"Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
What are you on about cafael? I didn't respond to you.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
-
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Sorry Manapa, I meant Alan.
Alan, I'm amazed that you attack me (quite nastily, to be fair) about my lack of orthodoxy while at the same time discounting teachings on emptiness, the most fundamental concept in Buddhism. How do you reconcile those two approaches?
Alan, I'm amazed that you attack me (quite nastily, to be fair) about my lack of orthodoxy while at the same time discounting teachings on emptiness, the most fundamental concept in Buddhism. How do you reconcile those two approaches?
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
the wheel is turning.
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
One does not follow the other, but if you think they do, then it is up to you, since made the claim, to show it to be so.Cafael Dust wrote:The odd thing is that I consider myself a Buddhist fundamentalist. In terms of not-self and emptiness, I'm unshakeable. Except that they're empty too...
If these things are true, there must indeed be many ways up the mountain, because all ways are empty.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
missed this earlier?alan wrote:Not sure what you mean, Manapa!
(Thanks for your generous offer to teach me how to use the quote buttons. I'll PM you as soon as I figure out how to do it...)
there is a PM button on the left side of the the post, all you do is click on that under my name, then you don't have to do anything but type the message.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
-
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Tilt:
There is no such thing as Buddhism, there are just sounds that are perceived as sounding like 'Buddhism' and 'Buddha', people sitting cross legged on the floor and so on, even these can be broken down and shown to be empty, even concepts like 'sound', so how can something that is intrinsically empty of self nature, of essence, make claims of being the only path to enlightenment? How can Buddhists say on one hand 'there is no path' and on the other 'this is the only path'. It's ridiculous.
There is no such thing as Buddhism, there are just sounds that are perceived as sounding like 'Buddhism' and 'Buddha', people sitting cross legged on the floor and so on, even these can be broken down and shown to be empty, even concepts like 'sound', so how can something that is intrinsically empty of self nature, of essence, make claims of being the only path to enlightenment? How can Buddhists say on one hand 'there is no path' and on the other 'this is the only path'. It's ridiculous.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
the wheel is turning.
- Cittasanto
- Posts: 6646
- Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 10:31 pm
- Location: Ellan Vannin
- Contact:
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
please don't confuse ultimate with conventional reality.Cafael Dust wrote:Tilt:
There is no such thing as Buddhism, there are just sounds that are perceived as sounding like 'Buddhism' and 'Buddha', people sitting cross legged on the floor and so on, even these can be broken down and shown to be empty, even concepts like 'sound', so how can something that is intrinsically empty of self nature, of essence, make claims of being the only path to enlightenment? How can Buddhists say on one hand 'there is no path' and on the other 'this is the only path'. It's ridiculous.
Blog, Suttas, Aj Chah, Facebook.
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them.
But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion …
...
He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them … he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.
John Stuart Mill
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Ugh. The ability to break down a chariot into constituent parts does not render its existence "empty".Cafael Dust wrote:Tilt:
There is no such thing as Buddhism, there are just sounds that are perceived as sounding like 'Buddhism' and 'Buddha', people sitting cross legged on the floor and so on, even these can be broken down and shown to be empty, even concepts like 'sound', so how can something that is intrinsically empty of self nature, of essence, make claims of being the only path to enlightenment? How can Buddhists say on one hand 'there is no path' and on the other 'this is the only path'. It's ridiculous.
The Buddha was not interested in ontology. Neither should buddhists be... at least from the perspective of buddhism.
- Karma Dondrup Tashi
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:41 pm
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
If that was the point enlightenment would be very easy, no?Cafael Dust wrote: Yes it does go nowhere. That's the whole point.
"Going nowhere" and "going somewhere" are equally empty.
In which case, as our Theravadin friends are pointing out to you, how can you say that "all paths up the mountain go to the same place"?
It has been the misfortune (not, as these gentlemen think it, the glory) of this age that everything is to be discussed. Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France.
- Karma Dondrup Tashi
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 7:41 pm
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
The same way that someone can say on the one hand we are all "going nowhere" and on the other that "all paths ascend the same mountain".Cafael Dust wrote: How can Buddhists say on one hand 'there is no path' and on the other 'this is the only path'. It's ridiculous.
If this trick were as easy to solve as you think it is, we would all be magicians by now.
It has been the misfortune (not, as these gentlemen think it, the glory) of this age that everything is to be discussed. Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France.
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Sorry if this is off-topic. I feel compelled to respond to the idea of emptiness, and the general attitude of its discussion.
I think emptiness falls into the class of ideas that are (intentionally?) confusing enough to sound "deep" and therefore to be lumped in with Buddhism.
I never see the Buddha take a position on metaphysical matters like this. If you read the suttas do you seriously think that the same Buddha would say something to substantiate "In terms of not-self and emptiness, I'm unshakeable. Except that they're empty too..." ?
There may be a place for apparent paradox somewhere far along the path, but what about the targets that are perfectly reasonable, not confusing in the slightest, and within reach right now? How many here have perfected the brahmaviharas? How many people here have perfected the paramis? Why are people drawn to questions that lead nowhere, questions that were specifically rejected by the Buddha in the traditional form (answering neither true, nor false, nor both, nor neither) when there are so many real, skillful qualities yet to be developed?
Does it seem like someone accomplished in viriya (effort) would talk about nothingness? Does it seem like a monk exercising the four exertions ("There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for ... [the four exertions] ...") at the same time thinks that all paths are empty?
To me the Theravada tradition is a sanctuary within Buddhism where things are allowed to make sense, where meaningful work is allowed to be done, and where we're allowed to take real reality as the working hypothetical basis for our practices.
I think emptiness falls into the class of ideas that are (intentionally?) confusing enough to sound "deep" and therefore to be lumped in with Buddhism.
I never see the Buddha take a position on metaphysical matters like this. If you read the suttas do you seriously think that the same Buddha would say something to substantiate "In terms of not-self and emptiness, I'm unshakeable. Except that they're empty too..." ?
There may be a place for apparent paradox somewhere far along the path, but what about the targets that are perfectly reasonable, not confusing in the slightest, and within reach right now? How many here have perfected the brahmaviharas? How many people here have perfected the paramis? Why are people drawn to questions that lead nowhere, questions that were specifically rejected by the Buddha in the traditional form (answering neither true, nor false, nor both, nor neither) when there are so many real, skillful qualities yet to be developed?
Does it seem like someone accomplished in viriya (effort) would talk about nothingness? Does it seem like a monk exercising the four exertions ("There is the case where a monk generates desire, endeavors, activates persistence, upholds & exerts his intent for ... [the four exertions] ...") at the same time thinks that all paths are empty?
To me the Theravada tradition is a sanctuary within Buddhism where things are allowed to make sense, where meaningful work is allowed to be done, and where we're allowed to take real reality as the working hypothetical basis for our practices.
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Hi Cafael
metta
Ben
The idea that there were 'many ways up the mountain' is not new and was something that the Buddha categorically refuted.Cafael Dust wrote:If these things are true, there must indeed be many ways up the mountain, because all ways are empty.
As the Bodhisatta, Gotama practiced the various spiritual paths on offer in Northern India (MN 12) and had attained the seventh and eighth jhanas under the tutelage of Alara Kalama and Ramaputra.Bhikkhus, this is the direct path* for the purification of beings, for the surmounting of sorrow and lamentation, for the disappearance of pain and grief, for the attainment of the true way, for the realization of Nibbana - namely, the four foundations of mindfulness.
What are the four? Here, bhikkhus, a bhikkhu abides contemplating the body as a body, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating feelings as feelings, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating mind as mind, ardent, fully aware and mindful, having put away covetousness and grief for the world. He abides contemplating mind-objects as mind-objects, ardent, fully aware, and mindful, having put awaay covetousness and grief for the world.
* The Pali reads Ekayano ayam bhikkhave maggo and virtually all translators understand this as a statement upholding satipatthana as an exclusive path. Thus Ven Soma renders it: "This is the only way, O Bhikkhus", and Ven Nyanaponika: "This is the sole way, monks" Nm however points out that ekayana maggo a MN12.37-42 has the unambiguous contextual meaning of "a path that goes in one way only," and so he renders the phrase in this passage to. The expression used here, "the direct path," is an attempt to preserve this meaning in a more streamlined phrasing. MA explains ekayana magga
as a single path, not a divided path; a way that has to be walked by oneself alone.
-- MN10, Satipatthana Sutta
Having found these attainments to be deficient, Gotama set out on his own and rediscovered the Dhamma and became a Sammasambuddha, fully enlightened by his own efforts. Apart from the attainment and teachings of previous Buddhas, Gotama's attainment and teaching is unique to the world. No other teacher has ever provided a path, that when practiced, that leads one from dukkha to bodhi.Thus Alara Kalama, my teacher, placed me, his pupil, on an equal footing with himself and awarded me the highest honour. But it occured to me, 'This Dhamma does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana, but only to reappearance in the base of nothingness. Not being satisfied with that Dhamma, disappointed with it, I left...
Thus Uddaka Ramaputta, my companion in the holy life, placed me in a position of a teacher and accorded me the highest honour...'This Dhamma does not lead to disenchantment, to dispassion, to cessation, to peace, to direct knowledge, to enlightenment, to Nibbana, but only to reappearance in the base of nothingness. Not being satisfied with that Dhamma, disappointed with it, I left...
-- MN26
metta
Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- tiltbillings
- Posts: 23046
- Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:25 am
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Ah, well, then there is no such thing as really killing someone; it is all empty. There is no such things rape; it is all empty, have no greater or lesser value as motivation and as an action than compassion and love - that is, following your line of thought. It would seem you have no idea what emptiness is either as a teaching or as an experience. You have made the classic emptiness blunder.Cafael Dust wrote:Tilt:
There is no such thing as Buddhism, there are just sounds that are perceived as sounding like 'Buddhism' and 'Buddha', people sitting cross legged on the floor and so on, even these can be broken down and shown to be empty, even concepts like 'sound', so how can something that is intrinsically empty of self nature, of essence, make claims of being the only path to enlightenment? How can Buddhists say on one hand 'there is no path' and on the other 'this is the only path'. It's ridiculous.
>> Do you see a man wise [enlightened/ariya] in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him.<< -- Proverbs 26:12
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.
“Of course it is happening inside your head, Harry, but why on earth should that mean that it is not real?” HPatDH p.723
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
As far as I know "emptiness" (suññatā) refers exclusively to "not being or containing a self" with respect to anattā.
Which doesn't mean this or that path is equally appropriate to attain enlightenment because of their "emptiness", it means neither this nor that is a self! Neither this nor that is mine, I am not this nor that!
More general: everyone has to see that everything is void of him or her! This or that is void of my-self!
best wishes, acinteyyo
Which doesn't mean this or that path is equally appropriate to attain enlightenment because of their "emptiness", it means neither this nor that is a self! Neither this nor that is mine, I am not this nor that!
More general: everyone has to see that everything is void of him or her! This or that is void of my-self!
It does not mean the world is empty because it is empty of every content, substance or meaning!SN35.85 wrote:"Empty is the world ... because it is empty of a self and anything belonging to a self"
best wishes, acinteyyo
Thag 1.20. Ajita - I do not fear death; nor do I long for life. I’ll lay down this body, aware and mindful.
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Nice post acinteyyo!
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road
Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725
Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global Relief • UNHCR
e: [email protected]..
-
- Posts: 194
- Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2009 2:55 pm
Re: "Luminous mind" was Question Regarding God and Agnosticism?
Manapa:
Ben: so what is the difference that makes Buddha's path exclusive? And what of Zen, based as it is on the flower sermon and just-sitting? Are its practitioners of a simple way only at the 7th or 8th Jhanas? I have never found anything in the Buddhist path that appears to me unique, I have only found better presentation than most other paths. It seems that Buddha said that the seventh Jhana led to a long life in bliss, but afterwards samsara continued. What is the difference between his path and the path of the seventh Jhana? In my experience meditation doesn't 'stop' at any place, there is no volition in it, it just happens.
You have definitely got my ear though .
yuuki:
Karma Dondrup Tashi:
You could say that conventionally speaking, Buddhism just happens to be the only path, despite being empty and lacking a special essence, in the same way that America just happens to have the only Superbowl, though America lacks an essence which specially qualifies it to have a Superbowl, but I would ask 'how on earth can you know that?' and you would probably answer 'because it says so in the scriptures' and I would at that point roll my eyes and ask 'but doesn't it say that in all the other religions' holy books?'please don't confuse ultimate with conventional reality.
Ben: so what is the difference that makes Buddha's path exclusive? And what of Zen, based as it is on the flower sermon and just-sitting? Are its practitioners of a simple way only at the 7th or 8th Jhanas? I have never found anything in the Buddhist path that appears to me unique, I have only found better presentation than most other paths. It seems that Buddha said that the seventh Jhana led to a long life in bliss, but afterwards samsara continued. What is the difference between his path and the path of the seventh Jhana? In my experience meditation doesn't 'stop' at any place, there is no volition in it, it just happens.
You have definitely got my ear though .
yuuki:
To hide inside a box in a burning house.To me the Theravada tradition is a sanctuary within Buddhism where things are allowed to make sense, where meaningful work is allowed to be done, and where we're allowed to take real reality as the working hypothetical basis for our practices.
Karma Dondrup Tashi:
Samsara goes nowhere, ego goes nowhere, desire, logic, thought, ignorance, hatred, fear... all go nowhere. All paths that follow nibbana lead up the mountain. But you need to get a grasp on nibbana that is more than conceptual, one that is as deep and familiar as a lover's touch. You have to recognise that nibbana is not a kind of happiness, it is the foundation for all happiness, all the joy you have ever experienced, and when understood as the ground of being it has an inexorable effect on that being, dragging one up the mountain through gullies and thickets and snow, scraping the ego across rocks, slicking it over glaciers and casting it down ravines to trawl it back ragged up along the path, with no care except for the journey at hand. That is practice. That is what lies before us.The same way that someone can say on the one hand we are all "going nowhere" and on the other that "all paths ascend the same mountain".
I see enlightenment as very easy. It's so easy, you couldn't stop it if you wanted to.If that was the point enlightenment would be very easy, no?
"Going nowhere" and "going somewhere" are equally empty.
Last edited by Cafael Dust on Tue Dec 29, 2009 11:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Not twice, not three times, not once,
the wheel is turning.
the wheel is turning.