Jump to content
Dharmaling Forums

kunzang

Members
  • Content Count

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About kunzang

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Poglavje iz romana Palomar (1983) Itala Calvina. Marmor in kri Premišljanja, kot jih vzbudi mesarija v človeku, ki vstopa z nakupovalno torbo, vključujejo znanja, ki so se stoletja prenašala znotraj različnih področij človeškega vedenja: poznavanje mesa in rezov, najboljšega načina priprave vsakega kosa, obredja, s katerim je moč ublažiti krivdo zaradi odvzema drugih življenj, da bi nahranili lastno. Klavsko znanje in kuharsko znanje pripadata eksaktnim, eksperimentalno preverljivim vedam, opirata se na navade in tehnike, ki so od dežele do dežele različne; žrtveno znanje pa je v oblasti negotovosti in je danes že davno zapadlo pozabi, čeprav še vedno, kot neizrečena potreba, mračno teži vest. Spoštljivo čaščenje vsega, kar je povezano z mesom, vodi gospoda Palomarja, ko se nameri kupiti tri biftke. Sredi marmorja mesarije postava kakor sred templja in se zaveda, da ta prostor pogojuje njegov individualni obstoj in kulturo, ki ji pripada. Vrsta strank teče počasi ob visokem marmornem pultu, ob konzolah in pladnjih, kjer so postrojeni kosi mesa, v vsakega od njih je zapičen karton z imenom in ceno. Sledijo si živordeča barva vola, svetlo roza telička, bledo rdeča jagnjeta, temno rdeča prašiča. Vzplamenevajo debeli kotleti, tolsti turnedoji, ki jih po širini ovija slanina, gibki in vitki fileji pljučne pečenke, s svojo neodložljivo kostjo oboroženi biftki, vsi okorni in pusti koluti belega reza, na nemastno meso in loj razplasteni kuhani kosi, svinjska ribica v pričakovanju vrvice, ki jo prisili, da se bo obrnila vase; zatem barve zbledijo: telečji zrezki, ledvene pečenke, kosi pleč in prs, hrustančevina; in že vstopamo v kraljestvo jagnjeških stegen in pleč; še nekoliko dalje, vse belo od vampov, vse črno od žolča Belo odeti mesarji za pultom vihtijo sekire s trapezoidnim rezilom, nože za sekanje in nože za odiranje, sekirice za lomljenje kosti in bate, ki tlačijo vijugaste roza kodrčke v lijak rezalnice. S kavljev visijo razčetverjena telesa, ki te spomnijo, da je vsak tvoj grižljaj del bitja, samovoljno iztrgan iz njegove živeče celote. Na zidnem panoju je vol v prerezu kot s črtami prepreden zemljevid, kjer so področja prehranjevalnega interesa lepo zamejena, da zajamejo anatomijo celotne živali, razen rogov in kopit. Shema človeškega habitata je to, nič manj od planisfere planeta; oba seznama bi morala uzakoniti pravice, ki si jih je odredil človek, kot tudi prisvajanje, deljenje in žrtje, da je od zemeljskih kontinentov in ledij živalskih teles na koncu vse brez ostanka. Reči je treba, da je simbioza človek-vol v stoletjih dosegla nekakšno asimetrično ravnotežje, ki obema vrstama omogoča nadaljnje razmnoževanje (resda ima človek na skrbi hranjenje vola, a se mu ni dolžan dati v jed), in je jamčila za razcvet civilizacije, ki se ji reče človeška, pa bi jo vsaj deloma lahko imenovali človeško-volovska (ta deloma sovpada s človeško-ovčjo in še bolj deloma s človeško-svinjsko, glede na alternative v zapleteni geografiji religioznih prepovedi). Gospod Palomar sodeluje v tej simbiozi pri polni zavesti in z jasno privolitvijo: v visečem volovskem truplu lahko prepozna osebo svojega razčetverjenega brata, v rezu na ledjih rano, ki je zasekana v njegovo lastno meso, in kljub temu ve, da je s svojo prehranjevalno tradicijo opredeljen mesojedec, v mesariji zasluti obljubo okušalne radosti; ko opazuje krvaveče kose, si predstavlja zebraste proge, ki jih bo plamen pustil na biftkih z žara, in ugodje zoba, ko grize v potemnela vlakna. Eno čustvo ne izključuje drugega: stanje Palomarjevega duha med čakanjem v mesariji je hkrati zadrževano veselje in strah, želja in spoštovanje, egoistična skrb in splošno sočutje, stanje duha, ki ga morda drugi izražajo skozi molitev.
  2. Dear all, I wanted to post the entire text about the guilt and hypocrisy in the culture that venerates eating meat, but managed to find only a short quote from the novel by Italo Calvino, Mr. Palomar: "On the wall a chart shows an outline of a steer, like a map covered with frontier lines that mark off the areas of consuming interest, involving the entire anatomy of the animal except only horns and hoofs. The map of the human habitat is this, no less than the planisphere of the planet; both are protocols that should sanction the rights man has attributed to himself, of possession, division, and consumption without residue of the terrestrial continents and of the loins of the animal body." Italo Calvino "Marble and Blood." Mr. Palomar. Pg. 77.
  3. If even our good or virtuous actions are a mixture of positive and negative causes (as long as we don't have high realizations) then it is really difficult to step on the Path and even the contact with the Dharma in next lives is not sure, could be swept away by a karmic wind easily, along with good habits, virtues, shine... But here one question comes: given that even our good actions are a mixture, how to diminish the amount of negative if we may not be even aware of the negativities mixed in/with positive elements? Sometimes we may even see something as good, in the same way that one can be firmly convinced that e.g. eating meat is healthy for various reasons..., without having even a tiny possibility of seeing the faultness of such a view... I am terrified of the (many) situations and possibilities where one might take sth. as good and virtuous, thus not having a slightest chance to apply the four opponing powers. Or one might even notice the negativity but somehow does not react quick enough, thus causing the "snow-ball" effect. Does this bring us once again up to the necessity of purification and merits collection, in order to be able to see, at least, what are the faults (or a limited number of faults)? It would be nice that also purification and merits collection followed the law of an exponential karma... (or do they follow it?). So, the motivation should go along with the purification and merits collection. But how or when do we know what measures to take in order that the purification outdoes the quantity of negative karma?
  4. One more specific question. Does one break samaya if: 1. one is slow minded, in the sense that one finds out only after a certain delay (let us say of 7-10 days) what, behind the factual work, was the essence of guru's advice? 2. one understands well what guru advised to do/practice, has the intention and the motivation to put it into the practice, yet one procrastinates, in the sense of letting other little things/work come and prevent from putting the advice into practice? In a sense, it is perhaps a question of making priorities... and, above all, being conscious about the real priorities. All the best.
  5. One thing more. I will take an example from the Bible, one of the Gospels. What does Christ say to Pilat? You are a slave of your crown... So, slavery/inferiority has many faces and facets... exposed ones and disguised ones. Humility is something completely other.
  6. Dear Tatjana, 1. there is a strange contradiction in your post. But don't worry, the same contradiction, alas!, can be found in many cases of feminist discourse. The contradiction goes like that: a. at the level of the contents, there is an expression of a demand for a "respectful relationship between women and men", b. however, the level of the form that is used to express this contents, NEGATES what is claimed and demanded and requested at the level of the contents. Why is that so? "Respectful relationship between women and man is grounded by ALLOWING women's to talk about theri experiences, about their needs by herself. Me, as a women, do no need a man for expaining me what should I feel or perceive as real/reality." There is the claim about women being autonomous with their needs and perception of reality. Great! But how it is expressed in language? It seems that DESPITE this autonomy, a women still asks somebody hierarchically higher than herself (a man? ) to ALLOW HER to be autonomous. So the woman puts herself automatically in a lower position. The language that was used shows how the chauvinist mentality with its forms remained untransformed, hidden at the bottom of the feminist discourse. A discourse that is structured in this way seems not only unconvincing and without real results; worse: it is autochauvinistic! It is as a women would would split in two, a woman that wants desperately to liberate herself from chauvinism, BUT using male chauvinist mentality for that end. She acts out of an idea or an ideal, but she tries to reach it with a wrong means/instrument/skill. In the end, she uses a male chauvinism against herself, BEING CONVINCED that she is going to liberate herself. So she remains where she is. A standard woman mistake. And a very, very sad one. Because in such a position a woman (a contemporary woman!!! a high level of education and intelligence is not a guarantee for being liberated from it) ends up with lots of fear and frustrations. So, she gambles out her inner force. That is really sad. What is possibly good in this situation: perhaps we simply don't have other choice but to use old language (old mental forms) while taking a step against all projected fears and pains, a step into a new land. That is a difficult period of "being in the process", of being on the Path. Only after such a step is done, we can reconstruct our mental forms. I wish that all beings had a tremendous force to take such a step, not only to rebuild more productive mental forms, but to take it completely! 2. I have also one more specifically Buddhist observation. "We don't need to nourish men's projections in order to complete our karmic position..." I agree... up to a certain point. There is no need to repeat what has been said about a male chauvinism that a woman uses and directs against herself. There are two more points. a. We don't need to nourish neither our own feminine projections... So, here the advise and guidance of a higher realised being, male or female, becomes extremely precious. b. All what we experience is a karmically bound network. Whether I experience it as a woman or as a man, in any case it is suffering that is karmic and exists as dependant origination. One can imagine it as a special dish, women have one special dish, the men are specialists in making another special dish. Both kind of suffering-dishes are served in the restaurant called Samsara. So, what is the point of arguing which dish is better? And which one is tastier? Now, for each specific suffering a specific strategy (antidote) should be used. (At least, this is how I understand it. And I understand it, very theoretically.) This means what? for women, certain practices are needed, for men, other practices are needed. In the end, it's just the difference of instruments that have to be used for the same final goal. Here comes what I find useful in Ani.Chödron's post. Whatever is experienced as suffering has the chance to be transformed into a practice of knowing, taming, transforming the ego (male or female one). The basic thing that she suggests is to change a perspective, a viewpoint: what was seen as painful to be taken as a 3D product of karma and transformed into a precious chance to practice... With the "middle way", it doesn't lead to the woman slavery, but to a certain autonomy or independence, even if it outwardly shows as humility that should not be mis-taken for inferiority and dependance. And yes, middle way is difficult, the right measure is difficult to find and to maintain. That is why we can rejoice the help of realized teachers. All the best.
  7. I agree, dear Pamo! Yet - this is (at least in my practice) depending on the depth of disturbing emotion or negative mental factor. The point is, what to do "on the spot" to cut the mind out of this negative emotion? So, one has to change one mental automatism for another. One has to "trick" ones mind because the mind cannot split in two and cannot be concentrated upon two different objects. (I am copying the advise from Lama Shenpen Rinpoche. ) So, it is either pain or something positive, constructive. The picture that comes into my mind is the picture of a mother that sees her child at the verge of crying for nothing, just because it wants some attention when mom is talking to a friend. So she diverts child's attention saying: "Oh, my my, what a beautiful autumn leaves we have there! Could you bring some to mummy?" And in that moment, the child sees the beautiful colours (mom said they were beautiful, so they surely are) and starts observing, running towards beautiful yellow-reddish leaves. And it starts smiling! I was talking about a situation when our mind behaves as a child not wanting to listen to reason while being oversensitive and (from its perception) hurt. How to make unharmony into harmony as effectively as possible? I see it even like that: even if the person may not have positive characteristic, I would invent them in order to block the disturbing emotion, preventing it from becoming harming other (even internally). Thus, one can also open towards another person more easily. I think, this could be felt in the communication with another person, in the sense, that there is the feeling that the problem can be resolved - only some time and patience with others are needed. But, as my friend (with whom still discuss about this topic) says: the method depends on the situation and on the individuum; to one one method is more easy to apply while to another person the other might be more effective... I would like to hear an opinion about such trick(s) that exploit the mind's capability of creating projections. I would like to hear also about the relation between such tricks and tonglen/Emptiness practice...
  8. Dear both, Pamo and Dani, thank you for your answers and for sharing your experiences, for courage! I find all this very helpful! From what I see, the analysis on jelausy can lead also towards the analysis on the mental factor which serves as a basis of jelausy/envy: excessive attachment (longing desire, according to Berzin) and the problems and practices connected with its transformation: but to write about this would mean to open a whole new topic which would include meditation on emptiness, if I'm not mistaken. Interesting, if we remain in the jelausy topic, is also the distinction between jelausy and envy and some other emotion I am unable to name. I discussed about this with a friend, so the thoughts that I'm going to write down, are not mine, yet I find them very inspiring. One type of emotion, jelausy proper and well developed, is like Berzin describes it: "Oh, I don't have such a skill, characteristic etc., I remain excluded from the circle of the beings that have it, I am a loser, they are a winner..." and from here onwards, depending on the individual mental continuum, either a hostility against the person develops or the miserliness and closing oneself in the "black hole" develop. In both cases, it is "me", "me" and again "me" that speaks very loudly, alas, also very unproductively. The object of envy doesn't serve as inspiration to become better. There is one type of emotion when we see sth. good in others and see that we don't have such a skill, characteristic etc. and wish "If only I as well had a little bit of this." If it spurrs us to practice actively in order to develop such a skill, such thought gave a good result, at least in motivation, if not other. So, the "object" served as an inspiration. In this case, there is no inclusion/exclusion field, no hostility or miserliness; the "me" is present, but not that much strong. In fact, the "me" moves in the direction towards becoming less and less fixed as it makes a motivation to transform itself. A question: does anybody know how this other type of mental factor is named? Another point of view: with disturbing emotion such as jelausy, one could switch to this other "mode". I'm not talking so much about the analysis but more on what can be done "on the spot", when one needs no big philosophies but quick reminders, magic words (if I paraphrase Lama Shenpen Rinpoche) and above all, an alternative reaction mechanism. Could that be a constructive approach towards dealing with such a disturbing emotion? To switch to admiration of what one lacks and then trying to develop the admired characteristic? Are there better constructive approaches? All the best.
  9. Dear Pamo, tnx for excellent links, especially Berzin! As if you read my thoughts! Berzin, when he deals with Lo.rig, puts "jelausy" among the 20 disturbing emotions (5/20, jelausy, phrag-dog). Jelausy is due to excessive attachment to our own gain or to the respect we receive (I'm just quoting Berzin). So, it is connected to the negative mental factor excessive attachment. I, too, was once convinced that there is no jelausy in myself. After pondering upon that a little bit more thoroughly, I found out that one of my first child memories is linked to jelausy (fear of losing a parent) - and that this "model" of reaction was only reused later on in various forms, projected up to other persons or things. I tried to fight against jelausy with generosity attitude: "let him/her have this/that", "it's excellent for him/her!", "I rejoyce for him/her". I have one question: what about the case when one does not want to admit jelausy to him/herself - because he/she regards this disturbing emotion as very low and in complete opposition to generosity? If jelausy links itself to pretension or concealment of shortcomings, is it possible that it manifests in the form of aversion? I'm not talking here about hatred but just of simple "I don't need this" or "I fly away from this", which is so well illustrated in the famous story about the fox who did not want to eat acid grapes. But to fly away mentally (even physically): isn't it a sign of a certain pain (of jelausy) that manifests through all the layers that the mind designed to block the emotion? What antidotes to use in that case? All the best.
  10. Dear Dragtsman, as a total idiot as to the legal sphere, and not having read the two links suggested in your post, I'm interested, how is the child's best interest constructed from the legal point of view (but does this not include also the view point of humanities?) Isn't here always a legislator's (ideological) point of view that constructs it? And - what are your opinions on this, somewhat arduous topic?
  11. What an important question. I will try to give a one sided answer in the form of a story. Once, I was driving in a car with two other women. We talked about love, forgiving and so on, when one of them said: "But how can I love another being when I do not love even myself?" I think, this question has a lot to do with respect or self-respect. Usually we have an authoritarian form of (self)-respect: I respect you because you have so much power, are hierarchically higher than me and can influence my life/future etc. The other image of self-respect is somehow best presented by Claudia Schiffer in the L'Oréal publicity: "I do this because I respect myself". Buying this or other goods, for a better self-image is a consumerist kind of self-respect. It was hard for me (and is still hard for me) to understand what a real respect is. I think a real respect is based on the capacity to observe, it is based on mindfulness, in short. You can observe how people react and what are thier deeds, how they talk. On the basis of that you can see, of course, the imperfections, ego-reactions etc. but also golden and precious seeds of virtues. >One can respect and appreciate them, althought perhaps (let us take the metaphor of "gold") in non-purified form. And the same goes, I think, for self-respect. It then opens heart, on the basis of such a mindful respect you can try to see a person as a whole. And: the friends are good when we can cry with them, they are better when we can have good time with them, but they are best when they respectfully give us our mirror image.
  12. Hi Frédéric, merry Chrismas also to you! And thanks for showing me the obvious starting point ! All the best, künzang.
  13. Does anybody have experience with an outdoor cat eating Ami? I tried to give her Ami food mixed with ordinary meet (fish) food and it would eat only the meat food, leaving Ami on the plate. It would eat Ami only in the case of great need (read: hunger, for ex. - when I am absent from home till late in the night, it would eat also Ami). So, my cat does not like Ami. I decided not to press it with it... But: could it be that I made a mistake in offering it Ami food when cold days began (in the middle of November)? That is why I decided to wait for a little bit and try for a second time when it's warm. All the best.
×
×
  • Create New...