Throw Out Buddhist Philosophy / Phenomenology / Psychology

[Astus]

Throw away philosophical jibberish and your problem will be solved.

That is the "throw away philosophy" philosophy. Doesn't lead far, or anywhere for that matter.

[LastLegend]

Throw away philosophical jibberish and your problem will be solved.

That is the "throw away philosophy" philosophy. Doesn't lead far, or anywhere for that matter.

Anders,

Good point.

Throw away that philosophy too and all philosophies. And where are you trying to go exactly? You better walk there if you want to go there, or you can sit here and talk about how you will walk there and how it feels to be there.

[Mr. G]

Throw away that philosophy too and all philosophies.

Should we also throw out the philosophy of throwing out philosophies?

[LastLegend]

Throw away that philosophy too and all philosophies.

Should we also throw out the philosophy of throwing out philosophies?

Throw out this sentence I am typing right now also.

[Jikan]

What is left behind after throwing it all away?


(I mean this as a real question, not a rhetorical one)

[plwk]

What is left behind after throwing it all away?

Just this!

[devilyoudont]

Throw out this sentence I am typing right now also.

Indeed, but are you willing to renounce it to the extent of becoming a philosopher for the sake of all sentient beings, or will you idealize this into an anti-philosophical bias that hinders skillful action? If you renounce the statement but not its purport, what does it accomplish to stop using specific words that characterize your intention? Does one stop being drunk because one is too inebriated to recall the word "drunk"? This is the defining characteristic of idealism, pushing an arbitrary grouping of attributes so far into the background that one ultimately insists that no justification is necessary to posit a mutual association. As in, don't say "no philosophy", just do no philosophy because "no philosophy" goes without saying, unlike "no eating" and "no breathing". Why? A study of philosophy helps raise awareness of these pitfalls.

I use a kind of mahamudra view where, as I understand it, nothing is "thrown out", just recognized. Throwing out can be as symbolic of emptiness as any other phenomenon, so throwing stuff out can also result from cognitive reification. After all, what is there to be rejected? When it's skillful, do philosophy, and do it well, with full recognition of no philosophy, no philosopher.

Please correct my misconceptions.

[LastLegend]

Throw out this sentence I am typing right now also.

Indeed, but are you willing to renounce it to the extent of becoming a philosopher for the sake of all sentient beings, or will you idealize this into an anti-philosophical bias that hinders skillful action? If you renounce the statement but not its purport, what does it accomplish to stop using specific words that characterize your intention? Does one stop being drunk because one is too inebriated to recall the word "drunk"? This is the defining characteristic of idealism, pushing an arbitrary grouping of attributes so far into the background that one ultimately insists that no justification is necessary to posit a mutual association. As in, don't say "no philosophy", just do no philosophy because "no philosophy" goes without saying, unlike "no eating" and "no breathing". Why? A study of philosophy helps raise awareness of these pitfalls.

I use a kind of mahamudra view where, as I understand it, nothing is "thrown out", just recognized. Throwing out can be as symbolic of emptiness as any other phenomenon, so throwing stuff out can also result from cognitive reification. After all, what is there to be rejected? When it's skillful, do philosophy, and do it well, with full recognition of no philosophy, no philosopher.

Please correct my misconceptions.

Yes I am a philosopher in this thread.

[Fu Ri Shin]

As I see it, there is complete validity in throwing out philosophy when approaching the Buddha Dharma. I can't say there's anything truly incorrect in saying that the doing away is still a philosophical choice, but it seems strange to assert that the practical approach will lead nowhere. Is there some backing for the OP?

Moreover, I'm not sure I understand the lumping of phenomenology and psychology with philosophy.

[devilyoudont]

Yes I am a philosopher in this thread.

Yes, an idealist to be specific. So, philosopher, why practice "no philosophy" without the words, but not literally "no breathing"?

Moreover, I'm not sure I understand the lumping of phenomenology and psychology with philosophy.

In a general sense, phenomenology is the study of phenomena, one branch of philosophy.

[LastLegend]

Yes I am a philosopher in this thread.

Yes, an idealist to be specific. So, philosopher, why practice "no philosophy" without the words, but not literally "no breathing"?

Moreover, I'm not sure I understand the lumping of phenomenology and psychology with philosophy.

In a general sense, phenomenology is the study of phenomena, one branch of philosophy.

Apple

[Fu Ri Shin]

In a general sense, phenomenology is the study of phenomena, one branch of philosophy.

True, but that doesn't explain why they were lumped together in the OP. LastLegend made a comment about doing away with philosophy, and then phenomenology and psychology were thrown in there as if they had been mentioned. It rather looks like words were put in LL's mouth, and that the subtlety of the comment was overlooked and continues to be.

[devilyoudont]

Apple

It's okay if you don't intend to change your mind. Just don't hide your idealism behind an arbitrary, awareness-eroding "no words" policy.

It rather looks like words were put in LL's mouth

the subtlety of the comment was overlooked and continues to be.

Nope.

[LastLegend]

Apple

It's okay if you don't intend to change your mind. Just don't hide your idealism behind an arbitrary, awareness-eroding "no words" policy.

It rather looks like words were put in LL's mouth

the subtlety of the comment was overlooked and continues to be.

Nope.

You will always have something to say...what do you want to me to do make you happy? You wanted me to be an idealist, and I agreed to be one. But all of this talk does not stop me from reciting NAMO AMITABHA and does not stop me from practicing letting go of attachments (sleeping, eating, pleasures,etc). Does not stop me from looking at and correcting my own mistakes and not looking at others' mistakes.

[devilyoudont]

You will always have something to say...what do you want to me to do make you happy?

My happiness is independent of your actions. My actions arise of their own accord out of that happiness.

You want me to be an idealist

Why would you say that knowing I do not?

But all of this talk does not stop me from reciting NAMO AMITABHA and does not stop me from practicing letting go of attachments (sleeping, eating, pleasures,etc). Does not stop me from looking at and correcting my own mistakes and not looking at others' mistakes.

Good, let's start over. Here's more or less how I understand your philosophy: Practice "no philosophy", but throw out the philosophy of "no philosophy" by fully internalizing the practice. Is my understanding is flawed? If so, all my posts are addressed to mental constructs, and none their contents may be applicable to your position.

[Fu Ri Shin]

the subtlety of the comment was overlooked and continues to be.

Nope.

Okay, we can go about it this way: Yes.

I'll do you one better, though. An explanation: LL created a theory-practice dichotomy which is perfectly legitimate. The Dharma is to be practiced for disengaging the defilements. It's a craft, not unlike carpentry or blacksmithing. Now, carpenters and blacksmiths have techniques, but I doubt they'd ever call them "philosophies".

[LastLegend]

You will always have something to say...what do you want to me to do make you happy?

My happiness is independent of your actions. My actions arise of their own accord out of that happiness.

You want me to be an idealist

Why would you say that knowing I do not?

But all of this talk does not stop me from reciting NAMO AMITABHA and does not stop me from practicing letting go of attachments (sleeping, eating, pleasures,etc). Does not stop me from looking at and correcting my own mistakes and not looking at others' mistakes.

Good, let's start over. Here's more or less how I understand your philosophy: Practice "no philosophy", but throw out the philosophy of "no philosophy" by fully internalizing the practice. Is my understanding is flawed? If so, all my posts are addressed to mental constructs, and none their contents may be applicable to your position.

Here listen to this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kR3bzZHbhY

[devilyoudont]

Here listen to this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kR3bzZHbhY

Thanks, I did. Somewhat New Ageified, but it's all good.

Will that be all?

[devilyoudont]

Look, it's very simple. Do you mean "no philosophy" in the same sense as "no eating" and "no breathing"? If that is the case, there is no disagreement between us and this pretentious dance is completely unnecessary.

[devilyoudont]

Fu Ri Shin: I beg to differ.

All: