Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Question about Mahayana.

Expand Messages
  • Ken H
    Hi Pt (Azita and Howard), ... KH: You will remember Azita s contribution to this thread, reminding us that panna must know the difference between nama and
    Message 1 of 158 , Mar 6, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Pt (Azita and Howard),

      -------
      > Pt: How panna actually knows these things, and whether the description of that knowing is more adequately put as something "real" or something "unreal", who knows?
      -------

      KH: You will remember Azita's contribution to this thread, reminding us that panna must know the difference between nama and rupa. If there is ultimately no nama and no rupa – if there is ultimately just something called change – then how can panna even begin to know that difference?

      ------------
      > Pt: Even in the suttas both descriptions are used - you often cite the Flowers sutta that uses "real" descriptions, Howard often cites that other sutta that uses the "unreal" description. So can both be used, or is it about the context, or is it down to translation, or we're just overthinking things? etc. I don't know.
      -----------

      KH: My usual response to Howard's "unreal" quote is to suggest that conditioned dhammas are unreal in the sense of "untrue" or "untrustworthy" etc. In the absence of panna they appear to be something that they are not. So they are unreal in that sense.

      However, I don't remember the other responses. So I don't remember the official, ancient-commentarial, explanation.

      Ken H
    • Robert E
      Hi Sarah. ... I continue to think this is a very zen approach to Dhamma - I think if you called it zen you d probably convert a bunch of Mahayanists, as it
      Message 158 of 158 , Apr 27 10:48 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hi Sarah.

        --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "sarah" <sarahprocterabbott@...> wrote:

        > S: Better to just talk about realities, paramattha dhammas that can be understood now. I think this is more productive than discussions about formal meditation.
        >
        > This morning at breakfast, another swimmer started asking me about retreats and meditation because of stress issues. I just started talking about 'now', about seeing now, hearing now, 'meditation' now, even in the noisy cafe. Otherwise, there's always a thinking about another time, another place, never any understanding or awareness now. She appreciated it!

        I continue to think this is a very "zen" approach to Dhamma - I think if you called it "zen" you'd probably convert a bunch of Mahayanists, as it is very appealing, and I agree really is the heart of becoming aware, which can only happen at this moment now.

        A favorite quote of mine is sort of analogous in its simplicity, from the avant-garde saxaphonist/bass clarinetist Eric Dolphy, now deceased: "Music, after it's over, it's gone in the air - you can never capture it again."

        Best,
        Rob E.

        - - - - - - - - - - - -
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.