XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: brainmill@fishing.net   
      
   Tang Huyen  wrote:   
      
   >On 8/13/2015 8:47 PM, Nobody in Particular wrote:   
   >   
   >> Vely intelesting. So if Buddhism declared something   
   >> akin to the Christian's creationism as opposed to   
   >> science's evolution, you would propose defending   
   >> creationism.   
   >   
   >Evolution can well be supported by facts, but mental   
   >culture largely suspends matters of facts whilst it   
   >proceeds. In Buddhism, there are methods (dharma-s)   
   >which violate facts, like imagining that the whole   
   >world is a skeleton, or enveloping the whole world   
   >in friendliness, compassion, sympathetic joy,   
   >equability. Such methods are pure ways of voluntary   
   >adhesion, and mostly do not relate to the real world,   
   >but aim at reforming the cultivators' attitudes. They   
   >are purely subjective and strictly sentimental, even   
   >if they do not deny the world per se. The sublation   
   >of mental proliferation is also purely subjective   
   >and strictly sentimental, and works only on the   
   >subjective side, leaving the objective side intact.   
   >The objective side still proceeds like before, but   
   >the subjective side does not attempt to fit it into   
   >its boxes, and that is the meaning of the Diamond   
   >scripture, as I discussed in "the Elephant". There   
   >is an effort to drop all views (which I do not claim   
   >to have attained), and what is (real or unreal, true   
   >or untrue, or whatever else) is left intact. That is   
   >the sublation of mental proliferation.   
      
   I'm interested to know exactly where you place this dividing line between   
   subjective and objective.   
   Which side is consciousness on?   
      
   >   
   >I take "agnostic" literally, as meaning not knowing,   
   >and in not knowing, the cultivator abstains from   
   >judging what is real or unreal, true or untrue,good   
   >or bad,  or whatever else. As Norbu says, mindfulness   
   >is to look and not to judge.   
      
   If we're going to refrain from judging whether a thing is real or unreal, we   
   can only speak in terms   
   of appearances; that which consciousness mediates. What are the marks of   
   objectivity or subjectivity   
   within appearance?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)