tsuki

Did leaving the online groups help to solve your privacy problem? Doesn't it hit you as strange that people around you always seem to disrespect your boundaries? Are you sure that it is actually a problem with all the people around you?

Do you think that your friends value their privacy as much as you do? Do you think that your friends understand privacy the same way as you do?

Outline of Buddhism <~ That's just beautiful.

Skandha - This is a goldmine. It seems like the thing I've been looking for. The mind = Citta + Manas + Vijñāna

@Ampresus So, basically: privacy is a tool to control your self-image. Is it important to you that people see you exactly the way you want them to see you? Do you value the privacy of other people as much as you value your own privacy? How would your friends react if you told them that you ask us for advice on how to deal with this situation? Are you sure that this doesn't violate their privacy? What you describe here are still various ways to block people. Cut ties with them. Do you cut ties with online people when they do not perceive you the way you want them to perceive you?

Saṃjñā - perception, cognition, conceptualization, distinguishing. This sounds very reminiscent of what I usually think of as memory. Buddhists approach this as the possibility of repeated recognition. Marking. Noting. The mechanism seems to be: distinguishing characteristic features. Woodcutter marks wood to know its kind later on. For example: this mug is different than that mug because of its color. The left hand is different than the right hand because it has the thumb on the other side. I wonder whether 'location' is also included in perception? Like: this mug and that mug are not the same mug, as they stand next to each other. I'll have to dig into that deeper later on.

@Shadowraix You are responding to the prelude to further points that agree with what you are saying.

Seven universal mental factors What I mean by meaning roughly translates to Vedana (feelings in Mental factors) in Mahayana terms. Classification of kinds of vedana roughly translates as: Physical and mental (here: outer and inner) With respect to meaning: positive, negative, neutral With respect to senses: eye, ear, nose, tongue, body, mind (here: vision, hearing, smell, taste, motion, being) Then, there are combinations: 18 kinds: meaning and senses 36 kinds: meaning and senses distinguished for laymen and monastics 108 kinds: the above 36 kinds distinguished for past, present and future Why would they enumerate such simple Cartesian products though?

Samadhi, Dhyana - model of enlightenment via classification of states of consciousness. Very important. Bodhipakkhiyādhammā - qualities associated with awakening Arupajhana - four final djanas, immaterial form. Buddhist cosmology - for context Visuddhimagga (Theravada), 40 meditations, Yoga sutras - for reference Buddhist psychology: Anapanasati - texts Vitarka-vicara - (Vitarka mudra) Mental factors The mind = Citta + Manas + Vijñāna Techniques: Anapanasati - breath meditation? Oohh, this is a goldmine: Pratītyasamutpāda

I am nothing, I know nothing.

@Ampresus You cannot control other people. What you can control is your reaction to their behavior. By saying that you do not want pictures of you to be taken, you just told them how to trigger you. Yes, they probably did it playfully, but still - you told them what to do. Instead of trying to change their behavior - look into why you value your privacy so much. My question is: what is privacy to you and how was it violated simply by taking a picture of you? What would also be beneficial to learn is: what is the difference between online and offline relationships? What would internet look like if you couldn't just block people? Online and offline are not separate.

Are the subconscious levels of karma perceivable? (I realize the absurdity of this question) Do they have names? Can you describe them? How do they manifest? Is there a taxonomy of karma? I'm asking in relation to this response: What are the methods of working with karma? Can awakenings clear it?

@Arhattobe Thank you very much. I hope that you don't mind another related questions? My thirst for knowledge is insatiable . What is the importance of self-reference with respect to karma? For example, there are thoughts about thoughts and emotions about emotions. How is self-reference related to self-awareness? Are there collective expressions of karma? Can corporations amass karma? Is karma equivalent to ego in your understanding? Is karma related to person's psychology, or can it also be a physical phenomenon? There are multiple questions in each point. Please treat each point as one question seen from various angles.

@Arhattobe Very informative, thank you. Another question: can you please explain what is karma? Do you know any good (preferably modern) resources on this topic?

@SOUL Sigh, still discussing the futility of discussion? Does this bring about clarity about what shadow is?

@lmfao Great insight.

Anger is just the recognition that something is wrong and that I have to do something about it. The problem is that anger has the ability to consume us beyond this basic recognition and entrance us to the point of blindness. Letting be consumed by anger creates a habit that is strengthened each time something is wrong and it becomes more and more difficult to lose its grip. Not only that, but we often hurt others, which makes them want to retaliate. That creates a cycle of anger that is not easily broken. Anything that can be done in anger, can also be done while being calm.

Let me play some word-games with you: is there anything to do when you meet an open person? Is enlightening people your goal?

@Arhattobe Please explain what enlightenment means to you.

Yes. Vulnerability is definitely an emotional quality, and I would add that it has two components: Honesty = authenticity = truthfulness, which is the lack of separation of the inner world and outward behavior Recognition of the fear that another person knows us well enough to destroy us. Relationships founded on two-way vulnerability (which is intimacy?) are very beautiful and very difficult at times. My wife still has trouble understanding that we fight because we love each other deeply. I think that the utility of the relationship should never be denied. There will inevitably be dry periods where the only visible thing is the utility of it, but it is still something to be cherished. The fact that people can love each other is absolutely insane. People are a lot of trouble to be around closely. Very beautiful. Vulnerability is a powerful practice. This is how I view my marriage. My wife was my first partner in my adult life.

I think that it simply means that you know the theory, but there's work to do. Relationship with another human being is a wonderful practice. Experiencing satori on a meditation cushion is one thing, but living it in everyday life is the end-goal. And that is the perfect place to start a relationship. Try to not be attached to non-attachment as well . Let me ask for a clarification: Is your understanding of intimacy grounded in exclusivity? Is a relationship intimate because she does things to you that she does not do with other people? Well, commitment to accepting everyone in your life, unconditionally, would be a powerful practice.

Hahaha, now isn't that the attitude that lets you enter the relationship freely? The question is: do you really feel that way in everyday life? Do you embody it? Yes. Are you willing to reflect why do you want to change that? Is changing that actually possible? In front of the monitor with me? No offence taken! Just like you reflect on yourself by asking this questions - so am I, by responding to them.

Yep. We always think that we have answers until we are proven wrong. Don't get too hung up on that and actually try to live your insight until it proves itself to make you suffer. What does it say about your relationship with your mother? If "my" reality is the same as "your" reality, then are there actually two realities, or just one? Is one and two actually a valid distinction in this case?

I'd expect them to be offended and I would point this feeling back at them by saying: You just made an ass of yourself by judging that girl to be ugly. And then, probably ask: what made you sleep with her in the first place?

Thoughts and feelings are not disjoint dimensions of experience and the fact that you can meddle with their connection is one of the most amazing observations to make. I think that you falsely attribute this change to the process of 'thinking' (inner hearing), though. The connection between thinking and feeling is not rooted in thinking, nor it is rooted in feeling. Thinking and feeling are how this connection is expressed.