Flaw in the typical spiritual (buddhist-type) thinking

[dorry]

I think by all means if we spiritually thinks that happens difinitely.

[Stillwater]

God has given you one face, and you make yourself

Hamlet?

[Summerlander]

all the hippy dippy new agers have forced the notion of "love and light" on us.  but you just said it snake, it makes YOU happy when others are happy.  caring about the wellbeing of others is just as selfish as what razputin believes.  you're no better.

It's not about being better than the next. It's about finding the harmony. It's about having consideration for others just as you would like them to have consideration for you.

"Be the change you want to see in the world" - Gandhi

There is no right or wrong. People do what they think is the best course of action. Some do what they think is the best course of action for themselves only...and it usually ends in pain. Others do what they think is the best course of action for others only...and it usually ends in pain. Others balance it out...and they usually lead happier lives.

Have the will to be happy. Care about yourself. Care about others too (and this may involve giving those altruistic fools advice about taking care of themselves too). Every action has an effect! Don't expect things to go swimmingly well for you all the time. The trick is to get your mind ready for anything. Buddhism is about getting people to detach themselves from possessions...note, I said "detach", not "prohibit". You can still have the will to do things, you can still enjoy your possessions...but just know deep within that if you lost everything it wouldn't be the end of your world.

Do what you think is right. Do what you want. See where it takes you. Hold on to your ego for dear life! But just remember that this ego that you hold on to is not real. It is something you created...it is an illusion. This is why people suffer so much and end up losing control when their egos are bruised.

I really don't understand where this anti-Buddhism talk is coming from...

The less you look at the world based on your likes and dislikes, the more at peace you will be with yourself... - note that this statement never urges you to get rid of your preferences. 

[Razputin]

it's easy to find harmony in a null void where nothing can get in the way of it...but I am talking about finding harmony in the scary, imense, cruel, cryptic, and packed place that is the real world

you experience only your experience. that is a self evident fact which leads to the self evident conclusion that, while right and wrong may not be black and white, it's pretty directed. and that direction centers around you. do you know how hard it is to find harmony in (a logical)selfishness? it's like an oxymoron

while primal ("terrestrial" matrix) selfishness usually has bad ends, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about pure selfishness unassuged of context-sensitive matrixes (hedonically the matrixes would be any one vice. you get the idea) this is logical selfishness. this is productive hedonism


I'm hating on Buddhism because, while it has found a reality, it hadn't found the one directly relevant to me. to any one person in general.
you seek to lose ego aka make it that if the universe. a universe effected by will. sentient beings being the biggest source of will.
reality is survival of the (non-context-sensitive) fittest ( aka overall fittest, not just physically). and you are making the fittest your god without giving it any competition

[Razputin]

this is why the relative reality sits on top of the universal reality (with subjective delusion in between)
the closer you are to relative reality (resulting in an Ego), the closer you are to ruling the universal/outside reality....and all of the dellusional egos that occupy it

[Summerlander]

I'm hating on Buddhism because, while it has found a reality, it hadn't found the one directly relevant to me.

"Don't take what I'm saying, just try to analyse as far as possible and see whether what I'm saying makes sense or not. If it doesn't make sense, discard it. If it does make sense, then pick it up."

- Buddha

You don't have to hate on Buddhism. Like any other philosophy, it can resonate with some but not with others. It is interesting to see how, mostly in the West, people have erroneous views on Buddhism.

Buddhists take into account The three Jewels (the Buddha, the dharma (teachings) and the sangha (the community)) in order to dispel or refrain from dissonant and unhelpful states. They acknowledge that life can influence you to focus on three "poisons"...greed/craving/desire...hatred/aversion...delusion/ignorance...

The opposition of these is the Buddhist path. This is their philosophy, their view, their way of life...take it or leave it. It won't make them perfect, of course not because we are all human and bound to err...but the Buddhist way of life is supposed to improve you as a person. In fact Buddhism can be molded and applicable in all walks of life but the principle is the same. The historical Buddha presents himself as an agnostic who lived according to his perspective and what made sense to him and he urged others to do the same, not to follow him but to find their own way. Perhaps you think you have found your own way in abundant egoism at this particular point in time, Razputin, but just remember that what doesn't work for you might work for others. There's no need to hate on Buddhism at all. This philosophy also teaches about "Refuges" that one can take for improvement and healthy perspectives. Please not that refuge here is not implying hiding from something but rather, setting up foundations from which you can grow and become productive.

Here's a passage written by a Japanese Buddhist teacher:

"Taking refuge is the first step on the Buddhist path to inner freedom, but it is not something new. We have been taking refuge all our lives, though mainly in external things, hoping to find security and happiness. Some of us take refuge in money, some in drugs. Some take refuge in food, in mountain-climbing or in sunny beaches. Most of us seek security and satisfaction in a relationship with a man or a woman. Throughout our lives we have drifted from one situation to the next, always in the expectation of final satisfaction. Our successive involvements may sometimes offer temporary relief but, in sober truth, seeking refuge in physical possessions and transient pleasures merely deepens our confusion rather than ending it."

-Shunryu Suzuki, Zen Mind, Beginner's Mind,
Weatherhill, 1982, p7

If you find Buddhism practical, then use it, if you don't...then leave it be and good luck.

[Razputin]

you're telling me not to hate on Buddhism, I'm telling you why Buddhism isn't logical and presenting an alternative, and you again tell me not to hate on Buddhism

it doesn't matter what 'works for me'. im sure Buddhism would work for me, but what matters is logic. and I'm willing to change myself so that who I am conforms with logic


if it's any consolation, I'm going to be giving Buddhism a real try soon, but just because losing an ego is on my oath to gaining an Ego

[personalreality]

logic was spawned from human minds.  it is equally flawed.  it relies on current knowledge.  what seems illogical now may make perfect logical sense in 100 years.  logic is useful, but it is not beyond bias.

[Razputin]

logic was spawned from human minds.  it is equally flawed.  it relies on current knowledge.  what seems illogical now may make perfect logical sense in 100 years.  logic is useful, but it is not beyond bias.

context-sensitive logic is flawed...but, by following it without real attachment, you could get outbid that matrix into a more pure logic

logic is a direct application of life. the matrixes we put around it, is what corrupts it

[Summerlander]

logic is useful, but it is not beyond bias.

Very well said. Just like there is human logic...and quantum logic...

[personalreality]

and that is my point.  remove all of your human perceptual bias and then we'll talk.

[Summerlander]

Hmmm...maybe you shouldn't talk to Razputin then as he refuses to do this.

[personalreality]

yea, my last comment was directed to razputin, i should have quoted him.

logic as a quality of critical analysis is fine, practical logic is flawed (goes without saying, but imo).

it's like science as an abstract concept is fine, but practical science is flawed, biased and unfavorably balanced toward the prevailing social context.

[Summerlander]

it's like science as an abstract concept is fine, but practical science is flawed, biased and unfavorably balanced toward the prevailing social context.

A lot of reputations at stake, I suppose!

I'd like to finish here with a quote from a meditation teacher if you lot don't mind because I don't think I'll be posting here no more. You may have realised that I subscribe to a great portion of the Buddhist philosophy but it is not my intention to persuade others to follow it. I also take what resonates with me from LaVeyan Satanism, though I'm more of a Buddhist zealot:

"Try to be mindful and let things take their natural course. Then your mind will become still in any surroundings, like a clear forest pool. All kinds of wonderful, rare animals will come to drink at the pool, and you will clearly see the nature of all things. You will see many strange and wonderful things come and go, but you will be still. This is the happiness of the Buddha."

-Ajahn Chah, A Still Forest Pool, Kornfield and Breitner (eds), Quest Books, 1975

[Razputin]

my human bias is what makes me, me. but it's not like most humans embrace this. most take on the politically correct universal logic

considering that I am 1 person, a universal logic is illogical. having a perspective based logic (which would also require one to realize that perspective's place in the universe) is logical

[Summerlander]

So it's logical to believe in chakkras but illogical to take Buddhist thinking into account?

[Razputin]

So it's logical to believe in chakkras but illogical to take Buddhist thinking into account?

I've taken it into account. you won't even try mess with your energy. don't even think of it as chakras

and once you actually do it, take a look at the locations of chakras and you tell me if you think theyre real


arguing ideologies and arguing the existence of an experience (because the experience itself proves it's existence) are 2 different things

[Summerlander]

There's only one thing that I realise. You can achieve many without indulging in chakras and energy work...like inducing OOBEs and Lucid Dreams...you don't really need chakras.

As for Buddhism, I've seen this philosophy being put into practice and it works. In fact I've applied it (didn't even fully embrace it) and it was effective. I found that people started being generous towards me, giving me things for free out of kindness. I brought the good out of people with it...just like the Buddha and other wise men did with their speeches and teachings and in return people would give them food.

It's simple really...if you are helpful and resourceful when you can be you will get the same back from others. You are liked without even asking for it. On the other hand, if you show yourself to be selfish and don't give a toss about others then that's exactly what people will see and they'll lose interest.

[personalreality]

my human bias is what makes me, me. but it's not like most humans embrace this. most take on the politically correct universal logic

considering that I am 1 person, a universal logic is illogical. having a perspective based logic (which would also require one to realize that perspective's place in the universe) is logical

your human bias is what makes your journey unique.  but the idea behind modern spiritual practice is to align oneself with universal logic as you call it.  more appropriately, to become cosmic consciousness.  some say that the evolution of consciousness in humanity has moved beyond tribal consciousness/wisdom (or earth based consciousness) in favor of the individual and that they next step is cosmic consciousness.  in fact, that's kind of the whole point of the western mysteries.  we are now seen as mediators of the energy between worlds, we are the "as above, so below" that Hermetic text is famous for teaching.  we are the cosmos embodied in the microcosm.  so, universal logic is not illogical, it's actually the next logical step.