Conducive to purpose

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Rain95

You cannot be selfless holding onto or referring to any teaching, true or false. Correct interpretations only hold a value for those that need them. Only are important to those in delusion. Life is not thinking. Life is not having ones attention on ideas. Unless one chooses that as life.

Well, the teachings allude to 'right' (samma) which doesn't mean 'correct'. It means something like full or complete or whole. The story of 5 blind men feeling parts of the elephant represents how partial views can't be called incorrect; just incomplete. The interpretation of 'samma' to mean correct is in itself a wrong view, which is not to say the interpretation is incorrect - only that it is a small fraction of the whole.

[happy soul]

Originally Posted by Gem

In the actual practice which is concerned with the truth, it doesn't make any difference what religion an individual prefers. For example, the is no Muslim breath, Zen breath, Christian breath, and anyone, regardless of their religious background can observe the breath. In this sense, the breath is universal, and not sectarian. This is an analogy illustrates that dhamma is universal.



If on the other hand we visualise the icons Muhummad, Jesus and Buddha, they are sectarian symbols, not universal ones. A Christian, for example, takes refuge in the icon Christ, and not in the icon Buddha; takes refuge in the Bible, not in the Pali Canon.


My discussion here is not the sectarian issue; it is the universal issue, so it necessarily pertains to the real lived experience and not so much the sectarian beliefs, and this is not a derision of the various sects; it is just to say these sects are not important when it comes to universal dhamma, and the fact that anyone can notice they are breathing no matter what religious belief they prefer merely illustrates that point.


Hence, if people come here with no regard for the person Buddha, it makes no difference to the 'enlightenment in themselves' or 'the way of nature'. In this way everyone is included.


The meditation school I am associated with is open to anyone of any religion and most people attending the retreats do not call themselves Buddhist, and we are not concerned with converting anyone to Buddhism so we do undertake any conversion ceremonies. We still adhere to the formality of taking refuge in the three jewels and taking the vows of sila, but only in the universal sense - not in any religious sense.


The dhamma talks covering the Buddhist philosophy are used to explain the 'right meditation', which is always universal because it involves seeing it 'as it is'. In the example of the breath, every person can feel themselves breathing, but everyone has a unique subjective experience of that, and hence the truth of the breath 'as it is' doesn't have an answer. It is only true in the way it is experienced by you.


Hence the meditation is universal dhamma, but there is only the truth as it is now and now and now and now... as it is experienced, in the way it is experienced by you. Actually experienced. Not what anyone believes and imagines, but the direct experience as it happens, just as it is.


So I just throw that out there as a bit of a rant as I'm trying to communicate a meaning which can't be grasped as knowledge or an answer in the mind, but can be understood as an impression of sorts.

Thanks for getting back to me.

Always nice connecting with you.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Gem

In the actual practice which is concerned with the truth, it doesn't make any difference what religion an individual prefers. For example, the is no Muslim breath, Zen breath, Christian breath, and anyone, regardless of their religious background can observe the breath. In this sense, the breath is universal, and not sectarian. This is an analogy illustrates that dhamma is universal.



If on the other hand we visualise the icons Muhummad, Jesus and Buddha, they are sectarian symbols, not universal ones. A Christian, for example, takes refuge in the icon Christ, and not in the icon Buddha; takes refuge in the Bible, not in the Pali Canon.


My discussion here is not the sectarian issue; it is the universal issue, so it necessarily pertains to the real lived experience and not so much the sectarian beliefs, and this is not a derision of the various sects; it is just to say these sects are not important when it comes to universal dhamma, and the fact that anyone can notice they are breathing no matter what religious belief they prefer merely illustrates that point.


Hence, if people come here with no regard for the person Buddha, it makes no difference to the 'enlightenment in themselves' or 'the way of nature'. In this way everyone is included.


The meditation school I am associated with is open to anyone of any religion and most people attending the retreats do not call themselves Buddhist, and we are not concerned with converting anyone to Buddhism so we do undertake any conversion ceremonies. We still adhere to the formality of taking refuge in the three jewels and taking the vows of sila, but only in the universal sense - not in any religious sense.


The dhamma talks covering the Buddhist philosophy are used to explain the 'right meditation', which is always universal because it involves seeing it 'as it is'. In the example of the breath, every person can feel themselves breathing, but everyone has a unique subjective experience of that, and hence the truth of the breath 'as it is' doesn't have an answer. It is only true in the way it is experienced by you.


Hence the meditation is universal dhamma, but there is only the truth as it is now and now and now and now... as it is experienced, in the way it is experienced by you. Actually experienced. Not what anyone believes and imagines, but the direct experience as it happens, just as it is.


So I just throw that out there as a bit of a rant as I'm trying to communicate a meaning which can't be grasped as knowledge or an answer in the mind, but can be understood as an impression of sorts.

Correction. I meant to say we do not undertake any conversion ceremonies.

[sky]

Originally Posted by Rain95

That's important to you as you are keeping your attention on thoughts and thinking. What are you afraid would happen if you stopped keeping your attention on such things? You would become a nothing, a nobody? Your fears are true as that is what you become. Selfless. Being a nothing is not as bad as you THINK it is.... as thought is not a part of it!

Thought.... yes it hates the idea of not being the center of ones attention.... of masquerading as self. It will come up with a billion reasons why one needs to stay focused on it, for truth and wisdom and enlightenment and on and on.... all fake, all untrue.... as Buddha said.....

remind you how necessary it is to let go of all the true teachings, not to mention teachings that are not true

Let go of all teachings, true or false.... why so difficult? Just let go. Stop trying to be a somebody or a something. Just be. Don't be a Buddhist, or a Christian, or a anything.... just be empty with the attention not on the thoughts and thinking, on opinions and belief, on judgements and interpretations.

Just be. Experience/perception.... conflict free within and without.

One cannot find that, when one is not, there it is.

We have skillful and unskillful thoughts, some have advantages others disadvantages, the key is to choose which one's are useful.

The Raft Parable is a teaching on using the Dharma to get you to the other side or the safety of the shore, which is ' Enlightenment '.
After reaching safety you drop or leave the teachings for others to use. It isn't about not using Dharma or thinking as you seem to be saying

[sky]

Buddha used the analogy of a Harp/Lute string to explain what Samma means. It is usually interpretated as,

Well directed, appropriate or best..

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by Gem

Well, the teachings allude to 'right' (samma) which doesn't mean 'correct'. It means something like full or complete or whole. The story of 5 blind men feeling parts of the elephant represents how partial views can't be called incorrect; just incomplete. The interpretation of 'samma' to mean correct is in itself a wrong view, which is not to say the interpretation is incorrect - only that it is a small fraction of the whole.

One thought that occurred to me was "interpretation" or a response to a teaching didn't necessarily have to be mental or celebrial in nature. It could be an action or a different response to a teaching or sutta or whatever. But then "interpretation" is probably not a good word for that. You read a sutta or teaching and you respond with a realization, an insight into yourself. You actualize what was taught. That is not really "interpreting" as that is more thinking. The teaching leads you to be more aware of something present, something actual. This is not interpreting a teaching correctly, this is realizing a teaching, which results in a change of consciousness. I suppose the word "interpretation" can refer to the whole beings response outside of thought, but really I doubt that is how that word is commonly applied. The word implies a duality. The one that does that interpretation.

Reminded me of the pop icon Yoda as a cartoon like representation of a Buddhist/Zen master. Yoda told Luke, "No. Try not. Do… or do not. There is no try." If Buddha's message is to withdraw the attention from the conceptual, which is basically thought, does this teaching require an interpretation or an action? Can you think about taking your attention off of thought? Well you can but this just continues the attention staying fixed on thought. So like the Zen Buddhist based character Yoda said, not really. You can't try to not think, trying is thinking. You either take your attention off of thought or you don't. Do or not do. There is no try. Trying to do it is not doing it. The trier is a creation of a thought centered consciousness. If a trier is present, so is thought based consciousness.

Interpret correctly would mean applying the message to yourself in such a way your consciousness changes. You "do it" in other words. You actualize the teaching. Make it a lived and perceived experience. That's the only "right" interpretation in this case as Buddha is clearly saying to take ones attention off of thought and the conceptual. Other intellectual interpretations are doing the opposite of what Buddha said to do. Buddha himself says in that discourse his teachings are being flipped and understood in the opposite and wrong way he is intending.

Buddha states his teaching are becoming things to think about, to debate others with etc, to prove oneself right and others wrong, and Buddha says such people have not understood his teachings at all. In fact, he says such people are not interested in realizing their meaning. He states his teaching is for liberation, and that is all. If you don't get liberation from them, you have not understood them.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Rain95

One thought that occurred to me was "interpretation" or a response to a teaching didn't necessarily have to be mental or celebrial in nature. It could be an action or a different response to a teaching or sutta or whatever. But then "interpretation" is probably not a good word for that. You read a sutta or teaching and you respond with a realization, an insight into yourself. You actualize what was taught. That is not really "interpreting" as that is more thinking. The teaching leads you to be more aware of something present, something actual. This is not interpreting a teaching correctly, this is realizing a teaching, which results in a change of consciousness. I suppose the word "interpretation" can refer to the whole beings response outside of thought, but really I doubt that is how that word is commonly applied. The word implies a duality. The one that does that interpretation.

Reminded me of the pop icon Yoda as a cartoon like representation of a Buddhist/Zen master. Yoda told Luke, "No. Try not. Do… or do not. There is no try." If Buddha's message is to withdraw the attention from the conceptual, which is basically thought, does this teaching require an interpretation or an action? Can you think about taking your attention off of thought? Well you can but this just continues the attention staying fixed on thought. So like the Zen Buddhist based character Yoda said, not really. You can't try to not think, trying is thinking. You either take your attention off of thought or you don't. Do or not do. There is no try. Trying to do it is not doing it. The trier is a creation of a thought centered consciousness. If a trier is present, so is thought based consciousness.

Interpret correctly would mean applying the message to yourself in such a way your consciousness changes. You "do it" in other words. You actualize the teaching. Make it a lived and perceived experience. That's the only "right" interpretation in this case as Buddha is clearly saying to take ones attention off of thought and the conceptual. Other intellectual interpretations are doing the opposite of what Buddha said to do. Buddha himself says in that discourse his teachings are being flipped and understood in the opposite and wrong way he is intending.

Buddha states his teaching are becoming things to think about, to debate others with etc, to prove oneself right and others wrong, and Buddha says such people have not understood his teachings at all. In fact, he says such people are not interested in realizing their meaning. He states his teaching is for liberation, and that is all. If you don't get liberation from them, you have not understood them.

No one understands them, they just ascribe a meaning - one way is an intellectual interpretation, or another way is 'getting it' according to actual insight. Either way, no two people see it in the same way. Personally, I wouldn't care if the teachings vanished and the whole religion disappeared overnight for all the difference that would make to what I have for breakfast.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by sky123

Buddha used the analogy of a Harp/Lute string to explain what Samma means. It is usually interpretated as,

Well directed, appropriate or best..

I guess that alludes to the word 'skillful' as well.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by sky123

We have skillful and unskillful thoughts, some have advantages others disadvantages, the key is to choose which one's are useful.

The Raft Parable is a teaching on using the Dharma to get you to the other side or the safety of the shore, which is ' Enlightenment '.
After reaching safety you drop or leave the teachings for others to use. It isn't about not using Dharma or thinking as you seem to be saying

I will carry it with me as I continue my journey....

Buddha says to drop them as you don't need them on your journey anymore...

He does not say the journey is over or completed....

Buddha was not speaking of a final destination or achievement, an enlightenment. But then this word "enlightenment" is being misunderstood as well. In Buddha's teachings there is no self, so what is enlightened? What is enlightenment? It is a state of consciousness. A way of being, A realization.

Buddha was saying to not carry teachings once you have got what they are pointing to... liberation from thought based conceptual self, to continue your journey actualizing them, living them.

Bhikshus, there are six bases for views. This means that there are six grounds of wrong perception that we need to drop. What are the six?

Once the raft is dropped, one discerns and walks in right perception...

Whenever there is an idea of self, there is also an idea of what belongs to the self. When there is no idea of self, there is no idea of anything that belongs to the self. Self and what belongs to the self are two views that are based on trying to grasp things that cannot be grasped and to establish things that cannot be established.” Such wrong perceptions cause us to be bound by internal knots that arise the moment we are caught by ideas that cannot be grasped or established and have no basis in reality. Do you see that these are wrong perceptions? Do you see the consequences of such wrong perceptions in the case of Bhikshu Arittha?”

Buddha is pointing out that "teachings" are not the focus as they belong to the delusional idea of self.

https://plumvillage.org/sutra/discou...catch-a-snake/

The Buddha taught, “I have given this teaching on the raft many times to remind you how necessary it is to let go of all the true teachings, not to mention teachings that are not true. there are six grounds of wrong perception that we need to drop....Having heard the Buddha speak thus, the bhikshus, with great joy, put the teachings into practice.”

Lived/actualized the teachings. Transformed them into experience. Like dropping that raft on the other shore and walking on without it....Walking.... living them....journey that never ends. Staying in right perception and discernment.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by Gem

no two people see it in the same way.

Lot's of people seem to be saying to same thing. having the same realization. to me. Not on these forums though lol.