Discernment

lobster

Most of us, or maybe it's just me, are superficial practitioners. We expect someone else, or some group or some teaching to do the work for us, then tell us what to do, when and how.
Oh dear.
How can we gain a little genuine depth, rather than opinions, thus has it been said, done and failed/succeeded?
How do we become genuine, rather than wondering about someone else's qualities?

How many with real discernment would admit to it?

Have a nice day, you might enjoy it . . .

:clap:

nenkohai

Hiya Lob,
All I can say is what I can say. And All I know is what I know, ya know?

I can't afford (I've found out) to expend my energy in the pursuit of someone else's ideals and/or opinion. In fact, doing that very thing had led me to a very warped self-perception. It messed with my head.

And I would dare say, to look upon someone's opinion of my dharma practice as gospel (twisted religious pun is, hell-yes, intended) could distort/warp my dharma-path. I won't allow that.

Okay... that said... I learn. Like a sponge. Everything that I can use in my practice... if I read it, hear it, whether Buddhist, Atheist, or Martian, I will digest it; meditate on it; consider it. If its good, I'll use it. What's left, I'll just leave.

I'm not saying a teacher of even a Buddha can't teach me something (or everything). I AM saying is that my path is mine. Which is different than any other of the world's billion+ Buddhists. But a good teacher or even Buddha will already know that.

At least, this is what I think.

lobster

If its good, I'll use it.

Sometimes medicine is not sweet or even recognized as healing, it may even exasperate a condition for a while.
What then?

:hair:

taiyaki

You never know for sure.

And that's it.

How many can open to that?

lobster

taiyaki said:

You never know for sure.

Perhaps.
Perhaps a part of us really does recognise the genuine and another part is bamboozled by the sham.
Maybe we are part real and partly false. With integrity we should be able to separate these in ourselves and others . . .

:thumbup:

chela

For me, this is where faith comes in. The Buddha didn't have anyone to teach him the right path. He tried various things at which he failed, and he sort of stumbled upon enlightenment (at least, that's how I see it) using only his own mind to guide him. Therefore, I must do what I can do with Right Diligence and all the other Rights, along with plenty of introspection, and then, at the end of the day, have faith that I might make it one day-- maybe not in this lifetime.

riverflow

'...stumbled upon enlightenment' -- I like that!

lobster

I think we return to discernment.
I for one have total confidence that the conditions/template of the dharma is applicable for most of those prepared to engage.

It is interesting that people describe the sponge mentality. That is the opposite of discernment and is closer to credulity.

Is it credible that insight leads to long term non virtue (as a temp impact - maybe) as a life impediment it sounds like not walking the walk but stumbling over ones own left feet or someone else's . . . ?

So again we have to allow for discernment and discrimination because it is quite possible we are attracted to the flawed and totally impervious to the useful?

For example we have alcoholics and those with mental health problems here. I value their insights. They have developed the capacity and discernment to acknowledge their situation and that is inspirational.

Can we take seriously the platitudes and examples of those without discernment? Do we assume we already have it? Do we have to develop discernment.

:wave: