Yes Vam, my pleasure for sure! And, as you say, there are conditions for planting…
On Jan 14, 8:42 pm, Vamadevananda <[email protected]> wrote: > " As human beings, ‘we’ are so much more than rational musings and > analytical thinking." > > Indeed. Only, if the clerks of science and religion, politics and > finance, justice and economics, would actually assume and extend the > scientific temperament and discover ... all that is there in the " > much more !" It would sure lead them to a ( self - ) realisation of > much greater sense of balance and proportion, in truth. > > Thank you for the quote, and the quotes. These words have the capacity > to bless all, without exception, whose ' ground ' is prepared and > ready for the seed. > > On Jan 15, 1:15 am, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In partial response to Neil’s post in the topic “Science” I present > > the following. Since doing so there might be construed as hijacking > > that thread, I’ve started a new thread in the spirit of Twirlip’s > > search for “Wisdom”. Herein will also be found echos from the topic on > > reincarnation. > > > As tedious and tiring as it may appear, for those new to the group, I > > have no problem at all with ‘evidence’. . . none at all. What is > > perhaps suggested by the phrase ‘dogma of evidence’ is the current day > > meme that our epistemology is *just* to be based on an ontologically > > unfounded notion of evidence or even the possibility thereof. As human > > beings, ‘we’ are so much more than rational musings and analytical > > thinking. And, any attempt to divorce our apparently differing > > instincts and methods of being one from another in and of itself is a > > failure in understanding the being-as-such…and any result from such > > exercises distorts what most hold as reality even more than pure > > reliance on the senses alone does. For any sort of knowing to be full > > and complete, to repeat, no aspect of being can be left out. > > > And, as to non-dogmatism being a type of dogma…of course it can be. > > Any attachment to a thought by definition is dogma…leaving no room for > > change. This is part of the beauty of the ancient mantra found in the > > Heart Sutra: > > Tadyatha gate, gate para, gate parasam, gate…bodhi svaha. > > >http://www.purifymind.com/HeartSutraPra.htm > > > My teacher translates it a little differently, but the truth is there. > > > Further, Nagarjuna’s “Mahayanavimsaka - Adoration to the Three > > Treasures”, for those who can get past the use of the term adoration > > has much to be said about what is, what is not, …that there is neither > > being nor not-being nor both nor neither. The following treatises have > > much to say and do so as well as any words can do. > > >http://members.optushome.com.au/davidquinn000/Buddhist%20Writings/Nag... > > > I find it so profound that even though it may attract ridicule, I’ll > > copy/paste the first part here now. > > > 1 > > I bow down to the all-powerful Buddha > > Whose mind is free of attachment, > > Who, in his compassion and wisdom, > > Has taught the inexpressible. > > 2 > > In truth there is no birth - > > And thus no cessation or liberation; > > The Buddha is like the sky > > And all beings have that nature. > > 3 > > Neither Samsara nor Nirvana exist. > > All things originate from their conditions > > With an intrinsic face of void - > > The object of ultimate awareness. > > 4 > > The nature of all things > > Appears like a reflection, > > Pure and naturally quiescent, > > With a non-dual identity of suchness. > > 5 > > The common mind imagines a self > > Where there is nothing at all, > > And from this arise emotional states - > > Happiness, suffering, and equanimity. > > 6 > > The six states of being in Samsara, > > The happiness of heaven, > > The suffering of hell, > > Are all false creations, figments of mind. > > 7 > > Likewise the ideas of bad action causing suffering, > > Old age, disease and death, > > And the idea that virtue leads to happiness, > > Are mere ideas, unreal notions. > > 8 > > Like an artist frightened > > By the devil he paints, > > The sufferer in Samsara > > Is terrified by his own imagination. > > 9 > > Like a man caught in quicksands > > Thrashing and struggling about, > > So beings drown > > In the mess of their own thoughts. > > 10 > > Mistaking fantasy for reality > > Causes an experience of suffering; > > Mind is poisoned by interpretations > > Of the nature of objects. > > 11 > > Dissolving figment and fantasy > > With a mind of compassionate insight, > > Remain in perfect awareness > > In order to help all beings. > > 12 > > By developing unsurpassable bodhi, > > One should become a Buddha. > > A Buddha is a friend of the world, > > Being freed from the bondage of false notions. > > 13 > > Knowing the relativity of all, > > The ultimate truth is always seen; > > Dismissing the idea of beginning, middle and end > > The flow is seen as Emptiness. > > 14 > > So all samsara and nirvana is seen as it is - > > Empty and insubstantial, > > Naked and changeless, > > Eternally quiescent and illumined. > > 15 > > As the figments of a dream > > Dissolve upon waking, > > So the confusion of Samsara > > Fades away in enlightenment. > > 16 > > Idealising things of no substance > > As eternal, substantial and satisfying, > > Shrouding them in a fog of desire > > The samsaric round of existence arises. > > 17 > > The nature of beings is unborn > > Yet commonly beings are conceived to exist; > > Both beings and their ideas > > Are false beliefs. > > 18 > > It is nothing but an artifice of mind > > This birth into an illusory becoming, > > Into a world of good and evil action > > With good or bad rebirth to follow. > > 19 > > When the wheel of mind ceases to turn > > All things come to an end. > > There is nothing inherently substantial > > And all things are utterly pure. > > 20 > > Who can reach the other side of samsara, > > Which is full of the water of false notions? > > How can these false notions arise in a man > > Who thoroughly knows this world? > > > Of course, if the cultural and perhaps perceived theological > > trappings offend, merely look at the essence. As you imply Neil, > > science is not objective …all protestations aside. And, ‘it’ is but > > one aspect of consciousness and in no way is ‘outside’ nor separate > > from same. So, as apparently useful as is focusing attention upon > > small aspects of reality can be and is, to ignore or even worse to > > reject the whole (call it ‘the One’ if one must) results in a broken > > epistemological praxis. > > > So, when it comes to any search for social justice or similar ‘good’ > > use of science, waiting for ‘the light’ until *afterwards* seems to be > > putting the horse before the cart. And, while ‘we’ are using such > > tools, > > > "...the moral test of government is how that government treats those > > who are in the dawn of life, the children; those who are in the > > twilight of life, the elderly; those who are in the shadows of life; > > the sick, the needy and the handicapped. " ~ Last Speech of Hubert H. > > Humphrey > > > "A nation's greatness is measured by how it treats its weakest > > members." ~ Mahatma Ghandi > > > What do you think?- 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.
