When the Monks Met the Muslims

Casual conversation between friends. Anything goes (almost).
Locked
tkp67
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 »

muni wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 8:32 am
tkp67 wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 1:02 am Even if everything outside of the state of the teachings that lead to bodhi are simply understood to clinging what is it they are clinging to? As I understand it their mind is clinging on to existence because the ego like us fears death and when someone with that mental framework tends to cling harder in light of that fear.

How one untangles those minds seems to require (this might be me clinging to intellectualizing) dialog about what is in them and I am trying hard to avoid that trespass but I think I made the point whilst avoiding any offence.

Hopefully, at least.

I will say what attracted me was the minds behind the people who practiced before me, they seemed to carry themselves in a way that I desired to conform do once I had the chance to observe it.
Hello :namaste: ,

You say: "Even if everything outside of the state of the teachings that lead to bodhi are simply understood to clinging what is it they are clinging to?"

Please, what is out of the state of Bodhi?

How can there be clinging, other than by idea of being there phenomena-appearances which need to be avoided or hold on, phenomena which are wrong and other right?

When there is anything perceived out of the teaching of the Buddha, can it be the teaching of the Buddha? Since appearances-emptiness are inseparable, what 'we can see in meditation', it is completely impossible there is some thing or some phenomena out.

But possible, there can be a fear that the conventional dharma would be spoiled by other, by believes. Faith in the Buddha's teachings and very much Practice, can take this fear away. May all be blessed.
My understanding of bodhi is that it is Buddhist born (or dharma derived) enlightenment, my own paraphrasing of course.

When I say teachings outside of the state of teachings that lead to bodhi I am saying any thing the mind holds that is not dharma, as I understand it has no discussion value here in context to Buddhism.

In my mind working and in that framework it simplifies everything as either being applicable to dharma or not. This seems to be reasonable for sake of trying to develop a sound understanding without offence (discussing anything specific regarding teachings outside of Buddhism)

Now, through observation, it very much appears to me that the same buddhist truths as divined through enlightenment still remain even under deep and shallow examination of other teachings. This is not meant to abandon personal meaning of my own path or that of others but rather to treat it outside the context of buddhism and to leave that at the door in these discussions. I do lack much of the vernacular to discuss things in gracious terms that everyone is familiar with as traditional but that doesn't mean I haven't considered it both outside any path and how those paths reconcile to Buddhism. Discussing particulars causes problems here and out of respect for this dynamic I conform to it.

It is under this premise that I am simply saying that even if we don't understand other teachings and due to whatever circumstance even if these teachings are considered nothing more than clinging to formations of the mind is there still cause for compassion regardless of the state of one's practice or enlightenment.

See from the premise of simple clinging we have to ask why does the mind do this? of course we can be very particular to cause and effect but that requires detailed examination of foreign teachings and belief and that gives rise to a new set of problems that vary according to practitioner.

That does not mean there isn't a common theme that is underlying for all people that practice anything other then buddhism as far as belief.

Even the most rudimentary and delusional belief is perceived by the holder of that belief to have a benefit. In this light and under the assumption that all belief from other teachings are various and erroneous does that mean the human condition that requires them various or erroneous?

If we regard them at face value as defined here, diverse, erroneous and without benefit does that mean they are not self deluded means to end suffering? and if they are that at absolute face value then isn't it like a person hoping to use concrete as a life preserver?

See as my mind rationalizes it there is no excuse for a lack of compassion except unless we don't posses that compassion for our own like causes and karma which is why I use words like reconciliation.

Personally If I wasn't able to be compassionate to the erroneous and diverse beliefs of man as a cause I don't understand how can I say I understand the purity of mind that is described as bodhi. I would say apparently in this notion I am a minority. I'm ok with that, for me, since the same understanding seems to hold up in both simplistic examination and under verbose and fully manifest understandings of all teachings. This does not imply I am right but I can't find any dialog that says I am wrong.

I personally find amazing value in all the humanities and feel personally anything of real worth to be distilled from them is universally accessible through Buddhist practice but to the same end I don't feel that they have 0 value or can only be seen as pure delusion but if we work in that framework it suits this conversation all the same.
Simon E.
Posts: 7652
Joined: Tue May 15, 2012 11:09 am

Re: When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by Simon E. »

Why not just get a teacher and get on with it.there is no end to verbalisation.Verbalisation can be a way of sorting stuff for ourselves. The act of verbalising makes things clearer to ourselves, and that’s good.
But in the end we need to buckle down and try to process what our teachers are telling us.
First we do this, then we do that.
“You don’t know it. You just know about it. That is not the same thing.”

Chogyam Trungpa Rinpoche to me.
tkp67
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 »

Having experienced transcendence of many life conditions the internal joy born from it doesn't insulate me from the suffering of others it makes me keen to it and I feel so grateful for my own transcendence I feel indebted to those who helped me achieve it to do the same for others.

My own being is no longer of concern to me as far as suffering because my joy is not based on anything external.

This gift I rightly attribute to buddha(s) and this is to whom I feel indebted.

I have been given a life of suffering that even when I share small pieces of it makes people react and recoil when then try to fathom it for their own and because it is at the hands of others it was a great and amazing cause for me.
tkp67
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 »

Simon E. wrote: Tue Jul 16, 2019 11:27 am Why not just get a teacher and get on with it.there is no end to verbalisation.Verbalisation can be a way of sorting stuff for ourselves. The act of verbalising makes things clearer to ourselves, and that’s good.
But in the end we need to buckle down and try to process what our teachers are telling us.
First we do this, then we do that.

Get on with what? The same tradition and methodology? For what purpose? Do you know me outside of my words here to judge my practice as insufficient or under utilizing my capacity? Are you saying there is only one true dharma for me and that you know it specifically?

How does my verbalization within the dictates of the rules here make you feel and why are you projecting just silent transmission for my own benefit when it also seems to be a desire of yours that I remain silent.

I feel you assume I haven't spent much time silent and in meditation or have never had silent conscious transmission between my teacher and myself.

Accordingly if my words are of no benefit to you and that is all you seek I can't change that dynamic no matter how silent I become. I am not acting out of accord for my tradition which is a practice supported here.

If you have some internal attachment to a preconceived notion about me all I can ask is when do you recall me placing it there?

It is a remarkably beautiful morning as I type this, I hope you are enjoying similar circumstance and that this finds you well.
tkp67
Posts: 2133
Joined: Sun May 12, 2019 5:42 am

Re: When the Monks Met the Muslims

Post by tkp67 »

My passion was really evoked on this topic by a talk given by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche on the Lotus Sutra

His commentary regarding how the Lotus Sutra reveals we are all "pure" underneath the formation of thought (I am ordinary human paraphrasing please keep this in mind) really resonated with my understanding of the lotus.

The simple point being that it validated for me that these descriptive and beliefs when used in our minds as identifiers are counter intuitive to the notion of purity and the greater our attachment to the notion because of past experience, understanding, conditions and karma may greatly increase.

So simply put the most rudimentary commonality is that purity.

I really don't understand how challenge stereotypes in our own community isn't critical and important but I am most certainly open to any understanding I am bereft.

Perhaps stereotypical thinking should be a cue for the cushion, not a challenge to it.
Locked

Return to “Lounge”