"Know thy not-self."
Aristotle mk.II
Metta,
Retro.
when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
- retrofuturist
- Posts: 27848
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
- Contact:
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
"Dropping Keys" by Hafiz:
The small person
Builds cages for everyone
She
Sees.
Instead, the sage,
Who needs to duck her head,
When the moon is low,
Can be found dropping keys, all night long
For the beautiful,
Rowdy,
Prisoners.
(Maybe I'm a closet Sufi)
The small person
Builds cages for everyone
She
Sees.
Instead, the sage,
Who needs to duck her head,
When the moon is low,
Can be found dropping keys, all night long
For the beautiful,
Rowdy,
Prisoners.
(Maybe I'm a closet Sufi)
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
Speaking about the moon...
WITH THAT MOON LANGUAGE
WITH THAT MOON LANGUAGE
- Admit something:
Everyone you see, you say to them, "Love me."
Of course you do not do this out loud, otherwise
someone would call the cops.
Still, though, think about this, this great pull in us to connect.
Why not become the one who lives with a
full moon in each eye that is
always saying,
with that sweet moon language,
what every other eye in
this world is
dying to
hear?
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
no aversions, and no craving, and no illusions of ego(arrogance), in koran:
لِّكَيْلَا تَأْسَوْا عَلَىٰ مَا فَاتَكُمْ وَلَا تَفْرَحُوا بِمَا آتَاكُمْ ۗ وَاللَّهُ لَا يُحِبُّ كُلَّ مُخْتَالٍ فَخُورٍ
In order that ye may not despair over matters that pass you by,
nor exult over favours bestowed upon you. For Allah loveth not any vainglorious boaster,-
(Al-Hadid, Chapter #57, Verse #23)
لِّكَيْلَا تَأْسَوْا عَلَىٰ مَا فَاتَكُمْ وَلَا تَفْرَحُوا بِمَا آتَاكُمْ ۗ وَاللَّهُ لَا يُحِبُّ كُلَّ مُخْتَالٍ فَخُورٍ
In order that ye may not despair over matters that pass you by,
nor exult over favours bestowed upon you. For Allah loveth not any vainglorious boaster,-
(Al-Hadid, Chapter #57, Verse #23)
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
After listening to a talk where the presenter apparently put freud, jung, and buddhism in a blender. Id say at about the same time Stephen Batchelor did. I cant tell whether he is a psychologist disguised as a buddhist or the other way round.jcsuperstar wrote:why is it that modern teachers feel the need to have quotes by non-buddhists and mystics from other religions in their books as some sort of "proof" that what the Buddha said is right?
seems silly, why would i care?
Id much rather have my buddhism polluted with rumi than freud tho.
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
Peter?
Metta,
Anna
Peter?
Metta,
Anna
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
Annapurna wrote:..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
Peter?
Metta,
Anna
Maybe so, but if you are presenting a dharma talk you need to decide where you are speaking from before you start. In addition freuds simple vision is not in great repute with the rest of the so-called science these days and imo has no place in a dharma talk. I have only heard the one talk by SB and maybe he was having an off day or something, but rather than worry about Rumi being quoted, its alot more serious imo when someone like batchelor presents himself as a teacher and then confuses the dharma with questionable psychological theories.
“The truth knocks on the door and you say, "Go away, I'm looking for the truth," and so it goes away. Puzzling.” ― Robert M. Pirsig
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
Mark Epstein.Annapurna wrote:..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
Peter?
Metta,
Anna
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Epstein" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Liberation is the inevitable fruit of the path and is bound to blossom forth when there is steady and persistent practice. The only requirements for reaching the final goal are two: to start and to continue. If these requirements are met there is no doubt the goal will be attained. This is the Dhamma, the undeviating law.
- BB
- BB
- Pannapetar
- Posts: 327
- Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:05 am
- Location: Chiang Mai, Thailand
- Contact:
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
What exactly speaks against it? As far as I understand it, certain professions don't go well with Buddhism, such as executioner, arms dealer, drug dealer, pimp, slaughterer, and such, but I don't think that psychologists fall into that category.Annapurna wrote:..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
- because they might want to engage a secular audience.jcsuperstar wrote:why is it that modern teachers feel the need to have quotes by non-buddhists and mystics from other religions in their books as some sort of "proof" that what the Buddha said is right? seems silly, why would i care?
- because they might feel that third-party corroboration is useful.
- because they might want to bring across a point in a specific context.
- because they might feel a particular phrasing was lucid and clear.
- because they have personal associations with the quoted teachings.
There are plenty of good reasons. It also helps to remember that Buddhism has no patent on truth. Truth has been expressed in the context of many different teachings. Some of these teachings are in agreement with Buddhism in important aspects. But perhaps the most important reason is that people who are intimately familiar with Buddhism form a minority on this planet and that one cannot assume this familiarity when speaking to a global audience.
Cheers, Thomas
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
I am not a psychologist Anna dear...I am a psychiatrist and psychotherapist...just for the record.Annapurna wrote:..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
Peter?
Metta,
Anna
Of course I have psychologist colleagues and use their expertise all the time.
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
Hello all,
Where did Rumi go??
The Buddha here tells the story of a king who had six blind men gathered together to examine an elephant.
"When the blind men had each felt a part of the elephant, the king went to each of them and said to each: 'Well, blind man, have you seen the elephant? Tell me, what sort of thing is an elephant?".
The six blind men assert the elephant is either like a pot (the blind man who felt the elephants' head), wicket basket (ear), ploughshare (tusk), plough (trunk), granary (body), pillar (foot), mortar (back), pestle (tail) or brush (tip of the tail).
The men cannot agree with one another and come to blows over the question of what an elephant really is like, and this delights the king. The Buddha ends the story of the king and compares the six blind men to preachers and scholars who are blind and ignorant and hold to their own views: "Just so are these preachers and scholars holding various views blind and unseeing.... In their ignorance they are by nature quarrelsome, wrangling, and disputatious, each maintaining reality is thus and thus." The Buddha then speaks the following verse:
O how they cling and wrangle, some who claim
For preacher and monk the honored name!
For, quarreling, each to his view they cling.
Such folk see only one side of a thing.
............
Rumi, the 13th Century Persian poet and teacher of Sufism, included it in his Masnavi. In his retelling, "The Elephant in the Dark", some Hindus bring an elephant to be exhibited in a dark room. A number of men feel the elephant in the dark and, depending upon where they touch it, they believe the elephant to be like a water spout (trunk), a fan (ear), a pillar (leg) and a throne (back).
Rumi uses this story as an example of the limits of individual perception:
The sensual eye is just like the palm of the hand. The palm has not the means of covering the whole of the beast.
Rumi doesn't present a resolution to the conflict in his version, but states:
The eye of the Sea is one thing and the foam another. Let the foam go, and gaze with the eye of the Sea. Day and night foam-flecks are flung from the sea: of amazing! You behold the foam but not the Sea. We are like boats dashing together; our eyes are darkened, yet we are in clear water.[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
with metta
Chris
Where did Rumi go??
The Buddha here tells the story of a king who had six blind men gathered together to examine an elephant.
"When the blind men had each felt a part of the elephant, the king went to each of them and said to each: 'Well, blind man, have you seen the elephant? Tell me, what sort of thing is an elephant?".
The six blind men assert the elephant is either like a pot (the blind man who felt the elephants' head), wicket basket (ear), ploughshare (tusk), plough (trunk), granary (body), pillar (foot), mortar (back), pestle (tail) or brush (tip of the tail).
The men cannot agree with one another and come to blows over the question of what an elephant really is like, and this delights the king. The Buddha ends the story of the king and compares the six blind men to preachers and scholars who are blind and ignorant and hold to their own views: "Just so are these preachers and scholars holding various views blind and unseeing.... In their ignorance they are by nature quarrelsome, wrangling, and disputatious, each maintaining reality is thus and thus." The Buddha then speaks the following verse:
O how they cling and wrangle, some who claim
For preacher and monk the honored name!
For, quarreling, each to his view they cling.
Such folk see only one side of a thing.
............
Rumi, the 13th Century Persian poet and teacher of Sufism, included it in his Masnavi. In his retelling, "The Elephant in the Dark", some Hindus bring an elephant to be exhibited in a dark room. A number of men feel the elephant in the dark and, depending upon where they touch it, they believe the elephant to be like a water spout (trunk), a fan (ear), a pillar (leg) and a throne (back).
Rumi uses this story as an example of the limits of individual perception:
The sensual eye is just like the palm of the hand. The palm has not the means of covering the whole of the beast.
Rumi doesn't present a resolution to the conflict in his version, but states:
The eye of the Sea is one thing and the foam another. Let the foam go, and gaze with the eye of the Sea. Day and night foam-flecks are flung from the sea: of amazing! You behold the foam but not the Sea. We are like boats dashing together; our eyes are darkened, yet we are in clear water.[
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_men_and_an_elephant" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
with metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
ok. Fair enough. I just thought that the Dhamma itself appears like psychology to me...you know what I mean?m0rl0ck wrote:Annapurna wrote:..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
Peter?
Metta,
Anna
Maybe so, but if you are presenting a dharma talk you need to decide where you are speaking from before you start.
Hard to separate, or no? But then I'm not so familiar with most psychological theories...
Metta,
Anna
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
Thank you Bodom.bodom wrote:
Mark Epstein.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Epstein" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Something like this has been interesting me for a while.
I like the quote:
Hi, all,all babies are born with that; they instinctively love their caretakers. So if we can find that again, then our relationships will take care of themselves.
Wonderful. That is actually a thought that has been on my mind lately a lot.
I'll explain why:
I am watching BB, Big brother, the German version. Please don't jump top negative conclusions, anybody, but it's far more interesting than studying gorillas in the mountains, you see.
And my personal "hobby" is this:
I compare their behaviour to the Dhamma.
It is my theory, that those whose behaviour is the "noblest", stay in the longest and almost always win in the end.
This is fascinating for me to watch.
Right now, we are having the most successful episode since several years, due to one man: Klaus.
He is the noblest in character, (imo) selfless, team player, sacrifices own comfort so the others can have more, disciplined, absolutely honest, compassionete, protects the weak, is totally fearless, respects his mother, but:
He criticizes others. A pretty petite girl was mobbed by the other chicks, and so he took her under his wings and told the others straight in the face:
"Look, it's quite simple: if you don't stop harrassing her, you'll get real problems with me, so choose wisely. "
Of course they hate him after such announcements and plot against him, and badmouth him, and insult him, but he stays strong. He is like a Rhino that can wander alone.
So, at times he really shames and annoys them, and on the other hand you could say he is doing this:
Interesting is, that the people in the house vote him onto the exit list each time, while the audience always votes him "in".76. Should one find a man who points out faults and who reproves, let him follow such a wise and sagacious person as one would a guide to hidden treasure. It is always better, and never worse, to cultivate such an association.
77. Let him admonish, instruct and shield one from wrong; he, indeed, is dear to the good and detestable to the evil.
It is a thought I am investigating:
if "people" out there know, what is right.
If there is an "innate goodness and nobility in all of us, " and I tend to say yes.
Actually, I am convinced of this.
We're all good, somewhere, inside.
And bad as well. But we "know" what is right, deep down inside. Only problem: Most of us are only good to loved ones, like Hitler to his dog Blondie...
But I see that the people reward those who are good to all.
Metta,
Anna
Re: when did Rumi become a Buddhist?
Imo, nothing.Pannapetar wrote:What exactly speaks against it?Annapurna wrote:..... can people be Buddhists and psychologists at the same time....?
Cheers, Thomas