What are you saying?
lobster
Veteran
Poets, dervishes, mystics, some tantrists, the odd zen or two and those using spiritual argot, may agree that an oxymoron is an oxymoron. In other words trying to reconcile the contrariness inherent in concept and meaning.
Tsk, tsk is that naughty or as usual just plain wrong . . .
Languages that are multifaceted such as Hebrew and Arabic, have levels of meaning dependent on the arrangement of vowels with the same constanants. Precise use of language beloved and indeed required by bureaucrats, lawyers and science is not demeaned by a wider potential.
Quite often I choose to misuse, abuse and even on occasion, Buddha and spellcheck help me, make unintentional/mindless mistakes. However I also choose to find more meaning in a persons communication if possible . . .
In some sense are we speech or revelation of our inner nature? What say you? :crazy: .
Comments
More papañca...
I think we should use language to bring people closer and to engage in a sincere dialogue.
When we are too meticulous, fussy and hair-splitting about semantics, semiotics and linguistics, we are abusing and misusing language.
Some people get lost in the maze of their own papanca but communicate nothing.
So if your in for liposuction and the surgeon turns around with this humongous liposuction apparatus and inadvertently drops his pants in the swirl.
And the nurse in awe states:
That is one mighty f(ph)at sucker.
What exactly is she saying?
:wtf: .
EDIT: Not that it has ever happened to me...
EDIT2: Sorry @lobster I am not saying anything more...or I fear I am in for another lesson with the Keisoku.
Language is like "Buddhism" -- it attempts to depict reality and invariably fails ... which is not to say it's not worth a try.
Err sorry? What you say? I mean "What are you saying?"
The problem is inherent when we mistake language (symbols) for reality. Which happens all the time.
"The thunder crashes" thunder(noun) crashes(verb)
Where in reality it's the same thing.
Here's something to think about, if we did not have language. Would there still be an ego?
Yep, that's the problem. Inner proliferation and confusion leading to meandering random monologues.
Thanks guys,
The use of language to communicate despite its inappropriate quality is part of the situation. As far as I am aware we are initially conveying a Buddhist or Dharma science. However you will notice even that dharma science is conveyed in different ways . . .
The transformative aspect that allows a wider or more spacious interpretation also plays with paradox, zen bubble bursting koans and 'tantric symbols are the reality' language uses that have useful things to say.
Indeed.
I would sincerely suggest that sometimes integrity and sincerity is more important than the message. For example a sincere Christian, who finds the search for truth undermines their belief is above the lesser form. Or perhaps closer to home, a Tantrist knowing that symbols dissolve, no matter how strong and meaningful . . .
Or let us examine how the Buddha like the past never existed, no more than the future ever exists. Where does that leave us for now? More words conveying nothing?
.
Those can be very useful in the right time and place. But muddling them up with ordinary conversation or discussion leads to confusion. Clarity is much more useful.
@Lobster
What are we saying?
The all is one & the all is different, is a common Zen expression,
that helps remind me that any meaning grasped is only half a truth.
This might be a classic question of worth that is ill measured when
it's content is isolated from it's effect
I am serious. If you feel this way then why be a buddhist? Or have I misunderstood something? Maybe you do not see yourself as one?
Just curious.
@Victorious - my take on @genkaku's observation may not have anything to do with what he was trying to say but nevertheless...
Words can only approximate truth. I read his statement along the same lines as, "The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao."
Thksei dkielsbddi dopvkrls sledibesn.
>
Yeah, well... that's easy for you to say.....
>
@victorious -- Truth to tell, the older I get the more I find reason to not worry too much about being a "Buddhist." In fact, to the extent that I might rely on such a description, I think there is some serious danger in the process.
But suffering is an equal-opportunity employer: Anyone can feel the lash and the desire to escape or revise or rework that confusion calls out for some sort of framework within which to work things out. Buddhism is a good framework for my money. Failure and success are not so much the point -- a good, functioning framework is the point.
Sorry for you that you feel that way.
I am not sure what being a Buddhist means to you at all. But...
If the Dhamma does not accurately describe reality in your opinion then there is nothing that will for you no matter what framework you latch on to.
Sounds like you lost focus to me and being old is no excuse.
Sorry for being blunt. I will not mention it again.
Thank you for sharing.
/Victor
@victorious, if your focus on "Buddhism" (as you construe it) leads you to make remarks like that to @genkaku, perhaps you are focusing on the wrong things.
Just MHO.
Yes, it's way inappropriate. Perhaps if he wasn't so fanatical he'd be more compassionate toward those who are older...and potentially wiser.
Thanks @how,
For me that is exactly what happens. We provide an expression but convey a message that reveals more or less than intended.
What you suggest is exactly right, effect is also in what is heard, not just in the potential.
So as well as being revealed in our speech, so too can we gain insight by what and how we hear the same message through our personal filters . . .
The all is one & the all is different wasn't that the Three Musketeers?
All for One and one for All.
and now back to Right Speech . . .
@victorious -- Thanks for a straight-forward view ... appreciated.
I thought I described the usefulness I found in Buddhism by saying that its framework strikes me as useful. Ergo, I use many of its suggestions. Whether that makes me a "Buddhist" or not I leave to others.
I'm not entirely sure what "the Dhamma" means to you, but any suggestion that "the Dhamma" accurately describes reality makes me gasp for air. Naturally, this does not need to affect your breathing.
Better always to speak openly among brothers putting feelings aside.
I think maybe you and I have a different opinion on what reality is or how buddhism describes it. I am very Bertrand Russel:y.
I will PM you.
By Dhamma I mean the Suttas primarily. But also some teachings I have received about them.
Perhaps. I will try to find out. Thanks.
Thanks vinlyn.
Compassion is not keeping silent about what you see as flaws in your fellow brothers paths. That is Pity and considered the enemy of Compassion in Dhamma.
There are in every moment 10000 good reasons not to do the right thing. The Art is to find the right reasons and grow and tend them. This is Right Effort in the Dhamma.
Old age is IMO being from SL a very good reason for respect but not to be used to avoid respectful discussion.
And I have no problem, contrary to others, with somebody being wiser, more intelligent or better in any other aspect among fellow travellers. And by better I mean in line with the Path of Dhamma. Because that would mean a potential source of wisdom. This is called Proper Discrimination in the Dhamma.
But if you are wiser then I dare you to prove it in word and in action not just potentially.
/Victor
I feel no need to prove anything to you. But I would not discount a person's wisdom due to their age, or race, or weight, or hair, or any other superficial aspect of life.
Being wiser is neither a constant nor a possible continuous process. Wisdom is in the eye of the beholder. One person's Wisdom is another person's pompousness.
We often see wisdom as thought and speech that parallels our own.
How very Wise....
@vinlyn well said.
perhaps i have my moments
That's a matter of opinion. Which I would hastily point out, was the nub of your post...!
I only claim moments!
Isn't that all what any of us can do...?
Then you and I are in agreement. On both accounts. With you I meant You and not you you.
.
If you are even remotely Theravadian and intent on becoming an Arahant. Then the word wisdom has a pretty particular Meaning. I am not sure about other traditions.
Unless of course I have stumbled in to the wrong forum and we are in reality discussing the borders of the Ukraine?
.
They could surely do with a hefty dose of the stuff right there...
Conservatives ... are you listening?
I find it very hard to see where the op is going with this. Can she or someone else simplify it for the less intelligent?
Oops. Lobster is a she?
Wise guy... :wave: .
As you know the majority of communication is non verbal. Body language and such.
In some aspects of wisdom traditions, the dharma or teaching is transferred independently of the overt communication.
In other words there is a transfer of attitudes, a sharing of qualities, a stimulation of experiences that will allow the lotus to bloom.
Clearer?
:wave: .
>
Well I would value a response to this either way. It is hard to tell with the embroidered cushions and the occasional language that would shame a trawleman...
.
More or less.
Seriously, isn't lobster a he?
I am 99% convinced @lobster is male. Never been contradicted so will continue to think so.
@lobster is a he.
Whether male to the core or closet stuff, well, that's his business...
My neighbour comes in such a beautiful male packaging, but is gay (or so we've been told, so for the time being he's closet material).
The other day he was doing the gardening topless and I had to remove myself from the window because his suntanned six-pack was making me nervous.
All of a sudden I hear my other female housewife neighbour saying to him: "Ooohh, so you're doing your gardening without your t-shirt on..."
Are we desperate housewives or what?
Indeed, before you know it people will be asking for a Buddha six pack as proof that Quan Yin is a housewife or other qualifications . . .
Exactly so. Our working structure is Buddhist. If some on occasion delve into clowning, heresy (if available), theism, body sculpting etc we can remember we all have similar tendencies . . .
Language that is independent of frameworks; that is a concentrated effort. We work with what we have access to . . .