What do you think?

[Chang]

The original quote encourages us to practice without thought of results. It can be summed up with yet another quote "Think not of the harvest but only of proper sowing."

 

When the speaker lists the things that have not come they are a list of the flowery trappings of the Tao, things that can distract us from our desired destination which in my case would be enlightenment. "The peace which passeth all understanding."

[Yascra]

The original quote encourages us to practice without thought of results. It can be summed up with yet another quote "Think not of the harvest but only of proper sowing."

But, ehm, sorry, I think to some extent this quote is bullshit.

A farmer will choose seeds according to what he wants the harvest to be, right? So, the choice to, for example, sow wheat, which you can eat, and not to sow weeds, is due to the thought of whether the harvest will be something that might be helpful, for himself and/or others.

 

Ok, d'accord so far that you should not practice to particularly reach some of the mentioned potential results, I think we agree that they are the sort of being "useless". D'accord also if you mean to not think about results WHILE you're doing something, as this would be a kind of distraction. But as a general attitude, I think, you'll hardly find out that the work you invest in sowing weeds is a waste of time if you never look at what came out of your seeds.

 

When the speaker lists the things that have not come they are a list of the flowery trappings of the Tao, things that can distract us from our desired destination which in my case would be enlightenment. "The peace which passeth all understanding."

So here now you define enlightenment as a kind of peace, right? Which is exactly on of the aformentioned results you should not aim at, right?

 

Alcoholics find peace in drinking alcohol, many persons find some kind of peace that passeth at least their "understanding" by having sex.

How do you know it's enlightenment if you don't care about results; what, in the end, IS this enlightenment you're looking for?

How do you know it is REAL enlightenment and not your false thoughts about what enlightenment might be?

Is it okay to go running amok and kill dozens of people if you find peace in doing it? If, why, and if not, why not?

I think actually many people who do this amok-running-stuff might feel very calm and clear while they are doing this. How do you find out, if, that this kind of deed is not "proper sowing" anyway?

 

...

 

Get my point?

[Songtsan]

I like it - to me it suggested that the drive to transcend, refine, see beyond, etc. is its own food. The thought that one might peel back a mystery, touch divinity, and so forth gives one the expectation that one is on the edge of something, riding the wave of possibility. It gives one that sense of childhood exploration - especially for those who have grown soul weary of the ten thousand things. Children don't have that yet. In Taoism, they say to become a child of illusion. Being on a path such as this is an exciting adventure, even if nothing is gained.

[C T]

But, ehm, sorry, I think to some extent this quote is bullshit.

A farmer will choose seeds according to what he wants the harvest to be, right? So, the choice to, for example, sow wheat, which you can eat, and not to sow weeds, is due to the thought of whether the harvest will be something that might be helpful, for himself and/or others.

 

Ok, d'accord so far that you should not practice to particularly reach some of the mentioned potential results, I think we agree that they are the sort of being "useless". D'accord also if you mean to not think about results WHILE you're doing something, as this would be a kind of distraction. But as a general attitude, I think, you'll hardly find out that the work you invest in sowing weeds is a waste of time if you never look at what came out of your seeds.

 

So here now you define enlightenment as a kind of peace, right? Which is exactly on of the aformentioned results you should not aim at, right?

 

Alcoholics find peace in drinking alcohol, many persons find some kind of peace that passeth at least their "understanding" by having sex.

How do you know it's enlightenment if you don't care about results; what, in the end, IS this enlightenment you're looking for?

How do you know it is REAL enlightenment and not your false thoughts about what enlightenment might be?

Is it okay to go running amok and kill dozens of people if you find peace in doing it? If, why, and if not, why not?

I think actually many people who do this amok-running-stuff might feel very calm and clear while they are doing this. How do you find out, if, that this kind of deed is not "proper sowing" anyway?

 

...

 

Get my point?

No, i dont get your point. You seem confused associating numbness with peace. You confuse addictive tendencies with peace. You also confuse psychopathic tendencies with peace.

 

I think your argument has pointed to a total negation of common sense, which is very often a good tool to have in the cultivator's kit.

 

Also, being a mahayana student yourself, it ought to be clear what enlightenment entails, that its not some pot of gold at the end of one's journey. The whole process of right practice (transcendence and refinement) is itself enlightening. And right practice is not some complex set-up or detail that one has to follow, it is simply to bring awareness to the fore of one's body, speech and mind as often as one can, and in order for this awareness to reach immediate present spontaneity, one learns thru practice of the preliminaries, which are the foundational works that helps to polish this awareness, to the end that it shines stainlessly.

[Yascra]

it ought to be clear what enlightenment entails

 

Actually I do think that assuming you know what full and perfect enlightenment entails as long as not being a fully awakened budda might in itself be an even greater hindrance to correct practice than most of the things that might come or not come due to that practice.

Edited January 23, 2014 by Yascra

[C T]

Actually I do think that assuming you know what full and perfect enlightenment entails as long as not being a fully awakened budda might in itself be an even greater hindrance to correct practice than most of the things that might come or not come due to that practice.

Can you please clarify the above? Not sure what point you are trying to make.

[Marblehead]

Well, I guess that leaves me out as I doubt that I will ever be a fully awakened buddha. Hehehe. I'm not even a Buddhist. No hope for me.

[Yascra]

Can you please clarify the above? Not sure what point you are trying to make.

 

In short: If holding a correct view about what complete, perfect enlightenment entails is such an easy task for mahayana students, as you seem to suggest, Tibet should be full of fully enlightened buddhas, which obviously is not the case, so my conclusion is that obviously the task of proper sowing or treating the correct path and holding the correct view is not that easy.

[Green Tiger]

That's one of the reasons I don't play lotto. It is a fact that you cannot win if you do not play. Nothings gonna' change my world. (What song is that from?)

 

Jai Guru Deva

 

Om

 

Images of broken light

Which dance before me

like a million eyes

They call me on and on

across the universe

 

Thoughts meander like a restless wind Inside a letter box

They tumble blindly as they make their way across the universe

 

Jai Guru Deva

 

Om

 

Nothing's gonna change my world

 

Nothing's gonna change my world

 

Nothing's gonna change my world

 

Nothing's gonna change my world

 

Sounds of laughter

shades of life

are ringing through my opened ears

Inciting and inviting me

 

Limitless undying love which shines around me like a million suns

And calls me on and on across the universe

[9th]

The sage hatches no schemes, so what use has he for knowledge?

He suffers no loss, so what use has he for favors?

He hawks no goods, so what use has he for peddling?

He has the form of a man but not the feelings of a man.

Since he has the form of a man, he bands together with other men.

Since he doesn't have the feelings of a man, right and wrong cannot affect him.

Puny and small, he wanders with the rest of men.

Massive and great, he perfects his Heaven alone.

 

- Zhuangzi

[C T]

In short: If holding a correct view about what complete, perfect enlightenment entails is such an easy task for mahayana students, as you seem to suggest, Tibet should be full of fully enlightened buddhas, which obviously is not the case, so my conclusion is that obviously the task of proper sowing or treating the correct path and holding the correct view is not that easy.

i dont recall suggesting that at all.

[Yascra]

Excuse me, but what else are you saying in this sentence then:

 

being a mahayana student yourself, it ought to be clear what enlightenment entails, that its not some pot of gold at the end of one's journey.

?

To me that suggests that a mahayana student should think ..., know ... and be clear about ..., doesn't it?

 

The whole process of right practice (transcendence and refinement) is itself enlightening. And right practice is not some complex set-up or detail that one has to follow, it is simply to bring awareness to the fore of one's body, speech and mind as often as one can,

Well, but if you aren't even aware of making religious-biased suggestions when you inherently suggest that persons who you regard to be mahayana students shall share this and that of your views, then what exactly do you mean by "awareness"?

that is one of the points I was aiming at with my more "extreme" examples, by the way. While s.one runs amok he might feel more aware than he ever was - but that's due to the fact that what s/he perceives to be awareness IS NOT ultimate awareness.

So, sorry, I think some of your words are not so bad, but if you have such great problems to applie this to a given example, I have reason to doubt that they are your own words.

Which is also okay to some extend, but in this case there's nothing to discuss, as obviously s.one can't discuss a point that's not truly his or her own thought.

 

and in order for this awareness to reach immediate present spontaneity, one learns thru practice of the preliminaries, which are the foundational works that helps to polish this awareness, to the end that it shines stainlessly.

Might you explain what you consider to be preliminaries?

 

I'm not a mahayana student in any religious way, just for your information. I'm not completely done with my experiences of Tibetan buddhism, but to be honest I haven't found any religion which would really emphasize searching for truth. Real buddhism does advice the latter.. But real buddhism has nothing to do with religion, quite the opposite. Which is the case for most spiritual cores of the existing religions.

If you want to sort me into some religion there's some interest in taoism or esoteric buddhism at the moment, but I'm still for sure closest to christianity. You don't change twenty years of cultural influence in two years.

 

Greetz

Edited January 24, 2014 by Yascra

[thelerner]

 

to be honest I haven't found any religion which would really emphasize searching for truth. Real buddhism does advice the latter.. But real buddhism has nothing to do with religion, quite the opposite. Which is the case for most spiritual cores of the existing religions.

Formal religion gets pretty dogmatic. Yet I think you can use the frame work to find truth. Not the main stream practice, but they all have deeper mystical tradition, well springs, paths that can lead towards enlightenment.

[idiot_stimpy]

Formal religion gets pretty dogmatic. Yet I think you can use the frame work to find truth. Not the main stream practice, but they all have deeper mystical tradition, well springs, paths that can lead towards enlightenment.

 

The difference between the exoteric side of religion and the esoteric side of religion.

[C T]

Excuse me, but what else are you saying in this sentence then:

 

?

To me that suggests that a mahayana student should think ..., know ... and be clear about ..., doesn't it?

 

Well, but if you aren't even aware of making religious-biased suggestions when you inherently suggest that persons who you regard to be mahayana students shall share this and that of your views, then what exactly do you mean by "awareness"?

that is one of the points I was aiming at with my more "extreme" examples, by the way. While s.one runs amok he might feel more aware than he ever was - but that's due to the fact that what s/he perceives to be awareness IS NOT ultimate awareness.

So, sorry, I think some of your words are not so bad, but if you have such great problems to applie this to a given example, I have reason to doubt that they are your own words.

Which is also okay to some extend, but in this case there's nothing to discuss, as obviously s.one can't discuss a point that's not truly his or her own thought.

 

Might you explain what you consider to be preliminaries?

 

I'm not a mahayana student in any religious way, just for your information. I'm not completely done with my experiences of Tibetan buddhism, but to be honest I haven't found any religion which would really emphasize searching for truth. Real buddhism does advice the latter.. But real buddhism has nothing to do with religion, quite the opposite. Which is the case for most spiritual cores of the existing religions.

If you want to sort me into some religion there's some interest in taoism or esoteric buddhism at the moment, but I'm still for sure closest to christianity. You don't change twenty years of cultural influence in two years.

 

Greetz

You said you were a Mahayana practitioner ~ as one, i assumed you understood the basics, for example, how Mahayana views enlightenment, and what preliminary practice means. Its clear you don't, as such, i have nothing more to add, except to wish you clarity in knowing which path suits your needs.

 

I have no wish to argue, and apologise for any perceived rudeness.

[Yascra]

You said you were a Mahayana practitioner ~ as one, i assumed you understood the basics, for example, how Mahayana views enlightenment, and what preliminary practice means. Its clear you don't, as such, i have nothing more to add, except to wish you clarity in knowing which path suits your needs.

 

I have no wish to argue, and apologise for any perceived rudeness.

 

No problem

Thanks and same to you : - )

Edited January 24, 2014 by Yascra