X-Ftn-To: Blue Rajah 

"Blue Rajah"  wrote:
>> In buddhism, the first noble truth defines suffering as a problem,
>> and the fourth noble truth offers the solution to the problem of
>> suffering in the form of the noble eightfold path, which leads to
>> the cessation of suffering - nirvana.
>
>What is suffering?  

Suffering is every state of consciousness that is below absolute
fulfillment.

>Is the sensation of pain suffering? 

Not necessarily. Pain without suffering is possible, if one doesn't
feel victimized by pain. There are masochists, you know.

>Does the cessation of suffering mean that one doesn't feel pain?

The fact that you keep mixing pain with suffering suggests that you
didn't think very deeply into the subject. Cessation of suffering is a
state of consciousness which you never want to leave, because it is
absolutely fulfilling.

>> And no, buddhism doesn't describe
>> enlightenment as bliss, not primarily; it defines it as
>> sunyata, the void, which _is_ bliss.
>
>A =/= C, but A = B and B = C.  

Sorry kid, but a grain of salt is not a grain of pepper, although a
grain is a grain.
What I said has an analogy in the statement that the sea is not salt,
although it is salty. Enlightenment is not (just) bliss, although the
void is blissful. Is that simple enough or do I have to draw you an
illustration in colors?

>Pardon me if I think you're just obfuscating.

And I think that you're full of shit.

>> >The enlightened
>> >person transcends them.
>>
>> :)) You probably think that you said something very wise. ;)
>
>Probably I did.  You probably think you're wiser than I.  

:) So, if I now say that I am, then I admit that my ego is bigger than
yours, and then it's actually _me_ who's an arrogant, shallowminded
egomaniac around here? No thanks, I'll leave that job to you, you are
much better equipped for it than my most humble and modest self. :)

>How long is your dick?

Long enough for my wife not to complain. :)

>> When one is happy, one transcends suffering.
>
>When one is dead, one transcends suffering, 

When one is dead, one doesn't necessarily transcend even the physical
existence - therefore the reincarnation, let alone suffering.
You can't transcend something you don't have. It's like saying that
poor people transcended money. You can transcend money only if you
have it, and then renounce it for something better. If you don't have
it, you're just broke.

>> When one is liberated,
>> one transcends happiness. That's how it works.
>
>You probably think I didn't say exactly that.

Yes, I probably do. I probably think that you're talking about things
far above your experience, too.

>> Indifference is the opposite of transcendence, although
>> many clueless people imply that it's the same thing.
>> Indifference is the worst aspect of tamo-guna, while
>> transcendence goes beyond sattvo-guna. Therefore, the
>> transcendence of suffering must go through happiness,
>> before it goes beyond it.
>
>Sorry, you lost me there.  What with your insistence that A =/= C although
>A = B and B = C, I'm having some trouble understanding just how you're
>arriving at your conclusions.

You're repeating yourself. Does that mean that one logical fallacy is
all you're able to come up with, or can you do better?

>How is indifference the opposite of transcendence?  

Indifference is when you don't react because you are too dumb - like a
rock. You can grind it and smash it into little pieces, and it doesn't
react in any measurable way.
Transcendence, however, is when someone you love hurts you in some
way, and you don't take it personally, and you forgive that person. It
doesn't mean that you don't care, or don't perceive the pain, or don't
understand the situation; it means that you have understanding of the
situation that is far above immediate response. A term consistent with
transcendence is "unconditional love" - the sanskrit terms would
probably be prema, karuna, maitreya and similar.

>Use English, rather than Sanscrit terms.  

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought that we were on alt.yoga, where even the name
of the group is in sanskrit.

>I realize this may be difficult for you, since you
>seem to be mired in terminology.

:)) Oh indeed, absolutely. :) 

>> I fart on your transcendence.
>
>Thank you.  I fart on your sattvo-guna.

Oh, did you just use sanskrit? Bad boy, very bad boy! ;>

>> >I don't know anything about truth, so I can't tell you what is
>> >closer to truth than something else.
>>
>> Then shut up and don't attempt to sell your ignorance as
>> high wisdom.
>
>I am unaware that I was "selling" anything.  What are you selling?

I'm selling your ass. Apparently I won it as a trophy.

-- 
Homepage: http://www.danijel.org