Been goin out more the past 2 weeks than ive been at home., partying hard(in a straightedge sorta way) head feels like its kicked in, throat feels a chainsaw has gone through it, hair looks like a birdsnest.
Is teenage living just torturing your senses for a fleeting moment of fun?
Friday, December 3, 2010
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Smiley Face
Happiness
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To expect happiness without giving up negative action is like holding your hand in a fire and hoping not to be burned. Of course, no one actually wants to suffer, to be sick, to be cold or hungry -- but as long as we continue to indulge in wrong doing we will never put an end to suffering. Likewise, we will never achieve happiness, except through positive deeds, words, and thoughts. Positive action is something we have to cultivate ourselves; it can be neither bought nor stolen, and no one ever stumbles on it just by chance.
-- H.H. Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, The Heart Treasure of the Enlightened Ones, page 1.
Happiness is the colour in which we view the world clouded by a veil by our own inabitions and fleeting emotions. Onus is upon oneself to find and define it, I can't help but question whether such tireless persistence is worth the end result?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To expect happiness without giving up negative action is like holding your hand in a fire and hoping not to be burned. Of course, no one actually wants to suffer, to be sick, to be cold or hungry -- but as long as we continue to indulge in wrong doing we will never put an end to suffering. Likewise, we will never achieve happiness, except through positive deeds, words, and thoughts. Positive action is something we have to cultivate ourselves; it can be neither bought nor stolen, and no one ever stumbles on it just by chance.
-- H.H. Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche, The Heart Treasure of the Enlightened Ones, page 1.
Happiness is the colour in which we view the world clouded by a veil by our own inabitions and fleeting emotions. Onus is upon oneself to find and define it, I can't help but question whether such tireless persistence is worth the end result?
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Nagasena
I think its time i let a story run of someone other than my own
A king asked a monk by what name is he called and he answered Nagasena but there is no man here.
Very confused the king asked him if his hair was Nagasena? No. Is his body Nagasena? Again no. Is his conscience Nagasena? No. After naming every part of Nagasena’s body he said, “I do not find any Nagasena, Nagasena is but a sound! Who is Nagasena? You are lying there is no Nagasena!” Quickly changing the subject, Nagasena asked the king if he rode in a chariot. Then he proceed to ask the king similar questions about his chariot. Is the axle the chariot? No. Is the yoke the chariot? No. Is the frame the chariot? No. Is the axle, yoke and frame the chariot? No. Then Nagasena said “I do not find any chariot, chariot is but a sound! What is this chariot? You are lying there is no chariot!”
Understanding Nagasena’s point the king said, “Good Nagasena, I did not lie. The word chariot comes into existence, dependent on the pole, dependent on the axle, the wheels, the frame, the banner staff, the yoke, the reins, the goad; it is a designation, a description, an appellation, a name.” Nagasena added, “But in the final analysis, the ultimate sense, there is no Person to be found herein.”
What we are is a sum of our many components that are always changing. Many view the soul as the part of us that is passed on through our bodies to somewhere else. However, how can something that is supposed to be you continue on without its intrinsically dependent components
King Milinda’s Doors of Perception
Nagasena appears to defeat the king on exclusively logical ground, viz, that the king’s initial statement is inconsistent and self-contradictory. By analysis of the argument alone and no reference to theories of the soul or perception, explain Nagasena’s objection at each step of the argument. Does he succeed?
King Milinda asks Nagasena, “Reverent Nagasena, do you assume the existence of the soul? “When the King is probed to come up with a definition for the soul, he replies, “The living principle within...which with the eye sees visible objects, with the ear hears sounds, with the nose smells odors, with the tongue tastes flavors, with the body touches tangible objects, with the mind perceives the Doctrine:-just as we here, sitting in this palace, may look out of whatever window we please,-east, west, north, south,-so also, Reverend Sir, this living principle within looks out of whatever door it pleases.”
In summary, Milinda’s soul uses each sense organ to acquire a different type of information, just as looking out a window allows one to acquire information about a different direction. I’ll continue this discussion with an analogy of my own, where each sense organ represents a different book, containing only information not found in any other book. The reader, representing the soul, is free to pick up any book he/she pleases and acquire the information that lies therein.
Nagasena inquires whether the soul can see out of the ear, or nose, etc. To this, Milinda replies, “No.” Nagasena then insists, “What you said last does not agree with what you said first, nor does what you said first agree with what you said last.” Presumably, “what you said first” refers to “the living principle within...which with the eye sees visible objects...” and “what you said last” refers to “this living principle within looks out of whatever door it pleases.” However, this is not the case. Continuing my own analogy, Nagasena is asking Milinda if the reader can acquire the information of Book A while reading book B. Because Milinda never implied that the information in Book A could be acquired while reading book B, and in fact stated the nature of the information that could be found in each book (visible objects in the eye book, sounds in the ear book, etc.), agreeing with Nagasena’s statement does not amount to contracting himself.
Nagasena then attacks Milinda’s analogy of the palace door by suggesting that we can see clearly out of doors, but the “doors” of the soul, the sense organs, somehow do not allow a clear representation of reality. Milinda agrees. However, Milinda’s analogy is not affected by this argument. The phrase “looks out of whatever door it pleases” is merely meant to suggest that there are multiple sources of knowledge for the soul, not that the soul is literally a door. Nagasena is trying to carry the analogy too far; an analogy by nature is not identical to its subject, but only shares certain characteristics with.
In the next argument, “Man Outside of Gateway,” Milinda agrees that he would know if a man left his presence to stand outside the door. Milinda would also know if the same man were to come inside the door and stand before him. Nagasena then attempts to make an analogy to taste-one knows the taste of a substance only when it is on the tongue, not while in the stomach. Thus the soul can not really look outside any door it pleases. In this argument, it is Nagasena’s analogy that is at fault. Milinda provided a specific and complete list of doors that the soul could look through; that list did not include any sense of taste in the stomach. Nagasena is trying to get Milinda to obtain information from a book that does not exists.
In the final discourse, “Man in Trough of Honey,” Milinda is obviously overwhelmed by Nagasena; he contends that sealed lips would block his understanding that he was swimming in a trough of honey! Of course this is not the case, as the other senses (touch, smell, sight) could be adequate for this perception. However, lets consider a case in which an object has a single sensory quality, such as sulfur gas can only be identified by smell. The fact that no other sense can identify this object, that the soul can look out any other door and can not gain information, does not contradict this argument as Nagasena merely provided the books and the limited information therein. He did not promise that all the information would be contained in every book.
A king asked a monk by what name is he called and he answered Nagasena but there is no man here.
Very confused the king asked him if his hair was Nagasena? No. Is his body Nagasena? Again no. Is his conscience Nagasena? No. After naming every part of Nagasena’s body he said, “I do not find any Nagasena, Nagasena is but a sound! Who is Nagasena? You are lying there is no Nagasena!” Quickly changing the subject, Nagasena asked the king if he rode in a chariot. Then he proceed to ask the king similar questions about his chariot. Is the axle the chariot? No. Is the yoke the chariot? No. Is the frame the chariot? No. Is the axle, yoke and frame the chariot? No. Then Nagasena said “I do not find any chariot, chariot is but a sound! What is this chariot? You are lying there is no chariot!”
Understanding Nagasena’s point the king said, “Good Nagasena, I did not lie. The word chariot comes into existence, dependent on the pole, dependent on the axle, the wheels, the frame, the banner staff, the yoke, the reins, the goad; it is a designation, a description, an appellation, a name.” Nagasena added, “But in the final analysis, the ultimate sense, there is no Person to be found herein.”
What we are is a sum of our many components that are always changing. Many view the soul as the part of us that is passed on through our bodies to somewhere else. However, how can something that is supposed to be you continue on without its intrinsically dependent components
King Milinda’s Doors of Perception
Nagasena appears to defeat the king on exclusively logical ground, viz, that the king’s initial statement is inconsistent and self-contradictory. By analysis of the argument alone and no reference to theories of the soul or perception, explain Nagasena’s objection at each step of the argument. Does he succeed?
King Milinda asks Nagasena, “Reverent Nagasena, do you assume the existence of the soul? “When the King is probed to come up with a definition for the soul, he replies, “The living principle within...which with the eye sees visible objects, with the ear hears sounds, with the nose smells odors, with the tongue tastes flavors, with the body touches tangible objects, with the mind perceives the Doctrine:-just as we here, sitting in this palace, may look out of whatever window we please,-east, west, north, south,-so also, Reverend Sir, this living principle within looks out of whatever door it pleases.”
In summary, Milinda’s soul uses each sense organ to acquire a different type of information, just as looking out a window allows one to acquire information about a different direction. I’ll continue this discussion with an analogy of my own, where each sense organ represents a different book, containing only information not found in any other book. The reader, representing the soul, is free to pick up any book he/she pleases and acquire the information that lies therein.
Nagasena inquires whether the soul can see out of the ear, or nose, etc. To this, Milinda replies, “No.” Nagasena then insists, “What you said last does not agree with what you said first, nor does what you said first agree with what you said last.” Presumably, “what you said first” refers to “the living principle within...which with the eye sees visible objects...” and “what you said last” refers to “this living principle within looks out of whatever door it pleases.” However, this is not the case. Continuing my own analogy, Nagasena is asking Milinda if the reader can acquire the information of Book A while reading book B. Because Milinda never implied that the information in Book A could be acquired while reading book B, and in fact stated the nature of the information that could be found in each book (visible objects in the eye book, sounds in the ear book, etc.), agreeing with Nagasena’s statement does not amount to contracting himself.
Nagasena then attacks Milinda’s analogy of the palace door by suggesting that we can see clearly out of doors, but the “doors” of the soul, the sense organs, somehow do not allow a clear representation of reality. Milinda agrees. However, Milinda’s analogy is not affected by this argument. The phrase “looks out of whatever door it pleases” is merely meant to suggest that there are multiple sources of knowledge for the soul, not that the soul is literally a door. Nagasena is trying to carry the analogy too far; an analogy by nature is not identical to its subject, but only shares certain characteristics with.
In the next argument, “Man Outside of Gateway,” Milinda agrees that he would know if a man left his presence to stand outside the door. Milinda would also know if the same man were to come inside the door and stand before him. Nagasena then attempts to make an analogy to taste-one knows the taste of a substance only when it is on the tongue, not while in the stomach. Thus the soul can not really look outside any door it pleases. In this argument, it is Nagasena’s analogy that is at fault. Milinda provided a specific and complete list of doors that the soul could look through; that list did not include any sense of taste in the stomach. Nagasena is trying to get Milinda to obtain information from a book that does not exists.
In the final discourse, “Man in Trough of Honey,” Milinda is obviously overwhelmed by Nagasena; he contends that sealed lips would block his understanding that he was swimming in a trough of honey! Of course this is not the case, as the other senses (touch, smell, sight) could be adequate for this perception. However, lets consider a case in which an object has a single sensory quality, such as sulfur gas can only be identified by smell. The fact that no other sense can identify this object, that the soul can look out any other door and can not gain information, does not contradict this argument as Nagasena merely provided the books and the limited information therein. He did not promise that all the information would be contained in every book.
Everything Imbetween 2
love is blind, its insunuating and consumes one whole, why can't it be pure of essence and nature, why can't love be a cumbersome nature to fufill you or is that just a notion lost in our bleak and desolate society?
Friday, July 16, 2010
100% Real Beef
Dear friends lovers sinners and saints
Its been a while since I made a post, a proper post. I guess I needed time off to let the sounds off my own thoughts to echo my head and if anything I think i've reached a clarity where i can start saying expressing myself again(however desolate or otherwise stupid it may be)
I find it ironic how such strong words can be used so easily yet refuted just the same with a dire opposite. Im sure you know what I mean when i say this but there is always that infuriating pair that fill there sentences with
" I love you babe"
or
"your my world"
Yet as soon as things become constrewed(don't think i spelt that right, sorry for the poor grammar/spelling XP) and they are not attempting to become one organism by sucking serious face, there words are filled with
"I hate you"
This metaphorical pair may be your parents(heaven forbid) people down the street people at school but yeah I think you get my point.
What bothers me is the opposites of honesty and lies. As far as I see it the time when honesty is most in need is when a person lies to themselves, its when preconceived views or misconceptions are there that things become skewed and its when someone has an outstanding view on the subject of "I" that problems start to arise. I think we lie to ourselves the most in terms of lifes end. I know talking about life, death and all its associated faiths is a touchy subject but none the less I shall venture there. We all once again view life through this unmitigates view of "I" where the life we wish to lead is made by this person "I", in which our death is as consequence of what "I" wants and one's legacy is also as a result of "I". I say this like only the minority of social underlings ever cling on to "I" but I can safely say we all do it, I guess it takes alot of maturity and courage to step back to see things for what they really are, that everything is subject to change, everything will rise and fall. I guess it comes down to the old granny's tale of what's best for you is not always what you want.
But who wants that right? In today's modern age everyone, like literally EVERYONE wants to hold the world in the palm of their hands, because were special right? Its crap that each of us have been told since birth, whether it be parents school or the man on the TV. Yet what is it worth if the preconception of someone special is the tall, dark eyed and handsome, or hour glass figure with stunning hair. None the less(sorry i got a bit carried away with that) we all see what we want to see and are willing see, yet not what we are meant to see. People say life is like a mountain, where its treacherous trails our are journey of life and the peak is the pinnacle of all that whether it be heaven, nirvarna or any other religious equivelent(im sorry for ignorance with that statement). Once again our paths is all formed by that idea of "I" whether we take the easy(ironically the easier way is always longer) way and go around have faith in what we believe and make the trecherous trek straight up, its all determined by "I". Yet in my mind that doesn't really seem worth it and god dammit sounds too good to be true. Life isn't a video game, there isn't a pause button or a reset key. If the preconceived view is that were totally in control of everything we do im just gonna say how any good 16 year old cocky smart mouth teenager would say it.
That being, fuck that.
In my mind I rather life be the edge of a cliff, where you jump off into what lies beneath. I know that amongst all things sounds reckless, but when it comes down to it I know that I don't have the wisdom to make the choices and carve a path to get up that mountain, I rather go to the uncharted territory and let the mountains find me. Its a risk for sure, but someone important once said to me "sometimes the biggest risk is not taking a risk at all".
Thats all from me for now, hope your all doing well!
Be honest to yourself, run the risk and fly!
love. Suhada
ps. thank you Kenny for helping me find the words to write this
Its been a while since I made a post, a proper post. I guess I needed time off to let the sounds off my own thoughts to echo my head and if anything I think i've reached a clarity where i can start saying expressing myself again(however desolate or otherwise stupid it may be)
I find it ironic how such strong words can be used so easily yet refuted just the same with a dire opposite. Im sure you know what I mean when i say this but there is always that infuriating pair that fill there sentences with
" I love you babe"
or
"your my world"
Yet as soon as things become constrewed(don't think i spelt that right, sorry for the poor grammar/spelling XP) and they are not attempting to become one organism by sucking serious face, there words are filled with
"I hate you"
This metaphorical pair may be your parents(heaven forbid) people down the street people at school but yeah I think you get my point.
What bothers me is the opposites of honesty and lies. As far as I see it the time when honesty is most in need is when a person lies to themselves, its when preconceived views or misconceptions are there that things become skewed and its when someone has an outstanding view on the subject of "I" that problems start to arise. I think we lie to ourselves the most in terms of lifes end. I know talking about life, death and all its associated faiths is a touchy subject but none the less I shall venture there. We all once again view life through this unmitigates view of "I" where the life we wish to lead is made by this person "I", in which our death is as consequence of what "I" wants and one's legacy is also as a result of "I". I say this like only the minority of social underlings ever cling on to "I" but I can safely say we all do it, I guess it takes alot of maturity and courage to step back to see things for what they really are, that everything is subject to change, everything will rise and fall. I guess it comes down to the old granny's tale of what's best for you is not always what you want.
But who wants that right? In today's modern age everyone, like literally EVERYONE wants to hold the world in the palm of their hands, because were special right? Its crap that each of us have been told since birth, whether it be parents school or the man on the TV. Yet what is it worth if the preconception of someone special is the tall, dark eyed and handsome, or hour glass figure with stunning hair. None the less(sorry i got a bit carried away with that) we all see what we want to see and are willing see, yet not what we are meant to see. People say life is like a mountain, where its treacherous trails our are journey of life and the peak is the pinnacle of all that whether it be heaven, nirvarna or any other religious equivelent(im sorry for ignorance with that statement). Once again our paths is all formed by that idea of "I" whether we take the easy(ironically the easier way is always longer) way and go around have faith in what we believe and make the trecherous trek straight up, its all determined by "I". Yet in my mind that doesn't really seem worth it and god dammit sounds too good to be true. Life isn't a video game, there isn't a pause button or a reset key. If the preconceived view is that were totally in control of everything we do im just gonna say how any good 16 year old cocky smart mouth teenager would say it.
That being, fuck that.
In my mind I rather life be the edge of a cliff, where you jump off into what lies beneath. I know that amongst all things sounds reckless, but when it comes down to it I know that I don't have the wisdom to make the choices and carve a path to get up that mountain, I rather go to the uncharted territory and let the mountains find me. Its a risk for sure, but someone important once said to me "sometimes the biggest risk is not taking a risk at all".
Thats all from me for now, hope your all doing well!
Be honest to yourself, run the risk and fly!
love. Suhada
ps. thank you Kenny for helping me find the words to write this
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Everything Imbetween 3: This goes without a title
Flower Garland Sutra
i will be a good physician for the sick and suffering. I will lead those who have lost their way to the right road. I will be a bright light for those in the dark night, and cause the poor and destitute to uncover hidden treasures.
i will be a good physician for the sick and suffering. I will lead those who have lost their way to the right road. I will be a bright light for those in the dark night, and cause the poor and destitute to uncover hidden treasures.
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Everything Imbetween 1: 21 things
Ive been taking a break from blogging lately i guess to get my head around school and simply just getting my shit together.
But i guess the reason i started blogging was to see where my headspace was at, i needed to write wat i think to really know wat i think. I don't think im in a position to be handing out life advice on life's gruelling questions, but i need to put my thoughts to paper(figuritively that is) to see where i am. What you make of it, well i guess thats up to you.
People do stupid shit like this on facebook so i thought i might try it, these are the 21 things most prominent on my mind, why 21? Well i dunn i just like the number =]
1. i don't understand why people hide behind a social disguise. like i know i do it to, but when you see kids on the street you don't see them as girl with dark hair and tight jeans, their labelled emo chic. If you see a guy with a mullet, trackies and adidas shoes your first thought it "oh shit another lad". Are they presumptions we create ourselves, or is it a social view which constrains our reasoning?
2. socks are terribly uncomfertable, does anybody else agree with me?
3. there are too many versions of itunes and msn that are released, what makes it more annoying is the constant message saying ''download the latest version''. Is the addage of "new and improved" really new and improved or just an adaptation to a current annoyance.
4. In those American high school tv shows, i don't know how those kids find something new to wear every day while still being fashionably acceptable. I get about 3 shirts and a pair of pants a year, everything else is hand-me-downs!
5. Pringles are genius
6. How come most people only watch a youtubers video not for their talent but because their ridiculously hot and the 3 and a half minutes where u stare at their face is considered precious face time.
7. is justin beiber really gay/girl/lesbian/unich?
8.back in 06-07 Jessica Alba was the hottest thing to walk the face of the earth, then it was Megan Fox. Just out of curiosity who are teenage boys craving about now? In my personal opinion Kirsten Kreuk is like the prettiest person on TV but i doubt most even know who she is or agrees.
9. kfc is over rated, maccas ftw
10. i don't like those straight downy fringe thingos(that was poorly worded but u get wat i mean)
11. to all those avatar the last air bender fans, WHY IS ZUKO INDIAN. Like come on i'd make a better zuko than dev patel. Sure my acting aint up to scratch, but i pull off the angsty, confused teenager thing so much better. Plus i have the hair to boot. RAGE
12. Sunkist really is better than Fanta
13. It annoys me how shounen jump take constant breaks scheduled for ''planning of their manga'' and after several thousand fans pine over a new chapter each week their only met with another dissatisfying 20 page issue.
14. Im going to Japan, China and Sweeden this year. Hooray!
15. I don't think 15 is a particularly interesting number
16. Dam im running out of things to say, my crass sense of humour has its limits!
17. Is tupac really dead?
18. It annoys me when people speak in their native language really loud in public and then look down on people around them speaking english. Im not trying to create racist tension, but wheres the love people, where in Australia aren't we?
19. im Flabawabajabanabawaba noonga, I'm back
20. I plan to play robot unicorn attack after dinner. What a trippy game aye
21. people always talk about when michael jackson was a talented black man to how died as a screaming white bitch. Wat about when he was imbetween huh WHEN HE WAS BROWN. Yeah you know what i mean, go watch thriller again. Tell me that someone with pants that end at his ankles with high white sock, greased up hair and just plain retarded dance moves isn't a curry!
I dunno if anything that was at leas the slightest bit liberating. There are so many things I wish I could say, but thats just I just can't. I guess for now this will have to do.... Its everything imbetween
With love
Sukhi
But i guess the reason i started blogging was to see where my headspace was at, i needed to write wat i think to really know wat i think. I don't think im in a position to be handing out life advice on life's gruelling questions, but i need to put my thoughts to paper(figuritively that is) to see where i am. What you make of it, well i guess thats up to you.
People do stupid shit like this on facebook so i thought i might try it, these are the 21 things most prominent on my mind, why 21? Well i dunn i just like the number =]
1. i don't understand why people hide behind a social disguise. like i know i do it to, but when you see kids on the street you don't see them as girl with dark hair and tight jeans, their labelled emo chic. If you see a guy with a mullet, trackies and adidas shoes your first thought it "oh shit another lad". Are they presumptions we create ourselves, or is it a social view which constrains our reasoning?
2. socks are terribly uncomfertable, does anybody else agree with me?
3. there are too many versions of itunes and msn that are released, what makes it more annoying is the constant message saying ''download the latest version''. Is the addage of "new and improved" really new and improved or just an adaptation to a current annoyance.
4. In those American high school tv shows, i don't know how those kids find something new to wear every day while still being fashionably acceptable. I get about 3 shirts and a pair of pants a year, everything else is hand-me-downs!
5. Pringles are genius
6. How come most people only watch a youtubers video not for their talent but because their ridiculously hot and the 3 and a half minutes where u stare at their face is considered precious face time.
7. is justin beiber really gay/girl/lesbian/unich?
8.back in 06-07 Jessica Alba was the hottest thing to walk the face of the earth, then it was Megan Fox. Just out of curiosity who are teenage boys craving about now? In my personal opinion Kirsten Kreuk is like the prettiest person on TV but i doubt most even know who she is or agrees.
9. kfc is over rated, maccas ftw
10. i don't like those straight downy fringe thingos(that was poorly worded but u get wat i mean)
11. to all those avatar the last air bender fans, WHY IS ZUKO INDIAN. Like come on i'd make a better zuko than dev patel. Sure my acting aint up to scratch, but i pull off the angsty, confused teenager thing so much better. Plus i have the hair to boot. RAGE
12. Sunkist really is better than Fanta
13. It annoys me how shounen jump take constant breaks scheduled for ''planning of their manga'' and after several thousand fans pine over a new chapter each week their only met with another dissatisfying 20 page issue.
14. Im going to Japan, China and Sweeden this year. Hooray!
15. I don't think 15 is a particularly interesting number
16. Dam im running out of things to say, my crass sense of humour has its limits!
17. Is tupac really dead?
18. It annoys me when people speak in their native language really loud in public and then look down on people around them speaking english. Im not trying to create racist tension, but wheres the love people, where in Australia aren't we?
19. im Flabawabajabanabawaba noonga, I'm back
20. I plan to play robot unicorn attack after dinner. What a trippy game aye
21. people always talk about when michael jackson was a talented black man to how died as a screaming white bitch. Wat about when he was imbetween huh WHEN HE WAS BROWN. Yeah you know what i mean, go watch thriller again. Tell me that someone with pants that end at his ankles with high white sock, greased up hair and just plain retarded dance moves isn't a curry!
I dunno if anything that was at leas the slightest bit liberating. There are so many things I wish I could say, but thats just I just can't. I guess for now this will have to do.... Its everything imbetween
With love
Sukhi
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
