Anattā (no self)

[Gem]

Originally Posted by janielee

Many teachers today have their writings/teachings transcribed. It doesn't mean it wasn't in the present day (e.g. Thus have I heard, Gem says nutrition is important ) - and someone who had spent decades following and listening to the Buddha (and who was bright and intellectually astute with a good memory) could do the same.

As memory has it, Buddha's assistant, Ananda, was critical to recording the suttas because he was always present with Buddha and had heard all the discourses Buddha gave, but he wasn't allowed to be involved in formalising all the teachings after Buddha died because he wasn't arhant. Since Buddha had died, Ananda didn't have so much to do anymore, so he started meditating very seriously and became arhant, then joined the 'council' that first formalised the teachings. It is said that Ananda had a very good memory and could largely remember everything Buddha said word for word, and he had heard the discourses numerous times, so he became instrumental in recording the teachings.


I understand how that works, because i have done many retreats and heard the discourses as my school says it. The first time I heard the teachings, I heard some but lot was in one ear and out the other the other. The second time I heard things i missed the first time. The third time I heard more things i missed the first two times etc. After I heard things 15-20 times I had a pretty good grasp of the discourses. This way I understand how Ananda, who had heard the discourses many times more over decades, would accurately recount what Buddha had said having spent decades immersed in it.


Since that first recording, there have been several meetings of monks who have tried to ensure the word is retained in original form, but of course there are now dozens of sects named 'Buddhist' tell different stories.

Some people on this Board - such as Rain95 and jonesboy amongst others - like the teachings to suit THEM, and limit the teachings because it is convenient for their agenda - but it remains true that the teachings stand on their own - and have been tested through the centuries by many genuine adepts and masters in the Buddhist tradition.

I don't think people can understand things intricately unless they have lived within a sangha, undertaken the retreats and served at the ashrams, but if you have done that, you'll understand things by knowing 'what its like'. Anyone can go on google and read suttas, but doing that seems to produce 'experts' without intricacy or nuance, and this doesn't 'create the conditions' that characterise 'Buddhism'.

Faith is not something arisen, it is something natural when one sees the truth. People say "Oh words are not truth" and show their own limitations and biases. We can talk about a mango and say it is sweet, ripe and plump. Of course it is not the meal, but it points us to it - the rest is semantics and intellectual word play by people invested in their own belief systems and limited practice objectives.

JL

In my experience, practicing in Buddhist ways is like the art of living a good and happy life - it's about the subtlety, nuance, and delicacy of a balanced mind (as opposed to an excitable, agitated, erratic mind). Long term meditators tend (there are more than a few exceptions) to have purified themselves more, are more balanced and stable in their mind, and have a greater capacity for metta.


My view is, there is no practice later on. I'm typing here and now so I practice typing. Not to be better and faster at typing, but to be presently aware that 'this' is what is happening now. It is not just typing in itself, it's everything to do with my motive for typing, it's every word I put forth - what nature of volition moves my mind just so - and it has to be said in a way that reflects a deeper metta or it's all just wasted words.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by janielee

Yes, my apologies - I should have said specific bias and intermingling of teachings with other traditions My comments on this and yours are in this long thread above. Be well, jb.

JL

Can you show me what you mean by specific bias?

I do admit I throw in other traditions at times and when I do I do my best to explain why I am doing so. Usually to help one understand something like Universal Mind. I believe I even said that the description that was masterfully described was still not at the same depth as a Buddha.

One thing I find funny about a couple of members who preach how important metta is. How having an open heart is so important and how you treat others is a sign of ones practice.

It is those members who are the ones disparaging others. Belittling ones views, interpretation of teachings or even knowledge of Buddhism. It is those same members who dismiss Buddhist traditions, practices and history while saying loving kindness is the measure in which they judge others.

Amazing...

[muffin]

Originally Posted by 7luminaries

Hahaha...Hello there muffin - how are you doing?
Well perhaps they do then :)
Ad so perhaps it's also about meeting their humanity one to another and giving that other person the space to share.
And in sharing, to both know that they matter and they are heard in the most intrinsic sense of these things.
And in sharing, likewise, there is the opportunity to take ownership as well and to acknowledge that in front of another (i.e., to act with integrity).

Quite a bit of key stuff there, really...simply in this innocent little ask and share

Peace & blessings
7L

Good afternoon 7luminaries

I'm fine thanks, just getting over the flu, best part I got a week off work

I've come to see as, they have always been there showing you things along the way. Till you get to a stage of meeting them on their terms.

What you see as,"acknowledge that in front of another", I see as what flows thru one, flows thru another and visa versa, nothing is hidden and all seen, to hurt one is to hurt yourself.

P.S I think it sucks there a limit on the amount of emoji you can use.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by janielee

Of course you think it is true

Buddha never taught people to carry opinions.
That is not Buddhism nor from Buddha imho.

[Rain95]

Those who cling to judgements, views, and opinions, wondering around this world, create conflict within and without. Buddha

it is fake - and obviously so for anyone who is familiar with Buddhist intent.

The mind is everything. What you think you become. Buddha

Can one know Buddha or Buddhism while arguing or judging the words of another? I would say if one is engaged in those activities they are not being familiar with Buddhist intent.

What's in the mirror is not obvious if one only see others in it.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by janielee

not using a word for a minute is enlightenment

That fake quote actually appeared while the original text was just above it. Amazing!

[sky]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Buddha never taught people to carry opinions.
That is not Buddhism nor from Buddha imho.

If you do a little research Rain into Buddhism and Buddha's teachings you will find that it's not ' Opinions ' that are the problems or cause problems, it's the Clinging/Attachment to the opinions.

[Rain95]

Originally Posted by sky123

Rain... it's not ' Opinions ' that are the problems or cause problems, it's the Clinging/Attachment to the opinions.

Yes that's what I posted right above your post. Read slower with more interest in what was said lol.

Originally Posted by Rain95

Those who cling to judgements, views, and opinions, wondering around this world, create conflict within and without. Buddha

The word "problem" is not in this quote...
Buddha never taught people to carry opinions.
Carry.... like the raft parable....

There is a huge difference between what is written and what one may imagine was written. (An opinion)

[sky]

Originally Posted by Rain95

Yes that's what I posted right above your post. Read slower with more interest in what was said lol.



The word "problem" is not in this quote...
Buddha never taught people to carry opinions.
Carry.... like the raft parable....

There is a huge difference between what is written and what one may imagine was written. (An opinion)

You don't believe either quote is acknowledged as coming from Buddha so it's puzzling why you keep engaging in the back and forth regarding the fake and the acknowledged. Any quotes that are part of Suttas are seen as a teachings, others are regarded as Fake.


You wrote....

' Personally, I believe neither quote, the one claimed to be fake or the one claimed to be real, would be said by anybody who is enlightened. I was just pointing out both said the exact same thing using different synonyms. If any teacher said such things, I would run away as fast as I could '


So why haven't you ran?




"People with opinions just go around bothering each other.” is what you posted and what I pointed out as being ' Fake '
“Those who cling to perceptions and views wander the world offending people.” The Buddha....


See the difference.... Cling..... Buddha did have opinions, read some Suttas/Sutras...

I rest my case lol....

[running]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

Can you show me what you mean by specific bias?

I do admit I throw in other traditions at times and when I do I do my best to explain why I am doing so. Usually to help one understand something like Universal Mind. I believe I even said that the description that was masterfully described was still not at the same depth as a Buddha.

One thing I find funny about a couple of members who preach how important metta is. How having an open heart is so important and how you treat others is a sign of ones practice.

It is those members who are the ones disparaging others. Belittling ones views, interpretation of teachings or even knowledge of Buddhism. It is those same members who dismiss Buddhist traditions, practices and history while saying loving kindness is the measure in which they judge others.

Amazing...

i have a hard enough time figuring out if im doing the right thing. am i doing the wrong thing. to often i have found being generous doesn't necessarely help the one im being so with. other times it does seem helpful. these things are full of calculations and perceptions. outcomes i may or may not witness. i conclude i will never know. therefore let everyone figure out for themselves for them in their mind in their culture and or their idealogy.

then coming into the conclusion of the practice. that being silence. that being bliss. is non dual anways. and i find it interesting that that phenomena is a much better facilitator of peace to oneself and the world than anything conceptionaly manufactured anyways. so for me i am pretty neutral. cause i know how dumb i am. and how intelligent bliss and silence is.