MMK23 wrote:Given my rantings on the other topics, I'm writing here to demonstrate that I am a foolish, yet-to-be-humbled hypocrite. I think given Ken Wilbur's track record: viz his infomercial super-religions, his hawking of shopping channel meditation devices, and his relationship with Genpo Dennis Merzl's unspeakable Big Mind TM, I'd very much like it if his presence were not continued in any Buddhist forums and he was left to hawk his products and his anti-dhammic views through his own door-to-door efforts.
Nibbida wrote:In this video, Ken Wilbur describes a phenomenon that I've heard many times from meditators:
http://integrallife.com/applications/da ... n-practice
My question is whether there are terms in the Theravada tradition that pertain to this.
"There is the case where an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person... does not discern what ideas are fit for attention, or what ideas are unfit for attention. This being so, he does not attend to ideas fit for attention, and attends instead to ideas unfit for attention... This is how he attends inappropriately: 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past? Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' Or else he is inwardly perplexed about the immediate present: 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?'
"As he attends inappropriately in this way, one of six kinds of view arises in him: The view I have a self arises in him as true & established, or the view I have no self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive self... or the view It is precisely by means of self that I perceive not-self... or the view It is precisely by means of not-self that I perceive self arises in him as true & established, or else he has a view like this: This very self of mine — the knower that is sensitive here & there to the ripening of good & bad actions — is the self of mine that is constant, everlasting, eternal, not subject to change, and will endure as long as eternity. This is called a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, the uninstructed run-of-the-mill person is not freed from birth, aging, & death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair. He is not freed, I tell you, from suffering & stress.
Rui Sousa wrote:The idea of self, such as in the thought "I am a sane person", is a consequence of wrong view, and a cause of suffering and despair (we now call it panic attacks). Fear of losing sanity only arises if one sees himself as sane, and then holds on to this idea.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests