home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.religion.buddhism      Buddhism followers and admirers      11,893 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 10,284 of 11,893   
   oxtail to Jigme Dorje   
   Re: The final determination (was Re: The   
   17 Aug 10 23:26:40   
   
   b9e4bba6   
   XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: oxtail@nowhere.org   
      
   Jigme Dorje wrote:   
      
   > On Aug 17, 1:52 pm, oxtail  wrote:   
   >> Hollywood Lee wrote:   
   >> > On 8/17/2010 7:05 AM, Jigme Dorje wrote:   
   >> >> On Aug 17, 8:43 am, Hollywood Lee  wrote:   
   >> >>> On 8/17/2010 6:25 AM, Jigme Dorje wrote:   
   >>   
   >> >>>> I was joking about Cat, of course. But there are also questions   
   >> >>>> that the mind poses about formlessness that, obviously, cannot be   
   >> >>>> answered by the mind that poses them.  This is why people who live   
   >> >>>> in the mind are continuously frustrated and, conversely, always   
   >> >>>> surefire certain about some position or other.   
   >>   
   >> >>> Are you certain about that position?  And is it really certain and   
   >> >>> obvious that questions about formlessness cannot be answered by the   
   >> >>> mind that poses them?   
   >>   
   >> >> The function of mind is to seek knowledge, which is, essentially   
   >> >> putting a label on things and accumulating them, ie. objectifying   
   >> >> them.   
   >> >>  But when you scratch the surface of the concept that the mind has   
   >> >> given form to, it is no more than a nebulous idea, a mere thought   
   >> >> form, and there is no real experience of that to which it points.   
   >>   
   >> > Or so you think.   
   >>   
   >> >> A question like "what is formlessness" simply points to something   
   >> >> beyond the mind's comprehension. The mind giving it a definition is   
   >> >> short circuiting the process of following what points beyond mind.   
   >>   
   >> > Again with the concepts and ideas.   
   >>   
   >> >>> It seems to me that these claims simply draw a veil of mystery over   
   >> >>> these ideas, elevating them up as some venerated concepts instead   
   >> >>> of just letting them go or helping dissolve them along with all our   
   >> >>> other mental fashionings.   
   >>   
   >> >> Ah, but the intent is just the opposite. As long as the mind can get   
   >> >> a hold of something, it can hoplessly muddle it up, creating   
   >> >> concepts of it and further confusion. As you say, letting go helps   
   >> >> them dissolve as mental fashionings do. Where do ideas originate?   
   >> >> And where do they go? They either are allowed to dissipate like a   
   >> >> fragment of a cloud, or you can gather them up into a larger cloud   
   >> >> that creates havoc.   
   >>   
   >> > I don't mean this in a debating/critical way as if I'm going to   
   >> > convince you of this.  It's just my observation of how talk of what   
   >> > you admit you can't talk about sounds like to me.  It seems that the   
   >> > sentence about how we can't talk about something is always followed   
   >> > by pages of looptyloop word salads.   
   >>   
   >> I don't know much   
   >> but I know I don't know.   
   >>   
   >   
   > I don't know more than you don't...   
      
      
   Good for you.   
   I don't know even more   
   than I think I don't know.   
      
   --   
   Oxtail is not doing what he thinks he is doing here.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca