BILL: There is nothing 'wrong' with living with the illusion of self
and having attachments.
MIKE: Bill, there's nothing morally wrong with that illusion, but it's
wrong in the sense that it is an incorrect interpretation of reality.
ED: Mike, how will you proceed to convince the other 99.9% of humans
that their experience of reality is incorrect?
BILL: Buddhism 101 teaches that attachments are the cause of
sufferring.
MIKE: Not just that there are attachments per se, but not seeing thru
those attachments.
ED: Mike, what do you mean by "seeing through those attachments"?
BILL: 'Happiness' is a dualistic concept. If you create 'happiness' then
you also create 'sadness' or sufferring.
MIKE: True, but again this is not the whole story. The more we drop the
'defilements' of craving, aversion, bad conduct etc. the more the mind
is freed to show its inherent purity. It's not wrong to say that
Happiness (as do Equanimity, Bliss, Compassion etc.) arises when this
eventuates (as opposed to the dualistic 'happiness' of, say, buying a
new car).
ED: Bill, 'happiness' is a feeling or experience, not a concept.
Happiness and unhappiness cannot be created, but are a consequence of
our thoughts, words and deeds and their interactions with the external
world.
BILL: If you're okay with that then you have no strong incentive to take
up zen. Zen (lower-case 'z') does not prosletize. Buddhism and Zen
Buddhism might, but zen does not.
MIKE: People prosletize. Zen Buddhism, arising out of Buddhism, takes
what the Buddha said seriously: "Don't just believe and follow what I
say, but find out the truth of what I say for yourselves."
ED: Bill, it appears that you (dualistically) regard 'not proselytizing'
as preferable to proselytizing.
--- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> wrote:
>
Bill!,
>There is nothing 'wrong' with living with the illusion of self and
having attachments.
There's nothing morally wrong with that illusion, but it's wrong in the
sense that it is an incorrect interpretation of reality.
>Buddhism 101 teaches that attachments are the cause of sufferring.
Not just that there are attachments per se, but not seeing thru those
attachments.
> 'Happiness' is a dualistic concept. If you create 'happiness' then you
also create 'sadness' or sufferring.
True, but again this is not the whole story. The more we drop the
'defilements' of craving, aversion, bad conduct etc. the more the mind
is freed to show its inherent purity. It's not wrong to say that
Happiness (as do Equanimity, Bliss, Compassion etc.) arises when this
eventuates (as opposed to the dualistic 'happiness' of, say, buying a
new car).
>If you're okay with that then you have no strong incentive to take up
zen. Zen (lower-case 'z') does not prosletize. Buddhism and Zen Buddhism
might, but zen does not.
People prosletize. Zen Buddhism, arising out of Buddhism, takes what the
Buddha said seriously: "Don't just believe and follow what I say, but
find out the truth of what I say for yourselves."
Mike
ED,
There is nothing 'wrong' with living with the illusion of self and
having attachments. Buddhism 101 teaches that attachments are the cause
of sufferring. 'Happiness' is a dualistic concept. If you create
'happiness' then you also create 'sadness' or sufferring.
If you're okay with that then you have no strong incentive to take up
zen. Zen (lower-case 'z') does not prosletize. Buddhism and Zen Buddhism
might, but zen does not.
...Bill!
> Bill,
>
> Within limits, what's the problem with having attachments which make
one
> happy. All non-human living entities and 99.9 percent of humans are
> under the illusion of self.
>
> So what?
>
> --ED
> > ED,
> >
> > 'Gratifying the self' is another phrase for 'having attachments'. It
> also implies the person is still under the illusion of 'self'.
> >
> > ...Bill
