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

Re: [Meditation Society of America] Re: Dealing With Life Meditations/Eglaelin

Expand Messages
  • Eglaelin
    ... This was the essence of Buddhist philosophy. The reason for pursuit of enlightenment was so that one could escape from the wheel of suffering. This is
    Message 1 of 123 , Nov 29, 2003
      --- Andy <endofthedream@...> wrote:
      > I really have no idea regarding this. Sure, I
      > know what the causation means, but I don't see
      > how one rises above it.

      This was the essence of Buddhist philosophy. The
      reason for pursuit of enlightenment was so that
      one could escape from the wheel of suffering.
      This is known as rising above the chain of
      causation.
      "THE CHAIN OF CAUSATION. If ignorance ceases,
      wrong desire ceases and so do selfish efforts,
      craving, grasping, sorrow and suffering. The
      chain of causation also works the other way, in
      which ignorance can give rise in turn to all
      these other unwanted actions and states."
      http://www.sonoma.edu/users/d/daniels/Buddha.html
      Of course, in agreement with you, this is only a
      concept. However, the actions used to take
      perform this action (the eight fold path) is much
      more important than the actual concept.
      >
      > I am here because there
      > is pleasure in this. And, more pointedly, I am
      > here because you want me to be here.
      Pleasure as a reason for existence is a flawed
      concept. Pleasure is a thing of the moment and
      many things that cause pleasure now will cause
      suffering later. Instead of living for pleasure
      why not live for happiness.
      "According to my experiences, the principal
      characteristic of genuine happiness is peace:
      inner peace. By this I do not mean some kind of
      feeling of being �spaced out.� Nor am I speaking
      of an absence of feeling. On the contrary, the
      peace I am describing is rooted in concern for
      others and involves a high degree of sensitivity
      and feeling." The Dalai Lama, Ethics For A New
      Millenium.

      > Are you asking me what I do for a living?
      Yes. I was curious what kind of employement you
      perform.

      >...mythological creation from the history
      > of spirituality...If that is what you mean by a
      >bodhissatva, then yes, there are bodhissatvas.

      Myths are the language of the sub-conscious. The
      existence of these kinds of people/creations are
      there for a purpose. They inspire us to raise
      ourselves above the normal mentality that focuses
      on selfishness.

      >
      > For the most part I find myself steering clear
      > of "why" questions (unless they are about
      > practical items like, "why should I use a
      > wrench for this job rather than a hammer").
      > The usual answer to all other types of "why"
      > questions is simply another story.
      Why is the most important question there is.
      Without "why" science is impossible. Without
      "why" psychology is impossible. Without asking
      yourself "why" spiritual change is impossible.
      Here is where you say change is impossible but
      change is possible. I know I have changed.
      Without the concept that I could change I would
      have followed in the footsteps of my father.

      > There are no enlightened beings. Personal
      > enlightment is a contradiction in terms,
      > another aspect of spiritual mythology.
      Refer to my previous message about mythology
      being the language of the sub-conscious. The
      concept of those who raise themselves to a higher
      standard(level) is religion wide. The fact is
      that some people feel called to a higher
      existence. Whether that existence is valid
      according to you is a matter of opinion. This
      does not invalidate the concept.

      > I never said that there was no change. To
      > quote what I previously wrote, "There is only
      > apparent change."
      Apparent as a term invalidates the word change.
      One of the definitions of apparent indicates that
      5 : manifest to the senses or mind as real or
      true on the basis of evidence that may or may not
      be factually valid. Does this not mean that
      change is only an illusion.

      > Why am I here at all? I'm not sure what you
      > mean by "here." Can you elaborate please.
      Actually you answered that question already.

      > I "choose" to help things get better. I choose
      > to help the hungry. I choose to help my friends
      > stop hating and being afraid. I choose to
      > support the efforts for peace.
      >
      > All of the above is because you believe you
      > exist as an independent entity, and that such
      > an entity has free will/choice, one that can -
      > eventually perhaps - become "enlightened."
      > Check out all the spiritual mythologies that
      > you refer to in your posts. The one
      > commonality amongst them is that there is no
      > separation: that the entire universe is a
      > single, UNcaused presence. This is true for
      > all the world's spiritual traditions. If you
      > accept these traditions, then why are you
      > avoiding their most fundamental, basic premise?
      Because I see a different meaning behind
      connected than they represent. That is what
      performing a spiritual search means. To find
      meaning in the works of others that you can
      relate to an integrate into your own. Several of
      the worlds main spiritual traditions insist that
      the universe does have a cause.
      My definition of connection: the fact that
      everyones actions affect the reality of others.
      My actions spread out in a chain from my into the
      world. My ethical conduct affects the world
      around me. Just as yours does. Eventually the
      waves of interaction meet like the waves in a
      pond.

      >
      > One example: from both buddhist and hindu
      > teachings comes the concept of the Net of Indra
      > (which, today, is referred to as the
      > holographic universe by some quantum
      > physicists). The Net of Indra is a poetic way
      > of asserting that everything is tied to
      > everything else, and that everything is a
      > reflection of everything else, and that
      > everything is, in fact, One. The Net of Indra
      > appears in many traditional texts; the
      > following is from the The Avatamsaka Sutra
      > (from the Hua-Yen school of Buddhism).

      When it comes to physical representations Taoism
      has the best. Everything is one in the Tao and
      yet maintains its individual natures. That is
      why Taoist have such a wide range of
      methodologies. Each seeks after union with the
      Tao but recognizes that each individual has
      different tendencies. The Tao is one and yet
      encompasses the ten thousand distinct and
      individual things. Taoism has embraced many
      concepts from Hinduism and Buddhism. This is why
      I can embrace their concepts of enlightened
      individuals (Immortals in Taoism). It is not
      necessary, just because everything is connected,
      to insist that there are no individuals.


      > Now let me ask you a couple of questions.
      > Do you have a job? Yes.
      > Do you have a family? Yes.
      > Do you interact with others? Yes.
      >
      > If so why? Because I have no say in the
      > matter. The desire to interact occurs
      > (sometimes). When it is not strong enough, no
      > interaction happens. When its pull is
      > compelling enough, then there is interaction.
      > It is how I am wired, it is my conditioning.
      > It's very simple. Only our thoughts make What
      > Is appear to be complicated.
      You do have a choice. Millions of people have
      made that choice. You do not have to interact at
      all. Nothing forces interaction not even your
      conditioning. Why do you interact with some
      people and not others? You choose among the
      people that come into your perceptions who you
      will associate with. In that very real fact you
      do have a choice.


      To sum up my arguments.
      1. The concept of escaping the chain of causation
      is a motivation for living an ethical life. Not
      the only motivation but a motivation.
      2. Pleasure as a motivation for living has many
      flaws. Pleasure is non-essential. There are many
      times in life when we must eschew pleasure to
      achieve our goals.
      3. The basis for inner peace is a consideration
      for the happiness of self and others. It also
      requires a sensitivity to the state of other
      beings.
      4. Why is the beginning of Wisdom.
      5. The need for those who dedicate themselves to
      raising themselves and others to higher ethical
      conduct is essential.
      6. It is not necessary for a concept of oneness
      to invalidate the existence of the individual.
      The statement, "We are All One," indicates that
      we all have the same need for happiness. Not
      necessarily that the individual is irrelevant. I
      prefer to look at this from the point of IDIC.
      Infinite Diversity Infinite Combination.
      Everything is essential for existence.

      A statement I would add for the above is looking
      at the universe in this way allows for the
      appreciation of the uniqueness of each item.




      =====
      Peace On Your Path,
      Eglaelin

      __________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
      http://companion.yahoo.com/
    • devi@pacific.net
      ... Patanjali. ... formed. ... devi: i have it on order from the library, i ve already read about four or five commentaries, most from indian scholors, i m
      Message 123 of 123 , Dec 17, 2003
        > If you like the study of the mind, Eglaelin, You might try Georg
        > Feuerstein's translation and commentary on "Yoga Sutra" by
        Patanjali.
        > It is the basis of Raja Yoga. It is very systematic and well
        formed.
        >
        > Love,
        > Bobby G.

        devi: i have it on order from the library, i've already read about
        four or five commentaries, most from indian scholors, i'm actually
        thinking about offering study groups in my area..
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.