Another day, another possibility. We don't know what tomorrow might be. _()_
Ein neuer Tag, wieder eine Möglichkeit. Wir wissen nicht was morgen sein wird. _()_
ថ្ងៃ ថ្មី មួូយ ជា ឳកាស ថ្មី មួយ ទៀត។ យើង មិន អាច ដឹង មុន នូវ អ្វី ដែល នឹង កើតឡើង ថ្ងៃ ស្អែក
"Dhammo have rakkhati dammacāriṁ"
"N'atthi santi param sukham"
Bhante, thank you for your reply.
I wrote a reply, but decided it would not be appropriate to post it.
Not always, Nyom Binucolar, since a defiled mind would only act further, or release grasped, if it is provocated by what might seem to be out of greed, aversion or ignorance. Yet of course certain kind of belittling for the sake of belittling would be more then poor.Oh yes... the bad "mighty"... is that all what can be effort by advices toward a better?Cynicism is the lowest form of wit.
Then go on, do the villagers way of discussing about philosophy their situations and how all would be better without being guided. Don't worry, actually both, wordily and beyond advices have nearly extinct in this world and defilements run their causes. By their majority you already have all the ways previous desired.
The old Krabat traumatic ... the liberation of defilement.
Go on as usual. Nobody, and at least Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha would force you to anything. Just think in how far it is of use to feed on what is rejected. Like a child should think twice before talking about their parents.
It's not about not wanting to be guided.It's because people desire to be guided, don't let go of this kind of giver (guṇa , goodness) , that makes it impossible to gain liberating guidance. It's a matter of debt and to whom/what. And the lack of effort of keeping certain promises and to feear of disadvantage breaking up with other certain promises . Guided by Mara (the "guṇa") beings are bond. (It also might make the meaning of the "confusing part" at the end more clear.
It's about not wanting to be guided by people who despise those they guide.Well, not having a little estimation for ones own defilements is necessary. If one finds them worthy to hold on, regards them as ones own, than there is less way. The resant talk [En] Hold on for All you're worth, Bhante Thanissaro might be useful here. If one would belittle ones good deeds, tendency, and potential, that is of course an enemy. But since it is not easy to take real goodness and enemy in disguise of goodness right, as long as not reached certain level of right goodness by one self, it's difficult and often a guess or ones upanissaya of what is met. Again, also here, giving at first place, makes things quick much more clear. Giving into the right, one derives there. Nothing to fear.
Can you tell the difference?Can, could Nyom take it?
It's about not wanting to settle for a religious life of quiet desperation.How could religion, as long the "re" is not simple recidivism of the same old story of "and the it goes back..." a desperation. Of course it's required that one old and hold religion (re-bondgage), which always leads to desperation, has to be given up first. It's, how ever, to re-ligion with ones old merits (results of past good deeds, ones old friend) if coming across and build on it, nurish such inwardly and outwardly for increading upanissaya (strong condition, relation). At least the re-ligion for liberation is not for the sake of re-ligion, but for liberation of at least also from this bond.
It's about not wanting to settle for a religious life of quiet desperation.
It's about not wanting to settle for a religious life of pretenses and going through the motions.The/a pretenses is required, in the meaning of Vision, not real yet, and it's not possible to get a diploma is thinking "I just enter the school if I know all", eg. "being" before doing. Of course it whould be not good the pretenses something, but actually has other objectives, use it as means of livelihood, either cheating one self, others, or both. But again, the way (all ways) can not be walked without debts, e.g. certain imitation or what is called "rites and rituals" before they become naturally.
My person guesses it has been explained, and not sure if it was primarily a language issue (the text may incl. still things which have been explained by Nyoms gift. My person didn't not "consume" it yet.)QuoteHard to give up ones desires, hard to gain thereby release, since a master teaching the abounding of desires would require to actually desire for release.
It would really help if you'd work on your English, because the way you sometimes confuse words results in saying the opposite of what you probably intended.
Oh yes... the bad "mighty"... is that all what can be effort by advices toward a better?Cynicism is the lowest form of wit.
Then go on, do the villagers way of discussing about philosophy their situations and how all would be better without being guided. Don't worry, actually both, wordily and beyond advices have nearly extinct in this world and defilements run their causes. By their majority you already have all the ways previous desired.
The old Krabat traumatic ... the liberation of defilement.
Go on as usual. Nobody, and at least Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha would force you to anything. Just think in how far it is of use to feed on what is rejected. Like a child should think twice before talking about their parents.
Hard to give up ones desires, hard to gain thereby release, since a master teaching the abounding of desires would require to actually desire for release.
Does that mean that it is thought that certain "Reichsärzte-Philosophie" found ground here? Or how should that be understood, this "I deprive you forced from your possibilities of ancestors, because they will probably estimated as worthless and killed (better they gain birth as a chicken... *provocative*). Does not any being die? This approch if followed would be an argument for annihilationist to best destruct the whole possibilities for taking birth... so what's that, (to this amount, hopefully "just") eel-wriggling approach about?This is what the State and Religion do to people anyway.
Johann
Weiterbearbeitung des Themas: Meinungsverschiedenheit und Hierarchie , aus April 2014.Aramika
It is precisely the point.It's really strange that you take issue with compulsory sterilization (either of humans or of animals).
You have always been a staunch proponent of the idea that people have no rights.
So why do you take issue with examples of when people (or animals) are treated as if they have no rights?
That's not the point, Nyom Binocular.
My person wonders why Nyom stays that much on the surface here, does not let the matter penetrate to a more clearer stage.Because I have no rights. See?