YOU CANNOT POST. OUR WEB HOSTING COMPANY DECIDED TO MOVE THE SERVER TO ANOTHER LOCATION. IN THE MEANTIME, YOU CAN VIEW THIS VERSION WHICH DOES NOT ALLOW POSTING AND WILL NOT SAVE ANYTHING YOU DO ONCE THE OTHER SERVER GOES ONLINE.

What is Wrong with Buddha Nature - Page 10 - Dhamma Wheel

What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths. What can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby daverupa » Thu May 26, 2011 1:46 am


Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Kenshou » Thu May 26, 2011 1:49 am


User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 1:51 am


Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Kenshou » Thu May 26, 2011 1:53 am


User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 1:54 am


User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 1:57 am


User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby daverupa » Thu May 26, 2011 2:01 am


User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 2:07 am


User avatar
daverupa
Posts: 5980
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby daverupa » Thu May 26, 2011 2:16 am


User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 2:18 am


Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Kenshou » Thu May 26, 2011 2:26 am

Focusing on (developing insight into) anatta, as well as the other characteristics is as relevant to realizing nibbana as contemplating craving, clinging and paticcasamuppada.

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 2:31 am


Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Kenshou » Thu May 26, 2011 2:39 am

Oh, well it sounded like it.

Is it that you're arguing against merely thinking about these things as opposed to developing more experiential insight? I wouldn't disagree with that. Though coarser contemplation is probably going to be a natural prerequisite. But of course, isn't sufficient.

User avatar
beeblebrox
Posts: 939
Joined: Thu Dec 31, 2009 10:41 pm

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby beeblebrox » Thu May 26, 2011 2:43 am


alan
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby alan » Thu May 26, 2011 3:56 am

Why is that appropriate?
How can Dogen ever be relevant in a Therevada discussion?

User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby ground » Thu May 26, 2011 4:06 am


Reductor
Posts: 1381
Joined: Sat Sep 12, 2009 6:52 am
Location: Alberta, Canada

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Reductor » Thu May 26, 2011 4:24 am

If I may interject.

In the sutta references, by beeblebrox, ancientbuddhism and kenshou, above anatta comes after contemplation of anicca. To paraphrase one: "the aggregates are anicca, what is anicca is dukkha and what is anicca and dukha is anatta".

And:

"attending to the perception of inconstantcy the perception of anatta will be established"

In the above case the perception of anatta is seen to be born from the proper contemplation of the other characteristics. This is of course fine and proper, and the perception of anatta that results this way is the fruit of insight and dispassion toward the aggregates.

However, the contemplation of anatta directly seems to be taking the stick from the wrong end. Doing such it might seem unclear just WHY something is not self. And if the proper answer, anicca, has not been well penetrated before hand then this contemplation of anatta amounts to an assertion of fact in absence of actual knowledge. Instead it becomes an view that denies such and such to be true, itself being unproven. And this kind of specious view making is not conducive to release, so far as I can tell.

So is the intentional labeling "Not self", "Not self", "Not self" a good practice in itself? I don't think it is, as such a label may be an unintentional reinforcement of a ontological position unproven by the persons experience. Whereas the contemplation of anicca and dukkha in the aggregates naturally leads to dispassion for all views of self: one no longer feels compelled by craving to identify with any of them as a self.

So, dispassion toward the aggregates leading to non identification with them as 'self' vs. an unfounded assertion that 'there is no self'.

I hope the distinction is not to subtle.

EDIT: made sure I said what I meant. Lol.

alan
Posts: 2812
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:14 am
Location: Miramar beach, Fl.

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby alan » Thu May 26, 2011 4:35 am

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Kenshou
Posts: 1030
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:03 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby Kenshou » Thu May 26, 2011 4:41 am


User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: What is Wrong with Buddha Nature

Postby ground » Thu May 26, 2011 4:49 am



Return to “Connections to Other Paths”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests

Google Saffron, Theravada Search Engine