Taking the Middle Path

[Gem]

To be clear, I do not identify as a Buddhist and have no intention whatsoever of converting anyone to any form of religion, but the teachings of the Buddha, called 'Dhamma', are necessarily universal and involve no sectarian idioms. It does not matter if people indentify as Buddhist, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Christian or another. These particular systems of belief are for the individual to decide, but there are universal truisms common to all of these that transcend their differences.

The first step onto the Middle Path is to take refuge, which I will describe as a surrender: a leap of faith, but not of belief. The first and last refuge is to the enlightenment within one's self. The Buddha is not the person, Guatama (though he may be referred to as that). "Buddha" refers to ones inner enlightenment. It has no object in which to believe, and it is at the heart of all people.

There are two lesser surrenders. One to the teachings of Guatama the Buddha, called 'Dhamma', but more importantly, Dhamma is also the word used to represent 'the ways of nature', and thus, this refuge primarily is to surrender to nature's way. The teachings of Dhamma are about nature, so these texts are not articles to take in blind faith in the way a Bible might be, but items which might be checked against oneself, who by insight gained through real lived experience, may discern with clarity the depths of their meanings.

The third surrender is taking refuge in the Sangha, and in the broader context, this means to find trust within the community, and be part of the sharing involved in serving each other and caring for each other's well-being. Formally, 'Sangha' refers to the community of monks, but in essence, monks are in constant service to others. This brings me to the principle called 'Metta', which means loving kindness. At the heart of refuge in the Sangha is the spirit of loving kindness, which in turn, emanates from the enlightenment within oneself.

This is not Buddhist particularly, but framed in the Buddhist context and expressed in the Buddhist genre of language. The essence of the expression is universally applicable to all people, and underwritten by that true wish, the expression of 'Metta' - that all living beings be happy.

This 3 part refuge is described as 'Triple Gem', and therefrom my avatar name was adopted. The Three Jewels go together, are inter-related, each enhancing the other, as they fortify the traveler of the Middle Path.

[naturesflow]

Originally Posted by Gem

To be clear, I do not identify as a Buddhist and have no intention whatsoever of converting anyone to any form of religion, but the teachings of the Buddha, called 'Dhamma', are necessarily universal and involve no sectarian idioms. It does not matter if people indentify as Buddhist, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Christian or another. These particular systems of belief are for the individual to decide, but there are universal truisms common to all of these that transcend their differences.

The first step onto the Middle Path is to take refuge, which I will describe as a surrender: a leap of faith, but not of belief. The first and last refuge is to the enlightenment within one's self. The Buddha is not the person, Guatama (though he may be referred to as that). "Buddha" refers to ones inner enlightenment. It has no object in which to believe, and it is at the heart of all people.

There are two lesser surrenders. One to the teachings of Guatama the Buddha, called 'Dhamma', but more importantly, Dhamma is also the word used to represent 'the ways of nature', and thus, this refuge primarily is to surrender to nature's way. The teachings of Dhamma are about nature, so these texts are not articles to take in blind faith in the way a Bible might be, but items which might be checked against oneself, who by insight gained through real lived experience, may discern with clarity the depths of their meanings.

The third surrender is taking refuge in the Sangha, and in the broader context, this means to find trust within the community, and be part of the sharing involved in serving each other and caring for each other's well-being. Formally, 'Sangha' refers to the community of monks, but in essence, monks are in constant service to others. This brings me to the principle called 'Metta', which means loving kindness. At the heart of refuge in the Sangha is the spirit of loving kindness, which in turn, emanates from the enlightenment within oneself.

This is not Buddhist particularly, but framed in the Buddhist context and expressed in the Buddhist genre of language. The essence of the expression is universally applicable to all people, and underwritten by that true wish, the expression of 'Metta' - that all living beings be happy.

This 3 part refuge is described as 'Triple Gem', and therefrom my avatar name was adopted. The Three Jewels go together, are inter-related, each enhancing the other, as they fortify the traveler of the Middle Path.

Thanks.

That was informative in a new way of seeing all this.

I see the connection now in ways I didn't before.

[RyanWind]

In Buddhism, the middle path is described in the Samyuktagama as:

"It is not coming nor going"
"It neither exists nor not exists."
"If we can see the truth
of the causes of worldly sufferings,
we will not be attached to the view of nothingness.
If we can see the truth of cessation in the world,
we will not be attached to worldly existence.
By avoiding the two extremes,
the Tathagatha teaches us
the Middle Path, which is,
what this is, that is; this arising, that arises…"
The Enlightened One
lives in the state of ego-lessness,
renounces self-conceit
and hence progresses towards liberation and Nirvana."
I and mine are both empty.
Why is it so?
Because this is the nature of things."

[Gem]

Cool Passage. I think the story goes something, Buddha, after leaving his princely palace and station of immense comfort ad wealth, he spend time meditating with some radical spiritual guys in the forest in complete poverty and was brought to the brink of starvation... story goes on to say it's not about excess and it's not about extreme poverty, and there is a middle way of modest living.

My aim on this thread is take that not as an historical account, but as a sort of parable into which some depth of meaning can be read. Over time and in the context of practice, the concept of The Middle Way started out with fairly simple meaning, but in dealing with the grey areas of living, somewhere between 'black and white', the meaning of 'The Middle' took on more nuanced dimensions.

[Gem]

If then, a person is able at least in principle to accept the enlightenment within in themselves in good faith, as a kind of deep trust if you will, with awareness of their own depths beyond what is known, and give over a sense of surrender to that to some degree or another - then we go on to some fundamental virtues of goodness that are nourishing to the soul, and help to guide one truly on the Path. In the Buddhist tradition this is referred to as "Sila", but as I appeal to the secular world and those of any religion, I'll term it as 'integrity'. In the Buddhist tradition this takes the form of precepts which include, not killing or harming living beings, not lying/being truthful, not engaging in sexual misconduct, not stealing (taking what is not given), and not taking intoxicants.

Importantly, this rule-set certainly does apply to formal Buddhist practice as fundamental to the meditation training, but it is not a rule-set only. It is a more like a condensate of the essence of integrity: which is living a life that brings benefit, rather than harm, to yourself and other living things.

If people are interested in a more detailed expression of this, please visit The Buddhist Centre for more detailed information. (https://thebuddhistcentre.com/text/ethics)

To summarise:

The Middle Path is entered with a consideration of the notions of surrender which were outlined first post (OP), which leads to the above described notion of integrity as founded in truthfulness, kindness, and consideration for the well-being of all living things (please see above link). Again, as was mentioned in the OP, this ethic relates directly to what is called 'Metta', which means loving kindness - and inherently emanates from 'the enlightenment within yourself' (as I have termed it).

[Still_Waters]

I always loved the story about how the Buddha discovered the "Middle Path" by listening to a musician on a boat instructing his student. Whether the story is true or not, one can only speculate, but it does emphasize the fact that one can learn from anyone and anything.

STORY SYNOPSIS:

A story is often told that when Buddha was still an ascetic he was sitting under a tree near the river meditating. Along the river came a small boat with a musician and his student on board. As the student was tuning his guitar, his teacher told him that if he tunes a string too tight it will break, and if he tunes it too loose the guitar will not play. When he heard this, he realized that the ascetic life was too tight, and that he needed to take care of his body in order for it not to distract his mind from his meditation.

http://www.urbandharma.org/udharma/dhamachakcom.html

[Gem]

Thank you.

The reason I started with the surrender or the refuge (ref OP), and then spoke of integrity (sila in post 5) might not seem clear, so this post will elucidate how these interact to give a strength to nourish the traveller's soul.

Firstly, the elements of surrender invoke virtues which amount to what I will phrase as 'trust in the enlightenment within yourself'. The qualities that emit from the enlightenment are describable as the infinite purity of love, and this is central to the spirit of loving kindness which does not expect gratitude, or ask anything in return. We can surmise that it follows that the ethics of integrity (post 5) such as not hurting living things, remaining truthful etc, are of natural consequence to such loving kindness.

As such, 'the enlightenment within yourself' is the very heart of not Buddhism per se, but yourself. The surrender opens this possibility, loving kindness enters the human expression, and the result is the sort of integrity arising from the one true wish: that all living beings be peaceful and happy.

I want to stress that without making the resolve consciously to surrender to enlightenment, and also, a sort of vow to be loving and kind toward one's self and also other living beings, it will be difficult to remain stable and true on the Middle Path. I encourage people to spend some time considering the surrender and the integrity and being serious to committing to what I hope I have conveyed in a most positive light, because if those two are are undertaken in life, you are automatically on the Middle Path, and if they are not in truth undertaken, then you haven't stepped up.

The reason this becomes critical is, the middle way was fundamentally stipulated by Guatama (widely known as 'The Buddha') by saying: "Monks, these two extremes ought not to be cultivated by the recluse. What two? Sensual indulgence which is low, vulgar, worldly, ignoble, and conducive to harm; and self-mortification, which is painful, ignoble, and conducive to harm. The middle path... (by) avoiding the extremes, gives vision and knowledge and leads to calm, realization, enlightenment,"

In the post on integrity (sila post 5) it was explained that, "(sila) is not a rule-set only. It is a more like a condensate of the essence of integrity: which is living a life that brings benefit, rather than harm, to yourself and other living things".

We see here that the integrity or sila concerns doing no harm, and The Middle Way is also predicated upon doing no harm. This obvious connection suggests that the Middle Path is one of integrity, which by virtue of its loving kindness, is inherently linked to the enlightenment within yourself. Thus, the surrender (post1), to the integrity (post 5), to the Middle Path.

I hope I have articulated in an understandable way how this all fits together. If I have, I would be very pleased, and if not, well, I've completely stuffed the thread, innit .

[RyanWind]

In my spiritual ponderings and readings, I came upon this one idea and for some reason it linked up in my mind as related to this concept of a middle path. Maybe it has nothing to do with it. But I was thinking about being mind vs becoming mind and the differences between the two. One thing that occurred to me is this idea of the middle between two ends. The middle is what the realization is if one is trying to find "being" mind. A mind that is not preoccupied with becoming something. Not preoccupied with time. Because only the ego thinks in terms of becoming and progress through time. There is nothing to become, only something to see. There is nowhere to go, you are already there. It can only be found now.

So, for example, the ends would be trying and not trying....they seem to be opposites. One can try, or do the opposite and not try. But really, both involve a doer. Someone is there trying to do both. Someone is doing nothing or doing something. The true opposite of trying or not trying is neither is done because one lets go of the doer.

This is one way I think of the phrase, the middle path. The ego thinks in terms of the two ends, or imagined opposites. I can try or I can not try. I can seek or not seek. I can make an effort or not make an effort. In the middle, between the two ends, is the truth. Just being.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by RyanWind

In my spiritual ponderings and readings, I came upon this one idea and for some reason it linked up in my mind as related to this concept of a middle path. Maybe it has nothing to do with it. But I was thinking about being mind vs becoming mind and the differences between the two. One thing that occurred to me is this idea of the middle between two ends. The middle is what the realization is if one is trying to find "being" mind. A mind that is not preoccupied with becoming something. Not preoccupied with time. Because only the ego thinks in terms of becoming and progress through time. There is nothing to become, only something to see. There is nowhere to go, you are already there. It can only be found now.

That sounds like the essence of my spirituality, where a person can be as they are rather than trying to be otherwise. I put a lot of emphasis on the idea 'the enlightenment within yourself' not in terms of future attainment, but in terms of surrender to what is simply true.

So, for example, the ends would be trying and not trying....they seem to be opposites. One can try, or do the opposite and not try. But really, both involve a doer. Someone is there trying to do both. Someone is doing nothing or doing something. The true opposite of trying or not trying is neither is done because one lets go of the doer.

Yes, the very structure of language assumes a doer, and the whole doer is probably a construct of language's symbolism itself, so I say 'surrender' as though someone surrenders, or 'accept' as though someone accepts, but it's not really the action or the choice of surrender or acceptance, but the cessation of action and choice. This,in effect, is the end of seeking and the beginnig of seeing, hence the meditation isn't a seeking, but a seeing. It's like stop seeking a 'special spiritual' and start watching what is happens to be there anyway. What we refer to as 'ego' can't withstand the non-volitional observation which characterises meditation.

During one of my long retreats, I was seated in a small dark quiet room purposed for an individual mediator, when I went into a vision where the ghost of myself appeared to me. It was highly distraught that I'd recognised it, and found it as the thing that pretends to be me. It was trying to find a way to get by my attention and 'become me' again, but I had one arm out in 'talk to the palm' fashion, and remained curiously observant of this highly volatile, self-like impression. This is the figurine that insists on keeping doing, becoming more spiritual, being someone where it can keep going as the in-control-of-volition, ghost-like self-image. But with cessation of doing and non-doing, the end of seeking and the commencement of seeing, it can't continue as 'me'. Well anyway, that's just a personal account, which doesn't implicate anyone else.

This is one way I think of the phrase, the middle path. The ego thinks in terms of the two ends, or imagined opposites. I can try or I can not try. I can seek or not seek. I can make an effort or not make an effort. In the middle, between the two ends, is the truth. Just being.

That's a great way of expressing it. Well said.

[Gem]

If people follow this thread, then there's been some consideration about how virtuous living arises through the loving kindness endemic to the enlightenment within.

If persons are prepared to commit to the surrender and to their integrity, as was discussed previously, then they are equipped and strengthened to travel the Middle Path. And so begins a practice of an artful way of life.

If I continue this thread, I'll start talking about making the space needed to enable the process describes as 'the path' in a context where Middle Path philosophy saturates not only all the aspects of daily living, but the holistic interactions between mind and body, and the environment within which a person lives. It is said that the path leads from bondage to liberation. Change is everywhere and this path can be thought of not as a direction per se, but as a transformation.