streaming consciousness…

Tagged: self Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

• 

  hardie karges 2:12 am on November 2, 2025 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: Buddhism ( 428 ), compassion ( 14 ), consciousness ( 29 ), empathy ( 5 ), Hardie Karges ( 239 ), language ( 144 ), meditation ( 189 ), religion ( 158 ), self   

  Buddhism in the End Days: Empathy and Sympathy 

  

  Create a world in your image and likeness, full of empathy and compassion. Then the problems of self and self-image exist no longer. Because these are universal blessings, the gifts of one human to another, which can only be accomplished with conscious intent. Nature offers no such promise, it full of suffering, however unintended. Nature doesn’t care. Only humans can care, and this is our responsibility on the face of this earth.

  Pandits and pundits quibble over whether anything is real beside consciousness, but this is unimportant. The important thing is that there IS consciousness, and it is capable of accomplishing much, if only we take the time to make the effort. If that requires a makeover of your own image at the same time, then so be it, more power to you. If humans need a self to have and to hold, until death do us part, then that is a small price to pay. Make it a good one. That is the responsibility of every serious artist, to make it a good one. So, start with yourself; what better place?

  Our time on this earth and in this space is limited, most likely, so time is of the essence. We are young and foolish, by design of our creator, it of pure and simple logic, but few means to enforce it. That is up to us, to enforce logic and reason with the passing of seasons, as if by Divine Creation, even though any true creator would only laugh, if it has that capability. We are the prophets of providence, not by our cleverness, but by our empathy. Only we can make this world what it is meant to be, because only we know what it is meant to be…

   

  Reply Cancel reply

  Required fields are marked *

  Name *

  Email *

  Website

  Notify me of new comments via email.

  Notify me of new posts via email.

  Δ

• 

  hardie karges 4:47 am on March 16, 2025 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: Buddhism ( 428 ), DOGMA ( 5 ), emotion ( 6 ), Hardie Karges ( 239 ), Hatred ( 6 ), impermanence ( 6 ), language ( 144 ), meditation ( 189 ), personality ( 3 ), self   

  Buddhism in the Time of Troubles… 

  

  The healing begins when the fighting ends, and hatred subsides in its wake. Because, what is hatred, if not misplaced emotion in search of a carrier, like some disease looking for a victim? We assume that these emotions are ‘ours’, as if we should be proud of that fact, when neither assumption is true. That is, we don’t own those emotions, and even if we did, there’s nothing there to be proud of. And nothing is better proof of the ‘aggregate’ nature of our personalities than the transient nature of ‘our’ emotions.

  Because, when we speak of ‘personality’ it’s clear that we are not speaking of any kind of ‘self’, much less an immortal soul. And that is our predicament here in this life in this world, that we are not much more than a bundle of emotions, looking for a place to lay the burden down. If that sounds like cruel fate under a cruel weight, then the reality itself may not be quite so bleak. Because the flexible nature of impermanent circumstances does have the advantage of a flexible response to changing conditions. If Buddhism is a failure, the it’s a failure as dogma.

  After all, how can you fashion agreement from a core fanbase that speaks probably at least a hundred languages from a few dozen countries spread out over the world’s largest continent and two largest countries over the last two millennia? And that’s just the core! It’s a challenge to be overcome, and it’s a glory to behold, that these diverse peoples from a thousand different circumstances can and do debate the dharma from diverse traditions, whether conservative or liberal, and still agree on certain starting points: the presence of suffering, the vacuity of personality, and the impermanence of…nearly everything.
   
• 

  hardie karges 4:13 am on November 10, 2024 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: anatta ( 22 ), atman ( 5 ), Brahman ( 3 ), Buddhism ( 428 ), emptiness ( 29 ), EVOLUTION ( 20 ), Hardie Karges ( 239 ), Hindu ( 8 ), Jain ( 5 ), language ( 144 ), philosophy ( 101 ), self, skandha ( 2 ), soul ( 9 )   

  Buddhism 202: Anatman on the Installment Plan 

  

  The fact that I’m not the same as I was before is at least partial proof of anatta, non-self, i.e. a heap of adjectives in evolution. The Sanskrit word skandha means something like ‘heap’, of course, that of which we are composed, without clearly defining exactly what that material is, though it would appear to fall in the category of ‘causes and conditions’, so more mind than matter, more substantial than material. Thus, I prefer to think of them as adjectives rather than nouns or even verbs, mere descriptions of what is to become.

  But this is immaterial (pun intended) to the substance of the original debate, mostly between Hindu Brahmins, Jains, and Buddhists, as to the permanence—or not—of a supposed ‘self’ or ‘soul’. For Hindu Brahmanists this was a cosmic ‘soul’ on a par with a God-like ‘Brahman’, while for the Jains this was an atomic soul that inhabited everything on a granular level. In response to these two choices, early Buddhists basically said, “Naah,” then moved on to bigger and better considerations.

  And, if this seems like a severe diminution of personality to the point that we (who are writing and reading this humble script) have no intrinsic existence, then I prefer to think about the freedom that this gives us rather than the limits imposed upon us. Because this emptiness is as close as we can come to infinity or eternity, and so the very opposite of limitation. There’s only one catch, though, already mentioned. It’s empty. There can’t be any sort of unlimited physical stuff. It’s simply not possible, sorry. Look on the bright side; there appears to be no current shortage of anything important. And we are a very conscious heap, in the process of evolution.

   
• 

  hardie karges 3:52 am on June 2, 2024 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: anatman, atman ( 5 ), Brahman ( 3 ), Brahmanism ( 8 ), Buddhism ( 428 ), Hardie Karges ( 239 ), Hindu ( 8 ), Hinduism ( 28 ), Indus River, khandhas ( 3 ), meditation ( 189 ), non-self ( 4 ), Pali ( 20 ), religion ( 158 ), Sanskrit ( 22 ), self, skandhas ( 10 ), spirituality ( 27 ), Vedas ( 3 )   

  Buddhism vs. Hinduism, Non-Self vs. Cosmic Self…  

  

  Anatta/anatman (non-self) doesn’t mean that we are nothing, just not much: no permanent soul, certainly nothing cosmic like Brahman. And this is where the fundamental concept comes from, the debate with the Brahmanists that we now call Hindus, though at that time (500BCE) the term was unknown, at least to Indians themselves. Because that’s all that the term ever meant, really: people of the Indus River, i.e. Sindhu or Hindu, a river now identified with Pakistan. India is now more identified with the Ganges.  

  But the distinction that the Buddha wanted to make between his worldview and that of the Brahmanists was that he saw nothing like the cosmic Atman ‘self’ that they propose to unite with the equally cosmic Brahman god-stuff that exists as the creative principle of the Universe. And while Hindus recognize Buddhism as but one of many Hindu Veda-based sects, Buddhism is having none of that, and the self/non-self debate is at the heart of that issue.  

  In fact, Buddhism relegates ‘self’ to ‘heaps’ of random qualities called ‘skandhas’ or ‘khandhas’ in Sanskrit or Pali. They are form, feeling, perception, consciousness, and reasoning, of which we all share equal and certain quantities. No one collection of such qualities is more important than any other, just as no one person is better than any other. The racist caste system of India will forever define the difference between Hinduism and Buddhism, and the atman/anatman distinction is at the heart of that.

   
• 

  hardie karges 4:08 am on April 7, 2024 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: anger ( 6 ), Buddhism ( 428 ), Hardie Karges ( 239 ), Hatred ( 6 ), justice ( 3 ), kileshas ( 2 ), lovingkindness ( 16 ), meditation ( 189 ), self, selfishness ( 4 )   

  Samma Sankappa: Right Thoughts in Service to Buddhism  

  

  Anger is an object lesson, not just about hatred, but lust, craving and mindless passion. It feeds on itself until it destroys something. And that is implicit in the Buddha’s message, that these kileshas, i.e. defilements, feed on themselves. That is why Buddhist love is not the passionate kind, and even lovingkindness better be careful, that the passionate embrace of a babe in swaddling clothes stops well short of puberty, and so finds a larger audience in brotherly and sisterly love, instead of rape, pillage, and incest. 

  Words can do that, calm passions and waylay anger, though it can often create as many problems as it solves. The point is that it’s a tool, and that implies choice, and skill, in the manner of its execution. That is why they are such a double-edged sword, but a steel-edged sword at that, rugged and durable and thorough in its prohibitions. The only question is how to apply those prohibitions with justice and fairness and forethought in its planning. 

  If words can devote themselves, at the insistence of consciousness, to the cessation of anger and hatred, then it will go a long way toward solving the problems of the world. If that mission can be extended to lust, craving, and mindless passions, then it will go a long way toward solving the problems of the self. Because the problem of self is not just an abstract point of doctrinal dispute between Buddhists and Brahmins. It is a problem of selfishness in the lives of men and women. Lose the self and save the world. 

   
• 

  hardie karges 4:26 am on February 25, 2024 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: Abhidharma ( 5 ), Buddhism ( 428 ), compassion ( 14 ), Dalai Lama ( 12 ), ego ( 33 ), karuna ( 9 ), lovingkindness ( 16 ), meditation ( 189 ), metta ( 25 ), nirvana ( 13 ), philosophy ( 101 ), rebirth ( 37 ), religion ( 158 ), self, spirituality ( 27 )   

  Kindness and Compassion are the Heart and Soul of Buddhism  

  

  Compassion has no expiration date. It’s never too late to make new friends with old enemies. This is one of the secrets to a good life: no grudges, no scorched earth, no retribution, and, most importantly, no regrets. It should be simple, since you don’t really have to do anything, but in fact it’s one of the hardest things ever, so attached as we are to our egos and our ‘face’ that we spend so much time and effort saving, lest someone steal it right off of our heads, haha. 

  The Dalai Lama once said that his religion was simple, and that’s kindness, which is compassion, in a word, same thing, same time, and that’s Buddhism, too, in a word. All the elaborate lists and literary expositions that comprise the Buddhist Abhidharma are unnecessary to describe the heart of Buddhism, so why waste so much time and effort when you can put it all in a word, or two? Because yes, there is another word that needs to be included, and if karuna is the first word, then metta is the second, often translated as ‘lovingkindness’ or simple ‘friendliness.’ 

  Put the two words together, and you’ve captured the heart and soul of Buddhism. In fact, modern standard Thai language does indeed often combine the two words for extra effect, so mettakaruna is a word or phrase that you will hear often there. Suffering is famously the back-story to Buddhism, that and its cessation, and that’s pretty much all you need to know. The cosmology of self and rebirth are important but debatable, IMHO, and thus of secondary importance, ditto nirvana. The analogy to Christian forgiveness might be worth mentioning but it isn’t necessary. Be good; don’t be bad. It’s that simple. 

   
• 

  hardie karges 6:51 am on November 12, 2023 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: duality ( 5 ), Hinduism ( 28 ), karma ( 49 ), New Age ( 8 ), non-duality ( 2 ), quantum physics ( 2 ), rebirth ( 37 ), self   

  Buddhism in the Real World: To Be or Not To Be… 

  

  When you believe in yourself, don’t believe too much, just enough to accomplish what you need, not enough to inflate your ego. But this is a hard thing to measure, so must simply somehow be ‘felt,’ as if it were a real substantial thing. It’s not. This is the problem which often occurs when all the ‘other’ religions, philosophies, theoretical sciences, and sundry spiritualities like Hinduism, Buddhism, quantum physics, and chaos theory all get lumped together as co-equal partners in ‘New Age’ metaphysics. 

  The problem, of course, is that many are mutually contradictory. Many things simply can’t be had both ways, Buddhism and Hinduism being the best examples. Hindus believe in an eternal soul. Buddhists don’t. Still Hindus consider Buddhists a renegade sect and constantly try to surround them and close the circle (zero?) while no one is looking. Karma, rebirth and past lives are the best-laid trap, to which Buddhism must constantly be on guard not to fully submit, lest it become ‘just another Hindu sect.’ 

  And so it is with you. Self is not a binary choice, all or none, duality or non-duality. You can be a personality with a happy and fruitful time in this life and this world without ever being left with the dubious choice of a cosmic eternal all-important soul or a subject-less object-less witness to actions that you have no right to. Our sentences have subjects and objects, whether English, Spanish, or Hindi, and so do you, if you want them. You are only an unwilling participant, simple mindless witness, if you so choose. You can be as active as you want, and you can tell Robert Adams that I said so. 

   
• 

  hardie karges 4:11 am on September 17, 2023 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: Buddhism ( 428 ), ego ( 33 ), Machiavelli, Now ( 4 ), self, selfishness ( 4 )   

  Buddhist Non-Selfishness…  

  

  Be kind to all sentient beings, even the ones that troll you on social media. Because the important thing is not to get even. The important thing is to get odd. Be the difference. Be the one who walks away from a silly dispute, rather than the one who dukes it out until the last man is standing and the rest are all down on the ground. The one who gets the last word is not necessarily the one who wins. The one who wins is the one who is right, but that is not always immediately known. 

  The important thing is to treat people better than they treat you. That way, we are assured that the world will become a better place, later if not sooner, better and not badder. Because the ego is a heartless bastard, intent on nothing but its own imaginary superiority for its own imaginary self, in the mistaken belief that somehow more benefits will accrue to it that way, benefits quantitative in nature the very proof of their inferiority. It’s probably safe to say that if you can count it, then you can’t count ON it, for much of anything but grief and sorrow. 

  Where does this selfish ego find proof of its own exalted status? It doesn’t. That’s pure greed and the will to power, the alpha male proving Machiavelli’s ‘might makes right,’ no matter that the future will prove him wrong—eventually. And that is the crucial trick, to play for time, in the hopes that things can only get better. It’s trendy to say that time doesn’t exist, that the only time is NOW, but the Buddha never said that. The Buddha said to save 25% of your wealth for those inevitable rainy days when work is not possible. Pragmatic considerations are more important than abstract metaphysics. 

   
• 

  hardie karges 12:03 pm on August 7, 2022 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: anatta ( 22 ), Brahmanism ( 8 ), Buddhism ( 428 ), Mahayana ( 46 ), Middle Path ( 53 ), non-self ( 4 ), philosophy ( 101 ), religion ( 158 ), rishi ( 7 ), self, Vedas ( 3 )   

  Buddhism in a Hindu World: no Time for Selves and Souls… 

  

  

  You should be able to find a comfortable balance between low self-esteem on the one hand, and overt selfish egotism, on the other, in the Buddhist doctrine of anatta, non-self or no-self, same thing. But this is one of the more controversial and misunderstood of the Buddha’s teachings, and subject to much abuse by those who want to go too far in the opposite direction from egotism, by claiming that we are all ‘nobody,’ and should somehow be proud of that. And that’s fine, if that’s what you want, but that’s not what the Buddha said.

  Because in one very real sense, the Buddha’s Middle path is not just the original path between luxury and lack, or even the esoteric existence and non-existence of the later Mahayanists. It is also very much a Middle Path between the competing philosophies of Vedic Brahmanism and the Jainism of his day. Those two, in effect, defined a very real dichotomy between the lush and lavish celebratory rituals of the upper Brahmin class and the self-denial of the renunciant rishis who once made India famous as a religious center, and to some extent still do.

  So, the self vs. no-self controversy for Buddhists was never supposed to be a total refutation of all things selfie, such that we are individually nothing at all and should aspire to nothing more than the average leaf blowing in the wind. The Buddhist doctrine of anatta only means that there is no permanent eternal soul to aspire to union with the cosmic Brahmana principle, as Brahmanic Hinduism invokes, and so nothing to worry about on that count. Peace in this life in this world is to be found by knowing the truths of suffering, craving, and impermanence, and then acting accordingly. Now we can get on with our lives.

   
• 

  hardie karges 10:47 am on May 22, 2022 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: Brahmanist, ego ( 33 ), Eightfold Path ( 17 ), George Harrison, Hardie Karges ( 239 ), identity ( 3 ), Jain ( 5 ), Middle Way ( 4 ), non-dualism ( 11 ), self, soul ( 9 )   

  Self, Ego, Identity, or the Lack Thereof in Buddhism… 

  

  

  Permanent self and immortal soul are a convenient fiction, but a fiction, nevertheless. And this is what the whole ‘no-self’ on ‘non-self’ debate is all about, or at least WAS. And if it’s disturbing enough that that principle is often misrepresented, it’s downright ridiculous that there is often even a debate over the preference or appropriateness of ‘non-self’ vis a vis ‘no-self.’ But the issue is very clear within the historical context of the competition and ongoing debate between the Brahmanists, Buddhists, and Jains way back some 2500 years ago.

  And the reverb echoes even today when George Harrison opines during his last days that these souls go on forever, so death is essentially meaningless. And whatever qualms you might have about such a statement from a scientific viewpoint would hopefully be secondary to the hope and optimism that it might do for you in the short-term of this life span. But it’s very popular now amongst ‘non-dualists’ as much or more than Buddhists to claim that thoughts have no thinker and actions have no doer. They even claim that the Buddha said that, but if so, then I can’t name the sutra, and even if he did it was likely in a metaphorical usage.

  Because Buddhism in general is nothing if not mental training, and so to conclude that there is nothing there, nothing at all, would seem counterintuitive. But that is the modern ‘non-dualist’ assertion, that any and all self-identity is detrimental to one’s spiritual well-being. And that may or may not be true, but I don’t think the Buddha said that, because it would render the Eightfold Path pointless. When you believe in yourself, don’t believe too much, just enough to accomplish what you need, not enough to inflate your ego. That’s the Middle Path between excess and lack…