alrighty: I did my best to clear up as much confusion as possible as to the nature of fundamental wisdom, and the accompanying moral transfigurations made possible thereby. there’s some stuff dealing systematically with various kinds of objections and misgivings over the traditional conception of the fully enlightened, and other such goodies.

Podcast page here

Direct download: TME3.3-GM.mp3

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “The Mosaic Effect: season three, episode three- the grudge match of Emptiness and Form

  1. Nice work. It’s been a while since I first listened to this one, so I’m working from memory.

    My major quibbles were with the argument that the way practice produces change in the practitioner was evidence for form being progressively affected by emptiness. But you could argue equally that this was form affecting form, no?

    Also I’m not keen on the idea that practice requires a context or framework. That sounds to me like an argument for orthodoxy or exoteric religion as an essential component of practice. I can’t go with that. The Buddha didn’t stick to a framework; Christ didn’t; and I strongly suspect they were urging the rest of us not to bother either. I think this is a point on which we see the marked difference between Buddhist practice and the Western Occult Tradition.

    But to be honest, I think I’m moving closer to your point of view. Dan Bartlett wrote a detailed account of his attainment of stream entry recently http://tinyurl.com/mcakkq and something his teacher said about how it was important to ‘milk the insight’ made sense to me. The teacher obviously wasn’t talking about gross actions, but something more subtle, to do with a change of attitude consonant with the realisation of emptiness. ‘If everything is empty then I don’t need to hang onto it.’ Yes, I can see how that might work! I don’t think you could do this without gaining the insights in the first place, though.

    Can anyone here point to more examples like the one Dan’s teacher gave? Actual instances are helpful!

  2. well, the interaction between emptiness and form, to the extent that there can be said to be one, is one of those krinkly edge things. it’s hard to demarcate where the changable transits into the changeless. and if they are, in fact, not two, then it’s a moot question. I do think that when form percieves itself as empty, it unlocks possiblities that didn’t exist before.

    and I wasn’t trying to imply that one had to operate within an orthodxy. I just think that without context for insight, you end up with insights that are very remote from daily life and situations where you might be able to use them. I don’t think it matters what the practice is, but it’s clear there has to be one, and the scope of the practice will tend to color what you can do with your wisdom/skillfull means. doing the full eight limbs of yoga is lot different than just doing dharana/dhyana in a cave until you get the equivalent of first path, or whatever. getting good at yama, nimaya, asana, pranayama, pratyahara and so forth adds several other skills to the mix that are meant to work together. these days, the vipassana or zen methods or so streamlined you could get dunked so fast you wouldn’t have a clue what happened or what to do. the “big mind” process is probably the most extreme example of this, if it even works, which I’m not clear on.

    I’ll admit I get kind of perplexed when asked for examples of what I’m talking about. it’s always been a cornerstone of my practice to cultivate usable wisdom. I guess I’d assumed everyone did the same thing. I’ll give some clear examples when I have more time.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s