More Religious Nutters

[Blake]

I suppose I could justify that.

Drugs induce a state of Rapture.

It is possible, during meditation, to encounter such states.

HOWEVER, such states are actually a distraction, experiencing them is not to be made the goal of meditation. If someone delights in such states of mind, they will not attain Nibbana. It's sort of like climbing halfway up a mountain and stopping forever to marvel at the view. Sure it's nice; but you've kind of missed the point of climbing the mountain. Although I think an even nicer analogy for drugs is like getting launched by catapult. You enjoy a really great view and experience and get really high... for a little while...


There are forms of meditation which are towards the "ecstatic", some meditative practices are designed to increase the sensual pleasure of sex, and such.
As surely as the sun rises, these will not lead to Nibbana.

Likewise, dulling the mind makes it impossible to meditate, one can not meditate with a slothful mind.

Meditation involves, experience fully, states like anger, boredom. Numbing yourself to these states of mind, will result in meditating like a chicken (bird, not coward).

Even if it were possible to make a drug which allowed one to experience the freedom and bliss of nibbana, anyone taking that drug would become utterly dependent on the provider of that drug, hopelessly attached, suffering miserably when denied that drug. They would not be experiencing the benefits of attaining nibbana. To use the mountain analogy, it would be a very powerful catapult.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Blake
It's sort of like climbing halfway up a mountain and stopping forever to marvel at the view. Sure it's nice; but you've kind of missed the point of climbing the mountain.

But climbing the mountain is not the same as climbing to the top of the mountain.

Someone may have some experience and say, I want to climb the mountain and see its majesty from below the peak.

Now, grant you, climbing to the top is great, but then, often, one is clouded or shrouded from the reality that lies below. This being said, the reality of what exists below because for the one that ascended, his reality is accomplishment of a lofty goal, but not the lofty goal of all.

Who sets a benchmark of what is and is not "Optimum Performance" in experience?

I dont do illegal drugs anymore, but when I did, I took different ones for different reasons, I took Acid and Mushrooms for the "experience", whereas i took Meth for a long term awakening, and cocaine for a short high.
I smoked reefer and then reefer dipped in PCP for a wild ride.

All were wrong, but during this, I achieved what i wanted, also what i didnt, physical harm may have hurt me internally.

Some times the question is not why but why not.

I am told that the best trip of all is death, thats why it is saved for last.

Gramps

[Blake]

The mountain is a metaphor, analogy.

In this case, there is only one mountain. The only place where you can see everything, in all directions, is from the top of the mountain. Otherwise, the mountain always blocks your view of at least half of reality.

You can climb part way up and marvel that "Oh yes, the view is much better from here". But you haven't got anywhere near having the full panoramic view of things.

(Also, there are no bragging rights)

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Blake

Even if it were possible to make a drug which allowed one to experience the freedom and bliss of nibbana, anyone taking that drug would become utterly dependent on the provider of that drug, hopelessly attached, suffering miserably when denied that drug. They would not be experiencing the benefits of attaining nibbana. To use the mountain analogy, it would be a very powerful catapult.

Brain surgery would make it permanent.

If you accept that the mind is the brain, and that is the only conclusion we have any real evidence for, then the state of nirvana will be a brain state, and hence probably subject to physical manipulation.

However, if you want to believe in souls and suchlike, then it's really no more reasonable that any other religion.

[Kidlicious]

I'll stick with drugs and the temporary delusion of freedom and bliss, as opposed to a permanent delusion, thank you very much.

Actually, that's a lie. I don't care for either one, but I do agree with a lot of what Blake is saying. I would just drop the Nirvana thing.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking


Fair point.

But given that hating oneself is (a) a psychoses; and (b) often does not negate acting in self-interest; I do not believe this is much of a refutation of my statement, so much as a justifiable criticism that my language (as usual) was too absolute.

It is generally inconsistent with the mammal Homo Sapiens to expect each individual it to behave in a manner wherein its desire for survival and propogation of other individuals is equal or greater than the desire for the survival and propogation of itself.

Thinking that you aren't any more important than anyone else is the psychoses? Are you sure the opposite isn't true, that thinking you are special isn't the psychoses?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Perfection
Well, snowflakes are neat patterns in the universe. so are human bodies.

The authority could be humanity as a whole by which the universe by some spooky means follows.

Coulda, shoulda, woulda...

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Blake
The mountain is a metaphor, analogy.

yeah, I..ugh..got that part, mine was also a metaphor, acceptance from a different perspective

In this case, there is only one mountain. The only place where you can see everything, in all directions, is from the top of the mountain. Otherwise, the mountain always blocks your view of at least half of reality.

You can climb part way up and marvel that "Oh yes, the view is much better from here". But you haven't got anywhere near having the full panoramic view of things.

(Also, there are no bragging rights)

[Kidlicious]

I've climbed actual mountains btw, in case anyone is interested.

[Blake]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Actually, that's a lie. I don't care for either one, but I do agree with a lot of what Blake is saying. I would just drop the Nirvana thing.

Do you know what Nirvana IS though? Or are you STILL thinking of it as a heaven or state of rapture?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Blake


Do you know what Nirvana IS though? Or are you STILL thinking of it as a heaven or state of rapture?

Hey Blake, is music considered a distraction from enlightenment the desire of which is best removed?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Blake


Do you know what Nirvana IS though? Or are you STILL thinking of it as a heaven or state of rapture?

I know what you are talking about since you explained it too me. It's still religious in nature IMO, but I think if you take the religious aspect out it would be reasonable.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Blake
Do you know what Nirvana IS though?

I don't get why it is a desirable state even apart from the insipid descriptions and analogies provided by Agathon. Nirvana even as Buddhists describe it doesn't sound all that appealing.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I don't get why it is a desirable state even apart from the insipid descriptions and analogies provided by Agathon. Nirvana even as Buddhists describe it doesn't sound all that appealing.

It's appealing because they define it to be and then make the definition true for themselves and their believers.

[Blake]

Originally posted by Geronimo
Hey Blake, is music considered a distraction from enlightenment the desire of which is best removed?

Methodologically distracting yourself with music, certainly yes!
Just listening to music because it happens to be? Not really a problem.

So there's no problem with enjoying music, but quite the problem with needing to listen to music in order to find enjoyment.

Originally posted by Kidicious
I know what you are talking about since you explained it too me.

. Sorry, but even the most skilled Buddhists teachers will say "I can explain what it is, but you wont believe/understand me", they then proceed to explain anyway, generally, to prove their point. Mainly because their words do (may) come to make sense. In order to prove that you do understand it, you'd need to explain what it is to me and if I accept your explanation as being valid you could then be said to know the same thing that I do. Otherwise you just have refined misconceptions.

It's still religious in nature IMO, but I think if you take the religious aspect out it would be reasonable.

What is the religious aspect? What is the part which you just have to take on faith and can never experience as being true?

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I don't get why it is a desirable state even apart from the insipid descriptions and analogies provided by Agathon. Nirvana even as Buddhists describe it doesn't sound all that appealing.

True Buddhists will call it Nibbana, not because they're elitists who prefer to use Pali words to sound clever, but because Nibbana does not translate well into English and unlike Nirvana (which probably could be used) does not have contradictory meanings attached to it (and meaning is an important thing - in this case having no conception of what Nibbana is, is certainly more useful than having preconceptions).

That aside; it's quite normal. And Nibbana is not to the seen as the goal anyway.

"How can I reach a state free of desire when the state itself is something that I desire"(webcomics ftw!)

This is a legitimate point! If someone is practicing Buddhism in order to reach the state of Nibbana, or in order to gain the power to levitate or read minds or something, then they wont get anywhere.

So Nibbana does not have to be an attractive thing, it should not be the goal. Imagine climbing a mountain always remaining focused on on the peak, you would soon trip and fall because you aren't watching where you place your feet!

The Buddhist path leads inexorably towards Nibbana, moreso than Nibbana being the goal of the Buddhist path. Once you reach Nibbana you have freed your mind of every fetter so in some sense you are done. Like at that point Buddha went and founded Buddhism.

All that said, Nibbana is an immensely satisfactory thing once you understand what it truly is, but that understanding can only arise once you break free of certain mindsets (like the one which causes the question I linked to).