Skillful Means?

lobster

What skilful means are best in the Middle Way?
Should for example I require an enlightened teacher or settle for the 'bland leading the blind'? How can the blind (that be me) assess implied or actual 'credentials'? It almost seems like insight is required to have insight . . .
Maybe start with meditation? Should I aim for being a Pacceka Buddha, stream dipper, arahat or just sit on it?

Decisions. Decisions. How best to not make them?

how

Interesting! ....another spiritual oxymoron.
I have always thought of skillful means as a manifestation of selflessness.
Getting your wants and dislikes out of the way, lets a larger picture emerge beyond the selfish self so that you can be sensitive to what really helps everyone.

Lobster seems to speaking of it to apply to solely himself and I've never considered that a possibility.

Jeffrey

Starting with meditation sounds like a good idea. I would examine WHY you want to be a pacceka etc.. What is the motive for that. For example it might be "that's pretty cool" and the root of that is "I want to be excited and have fun". The root of that might be: (you insert)..

To find a spiritual teacher you need to assess whether that teacher can help you. There may be the perfect guru on the other side of the world, but the guru here is the one who is available. As long as you are learning I guess it is good. And then when you have learned all you could or you find another guru then you may leave.

What will be will be. Have confidence in your mind in whatever situation there may be.

lobster

Jeffrey said:

Starting with meditation sounds like a good idea. I would examine WHY you want to be a pacceka etc.

Well I certainly don't need to be a 'crazy camel'
(Al-Insan al-Kamil)
http://www.israinternational.com/the-perfect-man.html
. . . as I am reminded of the story of the seekers search for 'the Perfected Master'. Finally the seeker found the 'perfect master' but was excluded from her company. Why? Well as the perfect one said, 'I as the perfect master, require the perfect student . . .'
I have always been able to find frauds on the basis they are willing to teach me . . .
My one teacher, never made any effort to do so . . .

OK so meditation.
I am thinking of getting a wall. Seemed to work for the legendary Bodhidharma. Nine years though and no eyelids . . .
http://www.froomple.com/2011/10/complete-biography-of-great-indian-monk.html :hair:

misecmisc1

i heard in some video that Buddha taught - do not believe what others say to you, do not believe what Buddha himself said, unless it agrees to your own examination and common-sense.

BhikkhuJayasara

lobster said:

What skilful means are best in the Middle Way?
Should for example I require an enlightened teacher or settle for the 'bland leading the blind'? How can the blind (that be me) assess implied or actual 'credentials'? It almost seems like insight is required to have insight . . .
Maybe start with meditation? Should I aim for being a Pacceka Buddha, stream dipper, arahat or just sit on it?

Decisions. Decisions. How best to not make them?

A Pacceka Buddha is just an enlightened one( Arahant) who does not/cannot teach, nothing different, and I don't think you "choose" to become one... it may mean something different in the Mahayana I dunno. in Theravada : buddha= Pacceka Buddha = Arahant in terms of attainments. The only difference between a Buddha/Pacceka Buddha and an Arahant is that both buddhas find the path on their own with no teacher or previously established dhamma.

Regarding how to " assess" The buddha talks about this here - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.192.than.html

AN 4.192
PTS: A ii 187
Thana Sutta: Traits

"Monks, these four traits may be known by means of four [other] traits. Which four?

"It's through living together that a person's virtue may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

"It's through dealing with a person that his purity may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

"It's through adversity that a person's endurance may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

"It's through discussion that a person's discernment may be known, and then only after a long period, not a short period; by one who is attentive, not by one who is inattentive; by one who is discerning, not by one who is not discerning.

misecmisc1 said:

i heard in some video that Buddha taught - do not believe what others say to you, do not believe what Buddha himself said, unless it agrees to your own examination and common-sense.

you speak of the Kalama Sutta, an often misquoted and misunderstood Sutta, which is found here - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an03/an03.065.than.html

I highly suggest reading the forward in that link.. and also Bhikkhu Bodhi's treatise on it - http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/bodhi/bps-essay_09.html

this is the section by which you mean -

"Of course you are uncertain, Kalamas. Of course you are in doubt. When there are reasons for doubt, uncertainty is born. So in this case, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering' — then you should abandon them.

as you can see it says not to go by conjecture and common sense(pondering views) as well..

Vastmind

Mr Lobster....I'm going to need a little more something
with this here thread.

Bringing in the links support the point of what?
Exposure...yes.
Extreme eyelids....yes.
But now connect it for me to the OP, and
meditation. Teachers teach meditation techniques,
but the student must be the meditator for himself.
Now please connect that with skilfull means.

That's wassup, brown cow. lolololol

lobster

Now please connect that with skilfull means.

Well . . . behind one of my shrines, I have found a suitable wall. I could remove the shrine but the wall is of course always in front of us . . .
The skilful means seem to involve gradual impacts and polishing, in other words creating the qualities. Faking it before you make it. This is the heritage of the three jewels.
The skilful means would involve a more direct pointing and belong to crazy wisdom, zen and interaction with someone already enlightened.
We all make the assumption that the enlightened teach in a traditional, obvious and comprehensible way. We assume we can recognise this. I wonder if such assumptions have been working out for our enlightened seasoned Buddhists?
As the Buddha abandoned his clan and family, his teachers and his companions, it might seem that the wall is the only realistic and skilful option?

Vastmind

^^^ Check that out.

Where do you think these assumptions come from?
I'm pretty sure I have some of my own.

What is the relation of the skilfull means to the wall?
Oh wait...letting go of the means for the option. yes?

lobster

We all start with assumptions, ideas of self, ideas of no-self, ideas of enlightenment. Our biggest assumption is that we have the attributes, karma if you will to remain ignorant or develop enlightened being, rigpa, emptiness etc.

So if attempting to settle into practice as enlightenment, enlightenment as the exhaustion of defilements or realization that wall, mind and one are already in the Buddha mind, what do we do?

I feel as individuals it is skilful to practice without options of preconception.
In other words the raft, the wall, even the Buddha are not optional obstacles, though they may have this tendency eventually.

To be skilful, we have to be our own Buddha, not somebody elses. That is quite an undertaking. It seems that truth calls to truth. If we genuinely intend to become enlightened, there is no wall and the means become apparent . . .

OK time for wall scaling . . .

sharonsaw

There must be a suitable teacher for you. I personally believe that the teacher is the source of all attainments. A wall (and no eyelids) may work for some but how would you know if you were on the right path. If there is no teacher near you, then go look for one. After all, if let's say Shakyamuni Buddha was in Alaska, would you go to Alaska to seek teachings from him when he can grant you enlightenment?

lobster

After all, if let's say Shakyamuni Buddha was in Alaska, would you go to Alaska to seek teachings from him when he can grant you enlightenment?

no

Jeffrey

I would want to go to Alaska of course. A lot of people come enlightened just from being in the presence of a Buddha. They have a 'buddha field' or so I have heard.

how

The trick to catching a Buddha is to be a willing student. Of course using such bait often hooks lesser teachers and Bodhisattva's but with proper catch & release techniques,
success is inescapable.
This is one of the 5 fishing laws of the Buddhist universe.

lobster

How fortunate, we do not have to go fishing or to Alaska. Become Real and the Buddha comes to us . . .
eh ma ho - how wonderful . . . :clap:

Nevermind

Jeffrey said:

I would want to go to Alaska of course. A lot of people come enlightened just from being in the presence of a Buddha. They have a 'buddha field' or so I have heard.

A lot of people? Can you name one?

Jeffrey

@Nevermind, I'm sure you could research. There are many enlightened beings according to tales. I am not much a scholar, but there are plenty of reports in my readings of enlightened beings. I seem to recall a Zen story of a person who was gardening and their shovel hit a rock and then all of the sudden they became enlightened.

Nevermind

Jeffrey said:

@Nevermind, I'm sure you could research.

I've done extensive searching and have not found any, hence my interest. Again, have you found any?

robot

Jeffrey said:

@Nevermind, I'm sure you could research. There are many enlightened beings according to tales. I am not much a scholar, but there are plenty of reports in my readings of enlightened beings. I seem to recall a Zen story of a person who was gardening and their shovel hit a rock and then all of the sudden they became enlightened.

I think this is where the story comes from Jeffrey.

http://www.dailyzen.com/zen/zen_reading0411.asp

Jeffrey

@Nevermind, in the Theravada tradition arhats are enlightened (they cannot be buddhas because the gig is already taken). Surely you didn't research in that tradtion because there are so numerous arhats in tales. I recall this but don't have a trail of bread crumbs, maybe @Jason has some info on arhats in history, particularly Buddha's timeline. I'm pretty sure his son and wife became arhats for instance.

In mahayana I believe Padmasambava, Milarepa, and some say Trungpa, even, who are Buddhas.