And, Pat, how do you know that Alan does not know ' the truth ?' Unless you are claiming copyright infringement !
On Oct 27, 1:08 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > No Pat, published papers seldom if ever ‘reak’ (sic ?) one out of the > space-time continuum. One shouldn’t expect such a result, should they? > > And, if I read it correctly, Alan’s words “…I don’t see any > resolution in sight…” were directly connected to and a commentary on > his previous “The topic of free will is something Western > philosophers, scientists and theologians have been debating in the > West for more than 200 years.” > > Pat, how can you say that this debate has been resolved? Perhaps in > your mind you have no question about it for whatever reason, but the > debate to me appears to continue. For you to then conclude from > something clearly not the case that he ‘neglects the truth’ smacks of > the fanatic rather than a scientist. > > And I can only assume from your later words: > > “..What we have to do is accept the fact that what we have is > illusory and, whilst not true 'free will' a 'practical free will' > And, from then, life goes on...”, > > that you didn’t read the article because that is imputed and more. > > Normally I appreciate your contributions, however unless you are > purposefully being argumentative, obtuse and provocative here, your > derision is not only misguided and uncalled for but totally > unsupported. > > On Oct 26, 10:44 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 25 Oct, 10:32, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Thanks Vam....I too found his apprehension matching things as they are > > > from my viewpoint too…almost exactly. And, this is the case even > > > though I haven’t practiced Tibetan Buddhism for many years now. Of > > > course, the school I’m involved with matches level by level most of > > > the Buddhist structure and understanding of mind, with a few small > > > exceptions. > > > > I’ve quoted or posted links to Alan’s writings in the past. Having > > > been the first westerner to have completed the Geshi degree, 7 years > > > or so of education at HHDL’s feet, and mixing this with his studies in > > > Western psych and physics, he is able to present a powerful vision > > > when it comes to such erudite issues. > > > > On occasion, he does say things that are easily criticized for one > > > reason or another. However, having seen how he ‘works’ when he is > > > directing specific words to specific questions or issues of people he > > > is talking with, my guess is that he consciously uses some license in > > > order to present a ‘big picture’. One that, in his words, is > > > practical. > > > > If you liked that one, check some of his other papers out Vam. He has > > > many there at his Santa Barbara Institute site as well at his personal > > > website. Either there are links to the latter from the former or just > > > type his name in Google. His personal site is his name. > > > Whilst I share his enthusiasm, it doesn't reak one out of the > > space-time continuum, so it only(!) offers a perspective ABOUT free > > will, rather than 'solving the problem OF it', which he states hasn't > > been resolved. But it has. So he neglects the truth and, if he can > > find happiness (or 'bliss') in his ignorance, then that's fine. But, > > to me, it's a bit of an ostrich's approach. His "Rather than raising > > the ontological question, the metaphysical question – do we have free > > will? – there is a much more pragmatic question: can we achieve free > > will and how might we do so?". What we have to do is accept the fact > > that what we have is illusory and, whilst not true 'free will' a > > 'practical free will' And, from then, life goes on... The > > ontological question has been solved, yet we still 'choose' to hide > > our heads in the sand and ignore it. Better to understand from a > > position of knowledge than to please oneself with guesswork. I expect > > the spit of the bliss of his ignorance will, some day, land in his > > face when he discovers the truth. I hope, then, that when that > > happens, he can re-achieve his bliss in knowledge. > > > > On Oct 25, 1:37 am, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > " What do I mean by genuine happiness? Genuine happiness is a quality > > > > of well-being that comes not because we’ve encountered some pleasant > > > > stimulus from the world – some really good food, a pleasant fragrance, > > > > or even a pleasant thought – but rather a quality of well-being that > > > > comes from what we bring to the world, rather than what we get from > > > > it." > > > > > This must be the second link I must have opened. And how rewarded I > > > > am. Thank you, OM ! > > > > > I 'll quote Alan Wallace, since he voices my view exactly : > > > > > " What do I mean by genuine happiness ? Genuine happiness is ... a > > > > quality of well-being that comes from what we bring to the world, > > > > rather than what we get from it." > > > > > " We have perfect freedom when the choices we make from moment to > > > > moment, whatever arises, are motivated by compassion, guided by > > > > wisdom, and they’re just the right choices based upon sound > > > > understanding of what is truly conducive to our own and others’ > > > > flourishing and well-being, for the alleviation of suffering, for the > > > > freedom of everyone." > > > > > " And isn’t it marvelous that whether it is sex, or food, or > > > > possessions, or fame, or reputation, or the love and appreciation of > > > > others, whatever it is, isn’t it wonderful that we are just not > > > > satisfied ? Because if we were satisfied, then we’d cut ourselves so > > > > short. It’s that dissatisfaction that moves us, and moves us, and > > > > moves us. It does not let us rest until we find what is of greatest > > > > meaning, until we discover for ourselves our deepest dimension and our > > > > capacity for freedom, for awakening, for genuine happiness." > > > > > On Oct 25, 12:58 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I guess I was also looking for criticism, analysis, opinions, etc. > > > > > about this too...In other words: > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > On Oct 24, 4:53 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > "B. Alan Wallace addresses the topic of free will: how Buddhism > > > > > > focuses on how we may achieve greater freedom in the choices we > > > > > > make, > > > > > > rather than struggling with the metaphysical issue of whether we > > > > > > already have free will. > > > > > > Central to the question of free will is the nature of human > > > > > > identity, > > > > > > and it is in this regard that the Buddhist view of emptiness and > > > > > > interdependence is truly revolutionary..." > > > > > > > A new article by Alan, the entirety of which can be read at: > > > > > > >http://www.sbinstitute.com/readinglibrary.html > > > > > > > (the first link on the page)- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
