0673749f   
   XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: firehose@everywhere.com   
      
   Jigme Dorje wrote:   
      
   > On Aug 16, 12:57 pm, firehose  wrote:   
   >> Hollywood Lee wrote:   
   >> > On 8/16/2010 9:29 AM, Jigme Dorje wrote:   
   >> >> On Aug 14, 10:00 pm, brian mitchell  wrote:   
   >> >>> Jigme Dorje wrote:   
   >> >>>> You have indicated that you do not accept explanations of my own   
   >> >>>> experience...   
   >>   
   >> >>> No (and I think this matters), I fully accept your explanations of   
   >> >>> your own experience. How could I do otherwise? It's your   
   >> >>> experience, your transition, and I'm eager and delighted to hear   
   >> >>> everything about it. The psyche fascinates me; people's experience   
   >> >>> of existence enthralls me; and the terms in which they relate these   
   >> >>> are of endless interest to me.   
   >>   
   >> >>> What I do object to is the tendency to universalise one's   
   >> >>> individual experience, insights, perceptions or what-have-you and   
   >> >>> make them the Rule, the Truth. When this is done, everyone else   
   >> >>> becomes invisible except to the extent that their confessions   
   >> >>> conform and agree. That which is really true in them, which is   
   >> >>> their unique responsivity, is disregarded. This is the   
   >> >>> destructiveness of the supposed teacher-student relationship; the   
   >> >>> One Who Knows and the one who doesn't; the authority.   
   >>   
   >> >> I just wanted to address this point.  When you "universalise one's   
   >> >> individual experience, insights, perceptions or what-have-you and   
   >> >> make them the Rule, the Truth" this is the mind at work, interpeting   
   >> >> and making an experience conform to an opinion.  This was not my   
   >> >> purpose at all; in fact, just the opposite. Rather than   
   >> >> universalizing the individual, the idea is to individualize the   
   >> >> universal - to attempt to capture it in words that are evocative,   
   >> >> not definative.   
   >>   
   >> > That assumes that there is a universal to individualize - another bit   
   >> > of boxing up and categorizing, perhaps?  Compare this to how Tang   
   >> > nicely describes the internal nature of awakening:   
   >>   
   >> > "Mental culture is purely internal knowledge, and it is about how to   
   >> > handle yourself, so it is like repairing a ship in plain sea, to   
   >> > borrow from Neurath. You have to be intimately familiar with   
   >> > yourself, and you have to be swift in the handling of your own state   
   >> > (mood, feeling, etc.). This is where mindfulness comes in. When you   
   >> > realise that you are angry and upset, you grab yourself, calm   
   >> > yourself, and move yourself to serenity."   
   >>   
   >> > No universals in sight.   
   >>   
   >> Such a small mindfulness.   
   >>   
   >   
   > How much would you expect from a bare bones conceptual descrition of the   
   > practice that leads to awakening?   
      
      
   At least, humility and generosity.   
   Case by case, always.   
   Can words help us to feel free and empty?   
      
   --   
   Firehose should be filtered out as well as those who talk to him regularly   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)