Compassion

[Vmarco]

If I didn't know better I'd say you were a masochist.

 

Aaron

 

Or,...perhaps a researcher. Whereas you look for what harmonizes with your beliefs to write a book on compassion,...VMarco researches the ignorance of those attempting to harmonize their beliefs to uncover why.

 

But, as T. S. Eliot said, "Human kind cannot bear very much reality"

 

The classical man is just a bundle of routine, ideas and tradition. If you follow the classical pattern, you are understanding the routine, the tradition, the shadow - you are not understanding yourself.

 

The man who is really serious, with the urge to find out what truth is, has no style at all. He lives only in what is.

 

If you want to understand the truth, you must throw away the notion of styles or schools, prejudices, likes and dislikes, and so forth. " - Lee Jun-fan

 

"truth is not ineffable, but that which is denied to protect the false" VMarco

[dwai]

Lost the argument, attack person's character, attack person's intelligence, pat self on back for being so witty and bright, add a smattering of quotes (mostly out of context)... does this sound familiar. It's like a broken record. Honestly, why do you even bother continuing if you know you've already lost? If I didn't know better I'd say you were a masochist.

 

Aaron

 

 

 

 

And what's peculiar is vmarco always refers to herself in the third person (for e.g.: Vmarco thinks that vmarco's intelligence is so great that sometimes vmarco gets a headache from the very thought of being vmarco...)

 

 

hmm...wonder why?

 

On a separate note -- I used to know someone who would troll with that style...used to elicit a lot of emotional responses. Of course the other person's purpose was to play devil's advocate and force his friends to come up with better and better counters to his points.

Edited April 14, 2012 by dwai

[Vmarco]

Edited April 14, 2012 by Vmarco

[Aaron]

Or,...perhaps a researcher. Whereas you look for what harmonizes with your beliefs to write a book on compassion,...VMarco researches the ignorance of those attempting to harmonize their beliefs to uncover why.

 

But, as T. S. Eliot said, "Human kind cannot bear very much reality"

 

 

 

"truth is not ineffable, but that which is denied to protect the false" VMarco

 

 

 

You're a great researcher, you're just not a practitioner. That's really the problem, you've accumulated all this knowledge, but have no real idea how to apply it to your own life, hence the reason so many people say, "I like your ideas, but I don't like the way you behave."

 

Also I'd be careful about speaking in the third person, simply because those that do speak in the third person almost invariably suffer from narcissism. That's the American Psychiatric Association for you, failing to see the enlightened nature of others and instead defining them as socially maladjusted. I'm not saying you're narcissistic by the way, just that I've learned about this kind of thing in my past studies. It's more of a warning that some people might be prone to attributing that quality to you because of your desire to allude to yourself in such a way.

 

I think your quote by T.S. Eliot was priceless, if only because it really does describe your own issues as well, the fact that you have come under the influence of the lotos flower, lost within a dreamlike world of your own creation, incapable of discerning what is real and unreal, assuming that the youth of the nation is in decay and that the past and future holds the truth rather than the present, here and now (which is actually what that passage means in case you were unaware... How do I know this? Because I researched and wrote a paper on the Four Quartets, so in the future you may want to choose a different source to quote out of context.)

 

I also want to thank you for conceding that you were wrong. You have not once responded to any of my comments regarding your actions and character, invariably because you cannot defend your actions. Also, please don't worry about hurting my feelings, I am more than prepared to handle your own brand of compassion, if you choose to dispense of it.

Edited April 14, 2012 by Twinner

[三江源]

How is circle jerk avoided?

[Simple_Jack]

Or,...perhaps a researcher. Whereas you look for what harmonizes with your beliefs to write a book on compassion,...VMarco researches the ignorance of those attempting to harmonize their beliefs to uncover why.

 

But, as T. S. Eliot said, "Human kind cannot bear very much reality"

 

 

 

"truth is not ineffable, but that which is denied to protect the false" VMarco

[Fū Yue]

How is circle jerk avoided?

 

Unclench thy shaking fist.

[Aetherous]

But, as T. S. Eliot said, "Human kind cannot bear very much reality"

 

[Jetsun]

Unclench thy shaking fist.

 

:lol:

[三江源]

Unclench thy shaking fist.

 

Ha! And in so doing the paralysed thought processes and rigid perspective

 

d i s s o l v e.

[Vmarco]

You're a great researcher, you're just not a practitioner. That's really the problem, you've accumulated all this knowledge, but have no real idea how to apply it to your own life, hence the reason so many people say, "I like your ideas, but I don't like the way you behave."

 

 

 

Twinner, you are a hoot! Over and over and over, VMarco brings up the problem of knowledge, and you continue accussing her of accumulating knowledge. The theme of most every VMarco post is to let go of knowledge,...and you spin it, like a Tea Party professional, that VMarco is knowledgable. Go figure!

 

At the least, what this thread has shown is that there are several on TTB who have a deeply embedded inferiority complex. Although VMarco is a superior person in that she is aware of the difference between what "comes and goes" and what does not "come and go," her spirit is neither superior, inferior, nor fearful of perceived other's.

 

As long as you (Twinner) continue getting a cerebral-emotional charge from VMarco's delivery style, or whatever else you fear in her posts, you will never understand real compassion.

 

And for your information, the term VMarco is not being used in the third person, but as a replacement for "I",...because at your State of Ignorance, it is too difficult to grasp that when VMarco uses the term "I", it does not mean individual, but includes all perceived others.

"those desiring speedily to be

A refuge for themselves and other beings,

Should interchange the terms of I and Other,

And thus embrace a sacred mystery." Shantideva

 

That quote may have come from a Buddhist,...but it is Wholly Tao.

 

To understand the Tao, is to realize what does not come and go. Of course for you (Twinner) to grasp that, means letting go of all your beliefs and predispositions,...and thus truly "practice" and be a practitioner of The Way. Within that comment, lies your imagined inferiority.

 

Lao Tzu correctly said, "The Tao gives birth to One. One gives birth to yin and yang. Yin and yang give birth to all things....The Tao gives rise to all form, yet is has no form of its own."

 

V

Edited April 14, 2012 by Vmarco

[Aaron]

Twinner, you are a hoot! Over and over and over, VMarco brings up the problem of knowledge, and you continue accussing her of accumulating knowledge. The theme of most every VMarco post is to let go of knowledge,...and you spin it, like a Tea Party professional, that VMarco is knowledgable. Go figure!

 

At the least, what this thread has shown is that there are several on TTB who have a deeply embedded inferiority complex. Although VMarco is a superior person in that she is aware of the difference between what "comes and goes" and what does not "come and go," her spirit is neither superior, inferior, nor fearful of perceived other's.

 

As long as you (Twinner) continue getting a cerebral-emotional charge from VMarco's delivery style, or whatever else you fear in her posts, you will never understand real compassion.

 

And for your information, the term VMarco is not being used in the third person, but as a replacement for "I",...because at your State of Ignorance, it is too difficult to grasp that when VMarco uses the term "I", it does not mean individual, but includes all perceived others.

"those desiring speedily to be

A refuge for themselves and other beings,

Should interchange the terms of I and Other,

And thus embrace a sacred mystery." Shantideva

 

That quote may have come from a Buddhist,...but it is Wholly Tao.

 

To understand the Tao, is to realize what does not come and go. Of course for you (Twinner) to grasp that, means letting go of all your beliefs and predispositions,...and thus truly "practice" The Way. Within that comment, lies your imagined inferiority.

 

Lao Tzu correctly said, "The Tao gives birth to One. One gives birth to yin and yang. Yin and yang give birth to all things....The Tao gives rise to all form, yet is has no form of its own."

 

V

 

Actually Lao Tzu said, "The Tao gives birth to One, One gives birth to two, Two gives birth to all things." He never said the Tao gives birth to form... just another correction of a misquote.

 

Obviously your use of Vmarco stems from your belief you are a highly advanced person (which is a characteristic of narcissism) and not from a belief that you are more intelligent and a better person than other people, oh wait, you just said that you were. My bad.

 

You can say that my problem is that I'm too cerebral, but it doesn't make it so. Bullies use this tactic (and sociopaths), they repeat the same thing over and over trying to whittle down the other person's self confidence. If one is aware of this, then they are more apt to not fall for that tactic.

 

In regards to emotion, if you are not emotionally invested in this conversation, then I do not know who is. I am actually not that emotionally invested in this. It's funny to see how you contradict yourself so often, and I don't care for your arrogance and all-knowing attitude either, but you will be what you are, just as I am what I am.

 

I also find it humorous that much of what you allude to has been experienced by others on this thread, Xabir, Seth, C T, and Black come to mind, but you seem to not be aware of it, even though they explain it in terms that anyone who has experienced it can recognize. This is why I say you have an intellectual understanding, but not an experiential understanding. You've read lots of books, thought about it all at great length and come to an intellectual understanding without ever having experienced it. You've mistaken a knowledge of the subject for gnowledge of the subject as you like to call it.

 

Also, I said you were a woman a long time ago and you denied being one, now you're referring to yourself as a "her". What gives? I'm assuming you either like to play mind games or have a sexual identity problem, either way, that's another sign of emotional immaturity.

 

You have yet to prove that you have an understanding of Taoism, though I'm sure you think that by integrating the two you will somehow be able to pull some of the "gullible" Taoists on this forum into your belief system, the sad (or happy) fact is that most of the "gullible" Taoists on this site have more knowledge of the topic than you do.

 

I wish you well, but seriously, get a grip, you're alienating most of the people on this thread with your know-it-all attitude. I just wonder why none of the Buddhist masters ever referred to themselves in the third person, does this mean you've transcended them as well?

 

Aaron

Edited April 14, 2012 by Twinner

[C T]

Twinner, you are a hoot! Over and over and over, VMarco brings up the problem of knowledge, and you continue accussing her of accumulating knowledge. The theme of most every VMarco post is to let go of knowledge,...and you spin it, like a Tea Party professional, that VMarco is knowledgable. Go figure!

 

At the least, what this thread has shown is that there are several on TTB who have a deeply embedded inferiority complex. Although VMarco is a superior person in that she is aware of the difference between what "comes and goes" and what does not "come and go," her spirit is neither superior, inferior, nor fearful of perceived other's.

How does one recognize one is a superior person other than to employ dualistic measures?

 

Even to split Vmarco up into awareness which lets go of knowledge/gnows(?) and transcended spirit which does not discriminate does not sit right.

 

The thing to remember perhaps is not to get caught up with the ideas surrounding the letting go of knowledge - rather, what takes its place... in some, the space is filled with thoughtfulness and wise reflections, in others, darkness sometimes diminishes the light. At each moment in the present, we can choose how to designate what we think, and what we say, which then determines how the next moment is, and so forth. This is Right mindfulness (sama-satti, or the watchful mind).

 

I think Vmarco overemphasizes the absolute, and thus have the tendency to reflect most points coming from the relative (see Lerner's and Twinner's posts) against this absolute-like background, which makes it almost impossible to gel. In the absolute sense, Vmarco's assertions are quite correct, but one cannot remain operative solely on that level simply because that will undoubtedly tilt the scales.

 

Sure, many silly Buddhist practitioners speak of wandering in pure lands and buddha fields and such, but they also have to remember to be human as well. Letting go of the knowledge of how to be a 'right' human being could have dire results.

 

What say you?

[Aaron]

Unclench thy shaking fist.

 

LOL... oh my god that was priceless.

[Vmarco]

[C T]

 

The absolute is quite central to any practice involving ones liberation. A particular absolute does not need to be understood for proper liberation practice, however, an cognizance of what is not absolute is vital. Thus the serious practicioner is conscious of what will never leave them, and from which they can never leave, without necessarily realizing what that is. For some, they may have had a taste of absolute bodhicitta, at which point there is no going back to the relative as one attached to the relative.

Sorry, but what you said there (bolded) is meaningless.

 

Other than this, i can agree with some of what was said pertaining to the lojong contemplations.

[thelerner]

Getting back on subject

I'm getting off subject. Let me quote a famous guy here:

 

"Buddhism is based on karuna, which means compassion. The practice of compassion is the most important basic practice. One develops compassion through one's own experience and through realizing that no other beings, not just human beings, want suffering. Through this realization, one can generate love and compassion. But first there has to be the realization of one's own level of suffering. There are pains that everyone agrees is suffering.

 

..All sentient beings-particularly human beings but also all animals and insects- appreciate affection, compassion an love. By identifying with others, one develops love and compassion.

 

..Through daily experience, one sees that compassion not only helps other sentient beings, but helps oneself, because through compassion and a warmhearted mental attitude- one gets more reliable friends, more smiles, even fame. If one shows other people a warm heart and genuine attitude, then they generally respond in kind."

 

Who said it?? A hint, its on page 125 of Tying Rocks to Clouds by William Elliot.

The quote is from:

A> The busty sage Dolly Parton

B> The exubrant Fanny Brice from the play 'Hello Dolly'

C> The Dalai Lama

 

 

The answer is, C, the Dalai Lama. People who aren't born into the his culture are often confused because it seems like he is sending out two different messages. That's because he is. The 'clergy' ie monks and lay people are on different paths, with different aims, following different rules. The Dalai Lama is spiritual leader to both. Depending on his audience the message is different, because the aim and life style is different. Tibetans and most Buddhists are aware of this, but its missed by most foreigners who glom on to one side and find the other wrong. Such thinking seems to me be a fundamental error.

 

The Dalai Lama speaks in simple terms about what compassion is, no need for mythologies or other material; love, smiles, reliable friends, affection, these simple things are recognized as the ingredients of karuna, the most basic practice.

 

 

Moving from Tibetan Buddhism into (alchemical) Taoism the smile holds the key to some powerful practices.

[RiverSnake]

"...The absolute is not within the reach of intellect,..."

Great quote.

 

 

I don't know what compassion is... but I do feel it

 

 

 

Good stuff. Bump.

[Vmarco]

 

The Dalai Lama speaks in simple terms about what compassion is, no need for mythologies or other material;

 

Then you haven't heard much of HH Dalai Lama. As you profess to like TV, try the DVD, HH Dalai Lana on the 4 Noble Truths. http://www.downtr.co/1011757-dalai-lama-four-noble-truths-2012.html

[Aetherous]

[C T]

Just found this and thought it was relevant...

Thank you sir... that is highly relevant.

[Vmarco]

Sorry, but what you said there (bolded) is meaningless. : wacko :

 

Other than this, i can agree with some of what was said pertaining to the lojong contemplations.

 

Most people haven't a clue that there is an absolute, let along understand it. What the "wacko...meaningless" comment points to is quite meaningful from a relative perspective for those serious about liberation.

 

A particular absolute does not need to be understood for proper liberation practice, however, a cognizance of what is not absolute is vital. Thus the serious practicioner is conscious of what will never leave them, and from which they can never leave, without necessarily realizing what that is. For some, they may have had a taste of absolute bodhicitta, at which point there is no going back to the relative as one attached to the relative.

 

For example,...those who use the Lojong correctly, understand that the relative proverbs cultivate an awareness that there is both a relative and absolute, and through which their practice, can recognize more and more, what is relative, and what absolute is not.

 

It is quite obvious, from reading more than a hundred of CT's posts, that you are unaware of any absolutes. Sometimes there were even comments refutiating absolutes, thus setting up a situation were predispositions prevent absolutes (a noumena, the Tathagata, absolute bodhicitta, the Tao) from being recognized.

 

An absolute lojong is quite different from a relative lojong. Relative lojongs are like the 8 fold path,...a recipe to train the mind. Buddha purportedly said (according to the Bodhicharyavatara), that there is nother easier to educate than the mind on the right path,...although he also said, there is nothing harder to govern than an untrained mind.

 

On the other hand, the absolute Lojongs, of which only a few were given by Geshe Chekhawa, are both for mind training, and the recognition of absolute bodhicitta.

 

Of course, these comments are meaningless to several here, like Twinner, whom generally disses anything not approved by Western scholars, and would consider Geshe Chekhawa's 12th century life too far removed from the Buddha to be legitimate or worthy of exploration.

 

Lao Tzu said (according to those during the last 1600 years who feel that the Hua Hu Ching are a collection of Lao Tzu sayings handed down by word of mouth, as if Lao Tzu actually discussed the Tao), "If you want to awaken all of humanity, then awaken all of your self." The Hua Hu Ching lays out a process for such liberation, which is quite consistent with Buddhism.

 

Thus, there are at least two "philosophies" that suggest there is something called liberation. These "philosophies" get quite specific on what it looks like. The Shurangama Sutra says

 

"Once the hearing was ended, there was nothing to rely on, and both awareness and its objects became empty. When the emptiness of awareness was ultimately perfected, emptiness and what was being emptied then also ceased to be. With arising and ceasing gone, tranquility was revealed....As soon as one sense-organ returns to the source, All the six are liberated."

 

When all 6 senses are liberated, compassion radiates effortlessly. And what does that kind of compassion look like? Certainly like the compassion of Tilopa, often called the Second Transmission of Buddhism, whose Twelve Astonishments that challenged Naropa's conditioning, that is, his ego and beliefs; followed by his Twelve Ordeals, or Hardships, that were intended to encourage his complete surrender. Of course mediocre Westerners would be appalled by Tilopa's cmpassion,...they want compassion to be the coddling, appeasing, and caring of their ego,...and what ever it takes to put the relative on a pedestal in honor of humanity and their beliefs.

 

V

[Vmarco]

Just found this and thought it was relevant...

 

Bodhichitta is a Sanskrit word; bodhi means "enlightenment" and chitta means "mind" or "thought." When you develop the thought of enlightenment, you are training your mind so that you will be able to truly benefit other beings. Bodhichitta can be understood in two ways, as relative and absolute. Relative bodhichitta is the actual manifestation of loving-kindness and compassion for all beings. Absolute bodhichitta is the realization of emptiness as the profound true nature of reality. Some people start meditating on love and compassion and then come to an understanding of emptiness. Other people meditate on emptiness and, by that, gain an understanding of love and compassion. Both aspects of bodhichitta are part of the enlightened nature of the mind.

 

 

Relative bodhicitta expresses a forced, non-organic, intellectualized compassion based on the relative,...absolute bodhicitta expresses an effortless, organic compassion.

 

"Relative and absolute,

These the two truths are declared to be.

The absolute is not within the reach of intellect,

For the intellect is grounded in the relative."

Shantideva

 

Both aspects of bodhichitta are NOT part of the enlightened nature of the mind. In Buddhism the distinction can be found in Buddhas own dialogues regarding self and Self.

 

What is relevant about that quote, is the authors attachment to the relative. Thanks for revealing another misguided Buddhist.

 

V

[C T]

It is quite obvious, from reading more than a hundred of CT's posts, that you are unaware of any absolutes.

I know better than to try to persuade Vmarco to assume otherwise. Since the absolute is beyond the realm of the intellect, its no wonder written words can at best only serve as 'tracing paper' towards pointing to that level of reality on the other side of the relative.

[Vmarco]

I know better than to try to persuade Vmarco to assume otherwise. Since the absolute is beyond the realm of the intellect, its no wonder written words can at best only serve as 'tracing paper' towards pointing to that level of reality on the other side of the relative.

 

That post merely supports the point,...instead of discussing any of that 300 word content, you pick one sentence that upsetted the 6 senses, and was compelled to responded to that.

 

Yes, the absolute is beyond intellect,...a first year Buddhist student should understand that,...however, it is not beyond discussing,...just as the Tao was not beyond Lao Tzu discussing it,...or Buddha discussing the Tathagata.

 

One of the first steps is the realization that the relative is relative,...and its OK to to talk about it.

 

The truth is, the absolute cannot be realized through the relative,...the 6 senses cannot observe the absolute. Does not matter if an absolute is or not,...what is, is that it cannot be realized through the 6 senses.

 

"don't seek love, but seek and find all the bariers you have built against it" Now, exchange the word "love" with liberation, enlightenment, Unborn Awareness, etc.

 

V