|
|
|
October 10th, 2008
inchoateworld
 | 06:08 pm - Extreme curiosity
Is curiosity a crime?
If I'm not mistaken, the lord Buddha once taught that we do not need to know the beginning of the world to find the path towards peace. If so, why are we ever so curious about... everything?
Cern, the LHC, the other galaxies, dinosaurs, etc. The list is endless. I slightly hesitate to list all the curiosities of mankind, for knowledge is certainly gained through innovative findings. Yet, I feel that going as far as building the LHC is too far. Is extreme curiosity an adverse trait? Is it something that we should all try to avoid? Does it help us in any way?Sorry about the underline and bolding. I can't seem to remove it.
|
October 9th, 2008
ocha_no_hanashi
 | 07:40 pm - Dreaming?
A few nights ago I was falling asleep and focusing on my breathing. I was aware that I was falling asleep. It was very subtle because my senses were all seemingly fading at the same time. I suddenly became unaware of my body and the bed that I was laying on. My focus no longer could focus on breathing because no such activity could be found. I knew that I had just been somewhere else a moment ago, but couldn't recall where. I just knew that this new place -- a kind of comfortable void -- was more real than that daydream I had just been lost in a moment ago. Like I said, it was a comfortable void of sorts. I then "forgot" who I was, what I was, where I was (even the void was no longer a certain reality I could posit as currently being in)... and then those questions of who, what and where all came to mind, but they were not asked in any language. It was just pure thought without any language or symbol attached to it. Again, awareness was present but there was no defined "being" -- just pure awareness and thought. There was no sense of time and no memories to be recalled. Nothing to see, nothing to hear, nothing to smell, nothing to feel, nothing to taste... but "I" was still aware, but there was no sense of "I" having something to be aware or unaware of. There was just awareness expanding into infinite space.
But then suddenly "I" felt a soft bed under a warm breathing body wrapped in a blanket in a dark room.
Anyone else have this kind of experience?
|
aaeichsteadt
 | 11:43 am
"Buddhist words such as compassion and emptiness don't mean as much until we start cultivating our innate ability simply to be there with pain with an open heart and the willingness not to instantly try to get ground under our feet. for instance, if what we're feeling is rage, we usually assume that there are two ways to relate to it. One is to blame others. Lay it all on somebody else; drive all blames into everyone else. The other alternative is to feel guilty about our rage and blame ourselves...
But suppose someone doesn't agree with us? Then what happens? Do we find ourselves getting angry and aggressive? If we look into the very moment of our anger and aggression, we might see that this is what wars are made of. This is what race riots are made of; feeling that we have to be right, being thrown off and righteously indignant when someone disagrees with us. On the other hand, when we find ourselves feeling wrong, convinced that we're wrong, getting solid about being wrong, we could also look at that. The whole right and wrong business closes us down and makes our world smaller. Wanting situations and relationships to be solid, permanent, and graspable obscures the pith of the matter which is that things are fundamentally groundless." (81-82, When Things Fall Apart, Pema Chodron)
|
piercedxwolfie
 | 01:04 pm - New Girl
Hi... My name's Nicci and I just joined the community.
I've been recommended to Buddhism by a friend of mine. I'm pagan as of now and I've known people who have practiced Buddhism, but when I asked him I should do because I feel "karmicly" out of balance he told me I should meditate. He gave me a list of books, Awaken the Buddhist Within, Four Noble Truths, The Compassionate Heart (which isn't availible anywhere.).
If anyone is willing to suggest more books or even links to places (or people) that could help me start this path, I would greatly appreciate it.
Current Mood: ![[mood icon]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/punquinheads/blue/tired.gif) exhausted
|
munkus_bubbly
 | 11:27 am - Martial Arts
What would be a buddhist perspective on practicing martial arts? From what I have read Siddhartha himself was quite an acomplished martial artist before enlightenment. I think I read somewhere that he brought it with him and taught his disciples, but I'm not sure about this.
I hope this doesn't seem to naive. I am aware of certain monks that practice martial arts for several hours a day as part of their meditation and as part of their self-awareness training.
Buddhists are pacifists, how does learning a martial art fit in there?
I practice Jujitsu you see, and thoroughly love it, not because it makes me a good fighter (thankfully have never been tested in the street) but because it has brought me self-confidence, self-respect, discipline and respect for others around me, as well as a kind of awareness that I can't really put my finger on.
|
October 8th, 2008
owl_clan
 | 02:03 pm - Some Words are Thieves
SOME WORDS ARE THIEVES
Coming empty-handed, going empty-handed -- that is human.
When you are born, where do you come from?
When you die, where do you go?
Life is like a floating cloud which appears.
Death is like a floating cloud which disappears.
The floating cloud itself originally does not exist.
Life and death, coming and going, are also like that.
But there is one thing which always remains clear.
It is pure and clear, not depending on life and death.
Then what is the one pure and clear thing?
-Zen Master Seung Sahn
"As one coming suddenly out of darkness, I perceived the full meaning of the doctrine of immutability and said: "Now I can believe that fundamentally all things neither come nor go." I got up from my meditation bed, prostrated myself before the Buddha shrine, and did not have the perception of anything in motion. I lifted the blind and stood in front of the stone steps. Suddenly the wind blew through the trees in the courtyard, and the air was filled with flying leaves which, however, looked motionless. I said to myself "This is the whirlwind that will destroy Mount Sumeru and which is permanently still." When I went to the back yard to make water, the urine seemed not to be running. I said "That is why the river pours but does not flow." Thereafter, all my doubts about birth and death vanished."
-Han Shan
* * *
Warning
The words I'm about to write are going to steal something from you. And then they'll turn you into a squirrel. If you're the sort of person that doesn't like to lose important things (up to and including your human form), you should stop reading at the end of this sentence.
If you are still reading, you're a strange type of person, or maybe just a person who likes to take chances. Maybe you're just curious; and even though you know what curiosity did to one famous unfortunate feline, your curiosity is strong enough to ignore the warnings of traditional wisdom. I think that's fine; risk-taking behavior can have rewards. They say there's no gain without risk. It's a double bind we all have to live with, a narrow line we have to walk.
But what would you do if I told you that you've never walked anywhere? How about something simpler: you have never moved, ever. After a lifetime of running places, walking places, driving, flying, being carried, falling, tumbling... you've never moved.
( Fuck You )
|
turil
 | 10:56 am - Are you ready for athe coming Buddhist style economy?
Out with the old materialist attachment-based economy of money and material wealth and in with the new, health and compassion based living economy!
Talk about "entering the market with open hands"... :-)
The good things that you create and offer the world that come from your own compassionate and loving hands, head, and heart are far more valuable than gold ever could be.
What resources that you can create are you ready to offer your community so that it can be healthy and happy?
|
October 7th, 2008
dichotomy2
 | 11:53 pm - Living Child-Goddess
What do you think of this?
|
hummuscyde
 | 06:53 pm - Why are we happy? Why aren't we happy?
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/dan_gilbert_asks_why_are_we_happy.html
My teacher has sent this out to us in an email. Thought I'd share.
-Stevo
|
October 6th, 2008
apemanmaldonado
 | 11:11 pm - Buddhadasa and The Dalai Lama.
I know that both Buddhadasa and the Dalai Lama held different views on many issues and that neither is or was a definitive authority on Buddhism, I do think they are both authoritative sources of information. I enjoy that neither can be accused of being Western or uninformed about Buddhism. I really can't argue for or against what either of them have to say on level, whether it be based on the suttas or knowledge of Sanskrit, Pali or Tibetan, nor admittedly with any logical force. Still, I would like to cite two opinions of the both of them and I would love to read what others thoughts were. Also, has anyone here read the Dalai Lama's book, "The Universe in a Single Atom: The Convergence of Science and Spirituality." ?
http://www.dalailama.com/news.5.htm
If science proves some belief of Buddhism wrong, then Buddhism will have to change. In my view, science and Buddhism share a search for the truth and for understanding reality. By learning from science about aspects of reality where its understanding may be more advanced, I believe that Buddhism enriches its own worldview.
...
Rather, I am speaking of what I call "secular ethics," which embrace the principles we share as human beings: compassion, tolerance, consideration of others, the responsible use of knowledge and power. These principles transcend the barriers between religious believers and non-believers; they belong not to one faith, but to all faiths.
http://www.what-buddha-taught.net/Books/BhikkhuBuddhadasa_Heart_Wood_from_the_Bo_Tree.htm
To call something a foundation of the Buddhist Teachings is only correct if firstly, it is a principle which aims at the extinction of Dukkha and, secondly, it has a logic that one can see for oneself without having to believe others. These are the important constituents of a foundation.
The Buddha refused to have any dealing with those things which don't lead to the extinction of Dukkha. Take the question of whether or not there. is rebirth. What is reborn? How is it reborn? What is its kammic inheritance? These questions are not aimed at the extinction of Dukkha. That being so they are not Buddhist teaching and they are not connected with it. They do not lie in the sphere of Buddhism. Also, the one who asks about such matters has no choice but to indiscriminately believe the answer he's given, because the one who answers is not going to be able to produce any proofs, he's just going to speak according to his memory and feeling. The listener can't see for himself and so has to blindly believe "the other's words. Little by little the matter strays from Dhamma until it's something else altogether, unconnected with the extinction of Dukkha.
Now, if one doesn't raise those sort of problems, one can ask instead, "Is there Dukkha?" and "How can Dukkha be extinguished ?". To these questions the Buddha agreed to answer and the listener can see the truth of every word of his answer without having to blindly believe them, see more and more clearly until he understands. And if one understands to the extent of being able to extinguish Dukkha, then that is the ultimate understanding. One knows that, even at this moment, there is no person living; one sees without doubt that there is no self or anything belonging to a self. There is just a feeling of "I" and "mine" arising due to the foolishness whereby one is deluded by the beguiling nature of sense - experience.
Therefore, there being no one born here, there is no one who dies and is reborn. So, the whole Question of rebirth is utterly foolish and nothing to do with Buddhism at all.
...
The real meaning of the word "birth" as the Buddha meant it is not the birth from a mother's womb, that's too physical. The birth that the Buddha was pointing to was spiritual, the birth of clinging to "I" and "mine". In one day there can be hundreds of births; the amount depends on a person's capacity, but in each birth the "I" and "mine" arises, slowly fades, and gradually disappears and dies. Shortly, on contact with a sense-object, another arises. Each birth generates a reaction that carries over to the next. This is what is called the kamma of a previous life ripening in the present birth. It is then transmitted further. Every birth is like this. This is what kamma - fruit and the reception of kamma fruit is meant to refer to. Such an interpretation agrees with the Buddha's own words. If we don't take it that way then we stray from the point. We must understand birth, kamma, and the fruits of kamma in this way. For example, there can be birth as the desirer of some pleasing object and then death followed by birth as a thief or robber, and then a further death followed by birth as the enjoyer of that object. In a short time there is birth as a prisoner in the dock and then, having been found guilty, birth as a convict in jail. These sorts of birth are many and muddled, many threads and strands tangled together. But if you look closely, you will understand that at any time one stops birth, then at that moment there is Nibbana which is not born, does not get old and sicken, and does not die. If there is still birth, still the feeling of "I" and "mine", it just goes on being the Wheel of Birth and Death, a continual chain of Dukkha.
|
apemanmaldonado
| 06:23 pm - Has anyone else had a similar experience?
Siddhartha looked out over the farmland. A man and his oxen were plowing the field, the birds were singing and the sun was shinning brightly. "It is so beautiful here," he thought. "The plowed rows in the field look like ripples on a lake." He sat down, and his mind relaxed for the first time in a long while. But as he looked closer at the scene before him, he began to notice things he had not seen before. Where the plow had come by and cut rows into the soil, he saw the bodies of hundreds of small insects that had been killed by its blade. He saw hundreds more running back and forth in conclusion now that their homes had been destroyed
He also noticed that the birds were not just gayly singing. They were constantly searching for food, swooping down to snatch up the frightening insects. and the smaller birds darted about in fear, scared of the hawks and other large birds who circled hungrily above them.He noticed that the oxen labored heavily while trying to drag the heavy plow through the ground. The lashes of the farmer's whip cut painful blisters into their sweating sides. And the farmer, too, worked hard. Like the beasts, his rough and sun-burnt body glistened with sweat."Such a circle of misery," thought the Prince. "This farmer, his animals, the birds and the insects work all day to be happy ,comfortable, and having enough to eat. But, in fact, they are constantly killing and hurting each other. How pitiful of the world seem to me." The Prince's heart was filled with compassion for all these suffering creatures. He hated to see them so unhappy. He found a shady place to sit under a rose apple tree and began to meditate deeply on what he had seen. As he looked deeper and deeper into the nature of the suffering he saw, his mind became more and more concentrated and calm. He experienced a quietness unlike anything he had known before.With his mind now at rest he began to think, " every living thing is searching for happiness. Yet most are so blinded by their ignorance and desires that they find nothing but misery. Fear, disappointment, hunger, old age, sickness, and death are rewarding for their trouble! " "Now that I have seen this, I have no more interest in the small and changeable pleasures of this world. I must find something that will bring me lasting peace and happiness. But how can I content to be free from others suffering? I must find out a way to help all other living as well. Because they have been so kind to me , and they are so suffering. And then I will share this experience with them."When Prince Siddhartha had finished this compassionate meditation .
I was wondering if anyone else had a similar experience to the Buddha's in this story. What I mean by that is if anyone remembers when they were young and before they may have heard or thought about Buddhism suddenly having some insight, a mini-Enlightenment experience, into the nature of the world. For myself, when I was young, around 8 or 9, becoming extremely afraid of changing. I reasoned that if I died at least I could possibly go to Heaven and live forever but that if I changed the way I thought or saw things, my personality and the way I viewed the world, it would be like the me at that time would cease to exist and have no chance at getting to Heaven. I think that those thoughts were motivated by learning about amnesia. The thought that a blow to the head could change my personality, my memories, my soul as I understood it at that time, seemed to show that there was nothing permanent about me. This lead me to thoughts of eternity and if the universe is eternal then things repeat and I thought the best way to deal with eternity would be to become some kind of Zen monk that could just be happy with existing. Of course this was all based on my 8 or 9 year old understanding of the world. Being so young I was able to put these things out of my mind quickly and fall back to praying for snow days and not to get into trouble for any number of things and trying to avoid boredom at all costs.
Do any of you remember anything similar?
|
nakedmen
 | 10:38 am - "I'm a non-practicing Buddhist"
I find this funny: people who say "I study Buddhism but I don't practice it." Or, "I'm Buddhist, but I don't practice it." Having an interest in Buddhism is a different thing, it means you're at the starting level, and it means eventually you'll study it and deal with this dilemma, but for people who already study or who "are" Buddhist it makes no sense at all.
If you know something is true then you act according to it. It's that simple. If you know factually that there's poison in a cup, then you drink something else instead. If you know that a certain internet service provider is faster and costs less then you go and switch to it, there's no conflict at all. If you know that gas costs less at the station across the street then you go there instead. So when you know the truth about suffering, about craving and desire, about how the mind works, about afflicted perception and our imputations and how these things are a DIRECT cause of suffering for yourself and others, then you DON'T act on it? You study irrefutable facts proven through logic and debate like emptiness, interrelatedness, impermanence, and you have at least some limited understanding to know that they're true, then you don't act on them anyway? People here say "fundamentalism" or "dogma," and they get upset if you love Buddhism. What does it matter? Either it's true or it isn't, it's that simple. If it's true you act on it, there's nothing "cool" or "uncool" about it. If you know definitely that it's true and your conviction only grows then why do anything short of going all the way with it?
When someone says say "I study Buddhism but I don't practice it," they sound even stupider than someone who doesn't study at all, first off because that's not actually correct, and more importantly because it's like saying "I know the truth but I don't act according to it." When you practice something you act towards it. So even if you have some knowledge it changes the way you think and act, consciously or unconsciously. So if you have some knowledge then either you're practicing in some degree but you don't see it that way, or you're officially "practicing," or you're completely inept incapable of doing anything.
Therefore if you know there's poison in a cup but you drink it anyway, there is an obstacle in between knowing the truth and acting on it. It is very clear that the problem is with inner obstacles. It happens constantly, all the time, even if someone knows definitely that something is the better choice and they COMPLETELY weight the options, they still won't do it. Sense pleasures and so forth are usually made the enemy here but there are many causes. These are the same things that make us suffer in the first place, which Buddhism aims to eliminate the causes of, and for the same reason they PREVENT people from seeing the cause of their suffering or from acting on what they know is the truth behind it, i.e. practicing Buddhism.
So, you're fortunate enough to have the ability to come in contact with Buddhist teachings, and to have the capacity to study them and understand them, and to figure out the truth of things such as the cause of your unhappiness, yet you STILL don't act on it? All those incredible elements are in place, and every second you step closer to death and time runs out, but you STILL won't go for it? It sounds dramatic but really it's just truth. And then when people actually DO practice you make fun of them or secretly look down on them? Even though since these people practice they have the compassion to wish to help you, and don't care if you insult them in the first place? Ridiculous. And the mind makes up all these excuses, "but, I don't believe in rebirth," "but I don't want to be 'detached' because I like life," "but, I don't like religion," OR "but, these aren't 'obstacles' these are valid concerns." If those aren't obstacles then what are? Because of the fault-finding mind they find ONE problem with a whole network of teachings, which is something they can't even disprove and don't even understand yet and won't put the time into studying, and immediately they get bitchy and turn themselves off; it's their afflicted perception preventing them from receiving the causes to end that afflicted perception.
So, some fortunate people decide to "practice," and this means their lives are on a direct path towards acting on the truth and self-improving. They do other things with their lives but in the mean time they are on this path. Obstacles arise all the time, constantly, but the path is there, the motivation is there, the actions are there, and there is a huge difference. Some people might be on some zig-zag path (they have the knowledge, they're "not practicing" but really they are practicing to some degree but won't commit) and inadvertently go very slowly in a similar direction, but what's the point? You think when you're dead and rotting in the ground that knowledge is going to matter if you didn't act on it? 5-10 minutes after you die your brain dies and your memory is completely wiped out, even for attained practitioners, but karma stays.
So, this is something I'm sharing from my similar life experience.
|
meaa_bath
 | 04:50 pm - Tashi Lhunpo monks creat sand mandala at Museum of East Asian Art, Bath UK
Tashi Lhunpo Monks create Sand Mandala
at the Museum of East Asian Art
14th - 19th October 2008As part of the Museum of East Asian Art’s Season of Tibet and associated exhibition COSMIC DESIGN: TIBETAN MANDALA (9th September – 9th December), we will be welcoming eight monks from the world renowned Tashi Lhunpo Monastery in India, from 14th- 19th of October. The monks will spend six days creating a Tara mandala out of sand.
During the six days the monks will also be hosting an hour-and-a-half workshop that will be repeated three times over the week to give as many visitors as possible the chance to take part. The workshop will teach various monastic crafts, such as sand mandala making, Tibetan calligraphy, butter sculpting and prayer flag printing. All participants will leave with their own prayer flag. The workshops will be held as follows:
Wednesday 15th October: 12noon – 1.30pm
Friday 17th October: 3pm – 4.30pm
Saturday 18th October: 10.30am – 12noon
Each workshop will cost £5 per person. To book a place please contact the Museum at least five days in advance. However, as we expect interest in the workshops to be high, please book early to avoid disappointment.
The DESTRUCTION OF THE MANDALA will take place from 10.30 am ON SUNDAY 19th OCTOBER, with the sand then being carried in a procession to Pulteney Bridge/Parade Gardens, where it will be poured into the River Avon. Places at the destruction ceremony will be limited and are available on a first come basis on the day. All are welcome to join the procession to Pulteney Bridge.
A “Mandala Ticket” is available and will entitle the holder to unlimited visits from the 14th to 19th of October to view the progress of the mandala. To book onto a workshop or to purchase a Mandala ticket please contact or visit the Museum.
For more information contact
The Museum of East Asian Art
on 01225 464640 or email info@meaa.org.uk
www.meaa.org.uk
|
October 5th, 2008
owl_clan
| 01:46 pm - Redefining death for organs
When did our madness go so deep as to send doctors into these depths?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/03/AR2008100301974.html
Sorry, but I thought doctors were supposed to save lives, not come up with new, spur-of-the-moment definitions of "death" to justify ceasing life-saving measures as early as possible, for the purposes of slicing up fresh bodies- some still with brain functioning- to give their organs to other people.
This is why I'm not an organ donor. I'd prefer it if a doctor actually worked longer than 75 seconds to save me- or my infant- or my wife- instead of grabbing any pretext they can to say "he's gone- get that heart out of him!"
My black-assed heart probably wouldn't pump in someone elses' chest, anyway. But that's not the point. I read an excellent article a while back regarding the corruption in the organ transplant industry- and yes, there are people out there, doctors included, making money off of freshly-harvested organs- which really helped me to understand just how far money goes towards ruining everything. Welcome to capitalism. It's financially feasible to give up early and dig out all the useful parts. More cases have stacked up than can be counted of times where doctors stopped efforts to resuscitate early, to justify giving transplants.
If you study the Tibetan science of death, the notion of "death as a process" is paramount. It isn't an "event" that occurs as soon as the flatline hits or as soon as the brain stops working. At such times, coarse consciousness ceases, but subtle consciousness is engaged. Even after the ceasing of subtle consciousness, sometimes days later, extremely subtle consciousness can remain attached to the body. The Tibetans don't mess with dead bodies for a long while after what western medical personnel call "death", so as not to disturb the delicate processes at work.
And that's a lot more wise and humane to me, than this "let's re-define death however we need to to justify chopping parts out while they are still fresh." Such violation of a person's body can lead to the transitioning mindstream to become confused or to seek a harmful rebirth.
I'm rather relieved to point out that doctors- or anyone- who screw with people's lives, give up early on people's precious human lives, or intend to not do their best (including justifying this with talk about "saving others" with parts that belong to someone else) to save lives, are conditioning themselves for a ripe horrid rebirth. When life and death get involved, you're dealing with heavy karmic conditioning-situations, and I wish (in vain) that our atheistic medical science in the west would take its head out of its unwise, value-free ass.
|
ocha_no_hanashi
| 11:46 am - A small bit of insight?
I sat down and meditated for an hour and a half or so last night.
I realized something...
This mind thinks in English and at times in Japanese. If this mind is really as absolute as I seem to feel it is, then why would it be using language not inherently a part of it? I feel it is absolute, self-existing and somehow separate from the external world, but upon analysis it is found to be relational and reflecting everything and anything of this so-called external world. So where is the line between internal and external? It is empty. Fabricated. Mind is dependently originated on a reality of infinite causes and conditions and so lacks any inherent existence.
Nevertheless this feeling of "me" remains. That, perhaps, is the toughest shell to crack.
|
owl_clan
 | 11:36 am - Buddha didn't praise "logic"
I understand why so many western Buddhists want to consider Buddhism to be the ultimate "rational" or "logical" path- and why they are in such a hurry to reject those religious beliefs and paths in the west that have for so long been called "illogical" or "irrational" by skeptics in the west.
I don't deny that Buddhism makes a lot of sense. It can, compared to some other paths, seem quite "rational" or logical. It mostly comes down to the idea that whatever you need to see or understand can be achieved by sitting- by mental culture or meditation. Through your own efforts you can achieve awakening. Buddhism doesn't ask you to think that you are cosmologically abberated or screwed over, in need of some merciful God to pull you out. It asks you to read the scriptures, understand them at the level you are ready, and sit- meditate- be compassionate. It makes way more sense. It tells you the answers will come, eventually.
Buddhism appears to be about direct experience and understanding, but as I have pointed out countless times here, there is much in Buddhism which must be taken on faith- beginning with the acceptance that a man that we now call "Buddha" really lived 2500 years ago and, after a spiritual quest, attained a state called "enlightenment" and was omnisciently aware of the workings of Dharma, the "way things really are" in the universe, and was thus able to teach the truth about this world and all of our lives. Without this initial faith, one has no reason to accept what the Buddha taught, or put it into action.
But none of these things can be "proven" according to the western paradigm of skeptical "proof" and nor can the state called enlightenment be "proven to exist", only inferred based on what Buddha said "enlightenment" was- the lack of craving, thirst, and attachment.
Sure that seems like a logical inference- if you began craving or thirsting for things at some point, it makes sense that there should be a way to stop. But none of the Buddhists I know have attained what they feel is "enlightenment". None of them know anyone that can be conclusively proven to be "enlightened". Only a faith that the "sun is shining behind the clouds" drives the Buddhists I know forward in their quest for awakening.
"Pure logic" in the Buddhist realm of philosophy is called "Takka". Inferential or empirical reasoning is called "anumana". And what did Buddha have to say about them? That they were both controversial and unreliable.
To quote Joanna Macy, from "Mutual Causality in Buddhism and General Systems Theory":
"By the same token, the Buddha, as Jayatilleke documents, rejected the independent validity of a priori reasoning. Takka, as pure logic, was distinguished from anumana, inferential or empirical reasoning, and seen as both controversial and unreliable. First of all, both derive from perception; there is no self-justifying realm of pure reason aloof from or unconditioned by the sensory world.
Quoting the Sutta Nipata, 886 and 874:
"There exists no divers truths which in the world are eternal, apart from perception. Having formulated theories in accordance with logic, they have arrived at the two-fold categories called the "true" and the "false".
Reckonings characterized by conceptual proliferation have perception as their source."
Consequently, the fruits of Takka, if taken independently, are suspect.
Quoting Majjhima Nikaya, I. 171:
"Even that which is well-reasoned (suparivitakkitam) is liable to be baseless, unfounded, and false, while that which is not well-reasoned or well thought out may turn out to be true, factual, and not false."
Views arrived at and defended in terms of Takka alone are suspect in the Buddhist view, because knowing is conditioned by habit and vested interests. As a Khanda, the faculty of knowing is one of the five components of human activity (along with body, sensation, perception, and volitions) and it is interdependent with these other four."
So, if you take nothing at all away from this short and informative passage, remember this: "Logic" doesn't have a foundation of ultimate truth because
(It derives from) perception; there is no self-justifying realm of pure reason aloof from or unconditioned by the sensory world.
In Buddhist philosophical thinking, you can't base your reasoning about the world on the Khandas (or Skandhas for you Sanskrit folk). The Skandhas are empty, or in other words, interdependent. They are conditioned by others, and subject to conditioned habit and vested interests- karma, in other words.
Even the desire to present one's logical reasoning as free of bias, as making only "negative" statements (thus avoiding the trap of the positive statement which is always open to skeptical criticism) and the attempt to claim that one's conclusions are based only on what logically follows, or is evident to the senses, is all karmically conditioned activity, and based on perception, for which there is no "pure realm" of perception to justify it, apart from the conditions and interdependency of the world.
Lacking the solid, pure ground needed for "logic", we have no choice but to release ourselves from the desire for "logic" to rule everything, and immerse ourselves in Prajna, in open watching of phenomenon, in real meditation. No more "this is the way it has to be" crap. Just what is, unflinchingly observed in its uprising and downfalling. Meditation offers a "way out" of the constant cycles of conditioning. Buddha's "logical" path is actually a path to the end of "logic" and beyond it, and beyond all categories.
Oh, well. That takes care of the "logic" addiction that so many westerners- and easterners- suffer from. We can begin again now, and submerse ourselves in Buddha's way, untainted by the bullcrap. How many people will circle in ageless cycles of suffering because of addiction to "logic"? I hope that at least one of them will read this, give up that ghost, and find the Pure Land, exactly eleven minutes from now.
|
dharma_ben
 | 12:18 pm - Hey! What's the Problem?
[The following are guided questions for introspection based on the Paticca-samuppada teachings. This and other great teachings at Suanmokkh.org.]
"An easy way to begin studying Paticca-samuppada is to reflect on some on-going issue or problem in your life. It need not be a big deal; any petty old problem will do for a start. It's best to focus on particular instances or situations in which the "problem" has manifested. (The following guide questions are derived from the above "short form" teaching on paticca-samuppada.)
1. What's the problem? What about it really bugs me, hurts me, or feels most burdensome?
2. How do I relate to it emotionally (fear, resentment, anger, boredom, lust, greed, worry, guilt, pride, …)?
3. Who do you think you are in this situation ("I am this," "I am not that")? Who's got the problem? What are the particular identities, personas, masks, self-images, roles involved in this problem?
4. What is mind/thought stuck on & trying to control? To what idea or memory or experience does it keep coming back? What is it hanging on to? How?
5. What does it want?
6. Which experiences & events connected with the "problem" feel negative (unpleasant, uncomfortable, painful) and which feel positive (pleasant, nice, convenient, happy) and which are somewhere in between?
7. Which experiences & events of seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, remembering, imagining, and thinking trigger these cycles (the above aspects of the problem)?
These questions are intended to aid introspection and reflection. They may have multiple answers and varying layers of subtlety. They may require time and further observation -- not just thinking -- to go deeper. They may be investigated repeatedly. Go into specifics and real-life detail. Notice how things interdependently co-originate and proliferate. Have fun!"
|
crazychaos3
 | 10:24 am - Hmm, something to ponder
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.
~Buddah quote of the day
Does anyone else agree with this. It really struck something with me when I read it.
Current Mood: ![[mood icon]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/mood/punquinheads/blue/blah.gif) blah
|
ocha_no_hanashi
 | 12:02 am - Virtue and Reality
"In order to put an end to all our suffering, the cycle of old age, sickness, death and rebirth and the problems of the intermediate state as well, we need to cure our sick minds, to make a complete recovery from the mental illness—the disturbing emotional thoughts, the delusions—that causes all these unwanted experiences. For our own ultimate peace, let alone that of others, we have to do this."
Virtue and Reality
Lama Zopa Rinpoche
Based on a four-day course given at Tilopa Center, Decatur, Illinois, USA in August, 1997
http://www.lamayeshe.com/lamazopa/vr/vr_1.shtml
|
October 4th, 2008
museofmonotony
 | 11:49 pm - Application of Buddhism
I'm not normally one for drama, but there's been an issue that i've never quite dealt with in any satisfactory sense.
I have an (old, old) 'friend' I went to high school with, who was my best friend at the time. I won't go into details, but because of circumstances we rather forcefully grew apart.
Since then, i've been down on my luck through my college years (all 5 of them so-- feels like i'll never graduate!) while she, on the other hand, has blossomed, attracting fangirls at all.
Every time I see something of hers I get upset- maybe it's a severe case of jealousy, probably is, but I have yet to find a way to deal with it in 5 years. I realize it's partially because of my own attachment to success, but can't seem to shake it no matter how hard I try.
To coin a phrase, what would Buddha do, do you think? I've tried many ways of dealing with her-- ignoring her, tried to come to terms with the fact that I'm jealous of her (which seemed to make me more angry) and as a last-ditch effort tried to tell myself her work for me would be a hollow victory, as i'm socio-politically minded and she's... well, not.
And then I ask myself, when did this become such an obsession for me- to best her at something? It's brought out the worst in me, but I can't seem to shake it.
Am I making too big of a deal out of this?
|
|
|
![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/community.gif){kind=small}
buddhists