I stand by my statement. If suffering is essentially pure there is nothing to purify, if it is capable of purification then it is not essentially pure. You do not purify obscurations (a term that only now you bring up) you remove them. Taking a veil from in front of your eyes does not purify the veil, neither does it purify your sight. Your sight is pure, the veil is a veil. The idea is not to make everything nice, this is samsara, everything is not nice nor will it be, the idea is to see things as they are and just as they are. Then you will see that everything is perfect just as it is.padma norbu wrote:gregkavarnos wrote:Nope, you can't purify something that is pure. Either it is pure (and cannot be purified) or it can be purified (and thus is impure).padma norbu wrote: Main point in the original thought was: "the only way I can view the incredible amount of suffering out there as "perfect" or "all good" is in the sense that at core it is pure and so can be purified.
I can quote you several places to explain what your misunderstanding is, but I'd rather not. Just consider the phrase popular in sadhanas: "purifying obscurations."
I am not asking you to qualify the term "undeserved" (which you did not do at the beginning of the post anyway) I am asking you to define it.Please, really, you need to read the thread from the beginning. I qualified the word "undeserved" right after I used it. I'm not going to go around in circles continually quoting my first 2-3 posts.
It will also pay to be a little less "agressive" towards people that are trying to help you through this discussion.