Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
I do not believe there is such a thing as enlightenment. I do not even know what "formless samadhi realms are" and i do not believe there is a "bodhi of the Buddhas".
It seems illogical to me to believe that this realm we are able to perceive with our senses (this three dimensional (four, if you count time), 'conventional' reality, is all there is. Even relying on our senses, we don't get far.
Take the amusing logic parable: Three men are on a train from England to Scotland. They've never been to Scotland, and are intrigued to see, on crossing the border, a black sheep on the hill.
The first man says "That sheep is black, therefore all sheep in Scotland are black".
But the second man contradicts him, saying "Incorrect. All we can say is that that sheep is black - we cannot guess at the colour of all other sheep in Scotland!"
At this the third man, a mathematician, interjects. "Actually, all we can say is that that half of the sheep is black. We cannot even know the colour of the whole sheep, let alone other sheep in Scotland!"
So that is where we are in conventional reality: we know one half of the sheep. The rest is a mystery to us, even if we study every subject for our entire lives. There is simply more to be known than can be known in a single life. And even that we cannot be certain of: our senses can, and do, deceive us, and our logic is often flawed. So most of what we think we know, we can only accept on faith (until proven otherwise).
I accept on faith that sheep are generally the same colour on both sides because I've never seen one that wasn't (piebald notwithstanding). But as a working assumption, it works pretty well. Same as most things in my life. To me, it's no more of a stretch to believe that there are other realities where the beings are Buddhas, or maras, or green blobs.
As for enlightenment, 'awakening', 'Awareness' or whatever. I have seen glimpses, for a fraction of a second, of what the world would be like if we saw it for what it ultimately is. That is enough evidence for me. The rest I have to take on faith.
seemingly knowledgeable quotes and explanations are nothing more than excuses for false knowledge to enhance one's own ego projections of understanding. It has an air of superiority of knowledge in them.....best to come down from the lofty branches before one slips and has a great fall.
It is a concern of mine that we may become so intellectually entranced by this stuff that we mistake head knowledge for practice. And also that by using high-faluting terms, we may alienate those who would otherwise be attracted to the dharma, to Buddhist teachings.
I have a first class degree in politics, and have studied post graduate philosophy, and if I struggle to understand many of the debates, you can bet your bottom dollar that a majority of people feel the same. It can be deep, and difficult to grasp, but before we post stuff that only an expert can follow, perhaps it makes sense to consider our audience.
The moment conventional morality (or anything else for that matter) is made into an absolute, true wisdom and compassion are lost. imo.
Absolutely! (ha--no pun intended ) Batchelor noted that a linguist who had devoted his career to studying the Indian languages of the Buddha's day said that the Buddha never used the term "noble truth". He never referred to his 4 principles as "truths". This same linguist commented that "As soon as one utters the word 'truth', one opens the door to violence". Meaning that, historically, religions or governments that have thought they had a corner on the truth have been responsible for some of the worst violence humanity has seen. To this Batchelor added: "As soon as one utters the words "Ultimate Truth" (or Absolute Truth), one opens the door to ultimate violence." Compassion tends to fly out the window.
@seeker242 Batchelor has studied the Pali canon extensively, in Pali. He uses the earlier texts as his standard of what the Buddha actually said, believing that the later texts show influence from Indian beliefs. He says the terms "non-duality" and "emptiness" came into use in the context of Buddhism sometime after the Buddha's death.
I do not believe there is such a thing as enlightenment. I do not even know what "formless samadhi realms are" and i do not believe there is a "bodhi of the Buddhas". These seemingly knowledgeable quotes and explanations are nothing more than excuses for false knowledge to enhance one's own ego projections of understanding. It has an air of superiority of knowledge in them.....best to come down from the lofty branches before one slips and has a great fall.
If you are not here to learn Buddhism, what are you here for? My knowledge and understanding comes both from extensive sitting practice and study. I do believe in enlightenment due to direct glimpses, both short and elongated, as well as the power these glimpses have to transform the human consciousness into a more illumined or conscious state of expression through being.
The formless realms of Jhana, were explained by the Buddha in the Pali Suttas. This is very basic.
Philosophy is mostly a big hindrance. *smile* As it strives for intellectual solutions.
Intellect and intuition, or logic and experience learn to work in tangent as practice deepens. "Buddhi," or inspired mind is to absorb "manas," the mind of conceptual thought, so that all concepts and intellectual musings arise from the state of higher and expanded self referencing, the result being no more dross, or bored thinking patterns. Expanded in the sense that the personal self is transcending it's own myopic point of reference and is surrendered to the entirety that is cosmos.
Take care.
Dear moderator:
There is a time limit to when I can edit my posts.
Philosophy is mostly a big hindrance. *smile* As it strives for intellectual solutions.
Philosophy does not strive for solutions. It explores the questions.
Excellent! I would say it also explores the experience of the answers in order to deepen the state of ones activity reflecting the experiences found in meditative states of consciousness. Thus integrating the deeply expansive states of consciousness with material reality.
Batchelor noted that a linguist who had devoted his career to studying the Indian languages of the Buddha's day said that the Buddha never used the term "noble truth". He never referred to his 4 principles as "truths".
Well, I don't know how "true" that is. Buddha used the term "ariya saccani" which is often translated as "noble truths", but I guess it could also be translated as "reality of the noble ones" or "truth of the noble ones" - which would mean that it isn't just the "truth" itself that is "noble", but the truths which will make one noble. They are "truths" in the same way that they are a "reality", as they are categories of experiences.
Of course, there is hardly ever a "one-word translation" as any linguist knows that there is a lot of polysemous words in the Pali cannon. Look at "dukkha" and the many translations people give for it, or even the different uses of "dhamma" as either a mental quality, a phenomenon in and of itself, or as the teachings of Buddha.
Philosophy is mostly a big hindrance. *smile* As it strives for intellectual solutions.
Intellect and intuition, or logic and experience learn to work in tangent as practice deepens. "Buddhi," or inspired mind is to absorb "manas," the mind of conceptual thought, so that all concepts and intellectual musings arise from the state of higher and expanded self referencing, the result being no more dross, or bored thinking patterns. Expanded in the sense that the personal self is transcending it's own myopic point of reference and is surrendered to the entirety that is cosmos.
Take care.
Dear moderator:
There is a time limit to when I can edit my posts.
Philosophy is mostly a big hindrance. *smile* As it strives for intellectual solutions.
Philosophy does not strive for solutions. It explores the questions.
Excellent! I would say it also explores the experience of the answers in order to deepen the state of ones activity reflecting the experiences found in meditative states of consciousness. Thus integrating the deeply expansive states of consciousness with material reality.
Well there are some techniques which are used to get people who desire for mental pleasure out of thoughts and ideas blow out there intelect, I guess that is the reason why Zen (koans) is so popular. Its sometimes a needed way to come to join the eightfold path. *smile* but no more needed if one has join it already. The lower fetters are not easy to overcome, generally I am not sure if it is wise to feed them. Reduce it step by step is a safer way. One could loos his "mind" before entering the stream. *smile*
@bodhipunk Thanks, I might add that to an email of questions for Batchelor. Yes, Pali is interesting that way, isn't it? Or maybe it's English (or European languages in gen'l) that are inadequate.
Comments
Take the amusing logic parable: Three men are on a train from England to Scotland. They've never been to Scotland, and are intrigued to see, on crossing the border, a black sheep on the hill.
The first man says "That sheep is black, therefore all sheep in Scotland are black".
But the second man contradicts him, saying "Incorrect. All we can say is that that sheep is black - we cannot guess at the colour of all other sheep in Scotland!"
At this the third man, a mathematician, interjects. "Actually, all we can say is that that half of the sheep is black. We cannot even know the colour of the whole sheep, let alone other sheep in Scotland!"
So that is where we are in conventional reality: we know one half of the sheep. The rest is a mystery to us, even if we study every subject for our entire lives. There is simply more to be known than can be known in a single life. And even that we cannot be certain of: our senses can, and do, deceive us, and our logic is often flawed. So most of what we think we know, we can only accept on faith (until proven otherwise).
I accept on faith that sheep are generally the same colour on both sides because I've never seen one that wasn't (piebald notwithstanding). But as a working assumption, it works pretty well. Same as most things in my life. To me, it's no more of a stretch to believe that there are other realities where the beings are Buddhas, or maras, or green blobs.
As for enlightenment, 'awakening', 'Awareness' or whatever. I have seen glimpses, for a fraction of a second, of what the world would be like if we saw it for what it ultimately is. That is enough evidence for me. The rest I have to take on faith. It is a concern of mine that we may become so intellectually entranced by this stuff that we mistake head knowledge for practice. And also that by using high-faluting terms, we may alienate those who would otherwise be attracted to the dharma, to Buddhist teachings.
I have a first class degree in politics, and have studied post graduate philosophy, and if I struggle to understand many of the debates, you can bet your bottom dollar that a majority of people feel the same. It can be deep, and difficult to grasp, but before we post stuff that only an expert can follow, perhaps it makes sense to consider our audience.
@seeker242 Batchelor has studied the Pali canon extensively, in Pali. He uses the earlier texts as his standard of what the Buddha actually said, believing that the later texts show influence from Indian beliefs. He says the terms "non-duality" and "emptiness" came into use in the context of Buddhism sometime after the Buddha's death.
If you are not here to learn Buddhism, what are you here for? My knowledge and understanding comes both from extensive sitting practice and study. I do believe in enlightenment due to direct glimpses, both short and elongated, as well as the power these glimpses have to transform the human consciousness into a more illumined or conscious state of expression through being.
The formless realms of Jhana, were explained by the Buddha in the Pali Suttas. This is very basic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dhyāna_in_Buddhism
You might search down to where it explains the different stages of meditative absorption.
I wish you well.
Take care.
Dear moderator:
There is a time limit to when I can edit my posts. Excellent! I would say it also explores the experience of the answers in order to deepen the state of ones activity reflecting the experiences found in meditative states of consciousness. Thus integrating the deeply expansive states of consciousness with material reality.
Of course, there is hardly ever a "one-word translation" as any linguist knows that there is a lot of polysemous words in the Pali cannon. Look at "dukkha" and the many translations people give for it, or even the different uses of "dhamma" as either a mental quality, a phenomenon in and of itself, or as the teachings of Buddha.
The lower fetters are not easy to overcome, generally I am not sure if it is wise to feed them. Reduce it step by step is a safer way. One could loos his "mind" before entering the stream.
*smile*