Dharma Wheel

A Buddhist discussion forum on Mahayana and Vajrayana Buddhism
It is currently Tue Dec 23, 2014 1:21 am

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Forum rules


Please click here to view the forum rules



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 7:40 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 5:04 pm
Posts: 5771
I'm referring to this item, from 1894:

http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/btg/index.htm

I didn't think many people accepted this as representative of the teachings of Shakyamuni Buddha except in the most limited and, well, fictional way (much like Hesse's novel _Siddhartha_), until today: in a conversation by email, an earnest inquirer alluded to it and quoted a passage at length. At first this seemed totally non sequitur, and in a way refreshing (at least it wasn't Ken Wilber or Andrew Cohen, yes?). So I appreciated the gesture. This:

Quote:
There is self and there is truth. Where self is, truth is not. Where truth is, self is not. Self is the fleeting error of samsara; it is individual separateness and that egotism which begets envy and hatred. Self is the yearning for pleasure and the lust after vanity. Truth is the correct comprehension of things; it is the permanent and everlasting, the real in all existence, the bliss of righteousness.


I'm wondering: has anyone here even read this book? I hadn't thought about it in many years. Thoughts on the book, on its historical impact, its present circulation as it were? I think being free online means it gets a second life in Second Life, for what it's worth.

_________________
Need help getting on retreat? Want to support others in practice? Pay the Dana for Dharma forum a visit...

viewtopic.php?f=114&t=13727


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon May 16, 2011 8:29 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 19, 2011 3:46 pm
Posts: 2445
Location: Washington DC
When we are deluded, there are two dharmas just like good versus evil, likes versus dislikes, ugly versus beautiful, self versus truth, etc. When are no longer deluded and have realized that Buddhism is all about detachment, then we will no longer use attachments to reach detachment. It is like the mentality is very far way but it could be very closed if we are able to see it. Like using arrogance to approach detachment, this is not the correct method. We have to recognize that arrogance is what we need to detach from.

Thanks for listening to rant.

_________________
NAMO AMITABHA
NAM MO A DI DA PHAT (VIETNAMESE)
NAMO AMITUOFO (CHINESE)

Linjii
―Listen! Those of you who devote yourselves to the Dharma
must not be afraid of losing your bodies and your lives―


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2011 12:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 11:44 am
Posts: 1577
Sravasti Dhammika writes :" Paul Carus, a pioneer of Buddhism in the West wrote this is 1894. It imitates the style of the King Jasmes Version but there is nothing wrong with that and its sentiments are genuine and reverential, I have modified it just a bit: http://sdhammika.blogspot.com/2009_06_01_archive.html "

_________________
svaha


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 3 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: heart and 9 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group