wayne’s last blog post..After the visitors– part 1

your comment in comment #6 did make me think, though. how challenging it is to ask a question and to let it stand, WITHOUT turning away from it.

(the question being, “is my view of human nature up for grabs?”)

on the one hand, it’s important to take seriously the invitation implied in a question. one asks, the other replies. that’s a very important part of communication.

what do we do when a question can’t be answered, when it turns out that answering the question really muddles everything, or when it opens up a can of worms that either party can’t/doesn’t want to handle?

perhaps all we can do is what we do here. keep throwing out ideas, companionably and respectfully, and keep coming back to the question.

(btw, i’m curious – where did you THINK this was going?)

ashok’s last blog post..International Relations 101: How did Post-Cold War US Policy Create The Russia Of Today?

I’m not asking all these questions to be rude. I just want to inquire and see where it goes.

ashok’s last blog post..International Relations 101: How did Post-Cold War US Policy Create The Russia Of Today?

saying that they are not in agreement because of the fundamental difference in how they view body and mind would be a quick-and-dirty answer. i seem to hear my philosophical methods teacher whispering in my ear, though, that it would also be a sloppy answer.

ashok’s last blog post..International Relations 101: How did Post-Cold War US Policy Create The Russia Of Today?

my tired brain tells me that while epicurus probably was, like other ancient greek philosophers, a tiny bit – let’s say “informed” by buddhism (“influenced” might be too strong a word), there still seem to be great differences in fundamentals.

while epicurus basically seems to say that the material isn’t quite what we think it is, it, and our sensation of it, is still the foundation of everything.

that’s very different from buddhism. the principal ideas behind buddhism are that 1) there is suffering; 2) suffering is caused by attachment; 3) suffering can end; and 4) there is a path that leads to the end of suffering.

sensation, then, is not at the centre; sensation is part of attachment. i also seem vaguely to remember that “sensation” for epicurus is not the pure sensation that buddhists often refer to (the “thusness” of experience) and hold up as something to strive for. epicurus’ sensation is, and correct me if i’m wrong – an INTERPRETED sensation (“my lover is not beside me. that is bad.”) which is very close to attachment.

of course you’re right that “material form” is not the same as material. “material” is the thing that i can sink my teeth into, “material form” is a concept, an idea (another word that the greeks loved so much).

the other thing we could wrack our brains over is that all the sutras themselves are views of human nature. how in-flux, impermanent are THEY?

all these contemplations are not very scholarly, of course, just thinking out loud before going to bed …

http://inrethinking.blogspot.com/2007/05/on-epicurus-letter-to-herodotus.html

Epicurus is famous for saying “don’t worry about pain, it’s just material, so when you die, there won’t be any pain” with a straight face. Now granted, he’s a materialist – material is everything. Reading that entry above shows that love is eternal because the material is eternal.

But “material form” isn’t material, strictly speaking. It’s what we are now, but we dissolve into material, no? (I’m asking here, I don’t know what the rest of what you quoted says).

Thing is, if Epicurus and the nirvana sutra are in agreement, you’re fine, b/c Epicurus technically has a conception of human nature. For Epicurus, people were good, and living simply and recognizing the nature of the universe (atomism) alone meant the good life was possible.

I realize there are about 928374972979 issues I’m ignoring here, and that I’m being really terse, b/c none of this is my specialty. Hope it helps some though.

ashok’s last blog post..Why Does Marketing Exist? Hasn’t Dilbert Proven It’s The Most Worthless Department In Any Business?