gatito Posted June 12, 2012 Doing that would not provide truth to you, for you can only find this truth within and first hand. Have you found the Truth within at first hand? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Informer Posted June 12, 2012 Depends on what you consider to be "The Truth". I have found truth in some things that many teachings are pointing at if that's what you mean? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gatito Posted June 12, 2012 Depends on what you consider to be "The Truth". I have found truth in some things that many teachings are pointing at if that's what you mean? But that doesn't include the Heart Sutra? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Informer Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) A monk asked Master Joshu, "Does a dog have Buddha Nature?" Joshu replied, "Yes." And then the monk said, "Since it has, how did it get into that bag of skin?" Joshu said, "Because knowingly, he purposefully offends." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- A monk asked, "Does a dog have a Buddha-nature or not?" The master said, "Not [Mu]!" The monk said, "Above to all the Buddhas, below to the crawling bugs, all have Buddha-nature. Why is it that the dog has not?" The master said, "Because he has the nature of karmic delusions". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29 Mu. The term is often used or translated to mean that the question itself must be "unasked" - "mu" in this sense means to "unask" the question or that no answer can exist in the terms provided. In Robert M. Pirsig's 1974 novel Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, mu is translated as "no thing", saying that it meant "unask the question" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mu_%28negative%29 Edited June 13, 2012 by Informer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Spiralmind Posted June 13, 2012 Answer to you're confusion: Ask him again +1! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Informer Posted June 13, 2012 (edited) Something that doesn't seem to be true to me is this vow: In the various Bodhisattva vows (sometimes called the Bodhisattva Precepts) of Mahayana Buddhism, the bodhisattvas take a vow stating that they will strive for as long as samsara endures to liberate all sentient beings from samsara and lead them to enlightenment. The Bodhisattva does not seek bodhi (Awakening) solely for him/herself, but chiefly for the sake of freeing all other beings and aiding them into the bliss of Nirvana. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva_vows Realistically this seems to be wanting and desire and hope. It seems in reality not everyone cares to be enlightened or liberated, which is a choice. To seek to imbue upon others what you have yet to experience is ignorance at its finest. People take this vow with wanting and desire in mind, when it is only pointing towards compassion. Its not a label or something to wear, or an edge to have in seeking enlightenment, it is an aspect of it. A pointer to that aspect. This vow seems to hold a similar premise to the one christians used to orchestrate the crusades. Save everyone! heh. Edited June 13, 2012 by Informer Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ChiDragon Posted June 28, 2012 (edited) "You are empty space, enlightenment is emptiness, I am empty, you are empty, everyone is empty. We are all one thing and it is the emptiness" If enlightenment is emptiness, then, it seems there was nothing in the enlightenment to be enlightened. If there was only emptiness in the enlightenment, then, you were only get enlightened for nothing. If your master tells you that enlightenment is emptiness, then he was not enlightened because his enlightenment was emptiness. Hence, his enlightenment was only a delusion with emptiness. Edited June 28, 2012 by ChiDragon Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jeshopk Posted July 3, 2012 When I am awake to the truth, it strikes me as banal. When I am waking up to the truth, it strikes me as profound. I think we all "traverse the two worlds" to some extent. As we permanently learn, what once felt profound become permanently banal. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
yiming Posted August 28, 2012 When I am awake to the truth, it strikes me as banal. When I am waking up to the truth, it strikes me as profound. I think we all "traverse the two worlds" to some extent. As we permanently learn, what once felt profound become permanently banal. It is the same with falling for women. At first sight, they all are profound; afterwards...you'd said it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted September 10, 2012 Apologies for butt(su-)ing in. I am new so do forgive any gauchness but this whole enlightenment thang puzzles so any advice and guidance would be appreciated. Who is it knowing they are enlightened, how and why?* *(Satsang doesn't count, I sorta understand how that works) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Protector Posted September 10, 2012 When you stop asking Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted September 10, 2012 Before enlightenment carry water chop wood, ask questions After enlightenment carry water chop wood, ask questions Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted September 10, 2012 and of course... ....show an interest. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
konchog uma Posted September 10, 2012 there is more to you than your ego, your habits and conditions, and all that is dropped if you were to attain liberation there is something that remains which some call buddha-nature and others call Self and still others have other names for it doesn't project labels and feelings like the ego does, but it still recognizes itself.. it can perceive itself without fascinating itself with itself or fixating that is all i know about it in a nutshell lol Share this post Link to post Share on other sites