Morality

[Marblehead]

Of course you don't want to be so bound up that you become 'ridgid;' flexibility is needed, especially in today's world.

Just wanted to somehow highlight this and I suppose that by repeating it it has become highlighted.

[suninmyeyes]

Why should we have to exasperate this division of 'relative' and 'absolute' levels of experience? I'm all for demolishing this dichotomy! Who's with me????

No. Dont do it.

 

It could be an important part of an invisable map for returning back Home,

a crucial part at some point in someones dream - a link that has potential to metamorphosise simple melody into a incredible symphony or profound silence,

in one way or another.

[suninmyeyes]

One of the best works to come from China dealing with the subject of this thread is Liao-Fan's Four Lessons My link. Pay particular attention to the dialogue between the Confucians and the Chan master.

Nice SJ .

Just read a nice bit from the dialouge about importance of having a pure heart which relates to our disciussion here well, about page 66 - def reccomend.

Edited June 2, 2012 by suninmyeyes

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Simple_Jack]

No. Dont do it.

 

It could be an important part of an invisable map for returning back Home,

a crucial part at some point in someones dream - a link that has potential to metamorphosise simple melody into a incredible symphony or profound silence,

in one way or another.

Ahhhh, I'll do it! I swear I'm gonna do eeeeeet! Ahh...Ahhhhh....Ahhhhhhhhh!!!

 

 

::Start of pseudo-wise comment, but really just quite retarded::

Metaphorically speaking...Not having any referential point of designation, I wander freely with ease; not pin-pointing anything as "Home," why bother being pinned down in any particular location? Having given up all attachments to any such designations: Everywhere I go is "Home."

::End of pseudo-wise comment, but really just quite retarded::

[Simple_Jack]

I was just going to respond: "Yes. Do do it" then realized that the invitation was towards "demolishing the duality" rather than make the it be irrelevant.

Be it a dream be it real always choose the better way to be!

At one point, I would've agreed with both of you. That's in the past though.

 

Anyway's, of course, I'm talking of making it irrelevant. Why should I divide my experience into an imagined "relative" and an imagined "absolute?" If I don't believe in making the former any less "real," than the latter: Why would I accept the dichotomy in the first place? Sorry, I don't buy into that whole shit, . I don't bother to discriminate between a "relative" and "absolute" realities.

 

This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that I'm mentioning this*: Ch'an/zen, dzogchen, and mahamudra, don't bother with the whole "two truths" model. Even in orthodox Buddhism: The "ultimate truth," is that there is no "ultimate truth." With the "relative" state of flux in itself, being the "ultimate." Why would I bother with this whole distinction anyways?

 

*I apologize to everyone for polluting this thread with the talk of Buddhism.

[suninmyeyes]

dp

Edited June 3, 2012 by suninmyeyes

[suninmyeyes]

Ahhhh, I'll do it! I swear I'm gonna do eeeeeet! Ahh...Ahhhhh....Ahhhhhhhhh!!!

 

 

::Start of pseudo-wise comment, but really just quite retarded::

Metaphorically speaking...Not having any referential point of designation, I wander freely with ease; not pin-pointing anything as "Home," why bother being pinned down in any particular location? Having given up all attachments to any such designations: Everywhere I go is "Home."

::End of pseudo-wise comment, but really just quite retarded::

Nooooooooooo stop iiiiiiiitttttttttt!!!!!!!!!

 

Pseudo wise is the cool of the day, I too am going for it.

Not pin pointing something as home is a Home.

You may understand this , but not everyone else does.

Some are on vacation ,work ,falling in love in the pine forest, talking a walk ,picking their nose at the traffic light, sleeping in the park, lost in mountains...etc - they are not at Home yet.

There is something that seems as a process on some level and it is important to acknowledge for what and when it is. Invisable map to return back Home.

Edited June 3, 2012 by suninmyeyes

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Marblehead]

With the "relative" state of flux in itself, being the "ultimate."

 

...

 

*I apologize to everyone for polluting this thread with the talk of Buddhism.

Well, the thought above is very compatible with Taoist Philosophy so IMO no apologizes are necessary.

[Simple_Jack]

The "ultimate truth," is that there is at least one "ultimate truth"... and there even is a possibility that there could be other ultimate truths. I say we need to bother with this whole distinction because it can lead us to understand better what be going on. To put this in the context of morality if there is no ultimate morality then there is no point in bothering with this whole distinction but if there is an ultimate morality well then how do we go about actually discovering it and comparing it to what we hold.

 

I find useful the notion of sustainable-desirable-congruent for it gives each what they want in abundance.. The notion "there is no ultimate truth" creates a contradicting paradox where as the notion "there is an ultimate truth" does not. I find hilarious how the relativists will resort to absolute terms to discredit the absolute rather than making their case using relativist terms. What's even more hilarious to me is how a true relativists will expose that they are not a true relativist when considering the absolute position, be it because the reject the absolute position or because they embrace the absolute position.

 

Now to 'correct' shakespeare... ---To be or not to be... isn't the question ---it be how to be!

Well, you should have an idea by now of how I'm going to explain this. Since this is a discussion board, I felt like killing some time to respond to some things: So, I'm not asking anyone to accept anything I type. I'm not going to get too into this, since this isn't the Buddhist sub-forum:

 

Cause and effect of past action is never disregarded, though the seeds of prior action keep rolling on; yet they can totally be 'seen through:' Even in the midst of experiencing the ripened effect of past actions of body, speech and mind. So, there's no denial of cause and effect here. Though being that these seeds are 'empty,' having arisen due to the result of prior action: The whole twelve-fold chain of interdependence ceases - In terms of being re-expressed as ignorance.

 

This reminded me of a quote when typing this response. It's from The Five houses of Zen by Thomas Cleary:

 

Yang-shan asked, "As a temporary event, where do I focus my action?"

Kuei-shan said, "I just want your perception to be correct; I don't tell you how to act."

 

Morality, in 'relative' and 'absolute' terms, doesn't really apply when looked at from the POV of cause and effect. The notion of 'free will' is also a moot point, since the continuum of experience, is the unfolding of prior causes. Of course, this doesn't mean that you can't change the way this unfolds. This also means you can 'plant new seeds' which can alter the trajectory of events.

 

Since, most people don't have 'clear perception' like the example from Cleary's book: This is where things like a code of conduct/disciplining our behaviour (so as not to further engender negative habit patterns) and merit accumulation comes in. When combined with meditation, these engender the causes for clearing away the 'mental effluents' to reveal what's already there.

 

Lol, writing the above: I'm reminded just how much of a horrible person and cultivator I am. I'm definitely not the person to be commenting about 'morality' on this board. I'm the perfect example of how not to be like .

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Simple_Jack]

ALSO to me its quite irrelevant what be your perception so long as you get the right message... to focus your actions appropriately.

Even if someone tell you how to act, its up to each to choose how to act ... and what to cultivate... the challenge resides in focusing in the perfect example of how to be ... and thats where morality helps us by providing us a map

I agree. However we conduct ourselves now will give rise to a future result. Therefore taking the example from the Laio Fan PDF: We should always be examining/reflecting on our own behaviour, always striving for virtuous conduct, since prior action will always dictate future outcomes. Also virtuous conduct starts from within, as our mental state will reflect on how we respond to the world.

 

This also goes for the saints and sages as well. A quote from Padmasambhava, a Buddha of Tibetan vajrayana, illustrates this well:

 

"Although my view is higher than the sky, my conduct is finer than flour."

 

Too bad, I fail everytime when it concerns things like this. Yay for me!

Edited June 4, 2012 by Simple_Jack

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Stosh]

Therefore taking the example from the Laio Fan PDF: We should always be examining/reflecting on our own behaviour, always striving for virtuous conduct, since prior action will always dictate future outcomes. Also virtuous conduct starts from within, as our mental state will reflect on how we respond to the world.

 

 

From the buddhist perspective ,

just what is the determining agent which delineates 'virtuous' conduct?

Someone elses opinion?

[The Observer]

Does there exist an absolute moralcode that we must all follow, or is it up to each of us to decide what is right and what isn't?

 

In my very limited experience, there are good general principles to follow; it is better to know the essence of certain moral codes and then apply them in a natural way to situations as they arise.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts