Author Topic: Peace?  (Read 12474 times)

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #25 on: July 25, 2013, 03:46:26 AM »
What is this happiness if not feeling?



Happiness free from sensual pleasure.

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #26 on: July 25, 2013, 03:51:28 AM »
I am not trying to play games with words Matthew, I'm pointing out a possible error in the use of a particular word.

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Peace?
« Reply #27 on: July 25, 2013, 08:37:52 AM »
The issue with the way you're doing it though is that it's a faith based perspective. Effectively you could use the same approach to negate or approve anything, it becomes a matter of pointless semantics.

Quardamon

  • Member
    • Teachers were: P.K.K. Mettavihari, Frits Koster, Nel Kliphuis. (In the line of Mahasi Sayadaw)
Really? I see anger, and fear for the unknown.
« Reply #28 on: July 25, 2013, 10:00:57 AM »
Gentlemen,
Dharmic Tui, Redalert, Matthew,

Could it be, that some hidden anger is running around this thread?  ???  Just maybe?

To me it seems, that the only time that it was named, was in the quote at the bottom here.
To me it seems, that anyone who is not willing or not ready to face their anger (and uncertainty), could go on and on in this thread.

It seems to me, that in this thread there is the activity of what is called a "ghost role" by Arnold Mindell. He uses that term in his work with groups. People in therapy groups have roles: the leader, the follower, the prudent, the dare-devil, the weak, the protector, and so on. If, for example, there is fear in the group, and nobody takes the role of being fearful, then that "ghost role" will run around and play havoc - until it is named and addressed.

Pointing to others as being wrong is an indication that there might be a ghost role.
Running around in circles and repeating oneself is an indication that there might be a ghost role.

It might be that I had a role in starting this, when I was angry with Redalert for not being careful with an other forum member. But I let him know, he reacted appropriately, and to me it seems that that has been settled.


Please gentlemen,
See for yourself what is pushing and pulling you.


Round and round in circles we go,
Where it will stop nobody knows,


I thought this forum was not exclusively Buddhist, but was welcoming of other perspectives.


You seem to be inventing a language of your own.


    . . .     This is not right action or right speech if you are dishonestly mixing with these people you "give a wide birth to" and take "with a grain of salt", then come here quoting.    . . .   


Are you trying to become the class-comic or something?  If not you're doing an excellent job with these word-games! Ah - but much better you make me laugh, you've really cheered me up today.  :D


How else do you expect to break free from states of mind like fear and anger if you cannot view them in a detached way as merely a vibrational frequency,   . . .   


    . . .    please don't beat the crap out of me too badly y'all.  This may be a bit tough to digest :)

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Peace?
« Reply #29 on: July 25, 2013, 10:51:58 AM »
Gentlemen,
Dharmic Tui, Redalert, Matthew,

Could it be, that some hidden anger is running around this thread?  ???  Just maybe?

To me it seems, that the only time that it was named, was in the quote at the bottom here.
To me it seems, that anyone who is not willing or not ready to face their anger (and uncertainty), could go on and on in this thread.

It seems to me, that in this thread there is the activity of what is called a "ghost role" by Arnold Mindell. He uses that term in his work with groups. People in therapy groups have roles: the leader, the follower, the prudent, the dare-devil, the weak, the protector, and so on. If, for example, there is fear in the group, and nobody takes the role of being fearful, then that "ghost role" will run around and play havoc - until it is named and addressed.

Pointing to others as being wrong is an indication that there might be a ghost role.
Running around in circles and repeating oneself is an indication that there might be a ghost role.

It might be that I had a role in starting this, when I was angry with Redalert for not being careful with an other forum member. But I let him know, he reacted appropriately, and to me it seems that that has been settled.


Please gentlemen,
See for yourself what is pushing and pulling you.


Round and round in circles we go,
Where it will stop nobody knows,



Dear Quardamon,

What a wise and interesting post. I had not encountered this theory of the 'ghost role' before, though I'm well aware that often hidden dynamics are involved in such discussions. It is an illuminating and informative theory indeed, and yes - it seems quite appropriate to what is happening now (and sheds light on previous discussions of a similar nature).

There certainly was some residual anger and frustration on my part at the beginning. This is not so now, since I posted the little poem you quote above.

Personally my experience of this discussion now, the mind-states I experience when engaging and the feeling-tones I can identify in my body are thus:

Concern: that this best not go on too long without some fruitful resolution, due to the potentially divisive nature of such debates, and that someone may feel hurt or put-off from joining in future discussions.

Humour: I'm laughing inside (and sometimes out loud) as the obvious issue is not really Dhamma but the meaning of words, and though this is sometimes explicit, it often is not.

Peacefulness and relaxation: Having arrived at the above conclusion, and despite the sense of concern, I see this topic coming to resolution fairly soon.

Equanimity: What will be will be, seeing resolution in sight I have been able to resist easily the temptation to 'fight every battle', safe in the knowledge that when this is resolved something perhaps quite original and even profound may, and I suspect will, emerge.

EDIT: forgot one!: Satisfaction: that this Sangha is resilient enough to weather a storm.

I trust you, dear friend in the Dhamma, to be gently and brutally honest if you think I am fooling myself.

Warmly,

Matthew
« Last Edit: July 25, 2013, 11:20:02 AM by Matthew »
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #30 on: July 25, 2013, 12:30:46 PM »
The issue with the way you're doing it though is that it's a faith based perspective.

It has nothing to do with faith.

Quardamon,

I felt some anger and resentment in your original post, I did not know Hazamat and had not read through many old posts, my intention was not to resurrect any old arguments, and I do not know why you originally assumed that my intentions were unwholesome. You could have sent me a PM.

Matthew,

As of lately I feel nothing but anger and resentment in your posts towards me, if this is otherwise understand that your message is unclear.

It is clear to me that although we use similar words to describe our practices, they are different.

I don't mind having a different perspective than the collective, and I don't mind if you feel that it is incorrect(its changing constantly). But I do find it difficult to converse with you when you are constantly insulting and intolerant to these differences.

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Really? I see anger, and fear for the unknown.
« Reply #31 on: July 25, 2013, 12:57:19 PM »
Gentlemen,
Dharmic Tui, Redalert, Matthew,

Could it be, that some hidden anger is running around this thread?  ???  Just maybe?
Potentially yes. I can see a frustration of Matthew towards Redalert. As for me, I have a reasonably direct style of posting, and I don't tend to mince words, but I feel no anger.

If I can be straight up, I can identify with most posters on here. There's the guys that I can identify as having walked down the path, who's perspectives and experiences I can relate to. Then there's the newcomers full of questions, trying to make sense of this whole thing. I've been both of these people, and some days I float in between.

Then there's the redalerts. I've encountered them on many a forum, sometimes they're talking about god, sometimes it's 9/11 theories, what have you. Their positions become untenable for me, because they're usually incapable of adequately reinforcing their position using a trail of logic I can identify with, instead resulting to circular lines of reasoning or assuming a level of self evidence in their concepts that are anything but for an outsider. It makes conversing in threads quite difficult and perhaps it is showing a sign of weakness from me, because I engage with them regardless expecting a bi-directional conversation of like-mindedness that deep down I know will never manifest. Whatever redalert has going on has almost nothing in common with my reason for engaging in this forum, or my path in general, I am not really into ontology, I'm just happy being. Accepting words or concepts without compelling justification to me is tantamount to faith, which I'm not big on.

I apologise to redalert for these words, and wish you well in your journeys. Perhaps this is a good point for myself to take a leave of absence from here as I don't believe it is of use to my practice at this point.

Enjoy the ride,

Brad

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Really? I see anger, and fear for the unknown.
« Reply #32 on: July 25, 2013, 02:01:27 PM »

Then there's the redalerts. I've encountered them on many a forum, sometimes they're talking about god, sometimes it's 9/11 theories, what have you. Their positions become untenable for me, because they're usually incapable of adequately reinforcing their position using a trail of logic I can identify with, instead resulting to circular lines of reasoning.

This is the difficulty that I am experiencing engaging with some of you here on this forum, you are thinking in a linear or circular fashion. My logical process is more of a multidimensional than linear approach to the Dhamma. I am doing the best that I can to make my views clear, but it does not always go smoothly.

Just to be clear DT I am not accusing you of posting angrily, I have never felt anger in your posts towards me, frustration yes, but anger no. I'm sure that if we spent time together in person we would be mates.

Be well,
Red

Quardamon

  • Member
    • Teachers were: P.K.K. Mettavihari, Frits Koster, Nel Kliphuis. (In the line of Mahasi Sayadaw)
Re: Peace?
« Reply #33 on: July 25, 2013, 02:06:55 PM »
Thank you, gentlemen, for your reactions. I will need time to digest this.

Quardamon

  • Member
    • Teachers were: P.K.K. Mettavihari, Frits Koster, Nel Kliphuis. (In the line of Mahasi Sayadaw)
Re: Peace?
« Reply #34 on: July 27, 2013, 12:10:11 PM »
The start of this: anger in my post
Quardamon,   I felt some anger and resentment in your original post    . . .    my intention was not to resurrect any old arguments, and I do not know why you originally assumed that my intentions were unwholesome. You could have sent me a PM.
OK. It is true that I chose harsh words. Probably too harsh then - I mean that it seems that (partly) we are meeting with an aftermath of my harshness.
Please understand that I did not doubt your intentions. I was concerned about the effect of your words on an old member. (I am emotionally attached to protecting that person.) ;)

An important part of the interaction on this forum is - in my view - that is is a social interaction. It seems, that we are talking about topics, like "Peace" or "Flashes of circular light" - but sometimes it is far more important that we are a bunch of people that interact. Compare a singing choir. It seems that people come to sing, but at times the social interaction is far more important.
In this thread, the social interaction is more important than the topic. (That is how I see it.)

Then there's the redalerts. I've encountered them on many a forum, sometimes they're talking about god, sometimes it's 9/11 theories, what have you. Their positions become untenable for me, because they're usually incapable of adequately reinforcing their position using a trail of logic I can identify with, instead resulting to circular lines of reasoning
This is the difficulty that I am experiencing engaging with some of you here on this forum, you are thinking in a linear or circular fashion. My logical process is more of a multidimensional than linear approach to the Dhamma.
I don't mind having a different perspective than the collective, and I don't mind if you feel that it is incorrect (it is changing constantly).

It seems to me, that both Dharmic Tui and Matthew have difficulty with the thought trains that Redalert is posting, and the views he is painting. And Redalert writes: "I am doing the best that I can to make my views clear, but it does not always go smoothly."

Obviously, for Dharmic Tui and for Matthew these thought trains are not part of an intellectual discussion. But what are they? Redalart is not able to tell, although he is doing his best.

I am sure that DT and M are well versed in dealing with thought trains and visions that come up in their own 'heads' while sitting on a cushion. But now there is the issue of how to deal with thought trains and visions that come up in an online shanga.
Personally, I go back to counting breaths.
I had hoped that it would be good enough to name the feeling tones that are behind the posts that try to be logic. I am not so sure any more that that will work.

This is my current understanding of Peace, please don't beat the crap out of me to badly y'all.  This may be a bit tough to digest :)
What I like about this remark of yours, Redalert, is that it says where you are standing. And one can only empower oneself when one is standing in one's own place.
I think it helps that you say that in the posts of DT you feel no anger, but frustration.
I think it helps that you say that in the posts of M you feel anger and resentment.
At least it helps them to dare use such words.

Oh - you also mention that you felt some resentment in my original post. Resentment. Maybe I should do some homework on that one.


Well - I will leave it at this, for now.

Dharmic Tui - I would be very sorry to see you leave. I found your contributions very valuable since the time you came.
Matthew - since you are encouraging me to be gently and brutally honest - please look into this:
Humour: I'm laughing inside (and sometimes out loud) as the obvious issue is not really Dhamma but the meaning of words,   . . .   
be careful not to laugh at someone. For Redalert, it is not obvious that this is not really Dhamma.
Sometimes, what is OK as a naming just for yourself, is not OK as a naming in a social interaction.

Masauwu

  • Member
    • chipping away
Re: Peace?
« Reply #35 on: July 27, 2013, 09:08:46 PM »
While i don't identify myself as "a buddhist" i do find great experiential value in Gautama's teachings of the eightfold path. We tend to focus on meditation but that is only a small part of the path, while communicating on a forum it might be skillful to prioritize right speech:
Quote
[1] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[2] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[3] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
[4] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[5] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[6] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."
source
I'm glad to be part of a community of people who try to deal with the issues and understand each other, this is also practice.
The summer river:
although there is a bridge, my horse
goes through the water.

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Really? I see anger, and fear for the unknown.
« Reply #36 on: July 29, 2013, 10:10:40 AM »
Heh, once more from the top.
This is the difficulty that I am experiencing engaging with some of you here on this forum, you are thinking in a linear or circular fashion.
Probably linear in general. It sorta ties into determined origination, there's usually a clear process of steps leading to a state, the result requiring the proceeding steps to be valid.
  My logical process is more of a multidimensional than linear approach to the Dhamma.
Which is where the difficulty lies. I have to say, I am really no Buddhist, at best, I am extremely secular. But if I cut to the chase, I see the heart of the matter, the reduction or abandoning of traditional thought, moving towards experience. What you seem to be doing is trying to add a narrative to insight, when the absolute inverse is what's required. It doesn't need re-interpreting or pondering, it needs the absence of that.

So the problem becomes two-pronged, you're not using deductive reasoning to establish your claims, and you're hunting for answers in the wrong way. Sometimes it's good to think outside the box, but it's not necessarily a good thing to take it as the status quo, because:

a) Sometimes consensus is correct, and that's why a lot of people agree with things
b) You run the risk of casting yourself in the role of outsider, which becomes more time spent in your own head, projecting your will and ideals on the world, instead of being with the rest and identifying with that which is around you

Anyway, I have said all I probably need to say regarding this, and hope this post finds you at relative peace (my version).
« Last Edit: July 29, 2013, 10:16:19 AM by Dharmic Tui »

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #37 on: August 01, 2013, 06:20:52 PM »
OK. It is true that I chose harsh words. Probably too harsh then - I mean that it seems that (partly) we are meeting with an aftermath of my harshness.
Please understand that I did not doubt your intentions. I was concerned about the effect of your words on an old member. (I am emotionally attached to protecting that person.) ;)

I understand where you are coming from, but this is a practice that should and could have been done with a private message. By posting in the fashion that you chose you placed me in the wrong, and set up a situation for other like-minded individuals to jump on board with your views, whether correct or not. It sets a stage for bullying to occur, and in my opinion this is what has happened in this case.

An important part of the interaction on this forum is - in my view - that is is a social interaction. It seems, that we are talking about topics, like "Peace" or "Flashes of circular light" - but sometimes it is far more important that we are a bunch of people that interact. Compare a singing choir. It seems that people come to sing, but at times the social interaction is far more important.
In this thread, the social interaction is more important than the topic. (That is how I see it.)

The interaction between forum members is important, but more important is "minding our own business" guarding the sense doors so as not to react blindly to sensory data.
Also your views and how you see things is not going to be the same as others, so why try to even judge the importance of a topic vs. the social experience. This is an interesting topic to me, and I have much more depth to share if there is an interested consciousness to perceive it. When senior members here try to squash a topic or belittle it, it is less likely that new members will be likely to engage. The only thing that can come from behavior like this is a narrow minded forum full of fear and anger.

I know I can follow my own advice and should send you a PM regarding this, but the dirty laundry is out in the open and I feel it appropriate to reinforce this publicly given resent reactions towards me.

Understand that there is no hard feelings towards you with regards to this matter and I understand you were thinking of another. I also appreciate that you took the time to try and understand this from a more detatched perspective.

Kind regards,
Red

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #38 on: August 01, 2013, 06:32:39 PM »
While i don't identify myself as "a buddhist" i do find great experiential value in Gautama's teachings of the eightfold path. We tend to focus on meditation but that is only a small part of the path, while communicating on a forum it might be skillful to prioritize right speech:
Quote
[1] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial (or: not connected with the goal), unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[2] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, unendearing & disagreeable to others, he does not say them.
[3] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, but unendearing & disagreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them.
[4] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be unfactual, untrue, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[5] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, unbeneficial, but endearing & agreeable to others, he does not say them.
[6] "In the case of words that the Tathagata knows to be factual, true, beneficial, and endearing & agreeable to others, he has a sense of the proper time for saying them. Why is that? Because the Tathagata has sympathy for living beings."
source
I'm glad to be part of a community of people who try to deal with the issues and understand each other, this is also practice.

I would like to make my statement regarding Buddhists and giving them a wide berth a little clearer.

I tend to give "some" Buddhists a wide berth and take "some" Buddhist with a grain of salt. I have found that some traditional Buddhists rely to heavily on doctrine and not enough on personal experience for my tastes.

Thank-you Masauwu for this posting, I will try to be more diligent with my speech on this forum.

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Really? I see anger, and fear for the unknown.
« Reply #39 on: August 01, 2013, 06:51:24 PM »
But if I cut to the chase, I see the heart of the matter, the reduction or abandoning of traditional thought, moving towards experience. What you seem to be doing is trying to add a narrative to insight, when the absolute inverse is what's required. It doesn't need re-interpreting or pondering, it needs the absence of that.

So the problem becomes two-pronged, you're not using deductive reasoning to establish your claims, and you're hunting for answers in the wrong way. Sometimes it's good to think outside the box, but it's not necessarily a good thing to take it as the status quo, because:

a) Sometimes consensus is correct, and that's why a lot of people agree with things
b) You run the risk of casting yourself in the role of outsider, which becomes more time spent in your own head, projecting your will and ideals on the world, instead of being with the rest and identifying with that which is around you

Anyway, I have said all I probably need to say regarding this, and hope this post finds you at relative peace (my version).
I will reply to you with Masauwu's poem:

The summer river:
although there is a bridge, my horse
goes through the water.

It seems you prefer the Dhamma neat and tidy, you see a clearly laid out path, and you see a nice bridge to cross to the other side. I also see the path and see the bridge. But I'm bushwhacking and going for a swim.  Just because ;D
Enjoy the ride, we'll get to the other shore.
Red

Dharmic Tui

  • Member
  • Something
    • Some Theravada, some secular
Re: Peace?
« Reply #40 on: August 02, 2013, 08:59:44 PM »
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in :)

It might "seem" that way to you, but it shows a fundamental difference in our interpretations of the Dhamma. The Dhamma in my interpretation and experience is a gradual path of mental progress from an unskilled mind towards enlightenment/awakening - it doesn't pretend to be neat and tidy, that is part of the point. I can try and dress it up with a whole bunch of other "stuff" like vibrations and spiritual meaning but that would be an unnecessary distraction that adds nothing to the end result, that is not Dhamma, it is a path in the opposite direction. Life is already a rollercoaster ride, and the way the human mind works there is more than enough there that gets in the road of awakening, no need to deliberately go adding more.

Perhaps I now understand why you've so much confusion about the term peace.

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #41 on: August 03, 2013, 01:03:37 AM »
Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in :)

"They" certainly do a lot of pushing and pulling don't they? No peace with them around. ;)

It might "seem" that way to you, but it shows a fundamental difference in our interpretations of the Dhamma. The Dhamma in my interpretation and experience is a gradual path of mental progress from an unskilled mind towards enlightenment/awakening

No difference, I agree with this statement. A mind full of impurities is gradually cleansed.
When a certain level of cleansing has been reached a "glimpse of Nibanna occurs". The meditator has entered the stream, although more like just touching ones tongue to the water for a brief moment. This is the experience of real peace, until this one does not know peace. Real peace has the power to eradicate the fetters. Even though this being is now partially enlightened/awakened they do not have full access to this peace, they can not fully bathe and drink from the stream. Only when the mind has reached the purity of non-returner or arahant is the ability to dwell in peace accessible.


- it doesn't pretend to be neat and tidy, that is part of the point. I can try and dress it up with a whole bunch of other "stuff" like vibrations and spiritual meaning but that would be an unnecessary distraction that adds nothing to the end result, that is not Dhamma, it is a path in the opposite direction. Life is already a rollercoaster ride, and the way the human mind works there is more than enough there that gets in the road of awakening, no need to deliberately go adding more.

People are free to interpret and practice as they desire, there does not need to be a layering of words or different descriptions of the Dhamma, but I find beauty in this. I love reading or hearing someone communicate their experience in their own unique ways. It's part of the fun of bushwhacking and swimming in samsara. I understand that some are quite rigid in their Dhamma, and this is not problematic. The difficulty arises when attachment is formed around words (my word is right and your word is wrong). This becomes the foundation for divisiveness between individuals, groups become formed with people who like certain words, and those who use other words become outcasts. All the time they are talking of the same "thing". This "thing" that cannot be adequately described by any word.

I know what people are describing when they say they feel peaceful. They mean they are feeling closer to peace/God/stillness/Nibanna.

I'm glad you stuck around,
Red

Mpgkona

  • Member
    • Some of this, some of that.
    • Here
Re: Peace?
« Reply #42 on: August 03, 2013, 03:47:20 AM »
Finally, this discussion has come full circle and it seems everyone is at peace now. In that spirit can the thread now be locked? (Jk) 
When you change the way you look at things the things you look at change.

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Peace?
« Reply #43 on: August 03, 2013, 11:20:22 AM »
Finally, this discussion has come full circle and it seems everyone is at peace now. In that spirit can the thread now be locked? (Jk) 

Mpgkona,

As yet I have not responded to this thread. Probably I will do so. Currently I am meditating upon my response and contemplating both what to say and how to say it in a way that is wholesome, conducive to harmony in the Sangha and true to the Dhamma.

As such locking the thread seems not the best way forward.

Warmly,

Matthew
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

Mpgkona

  • Member
    • Some of this, some of that.
    • Here
Re: Peace?
« Reply #44 on: August 03, 2013, 03:12:49 PM »
I was just kidding about locking it. I was really just complementing everyone. It seems everyone gained a bit of insight during the past few weeks from this discussion.
When you change the way you look at things the things you look at change.

Matthew

  • The Irreverent Buddhist
  • Staff
  • Meditation: It's a D.I.Y. project.
    • KISS: Keep it simple stupid.
    • Getting nowhere slowly and enjoying every moment.
Re: Peace?
« Reply #45 on: August 03, 2013, 06:59:23 PM »
Apologies Mpgkona,

I'm in a situation at the moment whereby I missed the (jk) bit ... and indeed some insight has been gained.

When mine feels right I shall respond.

Kindly,

Matthew
~oOo~     Tat Tvam Asi     ~oOo~    How will you make the world a better place today?     ~oOo~    Fabricate Nothing     ~oOo~

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #46 on: August 31, 2013, 01:33:21 AM »
Peace is not a synonym for Nibanna, despite your strange belief. Give some reference in the Pali cannon where this is used - I'm fairly confident you will not find one. You seem to be inventing a language of your own.



Nibbana

nibbana

(Skt: nirvana)

© 2005–2013

   


Nibbana names the transcendent and singularly ineffable freedom that stands as the final goal of all the Buddha's teachings.

Defined in terms of what it is...


"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana."

— AN 3.32


I found this from access to insight.

I don't know if this is from the Pali cannon but it seems I am not the only one with this view.

floyd

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #47 on: August 31, 2013, 11:18:49 AM »
Hi Redalert

Quote
"This is peace, this is exquisite — the resolution of all fabrications, the relinquishment of all acquisitions, the ending of craving; dispassion; cessation; Nibbana."

Compare this with standing in a superstore: "this is bakery, this is chemist, this is greengrocer" ... but this doesn't imply that you can stand in a bakery and say "this is superstore".

Peace is likely a facet of nibbana, though having never been and understanding that nibbana is a concept that cannot be adequately described, I'd be shocked and rather disappointed if, as you assert,  nibbana (ie true nature) == peace. If I were looking for peace I'd go for a walk somewhere quiet.

Cheers

I couldn't really be shocked and disappointed in nibbana as that would require attachment :)
« Last Edit: August 31, 2013, 11:56:30 AM by floyd »

redalert

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #48 on: August 31, 2013, 12:49:33 PM »
Compare this with standing in a superstore: "this is bakery, this is chemist, this is greengrocer" ... but this doesn't imply that you can stand in a bakery and say "this is superstore".


Hi Floyd,

Correct.

Now, meditate. there is the in breath, there is the outbreath, there is an itch on my nose, there is a pleasant vibration in the head, there is a pain in the knee, there is the memory of that beautiful redhead I met in the pub, ......

Peace/Nibbana is just the awareness of this phenomenon. "it" exists in all of us always.

Peace is there on a quiet walk, and peace is there at the final game of the world series with all the fans screaming and partying, and peace is there while standing in a superstore.

"it is" the ever quiet, eternal stillness, all knowing, true nature in all of us.

floyd

  • Guest
Re: Peace?
« Reply #49 on: August 31, 2013, 02:59:19 PM »
Hi Redalert

You and I have different understandings of the word peace. If we take a dictionary definition:

peace 
/pēs/
Noun
Freedom from disturbance; quiet and tranquility.
Exclamation
Used as a greeting.
Synonyms
quiet - calm - tranquillity - tranquility - stillness

I think you'd have trouble using peace to describe screaming and partying in any sensible way. Afterall, language is an agreed set of conventions by which we can communicate - note I say communicate and not tangerine because if I said tangerine you'd have no idea what I was going on about.

So yes, I guess if we all used the word peace enough instead of the word nibbana then perhaps the meaning would evolve through common usage, but until then peace means peace and nibbana means something entirely different.

What's with the peace fixation anyhow?

Check this out for some fascinating word monkeying http://beatlesnumber9.com/spaniard.html

Cheers