Freud once said something akin to 'methodologists get caught up in polishing their glasses and never looking through them'. I often wonder what others do in respect of 'reading' Orn. I am not at all 'bookish' and yet am often accused of being so. I've said before that much of this kind of material is available in philosophy generally. There is too much for one lifetime even in that opus unless we are trying for 'person development' (or whatever other term). One might say that the nominalism of Occham was shattering and that some turn in modern philosophy (or ancient in new use) might be equally so. I don't really expect much in this sense, but admit the possibilities. The guess I'm working with is that technology may open us up to less nastiness by letting more people, perhaps the vast majority, be together with what they find.
On 22 Nov, 02:17, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > For the record, I do not “follow Wallace” although, as a true > scientist, I have experimented when it comes to mind with him and > others. In addition, he is a wonderful language instructor even though > my brain isn’t so inclined. I retain little to no Tibetan from the > 80s. > > And, Neil, in one sense I agree with you about the traditional > background and apparent complexity. Yet, as Alan presents the analogy > of graduate coursework, it just takes that amount of homework. Of > course, Buddhism itself has forecast the moment in the future of its > entire demise. > > I still remember an inquiry from a fellow member of an Inner Light > Conference ask HHDL about a shorter method and watching HHDL tear up > and say something to the effect of “I wish there were.” A surprising > insight, admission and answer all in one! > > Overall, I fully embrace pragmatism in all such areas of inquiry. So > far, what I have found is what I have found. > > On Nov 21, 4:45 pm, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > To be brutally honest I find the study of this kind of stuff a waste, > > though one can waste around and learn and there are much worse things > > being done. The science that has tended to interest me could share > > some of the spirit of trying to find something worth discovering in > > virtue and integrity but I have great difficulty with anything that > > requires so much tradition of any kind. I think the world is barking > > mad and would welcome something more peaceful and at one about a > > practice of peace. I think, for now, we have missed the chance and > > need some minimalist rules around which to try again. We have made > > this extremely difficult through denials of fact in our praxis. I > > tend towards pragmatism in this and that we have to accept limitations > > in human reasoning on the basis of a factual history. There is as big > > a mistake in the separation of fact and value as there is in the > > bifurcation of nature. > > > On 21 Nov, 22:26, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I for one would not follow wallace > > > I do not know any other way of putting it > > > Allan > > > > On Sat, Nov 21, 2009 at 10:07 PM, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Sorry Orn - I lose spellchecking with IE for some reason. My general > > > > sense of 'out there' is that it is operationally defined and then this > > > > is forgotten, or perhaps it is forgotten that not all others referring > > > > to such a definition have forgotten. > > > > > On 21 Nov, 15:24, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I am curious about the work this organisation does : > > > >http://www.mbaproject.org/ > > > > > ! > > > > > > Just felt like asking, without starting a new thread. " MBA " stands > > > > > for : Mind Body Awareness. They seem to be into actions that impact > > > > > the individual and the society, including the ' management ' and > > > > > institutional fraternity. > > > > > > That they are doing it, if you may confirm, means a million times more > > > > > than the fact that it may amount to nothing much. > > > > > > On Nov 21, 8:06 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > Without knowing what is meant by “rekection” it is difficult to > > > > > > comment. However, in all cases, I find what most call “out there” to > > > > > > *all* be at once here, universal and neither inside nor outside. > > > > > > > On Nov 21, 6:45 am, archytas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I take a rather different route Orn, as you know. Something like > > > > this > > > > > > > is considered in the Kantian sublime and I do know quite a few > > > > > > > people > > > > > > > who are not 'adherents' but still use these techniques as a > > > > framework, > > > > > > > even some more 'magical-astrological' ones. I have to say I have > > > > > > > experienced a great deal 'unusual' in such company, including > > > > > > > great > > > > > > > relief to be amongst people managing to care without my angst. I > > > > > > > strongly believe now that it is too difficult for us to commune. > > > > > > > > My sense of much of what you post feels like something of a > > > > > > > rekection > > > > > > > of the 'out there'. I immediately agree and yet wonder about the > > > > > > > nature of the descriptor 'out there'. I wonder in very naive ways > > > > > > > about 'why we are here'. This leads me to some rather different > > > > > > > frameworks. > > > > > > > > On 21 Nov, 13:22, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > A new article by Alan Wallace having to do with numerous > > > > > > > > important > > > > and > > > > > > > > informative instructions for achieving one pointed concentration > > > > and > > > > > > > > associated states of consciousness with the goal of helping > > > > humanity. > > > > > > > > Here one will find indications for the necessary conditions, the > > > > > > > > necessary prerequisites, the actual practices involved along > > > > > > > > with > > > > an > > > > > > > > erudite presentation of historical advice from the most > > > > > > > > recognized > > > > and > > > > > > > > realized personages involved in this scientific praxis over the > > > > span > > > > > > > > of the last 2,500 years. > > > > > > > > > Mr. Wallace who is proficient in the Tibetan and Sanskrit > > > > > > > > languages > > > > > > > > and who has spent decades seeking and receiving personal > > > > instruction > > > > > > > > from masters of true lineages for his personal practice is well > > > > > > > > qualified to share this sage advice. His foundation in both > > > > > > > > contemplative and scientific practices aids him in his ability > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > share insights and recommendations to those of us in today’s > > > > western > > > > > > > > societies. > > > > > > > > > His ability to clearly present a full practice and solution for > > > > > > > > humanity in areas that normally are seen as being inscrutable > > > > > > > > is a > > > > > > > > rare and extremely valuable quality. Those who are serious in > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > search for actual and lasting solutions for the global, social > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > personal issues of today would be well advised to take the time > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > read study and apply his wisdom. > > > > > > > > > Although this is a relatively short article published in > > > > > > > > Tricycle, > > > > a > > > > > > > > contemporary magazine, rarely is there such a wealth of > > > > > > > > practical, > > > > > > > > well founded and accessible advice found today in any format or > > > > venue. > > > > > > > > It is an excellent way to gain the foundation necessary for > > > > > > > > understanding what is involved in entering such an important and > > > > > > > > necessary path today. > > > > > > > > > For the benefit of all: > > > > >http://www.sbinstitute.com/PDF%20AW.org/Wallace_WithinYouWithoutYou.p... > > > > > > > > - 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]<minds-eye%2bunsubscr...@googlegroups > > > > .com> > > > > . > > > > For more options, visit this group at > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=. > > > > -- > > > ( > > > ) > > > I_D Allan- 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=.
