shame on you lot!

[SmallAssassin]

I just read the (long) post on Shaolin Ulysees, and I have to say what world do you live in???

From what I understood this Doc chap did an interview in Hooters or something? Well, I think that's bloody brilliant! It was a smart thing to do, because it is exactly YOU LOT he was trying to rattle.

I mean people, I read your posts and you're all "ah, brother" this and "ah brother" that like you're living in some kungfu movie! next thing you're going to tell me is that you speak in dubbed and have wires attached to your bodies so you can fly high in the air!

What do you think Shaolin is? It's a martial art, a hobby, a discepline, a way of learning that LIFE IS MEANT TO BE ENJOYED and be enjoyed by EVERYONE!

On that note, he is also trying to express that ANYONE is allowed to study Shaolin.

My sifu just had the privaledge of meeting one of the last, true Grandmasters of shaolin. This guy is the grand-daddy of what is considered to be the hardest and most practical Shaolin fighting style. And you know what? Let me shock you: this grandmaster drinks, smokes and has parties. OH NO! That must make him less shaolin. And the fact that my sifu also likes to hit the Glastonbury Rock Festival once a year and large it up on drugs and alcohol means he's less Shaolin, despite being the first westerner ever to be invited to join this true shaolin clan.

Do you know why we wear a uniform in kungfu? It's not to say "I am Shaolin, I am a monk!" That's fanciful rubbish. The only reasons we wear a uniform are these:

1) To show equality amongst everyone in the class;
2) To show that no matter who you are, and what you do (a stripper, solictor, criminal, doctor, streetsweeper) it doesn't matter, everyone has the equal right to study Shaolin.

So good on him for doing what he did. It's a shame that such a great art is wasted on people who only study to give themselves a sense of identity because they just can't be themselves. And I speak of 99% of shaolin practitioners.

[freedom76]

Whatever happened to health and humility?

[MasterKiller]

My sifu just had the privaledge of meeting one of the last, true Grandmasters of shaolin. This guy is the grand-daddy of what is considered to be the hardest and most practical Shaolin fighting style. Name? Style?

[GeneChing]

Actually, I agree with you to some extent. Shaolin is a layman's discipline and the whole monk trip is totally overrated. I don't mean that to be disrespectful to the monks themselves, moreso those who would call themselves monks. It always strikes me as funny when someone says they want to become a monk because of the martial arts, but doesn't know the first thing about what monkhood means. Personally, I've pursued the monastic path outside of martial arts - I took my Buddhist vows before I took my disiciple vows. I've lived in many temples around the world and studied. So it's particularly pretentious to me when I hear people going all monk-y.

But to each their own. Eveyone has Buddha potential, and everyone arrives from a different path, whether it be Hooters or Glastonbury. The one thing I will say about authentic Shaolin, and that is that authentic Shaolin must be Chan. That doesn't mean that you have to be a monk to be Chan. You can be a jew (http://www.spiritualityhealth.com/newsh/items/bookreview/item_844.html), a pothead (http://www.zigzagzen.com/), a punk (http://www.greenapplebooks.com/cgi-bin/mergatroid/new378.html), a ****sexual (http://dmoz.org/Society/Religion_and_Spirituality/Buddhism/Sex_and_Gender/Gay,_Lesbian,_Bisexual/), a subscriber (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/19341.html) - you name it.

As for the intention of Dr. Russell, I don't think it's us he wants to rattle, I think its them (http://www.ussd.com/) ;)

In regards to the uniforms of shaolin (http://store.yahoo.com/martialartsmart/sholinrobes.html), well, originally it was more to show humility, not equality. Buddha fashioned his first robes using scraps of cloth he found on corpses - it was an austerity thing. Nowadays, though, you don't have to wear robes to be Shaolin.

[SmallAssassin]

Now that we're on the subject of Buddhism, i find this to be quite a fasinating chapter in Shaolin.

From what I understand of Buddhism, and I mean the absolute core of Buddhism, is that you cannot actually BE buddhist. By being buddhist you end up contradicting the purpose of buddhism.

Buddhism is like kungfu in that it is form from formlessness and vice versa, hence why it was practised - what more physical expression of buddhism could you obtain other than through kungfu?

Then it gets confusing for me, because therefore by being a monk you are contradicting the understanding of Buddhism because you are not being yourself, you are being a monk. But then how do you follow Buddhism unless it has some form for which to follow? Then perhaps Buddhism is not meant to be followed.

Buddhism seems to be the whole "trying to catch flowing water" paradox. Best to just let it flow through your open palm than try to hold it with a closed fist.

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by SmallAssassin

From what I understand of Buddhism, and I mean the absolute core of Buddhism, is that you cannot actually BE buddhist. By being buddhist you end up contradicting the purpose of buddhism.


I think this is where you are wrong. by being a "true" buddhist, you are practicing every single moment. Every single act you perform conform to buddhism in spirit. In fact, it seem you are not doing anything out of ordinary. Buddhist principles are completely fused into the everyday chore.

Using Dalai Lama as an example. If you ask him if he is a buddhist, he will reply in the affirmative. He might not be a buddha yet, but for this discussion, his mastery is high enough. If you inquire why is he consider a high master, he will reply that he is a simple monk and not a high master. he is just a simple monk who practice buddhism everyday at every moment.

That simplicity in itself makes him a high master. It seem so simple, yet it is very hard to do. Try it sometime. Have just one thought while perform every act in one day. The thought of just performing that act/task at hand. Concentrate on that act and nothing else.

There is no paradox. It is all very simple yet very hard to do. Patience and persistence that is all it requires. Yet, countless have tried and failed.

wm

[Lowlynobody]

Hey SmallAssassin, if your shaolin where did you learn your Pak Mei?

[SmallAssassin]

Again this is something in buddhism which doesn't exist. There is no wrong or right, there is only that which is. The essence of buddhism is just to be.

We are taught that all of life is a matter of perspective: one person may look at a flower and decide it is pretty, another may decide it is ugly. The universal truth however dictates that the flower is neither pretty nor ugly, it just simply is, it exists, that is all.

If you read "The Teaching of Buddha" by the Bukkyo Dendo Kyokai, Tokyo, and "The Sermon on the Mount" by Emmet Fox, both highly acclaimed books in their field, they both state that Buddhism is something that which cannot exist in form, it is merely the essence of being. The moment one calls himself a Buddhist, that truth becomes non-existent because you have labelled yourself and thus have not understood the Buddha-truth.
Which to me feels more like Buddhism.

There is a saying in kungfu which says "Kungfu is not what you learn, but what you are." which directly confirms these teachings of learning to just be, to accept what you are in truth.

[SmallAssassin]

Originally posted by Lowlynobody
Hey SmallAssassin, if your shaolin where did you learn your Pak Mei?

I do not understand your question. Why "if you are shaolin". Pak Mei is Shaolin.

You will have to forgive me for not wishing to talk about pak mei, it just results in too much aggressive politics and arguing, and not enough enthusiasm for positive learning.

[Lowlynobody]

Just wondering if you trace your lineage back to CLC?

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by SmallAssassin
[B]
We are taught that all of life is a matter of perspective: one person may look at a flower and decide it is pretty, another may decide it is ugly. The universal truth however dictates that the flower is neither pretty nor ugly, it just simply is, it exists, that is all.

If you read "The Teaching of Buddha" by the Bukkyo Dendo Kyokai, Tokyo, and "The Sermon on the Mount" by Emmet Fox, both highly acclaimed books in their field, they both state that Buddhism is something that which cannot exist in form, it is merely the essence of being. The moment one calls himself a Buddhist, that truth becomes non-existent because you have labelled yourself and thus have not understood the Buddha-truth.
Which to me feels more like Buddhism.


There's many acclaimed western buddhist books that has nothing to do with buddhism. Having not read these books, I can't judge on their qualities. The definition you gave based on your interepretation of these author's thesis is technically correct. But, you must learn how to walk before you can run.

Form and dogma are used to instill the essence. If one regard form and dogmas as the truth in totality, then certainly he is mistaken. When one achieve high level of mastery, he can forego these formalities. Yet, few really achieve high level of mastery. Many will tell what the finish line looks like, but most people can't get to the finish line from the starting line by just knowing what finish line looks like. They actually have to "run" the course. If you forego these formalities before really reaching mastery, you can only relay what other people description of what the finish line look like. You can't really say what it is because you have never "experienced" it.

Labeling oneself as a buddhist does not deviate from true buddhism. It means his practices are in accordance with four noble truths and eight folded righteous path. If what one practice does not conforms to the four noble truth and eight folded righteous path, then it is not buddhism. Regardless what people tell you.

But, based on your contention, Dalai Lama is not a "true" buddhist. I have seen him being interviewed and he professes to be a simple buddhist monk. Does that make him not a "true" buddhist? In fact, if you read through the buddhist scriptures, you will find many distinguished masters refer to themselves as "monk" in the scriptures.

I find your explanatiion misguided. Labels don't mean anything. buddhism teach one to transcend labels. but, by adopting the label does not deviate from true buddhism. It is only a formality. It is only when one define himself by the label and only see the labels, does he go astray. Buddhism allow one to put on labels and throw it away whenever one wants to (at the highest level). One is not limited by labels. but, if you see the simple act of adopting of a label deviate from "true" buddhism, then I think you are trap by these labels. But, maybe I misunderstand you which is perfectly possible.

wm

[SmallAssassin]

Wow, thank you very much for that. I am very new to the entire concept of Buddhism and it is very generous of you to be so thorough in your information.

I will dwell on this a while and see what I make of it.

Cheers!

But do see if you can get your hands on the Emmet Fox book, it is very enlightening.

[GeneChing]

Don't get caught in semantics. Buddhism can be a very intellectual pursuit, but if you start overanalysing it, it won't be the flag flapping, nor the wind flapping. It'll be your mind flapping.

Also, if you don't enjoy paradox, don't pursue Buddhism. We Buddhists love paradox, or at least that's how it might seem from the outside. From the inside, there is no outside.

The big problem with approaching Buddhism from a martial world is that it's akin to approaching physics from construction. Physics is the model, construction is the actual. Buddhism is the model, Kung Fu is the actual. Wait a minute. Strike that and reverse it. Remember what I said about paradox? ;)

Keep in mind that there are many forms of Buddhism. Zen and Tibetan Buddhism are as alike as Lutherans and Mormons. Same foundation, but different variations.

It's a mistake to view Zen as 'no right, no wrong'. In Chinese Zen, that is what I call a Kwan Yin oversight. If you fail to grasp the bodhisattva way of compassion, you lose the true gem of karma. I think this was the problem with Herrigal, who wrote Zen and the Art of Archery then went on to become a Nazi sympathiser. You miss the first and final step.

[Shaolinlueb]

Actually, I agree with you to some extent. Shaolin is a layman's discipline and the whole monk trip is totally overrated. I don't mean that to be disrespectful to the monks themselves, moreso those who would call themselves monks. It always strikes me as funny when someone says they want to become a monk because of the martial arts, but doesn't know the first thing about what monkhood means. Personally, I've pursued the monastic path outside of martial arts - I took my Buddhist vows before I took my disiciple vows. I've lived in many temples around the world and studied. So it's particularly pretentious to me when I hear people going all monk-y.

I agree with you Gene. too many people want to be a monk without understanding what it takes. before i took kung fu i knew what it takes. im a wana be monk. of course im a wana because i dont have what it takes to become a real one.

[Chinwoo-er]

Note to all


Practice buddhism

Don't think or analyse it

last time I thought about it, my brain exploded

:D

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by GeneChing

Also, if you don't enjoy paradox, don't pursue Buddhism. We Buddhists love paradox, or at least that's how it might seem from the outside. From the inside, there is no outside.
...
Keep in mind that there are many forms of Buddhism. Zen and Tibetan Buddhism are as alike as Lutherans and Mormons. Same foundation, but different variations.



From my experience, only chan/zen buddhism employ "paradox" as a major vehicle of traning. In other schools (e.g., pure land, tibetan) there are significant less use of paradox.



It's a mistake to view Zen as 'no right, no wrong'. In Chinese Zen, that is what I call a Kwan Yin oversight. If you fail to grasp the bodhisattva way of compassion, you lose the true gem of karma. I think this was the problem with Herrigal, who wrote Zen and the Art of Archery then went on to become a Nazi sympathiser. You miss the first and final step.

There are several conceptual problems that novice have when studying buddhism. 1. "no right, no wrong". 2. "no practice" 3. excessive emphasis on the abstract. 4. "no thoughts'

1. no right, no wrong. In buddhism, every action has a reaction. For every merit/misdeed, there is a reward/punishment. A merit cannot cancel out a misdeed (very accurate accounting) Bodhisattva views sentient beings with compassion and overlook sentient beings' faults. It is like a parent willing to overlook a child's faults and help him to find the right path. But, it does not mean karma does not bear fruits.

2. "no practice", there are description of high master who don't practice in buddhist scriptures. This "no practice" actually refers to continual practice. Some these master describe their practice as walking, eating, sleeping, etc. It appears that they are not practicing. What they don't say is during these activities, their minds are completely focus on one thought or are in the state of "no thoughts". They are completely at ease and it is a form of zen meditation. So, this actually refer to a continual practice. Practice which is fuse into everyday chore.

3. excessive emphasis on abstract thoughts
Shakyamuni Buddha embarked on his journey when he saw the suffering, sickness and death of sentient beings (e.g., all living things) around him. He decided to find a path to liberate sentient beings from these suffering. This was the original and true intent of buddhism. He sought out other religious practitioners and practiced severe austerity and starved himself near to death. He came to the conclusion that in order to achieve true enlightenment, one must be sounded in both mind and body. The only way that truth can be found is through the middle path. Moderate compassion with wisdom and avoid either extremes. Westerners are sometimes fascinated by these zen paradox and miss the true intention of buddhism.

4. "no thoughts"
This is a common problems of many practitioner who study buddhism. They come across this concept of "no thoughts" and find that this must mean the master think of nothing. In a sense, he is a rock. he has no emotion and no thoughts. So, buddhist aspires to be rocks. well, what a waste of time. To me, no thought means no thoughts to distract you. Many people's minds are constantly ravaged by thoughts of what need to be done today, tomorrow, deadlines, etc, etc. When all these extraneous thoughts are clear away, then you are at a calm and quiet place (focusing on one thought is one of the practice to help clear these extraneous thoughts). When your mind is quiet, it is like a pond which is perfectly still. Then, it is possible to reflect on the true meaning of life and existence without bias.

these are just some buddhist knowledge that I gained through the years. Perhaps, it can be of some service.

wm

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by SmallAssassin
Wow, thank you very much for that. I am very new to the entire concept of Buddhism and it is very generous of you to be so thorough in your information.

I will dwell on this a while and see what I make of it.

Cheers!

But do see if you can get your hands on the Emmet Fox book, it is very enlightening.

If Fox's book is in my local library, I'll have a look. I'll also moderate my original position about western books on buddhism. There are good one out there, but some really missed the point.

I will give you two ancedotes to help digest my previous reply.

1. Two friends are travelling to a distant city. One is a monk and other is a young man. They pass by a young lady who was hesistant to walk because there was a pot hole filled with water on the road and she didn't want to get her shoes dirty.

The monk inquired about her problem and offered to carry her across the pot hole. The young lady agreed. Hours later at rest stop, the young man angrily confronted the monk, I thought you were a monk. How can you carry that girl on your back? The monk paused and smiled. I let her off hours ago. Why are you still carrying her (in your heart)?

2. A young monk entered a monastery to meet an old master. The young monk declared he has reached achieved great attainment and surpassed the old master. The old master looked down and said: "your shoe is untied". The young monk hurrily try to bent over to tie his laces.

The old master laughed and said, I thought you have achieved great attainment. Why do little things like this trouble your mind?

To truly learn buddhism requires a good teacher. Unfortunately, there are many hacks out there just like in kung fu. Be careful.

wm

[SmallAssassin]

Originally posted by WanderingMonk

1. Two friends are travelling to a distant city. One is a monk and other is a young man...


hahah that's excellent because that is the exact same storymy sifu told me, but what makes it even funnier is that he cunningly used it against me:

the day after he told me we went shopping, and in one of the stores there were big, heavy dummies blocking some stairs. One of the shop girls walked past the dummies, and knocked one over. It was abou to land right on her head and I luckily cuaght it in time. About a week later we are in the pub, and I go "What do you think, eh? eh? Pretty cool how I caught that dummy!' and he just calmly replies "Why do you still hold on to the dummy?" which put me off my drink completely...

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

WM.

I read most of those and similar stories in comic format over here.
:D

BTW, I disagree that learning buddhism requires a good teacher all it requires ,IMHO, is honesty with yourself.

For me the study of CMA is VERY similar to the studying Buddhism, you need to see things for what they truly are without judging and labeling them.
One of the MA I studied had meditation exercises to help us with this.

In order to become good at MA or enlightened you first need to let go of:
Who am I.
What am I.
etc

Only than can you see your past life and studies for what they truly are.

MA study like buddhism is NOT about adding on, but about removing unneccessary things that are holding you back.

Forget the techniques forms and drills and only see the principles and you will get closer to mastery than training every day for x hours.

[SmallAssassin]

TJM

That's very enlightening, because one of the first things I was told to do with my training was to read a self-help book by Louise Hay called "The Power is Within You", because my sifu said the only way to learn CMA is through sincerity, and in order to do that I need to work out me first.

I would usually have thought it was rubbish, but since all i ever saw outside of his teachings was "Kungfu is about smashing bricks and pulling out people's eyeballs!" I thought, "He must be on to something."

It's good, but now all this crap about my life is surfacing and making me very worn out. I have a lot of issues with my dad, he drinks too much and has a very short temper. He hates listening to other people's opinions and things, and generally dislikes the world. Unfortunately a lot of that had rubbed off on to me, and now that I have become aware of this it's all very draining. Sifu says it's going to be tough, but you have to keep at it because eventually one can reap the rewards of doing this. I'm 27 and I actually cried for my first time in years when I first read this book.

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by T'ai Ji Monkey

BTW, I disagree that learning buddhism requires a good teacher all it requires ,IMHO, is honesty with yourself.


TJM,

I had a similar conversation with Kung Lek about this earlier. But, at the time, I didn't want to press the point. Since I am done with my work today, I'll go into this in a bit more details.

You are correct on most of the points but on this one, you are a bit off.

It really depends on which sect you practice. In the Tibetan buddhism, we take the four refuge vows. the first vow is to seek refuge in the vajra master.

Vajra vehicle is a short-cut and short-cut means danger. You absolutely need a guide who "ran" the course before. It is written clearly in the scripture, those who learn vajra vehicle without an instructor are stealing the dharma and will xxxxx (not good stuffs).

Since we are in a shaolin forum. Let's use a Chan buddhism example. In the sixth generation of chan buddhism in china, it split into north and south school. The southern school was lead by Hui-neng (the sixth patriach) and the northern school was led by master Shen-xiu.

For those who don't know the story, Master Shen-xiu was the foremost student of the fifth patriach and was deemed by many to be the legitmate succesor at the time. However, Master Shen-xiu's understanding of Chan was drastically less than that of Master Hui-neng. Master Hui-neng came into the temple for less than one year. But, he was a prodigy and demonstrated his understanding/mastery of Chan to the fifth patriach. Thus, the leadership was officially passed to Hui-neng. But, the fifth patriach knew that the political climate in the temple was against Hui-neng and told Hui-neng to flee south. This resulted in the split of Chan buddhism during Tang dynasty.

I don't want people to get the impression that Master Shen-xiu was a bad guy. But, there were many other monks in the temple that had vested interest in the outcome of the succession. Hence, master Hui-neng was in danger.

Master Shen-xiu was a good instructor and wished to expand his understanding of Chan. One of Shen-xiu's most talented student volunteered to go south to attend one of Master Hui-neng's lecture and returned to bring back what the student had learn.

Before starting the lecture which the Shen-xiu's student attended, master Hui-neng stood up and said that there's a thieve among us. Master Shen xiu's student stood up immediately and stated his original intention. He went to explain since Master Hui-neng felt this was a theft of dharma, the student will leave immediately.

Master Hui-neng told the student something to the extent that dharma is in the heart which cannot be gain/lost. we'll use your pharse, Master Hui-neng taught the student to let go "Who am I" and be natural and honest with oneself. (It's been a while since I read through master Hui-neng's classic. so, I can't tell exactly what Hui-neng said).

Master Shen-xiu couldn't help his student to understand buddhism beyond the dogma. Master hui-neng in one lecture clear out all the fuzzy area. Master hui-neng made such of impression, the student decided to leave Master shen-xiu stay with Master hui-neng.

So, what is the point?

Yes, you are right that you need to let go "who am I". This can only be accomplished by yourself. But, when do know you actually got there? Do you know how to let go? What is this "I"? How do I recognize my true self? Is there something that I should look for to gauge my progress?

A good teacher can guide you on this. A good teacher can tell you if you are getting close. he can point out what you need to work on. He can point out if you are doing something wrong.

Yes, it is entirely possible for one to be able to do all the self correction. Yet, it will take you a lot longer than if you had some help. You can go astray on yourself even when you think you are doing everything right. Some people have dark passion actually all people do. How do you control it? how do you use it to help you? What is the source of these dark passions?

Even a prodigy like Master Hui-neng had to study under the fifth patriach. Master Hui-neng had no schooling. He was illiterate. Spent most of his life, chooping woods in the mountains to provide for his elderly mother. He stayed to care for his mother until she passed away when the Master when in his thirties. Master Hui-neng had heard people chanting sutra and instantly understood the meaning. Yet, he knew he did not understand everything and he sought out the fifth patriach.

It was the fifth patriach who explained the intricacy of the "diamond sutra" in one night to hui-neng. After finishing explaing, the fifth patriach offered to row the boat for hui-neng and help him cross the river to flee. Master Hui-neng replied in the classic buddhist verse: "when I was lost, the Master row the boat (to take me to enlightenment). Now, I am awaken, I will row the boat myself (guide my own path)."

I can even turn this into kung fu analogy, but I think you got my point.

This is why you need a good guide, your teacher is the guide. ultimately, you have to run the course, but a good guide/teacher can point out some important signs on the road and save you some major detours and dead-ends. my old prof has a sign outside his door that says: "Old age and cunny will always overcome youth and enthuaism. " my friend, experiences counts.

wm

[SmallAssassin]

wow that too was excellent.

so what is Chan exactly? Are there any good books to read on understanding Chan?

[T'ai Ji Monkey]

WM.

A good teacher and guide will always make the road easier, OTOH one should not miss the goal by relying too much on the teacher/guide.

And this is something I see all too common in many MA.
;)

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by SmallAssassin
wow that too was excellent.

so what is Chan exactly? Are there any good books to read on understanding Chan?

To put it simply what Chan and buddhism is "honesty with yourself" like TJM had stated. Remove all the unnecessary layers to reveal your true nature.

Chan buddhism employs meditation to calm the mind, logical "paradox" to challenge you to think over the problem more.

Its weakness: either you get it or you don't. Abrupt enlightenment or nothing. Okay, not exactly nothing but it is how it is described sometimes

example of logical problem:

Monk 1: I seek salvation.
Monk 2: Who tied you up?

Monk 1: I am not tied up.
Monk 2: So, you are free!

It forces one to re-examine his problem through logical "paradox" and arrive a his own solution. After reading about your situation, I think you might want to look at this problem a bit closely.

I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I like to offer some suggestions that you might consider.

1. find sometime that you can be alone to sort out your thoughts everyday.
2. people become angry and bitter because they have lost hope and unable to resolve their own problems. This is when they lash out the most. Some understanding of the root cause of the problem often help one cope.
3. religion is a great healer. regardless christianity, buddhism, etc. If you can interest your father in some of religious material, may be it will help. But, be very slow about it. sometime, people isn't ready and will become more angry. I don't want to cause you any more problem.
4. Having to put up with a lot of external negative feeling will cause mental stress and anguish. You need to find a way to neutralize it by putting it in some context. These negative feeling are not necessarily direct at you. Even if they are, do not internalize it. Find a way to release it through physical activity or some other distraction.
5. Try to have a positive outlook regardless how bad the situation is. Positive energy bring out more positive energy. Negativeness will only bring on more anger and bitterness.

Ask Gene Ching for English book recommendation, I only have access to chinese materials.

good luck.

wm

[SmallAssassin]

thank you very much! A lot of very useful information. I'll get back to you when all is done.

Be well!

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by T'ai Ji Monkey
WM.

A good teacher and guide will always make the road easier, OTOH one should not miss the goal by relying too much on the teacher/guide.

And this is something I see all too common in many MA.
;)

Okay, so we agree that there need to be a balance :)

wm

[SmallAssassin]

lol i was going to say, if you two had a child together it would be a buddha!

[SmallAssassin]

I think you are both right though. My sifu lives on the other side of the world, and it is so easy to lose yourself when studying this kind of thing and easy to do stupid things.

It's a tough road, I suppose this is why I like to use forums sometimes because you can sometimes get advise that lets you get back to perspective.

I mean I even had the gall to tell a sifu out here that I heard his grandmaster was in it for the money. I mean that's just not me! Whether it's true or not is beside the point, because who is anyone to say if someone else is right or wrong? I usually resect everyone's path because it's thier own. Then I realised I was feeling how my dad feels, I was being him, but from inside me: After working so hard for your whole life to achieve something, it hurts your pride when someone else tries to make you feel it was all worthless. Pride, ego.

But once you recognise this kind of thing, how do you then remove it?

i suppose this is why so much rivalry exists in kungfu, we try to see the world too much in black and white. We feel that after we open up so much to the art that when someone else tries to tell the world about how great they are, it makes you feel like they aren't respecting the work you have done, the sweat and tears that you have put into it. i suppose it does in a sense.

What are your thoughts?

[WanderingMonk]

Originally posted by SmallAssassin

I mean I even had the gall to tell a sifu out here that I heard his grandmaster was in it for the money. I mean that's just not me! Whether it's true or not is beside the point, because who is anyone to say if someone else is right or wrong? I usually resect everyone's path because it's thier own. Then I realised I was feeling how my dad feels, I was being him, but from inside me: After working so hard for your whole life to achieve something, it hurts your pride when someone else tries to make you feel it was all worthless. Pride, ego.

But once you recognise this kind of thing, how do you then remove it?


overlook it by put things into perspective.

After one hundred years, where will you be? Where will those who did you wrong be? Did they do something to you that is so outrageous that even after one hundred year you will still be angry?

Was it worth the trouble of getting mad and doing something stupid?

---edit---
well, I already wrote this and hate to see it go to waste. I'll put it up. It doesn't directly answer your question but it explains a general approach one should take to deal with his flaw.

Buddha's teaching states that all sentient beings' miseries arise from three poisons:
greed, obsession, and hatred.

Learn to use them to help you instead of just arresting it as some school teaches.

if you are naturally prone to be greedy. Strive to be the greediest. For buddha is the happiest being in the universe, you should direct your greed to become the buddha. So, you can be the most happy

should you naturally prone to obsess. Then, obsess about lifting others out of suffering. Your should strive to become a bodhisattva for they are the most obsess. They obsess about helping others (e.g., people who volunteer to assist those less fortunate).

should you naturally prone to anger, then you should seek to become a dharmapala and protect/defend the doctrines (e.g., someone who is in law enforcement).

In essence, turn the three poisons into three cleanliness. Don't check it, but redirect it in your favor.

mantis108 put it more succintly.

Be greedy in earnest to attain the wisdom of Prajna

Be obsessed in earnest to attain the wisdom of Bodhisattva

Be wrathful in earnest to attain the wisdom of Vajra

don't tell him that I stole his lines. :)
--

Anyways, that's about it. I am not going to add any more to this thread. It has been interesting and enjoyable.

I will leave you with a book recommendation: "The Tibetan Book of Living and Dying" by Sogyal Rinpoche. It will be worth your time to look it over.

wm

[David Jamieson]

I have found that one of the keys to understanding Chan at an intellectual level is to read the sutra which was the seed of it's transmission ultimately.

When Hui ke became the disciple of Bodhidharma, (Tamo), Tamo had Huike read the Lankavatara sutra.

This sutra contains prety much all of the intellectual wrapping. rhyme and reason of the whys and wheretofors of the later Chan (*zen) practice.

Do a search for it online and see if you can't find it. It really is fascinating making the ties to the practice from the core idea.


imo, buddhism is best expressed in two paramount teachings of siddharta Guatama.

The first was the sermon in deer park where he(the buddha guatama) utters the "four noble truths" to the aesetics who later became his disciples, the second was the explanation of the middle path and how to walk it (figuratively) by employing the "8 fold path".
As far as I'm concerned the rest is details.

cheers

[Vash]

Yeah.