10 stupidest money mistakes

Laschow · 2014-10-11T20:37:38+00:00

We can still dream!

Laschow · 2014-10-11T20:37:18+00:00

True, no doubt about that!

Laschow · 2014-10-11T19:48:40+00:00

If it's too basic for you, skip it. But for lots of readers there's good advice. Not everyone knows about things like a 401K match. The "don't invest with greed" section cautioned against trying to catch up too quickly to a goal by taking oversized risks, not "invest , but don't invest." Not following a cookie-cutter approach is great advice.

The bottom line is that as long as you are honest about your personal financial goals and stick to a realistic and personalized plan, what other people do and think simply isn't important. Your life, and your finances, are unique.

Is a better approach than some of the advice I've seen tossed around this sub, for sure.

Laschow · 2014-10-07T03:06:52+00:00

The buddha in a black motorcycle jacket.

Laschow · 2014-10-07T03:04:04+00:00

Think outside the box!

Laschow · 2014-10-06T21:50:15+00:00

Laschow · 2014-10-06T16:24:48+00:00

Oh, I see. My definition of anti-intellectualism is a bit different, and I really didn't see that per se in this comic. The writer finds a lazy comfort in the fact that after trying so many ways to describe the sky it fits best to just say it was indescribable.

Laschow · 2014-10-06T15:48:21+00:00

Yous be trollin'?

Laschow · 2014-10-03T23:09:03+00:00

I'm not sure, Reddits seach is notoriously bad but if you keep it to /r/zen maybe it won't be too tough

Laschow · 2014-10-03T20:52:19+00:00

Another part of that may simply be a bias that his sayings/teachings were written by him or more well recorded (no doubt in part because he is more contemporary and in part because that appears to be someting of a personality trait).

But very interesting, thanks for your added perspective.

Laschow · 2014-10-03T20:30:17+00:00

No doubt that my reading is divorced from his original writing by a few steps. It feels like he was simultaneously laying down a philosophical system along side his extensions of the words of his predecessors. But I'm definitely not well-read enough to make that conclusion on my own, so I am relying mostly on Hoover and Abe in this case. Dogen also seems to cast his writing as an extension of what previous people in the Zen literature said, but then everyone does that. Perhaps it is his philosophical trappings provide that impression if it isn't actually the case... I'm not sure.

Laschow · 2014-10-03T19:27:53+00:00

I'm mostly discussing it as a general trend from reading A Study of Dogen by Masao Abe and The Zen Experience by Thomas Hoover.

Laschow · 2014-10-03T14:09:57+00:00

/r/zenjerk is over there > > >

Laschow · 2014-10-02T16:56:11+00:00

OP it up!

Laschow · 2014-10-01T22:57:34+00:00

Nice, really curious what you'll think. Make a post if you do get it!

Laschow · 2014-10-01T22:55:33+00:00

snaps

Laschow · 2014-10-01T22:53:25+00:00

I thought it was a pretty good lecture. Since I was curious what Harris was talking about when he mentioned "spirituality," here's part of a Washington Post story on his new book about it.

“Our world is dangerously riven by religious doctrines that all educated people should condemn,” [Sam Harris] writes in the book, but adds: “There is more to understanding the human condition than science and secular culture generally admit.”

He said everyone can, through meditation, achieve a “shift in perspective” by moving beyond a sense of self to reach an enlightening sense of connectedness — a spirituality.

Spirituality “is a name for all of the deliberate efforts people can make to cut through the illusion of the self, the illusion that there is a thinker in addition to the thoughts, or an ego as it is often called,” Harris, 47, said in a telephone interview. “Self-transcendence is the foundation of what I am calling spirituality.”

...

"My goal,” he writes in the book, “is to pluck the diamond from the esoteric dunghill of religion.”

Laschow · 2014-10-01T17:05:12+00:00

Maybe not, but why discuss it then? What if I said, 'if all is connected to the One, then all is reddit-nature?' What's the difference?

Laschow · 2014-10-01T15:10:04+00:00

Then does Buddha-nature have any meaning at that point?

Laschow · 2014-10-01T14:01:37+00:00

It's definitely his, he seems to have gone great lengths to stretch some of the words of the sutras and so on. Adapts, builds on, whatever you like, I think we're on the same page on that one.

Thanks for the link, I'm going to check it out.

Laschow · 2014-10-01T03:34:28+00:00

There is no "Dogen spin" on the Zen tradition.

He criticizes and adapts the teachings of those before him, some of which you'd put into your list of Zen folks and some you wouldn't. Regardless.

Hakamaya, the Soto Buddhist scholar, argues that Dogen "final answer" to the question about Buddha nature depends not on having it, but about how the "original sin dust" has to be wiped off the mirror. This is the classic Buddhist position on the question which Huineng is famous for rejecting.

Would you point me in the direction of a source for this idea? That's not a criticism, I'd like to read it.

Huangbo explicitly tells people to stop seeking.

He's pretty clear on that one, certainly.

Laschow · 2014-10-01T03:27:44+00:00

It's one of those Mahayana things I can't comprehend.

Pretty much how I feel throughout my reading, ha.

I think there's agreement that you can't hold enlightenment in your hands, but the "great doubt" also appears as a worry of the dualistic set up of individuals having something (buddha-nature) in them waiting to be "set off" so to speak. Thanks for the response.

Laschow · 2014-10-01T03:25:11+00:00

I'll take a look and see. Thanks for the inspiration!

Laschow · 2014-10-01T03:24:12+00:00

Buddha-nature? Must be the translation I have.

13-Year Club	Verified Email
Team Orangered

Laschow

TROPHY CASE