Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
@betaboy said:
I agree this works to my advantage in some cases - like approaching women etc. I can openly flirt, do anything, with women, and they seem to enjoy it. If other men try anything remotely similar, they'll get a smack across the face. So yes, my demeanor helps in this area. But in other areas, not so much. I don't relish being taken for granted. it is demeaning.
. . . poor @betaboy, he demeans women but wants to be respected in the moaning? He bad!
Mr Cushion says I should be kind to the demeaned @betaboy . . .
Being approachable doesn't equal being disrespected or taken for granted, but it seems thats the interpretation you are putting on it.
I get approached by people all the time, my family make a joke of it when we go places, betting on how long till someone finds me. I don't mind it at all, I meet some lovely interesting people, I sometimes am able to help them out and I can always leave a conversation if I felt unsafe, though I never have felt unsafe. We're all connected and I treat people how I'd like to be treated - with respect.
Perhaps it would be good to meditate on why this is such a trigger for you.
@Jason, what does it mean to demolish consciousness (from the link you gave)? People usually see consciousness as life..... was Buddha hinting at some other state beyond consciousness?
@Lii said:
?? Please explain. Being is the gift that transforms. Non-being is not the same as emptiness.
It was a play on words, @Lii. Being or becoming (Pali: bhava) in the sense used in SN 23.2 is a mental process that has the potential to lead to "renewed becoming in the future," which can be understood in both a psychological and cosmological sense, i.e., acting as a condition for the birth, ageing, and death (or arising, changing, and disappearance as per AN 3.47) of the conceit 'I am,' which occurs innumerable times throughout one's life (itself an idea that brings to mind the imagery of things like SN 12.61 and Nm 2.4), as well as a condition for birth, ageing, and death in the broader sense. (For more on this topic, see The Paradox of Becoming.)
@betaboy said:
Jason, what does it mean to demolish consciousness (from the link you gave)? People usually see consciousness as life..... was Buddha hinting at some other state beyond consciousness?
I like the way Thanissaro explains it in the introduction to his translation:
A number of discourses (among them, SN 35.191; AN 6.63) make the point that the mind is fettered, not by things like the five aggregates or the objects of the six senses, but by the act of passion & delight for them. There are two ways to try to cut through this fetter. One is to focus on the drawbacks of passion & delight in & of themselves, seeing clearly the stress & suffering they engender in the mind. The other is to analyze the objects of passion & delight in such a way that they no longer seem worthy of interest. This second approach is the one recommended in this discourse: when the Buddha talks of "smashing, scattering, & demolishing form (etc.) and making it unfit for play," he is referring to the practice of analyzing form minutely into its component parts until it no longer seems a fit object for passion & delight. When all five aggregates can be treated in this way, the mind is left with no conditioned object to serve as a focal point for its passion, and so is released — at the very least — to the stage of Awakening called non-return.
A number of discourses (among them, SN 35.191; AN 6.63) make the point that the mind is fettered, not by things like the five aggregates or the objects of the six senses, but by the act of passion & delight for them. There are two ways to try to cut through this fetter. One is to focus on the drawbacks of passion & delight in & of themselves, seeing clearly the stress & suffering they engender in the mind. The other is to analyze the objects of passion & delight in such a way that they no longer seem worthy of interest. This second approach is the one recommended in this discourse: when the Buddha talks of "smashing, scattering, & demolishing form (etc.) and making it unfit for play," he is referring to the practice of analyzing form minutely into its component parts until it no longer seems a fit object for passion & delight. When all five aggregates can be treated in this way, the mind is left with no conditioned object to serve as a focal point for its passion, and so is released — at the very least — to the stage of Awakening called non-return.
This is so confusing....can you provide an example? For instance, sexual desire. How does it fit into this? Is sexual desire (in our example) what he calls 'form'? If so, how will component parts apply here?
@ Betaboy. Do you just ask questions to ask them or do you really not understand Buddhism? It seems, and I say this nicely, that you are judging what you have not tried to practice.
@ Jason. Thank you for your explanation even though I don't understand it. I don't know why any aspect of being even if it is for future recurrence would suck ultimately.
@Lii said:
@ Betaboy. Do you just ask questions to ask them or do you really not understand Buddhism? It seems, and I say this nicely, that you are judging what you have not tried to practice.
@ Jason. Thank you for your explanation even though I don't understand it. I don't know why any aspect of being even if it is for future recurrence would suck ultimately.
Like most people, I understand certain. I don't understand certain other things. That's why I post here - to discuss, clarify, etc. Thank you.
I have a hard time believing you are looking for answers or solutions to your problem @betaboy when you have so far refused to answer the many questions that have been asked so people can better understand your position in order to give suggestions. Are you just talking to hear yourself talk? If so, i get it. I do that quite often. Sometimes, we just need to vent and aren't looking for advice. So, which is it? You say you are here to discuss, but you haven't answered many of the questions posed so people know what you are referring to.
Also, don't mistake a woman's willingness to sleep with you as respect or even as a positive feeling towards you. Just as men can remove themselves from the emotional component of sex, so can and do women. It's kind of funny, because men sometimes will pride themselves on being detached in regards to sex, yet they desire the woman to feel something for them, or at least to like the man as a person even if he doesn't return the favor, lol. Don't assume she appreciates your approach because she ends up in your bed. Women are strange creatures and they can use sex (and men) for reasons most men can't understand.
Comments
You have to give respect in order to get it.
Dude you've got issues
Huston, I think we have a problem
. . . poor @betaboy, he demeans women but wants to be respected in the moaning? He bad!
Mr Cushion says I should be kind to the demeaned @betaboy . . .
Being approachable doesn't equal being disrespected or taken for granted, but it seems thats the interpretation you are putting on it.
I get approached by people all the time, my family make a joke of it when we go places, betting on how long till someone finds me. I don't mind it at all, I meet some lovely interesting people, I sometimes am able to help them out and I can always leave a conversation if I felt unsafe, though I never have felt unsafe. We're all connected and I treat people how I'd like to be treated - with respect.
Perhaps it would be good to meditate on why this is such a trigger for you.
?? Please explain. Being is the gift that transforms. Non-being is not the same as emptiness.
@Jason, what does it mean to demolish consciousness (from the link you gave)? People usually see consciousness as life..... was Buddha hinting at some other state beyond consciousness?
No
It was a play on words, @Lii. Being or becoming (Pali: bhava) in the sense used in SN 23.2 is a mental process that has the potential to lead to "renewed becoming in the future," which can be understood in both a psychological and cosmological sense, i.e., acting as a condition for the birth, ageing, and death (or arising, changing, and disappearance as per AN 3.47) of the conceit 'I am,' which occurs innumerable times throughout one's life (itself an idea that brings to mind the imagery of things like SN 12.61 and Nm 2.4), as well as a condition for birth, ageing, and death in the broader sense. (For more on this topic, see The Paradox of Becoming.)
I like the way Thanissaro explains it in the introduction to his translation:
This is so confusing....can you provide an example? For instance, sexual desire. How does it fit into this? Is sexual desire (in our example) what he calls 'form'? If so, how will component parts apply here?
@ Betaboy. Do you just ask questions to ask them or do you really not understand Buddhism? It seems, and I say this nicely, that you are judging what you have not tried to practice.
@ Jason. Thank you for your explanation even though I don't understand it. I don't know why any aspect of being even if it is for future recurrence would suck ultimately.
Like most people, I understand certain. I don't understand certain other things. That's why I post here - to discuss, clarify, etc. Thank you.
I have a hard time believing you are looking for answers or solutions to your problem @betaboy when you have so far refused to answer the many questions that have been asked so people can better understand your position in order to give suggestions. Are you just talking to hear yourself talk? If so, i get it. I do that quite often. Sometimes, we just need to vent and aren't looking for advice. So, which is it? You say you are here to discuss, but you haven't answered many of the questions posed so people know what you are referring to.
Also, don't mistake a woman's willingness to sleep with you as respect or even as a positive feeling towards you. Just as men can remove themselves from the emotional component of sex, so can and do women. It's kind of funny, because men sometimes will pride themselves on being detached in regards to sex, yet they desire the woman to feel something for them, or at least to like the man as a person even if he doesn't return the favor, lol. Don't assume she appreciates your approach because she ends up in your bed. Women are strange creatures and they can use sex (and men) for reasons most men can't understand.
Think of Bogart's character in Casablanca...... would anyone dare approach him?