together with "I will not speak of this mystery..." is related to the era of persecution but also the inherited understanding that it is unseemly to talk publicly about the mysteries. In ancient Greece where almost everyone had been initiated into the mysteries, people could still be prosecuted for discussing them publicly. Chrysostom is credited with writing the liturgy that bears his name but no one really knows the exact history of it. In any case Chrysostom was the bishop in Constantinople at a time when Christianity was pretty secure as the dominant faith; Germanus was writing even later when it was thoroughly entrenched and pagans had been thoroughly purged from public life. My overall point is that esotericism takes many forms. Some of it really involves a secret and closed circle of initiates but that is only one piece of the picture and various kinds of public esotericism are widespread and important features of religious life around the world.

Again, the context of the passage makes it clear what it's about. Of course esoteric readings about spiritual struggle, cutting through attachments, etc. can and have been made but they don't contradict the basic gist that he is bringing intracommunal conflict and it's not going to be pretty.

Well he pretty much lays it out in what he says before and after this line, that is, that his doctrine and following will produce dissension within communities and families and the persecution of the disciples.

Emerging from the Mantak Chia retreat like

Believe what you like, I’m just telling you what the Chinese text says and how this arhat is described. There was zero polemic in what I said.

The Sandalwood-Storehouse King is described as a king of Yuezhi, ie Kushan. For someone trying to get rid of his dick your attitude seems… prickly

So I guess the artist definitely had the Master and Margarita in mind. It's interesting, I don't know of any country other than Russia where so many contemporary artists produce fine work comparable to academic painting and other 19th century styles. It's not like they're stuck in the past either, Russia has also contributed its fair share of avant garde art.