How would you know about the transformation of consciousness or lack of it that has occurred over the millennia? — Janus

I read the wiki page, of course. :brow:

If you want to learn a practice, any practice: art, music, literature and so on, guidance from those more experienced is, if not essential, at least an advantage. I see no reason why it should be any different with practices designed to transform consciousness and the self. — Janus

The difference, in a word, is religion. The purpose of religion is not to produce graduates but to bind communities. Graduates or 'free' individuals may not be as inclined to move with the herd. If a religion like Buddhism were actually interested in 'transforming consciousness and the self', wouldn't it do a better job of it after over two thousand years???

"Those who have no guidance, fall like leaves are free (enlightened)."

Fixed.

You’ll have to forgive his American slang.

This seems to imply that all (conditioned) life, including pleasure, is suffering from the perspective of the wise — Apollodorus

That seems to imply that the wise can’t feel.

I watched A Hidden Life last night. Beautifully made and a beautiful (tragic though inspiring) story.

The growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been, is half owing to the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs. — George Eliot

whale thumbnails ain't gonna catch on - just telling you now. — The Opposite

Have I mentioned that sperm whales have been on the endangered species list for fifty years?

A little show of appreciation and support would demonstrate exemplary character.

It's been 50 million years since they, in a fit of madness, decided to return to the sea. — jamalrob

Mad are they, who’s gonna look crazy once global warming covers the earth in water.

An hour and a half over 50 million years? Could do better. — jamalrob

Perhaps, but what’s the rush.

For some reason I thought you were American.
— praxis

I am. I saw it on the T.V. set. :death: — James Riley

Ah, I watched The Tiger King this year.

My impression - totally cray cray.

My Conclusion - ego bad.

My lesson - stay away from crazy egotists.

An adult sperm whale can hold its breath for an hour and a half, FYI. Pretty impressive, you must admint.

That I can't decide. Even though I've lived in both situations. — god must be atheist

And if you were forced to decide???

I also liked seeing some elephants and other wildlife come down out of the hills and start wandering towns. — James Riley

For some reason I thought you were American.

I'm being obtuse?

I've agreed with you that being less attached can be good. Being less reactive can be good. As I've mentioned, 'less' and 'non' are different. It's the extreme (non) that I think is not natural (nature is balanced) or religious in nature.

There's no point in continuing. It's like arguing over the existence of God.

Also, you keep ignoring my suggestions that you might see it more favorably if you think in terms of 'reactivity' instead of attachment. — Janus

Being nonreactive sounds even less alive than being non-attached.

I'm attributing my thumbnail's nonelection to penis envy. A sperm whale penis in its entirety is 13 feet in length, and weighs nearly 800 pounds.

What do you mean "harsh"? I'm using stupidity as an analogy to attachment; unlike pregnancy there are degrees. — Janus

I never disagreed that there are degrees of attachment or reactivity. I would disagree that there is such a thing as non-stupidity, at least in regard to human beings. I'm sure that God-fearing folk would say that God is non-stupid, similar to how Buddha-loving folk would say that Buddha realized non-attachment. Easy to claim, not easy to show.

Everything you've been claiming appears to be 'less' and not 'non'. Less can be great, but less is not non. 'Non' may not even really be desirable since we need to live in this world, and if we don't want to live in this world, a well-aimed bullet is an expedient solution.

Or a little stupid. — Janus

That was unnecessary harsh, and you still haven’t adequately explained non-attachment. You’ve described how people get stuck on something and then let it go. This is pretty much what we all normally do, in some cases effortlessly. Non-attachment indicates no further attachment and therefore nothing to let go of once one is non-attached.

Right, so it's only a matter of degree. — Janus

Yes, like being a little pregnant.

You wrote: "So if all the spectators can shut the hell up, those of us actually involved, trained and formally educated for this stuff, can get to work and do our job."

So I assumed you were a specialist in the field of infectious diseases such as an epidemiologist. I am impressed by your work in the ER and critical patient transport though. Mom must be proud.

So not being attached is not non-attachment? — Janus

In order to let go of something you need to first be holding it. As you say, we all know that we can let go of attachment to things when we need to. Even our strongest attachments will eventually fade in time. Non-attachment is like a teflon pan that nothing gets stuck to, not even yesterday's reheated four cheese spaghetti sauce. Ya feel me?

Ah, so not an epidemiologist.

You should read more closely and try not to think in black and white. I said I don't know if complete non-attachment is possible. We all know that we can let go of attachment to things when we need to. — Janus

Inconceivable!

Since when does letting go of attachments mean non-attachment? Never.

I don't see how you can say that it's odd, you're not even sure that non-attachment is possible, or so you've said in this topic.

Everyone has an opinion, but very few play in actual field. So if all the spectators can shut the hell up, those of us actually involved, trained and formally educated for this stuff, can get to work and do our job. — Book273

We're all involved, and we each have education and training in stuff. You might want to be specific enough for this to have some meaning.

Let me guess, your job is to advise the public not to waste their time with vaccinations.

Clear as mud, as I suppose it must be.

Not that religious talk needs to make sense, and in fact it's better if it doesn't, but it sounded like you just said that attachment is part of non-attachment.

Not just fear. It reflects the human craving for uniformity: "Everyone should do the same thing, be the same, even if in the process of becoming so, they die." — baker

There seems to be evidence for this kind of tribalism.



The weird thing is that Trump is always boasting about how he made the vaccine available, and he advises people to get it, though he also respects his follower's freedom (without responsibility). There's too much politicized anti-vax momentum, and it's litterally killing them.

Wait, I didn't think you got to use that argument? Everything causes death and injury.
— James Riley

Yeah, so why bother about non-vaxing? — Cartuna

Yeah, why bother, just get vaccinated.

I don't wanna deny you everything. I just say cars are the cause of many accidents, Mortal ones included. So all cars should be banned, including the roads they travel on. Like all no vaxing should be banned in your eyes. — Cartuna

I don't think it would do much good to ban anti-vaxers from public life, even if that were somehow possible, if that's what you're suggesting. Vaccination is not generally mandatory. If employers want to make it mandatory that's their prerogative. It's a free country, after all.

Also, Riley has repeatedly pointed out that driving is heavily regulated. People with DUI's are banned, for example.

Why does that matter, you travel on roads,
— praxis

But not in a car. — Cartuna

My tax dollars help to pay for the roads you use, traffic law enforcement, etc., but you would deny me an ICU bed because you’ve gotten too many DUI convictions?

Don't worry, I will not use your hospital bed when I get ill, nor that of your loved ones. But if you or your loved one get injured in a car incident, she should not occupy my bed or that of my loved one, as we don't drive cars. — Cartuna

Why does that matter, you travel on roads, don’t you? If you never go anywhere, the things that you and your loved ones consume depend on automotive transportation. In any case, I probably won’t need the ICU bed because I’ve been vaccinated.

The point I made about bowing - and I really didn't want to start an argument about that - is simply that it's an acknowledgement of the idea of there being a higher truth, which is, generally speaking, something which has been practically obliterated in Western culture. — Wayfarer

Actually, traditional minded folk still bow before Royalty, as a show of respect and deference to their authority. It helps to reify the hierarchical social order, which is essential to all religious institutions and tribes with ‘traditional’ values. Many of Trump’s base would probably love to bow before him if it were somehow made customary.

Where I live, an inspection for $50 would be a great deal, actually.

why does anyone that has been vaccinated give two shits about Covid? — Book273

Because many human beings care about other human beings and are not utterly self-centered.

The nature of attachment is connection or binding, and there’s no escaping the fact that we’re all connected and bound, so reason demands that we accept this enslavement. :flower:

To be concerned with virtue and well-being is to be attached.

It looks like zen and stoicism taught you a lot. — NOS4A2

Zen taught me to let go and stoicism taught me to hang on, so I'm basically back to where I started. :roll:

Though it's more applicable to his time, in some sense it pertains to the old sage, too. — NOS4A2

Oh? People tend to use their own understanding these days? A lotta folks seem to use the understanding of Fox & Breitbart News. People like yourself.

Self for Nietzsche isnt an entity but a vector of change.
— Josh’s

Sure, we can find a similar conception of self in Buddhism as well, by some Buddhist teachers, although this isn't mainstream.
For example, Thanissaro Bhikkhu: Selves & Not-self
He talks about the self as a strategy, as something one does (identifies with some things, disidentifies with others). — baker

I recall a Buddha quote something to the effect that the self, or rather what constitutes the self, shouldn’t be construed as an entity but a description of suffering.

I like unenlightened’s but I can’t decide if it’s a horse or a stormtrooper.

Years ago at a newcomer meeting at the Los Angeles Zen Center, the meeting started with newcomers asked to say something about themselves and why they were there. One of the newbies said some things about himself that completely escapes me, but I distinctly remember him finishing confidently with “… until I reach enlightenment”. The roshi and head monks all laughed at this. It wasn’t a mean spirited laugh but more like an ‘isn’t that adorable’ laugh. Kind of like a child who proclaims their ambition to be an astronaut when they grow up. I’m sure that being an astronaut has its rewards, but the child’s vision of being an astronaut and the adult vision may be somewhat different.