The Piraha are quite interesting for a number of linguistic reasons which are too boring to mention specifically, but yeah, neat stuff.

Note this as "good" and keep doing what you're doing, I think. From one random guy on the internet to another, it sounds like the qualities you are developing are good. And you'll have more intense experiences as well, over time, but also crappy sessions. The thing is that craving for a pl...

As you may recall, I posted numerous links explaining Thomistic answers those questions. No postings related to those links materialized. That's because you posted a lot of tedious and walls of text, rather than trying to answer questions in a straightforward way that is actually conductive to havi...

The whole point of kataphatic spirituality is using the insufficient to come to knowledge. Which would inevitably be insufficient knowledge. Not a basis for meaningful discussion. In continuing to read apophatic theology into the dhamma you continue to miss the point. The frequent theme of explaini...

this fact of his spiritual method is quite plain, especially when read in the context of Christians who were apophatic And this, really, is the problem. There's an old Zen saying about empty cups and whatnot... I understand that it is natural to approach new information from the perspective of what...

All the Buddha is saying is a) What we can sense is not-self, and b) What is beyond is beyond the distinctions of self and not-self. If you sift that out, you'll see quite clearly that what he is saying is whatever we are, it is ineffable. These are assumptions that are not at all inherent in these...

Oh, nevermind, my grumps aren't going to do any good. Entertaining thread, in any case.

There's something they call the "raft simile", which goes something like this: You construct the raft in order to get across the river, but once you're across, it's pointless to carry the raft on your back. Being obsessed with non-clinging and impermanence is, as obsessions go, in the cont...

I do not know if this idea of emptiness as non-existence is some Mahayana thing or a misinterpretation on your part, Darwid, but I'm going to be so presumptuous as to say that it's just not correct. Theravada certainly does not accept this idea of emptiness, you are right about that.

The thing Buddhist ethics revolves around is, whether actions are beneficial and lead to the reduction of suffering and stress, or do not. It is a pragmatic distinction drawn up for a specific purpose, and not for establishing a theory of objective moral absolutes.

What?

The breath itself may not be particularly riveting, but take notice of how peaceful it is when you are able to keep yourself on the breath, calmed undistracted and unworried. It is quite nice when it happens, and is a pretty good incentive.

As long as anything is taken to be "I, me, mine, myself", suffering and stress will follow. So the teaching aims at the ending of those cognitive habits. The thing that you are positing here kind of misses the point.

No.

But I now realize that this is a topic that I shouldn't have interjected into anyway, so don't worry about it.

...and what does that even mean and why does it matter?