Moving from a selfish practice to practice for all

[nknibbs]

Ironically, this sounds like a radical form of dualism to me. Also, this kind of thinking is no better than the anti-intellectual ignorance of a fundamentalist Christian.

Gassho,

Andrew,

Satlah

Hopefully, you are not responding in this way because you are feeling attacked. If you are, I am sorry and I meant no harm in the statement you are replying to. And with respect to that statement I believe you have read too much into it. You mention the idea of the encounter. When Buddha twirled a flower in front of his followers and only Mahakasyapa smiled, Buddha named him as his dharma successor. He did so not because this man grasped the intellectual intricacies better than the others. He reacted authentically to the reality of the situation with embodied wisdom. There was no duality, there was oneness, clarity.

Furthermore, Buddhism is largely about conduct. To embody the philosophy. To react authentically and with compassion to the world around us.

I acknowledge the use of philosophy and enjoy studying Buddhism from that angle but I don’t get bogged down by it. I appreciate your steadfast devotion to the intellect and to practice, my friend. I leave you to your thoughts.

Gassho,
Nick
Sat

[A.J.]

Hopefully, you are not responding in this way because you are feeling attacked. If you are, I am sorry and I meant no harm in the statement you are replying to. And with respect to that statement I believe you have read too much into it. You mention the idea of the encounter. When Buddha twirled a flower in front of his followers and only Mahakasyapa smiled, Buddha named him as his dharma successor. He did so not because this man grasped the intellectual intricacies better than the others. He reacted authentically to the reality of the situation with embodied wisdom. There was no duality, there was oneness, clarity.

Furthermore, Buddhism is largely about conduct. To embody the philosophy. To react authentically and with compassion to the world around us.

I acknowledge the use of philosophy and enjoy studying Buddhism from that angle but I don’t get bogged down by it. I appreciate your steadfast devotion to the intellect and to practice, my friend. I leave you to your thoughts.

Gassho,
Nick
Sat

Never felt attacked at any point. Just stating my opinion on Buddhist anti-intellectualism point-blank. And keeping to three sentences.

Gassho,

Andrew,

Satlah

[Risho]

....
When Buddha twirled a flower in front of his followers and only Mahakasyapa smiled, Buddha named him as his dharma successor. He did so not because this man grasped the intellectual intricacies better than the others. He reacted authentically to the reality of the situation with embodied wisdom. There was no duality, there was oneness, clarity.
...,,
Gassho,
Nick
Sat

This is a total sidetopic but an interesting one; that story, while very romantic, may be a big ruse; in fact, it may be more political in nature; apparently Mahakyasapa had quite a large following; if you haven’t read it, check out Stephen Batchelor’s “After Buddhism”. I have a feeling dharma transmission is sometimes more about a teaching or way to keep the dharma alive rather than about the individual receiving what they already have: Hui Neng (6th patriarch) may be another example of this.

gassho

rish
-st

[Kokuu]

The deeper you go into the philosophy, the further you can find yourself from practice (though not always of course).

I think Nick makes a good point here, and clarifies by saying "not always so".

While we do not want to endorse anti-intellectual Zen, which sadly I have seen too much, as if Dōgen and other teachers didn't leave us a virtual Mount Sumeru of written teachings, we also do not want to encourage over-intellectualising either. There is a time to study and discuss and a time to sit.


As far as Chögyam Trugpa goes, I sometimes practice with a sangha that is led by one of Trungpa's students and, in my opinion, Trungpa left us with some of the clearest and most insightful writing on practice in the last hundred years of Buddhism. However, he clearly violated many precepts and his "Crazy Wisdom" was not just for the benefit of others. But as I say he gave us some great written teachings and several excellent students such as Pema Chödrön and Reggie Ray. But, none of that excuses his behaviour and harm.

This short piece summarises some of his life: https://boulderbuddhistscam.wordpres...ogyam-trungpa/


Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[nknibbs]

This is a total sidetopic but an interesting one; that story, while very romantic, may be a big ruse; in fact, it may be more political in nature; apparently Mahakyasapa had quite a large following; if you haven’t read it, check out Stephen Batchelor’s “After Buddhism”. I have a feeling dharma transmission is sometimes more about a teaching or way to keep the dharma alive rather than about the individual receiving what they already have: Hui Neng (6th patriarch) may be another example of this.

gassho

rish
-st

Risho,

I am aware of that aspect to the story but I will definitely check out the text you mentioned!

Though a ruse, it can still be a rose of a teaching. Isn’t everything a bit of a ruse?

Gassho,
Nick

SatLah

PS: I always love a good reading recommendation!

[Risho]

Though a ruse, it can still be a rose of a teaching. Isn’t everything a bit of a ruse?

yes, I think that’s true! hahahaha

[Kokuu]

apparently Mahakyasapa had quite a large following

Hui Neng (6th patriarch) may be another example of this.

Mahākāśyapa was clearly an important figure in early Buddhism, and is believed to have led the early sangha following the Buddha's death. However, many scholars feel that his qualities were considerably embellished in later records in order to instill within him the ideal qualities of Buddhism and the sangha itself. I imagine this would have been necessary to show that there were individuals of a comparable stature to the Buddha able to continue the tradition.

In Ch'an and Zen, the story of the holding up the flower is likely to be apocryphal but displays something important about about tradition and way of teaching which is, to my mind, more important that whether it is literally true or not.

This is also the case with the Sixth Patriarch, whose story in the Platform Sutra now seems to be near total hagiography rather than biography, written by one of his students in order to cement the place of his lineage as the true line of Zen against that of the 'Northern School'.

In the development of Ch'an (Zen) in China, there were many different Buddhist schools vying against each other for position so being able to establish a clear lineage dating back to the Buddha was important, and also establishing the authenticity of your own lineage.

However, I do think that dharma transmission is not a bad way of authorising new teachers and providing some degree of legitimacy, even if we know that can be abused sometimes. It also is, to me, a very lovely symbolic way of a teacher recognising the fact that you have grasped the great matter of life and death.

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[Risho]

Damn Kokuu - that was awesome thank you! I absolutely didn't want to disparage the idea of dharma transmission; I'm just trying to be terse (hint, hint ) it is an important facet and hopefully provides some modicum of QA against bad teachers; no system is infallible but still.

Gassho

Risho
-stlah

[Kokuu]

I'm just trying to be terse (hint, hint )

Ha! Yes, I totally acknowledge my failure on that front!

Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

[nknibbs]

Kokuu and Risho— wonderful back and forth between you, much knowledge gained.

Sticking to 3 lines and saying that one feels one needs to say is a tough but humbling experience.

Thank you both,

Gassho,
Nick

SatLah

[Shonin Risa Bear]

Right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right samadhi can be summed up, one might say, as right action, a program of compassionate co-existence, underpinned by the right actions of mindfulness/samadhi.

When I noticed that while I am sitting in "silence" harm toward others seems to be reduced, I began to sit more.

Selfish/not selfish. _()_

gassho
shonin sat today and some lah

[Tairin]

However, I do think that dharma transmission is not a bad way of authorising new teachers and providing some degree of legitimacy, even if we know that can be abused sometimes. It also is, to me, a very lovely symbolic way of a teacher recognising the fact that you have grasped the great matter of life and death.

Dharma Transmission is as close to a teaching certificate as one can get. Personally I don’t care whether Jundo can trace his creds all the way back to Shakyamuni Buddha or not. I do care that he has put in the time and that there is some recognition that he knows what he’s talking about.


Tairin
Sat today and lah

[A.J.]

This is a total sidetopic but an interesting one; that story, while very romantic, may be a big ruse; in fact, it may be more political in nature; apparently Mahakyasapa had quite a large following; if you haven’t read it, check out Stephen Batchelor’s “After Buddhism”. I have a feeling dharma transmission is sometimes more about a teaching or way to keep the dharma alive rather than about the individual receiving what they already have: Hui Neng (6th patriarch) may be another example of this.

gassho

rish
-st

Lot's of scholars think Bodhidharma was legendary as well. With the ancient motivations around such legitimization I tend to take it for granted that official lineages are fabricated when you go back far enough. That's not to say that the stories and writings connected with legendary figures are not of value though.

Gassho,

Andrew,

Satlah

[A.J.]

I think Nick makes a good point here, and clarifies by saying "not always so".

While we do not want to endorse anti-intellectual Zen, which sadly I have seen too much, as if Dōgen and other teachers didn't leave us a virtual Mount Sumeru of written teachings, we also do not want to encourage over-intellectualising either. There is a time to study and discuss and a time to sit.


As far as Chögyam Trugpa goes, I sometimes practice with a sangha that is led by one of Trungpa's students and, in my opinion, Trungpa left us with some of the clearest and most insightful writing on practice in the last hundred years of Buddhism. However, he clearly violated many precepts and his "Crazy Wisdom" was not just for the benefit of others. But as I say he gave us some great written teachings and several excellent students such as Pema Chödrön and Reggie Ray. But, none of that excuses his behaviour and harm.

This short piece summarises some of his life: https://boulderbuddhistscam.wordpres...ogyam-trungpa/


Gassho
Kokuu
-sattoday/lah-

I basically don't trust any anti-intellectual tendencies in religion. I only meant to be clear and terse that it always smells to me like the beginning of a bad recipe. When formally sitting there is no need to be thinking critically all the time but it it is an invaluable tool in the hands of monkeys with the apparatus of thought.

Gassho,

Andrew,

Satlah

[A.J.]

Risho,

I am aware of that aspect to the story but I will definitely check out the text you mentioned!

Though a ruse, it can still be a rose of a teaching. Isn’t everything a bit of a ruse?

Gassho,
Nick

SatLah

PS: I always love a good reading recommendation!

Imo most Buddha stories are a-historical so whatever we may gain from them isn't from their historical veracity or even their pure lack of political motivation.

Gassho,

Andrew,

Satlah