.jpg.5c27b2a2306e91660c760b0f4b07803a.jpg)
Maddie
-
Content count
4,897 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
76
Everything posted by Maddie
-
Something that I have often noticed on this topic is that a lot of times I think people use the five aggregates or five skandas to explain what the Buddha said we are, but it seems when I read the suttas the Buddha is using the five skandas to explain what we are not.
-
I think I began to wonder if I was not thinking this way when I posted this question.
-
Actually for me now the question that the Buddhist side answered makes me want to better understand the Hindu or I guess proto-Hindu point of view that the Buddha was responding against.
-
Yes I am interested to hear from other perspectives as well.
-
It sheds a great deal of insight into at least part of it.
-
@CT that's actually a really good answer, thank you. If I understand correctly from that post it would seem the question if more of one about perception in regards to self as opposed to a teaching on the essence of a self or no-self? This raises the question though, what was he teaching in opposition to in India in his day?
-
It would seem CT's post answered the Buddha's take on that question pretty well.
-
The Buddha spoke of impermanence often which was his premise for no-soul, or at least of of his premises.
-
The reason it's emphasized is during the time of the Buddha in India one of the common teachings was that there was a soul and that it was defined as being permanent and unchanging. The Buddha on the other hand said this was not the case. This is why there is the focus on it being unchanging or changing in this context. This would be one definition of a soul. There is nothing to say that there couldn't be a soul that evolves and changes.
-
Yes I suppose that is a good point, defining what "soul" means. Though I think in the context of the time and place of the Buddha it was seen as the unchanging inner essence, and the Buddha rejected this notion.
-
I actually have known people who went to those things and they actually had to pay to get in and some of them actually got knocked down and they said that they were not trying to do so. The psychology of group hypnosis is actually pretty well documented and understood.
-
And for those who think someone demonstrating pyrokinesis on a YouTube video is definitive proof and could never possibly be faked this is for you.
-
This is just a case of group hypnosis and the power of suggestion. There was another one of these so-called Masters who got challenged by an MMA fighter and since the MMA fighter wasn't under the power of suggestion like his students he knocked him out in like 30 seconds. But if you would watch videos of the same Tai chi Master with his students he would throw them around barely touching them or even without touching them. There's many cases of group hypnosis having pretty profound effects on the people who buy into it.
-
Now we really know what happened to the dinosaurs. 🦕
-
Someone can shoot lightning out of their nostrils and fireballs out of their butthole but if they are not kind, compassionate and humble I could care less. "Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or clanging cymbal resounding in the wind. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and can understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have faith, that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." - I Corinthians 13:1-2
-
Questioning the validity of anything is not synonymous with an attack on the person holding the view. We only tend to perceive a challenge to our views as synonymous with a challenge to ourselves when we identify with the view as being part of our self. When we identify with a view as being part of the self than any challenge to that view is the challenge to the self. On the other hand when we do not identify with the view but only see it as a view and not part of the self any inquiry into the validity of the view simply focuses on why the view may or may not be correct. The mindset of scientific objectivity is to be willing to change ones view when new data disproves or modifies that view.
-
Yes check out my new guru.... https://youtu.be/0PsMdeVLmTs It's all real too because nothing in a video can ever be faked.
-
I don't know if the chicken or the egg came first but it seems like the vast majority of practitioners of the system that I've read on here seem to have a lot of ego and delusion, and tend to get very defensive if questioned.
-
But wanting to not talk with me is a desire, which is not applicable to someone who's transcended ego.
-
I suppose asking for evidence of statements is personal if one has an ego but that wouldn't apply to you would it?
-
Can you show me the quote where I said I have not tried cultivation?
-
Cultivation means to grow and develop. If I cultivate crops it means I'm growing crops. If I cultivate my ego it means I increase my ego. It's possible to cultivate anything
-
How would you know if I have or have not tried cultivation? If you can't have an ego to begin cultivation then what must one do in order to get rid of their ego?
-
But how do you know you're cultivating your ego less or more?
-
How do you know your mind has been freed from ego and delusion as opposed to that thought being just another delusion?
.thumb.jpg.dec3ed0d837a7d44c365eb5d82a9756c.jpg)
