Using Eastern spirituality to repress your individuality

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[zanshin]

Sure, good discussion, entertaining and food for thought. Being serious not snarky. Enjoyable to do a bit of intellectual roundabout without too much emotional hurt feeling vibe. Thanks and good night.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Cat Pillar]

 

do keep in mind the kids are watching...

 

Can I have a cookie?

[zanshin]

Can I have a cookie?

 

Sure!

 

You can have anything you want except the lime fruit bars. Those are mine.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[GrandmasterP]

who lies there? Who put it there?

 

Oh the wonders of words multiple questions within a single form...

who lies there? Who put it there?

 

Oh the wonders of words multiple questions within a single form...

...........................

No idea who is under the slab but the tourist stalls did a nicely camp line in postcards and plastic baby Jesuses.

[GrandmasterP]

If there is not then there should be a special circle amongst the Hells reserved for Fig Newton Cookies along with their foul brethren the lime flavours.

YECHHHH

[zanshin]

Yes, lime is awful and no one should eat them. That's what my kids think. So being hot and sweaty with no lime Popsicles because the neighbor kids ate them was an unexpected level of hell. They could have had the cookies, they could have had the ice cream sandwiches.

[GrandmasterP]

I always thought that Dante's Inferno sounded rather fun compared to the anodyne visions of what is supposed to go on in the Xtian 'heaven'.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[eye_of_the_storm]

Buddhism = spiritual suicide

[GrandmasterP]

Tibetan yep I'd agree but Zen and PL have their up sides. PL for preference. Nice 'n easy.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Apech]

Buddhism = spiritual suicide

 

Sometimes my jaw drops but ... never mind.

[Birch]

Sometimes my jaw drops but ... never mind.

 

Weelll, isn't the 'end-goal' of Bhuddism 'ego-death'?

[Apech]

Weelll, isn't the 'end-goal' of Bhuddism 'ego-death'?

 

Nope.

[Aetherous]

From what I understand of Theravadan Buddhism, you could put it like that.

[et-thoughts]

.

Edited December 11, 2012 by et-thoughts

[Apech]

From what I understand of Theravadan Buddhism, you could put it like that.

 

"According to the Buddha's teaching, it is as wrong to hold the opinion 'I have no self' (which is the annihilationist theory) as to hold the opinion 'I have a self' (the eternalist theory), because both are fetters, both arising out of the false idea 'I AM'. The correct position with regard to the question of Anatta is not to take hold of any opinion or views, but to try to see things objectively as they are without mental projections, to see that what we call 'I', or 'being', is only a combination of physical and mental aggregates, which are working together interdependently in a flux of momentary change within the law of cause and effect, and that there is nothing permanent, everlasting, unchanging and eternal in the whole of existence." (Walpola Rahula, What the Buddha Taught, 2nd ed., 1974, p. 66)

[Birch]

""According to the Buddha's teaching, it is as wrong to hold the opinion 'I have no self' (which is the annihilationist theory) as to hold the opinion 'I have a self' (the eternalist theory), because both are fetters, both arising out of the false idea 'I AM'. The correct position with regard to the question of Anatta is not to take hold of any opinion or views, but to try to see things objectively as they are without mental projections, to see that what we call 'I', or 'being', is only a combination of physical and mental aggregates, which are working together interdependently in a flux of momentary change within the law of cause and effect, and that there is nothing permanent, everlasting, unchanging and eternal in the whole of existence." (Walpola Rahula, What the Buddha Taught, 2nd ed., 1974, p. 66)"

 

Thanks for this Apech. Could you explain how the fetter of what is cited as 'annihilationist theory' arises out of 'the false idea 'I am'? I get the other one (I reckon).

[Aetherous]

Apech,

 

It's true the Buddha said that, and is something I can appreciate (if that's all there is to it, which is not the case)...but consider how Theravadan Buddhists view 'nibbana'. In fact...if you have the time and interest, please check out Ajahn Brahms "Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond". That clearly describes their viewpoint on the end goal, which I think could definitely be called spiritual suicide, and technically 'ego death'.

[Apech]

""According to the Buddha's teaching, it is as wrong to hold the opinion 'I have no self' (which is the annihilationist theory) as to hold the opinion 'I have a self' (the eternalist theory), because both are fetters, both arising out of the false idea 'I AM'. The correct position with regard to the question of Anatta is not to take hold of any opinion or views, but to try to see things objectively as they are without mental projections, to see that what we call 'I', or 'being', is only a combination of physical and mental aggregates, which are working together interdependently in a flux of momentary change within the law of cause and effect, and that there is nothing permanent, everlasting, unchanging and eternal in the whole of existence." (Walpola Rahula, What the Buddha Taught, 2nd ed., 1974, p. 66)"

 

Thanks for this Apech. Could you explain how the fetter of what is cited as 'annihilationist theory' arises out of 'the false idea 'I am'? I get the other one (I reckon).

 

The idea 'I have no self' could be said to be nihilist (or annihilist) as in 'nothing exists so nothing matters I think I'll just get drunk everyday and think about how crap it is that nothing is real' ... or some such ... if people hate life, hate themselves and so on and get depressed about the whole thing then they are actually attached to this view. Buddhism (usually Madhyamika although the quote is from a Theravaden so ...) keep a 'middle way' between nihilism on the one hand and eternalism on the other. So it doesn't fall into the trap of that negative view but on the other hand logic of its analysis says that nothing, not just us, but no-thing has a self.

 

God! I feel like Vaj! Ask me about dependent origination ... go on please!

[Apech]

Apech,

 

It's true the Buddha said that, and is something I can appreciate (if that's all there is to it, which is not the case)...but consider how Theravadan Buddhists view 'nibbana'. In fact...if you have the time and interest, please check out Ajahn Brahms "Mindfulness, Bliss, and Beyond". That clearly describes their viewpoint on the end goal, which I think could definitely be called spiritual suicide, and technically 'ego death'.

 

I haven't read that maybe I'll look it up, so thanks for the referemce. I suppose you could say that the way the ego dies is by realising that it doesn't exist in the first place.

[Birch]

The idea 'I have no self' could be said to be nihilist (or annihilist) as in 'nothing exists so nothing matters I think I'll just get drunk everyday and think about how crap it is that nothing is real' ... or some such ... if people hate life, hate themselves and so on and get depressed about the whole thing then they are actually attached to this view. Buddhism (usually Madhyamika although the quote is from a Theravaden so ...) keep a 'middle way' between nihilism on the one hand and eternalism on the other. So it doesn't fall into the trap of that negative view but on the other hand logic of its analysis says that nothing, not just us, but no-thing has a self.

 

God! I feel like Vaj! Ask me about dependent origination ... go on please!

 

I doubt anyone can approximate how Vaj felt - especially with that nick:-)

 

Right, so if I say 'I hate my life, it's shit, I'm suffering, I get treated badly by everyone, I treat others badly (although the latter is maybe not apparent at a first reading) and therefore it is pointless to continue life' that = 'annihilist'? Or I'm not getting it? I did make a distinction between a 'shit life' and 'life' (I think I did:-))