This One Should Get People Riled Up...

[Dreadnaught]

I'm sure you've all heard the story about the blind men trying to describe an elephant? One man grabs the tail and says" ahhh! the "elephant" is long and thin, like a snake!". another grabs the leg and says "No, an "elephant" is big, and sturdy, like a tree trunk." and so on...

ANother story that came to my mind while reading this thread is two monks are watching a flag blowing in the wind. One is arguing that it is the flag that's moving, and the other is arguing that it is the wind that's moving. Until the master comes along, hears this argument and says "You're both wrong, it's your minds that are moving"

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Nexus
Did you learn about reincarnation in this life or a past one?

i don't know, mate. but if i lived one life, and now i'm back for round 2, that sounds pretty circular. no?


stuart b.

[Nexus]

You are welcome to form your understandings based on 'what ifs.'

[Chang Style Novice]

For those of you with "King of the Hill" in syndication in your area, tonight they will air the episode where Bobby is thought to be the reincarnation of the Sanglok Lama.

Pay special attention to the scene where Hank drags Bobby off to a Methodist Minister for some spiritual counseling.

[Ryu]

"ANother story that came to my mind while reading this thread is two monks are watching a flag blowing in the wind. One is arguing that it is the flag that's moving, and the other is arguing that it is the wind that's moving. Until the master comes along, hears this argument and says "You're both wrong, it's your minds that are moving"


That's all fine and good, but in reality the flag will still be physically "moving" whether or not the monks are there. I understand the premise for this, and agree with it to a degree, but to imply the "reality" exists only as humans see it can get ridiculous at times. Human beings (or our bi-pedal ancestors) have been here for 3 million years at best, in the context of the world itself, we are the shortest species to have lived as of yet. The world had a certain "reality" to it before humans, and will have that certain "reality" after humans. It really matters little if we're here or not in that context.

This reminds me of the time I was talking to a girl about this very same thing. She picked up a flower and said, "some will think this is a flower, but someone else may think of it as throwing knife. The reality of the flower depends on what the person's mind makes it into."

I then took the flower and threw it at her. It disenegrated into little pollen-covered peddles, and floated down her chest.

I then said.

"Obviously it's just a flower."


Ryu

[Xebsball]

obviously you might have hurt her feelings

[Ryu]

Philosophy majors can be jerks.


Ryu

[David Jamieson]

The are the two main vehicles to consider as well. Lesser and Greater.

In Therevada Buddhism, enlightenment is thought to only be achievable by monks and holy, pious people.

In Mahayana Buddhism (Chan/Zen), it is taught that anyone can achieve enlightenment so long as they follow the 8 fold path and observe the four truths as taught at deer park by Guatama (the lesson on suffering, desire and release of these)

Boddhidarma was a mahayana buddhist and practiced the dhyana as a means to attain enlightenment. The Dhyana became known as "Chan" which in turn is now evident as "zen".

The methods are available to all and they do require study before the flow and free mind can establish itself in the seeker.

All the concepts of the greater and lesser vehicles are predated and found in Hinduism, from which Buddhism was born, much in the same way as christianity was born of judaism.

These are not "new ideas" by any stretch of the imagination.

I personally believe that Therevada and it's holding to the "holy monks only" idea is a bit elitist and outmoded. I prefer Ta Mo's modality of thinking and have had moments where these concepts as spread by the Chan / Zen school of thought have pervaded my own life.

So, in my experience, life is available to all, and the realization of the gift of life is enough enlightenment to get you through it.

And remember every day is a gift and that's why it's called the present.

peace

[Dreadnaught]

Originally posted by Ryu
"ANother story that came to my mind while reading this thread is two monks are watching a flag blowing in the wind. One is arguing that it is the flag that's moving, and the other is arguing that it is the wind that's moving. Until the master comes along, hears this argument and says "You're both wrong, it's your minds that are moving"


That's all fine and good, but in reality the flag will still be physically "moving" whether or not the monks are there. I understand the premise for this, and agree with it to a degree, but to imply the "reality" exists only as humans see it can get ridiculous at times. Human beings (or our bi-pedal ancestors) have been here for 3 million years at best, in the context of the world itself, we are the shortest species to have lived as of yet. The world had a certain "reality" to it before humans, and will have that certain "reality" after humans. It really matters little if we're here or not in that context.

This reminds me of the time I was talking to a girl about this very same thing. She picked up a flower and said, "some will think this is a flower, but someone else may think of it as throwing knife. The reality of the flower depends on what the person's mind makes it into."

I then took the flower and threw it at her. It disenegrated into little pollen-covered peddles, and floated down her chest.

I then said.

"Obviously it's just a flower."


Ryu

I agree. I think the story has more to do with our ability or inability to see reality. It's also reality that that flower is made up of microscopic particles moving around at high speeds, but we see it as compeltely still.

[Braden]

fa-jing

"This article explains it much better than I can..."

Ah. A different issue than what I thought you meant. I'm glad the article brings up Bohm, which is what I would have done had it not. Curiously, I've found support for Bohm from Lacan, who notes that science 'sutures the causes', thereby desubjectifying reality. I believe part of what he is noting is the curious equality of our meanings for 'causality' and 'identity.' The answer is in there somewhere.

"Reality can be proven? What is it, then?"

I can't prove what it is. Like I said, not much more other than 'reality exists' can be proven, formally speaking, about reality. This is the traditional 'skeptic's problem' from philosophy.

"So what's the most up-to-date conclusion about whether the Universe will continue expanding forever...Seems like I've heard different things over the past few years. Especially considering the unknown quantity of 'dark matter.'"

I don't think there's a general concensus on the matter. Continual uniform expansion was the unchallenged status quo for the longest time, but it no longer is. IMHO, the dark matter issue is largely a red herring.

[Braden]

GeneChing

"You might as well ask about Christ being outside of Christianity."

I think if people had done this, there would be alot less confusion about the nature of Christianity.

[Ryu]

Originally posted by Dreadnaught


I agree. I think the story has more to do with our ability or inability to see reality. It's also reality that that flower is made up of microscopic particles moving around at high speeds, but we see it as compeltely still.

That I definitely agree with.

[apoweyn]

Originally posted by Nexus
You are welcome to form your understandings based on 'what ifs.'

nexus,

is this directed at me? i'm not sure i understand. i'm forming my understanding based on what i've been told about buddhism. reincarnation sounds circular to me. if i'm misunderstanding this, then how about bagging the condescension and explaining it to me. and if you're unsure yourself, how about saying so. contradiction within a spiritual tradition is hardly a new idea, yeah?

i've heard snippets about their being no past and no future. only the present. but that doesn't exactly gel with the notion of karma. actions have repercussions. if there's no concern for the future, though, who cares? all life is sacred because of reincarnation. that bug might once have been a person. or may be a person in the future. but if there's no past and no future to concern yourself with, then it's just a bug. bombs away.

see what i'm getting at?


stuart b.

[Dreadnaught]

Apoweyn,

I think that your getting into the teaching of "dependent origination" in Buddhism. This teaching I think sort of ties together the ideas of karma and reincarnation, and teaches you how to practically use them. I don't have a good answer for you, however, if you have time, you might find this article interesting, it is from a book called "The Fundamentals of Buddhism" and this is the chapter on Dependent Origination.

http://www.buddhanet.net/funbud12.htm

I think it explains these principals pretty well, and it's not too long =)

[apoweyn]

thanks dreadnaught. i'll check it out.


stuart b.