A spiritual person is...

[Lunitik]

A strange example that comes to mind:

There was a show called "Most Evil" or similar about various killers and their childhood behaviors. I forget the name of this particular person, but here goes...

When this person was around maybe 10, he was caught with a womans shoe that he had stolen from a neighbor. The mother beat the boy senseless for this action, but this seemed to excite the boy. He began acting out sexually with other stolen shoes, they represented something forbidden and so gave him a rush. As he grew older, he began hunting women with high heels on for this was the type of shoe he had first stolen. He would rape and kill women wearing these shoes regularly over the course of his life until he was finally caught around 45 or so.

In trying to punish the boy, the mother has made things much much worse. Rather than trying to get to the bottom of why this boy stole the shoe in the first place, she just beat him. This is a drastic example, but I find that such examples are most effective in displaying a point. If she instead balanced his desire for the shoe with something positive like perhaps working to afford his own, she could have turned his bad behavior into something constructive.

 

[seattlegal]

A strange example that comes to mind:

There was a show called "Most Evil" or similar about various killers and their childhood behaviors. I forget the name of this particular person, but here goes...

When this person was around maybe 10, he was caught with a womans shoe that he had stolen from a neighbor. The mother beat the boy senseless for this action, but this seemed to excite the boy. He began acting out sexually with other stolen shoes, they represented something forbidden and so gave him a rush. As he grew older, he began hunting women with high heels on for this was the type of shoe he had first stolen. He would rape and kill women wearing these shoes regularly over the course of his life until he was finally caught around 45 or so.

In trying to punish the boy, the mother has made things much much worse. Rather than trying to get to the bottom of why this boy stole the shoe in the first place, she just beat him. This is a drastic example, but I find that such examples are most effective in displaying a point. If she instead balanced his desire for the shoe with something positive like perhaps working to afford his own, she could have turned his bad behavior into something constructive.

And that is the purpose for providing the tools to overcome passion, deceit, conceit, etc. Now, if someone does not want to utilize these tools, but would rather endulge the states that lead to harm, would that not point towards what they are actually seeking?

 

[Lunitik]

an example of specific tools:

Rahula Sutta: Advice to Rahula

I see what he is saying, but at the same time, I do not think this is particularly practical at all. He is essentially saying to concentrate on the Dharma and not to give mind at all to the issue. I feel this is good advice because once the goal is attained there will never be such selfish desires again, but at the same time, it is avoidance rather than solving. If this person can meditate effectively, it can work fine, but it can also become something which distracts from meditation if not solved. The person must understand the nature of an issue and come to terms with this craving before he can ever truly go beyond it.

 

[Lunitik]

And that is the purpose for providing the tools to overcome passion, deceit, conceit, etc. Now, if someone does not want to utilize these tools, but would rather endulge the states that lead to harm, would that not point towards what they are actually seeking?

I am not sure that what causes harm is the same for everyone. It would be like a doctor prescribing antibiotics to every patient they see, for some it might help, but for others it will actually cause harm, and still others it will do nothing at all. You must prescribe based on the symptoms, not generically.

 

[seattlegal]

I see what he is saying, but at the same time, I do not think this is particularly practical at all. He is essentially saying to concentrate on the Dharma and not to give mind at all to the issue. I feel this is good advice because once the goal is attained there will never be such selfish desires again, but at the same time, it is avoidance rather than solving. If this person can meditate effectively, it can work fine, but it can also become something which distracts from meditation if not solved. The person must understand the nature of an issue and come to terms with this craving before he can ever truly go beyond it.

Indeed. The meditation on the "foul" (a corpse in various stages of decay) is a specific tool that shows how passion will fade away as the body and flesh will one day pass away and decay. It highlights the need to acknowledge it, understand it, watch it rise, and then watch it fade away without clinging to it.

 

[Lunitik]

I think that something a lot of people miss about reading various scriptures is that there is a central purpose to each, and even more importantly that these things are what worked for a particular individual and was successfully transmitted to others (thus catching on) ... we must understand that each individual is different, however, and thus the teaching must be catered to be truly effective.

Obviously, if something prescribed for the ceasing of suffering causes suffering deep within you, you should probably not pursue that avenue further - other than to understand why it causes this suffering.

 

[seattlegal]

I am not sure that what causes harm is the same for everyone. It would be like a doctor prescribing antibiotics to every patient they see, for some it might help, but for others it will actually cause harm, and still others it will do nothing at all. You must prescribe based on the symptoms, not generically.

Hence, the need for mindfulness in identifying ones own problem areas. If you cannot perceive your own hang-ups, there are guidelines available to help you.

 

[seattlegal]

I think that something a lot of people miss about reading various scriptures is that there is a central purpose to each, and even more importantly that these things are what worked for a particular individual and was successfully transmitted to others (thus catching on) ... we must understand that each individual is different, however, and thus the teaching must be catered to be truly effective.

Indeed, it has been said there are 88,000 dharma doors. (or a very large amount of various combinations of personal hang-ups beings might have.)

Obviously, if something prescribed for the ceasing of suffering causes suffering deep within you, you should probably not pursue that avenue further - other than to understand why it causes this suffering.

This is where compassion comes in. Does your action cause suffering in others? (Back to the golden rule.)

Would your action cause others to stumble?

 

[Lunitik]

I appreciated this discussion, but at present it feels like we're going around in circles and so I will depart for a while. Have a great night (or morning or evening, depending on location)

 

[seattlegal]

Laters.

 

[Snoopy]

Vinaya Pitaka - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a for instance, although I have read it elsewhere.

Sorry, I didn't make it clear- I am aware of what you linked to. I meant a source for saying about the many years without rules. Clearly, at the first turning of the wheel there were no rules in place. Equally, the Vinaya represents the full body of rules created by the time of the Buddha's death.

 

[luecy7]

I did not call it good or bad, I only said this is what the enlightened ones have attained. I am not sure how you have gained this definition for Samadhi however, quite a strange definition...

You do imply that enlightenment, and the attainment of something, are good. You do imply that ego means something bad, harmful, and causing suffering. You are in denial, I'd say dishonest, of what you have come to believe is good, and of what you have come to believe is bad. Is meditation and the cessation of sense-desire a good thing to pursue?

an example of specific tools:
Rahula Sutta: Advice to Rahula

I see selfishness and hypocrisy: Good and Bad don't really exist, but associate with Good friends and choose a remote secluded lodging to control your five sense-faculties. The path to spiritual suicide, taking control, is well paved.

How would I describe meditation? Like finding oneself in an erratically moving vehicle and doing everything to bring it to a stop or under control. Like finding oneself in a windstorm being blown side to side, and using force to hold oneself steady in it. Like finding oneself distracted, and working to eliminate all distractions.

How would I describe being spiritual? Like finding oneself in a vehicle and driving out of the way, erratically, to help another. Like finding oneself in a windstorm being blown side to side, and rebuking it, learning from it, or enjoying the free ride. Like finding oneself distracted, and choosing which distraction to best give your time to next.

As meditation may be an act of taking control: having faith is an act of giving up control. As meditation may be an act of giving up control: having faith is an act of taking control. Not to say that mediation is bad... it is just solo. No spirit interaction. Meditation is mindfully just a solo event. Faith requires more than one. Self, solo, pursuits... are self, solo, pursuits. Again: self-ish. It is like masturbation. It is like pooping. It is like suicide. It is like an attempt to take a hike alone. Not to call it a bad activity, just to put the self induced activity in its place. Now if it were hypnotism... then I'd say there is a non-selfish spiritual element in the activity. It takes two to Tao.

 

[Lunitik]

You do imply that enlightenment, and the attainment of something, are good. You do imply that ego means something bad, harmful, and causing suffering. You are in denial, I'd say dishonest, of what you have come to believe is good, and of what you have come to believe is bad. Is meditation and the cessation of sense-desire a good thing to pursue?

I have stated nothing of the sort, certainly in my view the ultimate goal of meditation is to attain enlightenment, but this is neither good nor bad - it simply is. I certainly did state that ego is bad, ego is the formulation of a false sense of self, it is the culmination of all desires - how you want to perceive yourself, how you perceive others, what you want for your life, essentially every view you hold, this is all a function of ego. To state otherwise is simply erroneous.

I have no interest whatsoever in what is good or bad, meditation isn't good if it serves no purpose, cessation of sense-desire isn't good if it leads to no advancement - it can actually be a cause of suffering for many people. This separation of good and bad is meaningless - nothing is either always good or bad, as both are based on personal perception. Any obsession is bad no matter what, even if it seems to be something worthwhile - such as enlightenment or cessation of suffering.

 

[Lunitik]

Sorry, I didn't make it clear- I am aware of what you linked to. I meant a source for saying about the many years without rules. Clearly, at the first turning of the wheel there were no rules in place. Equally, the Vinaya represents the full body of rules created by the time of the Buddha's death.

I don't recall stating it was many years, although it well could have been since Buddha was teaching for some 45 years. Is there any record of when those trouble maker followers began to come on board? I haven't seen any.

The Vinaya certainly represents something quite meaningful to Buddhists, but alas as we have seen, they are not intended to be lasting rules. Firstly, they only apply to monks, and second as we have discussed, they are intended to be advanced beyond so as to become meaningless once the monk has crossed to the other shore.

This is all I have said on the topic, I am not sure where our disagreement is.

 

[seattlegal]

How would I describe being spiritual? Like finding oneself in a vehicle and driving out of the way, erratically, to help another. Like finding oneself in a windstorm being blown side to side, and rebuking it, learning from it, or enjoying the free ride. Like finding oneself distracted, and choosing which distraction to best give your time to next.

Actually, I agree. After all is said and done, this is what remains.

As meditation may be an act of taking control: having faith is an act of giving up control.

Agreed.

As meditation may be an act of giving up control: having faith is an act of taking control.

I don't agree with this.

Not to say that mediation is bad... it is just solo. No spirit interaction. Meditation is mindfully just a solo event. Faith requires more than one. Self, solo, pursuits... are self, solo, pursuits. Again: self-ish. It is like masturbation. It is like pooping. It is like suicide. It is like an attempt to take a hike alone. Not to call it a bad activity, just to put the self induced activity in its place. Now if it were hypnotism... then I'd say there is a non-selfish spiritual element in the activity. It takes two to Tao.

Actually, I don't see meditation as a solo event. There is the bit about God writing the law in the heart, and the bit about our cleaning the dark mirror.

 

[luecy7]

I don't agree with this.

Asking God, asking others, to make something happen. If you have faith as much as a mustard seed, you can say to this thing, and it will obey you. Even a rebuke. It is not the act of meditation. It is the act of disturbance. The disturbance can be answered in a multitude of ways, and it can be ignored. Faith would be more like going to see a hypnotist to rid oneself of smoking.

Actually, I don't see meditation as a solo event. There is the bit about God writing the law in the heart, and the bit about our cleaning the dark mirror.

Ridding oneself of one's own unfettered thoughts? If meditation is a conversation with God, it is the act of telling God to shut up. That is not to say meditation is necessarily that, it is to say that meditation is hopefully a solo event.

Where meditation is being the driver, faith is being the passenger. Where meditation is being the passenger, faith is being the driver. Sometimes a passenger is a bit distracting.

 

[Lunitik]

Asking God, asking others, to make something happen. If you have faith as much as a mustard seed, you can say to this thing, and it will obey you. Even a rebuke. It is not the act of meditation. It is the act of disturbance. The disturbance can be answered in a multitude of ways, and it can be ignored. Faith would be more like going to see a hypnotist to rid oneself of smoking.

If you are asking God for anything, you are asking him to change his will, you are not serving it. What is the point of asking God for anything? He already knows everything you want and need, he already knows what is best for you whether you believe or not.

Prayer should be reserved for thanking God, for being grateful and showing your trust. Become loving towards him, let this permeate to your very core, there is nothing else necessary. To ask is to infer you know better.

Ridding oneself of one's own unfettered thoughts? If meditation is a conversation with God, it is the act of telling God to shut up. That is not to say meditation is necessarily that, it is to say that meditation is hopefully a solo event.

Where meditation is being the driver, faith is being the passenger. Where meditation is being the passenger, faith is being the driver. Sometimes a passenger is a bit distracting.

Meditation should never be a conversation, why talk to God? He already knows all your thoughts if you believe he is omniscient. Meditation is about listening, it is about being silent both outwardly and inwardly and practicing calmness. Meditation doesn't require faith because it is real in and of itself, faith is only necessary when religion is more like a fantasy novel or similar. I personally see no use for any such thing, but then I have experienced enough to not need faith - certainly at one point my journey was faith based also, but it was quite erroneous then at the same time.

 

[seattlegal]

Asking God, asking others, to make something happen. If you have faith as much as a mustard seed, you can say to this thing, and it will obey you. Even a rebuke. It is not the act of meditation. It is the act of disturbance. The disturbance can be answered in a multitude of ways, and it can be ignored. Faith would be more like going to see a hypnotist to rid oneself of smoking.

I'm not interested in 'causing' God to obey me. :/

Ridding oneself of one's own unfettered thoughts? If meditation is a conversation with God, it is the act of telling God to shut up. That is not to say meditation is necessarily that, it is to say that meditation is hopefully a solo event.

I would say meditation is more about the one meditating listening and paying attention.

Where meditation is being the driver, faith is being the passenger. Where meditation is being the passenger, faith is being the driver. Sometimes a passenger is a bit distracting.

 

[seattlegal]

If you are asking God for anything, you are asking him to change his will, you are not serving it. What is the point of asking God for anything? He already knows everything you want and need, he already knows what is best for you whether you believe or not.

Prayer should be reserved for thanking God, for being grateful and showing your trust. Become loving towards him, let this permeate to your very core, there is nothing else necessary. To ask is to infer you know better.



Meditation should never be a conversation, why talk to God? He already knows all your thoughts if you believe he is omniscient. Meditation is about listening, it is about being silent both outwardly and inwardly and practicing calmness.

lol, we said the same thing at the same time

 

[Lunitik]

lol, we said the same thing at the same time

hahah