I’ve posted an audio monolog prompted by @evantthompson’s comment, recorded by @_awbery_. Most of it is not directly responsive, although we did get to the point at the end. The accompanying text notes may be more relevant.
Comments welcome!https://meaningness.com/metablog/buddhism-cognitivism-podcast …
One point I make in the series is that "states of mind" is an individualist touchstone the interactivist framework rejects. I try to present Vajrayana in interactional/embodied/situated terms. (This may not be fully true to the tradition, but isn't a complete fabrication either.)
-
-
I suspect this seems like it is evading your question, but I'm not sure I understand what your question is. Re some of the points in your posts: - Vajrayana does not aim to nullify the self - Tantra aims to heighten meaning - Dzogchen aims to allow meanings to be as-they-are
-
Let me see if I can clarify. How do you see the phenomenological experience that results from Dzogchen practice as interacting with meaning-making activity? Does that make sense?
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
in 100 years; Dzogchen will probably be extinct.