Asceticism
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Asceticism
How does asceticism relate to the spiritual path of giving up attachments? Is the person who ascetically refrains from all materialistic activities as much as possible purifying himself and heading in the direction of enlightenment? Or is he merely deviating away into a path of further self-indulgence? How is the path of giving up attachments to be measured?
-
Dave Toast
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm
Re: Asceticism
The way I see it, it's about attachment, not attachments. Ascetism removes one from the triggers of most of their attachments alright, but it doesn't go to the heart of attachment. It could certainly aid one in that quest but it could just as easily hinder if it is seen as some sort of panacea.
The path of giving up attachments is measured in multiples of never-ending attachments.
The path of overcoming attachment is measured in binary.
The path of giving up attachments is measured in multiples of never-ending attachments.
The path of overcoming attachment is measured in binary.
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: Asceticism
In your view, can one be free of attachment and yet still have attachments in one's life?
-
Dave Toast
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 6:22 pm
Re: Asceticism
If we're consistent with the definition, that is impossible.
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Re: Asceticism
I think a certain amount of avoidance of worldy temptations is necessary to begin with, as a visible commitment to moving apart from worldliness.
Because this is based on pride, it needs to be challenged eventually. Otherwise, one is still holding onto certain experiences as being intrinsically spiritual or correct. This is flawed because Nature is totally unbiased. Cause and effect has no boundaries.
We still discriminate on the probable consequences of our actions, as this is part of nature's processes. It can be pride to think we can take on everything, without having developed experiences through nature's causal processes. So, in this regard, i think ascetism eventually demands to be practised in the midst of worldliness. That's the demand of being Truthful, of not segregating oneself.
Weininger makes an interesting remark in the penultimate chapter of "Last Things", that ethical judgments aren't actually logical in themselves, because if something ought to happen, then it's not absolute. But the decision to be rational binds one to logic, so it is the foundation of ethics, and the decision to be irrational binds one to arbitrariness, or lawlessness.
Actions aren't in themselves ascetic or worldly, it really depends on what morals we set for ourselves, which are based on our highest values.
Because this is based on pride, it needs to be challenged eventually. Otherwise, one is still holding onto certain experiences as being intrinsically spiritual or correct. This is flawed because Nature is totally unbiased. Cause and effect has no boundaries.
We still discriminate on the probable consequences of our actions, as this is part of nature's processes. It can be pride to think we can take on everything, without having developed experiences through nature's causal processes. So, in this regard, i think ascetism eventually demands to be practised in the midst of worldliness. That's the demand of being Truthful, of not segregating oneself.
Weininger makes an interesting remark in the penultimate chapter of "Last Things", that ethical judgments aren't actually logical in themselves, because if something ought to happen, then it's not absolute. But the decision to be rational binds one to logic, so it is the foundation of ethics, and the decision to be irrational binds one to arbitrariness, or lawlessness.
Actions aren't in themselves ascetic or worldly, it really depends on what morals we set for ourselves, which are based on our highest values.
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Asceticism
If we are caused to be attachment-minded, and are afraid or offended by this, it would be a moral decision to experience attachment fully, and engage in it. For someone committed to being truthful and wise, that would be simply follow naturally from their values.
Yet because of the nature of truthful judgments, the attachment to experiences is reduced.
Yet because of the nature of truthful judgments, the attachment to experiences is reduced.
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: Asceticism
Kelly wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr> I think a certain amount of avoidance of worldy temptations is necessary to begin with, as a visible commitment to moving apart from worldliness.
Because this is based on pride, it needs to be challenged eventually. Otherwise, one is still holding onto certain experiences as being intrinsically spiritual or correct. This is flawed because Nature is totally unbiased. Cause and effect has no boundaries. <hr> Yes, I agree that asceticism is necessary in the beginning stages of the path, for it enables one to discard bad influences from one's life. It's a bit like giving up heroin. You initally have to engage single-mindedly in various disciplines and rituals to help you through the withdrawals. But then, as time goes on and the cravings fade away, you can start to relax and live life more naturally. The person who is strongly attached to asceticism tends to lose sight of this and usually fails to take this next step.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Weininger makes an interesting remark in the penultimate chapter of "Last Things", that ethical judgments aren't actually logical in themselves, because if something ought to happen, then it's not absolute.<hr> That's right. Our ethical judgments arise from our core values, and these, in turn, are arrived at through chance.
Quote:Quote:<hr>But the decision to be rational binds one to logic, so it is the foundation of ethics, and the decision to be irrational binds one to arbitrariness, or lawlessness.<hr> If, through chance, one decides that being truthful and rational is the most important thing in life, then one's ethical judgments will be determined by logic.
Quote:Quote:<hr> I think a certain amount of avoidance of worldy temptations is necessary to begin with, as a visible commitment to moving apart from worldliness.
Because this is based on pride, it needs to be challenged eventually. Otherwise, one is still holding onto certain experiences as being intrinsically spiritual or correct. This is flawed because Nature is totally unbiased. Cause and effect has no boundaries. <hr> Yes, I agree that asceticism is necessary in the beginning stages of the path, for it enables one to discard bad influences from one's life. It's a bit like giving up heroin. You initally have to engage single-mindedly in various disciplines and rituals to help you through the withdrawals. But then, as time goes on and the cravings fade away, you can start to relax and live life more naturally. The person who is strongly attached to asceticism tends to lose sight of this and usually fails to take this next step.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Weininger makes an interesting remark in the penultimate chapter of "Last Things", that ethical judgments aren't actually logical in themselves, because if something ought to happen, then it's not absolute.<hr> That's right. Our ethical judgments arise from our core values, and these, in turn, are arrived at through chance.
Quote:Quote:<hr>But the decision to be rational binds one to logic, so it is the foundation of ethics, and the decision to be irrational binds one to arbitrariness, or lawlessness.<hr> If, through chance, one decides that being truthful and rational is the most important thing in life, then one's ethical judgments will be determined by logic.
-
Diebert van Rhijn
- Posts: 6469
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm
Re: Asceticism
David Quinn:Quote:Quote:<hr> How does asceticism relate to the spiritual path of giving up attachments?<hr>
Asceticism seems in all its forms related to a measure of restraint or self-control. It could be seen perhaps as the reverse or the anti-dote against lack of self-knowledge, will power, dedication and concentration. It works by removing the things around you that might be keeping you from spending time on studying yourself, philosophy and your world, removing diversion of your intent, attention and passions and reducing the elements that are sapping your will and energy. And they are many.
It can only lead you so far of course. The absence of alcohol alone does not make one sober or clear headed. It even won't stop you to be an alcoholic but it's a start.
David, as for 'living more naturally', untouched by the usual cravings and delusion, that's hard to envision for me at the moment in the practical world of day to day existence. So much seems to revolve around the very things one is leaving behind! Which form takes this 'naturally'? Without effort? No resistance but invulnerable? Or far away from artificial society into nature? Which would be a form of asceticism I think since that takes in general more effort.
My own attempt for an answer so far is that it's about walking the balance that takes place through the eye of the needle and on the razor's edge. But this acrobatic sounding walk through life is the very thing that will have to be natural and effortless to the one performing it?
Asceticism seems in all its forms related to a measure of restraint or self-control. It could be seen perhaps as the reverse or the anti-dote against lack of self-knowledge, will power, dedication and concentration. It works by removing the things around you that might be keeping you from spending time on studying yourself, philosophy and your world, removing diversion of your intent, attention and passions and reducing the elements that are sapping your will and energy. And they are many.
It can only lead you so far of course. The absence of alcohol alone does not make one sober or clear headed. It even won't stop you to be an alcoholic but it's a start.
David, as for 'living more naturally', untouched by the usual cravings and delusion, that's hard to envision for me at the moment in the practical world of day to day existence. So much seems to revolve around the very things one is leaving behind! Which form takes this 'naturally'? Without effort? No resistance but invulnerable? Or far away from artificial society into nature? Which would be a form of asceticism I think since that takes in general more effort.
My own attempt for an answer so far is that it's about walking the balance that takes place through the eye of the needle and on the razor's edge. But this acrobatic sounding walk through life is the very thing that will have to be natural and effortless to the one performing it?
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>In your view, can one be free of attachment and yet still have attachments in one's life?<hr>
I can hardly say I'm free of attachments in my life. Yet, it seems that other people's attachment to me is at least as much of a problem as my own attachment (to people or things).
I can hardly say I'm free of attachments in my life. Yet, it seems that other people's attachment to me is at least as much of a problem as my own attachment (to people or things).
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Dealing with attachment naturally
David wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr>You initally have to engage single-mindedly in various disciplines and rituals to help you through the withdrawals. But then, as time goes on and the cravings fade away, you can start to relax and live life more naturally. The person who is strongly attached to asceticism tends to lose sight of this and usually fails to take this next step. <hr>
Because many cravings are biological, like hormones for instance, and have immense influence over our thoughts, relaxing is an ongoing process of judging the risk involved. The process of achieving spiritual goals is not set, wisdom arises and wanes causally, and can be destroyed or created.
I think the process is one of becoming more sensitive to flaws, as one learns to be more truth-conscious in every experience of daily life. As one gets to know what it means to experience non-attachment, then the delusions that arises can be identified and dealt with.
Quote:Quote:<hr>You initally have to engage single-mindedly in various disciplines and rituals to help you through the withdrawals. But then, as time goes on and the cravings fade away, you can start to relax and live life more naturally. The person who is strongly attached to asceticism tends to lose sight of this and usually fails to take this next step. <hr>
Because many cravings are biological, like hormones for instance, and have immense influence over our thoughts, relaxing is an ongoing process of judging the risk involved. The process of achieving spiritual goals is not set, wisdom arises and wanes causally, and can be destroyed or created.
I think the process is one of becoming more sensitive to flaws, as one learns to be more truth-conscious in every experience of daily life. As one gets to know what it means to experience non-attachment, then the delusions that arises can be identified and dealt with.
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: Asceticism
Diebert wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr> Asceticism seems in all its forms related to a measure of restraint or self-control. <hr> Yes, it's funny that the word "asceticism" always seems to be associated with the giving up of physical things, when in fact we should be concentrating on the giving up of false thought-processes and deluded forms of behaviour. Society has once again corrupted a perfectly good spiritual term by interpreting it in the crudest and most materialistic way. There is no real point in abandoning the world and living the life of a hermit if one's mind is still being buffeted about by delusion.
Quote:Quote:<hr> David, as for 'living more naturally', untouched by the usual cravings and delusion, that's hard to envision for me at the moment in the practical world of day to day existence. So much seems to revolve around the very things one is leaving behind! Which form takes this 'naturally'? Without effort? No resistance but invulnerable? Or far away from artificial society into nature? Which would be a form of asceticism I think since that takes in general more effort. <hr> To me, the only genuine form of asceticism is the mind dwelling in emptiness. By undercutting existence at its root, one is permanently beyond all things - even if one is fully immersed in the day-to-day running of the world.
Quote:Quote:<hr> Asceticism seems in all its forms related to a measure of restraint or self-control. <hr> Yes, it's funny that the word "asceticism" always seems to be associated with the giving up of physical things, when in fact we should be concentrating on the giving up of false thought-processes and deluded forms of behaviour. Society has once again corrupted a perfectly good spiritual term by interpreting it in the crudest and most materialistic way. There is no real point in abandoning the world and living the life of a hermit if one's mind is still being buffeted about by delusion.
Quote:Quote:<hr> David, as for 'living more naturally', untouched by the usual cravings and delusion, that's hard to envision for me at the moment in the practical world of day to day existence. So much seems to revolve around the very things one is leaving behind! Which form takes this 'naturally'? Without effort? No resistance but invulnerable? Or far away from artificial society into nature? Which would be a form of asceticism I think since that takes in general more effort. <hr> To me, the only genuine form of asceticism is the mind dwelling in emptiness. By undercutting existence at its root, one is permanently beyond all things - even if one is fully immersed in the day-to-day running of the world.
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>
DavidQuinn000
How does asceticism relate to the spiritual path of giving up attachments?
How is the path of giving up attachments to be measured?
<hr>
It's sumthin tuh do. Occupy, occupy.
Time is the measure.
DavidQuinn000
How does asceticism relate to the spiritual path of giving up attachments?
How is the path of giving up attachments to be measured?
<hr>
It's sumthin tuh do. Occupy, occupy.
Time is the measure.
-
David Quinn
- Posts: 5708
- Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
- Location: Australia
- Contact:
Re: Asceticism
I don't think these questions are intended for you.
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>
DQ: I don't think these questions are intended for you. <hr>
Hmmm.
Such succinct fullness.
Happy snipe hunting,
JLJ
DQ: I don't think these questions are intended for you. <hr>
Hmmm.
Such succinct fullness.
Happy snipe hunting,
JLJ
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Weininger extracts
I found the two extracts i was talking about, above.
From Weininger's "Last Things", chapter on Science and Culture:
It cannot be proven that people ought to do the good, for if that could be deduced, then the idea of the good would be the consequence of a cause, and thus could become the means to an end. If it ought to be done, then in order to be done for its own sake the good must be identical to that which absolutely cannot be the consequence of a cause, or the means to an end. But equally, I cannot prove why the true is to be chosen before the false; truth cannot justify its claim against falsity, against insanity and deceit, any more than Kant was able to make the good more plausible in the chapter of his philosophy of religion that deals with the "Legal Claim of the Good Principle over the Evil" (Kant, Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone).
One does not argue against the devil. One stands firm against him, or one forfeits to him.
Logic is addressed to the autonomous individual as a second categorical imperative which demands unconditional obedience, and whose source is just as much to be sought in our intelligible essence as is that of the other imperative, which Kant erroneously considered to be unique - doubtless because at bottom both are one. It gives the appearance of not being so. This appearance arises because ethics desires a practical embodiment in time, while logic, so to speak, is before all time. Ethics says what ought to be, logic says what is, that something is, that certain propositions have validity. Thus ethics gives to human birth a meaning relative to death; logic relieves human death of its meaninglessness in that from birth on it denies that everything will be forfeit to it.
From Weininger's "Last Things", chapter on Science and Culture:
It cannot be proven that people ought to do the good, for if that could be deduced, then the idea of the good would be the consequence of a cause, and thus could become the means to an end. If it ought to be done, then in order to be done for its own sake the good must be identical to that which absolutely cannot be the consequence of a cause, or the means to an end. But equally, I cannot prove why the true is to be chosen before the false; truth cannot justify its claim against falsity, against insanity and deceit, any more than Kant was able to make the good more plausible in the chapter of his philosophy of religion that deals with the "Legal Claim of the Good Principle over the Evil" (Kant, Religion within the Limits of Reason Alone).
One does not argue against the devil. One stands firm against him, or one forfeits to him.
Logic is addressed to the autonomous individual as a second categorical imperative which demands unconditional obedience, and whose source is just as much to be sought in our intelligible essence as is that of the other imperative, which Kant erroneously considered to be unique - doubtless because at bottom both are one. It gives the appearance of not being so. This appearance arises because ethics desires a practical embodiment in time, while logic, so to speak, is before all time. Ethics says what ought to be, logic says what is, that something is, that certain propositions have validity. Thus ethics gives to human birth a meaning relative to death; logic relieves human death of its meaninglessness in that from birth on it denies that everything will be forfeit to it.
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Weininger extracts
Quote:Quote:<hr>This appearance arises because ethics desires a practical embodiment in time, while logic, so to speak, is before all time. Ethics says what ought to be, logic says what is, that something is, that certain propositions have validity. Thus ethics gives to human birth a meaning relative to death; logic relieves human death of its meaninglessness in that from birth on it denies that everything will be forfeit to it.<hr>
I think the main point here is the [il]logical distinction that non-autonomous individuals make between logic and ethics. The supreme value and goodness placed on human birth (choice words), as opposed to human death.
Bit of a shame he gave human death enough meaning relative to human life. I'm not sure that those who suicide understand (truly) the meaning of death. Suicide is a completely selfish, egotistical activity, I reckon.
I think the main point here is the [il]logical distinction that non-autonomous individuals make between logic and ethics. The supreme value and goodness placed on human birth (choice words), as opposed to human death.
Bit of a shame he gave human death enough meaning relative to human life. I'm not sure that those who suicide understand (truly) the meaning of death. Suicide is a completely selfish, egotistical activity, I reckon.
-
WolfsonJakk
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2001 6:50 pm
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>Is the person who ascetically refrains from all materialistic activities as much as possible purifying himself and heading in the direction of enlightenment?<hr>
I would say "It appears he is doing a dance. Perhaps it is more, perhaps not. I have no way to know."
Quote:Quote:<hr>Or is he merely deviating away into a path of further self-indulgence?<hr>
Eveything we do is self-indulgent.
Quote:Quote:<hr>How is the path of giving up attachments to be measured?<hr>
Measured objectively? It's not.
Measured subjectively? Through the relative experience of freedom.
Tharan
I would say "It appears he is doing a dance. Perhaps it is more, perhaps not. I have no way to know."
Quote:Quote:<hr>Or is he merely deviating away into a path of further self-indulgence?<hr>
Eveything we do is self-indulgent.
Quote:Quote:<hr>How is the path of giving up attachments to be measured?<hr>
Measured objectively? It's not.
Measured subjectively? Through the relative experience of freedom.
Tharan
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Measuring the path of asceticism
Leyla wrote:
Quote:Quote:<hr>I think the main point here is the [il]logical distinction that non-autonomous individuals make between logic and ethics. The supreme value and goodness placed on human birth (choice words), as opposed to human death.<hr>
Yes, people either believe passively in values or create them. The latter make and break laws according to whatever meanings are useful.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Bit of a shame he gave human death enough meaning relative to human life. I'm not sure that those who suicide understand (truly) the meaning of death. Suicide is a completely selfish, egotistical activity, I reckon.<hr>
Weininger's point about logic was that not everything is forfeit to death. Suicide is nothing to Truth, because Truth is not dependent on consciousness. I choose to think that Weininger suicided to give meaning to the survival of wisdom, a case of "remember the purpose" rather than "remember the fallen". If he had lived as a "fallen" it would have been murder.
Quote:Quote:<hr>I think the main point here is the [il]logical distinction that non-autonomous individuals make between logic and ethics. The supreme value and goodness placed on human birth (choice words), as opposed to human death.<hr>
Yes, people either believe passively in values or create them. The latter make and break laws according to whatever meanings are useful.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Bit of a shame he gave human death enough meaning relative to human life. I'm not sure that those who suicide understand (truly) the meaning of death. Suicide is a completely selfish, egotistical activity, I reckon.<hr>
Weininger's point about logic was that not everything is forfeit to death. Suicide is nothing to Truth, because Truth is not dependent on consciousness. I choose to think that Weininger suicided to give meaning to the survival of wisdom, a case of "remember the purpose" rather than "remember the fallen". If he had lived as a "fallen" it would have been murder.
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Measuring the path of asceticism
Suicide, like everything, has no intrinsic "ought" or "ought not". Like birth it is meaningless.
It has meaning if one gives it meaning, when one decides to act based on whatever other decisions one has made. The same for continuing to exist.
One either chooses passive existence, following social mores, or actively breaks those laws and creates everything anew, continuing in order to live those new laws or not continuing (for the same reason).
It has meaning if one gives it meaning, when one decides to act based on whatever other decisions one has made. The same for continuing to exist.
One either chooses passive existence, following social mores, or actively breaks those laws and creates everything anew, continuing in order to live those new laws or not continuing (for the same reason).
Re: Measuring the path of asceticism
Asceticism is effective for those desiring a path back to the opioid-like womb.
Giving up attachments may reduce the resposiblity in ones life while providing a temporary relief form stress, but does nothing for the realization of the inherent I, in relation to Totality and the Void.
Giving up attachments may reduce the resposiblity in ones life while providing a temporary relief form stress, but does nothing for the realization of the inherent I, in relation to Totality and the Void.
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Measuring the path of asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>I choose to think that Weininger suicided to give meaning to the survival of wisdom, a case of "remember the purpose" rather than "remember the fallen". If he had lived as a "fallen" it would have been murder.<hr>
Kelly Jones 210: surprisingly, you are quite the romantic.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Suicide, like everything, has no intrinsic "ought" or "ought not". Like birth it is meaningless.<hr>
How about, like the survival of wisdom?
Quote:Quote:<hr>It has meaning if one gives it meaning, when one decides to act based on whatever other decisions one has made. The same for continuing to exist.
One either chooses passive existence, following social mores, or actively breaks those laws and creates everything anew, continuing in order to live those new laws or not continuing (for the same reason).<hr>
I feel this is not complete, somehow. Or not continuing in order not to live the created, everything-anew new laws? Unless the new law is not to continue simply to actively break the law?
Wow. My head. :)
Kelly Jones 210: surprisingly, you are quite the romantic.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Suicide, like everything, has no intrinsic "ought" or "ought not". Like birth it is meaningless.<hr>
How about, like the survival of wisdom?
Quote:Quote:<hr>It has meaning if one gives it meaning, when one decides to act based on whatever other decisions one has made. The same for continuing to exist.
One either chooses passive existence, following social mores, or actively breaks those laws and creates everything anew, continuing in order to live those new laws or not continuing (for the same reason).<hr>
I feel this is not complete, somehow. Or not continuing in order not to live the created, everything-anew new laws? Unless the new law is not to continue simply to actively break the law?
Wow. My head. :)
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>I choose to think that Weininger suicided to give meaning to the survival of wisdom, a case of "remember the purpose" rather than "remember the fallen". If he had lived as a "fallen" it would have been murder.
Leyla: Kelly Jones 210: surprisingly, you are quite the romantic.<hr>
It's not so surprising given my Christian upbringing. However, i wasn't being romantic, above.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Suicide, like everything, has no intrinsic "ought" or "ought not". Like birth it is meaningless.
Leyla: How about, like the survival of wisdom?<hr>
Yes, logically it is meaningless. It has meaning ethically, like birth. So, i think Weininger's suicide was an ethical decision relative to the survival of wisdom. That's not a romantic viewpoint, but logical given my values.
Quote:Quote:<hr>[Suicide] has meaning if one gives it meaning, when one decides to act based on whatever other decisions one has made. The same for continuing to exist.
One either chooses passive existence, following social mores, or actively breaks those laws and creates everything anew, continuing in order to live those new laws or not continuing (for the same reason).
Leyla: I feel this is not complete, somehow. Or not continuing in order not to live the created, everything-anew new laws? Unless the new law is not to continue simply to actively break the law?
Wow. My head. :) <hr>
Well, no. Weininger's bodily organism didn't continue to exist, but his new laws lived on in his effects (writings, and the memories in the minds of his contemporaries, and so on).
It's like a layman making a donation to a priest. He's giving up something that distracts him, because he wants the priest to give him something greater in return. It's a risk, of course, because the priest might be a thief, and it mightn't work out. But the layman values something far greater than what he gives up.
That's how i measure the path of asceticism. It's fraud not to want the ultimate, and accordingly not to give everything in return.
Edited by: Kelly Jones 210 at: 6/8/05 16:53
Leyla: Kelly Jones 210: surprisingly, you are quite the romantic.<hr>
It's not so surprising given my Christian upbringing. However, i wasn't being romantic, above.
Quote:Quote:<hr>Suicide, like everything, has no intrinsic "ought" or "ought not". Like birth it is meaningless.
Leyla: How about, like the survival of wisdom?<hr>
Yes, logically it is meaningless. It has meaning ethically, like birth. So, i think Weininger's suicide was an ethical decision relative to the survival of wisdom. That's not a romantic viewpoint, but logical given my values.
Quote:Quote:<hr>[Suicide] has meaning if one gives it meaning, when one decides to act based on whatever other decisions one has made. The same for continuing to exist.
One either chooses passive existence, following social mores, or actively breaks those laws and creates everything anew, continuing in order to live those new laws or not continuing (for the same reason).
Leyla: I feel this is not complete, somehow. Or not continuing in order not to live the created, everything-anew new laws? Unless the new law is not to continue simply to actively break the law?
Wow. My head. :) <hr>
Well, no. Weininger's bodily organism didn't continue to exist, but his new laws lived on in his effects (writings, and the memories in the minds of his contemporaries, and so on).
It's like a layman making a donation to a priest. He's giving up something that distracts him, because he wants the priest to give him something greater in return. It's a risk, of course, because the priest might be a thief, and it mightn't work out. But the layman values something far greater than what he gives up.
That's how i measure the path of asceticism. It's fraud not to want the ultimate, and accordingly not to give everything in return.
Edited by: Kelly Jones 210 at: 6/8/05 16:53
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>That's how i measure the path of asceticism. It's fraud not to want the ultimate, and accordingly not to give everything in return.<hr>
Well, Kelly Jones 210, I think you have answered David's question perfectly in that last sentence.
Quote:Quote:<hr>It's like a layman making a donation to a priest. He's giving up something that distracts him, because he wants the priest to give him something greater in return. It's a risk, of course, because the priest might be a thief, and it mightn't work out. But the layman values something far greater than what he gives up. <hr>
If that is not the height of self-indulgence, what is?
Well, Kelly Jones 210, I think you have answered David's question perfectly in that last sentence.
Quote:Quote:<hr>It's like a layman making a donation to a priest. He's giving up something that distracts him, because he wants the priest to give him something greater in return. It's a risk, of course, because the priest might be a thief, and it mightn't work out. But the layman values something far greater than what he gives up. <hr>
If that is not the height of self-indulgence, what is?
-
Leyla Shen
- Posts: 3851
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:12 pm
- Location: Flippen-well AUSTRALIA
Re: Asceticism
Quote:Quote:<hr>To me, the only genuine form of asceticism is the mind dwelling in emptiness. By undercutting existence at its root, one is permanently beyond all things - even if one is fully immersed in the day-to-day running of the world. <hr>
This I agree with completely.
This I agree with completely.
-
Kelly Jones 210
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 6:53 am
Asceticism
Consequently, a person that values genuine asceticism is constantly focussed on emptiness.
If contradictory values arise, then there is no choice but to indulge in selfish ideals, whether these ideals are the desire for truthfulness or delusion.
To allow contradictory values to continue, because of the stimulus to be truthful, is actually illogical and an act of egotism, because it wants to hold something back and to deny that Ultimate Truth is everything.
Because my name Kelly Jones is very common, i chose to add some numbers to differentiate it. You can either leave the numbers 210 off, or not. They remind me of the process of understanding the infinite.
If contradictory values arise, then there is no choice but to indulge in selfish ideals, whether these ideals are the desire for truthfulness or delusion.
To allow contradictory values to continue, because of the stimulus to be truthful, is actually illogical and an act of egotism, because it wants to hold something back and to deny that Ultimate Truth is everything.
Because my name Kelly Jones is very common, i chose to add some numbers to differentiate it. You can either leave the numbers 210 off, or not. They remind me of the process of understanding the infinite.