Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

[dsg] Re: Pull my finger, was: Eyes closed

Expand Messages
  • Scott
    Dear colette, c: ...More importantly, why should any and all conversation be pleasant or pleasing? Who should it please? Why should it please that person? If
    Message 1 of 316 , Jul 31, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear colette,

      c: "...More importantly, why should any and all conversation be pleasant or pleasing? Who should it please? Why should it please that person? If nirvana and samsara are two sides of the same coin then isn't it possible for pleasing to be painful? You don't know how much it hurt me to say that."

      Scott: Oh, don't hurt yourself, colette. I don't know, though. I think speech is expected to be a certain way. I just try to look at the facts but am rather socially inept, perhaps, or maybe too bloody-minded.

      c: "why is his consideration of greater value than my consideration? Why are you under this delustion that Howard is the only person in this group?"

      Scott: I don't know. Give me a few sentences and you'll be annoyed with me too and then you won't feel so left out. ;-) No, I try to consider you. Sometimes it's hard to get in on a thread, I think, especially when offering view divergent to it. Here you are, the only one left who will indulge in my metacommunicative forays.

      c: "NARCISISM! that's what you're getting at. Now I see. What if I were to say that I differ with you, Scott? Just to be the pimple on the ass of progress, why can't I say that? Sure, Howard may have gastrict problems when you say that you differ with him but maybe if I differ with you then it'll be like 'pulling his finger', but maybe it's just a ploy to bring Howard out and take a position that can be identified, recognized, and either left alone or attacked. What iff...? Simon says what?"

      Scott: Pwned. No, as Howard said, it's what it is. Whatever that is. If you differ with me, I'll differ back, I guess, and try to find a few textual references or whatever.

      c: "Now about this Tantric act you speak of 'walking on hot coals' or is it eggshells? If you're gonna make an aumlette well, then, you're gonna have to break some eggs, no? why walk on them, just throw them out. good for the compost pile."

      Scott: Yeah, I guess the com-post bin is best. Get it? 'Com-post' bin - posting on the list? Whatever. I'm responding in my own way, although you are the Mistress (i.e. Master, but for a woman) of just saying it the way you think it. It's a tough one. I can't find a really adequate way to interact these days I'm afraid...

      Stay cool my good woman.

      Sincerely,

      Scott.
    • sarah abbott
      Hi Howard, #100363 ... factors (excluding the 3 viratis of right speech, action and liveliood for now) as being practice and action ? ... H: No, while a
      Message 316 of 316 , Sep 3, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Howard,

        #100363

        --- On Thu, 27/8/09, upasaka@... <upasaka@...> wrote:
        >>S: Would you describe right understanding, accompanied by the other path
        factors (excluding the 3 viratis of right speech, action and liveliood for
        now) as being "practice" and "action"?
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- ---------
        H:>No, while a degree of right understanding is essential to do anything
        worthwhile, I'd be more inclined to describe it largely as a *consequence*
        of practice, including right resolve ("And what is right resolve? Being
        resolved on renunciation, on freedom from ill-will, on harmlessness: This is
        called right resolve." — _SN 45.8_
        ...
        S: This is the main area where we differ. I see the path as being the practice. At moments of satipatthana, there is the practice, the arising of the path factors leading to the Noble Eightfold Path.
        ...

        >>S: Let's assume we're both talking about tanha or lobha, attachment, here (and not wholesome chanda, for example). Yes, tanha is nearly always
        present in one guise or other. Didn't the Buddha say that it was the cause of Dukkha? Isn't it the mate that prevents us from attaining seclusion as Han always reminds us?
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
        >Yes. Nonetheless, akusala can lead to kusala, and it is our *aversion*
        to suffering that is the main impetus to practice. That is reality, Sarah.
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
        S: I disagree with this "reality", Howard! Most people have aversion to suffering, but no insight at all. I would say it is the understanding of suffering and it's cause which leads to "practice" or bhavana.
        ...
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
        >Actually, we DO often actively perversely pursue ignorance and
        craving.
        ...
        S: Yes, and this is why the Buddha taught about the perversions, the vipallasas. The path is the seeing the perversions for what they are so that gradually they are eradicated, beginning with the perversions of seeing permanence in impermanence and self in not-self.
        ...
        >...The
        irony is that seeing things as they actually are, not as we want them to be, is the way to end our suffering!>>
        ...
        S: Yes.
        ...
        >Yet craving is also the beginning of the way out, for without the
        strong aversion to the pain of craving, we remain complacently enslaved. In the Upanisa Sutta we see that craving leads to suffering, which in turn serves as a support for confidence and eventual freedom from suffering.
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
        S: Everyone has aversion to the "pain of craving", or the results of craving. It is the understanding, in spite of the craving and aversion and the seeing of realities, including these, for what they are that leads to freedom.
        ...
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---
        >I have no reason to think it was anything other than plain out disgust
        and aversion to suffering and the misery of samsara.
        In any case, ordinary people rarely do what is needed for them to do
        to extricate themselves from harmful circumstances until they reach a nadir, a point of misery so low that it overcomes their lethargy and the excuses they come up with to persuade themselves that "Things are really okay." Just look at addicts. (And each of us in our own way is an addict!)
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -
        S: Yes, we're all addicts, addicted to lobha and pleasant feelings.

        Again, I think there is plenty of disgust and aversion to suffering and misery around, especially that which concerns oneself. It didn't need a Buddha to teach disgust and aversion, but it did take a Buddha to realise the 4 Noble Truths and the way of right understanding with detachment, equanimity and non-aversion,loving-kindness, not attachment and aversion.

        Metta

        Sarah
        =======
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.