Getting more real about Buddhism

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by sky123

I don't see you as a threat at all, that comes from your way of thinking. I disagree with your Buddhist link but it doesn't threaten me or my understanding that those teachings never came from the Buddha.

Not to be calling him out, but that such things I was saying were to Jeremy Bong-- But I am uninterested in continuing that discussion the way it seems it must go between us, so I am just being clear; that was whom such things were directed to--

You and I in disagreement is not unpleasing; if I feel I have something worthy of expressing, than it is most likely worthwhile because it has not been there to be expressed; so who am I to expect you to agree? I would be more interested in being seen where I am coming from, rather than the facts of the situation which can line up so easily to so many views--

You see, every perspective to me has clarity; every delusion can have immense clarity (and I am not trying to say you have a delusion here), but that such a clarity that cannot include all within in it, cannot shine beyond the self-- The clarity that includes everyone, shines more brightly than the clarity that explains everyone; but that sadly, this medium is exactly that.. the clarity that explains, rather than includes-- So again, none of this is completely important, but is relevant--

[Gem]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

Everyone's personal narrative seems to misrepresent reality because the level of thinking reached does not contain those transcendent features that keep it from deteriorating in its usefulness every degree away from the relations in which it was conceived--

Well, the personal narrative is the reality of the personal narrative. I merely suggest listening to its content with discerning ears, as well as the story about others and the world at large.

The issue is that the transcendent features move in relation to ours in a weird way; so that I bring down the perfect narrative, I can see the distortions that people are dealing when I try to express it amidst the distortion--

Basically imagine this identity as I speak of it being a perfect clear sheet of plastic.. and that when I bring it down in contorts and construes in weird manners so that it even becomes colorful-- And that the distance of each person what what I am saying helps me see why it comes in the way it does, because all these wicky wacky forces move through you to, but because it is not taken into account, you think that your views are not complete, but they are eternity is in front of all of us, we are all Buddhas--

Buddha teaches about right views, and probably more importantly, no view.

I heard a good talk by Thich Nhat Hanh on this once.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odWIPhj-ivo (starts at 1 minute 10 seconds)

Now imagine each person has an identity that is like this clear sheet, it is their bliss to be this clear sheet, but everyone's own clear sheet is viewed through the contortions of these subtle realms-- that this is basically why identity is undependable because everyone's identity seems to only be a subjective concept since it does not remain clear who you are from every angle; your identity is not supported here, and that is the way it has been; unless you clanged to material ways which did support it to some extent until it to became so overwhelming--

The reason desire is the root of suffering is not because desire causes suffering; but because pleasure has been hidden in our fears-- Pleasure, when our identities are so misaligned and supportive meant that in order to get along you could not chase desires without causing suffering in some manner; it is not that your desires are wrong, but that they are unable to be fulfilled-- I know this is the buddhist section but I came across this last night, as I always google my wisdom (which I mean in a new sense I need to define a bit more sometime) to see what human thought has been on the subject--

Galatians 5:17
"For the flesh desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the flesh. They are in conflict with each other, so that you are not to do whatever you want."


So when I understand the distortion, I can help rectify myself into a clear sheet which will help others bring their identity to the choices in their heart-- If we say that ignorance is evil, well I came to know my ignorance directly; and that I did not come to know everyone's perspective in their personal manner, but that I came to know that perspective which we all have; and in this sense I cannot every declare to have removed my ignorance, for I have understood its necessity, and that to resolve these issues we must have a relationship with ignorance--

The information I have is useful for this purpose but not any other, my real work has little to do with information; so ultimately while I do have new information because such is needed as a bridge for the intellectual atheists and the like who need a more gentle approach to spirit; but again no information is what I have that is worth anything.. this is my work--

Consider me something like an emergent principle; if you were trying to understand reality with one coherent model, something like physics.. and you notices as you applied this to the rest of the world you would have to create phantom symbols to account for variables that do not seem to have a physical existence-- Like I am here to help express the nature of the intentions of those things we can't account for, and that we can only account for all things through intentions, but that we can create a material existence that is based on life, rather than the forms that express it--



PS: the same distortions that are occurring in my "perfected" view, are the same distortions in everyone.. that is how intimately connected I view us-- My sheet won't be clear again until everyone else's is, but that I am seeing the way in which to begin clearing it--

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, the personal narrative is the reality of the personal narrative. I merely suggest listening to its content with discerning ears, as well as the story about others and the world at large.



Buddha teaches about right views, and probably more importantly, no view.

I heard a good talk by Thich Nhat Hanh on this once.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odWIPhj-ivo (starts at 1 minute 10 seconds)

Sure this is important for individual liberation, but the greater liberation of something like a Bodhichitta is an entirely different manner, because the lesser liberation may free the individual of the circumstances as they are, but that same path will be found closed off as more aspects of nature are liberated, because things will no longer move in the same way-- Like you change, all changes.. but like you aren't free, the whole is not free--

To be clear, my path more specifically while being a devout wish for the well being of all those I see whom suffer, and this wish is undying as I still look around and that is my reason-- But my path itself is through extreme selfishness, so; basically it is a major sacrifice--

[Gem]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

Sure this is important for individual liberation, but the greater liberation of something like a Bodhichitta is an entirely different manner, because the lesser liberation may free the individual of the circumstances as they are, but that same path will be found closed off as more aspects of nature are liberated, because things will no longer move in the same way-- Like you change, all changes.. but like you aren't free, the whole is not free--

To be clear, my path more specifically while being a devout wish for the well being of all those I see whom suffer, and this wish is undying as I still look around and that is my reason-- But my path itself is through extreme selfishness, so; basically it is a major sacrifice--

Well, I'm not part of any sacrificial agenda, and want nothing to do with it. I'm just here to talk about spiritual stuff in a meaningful way.

The thing with spiritual life is it does come down to the individual level, but in that respect, as far as I'm concerned, people are OK as they are, so I'm not all caught up in this hope and stuff, but because I'm a reasonably compassionate sort of guy, I don't want people to be hurt, and I do want people to be happy.

[firstandlast]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, I'm not part of any sacrificial agenda, and want nothing to do with it. I'm just here to talk about spiritual stuff in a meaningful way.

The thing with spiritual life is it does come down to the individual level, but in that respect, as far as I'm concerned, people are OK as they are, so I'm not all caught up in this hope and stuff, but because I'm a reasonably compassionate sort of guy, I don't want people to be hurt, and I do want people to be happy.

This or that, tis cool-- It's a discussion--

[Gem]

Originally Posted by firstandlast

This or that, tis cool-- It's a discussion--

That's cool. To me a discussion is a listen response relation which has no other agenda, but there is this strange interplay between what the words are saying and what the words are doing, and then, more subliminally, what is intended by what is said. I can clearly state my place in the whole dymamic by saying I only have kindness for what is, and being without need that things be otherwise, I'm pretty much free of agenda, which as first sight seem kind, like helping people, but in effect negate the free flow of discourse by defining a 'type' of relationship. So, this is the risk of having self impressions: others are forced to fall in line as characters in that story. When this occurs, angst arises as people retain their own place rather than being swayed into the subtle agena of another. This is always going on, everywhere, but in the spiritual forum context, i my past experience, it mainly takes on a sort of master/student character as people with rather grandiose ideas fancy themselves as the harbingers of wisdom to the ignorant, forcing others into deficit positions which of course they resist. It sort of then becomes a binary of rightness and wrongness and loses that deeper element of mutual understanding.

So, why a I saying all this? What is the intent that drives what there words are at least aimed to do? Partly this is a response to the apparent tension in the dynamic of discourse that is common to Buddhist threads which occurs when people lose track of self awareness and concoct and project personal imagery onto the blank canvases of other folk, like enter into the image world of interpersonal images where one is defined against the Other. I want to cast a deeper peace over it all which would be akin to the harmony that can be can be experienced within the confines of an ashram. It is remarkable that people are people and we all have our life dilemmas, but with mindful self awareness we also realise how we self-generate them, and they are not, in fact, caused by others. The more fundamental aspect of relating with others is really a sort of genuine concern for their happiness and sensitivity, so the way through is this hard road between honesty and delicacy.

This brings me to the point, the real aim of my little game, the expression of compassion. This isn't some mushy lovey thing. Compassion, as I understand it, or at least the way I can articulate it, is an ability to be with people as you are and as they are. May people think it's about helping people and they impose their own discomfort with anyone's hard feelings, but I claim this is misguided. That is more about someone taking actions in order to consolidate themselves as a compassionate person as they express their insecure feelings toward others' emotionally turmultuous states. To me, compassion is a way of being at peace with turmultuous things. It is to 'be with'.

This comes from my history in horticulture where I can put a seed in the ground knowing that seed has all it needs to grow into the kind of tree it will become. My task in the nursery is only provide conditions optimal for its growth. The sun, soil, water and nutrition, and most of all, the space it needs to spread its branches to the sunlight. This is how plants benefit. Could I sum it by by saying that compassion is the space in which things can just be? I think that illustrates it quite well.

To end at the beginning, I firstly talked about what people say, but the other side of it someone who listens. In this passage about compassion it's ironic that I say so much, but then conclude with the more empathic aspects of compassionate listening.