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

Re: Question about Mahayana.

Expand Messages
  • thomaslaw03
    Hi Ken H, - T: Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment ... I think the view everything is empty of both
    Message 1 of 158 , Mar 24, 2013
      Hi Ken H,

      -"> T: Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment
      > ...
      > KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist." "

      I think the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was found in the Samyutta sutta (Samyukta sutras). Existence and non-existenceis are linked to the view "everything exists" and "everything does not exist." These views all come from self-attachment, and are regarded as the two extremes (see SN 22.90).

      - "> T: (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199).
      > ...
      > KH: I suspect Choon MK was writing about early Mahayana Buddhism, not early Theravada Buddhism. Some Mahayanists seem to have thrown conditioned dhammas into the definition of "everything." But dhammas were taught exclusively by the Buddha; they were not things that ordinary people held views about. So the Buddha never said the view "dhammas exist" was a wrong view. He said it was a right view. (SN22:94 Flowers: .... "

      The writing is about Early Buddhism (not early Mahayana or early Theravada).

      The notion that seeing and knowing "things" ("everything") as they realy are (= seeing and knowing yourself as you really are) (= dhammas)is the core teachings of Early Buddhism found in Samyutta suttas (Samyukta sutras).

      Thomas

      --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" <kenhowardau@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Thomas (and Lukas),
      >
      > ---
      > > T: I consider this: Everything exists, this is one extreme. Everything does not exist, this is the other extreme.
      > ---
      >
      > KH: Lucas has shown how the Buddha considered those views. But it was very different from the way you have considered them. You wrote:
      >
      > -----
      > T: Dhammas are empty of both existence and non-existence, which all come from self-attachment
      > -----
      >
      > KH: We can see from Lukas's quote that the view "everything is empty of both existence and non-existence" was not the sort of view held by the Buddha. It was just as wrong as "everything exists" or "everything does not exist."
      >
      > ---------
      > > T: (Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism, pp. 60-66, 92-97, 192-199).
      > ---------
      >
      > KH: I suspect Choon MK was writing about early Mahayana Buddhism, not early Theravada Buddhism. Some Mahayanists seem to have thrown conditioned dhammas into the definition of "everything." But dhammas were taught exclusively by the Buddha; they were not things that ordinary people held views about. So the Buddha never said the view "dhammas exist" was a wrong view. He said it was a right view. (SN22:94 Flowers:
      >
      > "And what is it, bhikkhus, that the wise in the world agree upon as
      > existing, of which I too say that it exists? Form that is impermanent,
      > suffering, and subject to change: this the wise in the world agree upon as existing, and I too say that it exists. Feeling ...)
      >
      > 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, 2013
        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.