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

Re: Question about Mahayana.

Expand Messages
  • upasaka_howard
    Hi, Ken (and Thomas) - ... HCW: Yes, and in Mahayana as well. What is the meaning of this self that is denied? What does it mean for an odor to be devoid of
    Message 1 of 158 , Mar 26, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi, Ken (and Thomas) -

      --- In dhammastudygroup@yahoogroups.com, "Ken H" <kenhowardau@...> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Thomas,
      >
      > ------
      > > T: About the middle way of emptiness (such as neither existence/arising/eternalism nor non-xistence/ceasing/annihilationism, neither sameness nor difference, neither coming nor going) found in Samyutta suttas/Samyukta sutras, you may first read SN 22.90 = SA 262 (See also Choong MK, The Fundamental Teachings of Early Buddhism (2000), pp. 60-66, 91-97, 192-199, 239; and The Notion of Emptiness in Early Buddhism (1999), pp. 32-40).
      >
      > > I hope this helps.
      > ------
      >
      > KH: Thanks for trying but, no, it doesn't help. Rather than read books I would prefer to discuss the "middle way of emptiness."
      >
      > In Theravada `emptiness' (sunnatta) "refers exclusively to the anatta doctrine:" "Void is the world because it is devoid of a self or anything belonging to a self" (Buddhist Dictionary, Nyanatiloka).
      ----------------------------------
      HCW:
      Yes, and in Mahayana as well. What is the meaning of this "self" that is denied? What does it mean for an odor to be devoid of self? Does anyone think that an odor has a spirit/soul within it? What people think is that an odor has a core of separate existence and identity, and that is the error being made at that level.
      -----------------------------------
      >
      > I am willing to accept that the Mahayana schools may have different meanings for emptiness, but in Theravada it definitely means `devoid of a permanent self, or soul.'
      >
      > So paramattha dhammas exist, and they are soulless.
      ---------------------------------
      HCW:
      They are devoid of self/own being.
      ----------------------------------
      >
      > The Channa Sutta (SN 22.90) you referred me to bears this out. "By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "non-existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, "existence" with reference to the world does not occur to one."
      ----------------------------
      HCW:
      Yes, the notion of real and separate existence just does not occur to one with right discernment.
      ------------------------------
      >
      > By and large, the world is seen as a place where the self lives eternally or where the self is annihilated. Only the Buddha has taught a middle way, in which there are only dhammas, and no self.
      >
      > Ken H
      >
      ==============================
      With metta,
      Howard


      Form is like a glob of foam; feeling, a bubble; perception, a mirage; fabrications, a banana tree; consciousness, a magic trick — this has been taught by the Kinsman of the Sun. However you observe them, appropriately examine them, they're empty, void to whoever sees them appropriately./

      (From the Phena Sutta)

      _______________________________

      /He who does not find core or substance in any of the realms of being, like flowers which are vainly sought in fig trees that bear none — such a seeker gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./

      (From the Uraga Sutta)

      ________________________________

      /He who neither goes too far nor lags behind and knows about the world: "This is all unreal," — such a monk gives up the here and the beyond, just as a serpent sheds its worn-out skin./


      (From the Uraga Sutta )
    • 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
      • 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.