galen_burnett

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    178

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Everything posted by galen_burnett

  1. Yes I see, it’s clear what you meant now: yes the Zen people etc. do say things to the effect of “the Enlightened Mind has transcended all practice and rules and structures and doctrine”.
  2. So you have a permanence in the indelible nature of reality, in the unity of all existence, and an impermanence in the change of the ‘illusory’ things inside that universe; that’s similar to how I see it too, except for me the forms are as valid as the formless. But ‘bliss’ is qualified, it is a form, an object, and as such, according to your ontology it is in the category of things that change, and so it cannot be permanent. You will probably just try and tell me “nah, it’s not” without substantiating that rebuttal in any way whatsoever, like everyone who’s been before you in this thread. What’s more, a conscious soul itself is a form and cannot ever be without a form if it wants to be able to know and experience anything at all—this has also been covered in the thread already—and so it can never be let into your fabled Realm of the Enlightened Mind, where no forms are permitted. You describe the Enlightened Mind in a grandiose way using words like “ultimate” and ‘unqualified’, but still, even after I demanded that you say what your position is regarding ‘perpetual-bliss’, you have neither properly explained what your Enlightened Mind really is (of course, I’m 99.9999% sure that you think it is a state of perfect and perpetual bliss, attainable through diligent practice) nor answered that question I just repeated (again, I’m just going through the motions—you think it is true, of course). The underlying unity of things can indeed be experienced and felt from time to time, but only as happy transitory states. The Forms are indeed fundamentally all made of the same elemental stuff, but that elemental soup is no more valid than the forms themselves. Life has form for a reason, and you’re missing out by blocking your eyes and ears to it and trying instead to escape back into the womb. This attachment (😮😮😮) to that fantastical state of formless bliss just tells me that a person is hoping to escape their reality; life’s hard sometimes—50% of the time actually—but whatever, there’s nothing to be done about that. You can’t alter the 50/50 ratio of happiness (or “bLiSs”, if you like) to suffering, and your journey through these spiritual traditions will yield a no better ratio than that when you finally emerge, disillusioned, on the other side, possibly some lifetimes from now.
  3. i don’t believe you [insert obligatory winking emoji]
  4. That’s no problem at all Daniel. I can’t say I myself aspire to agnosticism, but I certainly respect you. I guess, to offer my own take on the learning experience, I like learning things because it’s entertaining and engaging, and because it’s how I resolve difficulties that arise in my life. Personally I don’t really worry too much about the act of judging stuff to be true or untrue so long as I feel I’ve given some time to contemplating the issue; it’s generally important to me that I have a clear judgement on something after having spent the time thinking on something—I like to be able to say “I think this is true/false” after thinking about something—but once I’ve done that process with a topic I’m happy to hold myself to whatever judgement I’ve made about it; I’m generally not the type to worry about “judge not lest ye be judged” is what I’m trying to say. There’ll always be stuff I don’t know, and I guess I’m happy to just keep picking items out of my “stuff I don’t know” folder, spending some time with it, and then, if it’s up for debate as to whether the thing is true or not, making a decision about it in that regard. And no rush at all with your reply, I’m snowed under with the thread as it is!
  5. i mean you can enjoy attention from others, i’m not the guru telling you what you should do and how you should be; but i made this thread to address a very particular scruple i have with spiritual traditions, so i will be very critical and thorough with anyone who speaks on behalf of the ‘opposition’, which will include calling out anyone i feel is trying to dodge around proper argument. look, for the last time, your smooth talking doesn’t work on me, i can see right through it; no doubt it works well on pretty girls etc. though; i just cringe at it though. i’m unfriendly with you because i care a lot about the topic of the thread which i feel you’ve disrespected through failing to be direct in your answers due to a fear of yours of arguing properly about it—and the 19 pages of this thread have proven that the ‘perpetual-bliss’ concept cannot indeed be defended effectively without the influence of an enigmatic guru. i don’t care for what i may or may not know about you honestly; i disregard you in the context of this thread because you haven’t been honest in the argument. and, lol, “you see me”—i mean, whatever?—you see me, like this?:
  6. the video itself will receive not less than 5 BILLION views! and will be remembered as a GROUND-BREAKING piece of home-video in the junior years of the information-age—BRUH you will be completely CANCELLED from the internet ENTIRELY! the years before the video was published will be forever known in internet culture simply as ‘THE TIME BEFORE’. children in every school and workers in every corporate chain in the West will know liminal_luke as one of the best MEMES of the 2020’s—to rival even STAR WARS KID! make good use of the MONTHS your reputation HAS LEFT before you are completely CANCELLED!! you should never have CROSSED the GREAT ENLIGHTENED sage-master GIGALORD Galen Burnett! it will be BAD for YOU!1!!1 CAAAAAANCEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLL 🥸
  7. yes, i presume a lot of universal truths, i’d be daft not to: like, i presume a thorn in one’s foot would be painful for anyone. ‘youth’ is largely independent of age. i’ve nothing more to argue on the matter of problem-solving; i don’t think there is such a thing as surrendering in peaceful acceptance to a problem, beyond a tai-chi context of letting the problem fall over itself by getting out of the way of it, or beyond letting the problem destroy you and thereby solving it as there is no longer a ‘you’ to oppose it; so we just disagree, whatever. “Perhaps you will […]” ditto. I’ve argued pretty well against that fallacy in this thread, so if I’ve not persuaded you by now I don’t think anyone reasonable is going to be able to either anytime soon. ”I'm not too concerned with whether or not Buddhism breaks its own rules. Rules are artificial and conditional by nature. I'm much more interested in understanding what the wisdom teachings are trying to show me. With proper study and practice a deeper and more comprehensive understanding is possible if one has the interest and drive.” i mean, again, you’re just cherry-picking logic that confirms your bias, like so many others have done in this thread already: “i reject rules [logic]; but please give me rules [logic] enough to study and practise with, and to understand my guru’s wisdom by, and with which i may form a deep and comprehensive understanding of existence… but, no, banish them otherwise, banish the rules. i can’t deny i’m annoyed at coming up against what i think to be unreasonable argument once again; but at least you have been more polite than the others.
  8. Isn’t that ‘permanent’ cessation of attachments in conflict with the tenet of impermanence? what comes after such a permanent unshackling—‘permanent-bliss’?
  9. @Mark Foote your reply to Daniel on 28th august (page 14) regarding putting “(and what he was)” in brackets. it’s understood that he was answering in the present-tense* to a question about his future; but it’s still not clear—at least not to me—why you put that part in brackets. *note: i have also addressed the problem of ‘having been awakened’ being a past-participle—which is past-(perfect?)tense and not present-tense—anyway in a recent comment.

  10. My take on Chinese classical martial-arts

    galen_burnett replied to galen_burnett's topic in The Rabbit Hole

    The website ‘Steam’ is the go-to for PC gaming. basically if you can download and play a popular title from ‘Steam’ then you should be able to play this i reckon.
  11. Lol indeed! it must be unpleasant for them to always be on guard for attachments, like superstitious medieval house-wives adorning their homes with anti-demon charms, sort-of… But what I meant was what did you make of his view on the translation, that the use of the indefinite-article is incorrect there?
  12. @Ajay0 your reply to stirling on the 28th august (page 14). put away all concepts, except the concept that one should put away all concepts, and all the plethora of concepts that are involved in the concept of ‘putting away all concepts’, like diligence in practising everyday, practising correctly, carving your life around your practice, etc. so, put away all concepts, except for about a thousand of them, you’ll actually need those…
  13. @Daniel In your reply to Mark Foote on the 27th august (page 14) in which you refer to that “of what he would become” line, do you mean it doesn’t make sense because the Buddha was all about the ‘Present’?
  14. What do you make of that Daniel?
  15. @Mark Foote your reply to stirling on the 27th august (page 14). suzuki seems to be implying here that getting to a place where one “does nothing” is the ultimate, the desired state, perfection, Enlightenment; or at least is the vehicle that takes the practitioner thither.
  16. I just learned the other day that one’s teeth will stain even with regular bi-daily brushings! I tore my clothes and beat my breast when I learned that.
  17. Bzzt-Rrrp 👋 I am a helpful forum-bot. I go hither and thither. Here is an illustration of “friendships are suffering” for you:
  18. @Daniel Your reply to Mark Foote on the 26th August regarding the indefinite-article (page 13). I like how thorough you’re being about this, and I myself would relish the opportunity to learn those languages and see then what I could glean from it all by reading those original texts. Am I right to think that Mark Foote does indeed think the indefinite-article is implied in the original text, by his comment which you are replying to in that comment of yours I referenced at the start of this comment on the 13th Sep? [as much as I despise reddit.com, their forum-thread-format is pretty good…]. I’ll add that if ‘buddha’ is in fact a past-participle then that implies a past-tense—‘having been awakened, the Buddha began to complain in an annoying tone of voice’—which somewhat defiles the sacred ‘Present-Tense’ of the Buddhists through simply implying that other grammatical tenses exist besides the present-tense. If the Buddha really wanted a 101% sterile present-tense in his reality, then maybe he would have chosen a word that instead exactly reflects the present-tense, like the word for the adjective ‘awake’ in that language…
  19. @Mark Foote what are you talking about please in your sentences beneath the second quote of stirling in your reply to stirling on the 26th august? (near the top of page 13)
  20. Well thanks, but it’ll be years before it’s ready in any case 🙄
  21. ‘tedious’— why are you still here then lmao?? you’ve been lurking for weeks! i’m well aware of the lack of any appeal such a video would have, it would definitely be at the very bottom of the ‘bonus features’ of my channel; i’d expect only one or two people to be interested in it, if anyone at all—but even if just for one person i’d probably still make it. also, “your own take”… bruh… half the thread is my own take lol. and is taking a dump on the creative enterprises of other people a hobby of yours? you seemed to jump at the opportunity right here so it made me wonder 🤷
  22. Lol no, super serious actually dude! I’m making a gaming-channel with lots of fun nonsense on it, but then I’ll make a supplementary secondary channel with philosophical stuff for any crossover-interest in my audience.
  23. chill bro, the audience for it will be incredibly tiny—a commentary on a philosophical dialogue is not the sort of thing that draws millions of views. i think i was too late to catch the one you initially deleted anyway. besides, i don’t think there are any copyright laws that pertain to forums.
  24. i’m catching up slowly, i was away for a couple of weeks so… i’ve reached page 13, but i’m also archiving it all carefully, which takes some time, so i can give a “totally unbiased” and “completely dispassionate and objective” presentation of it on the youtube channel i’m making…
  25. @Michael Sternbach your reply to me of today, 11th sep. i’ll need to go back and reread the thread to remember in what context you mentioned archaeology and then reply more fully; but for now, sure, academia are hugely ignorant of the truth of the planet’s history; that it is in fact an extraterrestrial terraform, hollow, and has had at least settlements, if not whole civilisations, of people populate it throughout the last, probably, millions of years, much much more advanced than we are today in 2023. the ancient aliens documentary series is invaluable. all the religious icons in history, including the buddha, were most likely extraterrestrials—or even inter-terrestrials, or martians even, or maybe even inhabitants of the orion constellation. one needs to have some really quite soft and dry sand to bury ones head deep enough in now to be able to deny the mountains of evidence for all this. regarding the hominid reference: i may not like him, and found one joke he made about disabled people to be disgusting, but i still don’t really get why you’re calling him a proto-hominid; the ‘austra-‘ in australopithecus doesn’t seem to actually refer to australia, that ape was an african species, google tells me; and i don’t really see what beef you have with him otherwise… again, maybe i’ll get it when i reread the thread…