How can I compassionately ... hijack your thread?

muhlenberg, allentown college of st. francis de salles, schnech tech, cedar crest???

 

btw, i don't think this is a buddhist subject because many buddhists believe in reaching satori (enlightenment) through overindulgence in wine

 

Wouldn't even consider any of those.

Sure they do.

 

lehigh, moravian, northhamton county cc... lafayette???

 

No way. I go to college in a whole different state.

 

you mean a state of consciousness... now i understand

 

No ... are you stupid? Honestly.

I go to the Rochester Institute of Technology.

 

buddha is of the heart, not the mind... awakened consciousness is not a mental process

 

You clearly know nothing about Buddhism then. The Buddha taught that consciousness IS a mental process, and that it can be controlled and disciplined.

As a matter of fact, the Buddha taught others, through meditation, how to discipline their mind. He taught of wisdom, how we are all born into ignorance, and we gain wisdom throughout our lives. His entire philosophy revolved around the mind, and had far less to do with the heart.

 

the essence of awakened consciousness is compassion

 

... which is a mental process.

 

of a loving heart

 

I disagree; Buddha said mind is one of the senses. True, meditation will teach you to control it, and it is a manifestation of the consciousness (like everything else is) but consciousness is transcendent of mind.

 

That has nothing to do with it being a mental process.

I have to disagree with you here, Trippin. How can consciousness be trascendent of mind? Mind is indeed one of the senses, but the mind also handles all of the other sensations from the other senses. Consciousness can be determined by perception of those sensations, and/or reaction to them. These are all functions of one's mind, and if you removed the mind, there would be no volition or recognition of sensations, therefore there would be nothing you could call "consciousness."

 

its all about nothing... you are starting to understand grasshopper

 

Consciousness comes before the senses, before the body. Thus it transcends them all. At our cores, we are all pure consciousness, and out of that comes the forms and senses. Mind is indeed important, but the reason Buddhism focuses on the mind is because it is out of control and thus gets in the way of our true self...consciousness.

If you remove the senses (mind included) you have consciousness. Not consciousness of any one thing, but pure unadulterated consciousness.

 

Do nothing, go nowhere, be nobody


and your very being will be a service, and all your "actions" will be in dharma.

Your flower will bloom and the bees will buzz around you, and benifit from your honey... and the hive mind on earth continues to subtly manifest.

 

Sorry, now you're just getting to be a serious nuisance. I'll let you be, I don't have any more time to waste on contradictions by hypocrites.

See, I have to disagree, because the Buddha taught the princiapl of "Anatta", or "no soul." The Buddha taught that, there is no such thing as a soul, or anything permanent about us that can be identified as the "core" of us, that exists without our physical bodies. That being said, it would be impossible along this line of thinking, to believe that consciousness, or anything that is "I" or a part of "I" or belongs to "I" can exist otherwise.

Also, according to dictionary.com, to be conscious means "Having an awareness of one's environment and one's own existence, sensations, and thoughts. See Synonyms at aware."

The problem is, how can a person (or some form of "consciousness") be aware of their environment, existance, sensations, thoughts, and the like, if they have no mechanism through which to BE conscious (the six basic senses, touch, taste, smell, hearing, sight, and mind).

I think many times people substitute the word "consciousness" for "soul," and it leads to very confusing debate about a particular topic. Consciousness is just another term for "awareness," and it implies some form of singular, limited perspective that is not all-encompassing.

Your thoughts?

 

Happy New Year Hikaru!

1 : the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life
2 a : the spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe b capitalized, Christian Science : [size=-1]GOD [/size]1b
3 : a person's total self
4 a : an active or essential part b : a moving spirit : [size=-1]LEADER[/size]
5 a : the moral and emotional nature of human beings b : the quality that arouses emotion and sentiment c : spiritual or moral force : [size=-1]FERVOR[/size]

English is a little bit like Japanese- the context used around a word must be used to find which definition is intended. I fuck up reading into shit sometimes....

No, they aren't anymore. Now they are anyone's (who looks at them). I won't remember them (exactly) until I see them again. Well, maybe, but only if God makes me...

 

I'm not using "consciousness" as a word for "soul." I'm talking about a much more universal "substance." We could say "being" or "Self" or "oversoul" or "isness" if you like.

I'm agreeing with you in your first paragraph. There is no permanant, individual soul. There is consciousness. One universal consciousness that we all are. Our senses, mind included (or especially), gets in the way of that realization. That's why Buddhism focuses one quieting/controlling the mind.

I'm not saying Buddhists are trying to get rid of the mind, no more than they want to get rid of their eyes; one would still have all the mechanisms by which they see, hear, touch, smell, taste, and think of the world. But one would not be lost or trapped in them, identified with them.

I don't believe consciousness is limited at all. Many people substitute the world "consciousness" for "mind" and that also leads to a confusing debate. Mind may be a manifestation of consciousness but is not the totality of it.