Women as emotional being :myth ?

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

there you go,

'jupiviv dissatisfied'

being appears.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

Cahoot wrote:
Cathy Preston wrote:
Cahoot wrote:Without intent of life, delusion obscures truth. ;)

Ok tell me exactly what your intent of life is please.
That body of yours will surely be dust someday. And yet you continue to feed it. Why? The intent of life.

Your eyes that read will turn to dust in time. And yet, you read. Why? Go on, say it. The intent of life.

You acknowledge each life form that passes, touching it in some way, with those soon-to-be-dust eyes, or perhaps only with a thought. But you do it. Why? You know exactly why.

: )
Cahoot do you consciously hold the intent to eat? Your eyes have no intent to see they just see. The people I meet in my daily life seem to me to be exactly where they need to be, doing exactly what they need to be doing, the beauty and perfection of the Universe shines through them, as it shines through all things.
#
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

Dennis wrote:evoke a piece of brocade, embroidered silk material of gold or silver. this material presents 2 faces, its right side and reverse side, which are totally different it symbolises manifestation presenting its right side to God and and its reverse side to mankind.
Its right side is splendour and the reverse side is made of threads disposed in an apparently chaotic fashion. In different places, the threads present ravishing forms and in other places, frightening forms,
this is where the contrasting chaos is striking, from the torture of the sadist to the saint in service to others.
There is never a view from the Absolute, there is only manifestation, it only looks chaotic and frightening to those who think they have something to lose, It's splendorous to anyone who knows there's absolutely nothing to lose. Both Heaven and Hell are right here, right now.

If one is still suffering they're simply adding to the suffering of the world, that there is something completely beyond suffering is hope for the whole world. Suffering for the suffering of the world appears to be a noble cause if one believes in a God who will reward you for your sacrifice, your great caring, your undying devotion. Something to lose, something to gain.

Why do you bring up 5 branches of philosophy? Do you intend taking up one of those positions?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis Mahar wrote:Pam,
Seeing that phenomena is empty ends desire for form. The ending of the material universe. Transformation.
That's my understanding.
The cognition that the material universe (form) is impermanent, lacks its own essence, and is a play of causality.
therefore grasping at form as a way to guarantee a sustainable source of pleasure is erroneous and is the suffering.

nevertheless I exist.
the palpable experience of Being.
An enlightened Being is awake to the nature of form. (transformation).

So, what we've got so far is Being and emptiness.

Sartre wrote a book called 'Being and Nothingness' which I haven't read but I suppose he was trying to impart the same reasoning.
The palpable experience of Being, I relate to this vision.

For me, I express this palpable experience of Being as my "reconciling tender spot" which at its core, is comprised of compassion for the origin of grasping, sex awareness, and wisdom of the way to end this grasping, conscious absorption of sex awareness into asexual awareness [omnipresence of spirit].

The ending of sex in the totality of the causal web = the ending of matter. Cause and effect taken to its alpha-omega point and beyond, which is the integrity of reconciling sex to its [asexual] cause. Conscious intent to end the suffering that is the turning wheel of (re)birth. Transformation. Into what form of life beyond reproduced life? I do not know, for I am of the reconciliation, the "palpable experience of Being." :-)
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cathy: If one is still suffering they're simply adding to the suffering of the world, that there is something completely beyond suffering is hope for the whole world. Suffering for the suffering of the world appears to be a noble cause if one believes in a God who will reward you for your sacrifice, your great caring, your undying devotion. Something to lose, something to gain.
Cathy's understanding of suffering revealed. :-) By assuming I held this same view, can you see why our conversation become clouded by the mud of your "you" projection?

Compassion born of wisdom has nothing to do with believing in a God who will reward one for their noble sacrifice. Compassion born of wisdom is everything to do with understanding the law of the spirit of life or the law of omnipresence [I hope you can "see into" the metaphors I am using] and of understanding one's role in being caused to have this understanding. When the Buddha spoke of the noble path, do you believe his reference was in any way related to the reference of the noble cause you referenced above?
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

#
The Noble path is a method to end suffering so no I don't see it as relating to the appearance of a noble cause that includes suffering for the sake of suffering. If Buddha was still suffering how could he see a method to end it? To empathize with someone's suffering merely reinforces suffering, to empathize with the perfection they are creates opportunity for transformation.

Pam are you saying the way to end suffering is to quit having sex? Is your position that sex equals matter, and that matter is the cause of suffering?
#
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

There is never a view from the Absolute, there is only manifestation, it only looks chaotic and frightening to those who think they have something to lose, It's splendorous to anyone who knows there's absolutely nothing to lose. Both Heaven and Hell are right here, right now.
There's no evidence for God or an Absolute perspective.
These phenomena are inferred and are useful philosophically as models or theories.
they are possibilities.
Being and emptiness (causes/conditions) are confirmed.
There is a space for thought/emotion to play in called the 'God spot' for meaning making.
God is inferred because being/emptiness seems insufficient for most people as in 'what put being/emptiness there', then it goes on to 'what put God there' ad infinitum.
The human quest for a higher power is insatiable.
Donald Duck will do fine, its just a matter of believing.

God is usually given entityness as an outside superpower pulling the strings.

Buddha's equivalent to God is Nature or Buddha Nature.
We are that.
there's no entity in control.
This is it.

anyway, thoughts/emotions do not exist as their own things, they are not independant and exist dependantly.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Pam,
The palpable experience of Being, I relate to this vision.
Wisdom surely counts as one's mode of being in the matter of the experiencing of pleasure and pain.
Whaddya reckon?

Hitting the pain barrier over and over sucks.
It pays to do the math.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

Dennis wrote:there's no entity in control.
This is it.
Which is why the end of suffering in the world occurs one individual at a time. By imagining suffering is caused by anything other than the delusions of ego one can go on playing the game of god and attempt to change the World meanwhile ignoring the actual cause.

To see the world as perfect is not an emotional belief in God, it's acceptance of life as it is without the delusions of ego. As long as something external needs fixing, Ego is safe, the journey inward must be fully completed before the outward journey begins.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

By imagining suffering is caused by anything other than the delusions of ego one can go on playing the game of god and attempt to change the World meanwhile ignoring the actual cause.
what are the delusions of ego?
its not wrong or suffering to have the experience of ego or separate self.
the cause of suffering is the belief that ego is its 'own being' when the truth is its dependently arisen.
is that your point?
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

Dennis Mahar wrote: what are the delusions of ego?
its not wrong or suffering to have the experience of ego or separate self.
the cause of suffering is the belief that ego is its 'own being' when the truth is its dependently arisen.
is that your point?
Not wrong just a mis-perception of reality, which causes suffering, the ego itself is the belief you are separate from everything else, when that belief is completely dropped ego goes with it. Ego clouds the mind, thus clouds reality, seeing fault, seeking fulfillment, it's completely unnatural and is experienced as suffering, either for yourself or for others. When the ego is gone, life is just what it is, beautiful, whole, complete, natural, unbounded, infinite. No ego, no clouds, just reality. Each person literally experiences their own world, so if you want to end suffering in the World you end it in yourself.
SuperMegaUltraGenius
Posts: 32
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 11:17 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by SuperMegaUltraGenius »

How is the ego unnatural, not-natural? I consider everything in existence as natural. Why demonize the ego as something 'evil'? If it is so evil and unnatural why is it so ubiquitous, is then the whole manifest material universe inherently evil and unnatural? that seems a harsh perspective to take on the only existence we experience. Of course you can put this down to an ego just trying to defend its egoness in the face of a relentless barrage of anti-ego polemic.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Because ego is phenomena it's fit for investigation.
On the one hand we can't say it doesn't exist, has no redeeming features and is utterly illusory otherwise we have fallen into nihilism.
On the other hand we can't argue that it exists as its own being because we will fall into essentialism.
It cannot be assigned absolute existence therefore it is relative and arises out of causes/conditions.

If transformation is possible,
it has to exist and not exist as a solid, unchangeable entity.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dan Rowden »

SuperMegaUltraGenius wrote:How is the ego unnatural, not-natural? I consider everything in existence as natural. Why demonize the ego as something 'evil'? If it is so evil and unnatural why is it so ubiquitous, is then the whole manifest material universe inherently evil and unnatural? that seems a harsh perspective to take on the only existence we experience. Of course you can put this down to an ego just trying to defend its egoness in the face of a relentless barrage of anti-ego polemic.
Just because something is natural it doesn't follow that it's desirable. Such judgements always arise in a value context. If one values truth (and therefore devalues delusion) the ego becomes undesirable because it arises from a place of false ideas about the self.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Dennis Mahar wrote:Pam,
The palpable experience of Being, I relate to this vision.
Wisdom surely counts as one's mode of being in the matter of the experiencing of pleasure and pain.
Whaddya reckon?

Hitting the pain barrier over and over sucks.
It pays to do the math.
Reckoning, now there's a word oozing with palpable experience of Being!

Hitting the pain barrier over and over sucks, yet when one stops hitting the barrier, one's awareness of the pain barrier remains, does it not? The very fact that we are speaking of it is evidence of this truth. The principle of "it is not what one is aware of that reveals who they are, it is how one interprets what one is aware of that matters" applies here. In this case, one is aware of the pain barrier - how now, to interpret this awareness? For me, you defined this interpretation, whether you agree with my interpretation of your concept or not, that being the interpretation of reckoning, or reconciliation.

The spiritual metaphors of the Christ and of the Bodhisattva fit well with my interpretation, which is also the transformation, of the pain barrier.
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cathy: The Noble path is a method to end suffering so no I don't see it as relating to the appearance of a noble cause that includes suffering for the sake of suffering. If Buddha was still suffering how could he see a method to end it? To empathize with someone's suffering merely reinforces suffering, to empathize with the perfection they are creates opportunity for transformation.


Transformation does not happen in a vacuum. Empathizing with perfection is the transformation, but can you honestly say that awareness of perfection does not also include an awareness of imperfection?

I cannot say what the Buddha was experiencing within his consciousness when he spoke of suffering, I can only speak of what happens within my consciousness when I am caused to be aware of something, and that is, I am effected by that awareness. Was the Buddha different than me? Perhaps he was, but it is interesting to note that there is awareness of nirvana and of parinirvana, the latter occurring only with the death of the body.
Pam are you saying the way to end suffering is to quit having sex? Is your position that sex equals matter, and that matter is the cause of suffering?
Having sex gets to the heart of the idea of duplication of form, as if the original form is not, as you say, [already] perfect. Why do you think that most wise men and women become "monk minded?"
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by jupiviv »

Dennis Mahar wrote:there you go,

'jupiviv dissatisfied'

being appears.

'Dennis explains what he means by "being"' doesn't appear, so being doesn't appear either.
User avatar
Tomas
Posts: 4328
Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 2:15 am
Location: North Dakota

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Tomas »

jupiviv wrote:
Dennis Mahar wrote:there you go,

'jupiviv dissatisfied'

being appears.

'Dennis explains what he means by "being"' doesn't appear, so being doesn't appear either.
Excellent rebuttal.
Don't run to your death
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:
Transformation does not happen in a vacuum. Empathizing with perfection is the transformation, but can you honestly say that awareness of perfection does not also include an awareness of imperfection?
Yes. There are no imperfections only deluded minds.
movingalways wrote:
I cannot say what the Buddha was experiencing within his consciousness when he spoke of suffering, I can only speak of what happens within my consciousness when I am caused to be aware of something, and that is, I am effected by that awareness. Was the Buddha different than me? Perhaps he was, but it is interesting to note that there is awareness of nirvana and of parinirvana, the latter occurring only with the death of the body.
The ego (desire) causes re-birth, it's basically an illusion, the Buddha attained freedom from re-birth when he attained enlightenment.

Excerpts from the Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha
Through not seeing the Four Noble Truths, Long was the weary path from birth to birth. When these are known, removed is rebirth's cause, The root of sorrow plucked; then ends rebirth.

Destroyed is birth; the higher life is fulfilled; nothing more is to be done, and beyond this life nothing more remains." And the Venerable Subhadda became yet another among the arahats, and he was the last disciple converted by the Blessed One himself.

No movement of the breath, but with steadfast heart, Free from desires and tranquil — so the sage Comes to his end. By mortal pangs unshaken, His mind, like a flame extinguished, finds release.
From these we see that the mind and body are extinguished so by placing the end of suffering as something beyond form we just make it a moving target that will never be reached, mind and form are not two things, they arise together, cease together.
movingalways wrote: Having sex gets to the heart of the idea of duplication of form, as if the original form is not, as you say, [already] perfect. Why do you think that most wise men and women become "monk minded?"
Mind is not separate from Form, perfection of form is not possible without a pure mind (free of ego), Wise men and women become "monk minded" simply because they no longer have desire, not that they are trying to end form.
#
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

'Dennis explains what he means by "being"' doesn't appear, so being doesn't appear either.
There it is again, this time appearing satisfied as if its won something.

Ego (that form) looks like a bee in a bottle.
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

Pam and Cathy,

The distinction 'monk minded' as a mode of being shows up in your conversation and is certainly a palpable experience of being.
By your reckoning is living out of the Ego Context a flavour of being that looks like a bee in a bottle.

I really get that 'bee in a bottle' metaphor, brings it home nicely, easily recognisable.

causes/conditions are such that we experience existence as utterly alone in our own particular pattern, a drive to individuation.
in that we are different.
nevertheless we share those conditions and in that are the same.
not one, not two.

we can't escape our difference nor can we escape our sameness.

getting ego to grok itself quiets the mind sufficiently that grasping for stuff out there excessively involves more pain than its worth.
User avatar
jupiviv
Posts: 2282
Joined: Tue May 05, 2009 6:48 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by jupiviv »

Dennis Mahar wrote:
'Dennis explains what he means by "being"' doesn't appear, so being doesn't appear either.

There it is again, this time appearing satisfied as if its won something.

Ego (that form) looks like a bee in a bottle.

So "being" is a person's ego - is that your definition of it?
Pam Seeback
Posts: 2619
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Pam Seeback »

Cathy,

From the Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha, posted by you:
No movement of breath, but with steadfast heart, Free from desires and tranquil — so the sage Comes to his end. By mortal pangs unshaken, His mind, like a flame extinguished, finds release.
This sutta makes no sense when interpreted literally. How can one not be breathing and also have a steadfast heart? I propose that what it is saying is that by way of a steadfast heart, a still mind [a pure mind] the sage accepts the end of breath as the way of the end of suffering. And that the ending of suffering that is the ending of breath consciousness is a process, experienced individually for the sake of the whole, our wolf with or without the broken leg included. Note that the sage with steadfast heart still has mortal pangs. They are unshaken, to be sure, but they are present. Mortal pangs = awareness of suffering.

Finding release is all anyone who remains breathing can do. Release implies absorption. Absorption implies a gradual ending, not an annihilation.

You said the ego (desire) causes rebirth. Birth and breath are inseparable. Therefore, do you equate inhaling and exhaling with desire, with the ego? If so, how do you reconcile this equation with the breathing, dying Buddha and the breathing, dying wolf? Do either or both have egos?
Dennis Mahar
Posts: 4082
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 9:03 pm

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Dennis Mahar »

So "being" is a person's ego - is that your definition of it?
To a greater or lesser degree.
Have you met a being not concerned or not caring about its being or anothers being
not chasing some desired condition.
being and desire go together.
there's always a payoff projected.
Cathy Preston
Posts: 230
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:13 am
Location: Canada

Re: Women as emotional being :myth ?

Post by Cathy Preston »

movingalways wrote:Cathy,

From the Maha-parinibbana Sutta: Last Days of the Buddha, posted by you:
No movement of breath, but with steadfast heart, Free from desires and tranquil — so the sage Comes to his end. By mortal pangs unshaken, His mind, like a flame extinguished, finds release.
This sutta makes no sense when interpreted literally. How can one not be breathing and also have a steadfast heart? I propose that what it is saying is that by way of a steadfast heart, a still mind [a pure mind] the sage accepts the end of breath as the way of the end of suffering. And that the ending of suffering that is the ending of breath consciousness is a process, experienced individually for the sake of the whole, our wolf with or without the broken leg included. Note that the sage with steadfast heart still has mortal pangs. They are unshaken, to be sure, but they are present. Mortal pangs = awareness of suffering.
To me with steadfast heart, simply represents that body and mind of Buddha passed peacefully, they were in sync. By mortal (ego beings) pangs is the state of humanity absorbed with their individual existence over everything else, that the Buddha was aware of this is why he created the Noble Eightfold Path. Not even the deluded cries of the whole world could change the natural course.
movingalways wrote:Finding release is all anyone who remains breathing can do. Release implies absorption. Absorption implies a gradual ending, not an annihilation.


People with an ego don't find release, they can't because they refuse to let go, so they block change, for all we know they may very well block true evolution.
movingalways wrote:You said the ego (desire) causes rebirth. Birth and breath are inseparable. Therefore, do you equate inhaling and exhaling with desire, with the ego? If so, how do you reconcile this equation with the breathing, dying Buddha and the breathing, dying wolf? Do either or both have egos.
Rebirth is different from Birth, rebirth is clinging to the old, unchangeable, fixed, birth is potential for something completely new. Obviously I don't equate inhaling and exhaling with ego, otherwise the Buddha or anyone else would never be able to go beyond ego. In fact the more I experience the true wonder of this world, the more I see the destiny of man as conscious stewards of life, embodying a mutually symbiotic relationship with environment. I think that nature (animals and plants) provide a blueprint for evolution and if humanity can become a fully conscious, flexible, changeable partner in this process the potential is truly incredible.

Instead of humanity valuing the evolution of ego, which is like water in trapped in a toilet bowl, it rises only so far before being swept away with all the shit it accumulates, I see man eventually taking the big leap into complete evolution where the whole body of life is consciously studied and nurtured as a unit.
Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God. ~ The Gospel of John
That people find solace in the belief in re-birth confirms their fundamental delusion, that they exists separate from everything else. To be born anew is not re-birth, it is birth from the self imposed unchangeable confines of ego. To see the Kingdom of God is to see this life free of the delusions caused by ego (belief in separation).

#
Locked