yabyum24

Thanks for that. It may well be the case.

I'm interested if anyone here can help clear up a puzzle which occurred this weekend. On visiting an original Tudor mansion house, I encountered two opposing frescos. The first read "The wheel of fortune, whose ruler is ignorance". It depicted a buxom lady, lifting her long dress provocatively, whilst standing below a symbolic wheel. It reminded me of the famous opening sequence of Orff's Carmina Burana. It also brought to mind the Tibetan Wheel of Life, powered by the three poisons, of which the chief one is ignorance. Opposite this fresco was another which read "The Spear of Destiny, whose ruler is knowledge". This depicted a lady holding the orb of the earth above her in one hand with a pair of masonic looking callipers in the other This I have no idea about. I'd like to dismiss up front any Hitler conspiracy stuff please, as I've waded through this material online. These frescos are very old and predate anything like that (obviously). It is taught that both blood and water came from the pierced side of Christ - divine and human. But why should this spear's ruler be knowledge - and depicted as an obvious antidote to ignorance?

Why not just photocopy the stuff, It's faster... or scan it and put it online?

Absolutely.

Tut tut - another link. Bloody Ofsted.

If all else fails, tattoos and piercings seem to be an acceptable substitute.

Agree, but I've seen it used as such on many occasions. It runs a bit like this: Belief in god = irrational superstition. Science is not irrational. Buddhism doesn't worship god, therefore science and Buddhism are both rational. Karma and rebirth can both be (correctly) interpreted as events contained within this lifetime, thus dispensing of the last vestiges of something which could be construed as culturally accrued superstition. Emptiness is confirmed scientifically, as we now have physics to explain that nothing is there which we think is there, including (by default) 'self'. The body being just a collection of cells, electrical impulses and so on - no more to it than that. The way is now clear to follow a system which is exclusively concerned with lessening suffering within this life - a kind of therapy - as Buddha always intended it to be in the first place. If questioned on the afterlife, the reply is "that which was never born in the first place cannot be said to die". We thus arrive at (pretty much) the same place as modern science, which is both comforting and verifiable. But is it really what Buddha taught?

This! Seems to be the biggest "secret" in Buddhism today. Glad the author mentioned it.

Yes, but in my experience, it's very hard and virtually impossible. But, l'll first try to define what I think it is. When something appears to our consciousness we instantly apply a meaning to it . We subconsciously categorize it and assign a "value" to it. This happens in meditation too. Something emerges and for a split-second we abide with no judgement in the immediate experience. Then something kicks in and we grasp at it, we take ownership of it, you can see this happening. How to switch that off, I'm unclear because any conscious decision to do so, is fake and itself a kind of grasping, constructed event. It's like unexpectedly falling through the cracks in the pavement! It happens of itself but only fleetingly, before we push out our hands to stop the fall. It's a reflex.

But we have been (well, on this thread at least). Like a bunch of alcoholics in a brewery, making a documentary about kicking the booze, we've all managed to keep off it, at least whilst the cameras are still rolling... but... but...

As I see it, craving assembles 'self'. It is 'self' which perpetuates craving.

Of course there is - who is holding this belief?

Good link. Much truth in that.

When it comes investigating the aggregates in order to locate the consciousness, we may arrive at the conclusion that there is no separate consciousness which can be found. The best we can perhaps posit is that there is some kind of dependent relationship between the two - one upholds and makes possible the other. Some even claim that inability to find it amongst its basis is proof that it does not exist. There is much truth in the first but the second position is entirely incorrect. The truth is that the lower schools are looking in the wrong direction. Consciousness will never be found amongst the aggregates because all aggregates are held within consciousness. It's like taking apart a TV in order to find the living room. The prime division of pure consciousness into duality makes the arising of the aggregates (and all other objects of mind) a possibility. That's why the arisen product of the "self", its intellect and aggregates can never find consciousness. They are reflected within it, not the other way around. This understanding is what takes emptiness away from the territory of nihilism or eternalism because all categories of existence or non existence are irrelevant in the unconditioned. It's why I can't even be arsed to argue this stuff any more.

That dude's got a cult? Wow, cult leaders used to be charismatic and quite persuasive once upon a time. So that's what a cult leader looks like nowadays? Man you can't even get brain washed with any class.