Quote:
|
Originally Posted by blossomingtree
It's specious and shallow at best. Not an inquiry.
Your enso represents that, as do many of the masters ("seek and ye shall find", "Who am I?" "What is Truth?" "what is consciousness" "Where is the real Guru" "Heart Sutra" "The whole world is my self" "finger pointing to the moon" "what you seek is what is seeking")
Furthermore, as I stated elsewhere, these types of posts "there is nothing to do" "you have already arrived" "trust me I know best" seek to posit themselves as superior to the thousands of years of proven traditions. I have no issue against breaking the mold, I don't however have faith in people who posit useless and specious shortcuts that undermine a genuine path of faith and spiritual practice.
BT
|
Hello BT
I don’t have a problem with direct pointing as an approach. In the hands of certain writers/speakers it can be powerful and insightful. It’s not really a teaching as such, it’s more of a reporting/sharing - although it’s objectives are much the same. I think there is room for it alongside other approaches. But as you say, some of it is shallow - especially when it is second or third hand - which much of it is. It can also be inconsistent and muddled and it avoids accountability for some of its circular reasoning and lapses of logic (but then, most approaches do.)
My comments above are in the context of Jyotir’s post. I was agreeing with his view that it is disingenuous to suggest that this direct form of reporting doesn’t constitute a path, method or technique of sorts. And no, it’s not the same as self inquiry but its implied objective is ultimately the same.