Is it possible for people to freely "behave in a Godly manner"?

[lightgigantic]

How did you come to the conclusion that I conceded that??

You used the word "low" instead of "no"

The core principle of renunciation is to make the desired object difficult or impossible to attain.

Sounds like a sure way to fail in the quest for renunciation.

Monastics, for example, do this in several ways:
By moving to a location where the desired object (esp. women) is difficult or impossible to attain (such as a monastery or forest).
By making oneself unappealing to the desired object. One function of monks shaving their heads (and eyebrows) is to cease or at least decrease to be sexually attractive to others; so by shaving their heads and eyebrows they fend off inappropriate advances from others - given that people normally find shaved hair and esp. shaved eyebrows unappealing. Another way to make oneself unappealing is to wear simple robes. So even if a monk were to make inappropriate adances toward a woman, because he previously made himself look so unappealing, the woman won't recipricate, thereby becoming difficult or impossible to attain, so his desire will remain unsatisfied. (This is so in principle, there are exceptions, of course. In modern times, we have also become desensitized to the point where we don't find a shaven head unappealing.)

despite all this, if the mind is still attached to the sense object (an ability it has even in the complete absence of the before mentioned sense object ) then it is all futile

As a further example, with a basic desire like hunger for food, infants lose the desire for food after they have been hungry for long enough (and this is long before they would die of starvation).
Normally, infants cry when they are hungry; but when their efforts don't result in receiving food, they eventually stop crying and become apathetic to food.

why do you suppose the same isn't true of adults ?

As a further example, desires that are less important (to the individual) cease when those that are more important are not met.
So, usually, for example, people lose the desire to go the cinema, when they haven't eaten or slept for days. Going to the cinema is difficult or impossible when one is exhausted.

not sure what this has to do with your argument that an absence of sense objects equals an absence of desire

 

[wynn]

Sounds like a sure way to fail in the quest for renunciation.

Why?

despite all this, if the mind is still attached to the sense object (an ability it has even in the complete absence of the before mentioned sense object ) then it is all futile

Sure. But I contend that a prolonged inability to access the desired leads to a diminishing of the desire.

why do you suppose the same isn't true of adults ?

What makes you think I suppose that?

(I didn't want to make the list too long, so I didn't add examples of adults with eating disorders who are also apathetic to food.)

not sure what this has to do with your argument that an absence of sense objects equals an absence of desire

That desires cease in unfavorable circumstances, or that they transform/sublimate into other desires.

 

[wynn]

and you don't relate to it at all, and that doesn't have a damn thing to do with language or circumstances. that has to do with your desire. see, i'm able to put myself in your shoes just fine, to the point where it pisses you off i presume, since i don't buy your bullshit rationale de jour. i wasn't always a christian, but i'll tell you what signal...i was never as insincere as you are about my own intentions. i didn't want to know if god existed for what i thought were damn good reasons, and at least i was honest enough to admit that. i didn't go around making excuses and blaming other people like you do. i knew it was all me, and i know that about you too.

Anything that makes you feel good about yourself, huh, Lori? Even if you have to demonize others.

That's why I say - spirituality is a dog fight

 

[lightgigantic]

Why?

because the mind is naturally attracted to sense objects

Sure. But I contend that a prolonged inability to access the desired leads to a diminishing of the desire.

I doubt it

What makes you think I suppose that?

(I didn't want to make the list too long, so I didn't add examples of adults with eating disorders who are also apathetic to food.)

if thats true kind of makes you wonder why people bother to eat

That desires cease in unfavorable circumstances, or that they transform/sublimate into other desires.

I don't seethe evidence for desire ceasing in unfavorable circumstances.

Repression accomplishes absolutely nothing

 

[wynn]

because the mind is naturally attracted to sense objects

So?

What makes you think I suppose that?

(I didn't want to make the list too long, so I didn't add examples of adults with eating disorders who are also apathetic to food.)

if thats true kind of makes you wonder why people bother to eat

If what is true?
Usually, people tend to their desires, and this is what keeps the desires alive. Usually, people do not refrain from food to the point where they would become apathetic to food.

I don't seethe evidence for desire ceasing in unfavorable circumstances.

So you think it is common for people to desire to go to the cinema when they are starved and exhausted?

Repression accomplishes absolutely nothing

We probably have different ideas of repression.

I wasn't talking about a man tightening the metal cilice with inwardly-pointing spikes on his thigh while he is watching scantily clad women.


And it's tragicomical that it would be you, from your religious tradition, to talk about how repression accomplishes absolutely nothing. Sure, it's part of your doctrine. Gritting teeth and "just do it" indefinitely is also what is expected of outsiders/newcomers. This is when you people forget everything about how repression accomplishes absolutely nothing, eh.

 

[Lori_7]

Anything that makes you feel good about yourself, huh, Lori? Even if you have to demonize others.

That's why I say - spirituality is a dog fight

You wish it was a dog fight, but since you recognize no spirituality, your opinion is vastly unqualified.

I'm sorry but IMO you're not as clever as you think you are.

 

[wynn]

You wish it was a dog fight, but since you recognize no spirituality, your opinion is vastly unqualified.

I'm sorry but IMO you're not as clever as you think you are.

I don't exist, right?

I am what you say that you are.

There is no me.

There is only what Lori says that I am.

And I am really obligated to believe that, or I am an evil person.

 

[lightgigantic]

So?

So its futile to attempt a permanent solution merely by fiddling with sense objects

If what is true?
Usually, people tend to their desires, and this is what keeps the desires alive. Usually, people do not refrain from food to the point where they would become apathetic to food.

Incorrect
If desires were kept alive merely by being tended there would be none to begin with

So you think it is common for people to desire to go to the cinema when they are starved and exhausted?

So you think that fatigue is a permanent solution to quelling the desire to go to the cinema?

We probably have different ideas of repression.

I wasn't talking about a man tightening the metal cilice with inwardly-pointing spikes on his thigh while he is watching scantily clad women.

neither was I

And it's tragicomical that it would be you, from your religious tradition, to talk about how repression accomplishes absolutely nothing. Sure, it's part of your doctrine. Gritting teeth and "just do it" indefinitely is also what is expected of outsiders/newcomers. This is when you people forget everything about how repression accomplishes absolutely nothing, eh.

Its tragicomical that you think that is a spiritual conclusion

BG 3.33 Even a man of knowledge acts according to his own nature, for everyone follows the nature he has acquired from the three modes. What can repression accomplish?

There's practically an entire chapter in the gita about how adopting the "teeth gritting" method is a recipe for hitting the deck

:shrug:

 

[Lori_7]

I don't exist, right?

I am what you say that you are.

There is no me.

There is only what Lori says that I am.

And I am really obligated to believe that, or I am an evil person.

no, that is what you say, over and over and over again in every thread, and that is what i argue with you about. remember? i'm the one who tells you it's always your responsibility, that it's all about you, and your personal relationship with god, and your perception, and your experience. and then you start throwing around the word solipsism. remember? it's because you insist upon remaining unaccountable and blaming others for what has to be your responsibility and yours alone. does this ring any bells?

 

[wynn]

no, that is what you say, over and over and over again in every thread, and that is what i argue with you about. remember? i'm the one who tells you it's always your responsibility, that it's all about you, and your personal relationship with god, and your perception, and your experience. and then you start throwing around the word solipsism. remember? it's because you insist upon remaining unaccountable and blaming others for what has to be your responsibility and yours alone. does this ring any bells?

You are denying where you're taking from, lady. :shrug:

 

[Lori_7]

You are denying where you're taking from, lady. :shrug:

Is that sentence grammatically correct?

Are you confused now about which side of your mouth you're speaking from? Tsk tsk, that's what happens when you're not honest.

Truth is, someone observing your behavior and arguments and calling you out does not make you disappear. You may wish it did sometimes.

 

[wynn]

So its futile to attempt a permanent solution merely by fiddling with sense objects

Blind faith and taking for granted that a particular spiritual/religious tradition is the one and only right one doesn't help.

The formula "abandon the bad, cultivate the good" sounds nice in theory, but is problematic in practice. It simply is not clear what the "good" is and how to develop it.

Incorrect
If desires were kept alive merely by being tended there would be none to begin with

A child is born hungry. It is fed. It gets used to finding pleasure in eating. It desires more food. It gets more food. Grows up, takes care on his own to get food.
Usually, once people start doing something and they find it pleasurable, they continue to have that desire to do it again.

But we each seem to be talking about two different kinds of desires: I'm talking about habitual/recurring ones, you about singular ones.

Indeed, the desire of a tourist from Munich to go to New York ceases once he sets foot on Times Square.
But the desires for food or sex are not like that.


EDIT:

On a further note: There is a statement in a SB commentary to the effect that material pleasures are satisfying, while spiritual ones are not. This struck me as an awkward claim, and the rest of the commentary didn't seem to explain it either. My first thought when it comes to worldly pleasures is that they are unsatisfactory.
Later upon reading something else, it occured to me that when material pleasures are engaged in for material reasons, then those activities may indeed be satisfying. But when people engage in material pleasures for the purpose of satisfying spiritual desires, this is when those material pleasures turn out to be so completely frustrating.

Obviously, our anaylsis of desires so far has been rather simplistic, and we would need to be more specific to gain clarity.

So you think that fatigue is a permanent solution to quelling the desire to go to the cinema?

Strawmen are ugly.

Its tragicomical that you think that is a spiritual conclusion

It is the reality that many a newcomer/outsider faces in your religious organization.
And it is a reality that you persistenly refuse to acknowledge.

BG 3.33 Even a man of knowledge acts according to his own nature, for everyone follows the nature he has acquired from the three modes. What can repression accomplish?

There's practically an entire chapter in the gita about how adopting the "teeth gritting" method is a recipe for hitting the deck

Then your founder acharya should listen to himself, instead of talking about how to kill all the mudhas.
To say nothing of the devotees and how kosher they find it to expect, even demand from people to just grit their teeth and do the practices and beliefs that your organization endorses.

 

[wynn]

You may wish it did sometimes.

It's that for you, from your perspective, I don't really exist.
There is no room for an Other in your world and reasoning.
You talk to me as if I were a figment of your imagination, as if I wouldn't be real, as if I wouldn't be a person, as if I wouldn't really exist.

You set yourself up as my God, as God to me - as someone whom I am unconditionally obligated to, someone who dictates reality to me and what I am supposed to think, feel, say and do.

This is how I don't exist for you. And the more I shout and scream, the more I punch around in an effort to make myself visible and tangible to you, the more you tighten your grip, the more you objectify me and infantilize me, the more you make an effort to dictate reality to me, trying to eradicate me, minimize me, make me irrelevant - so that you could prevail.

 

[Lori_7]

It's that for you, from your perspective, I don't really exist.
There is no room for an Other in your world and reasoning.
You talk to me as if I were a figment of your imagination, as if I wouldn't be real, as if I wouldn't be a person, as if I wouldn't really exist.

You set yourself up as my God, as God to me - as someone whom I am unconditionally obligated to, someone who dictates reality to me and what I am supposed to think, feel, say and do.

This is how I don't exist for you. And the more I shout and scream, the more I punch around in an effort to make myself visible and tangible to you, the more you tighten your grip, the more you objectify me and infantilize me, the more you make an effort to dictate reality to me, trying to eradicate me, minimize me, make me irrelevant - so that you could prevail.

Are you seriously going to deny that this is exactly what you repeatedly INSIST people do to you while I refuse and contend? Because I will dig up the post after post after post. It wasn't that long ago you were insisting on some guru. You can't even keep track of your own bullshit can you?

 

[wynn]

Are you seriously going to deny that this is exactly what you repeatedly INSIST people do to you while I refuse and contend? Because I will dig up the post after post after post. It wasn't that long ago you were insisting on some guru. You can't even keep track of your own bullshit can you?

Excellent attitude, Lori!

 

[Lori_7]

Excellent attitude, Lori!

It's called honesty! Dare you to try it sometime!

 

[wynn]

So you think that fatigue is a permanent solution to quelling the desire to go to the cinema?

Why are you strawmanning?

And no, this is not about the solution to quelling desire or going to the cinema.

You have lately strawmanned my points, ridiculed them.
Why?

 

[wynn]

It's called honesty! Dare you to try it sometime!

It's called guilt-tripping. Something you excell at.

 

[lightgigantic]

Blind faith and taking for granted that a particular spiritual/religious tradition is the one and only right one doesn't help.

The formula "abandon the bad, cultivate the good" sounds nice in theory, but is problematic in practice. It simply is not clear what the "good" is and how to develop it.

If you are talking about applying yourself to "teeth grinding" renunciation you have already made these decisions

A child is born hungry. It is fed. It gets used to finding pleasure in eating. It desires more food. It gets more food. Grows up, takes care on his own to get food.
Usually, once people start doing something and they find it pleasurable, they continue to have that desire to do it again.

they were already starting with not eating.
IOW desire is always a constant companion of the living entity

But we each seem to be talking about two different kinds of desires: I'm talking about habitual/recurring ones, you about singular ones.

I don't follow

Indeed, the desire of a tourist from Munich to go to New York ceases once he sets foot on Times Square.
But the desires for food or sex are not like that.

There are broader (recurring) issues that prompt travel, much like eating or anything else you would like to mention

EDIT:

On a further note: There is a statement in a SB commentary to the effect that material pleasures are satisfying, while spiritual ones are not. This struck me as an awkward claim, and the rest of the commentary didn't seem to explain it either. My first thought when it comes to worldly pleasures is that they are unsatisfactory.

I can't think of the statement you are referring to ... particularly since it seems diametrically opposed tot he wider body of work of the SB

Later upon reading something else, it occured to me that when material pleasures are engaged in for material reasons, then those activities may indeed be satisfying. But when people engage in material pleasures for the purpose of satisfying spiritual desires, this is when those material pleasures turn out to be so completely frustrating.

I don't understand how you propose one goes about engaging in material pleasures to satisfy spiritual pleasure

Obviously, our anaylsis of desires so far has been rather simplistic, and we would need to be more specific to gain clarity.

Its not getting any clearer

Strawmen are ugly.

I don't think you understand which part of your argument I am contending

It is the reality that many a newcomer/outsider faces in your religious organization.

It is a reality that many aspiring spiritualists hit the deck because they misapply general precepts of renunciation

And it is a reality that you persistenly refuse to acknowledge.

Its quite simple.
BG says if you do act A you get result B and if you do act C you get result D.

Designations of newcomer or long term practitioner doesn't really mean anything in that context.

Kind of like if a person cuts their finger with a knife, it doesn't really matter whether they are a surgeon, master chef or spaced out toddler.
It bleeds the same.

Then your founder acharya should listen to himself, instead of talking about how to kill all the mudhas.

On the contrary, if the founder acharya suggests something yet one insists on it being a different way (since that is what the devotees "told" me) one is a mudha

To say nothing of the devotees and how kosher they find it to expect, even demand from people to just grit their teeth and do the practices and beliefs that your organization endorses.

If you are ready to advocate that the best solution in pursuit of renunciation is to lock the sense objects in a trunk and throw away the key, its not clear what is the precise problem you have with grinding your teeth, even if we want to hypothetically accept it as the standard in chanting.

 

[wynn]

I am repeating:

So you think that fatigue is a permanent solution to quelling the desire to go to the cinema?

Why are you strawmanning?

And no, this is not about the solution to quelling desire or going to the cinema.

You have lately strawmanned my points, ridiculed them.
Why?