No, I didn't find your reply sloppy. My comment also included befriend's comment about the idea of nothing can affect us. Which I feel strongly is not true, as each moment, we are affected by everything our senses are taking in. It's how we interpret/cognize this sensual information that results in the personalization. In my view, any personalization that takes place is dukkha. We can't just say all things are anicca. It doesn't hold up to our actual experience. We divide into subject/object. Every experience is met in this way. We think we are getting somewhere when we can refine our intellectual understanding into 'less' dukkha. It's easy to create less dukkha by changing our behavior and that is a good start to overcoming bad habits. But then we get to how we are actually perceiving experience itself, how we divide ourselves/experience into subject/object. You can't simply change this behavior because every tool and technique we use is part of this structure of division. It is not simply an intellectual/emotional activity. Our very existence is predicated on this activity. Can you follow what I'm trying to say? Every word of advice, wisdom, Dhamma, etc., is more food for this mill of division. No insight of the ordinary order touches this. 99.9% of insight is just mental, behavioral. Some make you feel good for awhile. None last.JohnK wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 6:29 pmI agree with both points.Saengnapha wrote: ↑Mon Feb 05, 2018 5:41 pm...Relatively speaking, it seems the recognition of things being impermanent is fairly easy to discern. Often people comment about the fleeting nature of experiences, etc. What is substantially more difficult is to come to terms with the 'personalization' of experience that we all engage in. It takes much more than an intellectual recognition of the way we cognize experience and create dukkha. The idea that nothing can affect us is impossible. What else are we other than experience?
My wording may have been a bit sloppy, but I tried to clarify "not affect us" as only in the sense of not creating dukkha (not affecting our equanimity might be another way to put it, or not affecting us to go bonkers with personalization/selfing). Also, my sense was that befriend was perhaps experiencing something a bit more than that "fairly easy to discern" impermanence, describing it as an "insight" and, I think, experiencing a sense of freedom because of it. So, I was assuming the possibility of some insight beyond the "fairly easy" that was nevertheless written down in a way that seemed imprecise and offering a rewording closer to what I take to be the teaching.
On the cultivation of insight/wisdom
I'm not saying I'm not affected by good and bad or neutral experiences but when doing vipassana you let go of good and bad love and hate and just witness the never ending flux of phenomena this diminishes your greed hate/aversion and delusion because you see there is nothing to want, hate or to confuse. It's not intellectual it's an experience an intuitive insight arising by itself it's Panna.
I agree.befriend wrote: ↑Tue Feb 06, 2018 12:24 pmI'm not saying I'm not affected by good and bad or neutral experiences but when doing vipassana you let go of good and bad love and hate and just witness the never ending flux of phenomena this diminishes your greed hate/aversion and delusion because you see there is nothing to want, hate or to confuse. It's not intellectual it's an experience an intuitive insight arising by itself it's Panna.
The few mind moments where you are not reacting are powerful, quickly liberating past conditioning and altering personality.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests