So refuge in the Triple Gem is a recipe for more suffering?genkaku wrote:to take some imagined goodness as a refuge is a recipe for more suffering, I'd say.
First you disparage the Dhamma, now the rest of the Triple Gem as well?
So refuge in the Triple Gem is a recipe for more suffering?genkaku wrote:to take some imagined goodness as a refuge is a recipe for more suffering, I'd say.
Peter -- I would be most grateful if you would tell me what you imagine the Dhamma to be.First you disparage the Dhamma, now the rest of the Triple Gem as well?
genkaku.genkaku wrote:No disrespect intended to you or some imagined Dhamma
The Dhamma of the Triple Gem is the teaching of the Buddha.genkaku wrote:Peter -- I would be most grateful if you would tell me what you imagine the Dhamma to be.First you disparage the Dhamma, now the rest of the Triple Gem as well?
It is where a Buddhist starts his investigation. The only way to know if the Dhamma (teachings of the Buddha as we've received them) is in fact the Dhamma (the way to end suffering) is to learn, read, hear the Dhamma and then investigate it.Then I would be grateful to know if imagining the Dhamma to be something is really the Dhamma.
Praise and blame is how the Buddha gets us started in the right direction. And by "us" I mean Buddhists. The Dhamma (teachings of the Buddha) is nothing other than "This is worth investigating; that isn't worth investigating."No disrespect intended to you or some imagined Dhamma, but I think that any position on what is or is not true is something that the Triple Gem encourages us all most persuasively to investigate right down to the root. Praise and blame just won't cut it.
I have said something similar many times in the past.thecap wrote:You seem to be replacing one extreme (attachment to goodness) with another extreme (aversion to praise-blame).
Thank you for your reply, genkaku.genkaku wrote:Dear thecap -- Apologies. Nothing wrong with encouragement at all. We all need it. But for my money, we all need to be aware as well of the limitations that encouragements can invite if they are taken too literally ... or as if those encouragements were actual answers to our deepest prayers.
Here, as a printed-word encouragement, is a small poem or sutra by Dai O Kokushi. To my mind, it wouldn't matter if Joe the Plumber had written the words or whether the author ascribed to Mahayana, Therevada or any other sort of Buddhism. What matters is whether those words are true AND the willingness of any particular reader to investigate/actualize/realize whatever truth they point to:
ON ZEN
There is a reality even prior to heaven and earth;
It has no form, much less a name;
Eyes fail to see it; it has no voice for ears to detect;
To call it Mind or Buddha violates its nature,
For it then becomes like a visionary flower in the air;
It is not Mind, nor Buddha;
Absolutely quiet, and yet illuminating in a mysterious way,
It allows itself to be perceived only by the clear-eyed.
It is Dharma truly beyond form and soud;
It is Tao, having nothing to do with words.
Wishing to entice the blind,
The Buddha has playfully let words escape his golden mouth;
Heaven and earth are ever since filled with entangling briars.
O my good worthy friends gathered here,
If you desire to listen to the thunderous voice of the Dharma,
Exhaust your words, empty your thoughts,
For then you may come to recognize this One Essence.
Dear thecap -- I trust that this is the question you were referring to and apologize for my sloppiness in not responding more promptly.Calling the Buddha-Dhamma "imagined" is disrespectful and does not agree with what you said earlier ("No disrespect intended"), so what is your true intention?
entangling briars indeed.genkaku wrote:Good.
Excellent.
Superior.
Authentic.
Blissful.
Enlightened.
Compassionate.
Clear-eyed.
Profound.
Wise.
True....
When it comes to such things, let others do the talking.
You and I have work to do.
Claptrap never got the job done.
Just noodling.
genkaku wrote:Good.
Excellent.
Superior.
Authentic.
Blissful.
Enlightened.
Compassionate.
Clear-eyed.
Profound.
Wise.
True....
When it comes to such things, let others do the talking.
You and I have work to do.
Claptrap never got the job done.
Just noodling.
I think it's impossible to know if anyone is disparaging what until the matter of the Triple Gem is clarified for oneself. For example, one might ask, what is the Triple Gem? In which case the book answer would come back - Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha. And then one might ask, well what is Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha. And the intellectual mind replays what it has learnt - for example, well Buddha is the founder of our religion, Dhamma is the body of teachings left by Lord Buddha, or maybe Buddha is the Buddha inherent in ever being, Dhamma is everpresent reality(depending on the persuasion of your learning) etc. And then we might continue, (assuming the answer is the first and simplifying it to Buddha), OK well who was Shakyamuni then? To which one might respond, he lived ages ago and was a Prince once! To which we might then ask 'Is that the meaning of Buddha really?' etc etc (and each of these can make up months of discussions for those still interested at this level so it's no joke)Peter wrote:So refuge in the Triple Gem is a recipe for more suffering?genkaku wrote:to take some imagined goodness as a refuge is a recipe for more suffering, I'd say.
First you disparage the Dhamma, now the rest of the Triple Gem as well?