that bore repeating, if anyone were to ask me.Originally Posted by monkey mind
meteor
that bore repeating, if anyone were to ask me.
meteor
you are! thanks!
Registered User
There is no reason to be snide!
Hui-neng's students compiled his sutra, there is no mention of whacking anyone. If it were considered an important part of his teachings it would have at least been mentioned.
The fact there is a sutra demonstrates Hui-neng gave teachings using words, the same goes for, "The Teachings of Huang-po"!
Not all Ch'an teachings involve whacking people and other direct forms of awakening!
Nor are there any mention of Bodhidharma or Master Yuan or hui-ko whacking anyone. If it were an important part of the teaching it would have been included.
The Tun-huang texts, which are the oldest known Ch'an texts to date, use anecdotes, words, and references, direct and indirect, to earlier Sutras. Nowhere is there any mention of whacking anyone. It is not even known for sure whether Hui-ko took off his own arm or not. There is an indication in some earlier and lesser known histories that he lost it to bandits!
What is important is not to make an affectation of whacking people with sticks, or avoiding words as a means of teaching.
After all, it was Hui-neng who taught to not just read the Sutras, but put what they taught into practice!
Resigned
from "Blue Cliff Record":
First Case: The Highest Meaning of the Holy Truths
The Case:
Emperor Wu of Liang asked the great master Bodhidharma, "What is the highest meaning of the holy truths?"
Bodhidharma said, "Empty, without holiness."
The Emperor said, "Who is facing me?"
Bodhidharma replied, "I don’t know."
The Emperor did not understand.
After this, Bodhidharma crossed the Yang Tse River and came to the kingdom of Wei.
Later, the Emperor brought this up to master Chih and asked him about it.
Master Chih said, "Does Your Majesty know who this man is?"
The Emperor said, "I don’t know."
Master Chih said, "He is Mahasattva Avalokitsvara, transmitting the Buddha mind to you."
The Emperor felt regretful, so he wanted to send an emissary to go get Bodhidharma to return.
Master Chih told him, "Your Majesty, don’t send someone to fetch him back. Even if everyone in the whole country went to go after him, he still wouldn’t return."
The Verse:
The Holy Truths are empty.
How can you discern the point?
Who is facing me?
But henceforth, he secretly crossed the river.
How could he avoid the growth of a thicket of brambles?
Though everyone in the whole country goes after him, he will not return.
Wu goes on and on, continually reflecting that.
Give up recollections.
What limit is there to the pure wind, circling the earth?
Master Xuedou looked around, to the right and left and said, "Is there any ancestor here?"
He answered himself, "There is."
"Call them here to wash this old monk’s feet."
Hsueh Tou's Commentary:
How could he avoid the growth of a thicket of brambles?
Bodhidharma originally came to this country to melt the sticking points, untie the bonds, pull out the nails and draw out the pegs, to cut down brambles for people: why then say that he gave rise to a thicket of brambles? This is not confined to those times; today the brambles under everyone's feet are already several yards deep.
'nuff said...
meteor
check the tapes! all I can say is I don't know.
of the two of us, you are the one still speaking about whacking and sticks my brother. don't avoid the stick as a means of teaching what is gobbledeegook.What is important is not to make an affectation of whacking people with sticks, or avoiding words as a means of teaching.
After all, it was Hui-neng who taught to not just read the Sutras, but put what they taught into practice!
pause.
words are okay too, so long as they make sense.
the point being there is a fatal flaw in your reasoning/presentation.
what's most important is to wake up. right now we have the luxury of knocking around some pixels on a screen. it's like wiping one's letter a double squiggle with silk.
if it's so bad in here, what is happening with the poor nagas, i am left wondering about those poor lost snake *******s, who is left to show them...well it won't be me, I'm off to JA.
Itinerant practitioner
where's your chan now godboy?
wait...how far are we now from the ch'an?
Kung Fu is good for you.
Resigned
the width of a cockroach's nostril hair...
Registered User
when asked any kind of question, e.g. "what is buddha", "what is dharma", "how do i train my mind", etc., chan master linji just shouted, juzhi raised one finger, eshan hit with a stick, the buddha told a parable....
four kinds of teaching, are they the same or different? which is correct?
Resigned
they are all a bunch of scoundrels who are selling water by the river!
you raise your whisk, but there are no flies to swat...
Itinerant practitioner
I wish that those guys were eskimos, because that would be cool.
Kung Fu is good for you.
Registered User
Taking the whack, avoiding the whack, both are Ch'an! It is attachment, especially to distinctions, that is the trap!
I merely recommend avoiding affectation!
I am still speaking about whacks because I am attempting to respond to your comments.
Rather than making an obvious observation, perhaps making sense yourself would be of benefit? Derisive appearing comments don't always make sense to me and since you insist we make sense to each other, perhaps you can set the example!
They do not make sense to you! They make sense to me and perhaps others as well, those with a similar contextual experience.
I would not understand a technical discussion on quantum physics, but that does not mean it does not make sense to the physicists having the discussion. Neither would I criticize what I have admitted I don't understand!
Okay....maybe I would......just for the fun of it....and to stir the pot!!!!
The flaw you perceive is the one you brought with you!
I disagree! There is nothing that is "most" important and "waking up" is an affectation.
As long as one is preoccupied with "what is important" and "waking up" they risk being trapped by attachment.
Nothing is important and there is no waking up to be done!
But I will agree it is all just a game! Play is fun!
I don't worry about it because I don't care!
It's right here...can't you see it?
Why I oughta whack you with a .50cal hunk of metal right between the eyes!!!!
That'll wake you u........... uh............nevermind.....it is too difficult to shoot.....er... aaaaaa....whack a fluttering butterfly!
Is there ever 'nuff said?
....and discussing it is a form of teaching, and not discussing it is a form of teaching......and being critical of a teaching is a form of teaching and embracing a teaching is a form of teaching........
.....there is nothing that is not teaching and none of it is teaching......
What we learn, what we criticize, what we think is important, what we disregard, etc. tells us more about ourselves than what we think of as the world system and other people........if we were to look inward rather than outward!
Registered User
And yet they are wise beyond measure, for everyone requires clean water!
After all, many people pay for bottled water when it is relatively free right from the tap!
Just because you see no flies does not mean they are not there, only that YOU do not see them!
Registered User
Me too......and I would call him Quinn and patiently wait for him to get here, cuz, then there will be a party!
meteor
well we are all speaking for ourselves of course, so let me here enter one of my favorite words, horsecrap. maybe you don't understand Quantum Mechanics but you can. anyone can, unless you are a brain dead mouthbreather. and even then. a physicist is able to show you what quantum mechanics is all about, because you can follow and learn, you can do the math yourself...you can certainly understand the application of gravity, for example, and not even know the math behind it. so there's hop for you yet. you don't need extra lives or any of that other crap, you have no idea what happens to you after you are dead so that whole premise is pointless gabber mucking up the beauty of the buddha's teaching, karma and all that. maybe he mucked it up himself, or had it mucked up for him right properly when the ism got added on- but buddhism is nothing if it is not repeatable and testable, while on the micro side of it there is room for local flavor on the macro side of it it has to work and be applicable or its nothing.
it's simple- you put forth an argument and there is a fatal flaw in its structure. it's not because I don't understand what you are saying my brother, as to why your premise was flawed. it's because i understand what you are saying that the flaw glares out.
Lol I don't understand why people think the earth is only 6,000 years old, those people are still all horrendously wrong, despite my not understanding them. for example.
the dharma is self evidentiary. anyone can grasp it since they already have it.
my friend if you don't understand something then it is good for you not to criticize it.
Registered User
And anyone can have a direct, unobstructed perception of reality! It can be directly experienced by anyone willing to look. It takes time just as learning about Quantum Mechanics does. And some will make the attempt and fail because they do not have the capacity just as with learning Quantum Mechanics.
Quantum Mechanics is an attempt to explain reality; the words used to describe direct perception of reality are also an attempt to explain reality. The descriptions of Quantum Mechanics are NOT what actually occurs they are only descriptions of what actually occurs, just as all the teachings of Buddhism. They are merely words meant to direct individuals to a direct apprehension for themselves.
No one said extra lives were necessary! It is a teaching of Buddhism that they occur, that is all! I don't care about it one way or the other!
At best all you can say is that YOU have no idea what happens to YOU after you are dead. I don't care what happens to me after I am dead! I concern myself with the moment at hand, but that does not mean others are not concerned. So, using "expedient means" I sometimes address the topic!
It may be your opinion that it is a mucking up of Buddha’s teaching, but it is also just as likely you do not understand what is being said very well or that it just doesn’t coincide with what you think you know, either way, so what???? Your comment appears to indicate an attachment to a fixed view, which obstructs perception. Obstructed perception cannot be relied upon to make accurate observations about others much less about our own mind and its experiences/understanding, which is where the action is occurring anyway!
Your criticism is too non-specific to have any value in improving my manner of presentation. It is doubtful I would care even if you did, because I do not present anything for the approval of others, but for my own entertainment!
Yes, Buddhism is repeatable and testable, that being the case, perhaps your time is better spent testing what you don’t understand! I can point you to Buddhist texts that say just about everything I have said, but in different words, so your criticism is not of me alone.
I do agree it is preferable that one has the experience directly, for themselves, rather than relying on texts of the Masters however.
Yet you are also glaringly non-specific about what those flaws are! One may ask why a person would deem it necessary to criticize another and also refer to him as “brother”, as if attempting to demonstrate a caring relationship, and yet avoid any useful comments that might direct his “brother” to a more comprehensive understanding and method of explaining his thoughts?
It is just as likely that, in truth, you do not understand what I have said because your understanding of Ch’an is perhaps more narrow than you realize! As I have stated previously I have said nothing that is not spoken of by teachers that have preceded you and I.
Neither have I said anything that cannot be directly perceived for ones self. After all, all a description is, is an inaccurate accounting of a direct experience. The description is never the "thing" itself. Therefore, why criticize a description?
Some descriptions are merely more understandable to some people than others due to individual experiences that have provided a similar context of experience to begin with!
There is no evidence that ANY of the early teachers adhered to the more modern method of teaching primarily popularized, according to historians, by Matsu, that of using actions to demonstrate direct perception. Some of the early Masters criticized sitting meditation, relying on textual teachings i.e. sutras and sastras, and of Masters as a useless activity as well. At least one notable one preceded Hui-Neng, who criticized these same things?
Anyone steeped in the more modern teachings would not have knowledge of these original teachings. At any rate they are all un-necessary to those who have a modicum of direct experience/perception for themselves.
As it is said, when the fish is caught, the trap is forgotten!
Where have I disagreed with this, please?
I am pretty sure I just said this to you! If you believe I do not understand something, for my own benefit, please demonstrate it in a manner that has meaning to me, use expedient means for my own benefit, rather than being so indirect about it. You have provided no useful information other than vague allusion as if your word on the matter is what makes it so!
Please lead me to a direct understanding of my errors for my own benefit if you choose to refer to me as "friend" and "brother" as I have taken the time to explain myself to you!
In the end it is likely we would both benefit from the interaction!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
