If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
I have given up on trying to intellectualize the Dharma. I'm certainly not scholarly when it comes to discussions such as this but do enjoy reading everyone's questions and responses. Which came first, the Buddha or the Bodhisattva? . Jundo, you have a wonderful knack to boil these questions down to their essence so simple Zen Buddhists like myself can make sense of it all.
Gassho, Shawn.
I feel that the true meaning of (Big B) "Buddha" and "Bodhisattva" is not to be approached with a philosopher's intellectual scalpel, but with a poet's soft heart. Buddhist philosophers of old may have debated and refined their definitions, much as a Western philosopher might try to define "God" or "the Good" ... or a physicist might try to come up with the exact equation capturing some physical property. It is not like that.
Maybe it would take the sensibilities of a Walt Whitman to sing of the Bodhisattva (from "Song of Myself") ...
I know I have the best of time and space -- and that I was never measured, and
never will be measured
I tramp a perpetual journey,
My signs are a rain-proof coat and good shoes and a staff cut from the woods;
No friend of mine takes his ease in my chair,
I have no chair, nor church nor philosophy;
I lead no man to a dinner-table or library or exchange,
But each man and each woman of you I lead upon a knoll,
My left hand hooks you round the waist,
My right hand points to landscapes of continents, and a plain public road.
Not I, not any one else can travel that road for you,
You must travel it yourself
It is not far . . . . it is within reach,
Perhaps you have been on it since you were born, and did not know,
Perhaps it is every where on water and on land.
Shoulder your duds, and I will mine, and let us hasten forth;
Wonderful cities and free nations we shall fetch as we go.
If you tire, give me both burdens, and rest the chuff of your hand on my hip,
And in due time you shall repay the same service to me;
For after we start we never lie by again.
This day before dawn I ascended a hill and looked at the crowded heaven,
And I said to my spirit, When we become the enfolders of those orbs and the pleasure
and knowledge of every thing in them, shall
we be filled and satisfied then?
And my spirit said No, we level that lift to pass and continue beyond.
You are also asking me questions, and I hear you;
I answer that I cannot answer . . . . you must find out for yourself.
Thank you for posting WW, Jundo. I used to carry his little hard back book in my car for years and read it while waiting for various car maintenance. And of course i did leave it once and later discovered that when my next maintenance was needed, oh damn, just a book and replaceable (i think i lost spell check and that is dangerous!). He was quite profound!
In my view, all sentient beings (humans, animals, rocks, trees) are Buddhas from the beginning (what beginning? ), not Buddhas-to-be. And Bodhisattva for me has the two meanings Jundo explains above.
Gassho,
Pontus
Pontus... well done. Not-Buddha-to-be it seems, but the realization of `presences.
The philosopher's scalpel peels off Buddha Nature, and leaves nothing behind. It is the same scalpel that , for me, peeled off Brahman and God, and cause/effect, and causeless cause..etc.... and lead to putting down these ideas, and instead looking into reaching and grasping and dukkha. It was only after practicing dukkha and cessation of dukkha, that the poet's heart has been freed to enjoy (big B) Buddha without becoming trapped by Buddha. It has been freed to enjoy a lot, and it has taken a while.
I feel that the true meaning of (Big B) "Buddha" and "Bodhisattva" is not to be approached with a philosopher's intellectual scalpel, but with a poet's soft heart. Buddhist philosophers of old may have debated and refined their definitions, much as a Western philosopher might try to define "God" or "the Good" ... or a physicist might try to come up with the exact equation capturing some physical property. It is not like that.
If you tire, give me both burdens, and rest the chuff of your hand on my hip,
And in due time you shall repay the same service to me;
For after we start we never lie by again.
I feel that the true meaning of (Big B) "Buddha" and "Bodhisattva" is not to be approached with a philosopher's intellectual scalpel, but with a poet's soft heart. Buddhist philosophers of old may have debated and refined their definitions, much as a Western philosopher might try to define "God" or "the Good" ... or a physicist might try to come up with the exact equation capturing some physical property. It is not like that.
Maybe it would take the sensibilities of a Walt Whitman to sing of the Bodhisattva (from "Song of Myself") ...
I know I have the best of time and space -- and that I was never measured, and
never will be measured
I tramp a perpetual journey,
My signs are a rain-proof coat and good shoes and a staff cut from the woods;
No friend of mine takes his ease in my chair,
I have no chair, nor church nor philosophy;
I lead no man to a dinner-table or library or exchange,
But each man and each woman of you I lead upon a knoll,
My left hand hooks you round the waist,
My right hand points to landscapes of continents, and a plain public road.
Not I, not any one else can travel that road for you,
You must travel it yourself
It is not far . . . . it is within reach,
Perhaps you have been on it since you were born, and did not know,
Perhaps it is every where on water and on land.
Shoulder your duds, and I will mine, and let us hasten forth;
Wonderful cities and free nations we shall fetch as we go.
If you tire, give me both burdens, and rest the chuff of your hand on my hip,
And in due time you shall repay the same service to me;
For after we start we never lie by again.
This day before dawn I ascended a hill and looked at the crowded heaven,
And I said to my spirit, When we become the enfolders of those orbs and the pleasure
and knowledge of every thing in them, shall
we be filled and satisfied then?
And my spirit said No, we level that lift to pass and continue beyond.
You are also asking me questions, and I hear you;
I answer that I cannot answer . . . . you must find out for yourself.
...This statement by Dogen...
"...There are grasses and trees that are like humans and beasts; whether they are sentient or insentient is not clear. Not to mention the trees and rocks, flowers and fruits, hot and cold waters of the transcendents — though when we see them we have no doubts, when we would explain them, is it not difficult?"
Personally, I think the whole argument is a moot point: trees and grasses, wind and water are already Fully and Wholly one with Nature; they have no need to become awakened to the nature that is already theirs. Would a tree have regrets holding it back from seeing reality as it is? Or a fox, for that matter? I think not; man's mind seems to be the only one capable of hiding its true Nature from itself.
Originally posted by Omoi Otoshi
...We couldn't function in our everyday lives without categorizing and labeling things. We do so effortlessly and automatically.
We label things to be able to describe them to others. It is inexplicably tied in with our language and heritage. Doesn't make them good or bad, they just are.
Leave a comment: