What a great thread !

[appicchato]

Hovering over everything is this One Truth. All attempts at explaining this Truth are thus far incomplete...

'...this One Truth'...In life there is suffering...pretty self explanatory (evident)...

[chicka-Dee]

Well actually i think you will find that the Buddha has pretty much done that for us. Our job is to now actualise it. So we start by researching what he said and trying out the range of practises that came into being around what he discovered. My guess is that if we really apply ourselves to that pretty soon we will have more than enough to occupy us and we will stop worrying about whether it is the same or different to Christianity, or Taoism, or Vedanta.
There are only 24 hours in a day and a whole lot of Buddhadhamma to actualise.

I should really know when to quit (but apparently I don't.. sorry)...

I dunno. It just sounds kinda like the reason I don't like Christianity (what I was raised in). It's a kinda 'don't ask questions, just believe this' sort of presentation (what I'm hearing.. which may not be what you are meaning, but what it sounds like to me). I like what the Buddha said.. (paraphrased): 'don't take my word for it, find out for yourself'. This is what I'm trying to do, find out for myself. Use my own experience as much as follow the guidance of the teachings. I have a feeling that what we are looking at is not so different afterall, it's just different views taken from different stances.

Anyways, I'll shut up now. Enough said.

[mikenz66]

I dunno. It just sounds kinda like the reason I don't like Christianity (what I was raised in). It's a kinda 'don't ask questions, just believe this' sort of presentation (what I'm hearing.. which may not be what you are meaning, but what it sounds like to me). ...

I think that the message of PeterB's post could be taken as: To really understand any Path, be it Theravada Buddhism, one of the many Mahayana schools, Christianity, Islam, Daoism, a Hindu school, ... would a lot of work, and not leave much time to think about all of the other Paths. This statement:

My guess is that if we really apply ourselves to that pretty soon we will have more than enough to occupy us and we will stop worrying...

could be applied to any Path. It would be a rare individual who could find time, and put in the effort, to read the teachings of all of those schools, spend time with competent teachers of each of them, spend weeks or months on retreats in each school, ...

Metta
Mike

[PeterB]

Thats it in a nutshell Mike. Life is fleeting. We can spend all of it trying to line all our ducks up before commiting to something, only to find time gone..

[chicka-Dee]

Hopefully I'm not trying to do all that. I was thinking this morning that it seems my creative mind just looooves taking over, trying to create something new. We are the creators of our own, personal 'reality', afterall, aren't we? It seems the true dividing line (if there is one) is a difference in one's personal approach. I guess this is why Buddhism and most other religions keep having splits, and seem to evolve over time. Some prefer to hold steady to the established way, while others seek new roads.

Thanks to all for sharing your advice and views.

[PeterB]

Hovering over everything is this One Truth. All attempts at explaining this Truth are thus far incomplete...

'...this One Truth'...In life there is suffering...pretty self explanatory (evident)...

[Dan74]

Just like there is a danger of becoming too narrow, caught up in the details of the path and losing sight of the purpose, there is a danger of getting swept away by the wide vistas and forever staying on the surface while neglecting the details that the path entails.

Perhaps it is simply a matter of personalities. Some people may start off broad, loose and new-agey and then develop deep practice and discipline without losing an intuitive intimation of the overarching simplicity and commonality hinted at by the great mystics. Others may start off strict and narrow and through sincere dedicated practice loosen their grip and broaden their outlook in a genuine appreciation of the commonality within the diversity of spiritual paths.

Like with everything it is simple a matter of balance, I think. Aware of our tendencies we work on developing a balanced approach to practice. The Middle Way.

_/|\_

[chicka-Dee]

Just like there is a danger of becoming too narrow, caught up in the details of the path and losing sight of the purpose, there is a danger of getting swept away by the wide vistas and forever staying on the surface while neglecting the details that the path entails.

Perhaps it is simply a matter of personalities. Some people may start off broad, loose and new-agey and then develop deep practice and discipline without losing an intuitive intimation of the overarching simplicity and commonality hinted at by the great mystics. Others may start off strict and narrow and through sincere dedicated practice loosen their grip and broaden their outlook in a genuine appreciation of the commonality within the diversity of spiritual paths.

Like with everything it is simple a matter of balance, I think. Aware of our tendencies we work on developing a balanced approach to practice. The Middle Way.

_/|\_

Very well said. Thank you, Dan. I think it is vitally important to be aware of our tendencies that can sway us to one extreme or the other. This is becoming clearer for me. The middle way is sometimes difficult to find, or stay at. But we need to stay aware when we stray too far one way or the other. And like you say, I think some start out 'loose' while others start out 'tight', and with time come to meet at the middle ground. One is not necessarily more 'right' or 'wrong' than the other. Thanks so much for pointing this out.

[PeterB]

Its actually quite funny and ironic. I started this thread because I was pleased to see another thread get rescued from what i see as the treacle of good intention, only to see this this thread becoming treacly.. I guess there is a moral here for me, when things are looking good dont mess with them by dwelling in either aversion or attraction, just move on PeterB . its tempting i find to see threads and posts as one's children, but they are not. Even one's children are not really.. So, if what went out with a particular intention ends up as a water-cooler around which the like- minded can gather, then thats the nature of Anatta.

[christopher:::]

I like what the Buddha said.. (paraphrased): 'don't take my word for it, find out for yourself'. This is what I'm trying to do, find out for myself. Use my own experience as much as follow the guidance of the teachings. I have a feeling that what we are looking at is not so different afterall, it's just different views taken from different stances.

Anyways, I'll shut up now. Enough said.

The part in bold i think is really what's key, not just stances but where we are in our life journies and practice. I know, for example, that Peter first became deeply involved with Buddhism in the 1960s, while you, Dee have only begun to explore Buddhism in the last year. Peter gave the example of Thomas Merton, who made a choice near the age of 60, to go with the dharma completely and deeply, leaving Christianity behind. How long did it take him to get to that point, to make that decision?

This needs to be kept in mind i think as we communicate with one another.

Just like there is a danger of becoming too narrow, caught up in the details of the path and losing sight of the purpose, there is a danger of getting swept away by the wide vistas and forever staying on the surface while neglecting the details that the path entails.

Perhaps it is simply a matter of personalities. Some people may start off broad, loose and new-agey and then develop deep practice and discipline without losing an intuitive intimation of the overarching simplicity and commonality hinted at by the great mystics. Others may start off strict and narrow and through sincere dedicated practice loosen their grip and broaden their outlook in a genuine appreciation of the commonality within the diversity of spiritual paths.

Like with everything it is simple a matter of balance, I think. Aware of our tendencies we work on developing a balanced approach to practice. The Middle Way.

_/|\_

I think so. Especially in this modern age where we have so much information available about alternate spiritual traditions. A hundred years ago such mixing and sampling was simply not possible.

Its actually quite funny and ironic. I started this thread because I was pleased to see another thread get rescued from what i see as the treacle of good intention, only to see this this thread becoming treacly.. I guess there is a moral here for me, when things are looking good dont mess with them by dwelling in either aversion or attraction, just move on PeterB .

[tiltbillings]

Perhaps it is simply a matter of personalities. Some people may start off broad, loose and new-agey and then develop deep practice and discipline without losing an intuitive intimation of the overarching simplicity and commonality hinted at by the great mystics. Others may start off strict and narrow and through sincere dedicated practice loosen their grip and broaden their outlook in a genuine appreciation of the commonality within the diversity of spiritual paths.

Commonality this way or that, but but there is a point at which commonality is too broad, too vague to have any real meaning, though it does feel good.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Tilt,

I think that's true but it's always worth remembering that people come to the Dhamma in different ways through different doors.

If people are standing in the new-agey fluffy doorway, do we wish to invite them in, or do we ask them to leave?

People are at where people are at... we need not expect commonality.

Metta,
Retro.

[mikenz66]

People are at where people are at... we need not expect commonality.

Umm... Isn't that what Tilt keeps saying?

He has specifically argued against commonality. It's those "people standing at the fluffy doorway" that are saying that "all paths are the same..."

Mike

[tiltbillings]

If people are standing in the new-agey fluffy doorway, do we wish to invite them in, or do we ask them to leave?

If a person is standing in the doorway of the Dhamma with fluffy bunny, new-agey, it's-all-one notions, "Please come in. I have been expecting you. Please feel free to look around, to ask questions." One need not compromise the Dhamma in teaching it, though one can be skillful in it presentation.

On forums such as this, fluffy bunny, new agey it's-all-oneism are going to meet differing responses. My feelings about this are if it is a motivation to practice, then good, but an exploration of Dhamma, Truth, also means being open to the possibility that things might be a bit different from what one expects or wants them to be, and open to the possibility that that can be uncomfortable.

We can celebrate commonalities (and what seems to be commonalities), but we should be careful not to assume they more than they are.

[retrofuturist]

Greetings Tilt,

Agreed - well said.

Metta,
Retro.

[Dan74]

Perhaps it is simply a matter of personalities. Some people may start off broad, loose and new-agey and then develop deep practice and discipline without losing an intuitive intimation of the overarching simplicity and commonality hinted at by the great mystics. Others may start off strict and narrow and through sincere dedicated practice loosen their grip and broaden their outlook in a genuine appreciation of the commonality within the diversity of spiritual paths.

Commonality this way or that, but but there is a point at which commonality is too broad, too vague to have any real meaning, though it does feel good.

Only when it is taken as an idea. When it is the experience, it is very useful in that it strips yet another layer of labels and reification.

_/|\_

[tiltbillings]

Only when it is taken as an idea. When it is the experience, it is very useful in that it strips yet another layer of labels and reification.

Well, the problem with experience is that it can be conditioned by expectation, which is why the jhanas can present a serious problem.

[Dan74]

Only when it is taken as an idea. When it is the experience, it is very useful in that it strips yet another layer of labels and reification.

Well, the problem with experience is that it can be conditioned by expectation, which is why the jhanas can present a serious problem.

I'd rephrase it to say the problem is with expectations rather than with experience. Experience is all there is.

_/|\_

[tiltbillings]

Only when it is taken as an idea. When it is the experience, it is very useful in that it strips yet another layer of labels and reification.

Well, the problem with experience is that it can be conditioned by expectation, which is why the jhanas can present a serious problem.

I'd rephrase it to say the problem is with expectations rather than with experience. Experience is all there is.

And expereience can be colored by one's expectations. It is why the first to factors of paticcasamuppada are ignorance and kamma-formations.

[christopher:::]

If people are standing in the new-agey fluffy doorway, do we wish to invite them in, or do we ask them to leave?

If a person is standing in the doorway of the Dhamma with fluffy bunny, new-agey, it's-all-one notions, "Please come in. I have been expecting you. Please feel free to look around, to ask questions." One need not compromise the Dhamma in teaching it, though one can be skillful in it presentation.

On forums such as this, fluffy bunny, new agey it's-all-oneism are going to meet differing responses. My feelings about this are if it is a motivation to practice, then good, but an exploration of Dhamma, Truth, also means being open to the possibility that things might be a bit different from what one expects or wants them to be, and open to the possibility that that can be uncomfortable.

We can celebrate commonalities (and what seems to be commonalities), but we should be careful not to assume they more than they are.

from your link:

The primary definition of a Fluffy Bunny is one who refuses to learn, refuses to think, and refuses to consider the possibility that they could possibly ever be wrong. Generally, they find one book, author or website and follow it as if it were the holy word, frequently denouncing anything that disagrees with it as obviously false. Fluffy Bunnies rarely get past the defense of "Because [insert favorite author here] says so." Sometimes they don't even get that far, responding to any and all criticism with something like, "You're just trying to persecute me!"

Interesting.