Conversation

This Tweet is unavailable. Learn more

The sudden/gradual, immanence/distinction tensions have gone on for a long long time....explored quite brilliantly by Sam Van Schaik (and others, I'm sure). May be less conflicting if one is able to take the pointers, not as a way to be free 'instantly', but as a way of training

Replying to

The problem, seen over and over again, is that most students really, utterly fail at that. There are better ways to get from there to here, IMO, especially for people expressly conditioned to cling to everything. If you can integrate into the culture, say a Zen temple, OTOH...

Replying to

The inability to recognize the cultural contingents of practice is a problem that repeats over, over and over again. The failure of yoga in the West is a good example. Buddhism, too.

Replying to

Interesting point - please say more.

Replying to

I am in the fortunate position of being two links of association away from many of those tasked with this stuff; too far to be entangled, close enough to understand broad strokes. You can't just bring the practice into a foreign culture. It won't "click". Too much baggage. E.g.:

Replying to

- Metta, compassion and love-based yogic practice DO NOT WORK for majority of westerners. - Social structure inimical to gurus, ashram, sangha etc. Those that flourish often (really often) are cults. - Scientism vs. mysticism; porting language is hard, stuff lost in translation.

Replying to

I found a reply to this in my drafts I forgot about. I’m curious what makes you believe the first point on metta/maitri/love practices? I don’t have much data to argue otherwise, I just have a very hard time believing it as a result of my own experiences. Never heard that before

Cinder

@Triquetrea

Replying to

@misen__

It's an interesting topic. I've seen westerners it did work for, so I was probably too generalistic in phrasing. It doesn't work for *most* westerners. Why would that be? Poor cultural translation of what is meant by love. "Love" as defined here severely pathological concept.

2:54 PM · Mar 7, 2018Twitter Web Client

Replying to

People I know who had good teachers got it right and had tremendous gains with it, but that was often after a long period of confusion - and even worse, damaging practice - until someone finally set them straight on the what, why, how of it.

Replying to

The problem is it's usually offered without context, and, well, that doesn't work well for people. It can be a tremendously damaging concept to misunderstand (see: compassion for bullies and other villains for a very simple example, but there are many, many others).

Show replies