Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

Why do westerners prefer to read books more than practising meditation?

13

Comments

  • lobsterlobster Crusty Veteran
    Shakespeare is gibberish to me I am not joking.
    The Bard is a good analogy. Without some study, knowledge of the language and conventions, Shakespeare, art, opera, computing etc are inaccessible to the novice. Lay Buddhists do need to know how meditation or ethical/wise behaviour will be helpful. In non literate society, the sangha provided this role. Now books and internet are a modern 'sangha' or dharma conduit.

    Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none.
    Bodhi William Shakespeare

    :wave:
    robotChazGlow
  • HamsakaHamsaka goosewhisperer Polishing the 'just so' Veteran
    lobster said:

    Shakespeare is gibberish to me I am not joking.
    The Bard is a good analogy. Without some study, knowledge of the language and conventions, Shakespeare, art, opera, computing etc are inaccessible to the novice. Lay Buddhists do need to know how meditation or ethical/wise behaviour will be helpful. In non literate society, the sangha provided this role. Now books and internet are a modern 'sangha' or dharma conduit.

    Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none.
    Bodhi William Shakespeare

    :wave:

    I am starting to get the rhythm of reading suttas, but slowly. I read or heard once that the earliest of the Pali canon were memorized and chanted, so I'd read them out loud and that really helped! I never put this kind of effort into Shakespeare, but I'll bet it would work.

    If I didn't have y'all, and the great scholars and translators, I doubt I'd get it at all. Especially how to meditate. "Consider, monks, a monk who knows when his breath is short, he says 'my breath is short'. Now, monks, consider a monk who knows when his breath is long, he says 'my breath is long'" :eek2:

    The parables and stuff, they're a lot easier on my poor little literal brain, but even then . . . yayyy for the 'modern' Sangha!
  • I've been told
    Told by the cosmic dancer
    Times unfold
    Rhymes that contain the answer
    If it's truth that you're looking to find
    It is nowhere outside of your mind
    You'll find me there
    Waiting for your change of heart

    Essra Mohawk
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:

    Nevermind said:

    These days people don't search for the Truth. People study simply in order to find knowledge necessary to make a living, raise families and look after themselves, that's all.
    Who is dumb enough to believe that?
    Not very many! Most everyone is too smart. Some even think they are smarter than an Arhat!

    Don't believe me? :(

    Well, for a practical example, there are places everywhere in the world call libraries. Go to one of them and see for yourself. They are full of books covering a very wide range of interests, like art, history, science, etc etc. Libraries do not in fact reflect an interest in knowledge only necessary to make a living, raise families and look after themselves.

    Don't believe everything you hear, seeker, and for that matter don't believe everything you read either. Use your head for God sake. :p

    I love librarys! Back before the internet, I used to go to the library on the weekend and spend all day there, reading about all kinds of stuff. That is where I first encountered Buddhism. :) But I don't think that is the context of the quote. The context of the quote is that you're not going to get enlightenment by reading books. I have read hundreds of books on Buddhism and Buddhist scriptures, etc. Still not enlightened, so I'm going to have to agree with what he says. :lol:

    He's not talking about attaining knowledge because anyone can attain that by going to the library and reading books. Knowledge does not put an end to suffering, wisdom does. He's talking about attaining wisdom that puts an end to samsara. This can not be attained by examining books but only by examining your own mind. If you look for the answer in a book, instead of in your own mind, you are looking in the wrong place. :)
    robotcvaluelobster
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    seeker242 said:

    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:

    Nevermind said:

    These days people don't search for the Truth. People study simply in order to find knowledge necessary to make a living, raise families and look after themselves, that's all.
    Who is dumb enough to believe that?
    Not very many! Most everyone is too smart. Some even think they are smarter than an Arhat!

    Don't believe me? :(

    Well, for a practical example, there are places everywhere in the world call libraries. Go to one of them and see for yourself. They are full of books covering a very wide range of interests, like art, history, science, etc etc. Libraries do not in fact reflect an interest in knowledge only necessary to make a living, raise families and look after themselves.

    Don't believe everything you hear, seeker, and for that matter don't believe everything you read either. Use your head for God sake. :p
    I love librarys! Back before the internet, I used to go to the library on the weekend and spend all day there, reading about all kinds of stuff. That is where I first encountered Buddhism. :) But I don't think that is the context of the quote. The context of the quote is that you're not going to get enlightenment by reading books. I have read hundreds of books on Buddhism and Buddhist scriptures, etc. Still not enlightened, so I'm going to have to agree with what he says. :lol:

    He's not talking about attaining knowledge because anyone can attain that by going to the library and reading books. Knowledge does not put an end to suffering, wisdom does. He's talking about attaining wisdom that puts an end to samsara. This can not be attained by examining books but only by examining your own mind. If you look for the answer in a book, instead of in your own mind, you are looking in the wrong place. :)

    But you meditate like he says and you say you're not enlightened so...

    We all have buddha nature but everyone is different and it takes different measures to awaken it. Buddha awoke during meditation but how many meditated before him without awakening?

    Sometimes when somebody says something in just the right way we get it even if we've struggled to understand it ourselves for years.

    Claiming the only way to wake up is in solitude is just parroting dogma.
  • You need to know the words before you can go beyond them.
    wangchueylobsterDairyLama
  • Indeed. Only by tasting can we understand what it tastes like. Difficult to explain a taste as much as to understand.
    lobster
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    ourself said:



    But you meditate like he says and you say you're not enlightened so...

    Not yet, with emphasis on the word yet. Just doing the practice, enlightenment is inevitable.
    Claiming the only way to wake up is in solitude is just parroting dogma.
    Dogma is no longer dogma when it's actually true. :)

    Furthermore, no one said anything about "solitude" anyway. At least I didn't. What I said was, if you think you can get enlightenment from reading books, you can't.

  • ChazChaz The Remarkable Chaz Anywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran
    edited February 2014
    ourself said:


    Claiming the only way to wake up is in solitude is just parroting dogma.

    Not if it's correct.

    But, for what it's worth, Naropa awakened when Tilopa hit him on the head with a sandal.

    So, there's two ways. Neither involves study.
  • anatamananataman Who needs a title? Where am I? Veteran
    jll said:

    to some extent, it is a stereotype, but you cant deny the cultural differences.
    The western mind is very much cerebral and over-stimulated esp the MTV generation. People from rural areas are generally more in touch with nature and their body.
    I would rather read a book than meditate anytime. That is just how my mind has been conditioned. Reading a book for 2 hrs is a breeze.
    Try observing your breath for the same length of time. Therefore the need re-condition our mind based on our background.


    vancouver, LA, DC and Las Vegas.

    ourself said:

    Depending on where you're standing I could be considered a westerner and to me it isn't meditation or learning through books but both.

    I may spend more time reading than doing sitting meditation but if walking, I usually spend time doing walking meditation.

    So where is the typical westerner located?

    Maybe Vancouver...

    There is more to meditation than watching your breath my friend, Watching your breath just brings you home to the point of 'recognising the recognition' - sorry if I am boring those of you who have been here before!. The breath is part of your natural rhythm. and you can't escape it, so let it be, and you may be forgiven for forgetting it but what else is there that you are really missing? What is escaping you every moment? Emptiness? Awareness? Loving Kindness? Compassion? If you are giving something unconditionally, why should you have to remember it you've given it away unconditionally, and as such don't expect anything in return. Why make such a fuss? Bless you all my teachers... As @lobster says: Ssshh! don't wake up the baby buddhas

    Oops I just remembered things are not working out in the right way here in samsara; so sorry if I have to give you a long hard shake but you need to wake up a little as you are grasping and clinging on to the dream world so much that its becoming a reality!

    Goodnight!

    Mettha

  • HamsakaHamsaka goosewhisperer Polishing the 'just so' Veteran
    But @Anataman, in my brief but doggedly persistent meditation experience, your first sentence caught me up. A completely subjective evaluation, here. I don't know enough of the suttas or dogma or doctrine to explain myself except through my experience of breath meditation. I'm not saying your statement is wrong per se, I'm saying that the 'more than watching your breath' you speak of seems to come directly FROM watching the breath. I sure hope that makes sense :buck:

    The discipline beneath my meditation is Theravadin, and it chose me rather than the other way around. So breath meditation it's been, with all the Theravadin doohickeys in attendance to extent of my ability and understanding. It boggles my everyday mind that I can spend the daily one hour watching my breath down to the molecular level (metaphor only) and have that hour seem to speed by. Yep! there is OBVIOUSLY much 'more' going on. (just to remain ruthlessly honest, the cumulative time of skillful concentration in that hour is nowhere near one hour, it's a nice goal though).

    Months of daily meditation, and a few weeks of this 'deeper' level of concentration. That's all. I'm glad for the progress . . . especially because I also (naturally) prefer to read and think and discuss, compare and contrast, yadda yadda, than plunge into a place that is rather wordless, thinkless, discussless. Not exactly inside my comfort zone, but that's not so true anymore :)
    anataman
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    edited February 2014
    seeker242 said:

    ... But I don't think that is the context of the quote. The context of the quote is that you're not going to get enlightenment by reading books. I have read hundreds of books...

    For someone who reads a lot your reading comprehension is not so hot. My comment didn't encompass more than the quoted text. His evaluation of contemporary values is obviously wrong. Or perhaps it suited his particular purpose, in context, to portray contemporary values falsely. Who knows.
    If you look for the answer in a book, instead of in your own mind, you are looking in the wrong place. :)
    Uh, in context, he's say'n look to the heart.

    Work on your reading comprehension!
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    edited February 2014
    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:

    ... But I don't think that is the context of the quote. The context of the quote is that you're not going to get enlightenment by reading books. I have read hundreds of books...

    For someone who reads a lot your reading comprehension is not so hot. My comment didn't encompass more than the quoted text. His evaluation of contemporary values is obviously wrong. Or perhaps it suited his particular purpose, in context, to portray contemporary values falsely. Who knows.
    If you look for the answer in a book, instead of in your own mind, you are looking in the wrong place. :)
    Uh, in context, he's say'n look to the heart.

    Work on your reading comprehension!

    Disagree with all of that. And next time, you can keep the insults to yourself...

  • lobsterlobster Crusty Veteran
    Meditation is an advanced practice.
    Yes really.

    Those who do it in the lay community usually need support and advice. Can you become enlightened without meditation?
    Yes.
    Really you can. You can do it through the impacts and immersion in teachings and study. You can do it through service to others. You can do it through practicing craft or ritual, you can do it through other religions and practices. On rare occasions it happens by accident, sadly that often leads to cults, abusers, prophets and religions but even so . . . they rarely have the maturity and depth of enlightenment to be still . . .

    If you want the fastest, the most direct, the way through the dukkha and bullshit, then you will have to meditate, advanced or not.

    Yes really :)
    anatamanhow
  • seeker242 said:

    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:

    ... But I don't think that is the context of the quote. The context of the quote is that you're not going to get enlightenment by reading books. I have read hundreds of books...

    For someone who reads a lot your reading comprehension is not so hot. My comment didn't encompass more than the quoted text. His evaluation of contemporary values is obviously wrong. Or perhaps it suited his particular purpose, in context, to portray contemporary values falsely. Who knows.
    If you look for the answer in a book, instead of in your own mind, you are looking in the wrong place. :)
    Uh, in context, he's say'n look to the heart.

    Work on your reading comprehension!
    Disagree with all of that. And next time, you can keep the insults to yourself...



    Try to remember, nevermind claimed that his hobby is correcting people on the Internet.
    Don't expect civility.
    Chazanataman
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    edited February 2014
    seeker242 said:


    Dogma is no longer dogma when it's actually true. :)

    How very true. Sadly the word "dogma" is much abused, it now often seems to just mean "Stuff I don't agree with".
    Chaz
  • jlljll Veteran
    dogma is not a bad word, i think the favorite meaning is the one that happens in the catholic church. eg nobody is allowed to use condoms.

    but the word dogma can also mean fundamental beliefs.

    anyway, here are the definitions.

    dog·ma (dôg′mə, dŏg′-)
    n. pl. dog·mas or dog·ma·ta (-mə-tə)
    1. A doctrine or a corpus of doctrines relating to matters such as morality and faith, set forth in an authoritative manner by a church.
    2. An authoritative principle, belief, or statement of ideas or opinion, especially one considered to be absolutely true. See Synonyms at doctrine.
    3. A principle or belief or a group of them: "The dogmas of the quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present" (Abraham Lincoln).
  • jlljll Veteran
    so, the dogma of buddhism is anicca, anatta and dukkha.
  • CinorjerCinorjer Veteran
    edited February 2014
    Ajahn Chah: "The Dhamma of the Buddha is not found in books. If you want to really see for yourself what the Buddha was talking about, you don't need to bother with books. Watch your own mind."

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures" and one of the tenets is that the practice must go beyond memorizing what the Buddha said and words can become roadblocks. Becoming obsessed with what other people think about the Dharma can get in the way of your own understanding. It's a simple observation, and one that is even obvious.

    Ajahn Chah taught a practice of simple mindfulness. He didn't demand that people not read, only pointed out that reading wasn't necessary. He was also not a scholar, so people wanting him to expound on the sutras were disappointed. He was not a great philosopher, able to elucidate fine points of the Dharma. It's not what he was.

    On the other hand, he lived in a land where Buddhist temples and even monk-hood was open to everyone, so there was no need to read about Buddhism. When you don't have access to a temple and a teacher, you have to read about it. So sometimes words are all you have to guide you. So be a reading Buddhist then. The important thing is intention. Ajahn Chah certainly would agree with that.

    He is a beloved character in certain circles, so implied criticism tends to get people defensive. However, he also had a few words to say about people who expected the teacher to be perfect or otherwise focused on how special he was.
    Jeffrey
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    edited February 2014
    Chaz said:

    ourself said:


    Claiming the only way to wake up is in solitude is just parroting dogma.

    Not if it's correct.

    But, for what it's worth, Naropa awakened when Tilopa hit him on the head with a sandal.

    So, there's two ways. Neither involves study.
    The fact you had to put "if" there makes it dogmatic. It then stays dogmatic until it can be proven true.

    Two ways? I would guess there are more than that. If one can be awakened by being hit on the head just imagine being hit with just the right turn of phrase.

    Heck, Mahakasyapa awoke by seeing a flower just the right way.

    If the intent or even a focused and compassionate mind is there, I'd imagine one could awaken doing a jigsaw puzzle.

    Sitting is but one of many meditative styles.
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    jll said:

    so, the dogma of buddhism is anicca, anatta and dukkha.

    Yep!

  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    Sometimes I think that many of our heavy sitters still have quite a self to get over.
    DaftChrisKundo
  • DairyLamaDairyLama Veteran Veteran
    jll said:

    dogma is not a bad word, .

    Yes, it's really a neutral term, and I think people often confuse "dogma" with "being dogmatic". Like when people confuse "making judgements" with "being judgemental".

  • Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.
    I thought the Mahakasyapa flower incident that ourself refered to was the original mind to mind transmission.
  • ChazChaz The Remarkable Chaz Anywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran
    Through

    Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.
    Through teaching, such as pointing out instruction, or abiesheka. Lung is another way. Explanation of definitive meaning, perhaps.
  • ChazChaz The Remarkable Chaz Anywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran
    edited February 2014
    Sometimes I think that many of our heavy sitters still have quite a self to get over.
    It might be best if you considered getting over your own sense of self, before trying to point it out in others.
    David
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    seeker242 said:

    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:

    ... But I don't think that is the context of the quote. The context of the quote is that you're not going to get enlightenment by reading books. I have read hundreds of books...

    For someone who reads a lot your reading comprehension is not so hot. My comment didn't encompass more than the quoted text. His evaluation of contemporary values is obviously wrong. Or perhaps it suited his particular purpose, in context, to portray contemporary values falsely. Who knows.
    If you look for the answer in a book, instead of in your own mind, you are looking in the wrong place. :)
    Uh, in context, he's say'n look to the heart.

    Work on your reading comprehension!
    Disagree with all of that. And next time, you can keep the insults to yourself...



    Follow the advice you quote and look to the heart. :)
  • CinorjerCinorjer Veteran
    edited February 2014

    Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.
    Oh, traditionally that's the function of the Temple Master who decides which monk gets the official Dharma Transmission or becomes the Dharma Heir, even. The ideal is that we have an unbroken string of enlightened Masters. Like the Tibet system, it certainly fails to live up to the ideal.

    But mostly it refers to the practice, which is almost all meditation and mindfulness and perhaps chanting the Heart Sutra and such. A monk might know less about the Buddha's actual words according to the old Sutras than you or I, yet still be considered to have an advanced understanding of the Dharma.
    anatamanhow
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran

    jll said:

    dogma is not a bad word, .

    Yes, it's really a neutral term, and I think people often confuse "dogma" with "being dogmatic". Like when people confuse "making judgements" with "being judgemental".

    So how many bad judgements does it take to be judgmental?
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    Some
    Chaz said:

    Sometimes I think that many of our heavy sitters still have quite a self to get over.
    It might be best if you considered getting over your own sense of self, before trying to point it out in others.

    Typical knee jerk and emotional response to an objective observation.

    Chaz
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    And so is your little smiley face, lol.




  • ChazChaz The Remarkable Chaz Anywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran
    edited February 2014
    Chaz said:

    Sometimes I think that many of our heavy sitters still have quite a self to get over.
    It might be best if you considered getting over your own sense of self, before trying to point it out in others.
    Typical knee jerk and emotional response to an objective observation.



    Knee jerk? Not really.

    Emotional? A little.

    Objective? Perhaps.

    Irrelevant? Completely.

    Still, deal with your own baggage. Leave others to their own, especially if you want to use it as an off-hand ad hominem.
  • lobsterlobster Crusty Veteran
    I love library's!
    Me too.
    My favourite was the British library before they moved it out of the British Museum. Now I rarely go to libraries, the Internet is more convenient.

    In many ways we are fortunate to be literate, educated to any standard and capable of taking some of the comments of the uneducated with a pinch of discernment.

    My feeling is revered, respected and able teachers are NOT advocating ignorance, they are promoting enlightenment and the way to reach it. Taking things out of context is not helpful as we all know . . .
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    edited February 2014
    A good teacher doesn't bend the truth to suit their purpose. Oh, but I forgot about the blessed 'expedient means'. Expedient means is like 'artist license', but not as nice. :(
  • howhow Veteran Veteran

    Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.

    @SpinyNorman

    Zen transmission is the recognition of a practitioners specific level of understanding.
    It is part seshine, part focus/concentration of the copying of the silks, part ritual of the masters invite to the student to share his/her mat and all that implies & part explanation of teachings specific to the masters linage transmission.
    It is used to qualify Dharma heirs/ to provide a specific direction to a qualified teacher when they are at a place in their practice that can appear directionless and to cement a qualified teachers commitment to continue the linage and those teachings.

    At best it is where a master publicly recognizances & backs another to represent his teaching and linage, at worst it is just spiritual empire building.
    Cinorjerlobster
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    edited February 2014
    Chaz said:



    Knee jerk? Not really.

    Emotional? A little.

    Objective? Perhaps.

    Irrelevant? Completely.

    Still, deal with your own baggage. Leave others to their own, especially if you want to use it as an off-hand ad hominem.

    Gee, I touched a nerve did I?

    Perhaps you should then follow your own advice.
  • ChazChaz The Remarkable Chaz Anywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran
    ourself said:

    Chaz said:



    Knee jerk? Not really.

    Emotional? A little.

    Objective? Perhaps.

    Irrelevant? Completely.

    Still, deal with your own baggage. Leave others to their own, especially if you want to use it as an off-hand ad hominem.

    Gee, I touched a nerve did I?

    Perhaps you should then follow your own advice.
    Nerve? Don't flatter yourself.
  • BhikkhuJayasaraBhikkhuJayasara Bhikkhu Veteran
    this thread is still going?

    :coffee:

    lets all just "go to the forest, or to the foot of a tree, or to an empty place, sit down cross legged(or walk :P), hold our backs erect, and arouse mindfulness in front of us."
  • Nevermind said:

    A good teacher doesn't bend the truth to suit their purpose. Oh, but I forgot about the blessed 'expedient means'. Expedient means is like 'artist license', but not as nice. :(

    Uh, remember? The truth isn't important. It only has to be meaningful.
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    Try not to take that to heart, robot. It was a warning, not a recommendation.
    David
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran

    Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.
    By getting smacked with a stick!
    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:



    Disagree with all of that.

    Follow the advice you quote and look to the heart. :)
    I did! And I found what Ajahn Chah says to actually be true! :)

    lobsterChaz
  • jll said:

    so, the dogma of buddhism is anicca, anatta and dukkha.

    Its more like moha (delusion). I've always thought that dogma refers to people believing what they want to believe without knowing if it's true or not. I can understand where people are getting the neutrality, but I'm thinking it's more of something that we need to uproot. We'd probably be happier without it completely.
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    seeker242 said:

    Cinorjer said:

    I don't see what the fuss is about, but then my own practice, Zen, openly declares itself to be geared toward "a special transmission outside of scriptures"

    So if the transmission is outside the scriptures, how exactly does transmission take place? I've never been clear about that.
    By getting smacked with a stick!
    Nevermind said:

    seeker242 said:



    Disagree with all of that.

    Follow the advice you quote and look to the heart. :)
    I did! And I found what Ajahn Chah says to actually be true! :)

    All of it, hook, line, and sinker?
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    Of course.
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    Then how do you explain the diverse interests demonstrated by libraries?
  • ChazChaz The Remarkable Chaz Anywhere, Everywhere & Nowhere Veteran

    seeker242 said:


    Dogma is no longer dogma when it's actually true. :)

    How very true. Sadly the word "dogma" is much abused, it now often seems to just mean "Stuff I don't agree with".
    It's like, "I don't like dogma so dogma is always wrong."

  • lobsterlobster Crusty Veteran
    I did! And I found what Ajahn Chah says to actually be true!
    :D
    My favourite book, which I had to go through many readings and libraries to find and it still has not been written - 'just sit on it' by Metta Ray (MAITREYA).
    Basically this is a large and heavily padded book. In fact at least 50% padding. Most of the pages are blank. Somewhere in the Middle are the words, just sit on it . . .
    http://tinybuddha.com/

    ;)
  • NevermindNevermind Bitter & Hateful Veteran
    Chaz said:

    seeker242 said:


    Dogma is no longer dogma when it's actually true. :)

    How very true. Sadly the word "dogma" is much abused, it now often seems to just mean "Stuff I don't agree with".
    It's like, "I don't like dogma so dogma is always wrong."

    Actually it means stuff you're not allowed to disagree with.
  • DavidDavid A human residing in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. Ancestral territory of the Erie, Haudenosaunee, Huron-Wendat, Mississauga and Neutral First Nations Veteran
    Chaz said:

    seeker242 said:


    Dogma is no longer dogma when it's actually true. :)

    How very true. Sadly the word "dogma" is much abused, it now often seems to just mean "Stuff I don't agree with".
    It's like, "I don't like dogma so dogma is always wrong."

    No, it's more like dogma is unproven, authoritarian doctrine that should be questioned.
This discussion has been closed.