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.
When it comes to Buddha Nature, I think you should know that I do not go to any text for my answers any longer…although I did that for decades. Now I simply look directly within to find all of the clarity I need.
This is the second ½ of the journey. You must let go of everything and travel on empty handed.
I read so much and studied so constantly that if words had been water, I surely would have drowned. ; ^ )
If you wish to KNOW what Buddha Nature is, in an intimate and meaningful way, sooner or later you will need to cut the umbilical cord that joins you to the sutras and look directly within. You will need to “become a sutra unto yourself.”
Sorry! If I could I surely would hand it out like candy to everyone. But, this isn’t something that someone, or ANY text can do for you.
To my knowledge, there is no mention of Buddha Nature in Theravada Buddhism nor in the Pali Canon.
In Mahayana it usually means the potential that all living beings are said to have for buddhahood (even slugs)
If you wish to KNOW what Buddha Nature is, in an intimate and meaningful way, sooner or later you will need to cut the umbilical cord that joins you to the sutras and look directly within. You will need to “become a sutra unto yourself.”
I was curious about your interpretation, I was not asking you for your instructions or for your 'Subjectivity9 teachings '. I have practised Vajrayana offline for many years - and I am now investigating Theravada.
Sorry! If I could I surely would hand it out like candy to everyone. But, this isn’t something that someone, or ANY text can do for you.
Happy Trails. ; ^ )
This is a wonderful adventure…let go and jump in!
You are trumpeting lots of hilarious advice that I didn't even ask for! How silly, why on earth would I want to accept your convoluted imaginary 'candy' even if you had any ?
I sincerely suggest that you seek an offline Buddhist centre or meditation group and start sorting out all that confusion you have accumulated about Buddhist teachings and practice.
Good luck with your efforts, I wish you all the very best _/\_
I was curious about your interpretation, I was not asking you for your instructions or for your 'Subjectivity9 teachings '.
S9: Obviously when you ask my take on something, anything, you have to be ready for MY answer. Otherwise you should not even ask me anything, or run off and write what I should say to you, and read it. : ^ (
How I look at things IS my teaching…in fact, who I am IS my teaching, as you are your teaching, in many ways, whether you realize that or not, YET.
Or do you look at things in one way, and then talk about or teach something altogether other than what you actually think?
I try to take people at their word, when they ask me something, anything, and give them my best answer possible. Maybe I should be more guarded than that, and look into your motives in asking me anything before I answer you.
However, I prefer to stay innocent of such thoughts and suspicions, and to remain open and giving. So ask me anything…but please do expect MY answer, and not what you may wish I would say instead. DEAL? : ^ )
You are trumpeting lots of hilarious advice that I didn't even ask for! How silly, why on earth would I want to accept your convoluted imaginary 'candy' even if you had any?
S9: See, that’s just not nice. : ^ ( S9 starts to cry!
Is this what you wish to teach about compassion?
I sincerely suggest that you seek an offline Buddhist centre or meditation group and start sorting out all that confusion you have accumulated about Buddhist teachings and practice.
S9: Thank you for your kind advice…I will take it under advisement. However, right now I am learning from this fine group of individuals.
Good luck with your efforts, I wish you all the very best _/\_
S9: As I sincerely wish the best for you, with all of my heart. : ^ ) I know you are doing your best…and I forgive you anything I don’t understand in your behavior towards me…so go in peace.
I have rarely seen so much aggression and disrespect go unmoderated in this forum but, perhaps, it is because you all claim to hold some sort of absolute truth about what the Buddha taught and therefore allow yourselves the 'luxury' of abandoning respect and Right Speech.
The title of this thread puts me in mind of the best example of blind faith that I witnessed. As a small boy, I met Queen Mary, then Queen Mother. She was judging a local garden competition and came over to speak to us, a small group of children. She towered over us and I think she understood how overwhelmed we were by the "Queen Empress" (although the Empire had now gone). She sat down. And, as she sat, a chair was put under the royal bum without her making any sign. She had absolute faith that, when she wanted to sit, a chair would be provided. When I read or hear about faith, I often wonder if those who claim it truly have this "blessed assurance".
I don’t believe that the mind can hold onto anything. The mind is constantly changing, so that doubt will always show its ugly head. It is the nature of the mind to continuously question.
I think that royalty is taught to Act as/if they trust that the chair will be there when they sit. We can all learn to mimic trust.
Perhaps this is why faith very often meets its match in any REAL crisis.
I think that true conviction transcends anything that the mind can hold onto, simply because it constantly renews itself. Once you know where to look, it is right there in your face, obvious, and we soon learn not to be led around by the nose or what the mind tells us to think/feel on whim.
I see the Buddha Nature like an island where it is always a calm and sunny day, thoughts are more like clouds that come and go, and moods more like a wind or breeze that happens only for a little while. But I also now have conviction, because of what I can see directly as Being or I can experienced as Presence.
My Buddha Nature is not a manifestation of the mind, is not changeable, nor does it come and go. So that conviction isn’t something wished for, but something seen directly…a certainty that is unshakable.
Buddha Nature is right here, all of the time, even when our ego selves are acting like nasty little idiots, and heaven knows we do that sometimes. Fear not, we cannot tarnish it. : ^ )
I am not sure that standing in (harsh) judgment is much of an improvement over name calling and arguing.
: ^ (
Whether this done by one person, or a group sings their disapproval in unison.
Only thing left unsaid is who is going to get the rope. : ^ (
For my part in this, I wish to apologize. It was a misjudgment on my part. I had truly thought there was something to be gained by asking a person not to be rude and showing them how it felt to feel that coming back at them.
Subjectivity Niner,
How can I assure you that I did not have you in mind at all when I wrote "Yuck" and about the idea of people just being allowed to make fools of themselves? Although I am certainly happy the moderators did not intervene in this, the lack of charity and contemptuous attitude shown by a few others really seemed improper and ridiculous to me. If this were an isolated occurrence and such attitudes never arose elsewhere on this board, I am sure the moderators would have closed the thread. However, it seems clearer to me now who the wolves in sheeps clothing might be.
It's unfortunate, but true, that religion tends to bring out a lot of headstrong righteousness from certain personality types. Reminds me of issues and personality conflicts raised in the history of Calvinism.
BTW, I have really enjoyed your contributions to this board, and have particularly enjoyed your discourse with Matt on this thread.
Thank you for your kind reply. But… I cannot give myself a pass on this.
Oh sure, I would love to. ; ^ )
But, having been married for about 1 millions years, if I have learned anything, I have learned this.
Hey, it HAPPENS! ; ^ )
That it takes two to fight. That is why I am now hoping in the future to be a little wiser in my choices.
I have also learned that ain’t none of us perfect…hard as it is to believe, not even me.
; ^ )
Sometimes our blindness is not about to change; real quick, just because someone points it out to us. Sometimes the best answer of all, is to “ count to 10,” as my wise grandmother used to advise, and try like anything not to get pulled in.
I find your latest words to ring with some great equanimity. I have noticed in myself that as I dismantle any personal striving (to be correct,to be accepted,to be heard) then the words of others do nothing other than illumine their attitudes, beliefs and skillfulness/unskillfulness in connecting to other people. Its pretty easy at that point to interact in a way that is skillful.
Nirvana,
I wonder about Calvinistic like drum/war sounding. I talked this over with one of my close friends, and we looked at it from this angle: If someone looks out into the world and sees trouble and delusion, but through a specific, rigid set of rules finds they are freed from that trouble, then it seems natural that they would use that rigidity to try to help others find the same peace of mind they found through the rules.
I think scripture is working in much the same way. Desire for others to experience clarity, coupled with a fear of the trouble they could get into without the scriptures, might directly lead into the bible-thumping like behaviors. Fear tends to collapse openness, yes?
It might be problematic for your own journey to label people as wolves. I find them to be loving people who are perhaps fearful or clinging. What do you think?
Thank you, for that fine explanation of Skillful Interaction…I too have found that in studying myself very closely, I have come to see others in a deeper fashion as not so very different even on the finite level of consciousness.
I believe compassion bleeds right out of this understanding of oneness and/or similarity. We can do this with mindfulness, reasoning, or even insights.
Some years back after doing sitting meditation of some intensity over a period of some months, I went to the grocery story. While in the parking lot I slipped into a state of mind that might have been a small Satori, I couldn’t tell you for sure.
Anyway as I looked into a number of people’s eyes, that day, I saw myself looking right back at me, out of their eyes. I don’t mean I saw S9 looking back at me, Oh no, I mean I saw me, whatever that is, looking back at me from each individual pair of eyes.
Everyone was in fact me. Crazy I know…
But I really believe at some point (not theoretically) that I am every living being, and that everyone is me, A Oneness.
I also do not believe that this was an isolated event, but that I actually tapped into something, a living truth of some kind, (there is a Certainty in my heart about this that has never diminished and never left me after that event, which everyone, I am sure, could find this same way by simply looking deeply enough within.
I am not claiming to be special in some way. Believe me. I think this is just the lay of the land for everyone.
...It takes two to fight. That is why I am now hoping in the future to be a little wiser in my choices...
Sometimes our blindness is not about to change; real quick, just because someone points it out to us. Sometimes the best answer of all, is to “ count to 10,” as my wise grandmother used to advise, and try like anything not to get pulled in.
Aw, S9, fighting's not always all that bad! Indeed Sri Krisna urges Arjuna to fight. However, you did not pick the fight, nor were you ever bitter or unkind --as others were. Some of what you said seemed to me just to be trying to get the other guy to listen to reason, and the rest seemed very measured and thoughtful to me (esp. see Post #63.).
On the other hand, posts such as #49 (not yours) seemed arrogant and presumptious. Also, they were unimaginative, unforgiving, and unkind.
Perhaps greed plays a part in this too, not only fear and clinging, which Matt has just suggested to me. No, there may be an intellectual hoarding of "the true light" to oneself. Post 39 and another post in this thread speak of ..........hearing, understanding or experiencing the voracity [sic] of the teachings or a teacher.
Can the the voraciousness of our appetites to be right or on the right track ASAP spoil us and trick us into thinking we have arrived at some momentous realization or truth?
Mind you, I do not think of wolves as unloving or undesiring creatures, but as ravenously hungry creatures with voracious appetites. Sheep have smaller brains and would seem to be more ardent followers of things like shepherds and the scriptures written on grasses. A wolf, however, would seize upon whatever was useful to him; but such is the way with all scripture: We select, we choose what we like. Indeed, in Latin (mother tongue to our intellectual reasoning) the primary meaning of LEGO, LEGERE (to Read) is "SELECT."
One phenomenon on this board that I do not understand is why some people seem to want to assert that only Buddhist thought can be rightfully expressed here. That is a real turn-off for people like myself who wish to learn more and be more Buddhist in outlook and understanding. I happen to be a Vedantist, with grounding in the Bhagavad Gita. Now, the Bhagavad Gita is HEAVILY influenced by Buddhist thought. Therefore, when someone gets up on his soapbox and declares he doesn't want to be bothered with "that Hinduism nonsense," I am greatly offended. Actually, this attitude is most stifling, intolerant, and dismissive.
To be frank, I think that young people will always think that they know everything and only a mature person can come to know that he knows nothing at all. I place myself among the more mature most of the time.
Now, the Bhagavad Gita is HEAVILY influenced by Buddhist thought. Therefore, when someone gets up on his soapbox and declares he doesn't want to be bothered with "that Hinduism nonsense," I am greatly offended.
Rather contradictory statement as I see it, not separating the Buddhist thought from the Hinduism. Indeed Sri Krisna urges Arjuna to fight because the soul cannot be cut. That may be the case but it still hurts. Sri Krisna has overlooked the dukkha. Sri Krisna is portraying arahants at war.
Q: “To everything there is a season.” Ecclesiastes
I do think like your self, there is a time to stand and fight. I am not a great believer in allowing myself, or others to be victimized. I also know that there are those who have a cruel side to their nature, (it is even rather sexual at times) and they can’t resist beating on a victim.
But nevertheless, a wise man said to me many years ago, “You do not have to meet everything face on. Sometimes you can simply walk around it.” Still learning that one.
I was doing my Crusader Rabbit thing. : ^ )
I saw others being bullied, although I didn’t actually fear anything for myself, and started defending. I never thought it was a good thing to stand by and simply be glad it wasn't me while others were hurt.
But than again, don’t you think that we have to be very careful not to become like those we do not admire by engaging with them on their terms?
I believe when Arjuna was told to lift up his sword and fight, it was a multi-phacited metaphor. Perhaps the sword was actually the sword of discrimination. Also at the same time he was being cautioned of another level, not refuse to fill his daily responsibilities as a jiva, using the excuse that he was more spiritual than that. Just two alternate ways of seeing this same small detail.
Many of the classical holy books often speak on multiple levels…something for everyone along this path to freedom. The Bhagavad Gita is certainly a jewel of wisdom.
I am a great believer in not simply reacting. It is a far higher wisdom to take a moment, perhaps watch your breath a bit, and only then choose how you wish to act in such circumstances.
I will admit that I was doing a strategy, which I saw as a child. My sister used to get mad and bite other children. She wouldn’t stop, no matter what was said to her. So one fine day after biting still another kid, my mother took her arm and two hands and bit my sister. A demonstration of how it felt to be bit.
After that my sister came to her senses and just stopped biting. A BIG cheer was heard throughout the land.
Whether it was because she finally understood it was hurting others, or simply feared being bitten again her self, I never knew. But she stopped abruptly.
That was my strategy, too. I think the problem was that I just kept up the biting (remarks) long after it proved ineffective in this case. Knowing when to stop is important, because the momentum will carry you beyond wise action.
We all seize upon what is good for us, I believe. The problem often comes out of our misjudgment of what IS actually good for us in the long run. Isn’t this the big difference between a hedonist and an Epicurean? A hedonist will eat until his stomach hurts, and he develops possible stomach problems, heart trouble, or even diabetes. An Epicurean notices that you can actually stop before the good turns into bad, as in “Too much of a good thing.”
This holds for psychological gluttony as well. We all want to be loved and admired. But if we insist that we are the “ONLY ONE” that is RIGHT, and should be admired because of this, grabby, grabby, giving nothing back to others, there is very little chance that we will be admired or loved.
So totally frustrated to the max, (this person is starving) he might very well become even grabbier after both respect and love, as in the hungry ghost symbolism.
This is truly sad if you look at it in this light. : ^ (
Since most of us suffer from this same ailment in varying degrees, it makes us capable of compassion for each other.
Don’t be fooled, a big crowd of sheep can turn into a wolf. None of us are totally innocent of these tendencies. I read a jewel of a little book called ‘The Crowd,’ that analyses the psychological changes that a crowd made on the individual, bringing them to do things they would consider doing if alone. This wasn’t just because of the numbers gave them courage.
We humans have a very strong impetus towards belonging. Unfortunately, one way of accomplishing this is the mechanism, “Us against them.” This can cause a good deal of animosity and hurt feelings all around.
I enjoyed you post. It obviously got me thinking, and writing/writing/writing. Better stop before I get blisters on my typing fingers. ; ^ )
Metaphor is a way of both engaging the Right Brain in our search for truth, and a way of saying things in a more symbolic fashion, also rather poetic.
As in “One picture say a thousand words.”
Very often the Left Brain holds us down with a previous bias, (habitual mind), and doesn’t let us fly into higher understandings beyond the merely practical. Poetry can even in a clandestine manner, often slip under the stodgy radar of the Left Brain, and bring us something new and refreshing. In other words, Metaphor (poetry) can aid in keeping us receptive and growing.
It helps to open up the doors of intuition as well, and allows for further insights. Perhaps this is why so many of the classic religious works, and wonderful words by holy sages are quite poetic.
The Ancient Greeks called poetry the language of the Gods, for good reason. : ^ )
I realize this is a difficult idea for our more literal friends to get their heads around. But, one size does not fit all (minds).
I don't see how straying further from the Dhamma and into the English language and related philosophy helps clarity here.
You are writing in English. Everyone is writing in English. This site is an English Language site. The Dhamma never changes whether you express it in Pali, Sanskrit, English or Plutonian.
In this context it is therefore beneficial to know what one means when one uses an English word. And you don't seem to get the importance of this.
Most of this thread has actually been about the definition of English words. You even quoted a dictionary yourself.
My point may be "mute" ... or even moot or even moo ... what matters is that all words are "fingers pointing at the moon" ... if you have no idea what a "finger" means you aren't ever going to see the moon.
I agree with you, if I understand your point correctly.
I think that it is very important to try to understand what is being said in our own native language, because very often what is being said is far too subtle to try to think in a foreign language at the same time as reaching beyond our more familiar concepts. That would be a bit like juggling or keeping too many things in the air at one time.
I have heard people say that certain words are not translatable. But even if there is not one word that adequate relates a meaning, in a word to word correspondence, very often a sentence or a paragraph will work out nicely.
After that, like you say, we must look at where these words are pointing, because at some point we certainly must travel beyond words.
Also it can get very tricky when dealing in a foreign language, if one word means multiple things. I think it was in Japanese that I read that sometimes the meaning of a word could change drastically because of the tone of voice. This wouldn't be easy to convey in writing.
Thai also changes depending on the tone of voice. There are five: low, medium, high, rising and falling. The sentence "Mai mai mai mai mai" means "new wood burns well, doesn't it?" - for example.
This whole thread has really turned into a question of definitions. DD thinks this is not important as we should all pretend we lived in India of 2,500 years ago and is therefore missing something rather essential.
I teach meditation at a University to students and staff. I don't use any Buddhist language, only English. I don't teach them in Pali, Sanskrit, Plutonian or Italian- because it is an English speaking University - and to use anything other than English would be to waste their time and mine.
The Dhamma does not change based on language. It is therefore of great importance to know exactly what one means by "faith", "belief", "confidence", "trust" or any other word one is using - and to know the difference between them.
Thai also changes depending on the tone of voice. There are five: low, medium, high, rising and falling. The sentence "Mai mai mai mai mai" means "new wood burns well, doesn't it?" - for example.
This whole thread has really turned into a question of definitions. DD thinks this is not important as we should all pretend we lived in India of 2,500 years ago and is therefore missing something rather essential.
I teach meditation at a University to students and staff. I don't use any Buddhist language, only English. I don't teach them in Pali, Sanskrit, Plutonian or Italian- because it is an English speaking University - and to use anything other than English would be to waste their time and mine.
The Dhamma does not change based on language. It is therefore of great importance to know exactly what one means by "faith", "belief", "confidence", "trust" or any other word one is using - and to know the difference between them.
Warmly,
Matthew
In agreeing with you, Matthew, I would add "opinion" as a further category which is all-too-often confused with belief and, even, faith. Opinions are, however, so much easier to change. Along the way, I have striven to transform most of my beliefs into opinions in the hope that I shall be able to change them as regularly as my socks - at least once a day.
In agreeing with you, Matthew, I would add "opinion" as a further category which is all-too-often confused with belief and, even, faith. Opinions are, however, so much easier to change. Along the way, I have striven to transform most of my beliefs into opinions in the hope that I shall be able to change them as regularly as my socks - at least once a day.
Having read your post, I think you are onto something.
It made me wonder if attachment to opinion isn't a very good definition for belief. I commend your working constantly in the direction of being open and receptive. : ^ )
The Dhamma never changes whether you express it in Pali, Sanskrit, English or Plutonian.
Indeed, that is true. But the Pali expresses spiritual phenomena and the English language does not.
Thus to define spiritual phenomena using the English languge is both tenuous and divorced from Buddhism.
In this context it is therefore beneficial to know what one means when one uses an English word. And you don't seem to get the importance of this.
In this context it is therefore beneficial to know what one means when one uses a word from the Buddhist teachings. And you don't seem to get the importance of this.
Most of this thread has actually been about the definition of English words. You even quoted a dictionary yourself.
I quote the dictionary to refute your English definition. The dictionary said 'belief' includes a conviction arising from experience.
My point may be "mute" ... or even moot or even moo ... what matters is that all words are "fingers pointing at the moon" ... if you have no idea what a "finger" means you aren't ever going to see the moon.
The Buddha described actual things. The Buddha did not point to the moon. You are unable to discern the functioning of faith within your own mind yet you concern yourself with the moon?
Brother.
"Monks, in this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork...
The Dhamma does not change based on language. It is therefore of great importance to know exactly what one means by "faith", "belief", "confidence", "trust" or any other word one is using - and to know the difference between them.
Dhamma does not change based on language. It is therefore of great importance to know exactly what one means by "blind faith" and "bright faith", by "blind belief" and "reasoned belief".
I already quote the suttas for you, which you deny.
Now to start on other threads.
0
federicaSeeker of the clear blue sky...Its better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak out and remove all doubtModerator
edited May 2010
DD, I would ask you confine your comments to discussion relating to points raised in the thread.
Please avoid making criticisms of others - veiled or otherwise - in an attempt to belittle or trivialise what their viewpoint is, simply because it differs from yours.
Whether another person is right or wrong is up for discussion.
To make critical and personal remarks thinly disguised as comments on other posts, is unacceptable.
You know as much about them, as they do about you.
suppositions of this kind are not called for.
Comments
When it comes to Buddha Nature, I think you should know that I do not go to any text for my answers any longer…although I did that for decades. Now I simply look directly within to find all of the clarity I need.
This is the second ½ of the journey. You must let go of everything and travel on empty handed.
I read so much and studied so constantly that if words had been water, I surely would have drowned. ; ^ )
If you wish to KNOW what Buddha Nature is, in an intimate and meaningful way, sooner or later you will need to cut the umbilical cord that joins you to the sutras and look directly within. You will need to “become a sutra unto yourself.”
Sorry! If I could I surely would hand it out like candy to everyone. But, this isn’t something that someone, or ANY text can do for you.
Happy Trails. ; ^ )
This is a wonderful adventure…let go and jump in!
Warm Regards,
S9
To my knowledge, there is no mention of Buddha Nature in Theravada Buddhism nor in the Pali Canon.
In Mahayana it usually means the potential that all living beings are said to have for buddhahood (even slugs)
I was curious about your interpretation, I was not asking you for your instructions or for your 'Subjectivity9 teachings '. I have practised Vajrayana offline for many years - and I am now investigating Theravada.
You are trumpeting lots of hilarious advice that I didn't even ask for! How silly, why on earth would I want to accept your convoluted imaginary 'candy' even if you had any ?
I sincerely suggest that you seek an offline Buddhist centre or meditation group and start sorting out all that confusion you have accumulated about Buddhist teachings and practice.
Good luck with your efforts, I wish you all the very best _/\_
.
S9: Obviously when you ask my take on something, anything, you have to be ready for MY answer. Otherwise you should not even ask me anything, or run off and write what I should say to you, and read it. : ^ (
How I look at things IS my teaching…in fact, who I am IS my teaching, as you are your teaching, in many ways, whether you realize that or not, YET.
Or do you look at things in one way, and then talk about or teach something altogether other than what you actually think?
I try to take people at their word, when they ask me something, anything, and give them my best answer possible. Maybe I should be more guarded than that, and look into your motives in asking me anything before I answer you.
However, I prefer to stay innocent of such thoughts and suspicions, and to remain open and giving. So ask me anything…but please do expect MY answer, and not what you may wish I would say instead. DEAL? : ^ )
S9: See, that’s just not nice. : ^ ( S9 starts to cry!
Is this what you wish to teach about compassion?
S9: Thank you for your kind advice…I will take it under advisement. However, right now I am learning from this fine group of individuals.
S9: As I sincerely wish the best for you, with all of my heart. : ^ ) I know you are doing your best…and I forgive you anything I don’t understand in your behavior towards me…so go in peace.
Have a wonderful day,
S9
The title of this thread puts me in mind of the best example of blind faith that I witnessed. As a small boy, I met Queen Mary, then Queen Mother. She was judging a local garden competition and came over to speak to us, a small group of children. She towered over us and I think she understood how overwhelmed we were by the "Queen Empress" (although the Empire had now gone). She sat down. And, as she sat, a chair was put under the royal bum without her making any sign. She had absolute faith that, when she wanted to sit, a chair would be provided. When I read or hear about faith, I often wonder if those who claim it truly have this "blessed assurance".
I don’t believe that the mind can hold onto anything. The mind is constantly changing, so that doubt will always show its ugly head. It is the nature of the mind to continuously question.
I think that royalty is taught to Act as/if they trust that the chair will be there when they sit. We can all learn to mimic trust.
Perhaps this is why faith very often meets its match in any REAL crisis.
I think that true conviction transcends anything that the mind can hold onto, simply because it constantly renews itself. Once you know where to look, it is right there in your face, obvious, and we soon learn not to be led around by the nose or what the mind tells us to think/feel on whim.
I see the Buddha Nature like an island where it is always a calm and sunny day, thoughts are more like clouds that come and go, and moods more like a wind or breeze that happens only for a little while. But I also now have conviction, because of what I can see directly as Being or I can experienced as Presence.
My Buddha Nature is not a manifestation of the mind, is not changeable, nor does it come and go. So that conviction isn’t something wished for, but something seen directly…a certainty that is unshakable.
Buddha Nature is right here, all of the time, even when our ego selves are acting like nasty little idiots, and heaven knows we do that sometimes. Fear not, we cannot tarnish it. : ^ )
Warm Regards,
S9
Let me finish: sometimes people just need to be given enough slack to make themselves look as foolish as possible.
Yuck!!!
<TABLE style="HEIGHT: 310px" cellSpacing=1 cellPadding=8 border=0><TBODY><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ebebeb"><TD>1. Right View</TD><TD vAlign=center align=middle rowSpan=2>Wisdom</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ebebeb"><TD>2. Right Intention</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #cccccc"><TD>3. Right Speech</TD><TD vAlign=center align=middle rowSpan=3>Ethical Conduct</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #cccccc"><TD>4. Right Action</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #cccccc"><TD>5. Right Livelihood</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b2b2b2"><TD>6. Right Effort</TD><TD vAlign=center align=middle rowSpan=3>Mental Development</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b2b2b2"><TD>7. Right Mindfulness</TD></TR><TR style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #b2b2b2"><TD>8. Right Concentration</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
I am not sure that standing in (harsh) judgment is much of an improvement over name calling and arguing.
: ^ (
Whether this done by one person, or a group sings their disapproval in unison.
Only thing left unsaid is who is going to get the rope. : ^ (
For my part in this, I wish to apologize. It was a misjudgment on my part. I had truly thought there was something to be gained by asking a person not to be rude and showing them how it felt to feel that coming back at them.
Again…I am sorry.
Forgive me,
S9
How can I assure you that I did not have you in mind at all when I wrote "Yuck" and about the idea of people just being allowed to make fools of themselves? Although I am certainly happy the moderators did not intervene in this, the lack of charity and contemptuous attitude shown by a few others really seemed improper and ridiculous to me. If this were an isolated occurrence and such attitudes never arose elsewhere on this board, I am sure the moderators would have closed the thread. However, it seems clearer to me now who the wolves in sheeps clothing might be.
It's unfortunate, but true, that religion tends to bring out a lot of headstrong righteousness from certain personality types. Reminds me of issues and personality conflicts raised in the history of Calvinism.
BTW, I have really enjoyed your contributions to this board, and have particularly enjoyed your discourse with Matt on this thread.
Thank you for your kind reply. But… I cannot give myself a pass on this.
Oh sure, I would love to. ; ^ )
But, having been married for about 1 millions years, if I have learned anything, I have learned this.
Hey, it HAPPENS! ; ^ )
That it takes two to fight. That is why I am now hoping in the future to be a little wiser in my choices.
I have also learned that ain’t none of us perfect…hard as it is to believe, not even me.
; ^ )
Sometimes our blindness is not about to change; real quick, just because someone points it out to us. Sometimes the best answer of all, is to “ count to 10,” as my wise grandmother used to advise, and try like anything not to get pulled in.
Friendly Regards,
S9
I find your latest words to ring with some great equanimity. I have noticed in myself that as I dismantle any personal striving (to be correct,to be accepted,to be heard) then the words of others do nothing other than illumine their attitudes, beliefs and skillfulness/unskillfulness in connecting to other people. Its pretty easy at that point to interact in a way that is skillful.
Nirvana,
I wonder about Calvinistic like drum/war sounding. I talked this over with one of my close friends, and we looked at it from this angle: If someone looks out into the world and sees trouble and delusion, but through a specific, rigid set of rules finds they are freed from that trouble, then it seems natural that they would use that rigidity to try to help others find the same peace of mind they found through the rules.
I think scripture is working in much the same way. Desire for others to experience clarity, coupled with a fear of the trouble they could get into without the scriptures, might directly lead into the bible-thumping like behaviors. Fear tends to collapse openness, yes?
It might be problematic for your own journey to label people as wolves. I find them to be loving people who are perhaps fearful or clinging. What do you think?
With warmth,
Matt
Thank you, for that fine explanation of Skillful Interaction…I too have found that in studying myself very closely, I have come to see others in a deeper fashion as not so very different even on the finite level of consciousness.
I believe compassion bleeds right out of this understanding of oneness and/or similarity. We can do this with mindfulness, reasoning, or even insights.
Some years back after doing sitting meditation of some intensity over a period of some months, I went to the grocery story. While in the parking lot I slipped into a state of mind that might have been a small Satori, I couldn’t tell you for sure.
Anyway as I looked into a number of people’s eyes, that day, I saw myself looking right back at me, out of their eyes. I don’t mean I saw S9 looking back at me, Oh no, I mean I saw me, whatever that is, looking back at me from each individual pair of eyes.
Everyone was in fact me. Crazy I know…
But I really believe at some point (not theoretically) that I am every living being, and that everyone is me, A Oneness.
I also do not believe that this was an isolated event, but that I actually tapped into something, a living truth of some kind, (there is a Certainty in my heart about this that has never diminished and never left me after that event, which everyone, I am sure, could find this same way by simply looking deeply enough within.
I am not claiming to be special in some way. Believe me. I think this is just the lay of the land for everyone.
Warm Regards,
S9
On the other hand, posts such as #49 (not yours) seemed arrogant and presumptious. Also, they were unimaginative, unforgiving, and unkind.
Perhaps greed plays a part in this too, not only fear and clinging, which Matt has just suggested to me. No, there may be an intellectual hoarding of "the true light" to oneself. Post 39 and another post in this thread speak of
..........hearing, understanding or experiencing the voracity [sic] of the teachings or a teacher.
Can the the voraciousness of our appetites to be right or on the right track ASAP spoil us and trick us into thinking we have arrived at some momentous realization or truth?
Mind you, I do not think of wolves as unloving or undesiring creatures, but as ravenously hungry creatures with voracious appetites. Sheep have smaller brains and would seem to be more ardent followers of things like shepherds and the scriptures written on grasses. A wolf, however, would seize upon whatever was useful to him; but such is the way with all scripture: We select, we choose what we like. Indeed, in Latin (mother tongue to our intellectual reasoning) the primary meaning of LEGO, LEGERE (to Read) is "SELECT."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
One phenomenon on this board that I do not understand is why some people seem to want to assert that only Buddhist thought can be rightfully expressed here. That is a real turn-off for people like myself who wish to learn more and be more Buddhist in outlook and understanding. I happen to be a Vedantist, with grounding in the Bhagavad Gita. Now, the Bhagavad Gita is HEAVILY influenced by Buddhist thought. Therefore, when someone gets up on his soapbox and declares he doesn't want to be bothered with "that Hinduism nonsense," I am greatly offended. Actually, this attitude is most stifling, intolerant, and dismissive.
To be frank, I think that young people will always think that they know everything and only a mature person can come to know that he knows nothing at all. I place myself among the more mature most of the time.
Salutations to all!
:hrm:
Q: “To everything there is a season.” Ecclesiastes
I do think like your self, there is a time to stand and fight. I am not a great believer in allowing myself, or others to be victimized. I also know that there are those who have a cruel side to their nature, (it is even rather sexual at times) and they can’t resist beating on a victim.
But nevertheless, a wise man said to me many years ago, “You do not have to meet everything face on. Sometimes you can simply walk around it.” Still learning that one.
I was doing my Crusader Rabbit thing. : ^ )
I saw others being bullied, although I didn’t actually fear anything for myself, and started defending. I never thought it was a good thing to stand by and simply be glad it wasn't me while others were hurt.
But than again, don’t you think that we have to be very careful not to become like those we do not admire by engaging with them on their terms?
I believe when Arjuna was told to lift up his sword and fight, it was a multi-phacited metaphor. Perhaps the sword was actually the sword of discrimination. Also at the same time he was being cautioned of another level, not refuse to fill his daily responsibilities as a jiva, using the excuse that he was more spiritual than that. Just two alternate ways of seeing this same small detail.
Many of the classical holy books often speak on multiple levels…something for everyone along this path to freedom. The Bhagavad Gita is certainly a jewel of wisdom.
I am a great believer in not simply reacting. It is a far higher wisdom to take a moment, perhaps watch your breath a bit, and only then choose how you wish to act in such circumstances.
I will admit that I was doing a strategy, which I saw as a child. My sister used to get mad and bite other children. She wouldn’t stop, no matter what was said to her. So one fine day after biting still another kid, my mother took her arm and two hands and bit my sister. A demonstration of how it felt to be bit.
After that my sister came to her senses and just stopped biting. A BIG cheer was heard throughout the land.
Whether it was because she finally understood it was hurting others, or simply feared being bitten again her self, I never knew. But she stopped abruptly.
That was my strategy, too. I think the problem was that I just kept up the biting (remarks) long after it proved ineffective in this case. Knowing when to stop is important, because the momentum will carry you beyond wise action.
We all seize upon what is good for us, I believe. The problem often comes out of our misjudgment of what IS actually good for us in the long run. Isn’t this the big difference between a hedonist and an Epicurean? A hedonist will eat until his stomach hurts, and he develops possible stomach problems, heart trouble, or even diabetes. An Epicurean notices that you can actually stop before the good turns into bad, as in “Too much of a good thing.”
This holds for psychological gluttony as well. We all want to be loved and admired. But if we insist that we are the “ONLY ONE” that is RIGHT, and should be admired because of this, grabby, grabby, giving nothing back to others, there is very little chance that we will be admired or loved.
So totally frustrated to the max, (this person is starving) he might very well become even grabbier after both respect and love, as in the hungry ghost symbolism.
This is truly sad if you look at it in this light. : ^ (
Since most of us suffer from this same ailment in varying degrees, it makes us capable of compassion for each other.
Don’t be fooled, a big crowd of sheep can turn into a wolf. None of us are totally innocent of these tendencies. I read a jewel of a little book called ‘The Crowd,’ that analyses the psychological changes that a crowd made on the individual, bringing them to do things they would consider doing if alone. This wasn’t just because of the numbers gave them courage.
We humans have a very strong impetus towards belonging. Unfortunately, one way of accomplishing this is the mechanism, “Us against them.” This can cause a good deal of animosity and hurt feelings all around.
I enjoyed you post. It obviously got me thinking, and writing/writing/writing. Better stop before I get blisters on my typing fingers. ; ^ )
Friendly Regards,
S9
Metaphor is a way of both engaging the Right Brain in our search for truth, and a way of saying things in a more symbolic fashion, also rather poetic.
As in “One picture say a thousand words.”
Very often the Left Brain holds us down with a previous bias, (habitual mind), and doesn’t let us fly into higher understandings beyond the merely practical. Poetry can even in a clandestine manner, often slip under the stodgy radar of the Left Brain, and bring us something new and refreshing. In other words, Metaphor (poetry) can aid in keeping us receptive and growing.
It helps to open up the doors of intuition as well, and allows for further insights. Perhaps this is why so many of the classic religious works, and wonderful words by holy sages are quite poetic.
The Ancient Greeks called poetry the language of the Gods, for good reason. : ^ )
I realize this is a difficult idea for our more literal friends to get their heads around. But, one size does not fit all (minds).
Friendly Regards,
S9
You are writing in English. Everyone is writing in English. This site is an English Language site. The Dhamma never changes whether you express it in Pali, Sanskrit, English or Plutonian.
In this context it is therefore beneficial to know what one means when one uses an English word. And you don't seem to get the importance of this.
Most of this thread has actually been about the definition of English words. You even quoted a dictionary yourself.
My point may be "mute" ... or even moot or even moo ... what matters is that all words are "fingers pointing at the moon" ... if you have no idea what a "finger" means you aren't ever going to see the moon.
Matthew
I agree with you, if I understand your point correctly.
I think that it is very important to try to understand what is being said in our own native language, because very often what is being said is far too subtle to try to think in a foreign language at the same time as reaching beyond our more familiar concepts. That would be a bit like juggling or keeping too many things in the air at one time.
I have heard people say that certain words are not translatable. But even if there is not one word that adequate relates a meaning, in a word to word correspondence, very often a sentence or a paragraph will work out nicely.
After that, like you say, we must look at where these words are pointing, because at some point we certainly must travel beyond words.
Also it can get very tricky when dealing in a foreign language, if one word means multiple things. I think it was in Japanese that I read that sometimes the meaning of a word could change drastically because of the tone of voice. This wouldn't be easy to convey in writing.
Warm Regards,
S9.
You get my point exactly.
Thai also changes depending on the tone of voice. There are five: low, medium, high, rising and falling. The sentence "Mai mai mai mai mai" means "new wood burns well, doesn't it?" - for example.
This whole thread has really turned into a question of definitions. DD thinks this is not important as we should all pretend we lived in India of 2,500 years ago and is therefore missing something rather essential.
I teach meditation at a University to students and staff. I don't use any Buddhist language, only English. I don't teach them in Pali, Sanskrit, Plutonian or Italian- because it is an English speaking University - and to use anything other than English would be to waste their time and mine.
The Dhamma does not change based on language. It is therefore of great importance to know exactly what one means by "faith", "belief", "confidence", "trust" or any other word one is using - and to know the difference between them.
Warmly,
Matthew
In agreeing with you, Matthew, I would add "opinion" as a further category which is all-too-often confused with belief and, even, faith. Opinions are, however, so much easier to change. Along the way, I have striven to transform most of my beliefs into opinions in the hope that I shall be able to change them as regularly as my socks - at least once a day.
Indeed.
Having read your post, I think you are onto something.
It made me wonder if attachment to opinion isn't a very good definition for belief. I commend your working constantly in the direction of being open and receptive. : ^ )
Warm Regards,
S9
Thus to define spiritual phenomena using the English languge is both tenuous and divorced from Buddhism.
In this context it is therefore beneficial to know what one means when one uses a word from the Buddhist teachings. And you don't seem to get the importance of this.
I quote the dictionary to refute your English definition. The dictionary said 'belief' includes a conviction arising from experience.
The Buddha described actual things. The Buddha did not point to the moon. You are unable to discern the functioning of faith within your own mind yet you concern yourself with the moon?
Brother.
Dhamma does not change based on language. It is therefore of great importance to know exactly what one means by "blind faith" and "bright faith", by "blind belief" and "reasoned belief".
I already quote the suttas for you, which you deny.
Now to start on other threads.
Please avoid making criticisms of others - veiled or otherwise - in an attempt to belittle or trivialise what their viewpoint is, simply because it differs from yours.
Whether another person is right or wrong is up for discussion.
To make critical and personal remarks thinly disguised as comments on other posts, is unacceptable.
You know as much about them, as they do about you.
suppositions of this kind are not called for.