Belonging, Appearance, Sacrifice?

Gaudrath said:It’s because passion tends to blind you to the sheer fullness of existence, and one really ought to move through this life with eyes wide open. Why? Because we only get one shot at this, and there is no guarantee of a second act, so we shouldn't be so reckless as to let it slip through our fingers.

That holds true, I suppose, if by "passion" we are strictly referring to an unhealthy attachment to material things—but even spirituality can be a form of passion. After all, Buddha was incredibly passionate in his pursuit of the Middle Way.

ravana said:That's a fair point—if we define passion strictly as an attachment to material things. But honestly, spirituality can be just as much of a passion. Even bestrastan Budha was incredibly passionate about pursuing his ultimate goal through the Middle Way.

Exactly. Siddhartha pursued his purpose with intense passion. It was only when he let go of those specific attachments—his worldly passions—that he truly found his aim. That's how he became Buddha, The Enlightened One. 😉

ravana said:What exactly was the poet trying to convey here?

Absolutely nothing. A poet is merely someone who takes lofty, profound ideas and reduces them to vulgar, common letters.

hollowviper72 said:Siddhartha pursued his purpose with absolute passion. It was only when he finally let go of that very passion that he truly found his way. That’s how he became Buddha, The Awakened One. 😉

It only happens after you've lived a life defined by an intense, burning desire for a specific goal. Otherwise, every single person in this country would be a Buddha. 😁

The only real variable in spiritual progress—if you can even call it that—is the sheer intensity of your drive toward a singular objective. You don't need some fancy technique or a complex philosophy to get there. It’s much simpler and far more brutal than that: the more obsessed you are with your target, and the more single-minded you remain, the further you'll actually get. In anything.

Not quite. But honestly, I can't really explain it to those who just aren't seeing it themselves—it’s simply the nature of the quest.

hollowviper72 said:No. But I can't exactly explain it to people who are incapable of seeing it themselves. That’s just how the search works.

Ha! There it goes again—that impenetrable, lofty wisdom of yours that supposedly refuses to descend to us mere mortals, these poor, unenlightened little souls. 😂

Or perhaps you simply have nothing to offer at all, save for a handful of dry, hollow philosophy. 🙄

Look, at the end of the day, we’re talking about a matter of personal perspective. For me to even begin explaining this to you, you'd essentially have to undergo a complete overhaul of your entire worldview—and honestly? Even if I had the time and the mental energy to try, I highly doubt that’s even possible. 😉

It’s just like beauty—something I find absolutely stunning might look totally hideous to you. How am I supposed to walk you through why I see beauty in it? You really have to experience it for yourself; otherwise, no amount of words is going to cut it. And that’s just how it is! 🙂

Alexander Parker69 said:If you stay this obsessed and single-minded, that’s exactly how much you’re going to achieve (no matter what the goal is).

You'll just end up spinning your wheels forever (while still hitting those goals😁 ).

There really is no such thing as "noble" passion; at the end of the day, all passions are "low."

In the three gunas, passion is considered a middle state (rajas), whereas our true aim should be to reach sattva—to transcend all passions entirely.
Sure, tamas is worse than rajas, but the ultimate goal remains sattva.

Nirvana represents the stillness of all passions; even after reaching nirvana, Buddha remained in this world for a long time.

It's true that Hegel argues nothing great in history happens without passion, but if you ask me, no great evil or crime has ever occurred without passion either. 😉

Elysium said:If someone lays down their life out of love—making a true "sacrifice" because they are giving up their existence rather than yours—does that finally strip away their pretenses and make them a genuine person?

Is it even possible for someone to actually give their life for another?😕
I would argue that it simply isn't possible.

Do you all agree with pesičin’s view that sacrifice is just a form of transaction?

I’m sticking to my guns: sacrifice means letting go of what is false or inauthentic.
It can only truly happen once we realize that what we are casting aside is nothing more than an illusion.😉

It’s a beautiful illustration of what sacrifice actually means:
The "King" sacrifices himself, shedding his human persona to embrace his TRUE (frog-like) nature.
Essentially, he gives up the illusion—the false identity—to attain the truth of who he really is.
Of course, most people would much rather cling to a lie than face the truth.

I’m looking forward to seeing your thoughts, specifically regarding this concept of sacrifice. 😉

But what is sacrifice, really?
Does it even exist in the way organized religions claim it does?
Or is it just a form of cosmic bartering? 😕

I believe we tend to view sacrifice as the act of giving up something specifically to gain something else; in that sense, a "sacrifice" functions much like a trade—offering one thing to secure another. On the other hand, what looks like a sacrifice from our perspective might not be one at all for the person making it. What we interpret as a loss could actually be a source of satisfaction for them. Ultimately, everything depends on your point of view.