Best Of
Re: The Other Elephant In The Room
As I've mentioned before, it saddens me that attacks are on the rise again, affecting both Jews and Muslims. Unfortunately, this was expected given the ongoing tensions. The actions of the Israeli government, led by Netanyahu, have contributed to the escalation,
It is crucial to raise awareness about alleged war crimes committed by the current Israeli government and the IDF against innocent men, women, and children. Silence in such situations can be perceived as complicity with the atrocities. Speaking out against government actions doesn't imply a stance against any specific group of people.
In situations where people oppose government policies, there are diverse views, and some may be extreme . This is a common aspect of democracies, where differing opinions exist.
For many years, the narrative has often focused on "Palestinian Muslim terrorists" and crimes against Israeli citizens, overshadowing the actions of the Israeli military in Palestinian territories. It's important to consider the complexities of the situation, including Israeli military activities and actions of Israeli settlers.
Recent events have shifted public opinion, with increasing awareness of Palestinian civilian casualties and evidence disputing some IDF claims. Independent sources, including reputable Israeli newspapers and eyewitness accounts, have provided alternative perspectives.
It is essential to differentiate between opposition to the Israeli government and its policies and anti-Semitism. Many individuals in the West who criticize Israel's occupation of Palestinian land are not motivated by anti-Semitic sentiments. Concerns for the safety of Jewish friends and family are valid, acknowledging that those in Western countries generally have state protection, unlike the Palestinian people in Palestine.
In times of conflict, the truth often becomes blurred, and extremists on both sides contribute to propaganda that fuels violence.
Shoshin1
Re: Ozempic
@IdleChater, respectfully, I think that the biggest difference is 2500 years. My understanding is that the mind isn't 1 thing, just like the self isn't 1 thing. The mind is the concept which humans use to describe our experience of having a brain which is capable of metacognition, aka thinking about thought.
There are a few different methods of detecting and identifying neurotransmitters in the brain, the names of which methods I can read and pronounce but mostly not explain. Neuroscientists have tested the timing relationship between the emergence, duration, and dissipation of these chemicals, and the awareness of the "minds" which experience their effects. As a matter of fact, literally everything that happens in the brain does so before we become aware.
ScottPen
Re: Space - the final frontier
Looks like a face in the background, just above to the right ...nose brow and forehead ....
Shoshin1
Re: Selflessness and Altruism
@IdleChater - I think I wasn't asking the right question. I was looking for descriptions of the characteristics of a Buddha or an arahat. A person who has reached enlightenment.
Some say that the most helpful way that the characteristics of enlightenment can be described is simply as ignorance's absence.
This is to avoid the ego/identity's tendency to relate to it as something possessable when its actual manifestation depends upon the very deconstruction of that which would try to possess it.
Perhaps renunciation, over acquisition, might better provide the answers that you seek.
how
Re: Pratyekabuddhas, enlightenment and entheogens
I have heard of a frog turning into a prince when kissed by a princess, but not a person becoming enlighten from smoking a toad's venom...
Shoshin1
Re: Selflessness and Altruism
@ScottPen said:
Straight answers really are hard to come by sometimes.
Y' think?
My response was pretty awesome. If you want to know more about what the Buddha said about himself, you'll have to crack a book, I'm afraid. There is no "The World-Honored One Talks About Himself Sutra".
It's an unusual question you ask. What the Buddha thought of himself, isn't high on most folks Dharma Bucket List. But WTF!! If it's important, find an answer.
Jeeez..... the more I think about this, the more interesting it becomes. Not so interesting that I'll undertake more research, though. Nope. I'm 70, and I don't have to do research anymore.
@ScottPen
Dude!
Figure this out, man! Find out what the Buddha thought of himself and then report back, with your findings. You can do this.
Re: How is dependent origination different than determinism?
@person said:
Currently I'm something of a compatibilist. I believe in causes and conditions, but don't think that quite means we're all on a completely predictable set of train tracks. I hold open the possibility of present moment causation, that in the moment we can be aware of what is arising in the mind and that information acts in the causal chain to allow divergence from strict past determinism. It frees us from Laplace's demon. I also think the common sense notion of the self as being a homunculus separate from the world and biology that makes decisions is a false view that confuses people. Just because a process in your decision making comes from the subconscious doesn't mean that's not you. Just because environmental factors influence decisions doesn't mean they don't affect your unique makeup differently than another's. Practically and morally there is a distinction between being pushed off a diving board and deciding to jump off yourself even though both are deterministic.
I think this is a good way of putting it, and I agree for the most part. I think that the non-linearity of the complex causal process of conditionality allows for multiple causes and conditions to impact any one moment, and that "in the moment we can be aware of what is arising in the mind and that information acts in the causal chain to allow divergence from strict past determinism." But I do think it's ultimately causation all the way down as it seems highly unlikely that the faculty of the mind that intends and makes choices is itself free from causality/causal processes, be they mental or physical. In fact, I really like pegembara's post because I think it expresses this succinctly:
@pegembara said:
When this is, that is.
From the arising of this comes the arising of that.
When this isn't, that isn't.
From the cessation of this comes the cessation of that.Dependent arising is the teaching of the Buddha.
One who sees dependent arising sees the Dhamma.All things, including suffering, are dependently arising or due to causes and conditions.
Intentions, too, are due to causes and conditions.
Mix with the wrong people and wrong intentions become the norm.
Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with an impure mind a person speaks or acts suffering follows him like the wheel that follows the foot of the ox.
Mind precedes all mental states. Mind is their chief; they are all mind-wrought. If with a pure mind a person speaks or acts happiness follows him like his never-departing shadow
I suspect a lot of the issue, as @person has already noted, is linguistical and comes down to the nuances of the terms used. I believe many of us ultimately agree on things but not how they're linguistically framed. Very few would argue that our intentions, or the psychophysical beings who produce them, are unconditioned, hence they're characterized by conditionality. But describing that process and reality can be a challenge for said beings as there are multiple levels and POVs involved.
So, as others have mentioned, the most skillful approach is to focus on the purpose of these teachings, that of understanding dukkha and the cessation of dukkha. Because ultimately, that's all the Buddha described.
Jason