There may be stable states which avoid it. The core Mahayana criticism of Theravada is that Arhat nirvana is not a stable state. Eventually you will fall out of it. That is unacceptable to them. Arhat is not a stable state, whereas Buddha level is. (Again, no idea if true.)
-
Then I'm glad. That was my purpose in making the thread - to unravel some threads. And to spout off, of course. Gotta spout off sometimes.
It’s also cool to see how people approach this stuff differently - I find it helps me notice blind spots in my own practice/life/behaviour etc.Amazing what can come out from spouting off sometimes. Something about a good conversation has tremendous capacity to make new connections in our thinking; clarify points, make the bullshit more visible to ourselves (and others) all that good stuff.
-
-
Of course, I need to pay more attention to the downsides to open discussion though. This is something I’m noticing more recently. I lean so heavily to the side of openness that I’ve become somewhat insensitive to potential risk. Important lesson to be learnt there, I suspect.
-
good will on both sides is generally necessary, and there needs to be enough common ground. Sindre and I have both.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Fuck. That's a thorough revelation of the method.
-
three things are necessary for mastery of intellectual topics. 1) reading; 2) contemplation and practice (depending on the discipline); 3) discussion.
End of conversation
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.