|
|
 Up |
|
|
  |
Author: TomTom Date: Aug 22, 2008 07:40
In Chapter 8, on renunciation and daring, Trungpa explains that the
renunciation of the warrior is not asceticism, but the casting aside of any
sort of armor. The spiritual warrior encounters the world naked,
unprotected. This is possible because the warrior has nothing inside to
defend.
That which needs protecting is the illusion of ego. Thus armor is any
behavior we have that arises from selfishness. It is what blocks us from
accepting the world as it is. We are insulated from reality by our
fantasies. We hide from inconvenient facts, from uncomfortable emotional
risks, from humiliation. Our armor cuts us off from the world we're trying
to avoid. It keeps us alone and in the dark. It desensitizes and
anesthetizes us.
Lots of our behaviors are armoring. Racism, drug addiction, religious
intolerance, avarice, hostility... all sorts of things.
Trungpa says that the key thing a warrior must renounce is privacy. We must
put aside anything that cuts us off from others.
|
| Show full article (1.66Kb) |
|
| | 12 Comments |
|
|
Date: Aug 22, 2008 10:57
"Tom" comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RfCdnRHOwPhtUzPVnZ2dnUVZ_rfinZ2d@comcast.com...>
> In Chapter 8, on renunciation and daring, Trungpa explains that the
> renunciation of the warrior is not asceticism, but the casting aside of
> any
> sort of armor. The spiritual warrior encounters the world naked,
> unprotected. This is possible because the warrior has nothing inside to
> defend.
>
> That which needs protecting is the illusion of ego. Thus armor is any
> behavior we have that arises from selfishness. It is what blocks us from
> accepting the world as it is. We are insulated from reality by our
> fantasies. We hide from inconvenient facts, from uncomfortable emotional
> risks, from humiliation. Our armor cuts us off from the world we're
> trying
> to avoid. It keeps us alone and in the dark. It desensitizes and
> anesthetizes us.
>
> Lots of our behaviors are armoring. Racism, drug addiction, religious ...
|
| Show full article (1.92Kb) |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: mikamika Date: Aug 22, 2008 11:23
On Aug 22, 10:57 am, "Searles O'Dubhain" wrote:
>
>
> In the Irish tales and traditions regarding the training of the warrior Cú
> Chulainn, he must jump across an abyss which has a brige over it so that he
> may enter the school run by Scathách. Cú fails when attempting to cross the
> bridge. He is constantly thrown backwards in his attempts until he commits
> all of his abilities and daring to the effort. The "hero light" comes upon
> his face and he lands more than halfway then is catapulted to the other
> side.
>
> It seems to me that the effort is casting off worldly knowledge to leap
> beyond it into Otherworldly knowledge where one can learn. Being able to
> return to this world with this knowledge or being able to be a bridge or
> conduit it is what is being described. Yoga's disciplines...
|
| Show full article (1.49Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Aug 22, 2008 11:32
"mika" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ed874498-c60c-434d-b9a7-fd4541b5eba2@s50g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 22, 10:57 am, "Searles O'Dubhain" wrote:>
>
> In the Irish tales and traditions regarding the training of the warrior C
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: BassosBassos Date: Aug 22, 2008 12:56
"Tom" comcast.net> wrote in message
news:RfCdnRHOwPhtUzPVnZ2dnUVZ_rfinZ2d@comcast.com...>
> In Chapter 8, on renunciation and daring, Trungpa explains that the
> renunciation of the warrior is not asceticism, but the casting aside of
> any
> sort of armor. The spiritual warrior encounters the world naked,
> unprotected. This is possible because the warrior has nothing inside to
> defend.
I am a bit unclear about the relationship between ascetism and meeting the
world head on.
> That which needs protecting is the illusion of ego.
Nah, it is other people's ego's that need protection.
I love it when mine gets bruised.
> Thus armor is any behavior we have that arises from selfishness.
I am selfish, thus i am unselfish ?
|
| Show full article (2.75Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: mikamika Date: Aug 22, 2008 13:34
On Aug 22, 12:56 pm, "Bassos" wrote:
>
>
> Nah, it is other people's ego's that need protection.
> I love it when mine gets bruised.
Liar.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: mikamika Date: Aug 22, 2008 13:49
On Aug 22, 11:32 am, "Searles O'Dubhain"wrote:
>
> What we think is knowledge in this world is
> actually the illusion of knowledge in others.
Alright...
> Tensor analysis and
> transformation theory as well as quantum mechanics and string theory all
> point to knowledge/being as being only partially defined in any particular
> space/time/continuum.
But, remember that tensor analysis etc remain valid, accurate and
*real* within the context of the system in which they are defined.
It's not as if you change the context and suddenly everything you
previously knew was in error, it's just that what you previously knew
may no longer apply to the new situation.
By the way, have you read this yet:
http://www.erwinhessle.com/blog/?p=101
Erwin just linked to it in another thread. Check it out.
|
| Show full article (1.15Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Date: Aug 22, 2008 16:16
"mika" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4b851d98-d605-4aaa-9a43-28d103e11208@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 22, 11:32 am, "Searles O'Dubhain"wrote:>
> What we think is knowledge in this world is
> actually the illusion of knowledge in others.
Alright...
> Tensor analysis and
> transformation theory as well as quantum mechanics and string theory all
> point to knowledge/being as being only partially defined in any particular
> space/time/continuum.
"But, remember that tensor analysis etc remain valid, accurate and
*real* within the context of the system in which they are defined.
It's not as if you change the context and suddenly everything you
previously knew was in error, it's just that what you previously knew
may no longer apply to the new situation."
*** It's how they transform from one system to another that increases their
usefulness. ***
|
| Show full article (1.85Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: mikamika Date: Aug 22, 2008 16:46
On Aug 22, 4:16 pm, "Searles O'Dubhain" wrote:
> "mika" wrote
>
>> "But, remember that tensor analysis etc remain valid, accurate and
>>*real* within the context of the system in which they are defined.
>> It's not as if you change the context and suddenly everything you
>> previously knew was in error, it's just that what you previously knew
>> may no longer apply to the new situation."
>
> *** It's how they transform from one system to another that increases their
> usefulness. ***
|
| Show full article (1.68Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Date: Aug 22, 2008 20:07
"mika" gmail.com> wrote in message
news:da0ded63-5636-4b94-9e34-dd92481d66b7@c58g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
On Aug 22, 4:16 pm, "Searles O'Dubhain" wrote:> "mika" wrote
>
>> "But, remember that tensor analysis etc remain valid, accurate and
>>*real* within the context of the system in which they are defined.
>> It's not as if you change the context and suddenly everything you
>> previously knew was in error, it's just that what you previously knew
>> may no longer apply to the new situation."
>
> *** It's how they transform from one system to another that increases
> their
> usefulness. ***
|
| Show full article (3.15Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
