Renunciation Impossible?

No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Sönam » Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:46 am

mindyourmind wrote:
tobes wrote:
people learning French,





Unacceptable.

Such bad karma !!


:thumbsup:
Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
Sönam
 
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Adamantine » Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:56 am

tobes wrote:There is nothing fixed about the law of karma, because in the human world at least, there are at least 7 billion different actions taking place here and now, on a wide ranging spectrum from wholesome to unwholesome. Why assume that there is continuity between them all?


Like I said, I made no such assumption, however these are prophecies made by wisdom beings that can discern the larger patterns. Yes there is diversity, however just as it is pointed out in the teachings that hanging out with negative people (unripe friends) one will only add to one's own obscuration and spending time with virtuous people or realized beings will help one develop virtuous qualities -- similarly there is a collective momentum just like there is in flowing water. If you had some worldy siddhi you can look back many lifetimes of interrelationship to see the roots of a particular pattern or momentum but since samsara is beginningless that would make your head spin.. unless, of course, you were a Buddha. So far many details of Guru Rinpoche's predictions concerning the global state of affairs have been on point, whether the Chinese invasion and decimation of Tibet, the degeneration of the quality of food, air and water (the elements), or many others.. so there is a good track record.



I agree that the Western idea of linear time is something of a theological fantasy. But this does not mean that the Indian idea of cyclical time is correct and in accord with natural observations. Just like....well, Mt Meru is probably not at the centre of the universe.....


You seem to be missing the essential point I was making. Whereas linear time has not observable basis, we live continually in cycles of time which can be observed: a single day and night with it's cycle of sleep and waking, the four seasons making a yearly cycle, larger astrological/astronomical cycles, etc. It is clear that our day-to-day is dependent on larger cycles of the planets and stars, and that this is the way our universe functions.
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
User avatar
Adamantine
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Sönam » Mon Aug 22, 2011 11:16 am

Adamantine wrote:Whereas linear time has not observable basis, we live continually in cycles of time which can be observed: a single day and night with it's cycle of sleep and waking, the four seasons making a yearly cycle, larger astrological/astronomical cycles, etc. It is clear that our day-to-day is dependent on larger cycles of the planets and stars, and that this is the way our universe functions.


yes but this observation of cycles is about samsara, thus linear ... ultimately it is not timely linear ...

Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
Sönam
 
Posts: 1870
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Mr. G » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:05 pm

No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:

    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Indrajala » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:17 pm

mr. gordo wrote:No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:


Computers becoming conscious means Skynet.

Image
Flower Ornament Depository (Blog)
Indrajāla's Contemplations (Blog)
Exploring Classical Chinese (Blog)
Dharma Depository (Site)

"Hui gives me no assistance. There is nothing that I say in which he does not delight." -Confucius
User avatar
Indrajala
Former staff member
 
Posts: 5573
Joined: Fri Feb 12, 2010 3:19 pm
Location: India

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Mr. G » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:22 pm

There are good robots too:

Image

:smile: :D
    How foolish you are,
    grasping the letter of the text and ignoring its intention!
    - Vasubandhu
User avatar
Mr. G
 
Posts: 4098
Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2010 6:36 am
Location: Spaceship Earth

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby justsit » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:30 pm

Namdrol wrote:Have you been to China? The place is a disaster. Crowded, polluted, etc. The place is a dump. They ruined their forests centuries ago, their western border is being desertified very quickly. They are busy destroying the enviroment of Tibet, etc.

They can be optimistic, but then people do like to gild shit.

N


Electroplated 24K gold Lexus in Nanjing, China.

Image
User avatar
justsit
 
Posts: 641
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:24 pm
Location: Delaware

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Malcolm » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:55 pm

Huseng wrote:
mr. gordo wrote:No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:


Computers becoming conscious means Skynet.

Image


Second that.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

" The one who teaches the benefits of peace,
he is said to be a ṛṣī; the others are the opposite of him."

-- Uttaratantra
Malcolm
 
Posts: 10218
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Astus » Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:09 pm

Those speaking the rhetoric of decline are "more interested in establishing a particular orthodoxy of “true teaching” than in voicing historical predictions of actual decline, prophetic warnings of moral failings, or existential statements about humankind’s capacity for realization. In fact, the beginnings of the Buddhist tradition of decline are best understood as a rhetoric of orthodoxy that marks the appearance of doctrinal differentiation in the Buddhist community. The elements of this argument can be found throughout the various canons, but always in the sense of an exhortation to adhere to the true teachings lest the predicted decline actually come to pass. It was also in China that we first encounter individuals convinced that the predicted demise had actually arrived, due in part to a preexisting and pervasive indigenous discourse of decline. In an interesting twist, the dominant use in China of the Buddhist polemic of orthodoxy was to legitimize new teachings, of which the Three Levels is one example. An important reason for this was that the decline came to be seen in terms of a decline in human nature, a claim about the corrupt existential condition of living beings rather than a decline of time or doctrine."
(Jamie Hubbard: Absolute delusion, perfect Buddhahood : the rise and fall of a Chinese heresy, p. 35)
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4128
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Adamantine » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:12 am

Astus wrote:Those speaking the rhetoric of decline are "more interested in establishing a particular orthodoxy of “true teaching” than in voicing historical predictions of actual decline, prophetic warnings of moral failings, or existential statements about humankind’s capacity for realization. In fact, the beginnings of the Buddhist tradition of decline are best understood as a rhetoric of orthodoxy that marks the appearance of doctrinal differentiation in the Buddhist community. The elements of this argument can be found throughout the various canons, but always in the sense of an exhortation to adhere to the true teachings lest the predicted decline actually come to pass. It was also in China that we first encounter individuals convinced that the predicted demise had actually arrived, due in part to a preexisting and pervasive indigenous discourse of decline. In an interesting twist, the dominant use in China of the Buddhist polemic of orthodoxy was to legitimize new teachings, of which the Three Levels is one example. An important reason for this was that the decline came to be seen in terms of a decline in human nature, a claim about the corrupt existential condition of living beings rather than a decline of time or doctrine."
(Jamie Hubbard: Absolute delusion, perfect Buddhahood : the rise and fall of a Chinese heresy, p. 35)


academic gibberish. why are you quoting it?
Contentment is the ultimate wealth;
Detachment is the final happiness. ~Sri Saraha
User avatar
Adamantine
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 7:09 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Heruka » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:30 am

Huseng wrote:
mr. gordo wrote:No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:


Computers becoming conscious means Skynet.

Image




http://articles.boston.com/2011-08-19/b ... ndra-modha

IBM works on chips that behave like a brain

The chips represent a significant milestone in a six-year project that has involved 100 researchers and some $41 million in funding from the government’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or Darpa. IBM has also committed an undisclosed amount of money.

http://www.darpa.mil/

DARPA
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Heruka » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:31 am

Adamantine wrote:
Astus wrote:Those speaking the rhetoric of decline are "more interested in establishing a particular orthodoxy of “true teaching” than in voicing historical predictions of actual decline, prophetic warnings of moral failings, or existential statements about humankind’s capacity for realization. In fact, the beginnings of the Buddhist tradition of decline are best understood as a rhetoric of orthodoxy that marks the appearance of doctrinal differentiation in the Buddhist community. The elements of this argument can be found throughout the various canons, but always in the sense of an exhortation to adhere to the true teachings lest the predicted decline actually come to pass. It was also in China that we first encounter individuals convinced that the predicted demise had actually arrived, due in part to a preexisting and pervasive indigenous discourse of decline. In an interesting twist, the dominant use in China of the Buddhist polemic of orthodoxy was to legitimize new teachings, of which the Three Levels is one example. An important reason for this was that the decline came to be seen in terms of a decline in human nature, a claim about the corrupt existential condition of living beings rather than a decline of time or doctrine."
(Jamie Hubbard: Absolute delusion, perfect Buddhahood : the rise and fall of a Chinese heresy, p. 35)


academic gibberish. why are you quoting it?


as an appeal to.. tradition... authority...academia.... to hault critical thinking?
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Heruka » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:47 am

mr. gordo wrote:No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:




transhumanists roll out in increments their "revelation of the method" ( Psychological Warfare ) on the public collective conciousness.

very dangerous people, for at heart they hate all useless eaters.
Last edited by Heruka on Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby kirtu » Tue Aug 23, 2011 2:59 am

mr. gordo wrote:No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:



Kurzweil does of course. The fact that Bill Joy doesn't should give us pause. Personally I'm in between - our future could be more like Dick predicted.

BTW - the job before I quite working for a Fortune 100 or so major defense contractor was writing expert systems to help diagnose operating system issues. Unfortunately our group was attacked by other groups socially and I was the last to turn out the lights. So now no one uses this really good software. As Bill Joy acknowledges we will be successful at AI from an engineering perspective. However that just lets the monied bosses extend their control over our lives *if they retain the power that artificial intelligence at various levels can provide).

To some extent we have already seen information technology used in mass murder: arguably the Holocaust for example. Probably in Yugoslavia too.


Kirt
Kirt's Tibetan Translation Notes

“All beings are Buddhas, but obscured by incidental stains. When those have been removed, there is Buddhahood.”
Hevajra Tantra
kirtu
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4131
Joined: Mon Jan 18, 2010 5:29 pm
Location: Baltimore, MD

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Heruka » Tue Aug 23, 2011 3:13 am

kirtu wrote:
mr. gordo wrote:No one here holds the optimistic view of Kurzweil's Singularity? :smile:



Kurzweil does of course. The fact that Bill Joy doesn't should give us pause. Personally I'm in between - our future could be more like Dick predicted.

BTW - the job before I quite working for a Fortune 100 or so major defense contractor was writing expert systems to help diagnose operating system issues. Unfortunately our group was attacked by other groups socially and I was the last to turn out the lights. So now no one uses this really good software. As Bill Joy acknowledges we will be successful at AI from an engineering perspective. However that just lets the monied bosses extend their control over our lives *if they retain the power that artificial intelligence at various levels can provide).

To some extent we have already seen information technology used in mass murder: arguably the Holocaust for example. Probably in Yugoslavia too.


Kirt



we already knew you were going to type this, a pre crime unit is on its way now to arrest you for crimes you will commit as not of yet.

have a nice day. :smile:

https://www.recordedfuture.com/



Heruka
 
Posts: 1069
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 2:34 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby LastLegend » Tue Aug 23, 2011 6:44 am

tobes wrote:How exactly are you able to determine that previous historical periods have not also been chaotic, immoral, difficult???

We have no vantage point but our own time. No one denies that things are shit now. Question is, how do you know that things weren't shit before?

:anjali:


1)There is a decline in human values. More emphasis is put on material things. Materialistic philosophy is the current model of thinking.

2)Let's take a look at the chaotic characteristics of society today. For example, lets talk about family dysfunction.

5 Precepts are no killing, stealing, sexual misconducts, lies, and alcohol (and drugs). Sexual misconducts, cheating for example is one important factor that causes divorce. Alchohol and drugs are one important factor that causes domestic violence. Stealing is to take advantage, for example, refusing to work is stealing.Sitting at home and doing nothing is stealing. So stealing is not contributing or giving but taking. Killing the family. Lies often go with cheating, not being in a relationship. These are the things that contribute to family dysfunction. What happen to children who grow up in these settings? And how will these children affect society? We see all kind of characters and stories in society these days. More so than before? Yes.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby tobes » Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:05 am

LastLegend wrote:
tobes wrote:How exactly are you able to determine that previous historical periods have not also been chaotic, immoral, difficult???

We have no vantage point but our own time. No one denies that things are shit now. Question is, how do you know that things weren't shit before?

:anjali:


1)There is a decline in human values. More emphasis is put on material things. Materialistic philosophy is the current model of thinking.

2)Let's take a look at the chaotic characteristics of society today. For example, lets talk about family dysfunction.

5 Precepts are no killing, stealing, sexual misconducts, lies, and alcohol (and drugs). Sexual misconducts, cheating for example is one important factor that causes divorce. Alchohol and drugs are one important factor that causes domestic violence. Stealing is to take advantage, for example, refusing to work is stealing.Sitting at home and doing nothing is stealing. So stealing is not contributing or giving but taking. Killing the family. Lies often go with cheating, not being in a relationship. These are the things that contribute to family dysfunction. What happen to children who grow up in these settings? And how will these children affect society? We see all kind of characters and stories in society these days. More so than before? Yes.


Well, from what standpoint do you assert that? From the cultural viewpoint of an American? A citizen of the world (who sees all the world)?? Do you think your claims are true in all parts of the world?

"The world is becoming increasingly materialist." How exactly do you know this?

Let's stay within the confines of America: it used to be that white people could have black people as slaves. There was an official policy of segregation.

Do you think it is a declining moral value that this is no longer acceptable?

My point is not to deny that certain things have declined. But simply to point out that certain things have, at the same time, also progressed.

There is no easy narrative here.....

:anjali:
User avatar
tobes
Global Moderator
 
Posts: 987
Joined: Fri Dec 24, 2010 5:02 am

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby LastLegend » Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:36 am

tobes wrote:
LastLegend wrote:
tobes wrote:How exactly are you able to determine that previous historical periods have not also been chaotic, immoral, difficult???

We have no vantage point but our own time. No one denies that things are shit now. Question is, how do you know that things weren't shit before?

:anjali:


1)There is a decline in human values. More emphasis is put on material things. Materialistic philosophy is the current model of thinking.

2)Let's take a look at the chaotic characteristics of society today. For example, lets talk about family dysfunction.

5 Precepts are no killing, stealing, sexual misconducts, lies, and alcohol (and drugs). Sexual misconducts, cheating for example is one important factor that causes divorce. Alchohol and drugs are one important factor that causes domestic violence. Stealing is to take advantage, for example, refusing to work is stealing.Sitting at home and doing nothing is stealing. So stealing is not contributing or giving but taking. Killing the family. Lies often go with cheating, not being in a relationship. These are the things that contribute to family dysfunction. What happen to children who grow up in these settings? And how will these children affect society? We see all kind of characters and stories in society these days. More so than before? Yes.


Well, from what standpoint do you assert that? From the cultural viewpoint of an American? A citizen of the world (who sees all the world)?? Do you think your claims are true in all parts of the world?

"The world is becoming increasingly materialist." How exactly do you know this?

Let's stay within the confines of America: it used to be that white people could have black people as slaves. There was an official policy of segregation.

Do you think it is a declining moral value that this is no longer acceptable?

My point is not to deny that certain things have declined. But simply to point out that certain things have, at the same time, also progressed.

There is no easy narrative here.....

:anjali:


From the Buddhist way of looking at the world, the progress needs to gear towards exiting samsara. When people focus on material things, this is not gearing towards exiting samsara…My belief is as much as most of dislike religion, it has provided moral guidance. But this is not to say religion is the only source where morals derived from. How many Christians today really follow 10 Commandments? How many people really practice their religions?

Tribal cultures have their own problems but the problems we have in our society today are unique to us. My point is our problems are caused by obsession of material things.

With regard to comment about slavery, remember Dr. Martin Luther King was the agent of morality. And credits to the civil right leaders to. That’s why there have been some changes.

Philosophically speaking, there is nothing in materialistic philosophy that implies absolute morality. Then morality is subject to interpretation.

All is fueled by greed, anger, and ignorance.

The level of pollution of the mind today is quite great.
Last edited by LastLegend on Tue Aug 23, 2011 9:41 am, edited 6 times in total.
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)
User avatar
LastLegend
 
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Location: Washington DC

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Jnana » Tue Aug 23, 2011 8:48 am

tobes wrote:There is no easy narrative here.....

For literalists there is always an easy narrative Tobes. Here's an early version of the narrative (from Ven. Ṭhānissaro's Introduction to DN 26):

    In the past, unskillful behavior was unknown among the human race. As a result, people lived for an immensely long time — 80,000 years — endowed with great beauty, wealth, pleasure, and strength. Over the course of time, though, they began behaving in various unskillful ways. This caused the human life span gradually to shorten, to the point where it now stands at 100 years, with human beauty, wealth, pleasure, and strength decreasing proportionately. In the future, as morality continues to degenerate, human life will continue to shorten to the point were the normal life span is 10 years, with people reaching sexual maturity at five. "Among those human beings, the ten courses of action (see AN 10.176) will have entirely disappeared... The word 'skillful' will not exist, so from where will there be anyone who does what is skillful? Those who lack the honorable qualities of motherhood, fatherhood, contemplative-hood, & priest-hood will be the ones who receive homage... Fierce hatred will arise, fierce malevolence, fierce rage, & murderous thoughts: mother for child, child for mother, father for child, child for father, brother for sister, sister for brother." Ultimately, conditions will deteriorate to the point of a "sword-interval," in which swords appear in the hands of all human beings, and they hunt one another like game. A few people, however, will take shelter in the wilderness to escape the carnage, and when the slaughter is over, they will come out of hiding and resolve to take up a life of skillful and virtuous action again. With the recovery of virtue, the human life span will gradually increase again until it reaches 80,000 years, with people attaining sexual maturity at 500. Only three diseases will be known at that time: desire, lack of food, and old age. Another Buddha — Metteyya (Maitreya) — will gain Awakening, his monastic Sangha numbering in the thousands. The greatest king of the time, Sankha, will go forth into homelessness and attain arahantship under Metteyya's guidance.

Guess we haven't "hit bottom" yet! :jawdrop:
Jnana
 
Posts: 1106
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 12:58 pm

Re: Renunciation Impossible?

Postby Astus » Tue Aug 23, 2011 10:00 am

Adamantine wrote:academic gibberish. why are you quoting it?


It fits well the situation. Those arguing for a decline also posit their form of Buddhism as appropriate for this rotten age. So it is more a rhetorical device than anything else, as it has been used as such for a long time now in Buddhism.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4128
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

PreviousNext

Return to Open Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: conebeckham, Google [Bot], Greg, M.G., smcj, zerwe and 23 guests

>