Re: Phassa (contact)
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 2:48 am
Greetings Tilt,
If we define the rupa as "materialty" we can do nothing (short of lopping limbs, popping eyeballs etc.)
Metta,
Retro.
I explained what I consider to be a valid utilisation of "cause and effect" in the lengthy post to you on page 1.tiltbillings wrote:I have no idea what he is saying here. We are not to see things in terms of "cause and effect?"
I'll have to ask that you rephrase this, as we've yet been able to reach a common landing on what is meant by "epistemological" and you're yet to advise which parts of the Wikipedia definition were amenable to you, or otherwise.tiltbillings wrote:Are there other "epistemological interpretations" that are appropriate?
We can do a lot about nama-rupa... investigate the Nibbana Sermons for bountiful examples.tiltbillings wrote:What can we do about rupa in terms of acheiving liberation? The question is no different, it would seem? I have idea of what is said here.retrofuturist wrote:The physiological POV is of no relevance to the method, as what can one actually do about physiology in terms of achieving liberation?
If we define the rupa as "materialty" we can do nothing (short of lopping limbs, popping eyeballs etc.)
Metta,
Retro.