Anonymous
03/25/2016 (Fri) 18:47:57
Id: 1f1051
[Preview]
No.
9130
>>9117>I assume you mean the same thing, that if someone acknowledges that he is unique, there is no more need for identification. No, this isn't quite what I was referring to. I was referring to the identification as in when we look at the our bodies and we say "I am the form of this body, I am this bone structure, I am this build, I am this complexion". When you delude yourself into thinking you are, in the example, form, then you worry about the changing nature of this form - when it becomes wounded, when it decays, and when it finally dies.
All the identification has caused you is suffering, and not even a glimpse at contentedness.
>If spirituality is a spook, why bring up happiness and suffering?It would be useful if we defined spirituality in this context. I never said it was a spook, either.
I contend that suffering is inherent in all phenomena that depend on other phenomena when we identify with these phenomena. For example, the identification with our physical form as I said earlier. Our physical form has an origination (birth) and it will have an end (death). It is transitory, impermanent, unsafe, constructed on a rickety structure with a poor basis. It ends.
It just doesn't make sense to identify with, in this example, form. Because it is transient.
Having a mid-life crisis, worrying about your death, getting anxious when you find a gray hair - these are all examples of the suffering that appears when we identify, in this example, with form. It would seem rather banal, but these banal examples show a desire underneath for permanence, best achieved by youth. The fact is that because we are born, we must die - and this permanence is nowhere to be found.
Message too long. Click here to view full text.