4 ms·

I think what you mean by dark night is the last chapter in The Mind Illuminated. Being red pilled with the literature doesn't make you immune to the "dark nigh

I think what you mean by dark night is the last chapter in The Mind Illuminated. Being red pilled with the literature doesn't make you immune to the "dark night"

HNLurker2 8y ago
Also don't by misguided by monks and nuns who are in RELIGION e.g Theravada (Zen is good). They sell their religion by calling it a philosophy which is by crap. Studying Theravada ~hundreds of hours with meditating you learn a lot about Early Buddhism but you get entangled in religion with: worshipping, reading the sutras religiously etc) As Albert Camus said: "Dogma is philosophical suicide". >Kierkegaard stated that a belief in anything beyond the Absurd requires an irrational but perhaps necessary religious "leap" into the intangible and empirically unprovable (now commonly referred to as a "leap of faith"). However, Camus regarded this solution, and others, as "philosophical suicide".
iliketosleep 8y ago
I was referring to the "dark night" Dr Daniel Ingram expounds upon in his writings (which I'm familiar with) and is referred to in the article. I haven't read The Mind Illuminated, so I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Regardless, there is no such thing as "red pilled" when it comes to all of this, and nobody who engages in intense meditation is immune. I went through it once and that was quite enough.
- HNLurker2 8y ago
  > haven't read The Mind Illuminated, so I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Basically it says at the end of the book telling us about: suffering, impeanence and no self. He tell us we should notice we become angry and enraged like a nihilist. (1) The idea is that meditation and absorption is the only salvation to that , meaning without these skills you will be bound to suffer for real. >Regardless, there is no such thing as "red pilled" when it comes to all of this, and nobody who engages in intense meditation is immune. I went through it once and that was quite enough. Well I am sorry for the language, as a lay Buddhist myself keeping up with the discourses, middle length,combined of the Buddha and other sutras. They are nihilistic and don't talk about the meaning of life but just about salivation from suffering. (1) Buddha was the first nihilist in the world. Source wikipedia.
  - iliketosleep 8y ago
    So the book that you mention takes things to the extreme, and this is what often happens with belief systems of any sort. Personally, I have found meditation on the three characteristics (unsatisfactoriness, impermanence, and non-self) to be useful. Why? So I can go on craving things I can't have, mourning losses, and getting caught up in my own ego, only without being completely overwhelmed by it all. Life without suffering is not life, and those who truly believe in the complete removal of suffering will indeed find their way to nihilism.
    - arpa 8y ago
      beautifully put! If I might add - the first noble truth is that life is suffering, to which, the noble eightfold path only offers a temporary remedy. It has been a long time since I've been on the path, but I still remember the beauty of the inner silence; however I also remember how the silence becomes the void that eats away at the world we dream, leaving only the cold and naked meaningless of the world - i still remember how it was easy to become one with nothing instead of becoming one with everything. I also wanted to say something more regarding Karuna, however that would probably be even more superfluous and pointless than my comment already is.
      - kup0 8y ago
        IMHO, I think the translation "life is suffering" is inaccurate enough to be particularly negative/nihilistic. Though, maybe "pain is an inescapable part of life" is too much the other way, not sure. "Life is dukkha" seems to mean so much more than that. Especially as the Buddha expounds on multiple types of Dukkha, only one of which is suffering/pain. The other two, being impermanence and conditioned states.
        arpa 8y ago
        One could go even further and say that life can not be easily defined by a single term; hence the three marks of existence, which also seem to be reflected in a way in a western ethos. But even these three marks, in my humblest ans undereducated opinion, are just an entrypoint to describing the human condition. It is probably most safe to say: "life is such". But that's akin to saying nothing; perhaps in this lies the absolute truth?
- tanseydavid 8y ago
  The term and concept go back to the Middle Ages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul

I think what you mean by dark night is the last chapter in The Mind Illuminated. Being red pilled with the literature doesn't make you immune to the "dark night"

HNLurker2 8y ago

Also don't by misguided by monks and nuns who are in RELIGION e.g Theravada (Zen is good). They sell their religion by calling it a philosophy which is by crap. Studying Theravada ~hundreds of hours with meditating you learn a lot about Early Buddhism but you get entangled in religion with: worshipping, reading the sutras religiously etc) As Albert Camus said: "Dogma is philosophical suicide". >Kierkegaard stated that a belief in anything beyond the Absurd requires an irrational but perhaps necessary religious "leap" into the intangible and empirically unprovable (now commonly referred to as a "leap of faith"). However, Camus regarded this solution, and others, as "philosophical suicide".

iliketosleep 8y ago

I was referring to the "dark night" Dr Daniel Ingram expounds upon in his writings (which I'm familiar with) and is referred to in the article. I haven't read The Mind Illuminated, so I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Regardless, there is no such thing as "red pilled" when it comes to all of this, and nobody who engages in intense meditation is immune. I went through it once and that was quite enough.

HNLurker2 8y ago
> haven't read The Mind Illuminated, so I'm not sure if it's the same thing. Basically it says at the end of the book telling us about: suffering, impeanence and no self. He tell us we should notice we become angry and enraged like a nihilist. (1) The idea is that meditation and absorption is the only salvation to that , meaning without these skills you will be bound to suffer for real. >Regardless, there is no such thing as "red pilled" when it comes to all of this, and nobody who engages in intense meditation is immune. I went through it once and that was quite enough. Well I am sorry for the language, as a lay Buddhist myself keeping up with the discourses, middle length,combined of the Buddha and other sutras. They are nihilistic and don't talk about the meaning of life but just about salivation from suffering. (1) Buddha was the first nihilist in the world. Source wikipedia.
- iliketosleep 8y ago
  So the book that you mention takes things to the extreme, and this is what often happens with belief systems of any sort. Personally, I have found meditation on the three characteristics (unsatisfactoriness, impermanence, and non-self) to be useful. Why? So I can go on craving things I can't have, mourning losses, and getting caught up in my own ego, only without being completely overwhelmed by it all. Life without suffering is not life, and those who truly believe in the complete removal of suffering will indeed find their way to nihilism.
  - arpa 8y ago
    beautifully put! If I might add - the first noble truth is that life is suffering, to which, the noble eightfold path only offers a temporary remedy. It has been a long time since I've been on the path, but I still remember the beauty of the inner silence; however I also remember how the silence becomes the void that eats away at the world we dream, leaving only the cold and naked meaningless of the world - i still remember how it was easy to become one with nothing instead of becoming one with everything. I also wanted to say something more regarding Karuna, however that would probably be even more superfluous and pointless than my comment already is.
    - kup0 8y ago
      IMHO, I think the translation "life is suffering" is inaccurate enough to be particularly negative/nihilistic. Though, maybe "pain is an inescapable part of life" is too much the other way, not sure. "Life is dukkha" seems to mean so much more than that. Especially as the Buddha expounds on multiple types of Dukkha, only one of which is suffering/pain. The other two, being impermanence and conditioned states.
      - arpa 8y ago
        One could go even further and say that life can not be easily defined by a single term; hence the three marks of existence, which also seem to be reflected in a way in a western ethos. But even these three marks, in my humblest ans undereducated opinion, are just an entrypoint to describing the human condition. It is probably most safe to say: "life is such". But that's akin to saying nothing; perhaps in this lies the absolute truth?
tanseydavid 8y ago
The term and concept go back to the Middle Ages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Night_of_the_Soul