Saijun wrote:meindzai wrote:It is really a problem of talking something that was meant as a here-and-now discourse to a specific group of people and writing it down and now here we are talking about it as if it's some sort of doctrine, which it isn't. My sense is that he would be very much disturbed to see this kind of debate over his talks.
Just as an aside, weren't the Suttas originally "here-and-now" discourses for "a specific group of people?" Ultimately, a teacher can only teach "here-and-now" to "a specific group of people." Otherwise the teacher would be more of a philosopher, no? In the end, it's all about getting down to the root of this "birth and death" thing, no?
(My apologies if "necor-posting" is frowned upon here)
Metta and Anjali,
Good points, the tendency to "reify", to see it as doctrine and then hold on to it, is strong. But to start with, it's OK I think. There is much that we hold on to that would be great to replace with "Buddhist dogma" for a while!