Spiritual Forums

Home


Donate!


Articles


CHAT!


Shop


 
Welcome to Spiritual Forums!.

We created this community for people from all backgrounds to discuss Spiritual, Paranormal, Metaphysical, Philosophical, Supernatural, and Esoteric subjects. From Astral Projection to Zen, all topics are welcome. We hope you enjoy your visits.

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest, which gives you limited access to most discussions and articles. By joining our free community you will be able to post messages, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos, and gain access to our Chat Rooms, Registration is fast, simple, and free, so please, join our community today! !

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, check our FAQs before contacting support. Please read our forum rules, since they are enforced by our volunteer staff. This will help you avoid any infractions and issues.

Go Back   Spiritual Forums > Religions & Faiths > Buddhism

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1711  
Old 07-06-2019, 01:28 AM
sentient sentient is offline
Guide
Join Date: Sep 2017
Posts: 713
 
A story related to "anatta" and to the "me-me-mee centeredness":

Was in a group situation once where a clinical psychologist demonstrated a guided meditation and it got the group so very deeply into it (from beta to low theta) – it took us quite a while to come out of it “back to the surface”. She was gooooood! And she is local.

Then later on we had a guided meditation demonstration by a Buddhist nun, (a local also) who at every turn of the guided meditative process had to keep on commenting on her ‘story’ – what she had gotten out of practicing meditation and how good she was at it – that we never even got to experience/taste the actual meditation itself.
So how unaware, unconscious was that - from her part?!

I still do get that Buddhist Centre’s newsletter, but as yet haven’t attended.

*
Reply With Quote
  #1712  
Old 07-06-2019, 02:05 AM
janielee janielee is offline
Master
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 1,910
 
Great me story, sentient!
Reply With Quote
  #1713  
Old 07-06-2019, 04:19 AM
Joe Mc Joe Mc is offline
Master
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,101
  Joe Mc's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by sky123
No problem Joe Mc

Three Hail Mary's and one Pater Noster for your penance

Runs quickly to catch the bus to the local church !!!!
__________________
Too much intellectual pride and not enough intellectual beauty

To Thine own Self be True

The Frost performs its secret ministry,Unhelped by any wind. Samuel Taylor Coleridge

And you won't find that Love comes easy but that Love is always right.So even when the dark clouds gather you will be the light.

All Intellect falls prey to Love's Glory ! Rumi

He Made the Lock, He also Made the Key ! Rumi
Reply With Quote
  #1714  
Old 16-06-2019, 11:11 PM
7luminaries 7luminaries is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,797
  7luminaries's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
It's almost as if as if there are two different subjects, but it's because the enlightenment is 'as you are now' and the complexities of human relations are inter-defining self-images. For example, I play a role as a 'trainer' which is social position compared with my 'athletes'. Just the same, a 'teacher' is contextualised with 'students'. The relative positions are interdefining, and the boundary conditions are the defining context.
Gem, hello. Agreed that the boundaries are the concrete means by which we de facto honour and recognise our mutual humanity and also contextualise the relationship. Be it coworkers, neighbours, employee to employer, teacher to student, parent to child, and so forth. It is within these boundaries we may concrete engage in ways that are affirming and not dehumanising.

Boundaries are key to honouring the other as other, because the fact of recognising the humanity of another must occur. We must recognise and accept that we cannot act as if there is no boundary between us and thus as if we can take from & do with others as they please. That is the definition of a narcissist...that they do not or cannot recognise the humanity of others...because they cannot apprehend that others' individuated consciousness is wholly distinct from their own...that others are not simply extensions of him- or herself. Others thus exist simply as means to an end for them, reflecting the narcissist's amoral, utilitarian engagement with the rest of the world.

Quote:
Ethics enters as soon as we organise interdefining relations. A husband/wife relation comes with boundary conditions that accept some behaviours and rule out others. It is precisely those conditions that define the relationship. Parent/child, brother/sister, friend/friend... trainer/athlete, teacher/student... no mater what relationship, it is defined by boundaries.
Yes...boundaries are particularly beautiful aspects of truth and existence as we know them, IMO.

Without boundaries, we cannot appreciate the distinct humanity of the other. It is the interbeing with one another and with all that is, which comprises the very essence of our existence. All these distinct things exist in interbeing because of the boundaries that exist between all things. Without boundaries, in fact, nothing of this material universe could even come to be. Nor would our awareness or our being exist as distinct from One.

Boundaries are highly underrated and hugely critical, IOW.

Quote:
We create definitions through comparable self-images for a specific purpose, be it to reach an athletic goal, enhance spiritual development, have social support, or whatever. We make these arrangements to fulfill and intended purpose, and because it involves intent, it involves morality. Should we become distracted by superfluous, contradictory desires, the intended purpose loses its way as the boundaries which define the relation start to become unclear, and the relation itself dissolves into obscurity, becomes futile if not detrimental - and ends.
Yes...if we do not respect the boundaries of our relationships within the appropriate, right-aligned context...then we move into a space of misalignment, tending toward amoral utilitarianism. Where the humanity of the other is not properly recognised as distinct and worthy in its own right but rather exists only to be of use to us.

Quote:
Hence we end up with detrimental teacher/student realtions, and ashram organisational structures without proper protection policy, but firstly the guru have to be a good bloke because he has to set the standards, and secondly, it takes very refined administrative skills to create the organisational structure and its constitution, the built environment, policy/procedure and codes of conduct etc. that will best focus the mission and not compromise it in any way.
Yes, agreed. Otherwise, this is such a misuse of power and authority.

Additionally, the devotee or seeker has sworn a vow of abstinence whilst on the grounds...and what is the guru doing by "persuading" them to break their vows? He is teaching them that their is no such thing as authentic love (lovingkindness centred in equanimity) -- a caustic and pernicious falsehood. The eternal message of the cynic and the unawakened.

He is essentially saying that there is no right-aligned morality or ethics, that what the tradition says is right-aligned is a meaningless sham. This is misdirection of the worst kind, in addition to taking advantage of them physically and emotionally. It is akin to telling them outright to live in misalignment without any deeper regard for their own highest good equally to that of all others -- because there is no higher good, so why bother?

Quote:
In short, know just what you do. Then it's the meditation of self-awareness without distraction, we call it 'mindfulness', other lots call it something else, but the truth is, the attention is right here right now, and 'this' is what is happening. If we know what's going on with ourselves, clear on our motives, and conscious of what we do, we're less prone to go off the deep end and do hurtful things.
Yes. Absolutely. And likewise, hopefully, we're also far more likely to recognise the misdirection of others, and avoid being harmed by that, as well.

Peace & blessings
7L
__________________
Bound by conventions, people tend to reach for what is easy.

Here we must be unafraid of what is difficult.

For all living beings in nature must unfold in their particular way

and become themselves despite all opposition.

-- Rainer Maria Rilke
Reply With Quote
  #1715  
Old 17-06-2019, 10:34 AM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,911
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7luminaries
Gem, hello. Agreed that the boundaries are the concrete means by which we de facto honour and recognise our mutual humanity and also contextualise the relationship. Be it coworkers, neighbours, employee to employer, teacher to student, parent to child, and so forth. It is within these boundaries we may concrete engage in ways that are affirming and not dehumanising.

Boundaries are key to honouring the other as other, because the fact of recognising the humanity of another must occur. We must recognise and accept that we cannot act as if there is no boundary between us and thus as if we can take from & do with others as they please. That is the definition of a narcissist...that they do not or cannot recognise the humanity of others...because they cannot apprehend that others' individuated consciousness is wholly distinct from their own...that others are not simply extensions of him- or herself. Others thus exist simply as means to an end for them, reflecting the narcissist's amoral, utilitarian engagement with the rest of the world.

Yes...boundaries are particularly beautiful aspects of truth and existence as we know them, IMO.

Without boundaries, we cannot appreciate the distinct humanity of the other. It is the interbeing with one another and with all that is, which comprises the very essence of our existence. All these distinct things exist in interbeing because of the boundaries that exist between all things. Without boundaries, in fact, nothing of this material universe could even come to be. Nor would our awareness or our being exist as distinct from One.

Boundaries are highly underrated and hugely critical, IOW.

Yes...if we do not respect the boundaries of our relationships within the appropriate, right-aligned context...then we move into a space of misalignment, tending toward amoral utilitarianism. Where the humanity of the other is not properly recognised as distinct and worthy in its own right but rather exists only to be of use to us.

Yes, agreed. Otherwise, this is such a misuse of power and authority.

Additionally, the devotee or seeker has sworn a vow of abstinence whilst on the grounds...and what is the guru doing by "persuading" them to break their vows? He is teaching them that their is no such thing as authentic love (lovingkindness centred in equanimity) -- a caustic and pernicious falsehood. The eternal message of the cynic and the unawakened.

He is essentially saying that there is no right-aligned morality or ethics, that what the tradition says is right-aligned is a meaningless sham. This is misdirection of the worst kind, in addition to taking advantage of them physically and emotionally. It is akin to telling them outright to live in misalignment without any deeper regard for their own highest good equally to that of all others -- because there is no higher good, so why bother?

Yes. Absolutely. And likewise, hopefully, we're also far more likely to recognise the misdirection of others, and avoid being harmed by that, as well.

Peace & blessings
7L




Even by the 'golden rule' we define the other against ourselves. "Do unto others..."


In philosophy the notion of the greater good is discussed, that which is virtuous, and many philosophers argue that morality is not based on universal virtues, but for someone of a spiritual inclination it is practically essential that morality is an extension of the infinite outpouring of love.
Reply With Quote
  #1716  
Old 18-06-2019, 01:37 PM
7luminaries 7luminaries is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,797
  7luminaries's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
Even by the 'golden rule' we define the other against ourselves. "Do unto others..."


In philosophy the notion of the greater good is discussed, that which is virtuous, and many philosophers argue that morality is not based on universal virtues, but for someone of a spiritual inclination it is practically essential that morality is an extension of the infinite outpouring of love.


Absolutely. We might equally say that the absence of boundaries negates the golden rule and renders us unable to extend the morality of lovingkindness and equanimity in any meaningful or skillful way.

Peace & blessings
7L
__________________
Bound by conventions, people tend to reach for what is easy.

Here we must be unafraid of what is difficult.

For all living beings in nature must unfold in their particular way

and become themselves despite all opposition.

-- Rainer Maria Rilke
Reply With Quote
  #1717  
Old 29-06-2019, 03:32 AM
Gem Gem is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,911
  Gem's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by 7luminaries
Absolutely. We might equally say that the absence of boundaries negates the golden rule and renders us unable to extend the morality of lovingkindness and equanimity in any meaningful or skillful way.

Peace & blessings
7L




This might an inconvenient conversation, because it is going to require any teacher quoted to not be interested in getting something out of their students or their organisation. I was schooled under the tenet of dana, to give without expecting anything in return, and that's the principle my school operates on - hence it's a Non-Profit and no one gets paid for their service. If I give service I do that for the benefit of others. If I make a donation, I do so that someone else can be roomed and fed on their retreat to learn the meditation. It is part of the teaching to practice dana, so no one gets anything in return and no one pays for what they do get. It will destroy 'what you want' from other people and cultivate 'what can I do for them'. Because I lived it, I learned it, and that's how I know that the teachers who are getting something from their students, like sex, money, or a lot of nice cars, have not yet matured as 'noble' (as they say in Buddhism).
Reply With Quote
  #1718  
Old 01-07-2019, 02:07 PM
7luminaries 7luminaries is offline
Master
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,797
  7luminaries's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gem
This might an inconvenient conversation, because it is going to require any teacher quoted to not be interested in getting something out of their students or their organisation. I was schooled under the tenet of dana, to give without expecting anything in return, and that's the principle my school operates on - hence it's a Non-Profit and no one gets paid for their service. If I give service I do that for the benefit of others. If I make a donation, I do so that someone else can be roomed and fed on their retreat to learn the meditation. It is part of the teaching to practice dana, so no one gets anything in return and no one pays for what they do get. It will destroy 'what you want' from other people and cultivate 'what can I do for them'. Because I lived it, I learned it, and that's how I know that the teachers who are getting something from their students, like sex, money, or a lot of nice cars, have not yet matured as 'noble' (as they say in Buddhism).

Gem, agreed. And that's a beautifully concrete way of understanding it...that's the magic of the practice...that it is transformed into concrete acts that have a 1000 other parallels in your life.

You understand selflessness and service by making a donation for services. Further, you donate whilst it's made clear that you are paying it forward both so that the community is sustained and others then may do the same (so that they may also perform a selfless service) but also so that those who cannot donate may still receive the experience.

Yet much more broadly and deeply, you understand this as an experiential teaching, where we are guided to destroy "what (do) I want" or "what can I get from others?" and cultivating "what can I do for others?" Native Americans would call this consciously starving the wolf of selfishness and feeding the wolf of love and service.

And the 1000 other parallels are all so clear and so obvious, once the lesson is grasped and understood concretely, at the level of being and doing.

Peace & blessings
7L
__________________
Bound by conventions, people tend to reach for what is easy.

Here we must be unafraid of what is difficult.

For all living beings in nature must unfold in their particular way

and become themselves despite all opposition.

-- Rainer Maria Rilke
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) Spiritual Forums