|
 laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
 Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken  [Re: xFrockx]
#14612626 - 06/14/11 02:50 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said:
What good is the knowledge that there is no self if you feel the need to defend it? What are you, or anyone on that forum, doing it for?
I haven't been back to that forum for months. I check it out occasionally, and find that I have no desire to post anything. Frankly, most of the people there bore me.
I don't really feel that I'm "defending" anything, more like explaining. I do it because these conversations are more interesting than bullshitting about the weather, or whatever was on TV.
Quote:
Just because I can't see a unicorn does not mean that there are no unicorns. As I said before, if there were a self, I do not expect I would be able to see it. Like how an eye cannot turn back and view itself without a mirror.
If the self exists in any way that matters, then it does something. If it does something, then that something can be observed. Unless you believe that the self is entirely passive, in which case, its existence cannot be disproven, but neither can any qualities be attributed to it. If by "self" you mean "awareness," then fine, a self exists. But it is not the self which makes decisions. It is not the self which events happen to. There is no self that does anything. If you want to claim there is a self which does nothing ... then congrats, you are useless, you don't do anything. If you want evidence of a self which does anything at all, there is none to be found.
|
xFrockx
 
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: Icelander]
#14612637 - 06/14/11 02:52 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I don't know. I like to think that everyone is enlightened underneath it all, and that we keep ourselves from it with beliefs, notions, thoughts, goals, or anything else that keeps us from just being content as fuck doing nothing. For me, this would include holding any belief about the existence or non-existence of a self. For me, its pretty trifling to think of such a thing if one's goal is inner peace. If one's goal is to argue a very seldom held belief that people aren't used to defending against, then well, its hardly trifling, it can have a kindof self-satisfaction to it.
Edited by xFrockx (06/14/11 03:06 PM)
|
xFrockx
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14612678 - 06/14/11 03:02 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
"I don't really feel that I'm "defending" anything, more like explaining. I do it because these conversations are more interesting than bullshitting about the weather, or whatever was on TV."
Explaining something? So your idea is true, but people need it explained to them?
I can see questioning people down to nothing, but explaining isn't going to rid preconceptions, its going to add them. Isn't it? Or did you mean you question people?
Quote:
"If the self exists in any way that matters, then it does something."
"In any way that matters"? I thought you cared about the truth? Not just your pragmatic demands.
Quote:
"If it does something, then that something can be observed."
Does that mean that we can observe it?
Quote:
"Unless you believe that the self is entirely passive, in which case, its existence cannot be disproven, but neither can any qualities be attributed to it. If by "self" you mean "awareness," then fine, a self exists."
I don't believe anything I don't know for sure, and I don't know anything for sure.
Quote:
"But it is not the self which makes decisions. It is not the self which events happen to. There is no self that does anything."
Again, just because we can't observe any effects does not mean that there are none. Claiming that it does not exist in "any way that matters" is just pragmatic. I'm not too interested in finding pragmatics, that is pretty easy. Finding truth though, I don't know if you've found any if you claim that there is no self, and even if you have, you certainly have no way to confirm it. Now, you might get somewhere saying that the burden of proof is on those who say that there is a self, but if you are going to claim that there is none, then no matter how you try to hide, you are making a claim, and something that can be tested. Now, we may never contradict the idea, but that doesn't mean it is true.
Quote:
"If you want to claim there is a self which does nothing ... then congrats, you are useless, you don't do anything. If you want evidence of a self which does anything at all, there is none to be found."
Why would I care if I have a use? What good is pragmatism if we are looking for the truth?
|
BlueCoyote
Beyond
Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 3 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14612774 - 06/14/11 03:25 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
If you repeat any word often enough, it will loose its meaning.
Maybe that's the trick here, ha
|
laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: xFrockx]
#14612863 - 06/14/11 03:46 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
I made this thread with the hope of prompting people to look for themselves (literally).
xFrockx, you're trying to rope me into a semantic argument, and I quite simply don't care enough to do that with you. My words are not going to prove anything about your experience. Experience already is what it is, and here I am claiming that what it is, is selfless. You can check that, and come to a conclusion or at least make some notes. Or, you can keep asking me semantic questions so that you don't feel obligated to attempt any real self-inquiry. If you choose the former, I'd be delighted to discuss what you find. If the latter, I'm leaving.
|
xFrockx
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14612897 - 06/14/11 03:51 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
"xFrockx, you're trying to rope me into a semantic argument, and I quite simply don't care enough to do that with you. "
Not at all. I have no interest in semantics. I am merely letting you know that I am not so sure of what you seem to think you know.
"Experience already is what it is, and here I am claiming that what it is, is selfless. "
What a fucking leap. If you say something is what it is, how do you go and say something else about it after that? It makes no sense.
"Or, you can keep asking me semantic questions so that you don't feel obligated to attempt any real self-inquiry. "
HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO INQUIRE INTO OR WITH SOMETHING THAT I DO NOT KNOW EXISTS, AND THAT YOU CLAIM DOES NOT AT ALL?!?!
STOP CALLING SEMANTICS ON ME AS A DEFENSE. I HANDED YOUR ASS SOME QUESTIONS YOU CANT SEEM TO ANSWER, AND YOU'RE COPPING OUT.
|
laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: xFrockx]
#14612971 - 06/14/11 04:04 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said:
HOW AM I SUPPOSED TO INQUIRE INTO OR WITH SOMETHING THAT I DO NOT KNOW EXISTS, AND THAT YOU CLAIM DOES NOT AT ALL?!?
By investigating immediate experience. Observe thought, see if there is a self involved. Observe motion, see if there is a self involved. This is what you would already be doing if you were actually curious whether or not you, yourself, exist.
|
xFrockx
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14612985 - 06/14/11 04:06 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
"By investigating immediate experience. Observe thought, see if there is a self involved. Observe motion, see if there is a self involved. This is what you would already be doing if you were actually curious whether or not you, yourself, exist. "
Again, just because we can't see it does not mean it isn't there. Just like God. We might not ever find God, but to say for sure God does not exist is to presume something we do not actually know.
But now you'll probably tell me I think God exists, skimming over what I'm saying completely.
Also, you have never addressed my question about how a self is supposed to "see" itself. How can an eye see itself without a mirror?
|
laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: xFrockx]
#14613029 - 06/14/11 04:14 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Your reasoning only makes sense if you allow that a "self" could be anything, including things which are invisible and have no effects in the real world. This is not what 99.9% of people mean by a self. A self is a doer of actions. Paying attention to action reveals that there is no doer, and thus no self, in that sense of the word. If you are inventing your own definition, fine, I have no comment on that. But the self which a vast majority of people presume to exist, very obviously does not exist.
|
xFrockx
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14613845 - 06/14/11 07:07 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
My reasoning? Are you even reading what I write? I'm not trying to reason you into anything. I'm trying to ask you questions for you to answer.
"This is not what 99.9% of people mean by a self."
I think you're forgetting India and China. Your percentage is probably much, much lower than that.
"Paying attention to action reveals that there is no doer, and thus no self, in that sense of the word."
Paying attention reveals absolutely no conclusions. Sorry. It doesn't. It only is what it is. That's like saying statistics conclude things. They don't, they merely are information.
information does not make conclusions, people do.
|
laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: xFrockx]
#14613862 - 06/14/11 07:10 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
You win. Stop talking to me.
|
xFrockx
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14613881 - 06/14/11 07:13 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Lol. You are funny. I have nothing to win. I'm sorry I couldn't help you let go of this idea, I was probably too confrontational.
|
foliocb
always running
Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1,152
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: xFrockx]
#14615603 - 06/15/11 02:07 AM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
xFrockx said:
I have nothing to win.
there is no you to win 
--------------------
^v^
|
xFrockx
Registered: 09/17/06
Posts: 10,458
Loc: Northeast
Last seen: 3 hours, 17 minutes
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: foliocb]
#14616161 - 06/15/11 07:44 AM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Well if they cut down all the trees, there'd be no more wind.
|
 teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻
Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: Hicquodiam]
#14618626 - 06/15/11 05:11 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Hicquodiam said:
Quote:
laserpig said:
RT is awesome at spawning shitty imitators. That's why I left. No-self is real but frankly I can't be fucked to explain it to most people. Too annoying, and if they actually care, all you've really got to do is point out the question and nudge them in the right direction anyway. Actually "talking someone into it" is impossible.
Too annoying? That's a first world problem if I've ever heard one.
You're fucking enlightened man, you can push past an incomprehensible amount annoyance and laziness.
Or do you not notice your species around you, destroying itself? Is it not obvious that the only way to find people who WANT this is to ACTUALLY GO LOOKING FOR THEM?
Know what happens if everybody who is seeking liberation got it? More people would want it. Jesus man, look how big this is. It's not inconceivable that it will spread, wide-scale, in our lifetime.
I dare you to present a more worthy cause. Go live with Jed, ramble about how awesome you are for 3 books, and watch TV all day? Travel with Ecky, and describe how great the state is to a bunch of people who will never get there? Jack off in presence?
What actual research have you done to think you have the right to determine that is what is best for all humanity? That is a pretty big claim, and I would expect data to back that claim up.
Have you done any controlled experiment with a society exclusive to members sharing your one and only belief?
|
teknix
πβπ
’ππ
π°π‘ πΌπ⨻
Registered: 09/16/08
Posts: 11,953
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: teknix]
#14618646 - 06/15/11 05:14 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
"One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is the teaching on anatta, often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn't fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of kamma and rebirth: If there's no self, what experiences the results of kamma and takes rebirth? Second, it doesn't fit well with our own Judeo-Christian background, which assumes the existence of an eternal soul or self as a basic presupposition: If there's no self, what's the purpose of a spiritual life? Many books try to answer these questions, but if you look at the Pali canon β the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings β you won't find them addressed at all. In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html
|
laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: teknix]
#14618754 - 06/15/11 05:31 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Naturally. That's upanada, clinging, attachment.
In my opinion, the absence of any object or entity which one could call a "self" within a human being is plainly apparent. In that sense, it is the truth. But there is a difference between this perceptual recognition, and the operations of ideas and doctrines.
Upanada will contort anything, including the knowledge that there is no self.
One man's opinion herp derp. 
Naturally, I have my attachments, and a somewhat ideological attitude towards the absence of self is one of them, and if I were really impartial here I would just sit back and not comment. I find this is more interesting.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: teknix]
#14618933 - 06/15/11 06:08 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
teknix said:
"One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is the teaching on anatta, often translated as no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for two reasons. First, the idea of there being no self doesn't fit well with other Buddhist teachings, such as the doctrine of kamma and rebirth: If there's no self, what experiences the results of kamma and takes rebirth? Second, it doesn't fit well with our own Judeo-Christian background, which assumes the existence of an eternal soul or self as a basic presupposition: If there's no self, what's the purpose of a spiritual life? Many books try to answer these questions, but if you look at the Pali canon β the earliest extant record of the Buddha's teachings β you won't find them addressed at all. In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice impossible."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notself2.html
I'm having a hard time trying to see what people even mean by the self beyond a linguistic reference point, which certainly DOES exist... defining your terms before claiming that something doesn't exist would help tremendously.
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
  
|
laserpig
Weedmaster_P
Registered: 04/28/09
Posts: 7,468
Last seen: 11 years, 10 months
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: deCypher]
#14618946 - 06/15/11 06:11 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
Just to clarify: the reference point does exist, but the reference point is not "who you are." The human body and mind =\= a linguistic reference point. Hence, a human body/mind does not contain a self, and selves do not have bodies or minds.
|
deCypher
Registered: 02/10/08
Posts: 56,232
|
Re: Just in case you wanted to Awaken [Re: laserpig]
#14618969 - 06/15/11 06:16 PM (12 years, 9 months ago) |
|
|
 When I use the word "I" or "me", I'm referring to this human. How else are you defining the self?
--------------------
We are all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder 
Red Vein Kratom
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 all )
Shroomism
moi
quinn
ciaran
deCypher
Ellis Dee