How smart do you have to be to get it?

[seeker242]

It depends on what exactly you mean by "smart". "Low IQ" just isn't a good enough definition to answer the question. If you have two people with an IQ of 80 and one thinks it's ok to kill other living beings and the other person refrains from doing that because it's unethical, the second person would be smarter than the first. Even though they have the same IQ. The first person is not smart enough to get it, while the second person might be.

[relay]

What is meant by "get it?"
Is it something abstract or is it simplistic?
Is it a matter of analyzing or a matter of acceptance?
How much of the practice involves intellectual activity? Not on a personal level where someone's tendencies are just that, but in the broader general sense.
I think that there is a certain level of focus (ability to follow instruction) needed which may be the first step towards "getting it" and where that is not possible and therefore guidance is not possible, there may be a limit. But, unless we are giving the "getting it" a value or a goal (apex), then we are simply discussing a process which is different for all based on many variables and factors. In fact, I think there may be those who, while not very functional in a social sense and without any premonition or cognizance, already got "it"... look at a child's eyes when she first sees the ocean or a mountain. Sadly, most of get smart build our own mountains and go about loosing "it."

“For things to reveal themselves to us, we need to be ready to abandon our views about them.”
~ Thich Nhat Hanh

peace,
gabe

[undefineable]

How does a statement hold anything?

I don't know what depths you refer to.

I wasn't using the words I've highlighted metaphorically, let alone literally. {I kinda regret 'coming out' autistic on this forum } - I was just making use of the conventions of language.

Consciousness grasps itself.

Or not - in the case of enlightened beings?

The conceiver and the conceived ... one or two? Subjectively and objectively ... one or two?

One, I guess - I only intuit that 'answer' somewhere in the gaps between conscious thoughts. I trust it won't be exactly the same for an enlightened being, and that's before we even start saying 'not neither one nor two' etc. etc..

The will for enlightenment usually comes from understanding suffering and its causes.

Well yeah; the central underlying cause and theme of suffering seems to be the idea that everything must refer back to some 'thing' called 'me'. Having gathered that much on reflection (rather than by calculation, lol), the will to 'be free of self' can appear-??

[Azidonis]

The RInpoche's video is a good one. "Don't look too far."

There are some who believe that logic, reason, and science are pathways to enlightenment. They don't realize that they are only reinforcing their frameworks.

Enlightenment is not part of any framework, nor can it be contained within a framework. Seeking to reinforce the frameworks only serves to reinforce the frameworks.

Seeking within, and eventually being released from the need from the frameworks, is part of the true path, in my opinion.

[gregkavarnos]

There are some who believe that logic, reason, and science are pathways to enlightenment.

Of course they are. Where has the Buddha taught anything to the contrary?

[Azidonis]

There are some who believe that logic, reason, and science are pathways to enlightenment.

Of course they are. Where has the Buddha taught anything to the contrary?

They are useful, but as this thread shows, not necessary. The local village bumpkin can awaken just like the university man with the PhD.

Edit: I should have written, "There are some who believe that logic, reason, and science are [the only] pathways to enlightenment." Sorry for the lack of clarity.

[gregkavarnos]

Well now, [with the addition] I will have to agree with you 100%!

[Azidonis]

Well now, [with the addition] I will have to agree with you 100%!

Apologies again.

[pemachophel]

Yudron

"I can't remember where I read it, but it is sometimes said in Mahayoga that the long complicated sadhanas are for people of the lowest capacity, those who are intellectuals and need something to think about."

Just a couple of weeks ago, Tsewang Sithar Rinpoche agreed that the long, complicated sadhanas are for those with less capacity and that shorter, more condensed sadhanas are for those with high capacity. However, His definition of capacity was somewhat different. My understanding of what He said was that, the more advanced a practitioner, the more practiced and skillful and the easier and quicker it is to do the visualizations. He didn't say anything about intellectuals. My guess is that He would take it as a given that those who are more practiced have less of a monkey mind through that practice. I don't see this as in any way a contradiction to what you said but an amplification/alternate POV.

[gregkavarnos]

Normally you do the long version until you "get" it and then switch to the short version to "maintain" it.

A good doctor, for example, does not need to read the entire microbiology manual every time they have to deal with an infection. They just go straight to the heart of the matter.

[Konchog1]

I read this today. It's somewhat relevant to this thread.

Do not use your own incapacity as a reason to repudiate what you cannot actually engage in or turn away from. Rather, think with anticipation, "When will I practice these teachings by actually doing what should be done and turning away from what should not be done?" Work at the causes for such practice--accumulating the collections, clearing away obscurations, and making aspirational prayers. Before long your mental power will become greater and greater, and you will be able to practice all of the teachings that you were previously unable to practice.

-Lam Rim Chen Mo eng v01 pg 49 tib pg 15

[windsweptliberty]

Yes!

[Sara H]

How smart do you have to be to be enlightened? Can even a stupid person of low iq get it, and is it easier or harder for them?
Also i read about the different "capacites" of different people. Do people of higher capacity need extra help? Because reading various buddhist bulletin boards, it seems that the ones that talk the most about capacity have the more complicated practices.

You don't have to be smart at all.

Enlightenment is not dependent upon education, or intellectual capacity.

all you have to do is make a practice to sit still, withdraw within, and reflect upon yourself. (And staring at a wall helps. ; )

The Buddha used a Boddhi tree, but a wall works too.
Take refuge in the Buddha, Dharma and Sangha.
If you do regular practice, Enlightenment will sooner or later happen naturally on it's own.

In Gassho,

Sara H

[muni]

When I come full of excitement with a new delivery of clevernesses, is the teaching I recieve: I have no clevernesses to say.

No wisdom ever "come" from ego/ dual habits.

[gregkavarnos]

... and reflect upon yourself.

Which self exactly does one reflect upon?

[Azidonis]

... and reflect upon yourself.

Which self exactly does one reflect upon?

Exactly! It's like holding a mirror up to a mirror, and saying, "Oh my, so many reflections! So many things I can be! So many things I am!"

When the mirror breaks, what is behind it?