A timely reminder for the taobums

[deci belle]

When studying worldy things, one relies totally on verbal meanings and mental thoughts. But if you use verbal meanings and thoughts to study the world-transcending Dharma, you are way off. Didn't Buddha say so? —"This Dharma is not something that thought and discrimination can understand."

 

In order to mitigate the repercussions of necessary admonishment, recreational philosophers should consider this when venturing out of their element…❤︎

[Stosh]

Words represent sets of associations , sometimes they are nonspecific. That which they represent is just as foggy as a feeling ,or an experience. They well up from the subconscious and appear before the awareness before being spoken or they blurt out before aware examination so they just arent clearly differentiable from nonverbal sentiment at their formative moment.

Dharma , may be.many things ...teachings, conduct ,virtues, rights, laws, doctrine etc.

If a person was going to try to study Dharma then its basically going to be by the use of verbal meanings and thoughts.

 

If its said that Buddha said that was not the case,

then the person saying it didnt understand Buddha or Dharma.

 

As far as admonishment goes , you yourself are tough enough to withstand and dismiss it ,

and I respect a persons ability to do that,, more than the admonishing, which is easy.

 

[Tibetan_Ice]

When studying worldy things, one relies totally on verbal meanings and mental thoughts. But if you use verbal meanings and thoughts to study the world-transcending Dharma, you are way off. Didn't Buddha say so? "This Dharma is not something that thought and discrimination can understand."

 

In order to mitigate the repercussions of necessary admonishment, recreational philosophers should consider this when venturing out of their element❤

Hi Guy,

Haven't seen you walking through walls or manifesting jewels or banquets lately.

 

It is one thing to cast aspersions upon the poor common unenlightened folk and it is another thing to present what the Buddha truly said. Perhaps you should do just a bit more reading before you use your meager understanding of Buddhism to insult people.

 

The Buddha said that you need to develop the five eyes.

Chapter 18

 

http://www.buddhisttexts.org/uploads/6/3/3/1/6331706/_vajra_prajna_paramita_sutra.pdf#page208

 

 

Let us look further into the five eyes.

 

Are they produced from within or do they come from outside? The five eyes are not produced from within; nor do they come from outside: nor do they exist in the middle. Cultivate, use effort, and when your skill is sufficient you will have them naturally. Before sufficient skill is attained, no amount of seeking will cause them to function. Seeking is false thinking. Seeking without the thought of seeking brings a response.

 

In what way does one make an effort to open ones eyes?

 

You need to be wise in managing affairs, and wise in cultivation. It is wise to recognize what is good and then courageously and vigorously work towards it. The characteristic of wisdom is to recognize and vow to cut off and cast out what is bad. Realizing something is good and yet not acting in accord with it is the characteristic of stupidity. It is stupid to recognize that something is bad business and still go ahead and become involved in it. If you are stupid, it is not easy to obtain the five eyes. In order to obtain them, everything you do must be done extremely clearly. You must be very precise and cannot be confused. What do the five eyes do?

 

The wisdom eye contemplates the nature of the dharma realm. In so doing, the wisdom eye is complete with all aspects of wisdom.

 

When you wish to consult the Buddhist sūtras, you must use a book. With the dharma eye, however, you do not need to read the sūtras, because you can see the Buddhadharma throughout all of empty space, everywhere throughout the dharma realm. There are sūtras everywhere. So it is said that the dharma eye completely illuminates the marks of the dharma. The Buddha eye enables you to understand the true meaning of all Buddhadharma. Those of you who wish to attain the Buddha eye should remember that it is located between your eyebrows. Otherwise on the day when an eye appears in that place you will utterly panic and wonder, How did I grow another eye? My telling you in advance is to spare you any fear.

 

The dharma eye can thoroughly investigate everything. Peoples prior causes and subsequent results, the penetration of past lives, the penetration of the heavenly eye, all are completely understood. The Buddha eye is extremely wonderful and inconceivable. It can see things with form and things without form, with a power several million times greater than that of the flesh eye.

 

If you obtain the five eyes, you should protect them carefully. How should you protect them? By continuing to nourish your good roots. Cultivate blessings and wisdom. Those of you who have not obtained the eyes need to work hard and develop blessings and wisdom. When your blessings and wisdom are sufficient your five eyes will open.

 

 

[BaguaKicksAss]

Starting a new thread to win an argument and belittle someone (yet again), awesome!

[Spotless]

I enjoy Socrates in his approach from the flip side of admonishment.

 

How he would bow to the orator and owner of some wisdom that he was "desperate" to understand and for which he would be extremely indebted for clarification on such things as Virtue.

 

And then slowly pierce by piece he would dismantle the complete certainty of the orator until it became obvious that his "knowledge" was in fact assumption and the certainty was in fact more puffery having never faced a sharp blade before.

 

A sharp blade can slice like butter or hack clean through - both can be effective - one way is certainly more easily dissipated while the other is more of a shock and the experience is not dissipated in talk and variations.

 

If their is real clarity - the blade is sharp - it cuts well in either case.

 

I don't think many of Socrates' fellow adversaries went back for more of him but none went away less wise.

And Socrates himself handled his trial well - he could not and did not retrace his steps.

 

We have the wonderful tool of ignore prefs at our disposal - it can remove nearly all of the clouds we may tire of here.

 

Some of those clouds are just din - like listening to white noise - nothing ever said.

Some are like an obnoxious brat with two years of "college" under their belt and certain that they can write the book and spot the fools (full blown idiots).

Some are like an obnoxious brat with no "college" under their belt - they are just jackasses who like the smell of their own farts.

 

The mass of what we have here is a relatively alive group working in a general sense to understand and to wake up.

In and among this "good group" and I mean that is a high sense - we do have those moderating types whether technically moderating or just those who have it under their skin. And sometimes it is hard for them not to press for "Elevator music" when it is not only not necessary but truly unfortunate - it's a bit like changing the subject just when you are getting to the good stuff with some actual pith in it.

 

Whether to slice like butter or hack through is a choice I have no judgement on - but actual sparring often takes the entire tread off and to its death. The very act of a clear decisive call-out over a specific pacifying dissipating comment can be refreshing and as we have seen - eye popping. Bypassing any judgement of either side - as though two aliens we have never met - bang - we were all brought to the very fine point of the matter and just how simply we can Skip over exactly that tiny trace mineral we are scraping around trying to find.

 

At some point the trace mineral is the big stuff.

 

I love Deci and GP - this that happened does not need to fester - sometimes dogs bark at each other - this was not a rant of "full blow idiots" - words and thoughts along these profound levels we often ponder here at the TTBs can sometimes lull into a summer day with tea and biscuits and barking needs to occur - we are after all pretty well agreed here at least in intent that we are not consciously wanting to ride in the elevator all day.

Edited August 15, 2014 by Spotless

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[GrandmasterP]

When studying worldy things, one relies totally on verbal meanings and mental thoughts. But if you use verbal meanings and thoughts to study the world-transcending Dharma, you are way off. Didn't Buddha say so? "This Dharma is not something that thought and discrimination can understand."

 

In order to mitigate the repercussions of necessary admonishment, recreational philosophers should consider this when venturing out of their element❤

Job Advertisement...

" Necessary Admonishers Required.

Must have own transport and be prepared to travel.

Applicants in possession of a current sense of humour may not be considered for the position.

We are an unequal opportunities company.

Apply in own handwriting in the first instance to...

P. Aradox & Associates.

Suite 1A

Ivory Towers.

Narnia."

 

There's no such thing as an absolute truth.

Now aint that the truth?

Edited August 15, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[joeblast]

discarding difficult depth of discernment via wordy-ness,

the absolute truth of a matter exists independent of the fingers that point at it (or which direction they come from, for that matter)

which is why the preponderance of deci's posts, I have naught but a nod and smile

understand the perspective and there's no need to attempt to pick apart the words.

pick apart the words too much and you're focusing on the finger, not the moon

[C T]

Those with small appetites will find it hard to swallow the moon. Licking their lips, they gaze longingly at moon, while sucking on their thumb.

 

Is this another way of saying it?

[deci belle]

Starting a new thread to win an argument and belittle someone (yet again), awesome!

 

oh, did i win again?!! …and who lost, yet again? And who, btw is the innocent bystander, dear one?

 

I start new threads to respond to the ones who need to be addressed outside of the context of the threads because they don't understand the context of the old threads to begin with.

 

As for the losers you refer to, they are like earwigs… dey sso dum, dey doe no dey done died.

 

It's like delusion. One's delusion is by definition the state of not knowing one is deluded. I'm a shock-rockette if it's called for and I have a blade that slices and dices before you'll ever know it~ with a routine and high-kicks to match. Whup sum up side dey head~ maybe doo sum guuud.

 

I don't want to fcuk up my own OP. Got it? Guuud.

 

 

 

 

ed note: add last line

Edited August 15, 2014 by deci belle

[deci belle]

Look mr P, I don't visit you. You visit me.

 

Study the 4th hexagram and deduce your relative position.

 

As for you being the first to bring up nihilism, I would have never known it was going to be a trend. Did you start it or did you just jump on the band-wagon first?

 

Like I said, you brought it to my door, I didn't deliver it to yours. I just sent it back.

 

Why? IT DIDN'T APPLY.

 

If you knew what my subject matter is, you wouldn't have made that mistake by accident …it would have been a deliberate mistake.

 

Which was it? I say you didn't know what you were doing in either case. You just wanted more light on yourself.

 

Want my lighting director do you? Hire yourself a real gaffer~ non-union if yer a real artist.

 

 

 

 

ed note: add to the original two lines

Edited August 15, 2014 by deci belle

[aboo]

"Giving up doesn't always mean you are weak. Sometimes it means you are strong enough and smart enough to let go and move on."

[deci belle]

Smart is not good enough. Seeing reality is knowing the stability of aware nature in the midst of situations that has never moved.

 

When one does not contemplate potential reality as things, one is the same as the potential inherent in things, including oneself.

 

Knowledge of the timing of action or inaction is the working definition of spontaneity. After one acts, it is too late to stay or go in terms of "moving on". That is indeed weakness, i.e.: the inability to stop oneself beforehand or, the inability to see reality as is.

 

After-the-fact, potential is the same as karmic residue, which is the same as having gone along with karmic evolution (creative energy) helplessly and unknowingly. So, aboo, what you are calling strength is, after all, retreating after it is too late. And it's not really a subtle point. I'd call that saving one's ass, at best— not strength.

 

Aboo is referring to a conventional wisdom and psychological protocols of polite society. It is not necessarily appropriate, much less conceivable for enlightening activity~ otherwise, one is subject to convention— and that is definitely how one doesn't steal potential and take over creation..

 

It depends on the time, above all— and one's personal power.

 

Seeing reality is not concerned with appearances, it is concerned with perpetual nonaction in terms of impersonal adaption to circumstances independent of circumstances.

 

It is not just a way of saving nonpsychological energy, it is a way to live unencumbered by convention.

 

In terms of the topic of this thread, the timely reminder is that reality is not comprehended by conventional mental or societal patterns.

 

Inconceivability is one's own nature. Intellectual approaches to the basis of enlightening function are simply inadequate. The people I am pointing out are the intelligentsia who affect a one-dimentional ineffectual approach to the source of the classics.

 

Most of them are perfectly satisfied with their approach because it suites their purpose. Fair enough for immortals who will live forever, and have seen the essence of their nature.

 

Then again, immortals don't have any reason to speculate on the classics in the first place, hmmmm? That might be something to take up with an immortal to suit the occasion, should there be one.

 

Heads up! If it applies, take it on the head or… move on.❤︎

 

 

 

 

ed note: add "of' in 3rd paragraph

Edited August 16, 2014 by deci belle

[Wells]

.

Edited October 28, 2014 by ZOOM

[GrandmasterP]

Why would a moth want to become a butterfly?

Do you mean 'caterpillar'?

[GrandmasterP]

Look mr P, I don't visit you. You visit me.

 

Study the 4th hexagram and deduce your relative position.

 

As for you being the first to bring up nihilism, I would have never known it was going to be a trend. Did you start it or did you just jump on the band-wagon first?

 

Like I said, you brought it to my door, I didn't deliver it to yours. I just sent it back.

 

Why? IT DIDN'T APPLY.

 

If you knew what my subject matter is, you wouldn't have made that mistake by accident …it would have been a deliberate mistake.

 

Which was it? I say you didn't know what you were doing in either case. You just wanted more light on yourself.

 

Want my lighting director do you? Hire yourself a real gaffer~ non-union if yer a real artist.

 

 

 

 

ed note: add to the original two lines

 

Yes , you are right Deci.

 

[Apech]

Why would a moth want to become a butterfly? Do you mean 'caterpillar'?

 

 

I became enlightened contemplating the answer to that.

[gatito]

Why would a moth want to become a butterfly? Do you mean 'caterpillar'?

 

Pedant!

[GrandmasterP]

Two monks, A and B, were arguing about a doctrinal problem; each insisted on his own opinion and rejected the others as fallacious. Monk A said, I am going to see our master and let him arbitrate, so he entered the chamber of the master who was at that time accompanied by an attendant monk who stood behind him.

 

O Master! cried monk A. I just had an argument with B. My interpretation of such-and-such passage in a Sutra is this . . . but B had a different interpretation and insists that I am wrong. Please tell me who is right and who is wrong?

 

The master said, You are right!

 

Monk B heard about this and rushed to the Master. Master! How can you say that A is right? According to the authoritative commentary of so-and-so, my interpretation should be right, and his wrong.

 

The Master said, Yes, you are right!

 

The attending monk who stood behind the master and saw the whole event could no longer maintain his patience. He proceeded forward and whispered to the master, O Master, you can either say A is right or B is right, but how can you say both of them are right?

 

The Master turned his head and looked at the protester, saying, Yes, you are also right!

Edited August 16, 2014 by GrandmasterP

[Marblehead]

Why would a moth want to become a butterfly? Do you mean 'caterpillar'?

Shall we consider the first question?

 

Primarily because a moth spends most of its active life in darkness whereas the butterfly spends most of its active life in the light.

 

A butterfly can become enlightened whereas a moth never will until it first becomes a butterfly and sees the light.

[Marblehead]

Yes , you are right Deci.

Yes. Deci is always right.

[Marblehead]

Yes, you are also right!

But I still reserve the right to be wrong.

[GrandmasterP]

You are right to do so MH.

[Bearded Dragon]

But I still reserve the right to be wrong.

 

Ah, but who really reserves the right?

 

haha

[Marblehead]

Ah, but who really reserves the right?

 

haha

No, no, no. I won't go there. I am a Taoist - I exist.