Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gem
Often we imagine Buddhism as a discursive construction built on scriptural knowledge, but that is the imaginary/symbolic system of organisational structures, temples, hierarchies and icons and ritual practice which sustains tradition through cycles of repetition. It's not an aspect of the real-lived experience of day to day life.
When we associate 'dhamma' with the institution and its textual foundations, we imagine dhamma as sectarian knowledge rather that the universal way of nature. My own teachers used to say if a dhamma is not universal, it ain't dhamma. When Buddha was alive and teaching, he addressed human suffering and liberation, and did not regurgitate the conventions of his society's former tradition. He spoke of life, which is ever changing, never repeating as if the universe was renewed entirely with each moment.
My time is limited, so I will return at a later time to continue this dialogue.
|
If Buddha did as you are sharing, why are others locked into the concepts and knowledge as such?
At what point in the process of studying the knowledge or concepts, would someone reach this awareness, to know and understand this point your making? Or is it overlooked by many who let the concepts become their favoured talking point?