Apech

The Dao Bums
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    17,056

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    215

Posts posted by Apech

  2. Posted

    4 hours ago, Maddie said:

    Recent discussions have brought some interesting points for consideration to light. Namely being is Buddhism a complete system for ending suffering permanently aka "enlightenment" all by itself or is it dated and lacking things? 

     

    When replying don't just state your opinion, but state the reason that you think so one way or the other.  

     

     

    I could argue it is, or I could argue it isn't - which would you like?

     

     

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 1

  3. Posted

    14 hours ago, idiot_stimpy said:

    I remember the Jeff controversy and used to hang out a bit in the daobums live chat. 

     

    Come and go infrequently now compared to when I joined in 2011. It was like a treasure trove of information not seen before with people sharing all types of information and experiences.

     

    I remember everything - unfortunately - 'sexcapades', genderwarz, Buddhawarz ... KAP/Kunlun ... it seems gentler now - maybe we're all just older and bit calmer.

     

     

    • Like 1
    • Haha 1

  5. Posted

    12 minutes ago, snowymountains said:

     

    This still doesn't show why the Dharma is complete.

     

    The adaptability of Buddhism is great.

    Of course there are many ways to do walking meditation, as there are to do insight meditation.

    But there are still processes that won't be uncovered by any variation, because we need others to tell us, we can't find them on our own.

    Nor is the toolset on emotions complete.

     

    Which is fine, it doesn't need to be complete, it just doesn't need to be treated as something complete, it can complemented with more modern knowledge.

     

     

    I think we may be going round in circles here, so I'll leave it.

     

    Best wishes in all you do!

  6. Posted

    3 hours ago, snowymountains said:

     

    From the moment the Buddha used incomplete models, including incomplete models for the Psyche, for his teachings, of course the Dhamma/Dharma is incomplete. He was bound by his era, just like everyone else is, including us of course.

     

     

    To say it's complete because the Buddha's awakening was complete is the sort of argument that every religion makes.

     

    "There is an Unborn, an Unoriginated, an Unmade, an Uncompounded; were there not, O mendicants, there would be no escape from the world of the born, the originated, the made, and the compounded."

     

    Udana 8:3  Khuddaka Nikaya

     

    3 hours ago, snowymountains said:

     

    Most of the points we discussed have nothing to do with the physical aspects of the Dharma, which of course are incomplete too, but also eg the topic of emotions, what can insight meditation reveal to someone ( not everything.. ) etc.

     

    Emotions as such are the ground in which we work - because human beings are 90% (?) emotional in their actions.  Insight meditation is (partly at least) to see those emotions and other mental activity against the background of the mind/nature as consciousness itself (one way of putting it).  Examining the intricacies and details of emotions is part of the process of unpicking their nature - just that.

     

    3 hours ago, snowymountains said:

     

    Producing great teachings, especially for the era they were written is impressive.

    This doesn't mean they are complete, nor that advice offered is the best for all cases nor that it applies everywhere. On some topics better tools have been developed, better models, even a better understanding of what he called enlightenment by eg Jung.

     

    Buddhism is not static.  It has over the last 2500 years migrated to different countries and cultures and developed forms of expression to suit the psyche of the people there ... like Zen in Japan for instance.  Being adaptable does not mean incomplete.

     

    3 hours ago, snowymountains said:

     

    Again, this is a different thing to whether it's beneficial to do Anapanasati, Insight meditation  ( or alternatively eg following the Zen tradition do Shikantaza instead), 4 elements, walking meditation etc, apply the precepts in their life etc.

    These can be beneficial, of course, there's no denying that, they're great practices.

    They're even more beneficial though when one understands their limitations.

     

     

     

     

    There are a very great many forms of technique, some are helpful others not so much, depending on the practitioner.  

     

     

    • Like 1

  7. Posted

    17 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:


    ....

     

    I see the incompleteness in Gautama's teaching as a strength.  I know, snowymountains, you were talking about his acceptance of some of the models of reality of his day, but I just thought I'd mention that as far as his dharma teachings, the incompleteness can be considered a strength.  A system that is too complete, has inherent contradictions.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    I think in this thread there is a fundamental conceptual mistake being made.  That, being that the Buddha was presenting a model of reality.  Other systems do this - like vedanta - but the Buddha specifically didn't.  This did not prevent of course the many schools of Buddhism producing their own subsequently.  Buddhism does use world models like the mandala of the abhidharma - Mt Meru and the four continents and so on - but this is symbolic of the universe and the Dharma does not depend on it being correct.  There is no Mt. Meru and yet the sky doesn't fall down.   

     

    Strictly speaking the Dharma is (and only is) the realisation or awakened nature of the Buddha post enlightenment.  Which he himself said is not directly expressible.  The teachings of the dharma are vast - traditionally 84,000 in variety - not because the truth varied but because the audience did.  Different people needed different approaches to becoming awakened.  The Buddha himself compared what he had taught to a handful of leaves compared to all the leaves in the forest.

     

    What is written down in the Pali Canon is incomplete - because it is a finite collection of accounts.  Written down some hundreds of years after his death and subject to the preferences and editorship of those who compiled it (who were by that time scholastic monastics).  But the Dharma is not incomplete in the sense which is being implied in this thread i.e. that some things could be discovered later which would alter or add to it.  That is because the Buddhas awakening was complete.  Nothing is added and nothing is taken away from it.  Or to put it another way - anything discovered later like say, the existence of quarks is only significant if it leads to awakening - to the same complete awakening of the Buddha - if it does not, it is not dharma it is dross.

     

     

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  8. Posted

    13 minutes ago, Mark Foote said:


    You are basing that on the distinction between initial and further jhanas, or...?


    the dominant philosophical framework at the time of the Buddha was samkhya - there were others but the sramana sages tended to use terms from it.

    • Like 1

  16. Posted

    2 hours ago, Maddie said:

     

    See this is why to me this is so complicated. On one hand to me emotions totally seem related to clinging as in clinging to various Sankharas.

     

    On the other hand I agree that not everything that the Buddha said is factually accurate and the reason this is relevant is that in the tradition he was basically made to seem like he knew everything. If he did not know as much as it is claimed he did in the Suttas then it makes one wonder what else might be wrong. 

     

    The Buddha used whatever beliefs were current in order to teach dharma.  Clinging to the aggregates is valid.  Also there are some things which are true in a relative sense but not in an absolute sense - so yes he might have said things which we know to be factually inaccurate today but it makes no difference to the dharma.

    • Like 1

  17. Posted

    2 hours ago, snowymountains said:

     

    We were  discussing emotions not necessarily being linked to clinging, and that is relevant to the teachings though.

     

    The 4 elements part was to demonstrate that the Buddha didn't always have a complete picture in other topics as well.

     

     

    Emotions are linked by the identification of self with compounded phenomena.  This is clinging.

     

    The Buddha did not propose an ontological analysis of the nature of the world but just worked with the current interpretations of his day.  Hence Mount Meru and so forth.  It makes no difference whatsoever if these descriptors of the world are true or not.

  18. Posted

    1 minute ago, snowymountains said:

     

    It's not, these are the elements or phases he sought to attribute all matter to. The list is not complete.

     

    He didn't make the list, it was the best list at the time, so he used that one.


    yes but it is irrelevant to his teachings whether it is complete or not 

    • Like 1

  21. Posted

    35 minutes ago, blue eyed snake said:

     

    yes, this

     

    and for some the gunk is so overwhelmingly bad that maybe its better left were it is

     

    I wonder about that.  Maybe at a certain time or stage this is true in a practical sense but ultimately will it not be uncovered.

     

     

  22. Posted · Edited by Apech

    Firstly thank you all for the helpful and warm replies.  It's very nice to see and feel how supportive this place can be at times - perhaps we are really building a community here which is what I always hoped for (especially when I was moderating).

     

    Second, slight apologies for the melodramatic nature of the the topic title.  I did write it from the heart - I have had many varying and strong emotional reactions like this over the years and at certain times they were quite common.  I remember one time I received a vajrayana initiation (Amitabha) and when I got home I just sat and wept for hours.  On that occasion it wasn't so much rage as regret - that somehow I had to tell my self how hard I had been trying - but failing again and again.

     

    My rage when it surfaces is mainly about what others have done to me.  I am by nature quite ingenuous and have to learn slowly over years that the intent of others is often disingenuous - so I have in my younger years blundered into situations where others took advantage.  What happens I think, is that when this kind of thing is not assimilated or understood it sort of 'pickles' inside where deep down you have the awareness to see but somehow cannot express it to your self.  Then when it breaks out it can be hot and angry or bitter and resentful ... etc. etc.

     

    @Bindi has often spoken of something called 'spiritual bypassing' where all this inner content is kind of ignored or buried by supposed 'higher thoughts' and wot not (I think I've got that right) - this is a great danger to the likes of us, especially if we form the idea that we are somehow advanced enough to be beyond ordinary human concerns and so on.

     

    The other problem is that meditation is currently 'sold' (literally or figuratively) as a way to relaxation and calm.  Actually, in my experience meditation (or any spiritual process) is the opposite - it is a great work full of challenge and needing great effort - and particularly the courage to face into those things you would most like to avoid.  But again this does not mean indulgence in one's emotions in a way which just feeds self importance - i.e. 'how I feel is the most important thing in the world'.

     

    @Taoist Texts stagnation of qi in the liver is interesting - but is this not just a technical description of the bodily store of certain emotion?  If the qi moves and causes a feeling like rage - how is that different to rage?  Isn't the subtle body qi movement simply the correlate to the human emotions anyway???

     

    Last point perhaps is that I take the view that emotional responses are a positive sign.  They are there all the time un-noticed and bringing them into awareness is what is needed even if it is painful.

     

     

    • Like 6
    • Thanks 3