S:C

Snake porn sees through lies Looked to deep, no love has come Gas station empty

will be stable then. Where run when hearts joys are gone Snake porn sees through lies

Universe is one Discernment none? Reason gone? Cord cutting not done?

Buridian‘s Ass was the donkey imagined by medieval philosopher Jean Buridian. The donkey had no reason to choose between two identical bales of hay and so starved to death, unable to make a decision.

I have no idea. Source of my confusion… Dementia? 💡 A split fragment wo wants to keep up the charade?!

Could that be equated with mental focus?

strangely, some of us will at times, consciously or not, still reach over for the steering wheel from the passenger seat and switch/be switched between an ultimate and a conventional perspective and/or action, no? or just another illusion/dissociation? curious… can the heart ever be controlled by willpower in a way that it is not affected by input? can control be implemented before input? @Apech , - does your subjective experience differ? are you talking about controlling actions or really heart/thought itself? hasn’t everything that reaches heart passed senses, minds synapses and nerves also? conceptual thoughts/feels of wish or woe will pull through the fabric? or not? can awareness or attention training ever help with conventional reality? who really makes the choice to switch and/or control?

This is something that intuitively I understand and understood this at this point. But only intuitively. It seems so counterintuitive still, that you cannot ‚cross borders’ with the intellect alone ever and not even for deductions. Why isn’t there a way for science to explain it? When will mountains again be just mountains? What again helps there? I seem to forget… Thanks @stirling, that aspect came just at the right timing for me!

.

(… deleted, seemed not useful after rereading)

Me? By observation and reflection. Or do you mean that in the sense, that there is no individual ‚doer‘?

(deleted… did not seem useful after rereading)

I’d recommend a book by Jack Kornfield for the matter at hand: After ecstasy the laundry. Obviously build on a proverb, which exchanges ecstasy with enlightenment. There seems to be some confusion on the two concepts, nevertheless… He expands on the topic, draws from different sources with personal experience from people. The approach might be the other way round (to stay grounded after having had the floor swept under one’s feet) but if I remember correctly the practice can also be used to get somewhere, if you don’t have an intention to get anywhere… It could help at least to prepare for accidents, I‘d suppose? Shouldn’t hurt to read it.

@Trunk

it does not cause new trauma? maybe the belief changes everything

“Are you on TikTok?” - “…”

Hello again may I have my name changed to: stellarwindbubble Many thanks!

(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. (bold by me) It does seem a bit extreme, no? But then again so does: (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? 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? 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? (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! )? (italic by me) Intriguing thought. 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…).

How do you differentiate conceptual illusions of the own mind from that? The 'consensus theory of truth' doesn’t seem all that promising. The catuskoti logic might offer more. 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?

Interesting concept, didn’t understand “unstruck”, had to look it up, thanks!

Would you be willing to share a bit about that? (Maybe via dm as it would go probably off topic?) @OP: don’t worship the gate, worship the light. Wherever you focus on, there your energy goes.

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!