I am asking the community for feed back and advice on an idea i had after coming out of meditation. I realise the problem is political but because the solution is not i am reasonably comfortable posting it here. If it is inappropriate in any way i ask for forgiveness.
Allow me to build the idea up.
Right now people are dividing based on things i dont believe are as significant as we are lead to believe. People who manifest different life situations and views are no longer as tolerant to fellow beings who are not similar. There is a lack of unity. People are identifying too hard with what they are and what they are not and cant see what we all have in common.
People are identifying with there manifest situation and not seeing the reality that binds us all. The commercial world is built with brands that represent something manifest in the world adding fuel to the division fire. My idea is to create a brand that represents the unmanifest aspect to life. This is why i am posting on a buddhist forum, because it relates to buddhism concepts but is not the same.
The brand name that came to me was āNo Profileā. The reason for it is if people know that the clothes they wear for example dont represent a profile then there is no posibility of division. Anyone of any type can be accepted if there is a recodnision that our brands or differences are not really us. Then we can unite.
It relates to the buddhas teaching on not self.
People often ask me āissnt no profile just another profile?ā By giving half the product away for free and charging twice as much for the half who pay you can create an unknown. If someone is seen using the brand there will be a 5050 chance of it being bought for a high price or received totally free creating a true no profile because you cant judge the finances of that person.
Im asking my fellow buddhists because it is realted to not self and you may have good advice.
Also we are stonger together so talking about ideas that create social harmony together is good even if we chose not to take action on it.
So yeah. A dhammic solution to a political divide. (Unless im missing something)
IMO, it is more or less related to education system rather than Buddhism.
or any other religions.
Formal education should emphasize on developing mindsets with a focus on peaceful co-existence as well as never failing to respect others.
Thanks and regards,
Yes, we like buddhism but were not quite sure what it is. Its inaccurate to say its a religion, philosophy or categorise it as something because it seems to be in its own lane. It fills the gap of religion and philosophy but its not just that, its bigger. Maybe this is useful. The Buddha was a man who understood many things and buddhism was his education system to help others realise their own suffering and the escape from it.
So instead of saying this is right, follow this. Educate people. With the no profile idea i guess educating people on my views of what profiles are and identityās are and how to create unity is the real valuable part.
We have faith in the buddha for reasons like the quality of his teachings and his views on non harm and so we follow his teachings more. others have other reasons like they like how loving good monastics are.
What Iām saying is people need faith in and education system for it to help. Why should I be so sure that Iām right with what Iām thinking. I canāt see how it all pieces together. What reason is there to have faith in the no profile thing if people donāt already understand it?
Correct, conventional reality purports to be ultimate. The task is to downgrade it personally and build the factors conducive to awakening, but it cannot be done by society as its function is to look after the body. CR has a limited role and has to be relegated to the perspective of right view:
"He, beyond any concept, wise,
would say, āI speakā;
would say, āThey speak to me.ā
Skillful,
knowing harmonious gnosis
with regard to the world,
he uses expressions
just as expressions.āāSN 1.25
Im not sure I fully understand what you are saying. This is what I think though. Society is made up of individuals making their own decisions that conglomerate and create trends. As individuals we can create forces that balance out the trends or humanise and disarm dangerous trends. We can share ideas that neutralise polarising problems by skilfully using conventional reality. Yes society cannot change but individuals can be helped to see different views by using skilful means and when enough individuals have a safe refuge in something pointing more accurately to our true nature then that gradually recreates a harmonious type of society to live in.
The task is first to understand it. When this idea occurred to me i thought it would be a good method for giving people the option to retreat from constantly asserting an identity on others that then gets reinforced by others. When you get the breathing space and your loose its easier to see clearly. What do you mean by āas its function is to look after the bodyā? If a society is to work then docent it have to look after every aspect of what matters in our lives, not just our bodys? What is CR?
So my point is when there is no reference to the ultimate in many public forums the conventional gets taken as ultimate and problems occur. So to counter that create a brand that references the ultimate so people who donāt want to fight and get political are not automatically represented by every detail about about them. IDK
So how would this work then? For example, would everyone on this forum have the same name āNo profileā and no avatar, so we just get comments to judge?
I think its best explained with clothing. I wear a green no profile t shirt and you get a red one with a nice pattern on it. I get what I like and you get what your preferences are. We get what suits us. Style, colour and size. We are all different and embrace those differences. Then someone notices that the style and colour of t shirt you are wearing is no profile. That means that you have that t shirts but there is a 50% chance that you bought it or were given it. Recognising the structure that backs your choice in t shirt the person realises that they canāt judge you as easily because it could be a gift or bought expensively.
So its not like anomalous where we hide by all being the same so there is no distinguishing features and canāt be picked out. No profile products could be any style and the more broad it is the stronger it is. With buddhism there is ānot selfā teaching that allows you to accept yourself for who you are right now whilst still making choices for convenient preferences. No Profile as I see it could be any product. It is how you acquired it that gives it the elusive quality.
Having said it can be any product I think it is wise to keep it to products that are upright morally righteous things to produce. You could base it on the 4 requisites and keep away from the wrong livelihoods.
Its a good question. I guess you would have to see. People are bound to take it the wrong way if they are that way inclined. You could say anything is virtue signaling if you see it that way. Me eating a mcdonaldās could be virtue signalling because Iām showing I donāt need to make my own food.
I think thatās the problem though, normal things are been made more significant than they need to be and its dividing people. Short answered people could turn around and just accuse you of virtue signalling or showing off but anyone who knows anything about the brand will see through that because its obviously not true. If you say that is vitue signalling what are you signalling? That you donāt have money or you can pay double for a t shirt. The true circumstance still remain unknown and thereās ambiguity.
I guess your being ambiguous about what you are by wearing that brand and questioning set solid group identitys because it brings rich and poor into one class free brand that everyone can benefit from who wants to. I donāt think the group thinking will be effective at covering over what it really is because ambiguity is central to its structure. You would look silly if you thought it was virtue signalling. Thats just my opinion so I could be wrong
Your signalling your two competing groups, wealthy and poor. I think when that is done it ties itself in knots and ambiguity it left.
Yes. Donāt get me wrong, I like interesting and novel ideas. The virtue signalling was about this bit:
How about anyone can use the brand and produce whatever they like in whatever fashion they like and they can give it away or charge for it? But that takes you away from the original idea I guess.
o right, i see what youāre saying. Maybe it the type of product could only be a suggestion. Maybe thatās personal preference. I guess people are in their own circumstances. What product it is is secondary i guess.
I donāt know whether it needs a central structure of a free anything goes structure. Most people who are open suggest that it issnt centralised or owned and controlled by someone. It certainly feels better keeping it open source and a concept anyone can dip into. It would be weird to sue someone for stealing the idea.
What happens if things get out of shape and structure and the meaning is lost. Maybe it would add to the ambiguity of the brand. Aslong as some people kept to the principles it would all add to its strength.
Yeah if its got legs to run then let it run. Give it as a reference point. Let people use the language to do what they like. It would start the ball running and that creates space to question current assumptions leading the way to unity which is the aimed for destination of this vehicle.
To add to what I said. If it was to be controlled and owned it would stifle. Its like trying to own a principle. No-one owns truth, no-one owns the sun, no-one owns the moon. We share these things and we all benefit from them. Looking at it from this perspective opens up opportunities for anyone to create unity to the right degree in their own lives. A far out example but it seems true.
