Author Topic: A Theory on Existence  (Read 6012 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

August 30, 2005, 11:29:55 PM
Reply #15


  • Settling In

  • Offline
  • *
  • Greenhorn

  • 18
  • Karma:
  • Personal Text
    • View Profile
Why would I be banned, if your comment was directed to me Mayan. I was just saying I don't believe a person can be selfless and that if one were to want an example of not being selfless when one intends to be then provide a scenario and I will attempt to unprove that an act is selfless by showing it is in a sense, selfish. I do not mean selfish as greed pertaining to oneself(such as wanting power or money or the like) but realting to self.
"I know everything!" they look at me stupidly, "Oh yeah? Then how do you stop a balck hole?" "I don't remember...""So then you don't know everything do you?""I said I know everything, not that remembered everything!"

"I can do anything!"Oh yeah! Then fly!"I said I CAN do anthing not I will do it."

August 31, 2005, 01:37:27 AM
Reply #16


  • Veritas Furniture

  • Offline
  • ****

  • 498
  • Karma:
  • Personal Text
    Veritas Furniture
    • View Profile
    • Dojo Malmesbury
I wasnt aware the primary premise of buddhism was to be good by being selfless. The primary motive of buddhism doesn't even revolve around the idea of doing good, it is concerned with solving the problem of human suffering. So yeah, as per Buddhist thought your self is just your ego, a creation of your mind from the things you experience. What the buddhists propose is to end suffering by the dissolution of the ego, as in to become selfless in the sense of having no self, not in the sense of having, exhibiting, or motivated by no concern for oneself; unselfish. Entirely different things.

Quite right. In fact the Therevadin * school of Buddhist thought is very much about you and you only. It's a personal path to Nirvana, the Boddhisattva ideal does not exist. Contrary to this are the Mahayana schools which evolved a more compassionate form of Buddhism (Examples being Zen, Pureland and so on) which was a smart move since it appealed to more people, to socitey as well as the hardcore monastic monks. I would wager the lay suppourt for mahayana schools is somewhat greater. Being good or selfless in Therevadin schools would come (I assume) as a by product of the dissolution of ego, like Vihang said. Although in some Mahayana/Tibetan schools of thought, the desire to become an altruistic "Boddhisattva" ** is the ultimate claim and attaining parinirvana in some sects holds less merit, but that seems a little 'lovey dovey' if you catch my drift. No doubt the motivation of an enlighetened bodhisattva to do good, would be somewhat above the level of comprehension attatched beings like us could muster. So its all well and good to speculate, but may it remain at just that. :)

*(the school that can claim with great certainty to be the closest to the historical Buddha's teachings)

**(A being who holds back from 'parinirvana'(final nirvana achieved upon death) in order to help the countless numbers of sentient beings throughout this samsaric cycle become enlightened.)
"There's a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can't take part, you can't even passively take part, and you've got to put your bodies on the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers... and you've got to make it stop!"
Mario Savio

August 31, 2005, 04:51:57 PM
Reply #17


  • Posts By Osmosis

  • Offline
  • *****
  • Pool Boy

  • 588
  • Karma:
  • Personal Text
    Pinkus Elephantus
    • View Profile
People can't be selfless as any action taken relates to the self, it's delusional to think selflessness is attainable.
The self will always be present in some regard.
The annihilation is not total annihilation, it is a method  in which the will is brought forth.
This is more what the goal of selflessness is ego annihilation pretty much the same thing.

The island of the "tonal" is swept clean to make way for the "nagual" as to have no resistance to it.
The "tonal" is another term for ego, "nagual" is the will, the inexplicable.

The emptiness inside is caused by the mistakeness that the tonal is missing, thus suffering is void in it's realisation.

How can you explain freedom, never having experienced it.
From the moment we ar born we conform to the physical world. In narrow awareness of all that there is to percieve.
Try Tachyon[/URL

August 31, 2005, 06:36:43 PM
Reply #18


  • A Familiar Feature

  • Offline
  • ***
  • El Mira - The Sight

  • 150
  • Karma:
  • Personal Text
    Live. There is no plan B.
    • View Profile
Have you ever read anything my Phillip K. Dick?
If not, read Valis by him, you'll like it.
“The purpose of all the major religious traditions is not to construct big temples on the outside, but to create temples of goodness and compassion inside, in our hearts.” –The 14th Dali Llama