Any Buddhists out there?

Discuss philosophical questions regarding theism (and atheism), and discuss religion as it relates to philosophy. This includes any philosophical discussions that happen to be about god, gods, or a 'higher power' or the belief of them. This also generally includes philosophical topics about organized or ritualistic mysticism or about organized, common or ritualistic beliefs in the existence of supernatural phenomenon.
Post Reply
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Burning Ghost:
hereandnow -

I never said what I said was going to be helpful. It is merely truthful. If you search you won't find a damn thing! You are most certainly not going to lock yourself away from social interaction and lie prone contemplating existence for a few months on my say so. You'd be pretty dumb to do so and you are not dumb so you won't do it. AND I am saying even if you did I cannot guarantee you'd like either the process or the possible outcome.

All I know is I got "somewhere" and thing like "happy" and "sad", "good" and "bad" were simply vacuous. I cannot describe it other than by making that rather obscure and disgusting "mystical" statement (meaning it is a meaningless statement).

All the books in the world say the same as the entrails of a dead rat or the pattern of birds in the sky. It is as meaningful as you make it and that is the fascination of life and the annoyance of life ... then we die (I hope!)
Of course, being helpful means contributing to an understanding of the matter at hand. It sounds more like you're being honest than truthful, leaving the issue of truth out of it. Not to mince words, but truth is actually part of the issue at hand, so ambiguity is, well, unhelpful.

You mean, if YOU search YOU won't find a damn thing. Could be that this is not your strong suit. You could be an absolute genius, but typically this does not help in the yogic search for enlightenment. And is this a surprise? If you actually read my original statement, you will see that I maintain what holds one to the mat IS knowing. If your are so pinned, as are most, then it is a very difficult matter, and all that will be there for you is disparagement. It is my belief that there is such a Buddha nature, we all are always already there. Philosophy, the hard stuff, frankly, can help undo conceptual binding that keeps us from seeing this.

You do have to care, though. It has to matter. Your thoughts suggest this is not the case.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Burning ghost »

Nah! Just using the usual cryptic nonsense common to all mysticism ;)

You can search and search and search and nothing will come. The harder you look and the more you try the less you'll "see".

If you someone told you they achieved what you seek you'd never believe them.
AKA badgerjelly
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14995
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Sy Borg »

Enjoying the smart commentary here. Much to digest.

I'd just like to add a very "back to basics" approach. I agree with the notion that words reduce happiness.

Humans lack fur, armoured plates, spines, sharp teeth, claws, venom or even a thick hide. Our "armour" is our big brain, which allows us to put our bodies in places where dangerous amounts of entropy are not. So our minds naturally turn to those things that are the greatest threat to our survival - other humans and their societies. Humans are complex and tricky so there's a lot to think about to keep oneself "safe" in human society.

Thinking becomes reflexive during our threatening teens, a time when we disengage from noticing the wonders of reality to focus on navigating human hierarchies. In time our "thought shield" becomes reflexive and constant. As adults we are often busy fixing problems that might not have been such an issue if we'd just taken time out to smell the roses and interacted less edgily, with less fear.

Simply, we tend to spend most of our time in a very mild fight-or-flight state, protected by the armour of words and concepts, rather than dropping our guard and letting more reality in.
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Greta:
Thinking becomes reflexive during our threatening teens, a time when we disengage from noticing the wonders of reality to focus on navigating human hierarchies. In time our "thought shield" becomes reflexive and constant.
Most people I know have a hard time remembering early childhood. It fades with time and maybe a vague nostalgia remains. I will go out on a limb here and say I remember it somewhat like Wordsworth's Intimations of Immortality:

THERE was a time when meadow, grove, and stream,
The earth, and every common sight,
To me did seem
Apparell'd in celestial light,
The glory and the freshness of a dream.

Wordsworth's romanticism is not welcome these days, in this age of wit and twitter, and that primordial wonder is all but gone. But there is something in this that just knocks the stuffing out of our presuppositions and presumptions. Too bad I will not be here to witness the next age of romanticism. It will come, I am sure, because of its insisting and profound nature.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14995
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Sy Borg »

Hereandnow wrote:Greta:
Thinking becomes reflexive during our threatening teens, a time when we disengage from noticing the wonders of reality to focus on navigating human hierarchies. In time our "thought shield" becomes reflexive and constant.
Most people I know have a hard time remembering early childhood. It fades with time and maybe a vague nostalgia remains. I will go out on a limb here and say I remember it somewhat like Wordsworth's Intimations of Immortality:

THERE was a time when meadow, grove, and stream,
The earth, and every common sight,
To me did seem
Apparell'd in celestial light,
The glory and the freshness of a dream.

Wordsworth's romanticism is not welcome these days, in this age of wit and twitter, and that primordial wonder is all but gone. But there is something in this that just knocks the stuffing out of our presuppositions and presumptions. Too bad I will not be here to witness the next age of romanticism. It will come, I am sure, because of its insisting and profound nature.
Romanticism needed to be questioned because almost everything beautiful in nature will kill you if you get too close. So balance arrived. Then the scaled tipped, as they do. Now we are terribly practical and hard-headed - as you said, "wit and twitter". Again, that's simply immersion in human abstractions rather than actual reality(-ish). Why are we immersed in human abstractions? Because most of our threats today come from humans.

I am conscious of this because, in retirement, I wanted to slow down and try to make sense of the maelstrom that was my life. I put romantic relationships and complicated friendships into the too hard basket and rebooted. Now today I am more like the long-forgotten little dreamer that I was, excited by animals, space, music and fun. In my teens I had to "sell pieces of my soul" to survive, putting aside "those childish things" (eg. interest in nature) to engage fully with human gaming. I had learnt. When I started high school I'd not put aside "childish things" and was vulnerable, becoming a target for energy vampires who inflicted lifelong damage. Battle scars. Many have them.

We need our protective barrier of words and thoughts today more than ever, but also the opportunity and ability to put them aside.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Spectrum »

Hereandnow wrote:Clearly you have not been grasped by the momentous present moment. If you are looking,and I take it you are not, for some way to grasp what Buddhists are talking about (and these good people do not know how to put language to the task. They are not jnana yogists, adn even when they are, it is a limited sort of thing), then read Husserl. Start with his Cartesian Meditations, move on to Ideas. Or not. But if you want to spek of it, you should read the things that encourage it,not everything that discourages it, like Nietasche's Zarathustra, which you apparently have read. This latter gives you no new thinking at all.


THAT is a bad analogy. The worst. I'll give you tight rope walking: political discourse, relationships with others, the demands of job and family, the fear of death and desease; and so on, and so on. Buddhism is like untraining the mind the engage in particulars, allow them to fall away, just fall away from the tightrope, and see the world as if you never had seen it before. I am saying this is at its foundation, a release from the very glue that holds the world together, Kantian synthesis of generality into particulars. There are no particulars.
You are entitled to an opinion on anything.
However I wondered how much time you have researched into Buddhism. What you have stated is certain aspects of Buddhism. What I have stated is true from some other aspects of Buddhism. For you to condemn my views indicate you have only grasped a tunnel vision of Buddhism.
Note I have spent lots of time on Buddhism [one of my specialty], addition to Kant, and now at present Islam.

-- Updated Sat Jul 22, 2017 9:48 pm to add the following --

@Hereandnow

At one time I was reading the original books from Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Rorty, Wittgenstein [On Certainty] and others. I have read of Davidson from secondary sources.
Then I don't find any thing novel from them apart from being 'footnotes' to Kant.

My present attention is on Islam thus I have a handicap to challenge you with reference to these philosophers till I have done a refresher on them. I don't intend to do so till I have finished my project on Islam.

There is claim Heidegger "plagiarized" his concepts from some Buddhist texts.
wiki wrote:According to Tomonobu Imamichi, Heidegger's concept of Dasein in Sein und Zeit was inspired – although Heidegger remained silent on this – by Okakura Kakuzō’s concept of das-in-der-Welt-sein (being-in-the-worldness) expressed in The Book of Tea to describe Zhuangzi's philosophy, which Imamichi’s teacher had offered to Heidegger in 1919, after having followed lessons with him the year before.
https://en.wik1pedia.org/wiki/The_Book_of_Tea
Point is Heidegger only covered a small sliver of Buddhism [Zen a fringe of Buddhism] and that is not sufficient to understand what Buddhism is all about. To understand Buddhism one has to cover the full range of total Buddhism of all the main schools of Buddhism, i.e. Theravada, Mahayana and Vajrayana [Tibetan].
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Synthesis
Posts: 189
Joined: July 15th, 2017, 12:54 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Synthesis »

Burning ghost wrote:If you someone told you they achieved what you seek you'd never believe them.
If you are every fortunate enough to be in the presence of someone who has a greater "understanding," you will know.
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Burning ghost »

Flibble flobble
AKA badgerjelly
Synthesis
Posts: 189
Joined: July 15th, 2017, 12:54 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Synthesis »

Burning ghost wrote:Flibble flobble
Burning ghost, it is often said that it is not what one knows that determines wisdom, but instead, what one knows that they can not know.

Many people have difficulty dealing with the notion that something of great significance can lie outside of their ability comprehend, but try not to be judgmental. Instead, check it out! You just might surprise yourself. :o
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Spectrum:
However I wondered how much time you have researched into Buddhism. What you have stated is certain aspects of Buddhism. What I have stated is true from some other aspects of Buddhism. For you to condemn my views indicate you have only grasped a tunnel vision of Buddhism.
Note I have spent lots of time on Buddhism [one of my specialty], addition to Kant, and now at present Islam.
Don't mean to ruffle your feathers, but I have to be honest about this. What "time" have you spent? Have you pored through the many texts of Mahayana Buddhism? Have you attended lectures by scholarly intellectuals? I am guessing you have a lot to say on this. But how do you reconcile the intellectualizing of Buddhism with the very clear understanding that it is essentially a matter that is the utter exclusion of intellectualizing? Not that thinking and talking have no purpose here; in fact I have trying to encourage the idea that philosophy is essentially a destructive, rather than augmentative, discipline, and thinking undoes knowledge at its basis, where hidden assumptions underpin everydayness.

Please, do not give me a bibliography of what you've read. We call that the fallacy argumentum ad verecundiam. As to your views, there is only one that is at the core of Buddhism, and that is enlightenment. Talking about it can be entertaining, but if it is not in the service of actually becoming enlightened, it is part of the problem. It is foolish to think otherwise; it would suggest Siddhārtha Gautama himself had a "tunnel vision" of Buddhism, having not "read' his way to enlightenment.
At one time I was reading the original books from Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Rorty, Wittgenstein [On Certainty] and others. I have read of Davidson from secondary sources.
Then I don't find any thing novel from them apart from being 'footnotes' to Kant.
The point of these philosophers in the context of this discussion is to put attention to basic questions. They pulverize structures of knowledge within the individual inquirer. Of course, as with Buddhist scholarly works, they can be taken up just to perpetuate an industry. If that is your cup of tea, whatever. Misses the point though: All of it, every scrap, is kind jnana yoga.

My present attention is on Islam thus I have a handicap to challenge you with reference to these philosophers till I have done a refresher on them. I don't intend to do so till I have finished my project on Islam.
Good luck with this. A worthy scholarly endeavor, I'm sure. Off point, though.
There is claim Heidegger "plagiarized" his concepts from some Buddhist texts.
wiki wrote:
According to Tomonobu Imamichi, Heidegger's concept of Dasein in Sein und Zeit was inspired – although Heidegger remained silent on this – by Okakura Kakuzō’s concept of das-in-der-Welt-sein (being-in-the-worldness) expressed in The Book of Tea to describe Zhuangzi's philosophy, which Imamichi’s teacher had offered to Heidegger in 1919, after having followed lessons with him the year before.
If you're suggesting Heidegger lifted his thoughts from Okakura Kakuzō then you haven't read Heidegger. He's not easy and is dense and complex. I just read Don't mean to be rude, though. Inspired by him?? If you dissect Heidegger you will find Kant, Kierkeggard, Husserl, Nietzche, Schleiermacher, Aristotle, and others.

But this is all off point, and I blame myself. Look, if I wrote something you disagree with, say what it is and where you disagree and why. Perhaps you could, for example, elaborate on "the general concept of detachment from desires to end sufferings is a VERY crude concept." Or, you could tell me the connection between Heiddegger and Okakura Kakuzō: I read through the Book of Tea and found nothing of Heidegger there at all. But then, I was reading pretty fast. Where is it??









.

-- Updated July 23rd, 2017, 3:46 pm to add the following --

ignore "I just read" in that weird bit above.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Spectrum »

Hereandnow wrote:Spectrum:
However I wondered how much time you have researched into Buddhism. What you have stated is certain aspects of Buddhism. What I have stated is true from some other aspects of Buddhism. For you to condemn my views indicate you have only grasped a tunnel vision of Buddhism.
Note I have spent lots of time on Buddhism [one of my specialty], addition to Kant, and now at present Islam.
Don't mean to ruffle your feathers, but I have to be honest about this. What "time" have you spent? Have you pored through the many texts of Mahayana Buddhism? Have you attended lectures by scholarly intellectuals? I am guessing you have a lot to say on this.
If you want to be honest you need to know the facts first about the other person, not just condemned based on one or two sentences I have made.

I have spent a lot to time on Buddhism and Eastern Philosophies as that was where I started before I ventured into Western Philosophy.
Other than the hundreds of books I have, a check with my Buddhism Folder in my hard drive indicate the following.
Total - 3,003 files in 284 folders.
Mahayana - 230 files in 29 folders.
This is a clue to the coverage I have on Buddhism. My purpose is to ensure I have covered all that is needed to cover for Buddhism as a religion and philosophy. If I missed out anything relevant I would jump at it immediately.

Attending lectures by scholarly intellectual is not a critical factor as one can get access to the views of the scholars from the internet through various sources.

Mahayana is the 2nd [2 of 3] turning of the Dhamma Wheel. One must cover the Mahayana Philosophy but I find Mahayana not reaching the ultimate levels of Buddhism, i.e. still under the subliminal control of the Zombie Meme.
But how do you reconcile the intellectualizing of Buddhism with the very clear understanding that it is essentially a matter that is the utter exclusion of intellectualizing? Not that thinking and talking have no purpose here; in fact I have trying to encourage the idea that philosophy is essentially a destructive, rather than augmentative, discipline, and thinking undoes knowledge at its basis, where hidden assumptions underpin everydayness.
From Hinduism, it is recognized humanity comprised of people with different inclinations, thus different approaches [jnana, bakti, raja, etc.] are established to cater [optimally] for these different people. This is the same for Buddhism and I believe the intellectual approach is the most efficient [with its pros and cons] as it provide pillars and supports for one practices.
The Tibetan has this tradition of very fiery debates amongst their scholars and monks on various Buddhist related issues. I am sure they understand intellectual debate is merely one tool.
I have mentioned this before re the Buddhist Raft Parable, where one leave the raft after reaching the other shore.

I have also mentioned the point where ultimately 'reason must kill itself' - a Madhyamaka principle.
Here is Jay Garfield, he mentioned Hume where 'Reason must subvert itself' ultimately and this basis is applied by Buddhism @5:39.
Even in Jnana Yoga, it must give up itself ultimately for Bakti to take over in the 'last mile'.

In philosophy there is Non-Philosophy:
Non-philosophy (French: non-philosophie) is a concept developed by French philosopher François Laruelle. Laruelle argues that all forms of philosophy (from ancient philosophy to analytic philosophy to deconstruction and so on) are structured around a prior decision, and remain constitutively blind to this decision. The 'decision' that Laruelle is concerned with here is the dialectical splitting of the world in order to grasp the world philosophically.

=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-philosophy

In Buddhism, the limitation of conceptual thoughts and the human conditions is a common theme. Note the Koans used in Zen.

Please, do not give me a bibliography of what you've read. We call that the fallacy argumentum ad verecundiam.
This is not about syllogism and argument. It is about facts. This is the same when authors include a bibliography in their book to represent their coverage of the subject matter.
As to your views, there is only one that is at the core of Buddhism, and that is enlightenment. Talking about it can be entertaining, but if it is not in the service of actually becoming enlightened, it is part of the problem. It is foolish to think otherwise; it would suggest Siddhārtha Gautama himself had a "tunnel vision" of Buddhism, having not "read' his way to enlightenment.
Where did I emphasize on enlightenment as an endgame.
My view is enlightenment is merely a raft as in the Raft Parable. Enlightenment is not something one should even aspire nor cling to - Chop Wood Carry Water. As the Gita has stated,"Do Not be Attached to the Fruits of Actions."
Are you familiar with the story of the Ten Bulls?
As I had mentioned somewhere I have been meditating for a VERY long time.
At one time I was reading the original books from Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre, Rorty, Wittgenstein [On Certainty] and others. I have read of Davidson from secondary sources.
Then I don't find any thing novel from them apart from being 'footnotes' to Kant.
The point of these philosophers in the context of this discussion is to put attention to basic questions. They pulverize structures of knowledge within the individual inquirer. Of course, as with Buddhist scholarly works, they can be taken up just to perpetuate an industry. If that is your cup of tea, whatever. Misses the point though: All of it, every scrap, is kind jnana yoga.
My point is since I am into Western Philosophy I might as well cover all the popular philosophers. What I noted is it is not efficient to rely on secondary sources on the views of these philosophers, so I study the original texts. If I were to counter your views on Heidegger I have to read his books sufficiently and have a 95/100 understanding [not necessary agree] of his philosophies. It is no point debating with you on Heidegger if my knowledge is only 30/100 of this total or at least core views.
There is claim Heidegger "plagiarized" his concepts from some Buddhist texts.
wiki wrote:
According to Tomonobu Imamichi, Heidegger's concept of Dasein in Sein und Zeit was inspired – although Heidegger remained silent on this – by Okakura Kakuzō’s concept of das-in-der-Welt-sein (being-in-the-worldness) expressed in The Book of Tea to describe Zhuangzi's philosophy, which Imamichi’s teacher had offered to Heidegger in 1919, after having followed lessons with him the year before.
If you're suggesting Heidegger lifted his thoughts from Okakura Kakuzō then you haven't read Heidegger. He's not easy and is dense and complex. I just read Don't mean to be rude, though. Inspired by him?? If you dissect Heidegger you will find Kant, Kierkeggard, Husserl, Nietzche, Schleiermacher, Aristotle, and others.

But this is all off point, and I blame myself. Look, if I wrote something you disagree with, say what it is and where you disagree and why. Perhaps you could, for example, elaborate on "the general concept of detachment from desires to end sufferings is a VERY crude concept." Or, you could tell me the connection between Heiddegger and Okakura Kakuzō: I read through the Book of Tea and found nothing of Heidegger there at all. But then, I was reading pretty fast. Where is it??
Note you attacked me with
Hereandnow wrote:Clearly you have not been grasped by the momentous present moment. ....
....
THAT is a bad analogy. The worst.
This is not a good start of any amiable discussion and kill any interests from me to get into more details.

It was long ago where I did dig into Heidegger [not my cup of tea] whence I had a good grasp of his philosophy. I have also read the Book of Tea. My present knowledge of these two views are low [40/100] so it is not efficient for me to discuss them fairly until I have done a refresher on them.

Generally as with most notable philosophers it is a default to exhaust all previous recognized philosopher prior to them and adopt their views. So it is only natural one will fined elements of past philosophers in Heidegger's work.
I spent 3+ years full time researching on Kant, and noted immediately after Kant the philosophers that followed [Schelling, Hegel, Schopenhauer, Heidegger, etc.] did not fully grasp what Kant was trying to convey.
Somehow they got controlled by the 'Zombie Meme' note Hegel's Absolute, Schopenhauer's Will, ...
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
User avatar
Hereandnow
Posts: 2837
Joined: July 11th, 2012, 9:16 pm
Favorite Philosopher: the moon and the stars

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Hereandnow »

Spectrum: Of all the things I said in this exchange, the one thing that should have crystal clear is that everything, everything you wrote in your indulgence above and all you've read and done is utterly and completely off topic. If this idea is simply alien to you, then I am brilliantly happy to kill your interest. I mean, when I asked you not to give me a bibliography of what you've read, how does that motivate you do then give a dissertation on what you've read? That is ego, not dialogue.

Just to close (unless you want to go again about the names of books and philosophers): You spend most of your time just telling me you've read this and studied this and understand that.....can you not put an idea that you have encountered on the table, say here you disagree and here is why? I mean, can you not do this? Or do you want send me a copy of your report card?
User avatar
Burning ghost
Posts: 3065
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Burning ghost »

Synthesis -

If something lies outside of my ability to comprehend it doesn't for me and never will ... obviously! I cannot help point out this stupidity to mystics but they'll flim-flam along todge-podging along mystical rainbows of bubblegum.

As a creative touch stone it is of high acclaim to me. Other than that it is a slippery slope to fanaticism and delusion.

We just have to face the fact that some subjective experiences we'll never be able to express well enough to others. It is not a big deal.

Just makes me laugh knowing, at least to myself, that I have got to the place many crave. The issue is they CRAVE it. I am not there now though, and then people say "but if you got there you'd never return", to which Zizek has pointed on the contrary nature of this in Buddhist philosophy generally and which many of his Buddhist friends cannot remedy!

What is funnier still is people expect some "elevated" thing. They seem to know exactly what enlightenment is and what Nirvana is even though they've never come to possess it. They have so much authority but only in their ignorance. So, no, I will continue to scathe those who have literally no idea what they are talking about because they admit they have no idea what they are talking about because they are pursuing this or that particular mystical carrot. They are duped.

You cannot get what you want. If you can except that you open the path to getting it ... but there in lies the irony! You will try to stop wanting in order to attain what you want, you will fool yourself into thinking you don't believe what you believe and this only fools others not yourself. You cannot "forget" only stubbornly persist and force yourself to a very dangerous extreme (you cannot stumble on "meaning" without "suffering", you must fail and fail and fail again, and keep going right to the precipice of your mortality, you must stare your end in the face and scream at the universe with utter distain - and you will, but you'll likely die soon after. There is a reason people who come close to death suddenly turn their lives around. It is not because they see "hell" or "heaven", it is because they attain X after having their face stripped away and mortality made explicit as being utterly meaningless.)

Spectrum -

"Whence"? Are you Gandalf or something? haha!

-- Updated July 24th, 2017, 3:14 am to add the following --

Zen Buddhism simply boils down to one simple principle, to continually ask why? and to pursue to the point of insanity. The rest is just some strange ideology formed to ready students for the turmoil brought about by pursuing the WHY? question to the ideal of its perceived resolution (which is a kind of contrary illusion!)

-- Updated July 24th, 2017, 3:15 am to add the following --

I guess the best word is DEFIANCE.

-- Updated July 24th, 2017, 3:20 am to add the following --

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEyH-57n6KM
AKA badgerjelly
Synthesis
Posts: 189
Joined: July 15th, 2017, 12:54 pm

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Synthesis »

Burning ghost wrote:Synthesis - If something lies outside of my ability to comprehend it doesn't for me and never will ... obviously! I cannot help point out this stupidity to mystics but they'll flim-flam along todge-podging along mystical rainbows of bubblegum.
Burning ghost, you mis-understand what it is. The goal of practice is awareness. This awareness allows for clarity and the wisdom that comes from seeing things for what they are, engenders. This is all. Nothing mystical.

Many get lost in the words and lose sight of the simplicity of the practice.
Spectrum
Posts: 5161
Joined: December 21st, 2010, 1:25 am
Favorite Philosopher: Eclectic -Various

Re: Any Buddhists out there?

Post by Spectrum »

Burning ghost wrote:Just makes me laugh knowing, at least to myself, that I have got to the place many crave. The issue is they CRAVE it. I am not there now though, and then people say "but if you got there you'd never return", to which Zizek has pointed on the contrary nature of this in Buddhist philosophy generally and which many of his Buddhist friends cannot remedy!

What is funnier still is people expect some "elevated" thing. They seem to know exactly what enlightenment is and what Nirvana is even though they've never come to possess it. They have so much authority but only in their ignorance. So, no, I will continue to scathe those who have literally no idea what they are talking about because they admit they have no idea what they are talking about because they are pursuing this or that particular mystical carrot. They are duped.
If you are on a spiritual path [I don't think you are], then you are treading into dangerous waters with the above views of yours i.e. people are craving for Nirvana (and its related experiences).
If you are not on a spiritual path, then it could be worst as one in such a situation is doing things blindly.

Those who do not understand the full process of spirituality, after having an unplanned experience [oneness, cosmic consciousness, etc.] will continue to crave for it and they will likely to turn to drugs, hallucinogens, opioids, and the likes to repeat and get what they want.
Some users of LSD say one of the most profound parts of the experience is a deep oneness with the universe. The hallucinogenic drug might be causing this by blurring boundaries in the brain, too.
http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shot ... e-universe
Not-a-theist. Religion is a critical necessity for humanity now, but not the FUTURE.
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Religion, Theism and Mythology”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021