From the Foundation to the Apex

[Gem]

G'day

I'm not religious, so I'm not interested in Buddhist religion(s), but I believe the philosophy of universal truth has merit and Buddhist philosophy applies to that sort of reality. It's not an objective truth, because due to the universe and the mind emerging momentarily together, the truth is more-or-less subjective in nature. Hence the discovery of truth involves subjective qualities of truthfulness such as honesty and trust.

Truthfulness, being the ability to walk the path of truth, gives spiritual discovery an ethical foundation without which one's spiritual journey would lack virtue due not having a moral compass. A moral commitment to abide by certain precepts including truthfulness, being harmless, not stealing and a couple of other basic moral commitments creates a foundational basis for meditation success.

Buddha said meditation is for purification, overcoming sorrow, staying the path of truth and spiritual liberation, and his lessons pertained to universal aspects of thoughts and feelings and virtues such as compassion and equanimity rather than sectarian beliefs and traditions. Not to put sectarian things down, as they might have some sort of cultural significance, just to say spiritualism is essentially universal and variations in culture/tradition aren't particularly relevant, but when I say 'truthfulness', you get it no matter your background, and since it's universal, we're on the same page.

[BigJohn]

Thanks for sharing.

I suspect there are others who feel very similar to the way you feel.

[Gem]

Just trying to establish a moral compass to keep one true to the path. It sounds very strange doesn't it, because people don;t really think of morality as an essential life ingredient. The philosophers have always tried to rationalise morality, but it's never quie pinned down and remains an open discussion. That's not the topic here, though, albeit a very interesting one.

This is not theoretical. It introspective because the meditation is for discovery within oneself, so I'm to tell others what's what. Just here to say how I see it and let everyone check on themselves to see what sort of merit it has, if any.

It's going to be hard, because I have to try to articulate morality as an integral aspect of meditation, purification and liberation. The Buddhists have a teaching about you could look up, but in essence, morality, meditation and wisdom enhance each other. These aspects are attached to the 8 fold path, and to go into that explanation would be tedious as hell, but be happy and look it up you're interested.

This won't be a tedious wall of text about the nuances of Buddhist philosophy. It's more like an introspective discussion about the big picture. Indeed, even though morality, meditation and wisdom are categorised in the teaching, IRL they are aspects of the same thing. You can't be moral without insight into yourself, and the sum of insight is wisdom. This implies that one with considerable wisdom would have a high degree of mortality, which frankly, leads one to consider what the questionable conduct of some spiritual teachers implies about their qualification.

Hence, when it comes to the spiritual path, your morality is import, and a teacher's moral standard needs to be exemplary. There are many devious characters who are Buddhist teachers, so on really does have to extraordinarily discerning when building trust and cultivating a teacher/student relationship - or any interpersonal relations.

I guess that brings me to refuge. Taking refuge is a Buddhist tradition which is basically trust. There is refuge in Buddha (the enlightenment in yourself), dhamma (way of the universe) and sangha (the community and monks or teacher(s)). Obviously, if you don't trust your teacher or community, you won't take refuge in them, and you don't just throw your trust-pearls before the swine. People have show their trustworthiness to build up your trust in them, so refuge is a bit of process. Refuge in your enlightenment within is easier in principle, but in reality, there is a process of coming to full trust in 'life'.

Anyway. I talk a bit and people drift off, so this is enough. Make a comment and be happy.

[Gem]

Kaboom


What was I saying? Some stuff, and I hope it came together, but the stuff in my head is so interwoven that to me there are just different ways of looking at the same thing, so I can't really talk about morality apart from mindfulness, insight or wisdom and all the other things. Buddhist philosophy creates distinct categories for explanation purposes, but the main thing to know about Buddhist philosophy is the artificial categories are not thought about as distinct separate things. Like taking refuge is one aspect, trust as another, and morais another, mindfulness different and wisdom another thing etc, but of course no one will take refuge unless there is trust and there is no sustainable trust unless there is morality, and so all the things link together. I think somewhere in Buddhist philosophy they talk about all the facets of a jewel... which is is like, dhamma is like one jewel with a lot of different facets - but you can look that up since google has the story about a million times..


Anyway, just thought I'd say something randomly... I might come back later and say something more betterer.

[Gem]

I'd talk on other threads, but they don't interest me at the moment, so I'm just banging along here, trying to talk about something so complex there is no way I can string it together, but this conversation has been going on for thousands of years without letting up, and for me to think this makes any difference is like saying a drop of water makes a difference to the ocean.

The pointless endeavour of lfe, right?

Well, even if life has no purpose, meditation does: purification, overcoming sorrow, truth and liberation - at least that's how Buddhists see it - but when they conform to these discourses... that's where they claim the knowledge, form the sect, create affirmation rituals and conscript, convert, ordain and all the other irrelevant things which are taken to be important.

Buddha refers not to a person, but the quality of enlightenment. You can refer to a person as a Buddha, but really it refers to the enlightenment in them, which is also in you. That spiritual journey is one that explores and gains insight into ones self. Through knowing the nature of the body you understand the nature of matter, through understanding the nature of the mind you understand suffering and its resolution, and by knowing the one you always thought you were is not-me, you realise who and what you are.

Now you might feel excited because 'wow spiritual', so I am always left with this futility. People always want something, they are running from discomfort chasing after pleasure, which means the mind is always agitated and they never just stop.

Stopping is fantastic. Not special, but great. It's not like 'something other than this' has to happen. It's just the immediate and conscious subjectivity of knowing 'this is how it is' - noticing.

Anyway. That's all I have to say, so notice things and be happy.

[Gem]

You know I'm just ranting, right, but still, it's important, this stuff. We could be all wound up in our delusions of spiritual grandeur you know, and forget that things we take for granted are important whereas the spiritual nonsense is actually menial.

Well, let me say it is ridiculous to be 'so spiritual' if the basics are missing.

The problem with the religion is it constrains people to a substructure. Different teachers saying different things, but they all use the same drop down menus: the three jewels, sub-menu: 4 noble truths, sub-menu: 8 fold path and so forth. It's all made up, it doesn't mean anything, and there no truth in it.

The ontology in Buddhism is something like. First you hear dhamma (teachings). Second you think it through - join the dots and see if it seems sensible, makes sense, adds up, sounds reasonable and logical. Third you examine it in yourself to see the way in which it is true, if it is true at all.

This ontological process means the philosophy or teaching includes examination. The theory is not separate from the meditation. There is no philosophy without practice. In Buddhist philosophy everything tends to merge together, so don't imagine the meditation is over there and later on and this conversation (or monologue as it turned out to be) is over here and happening now, because actually, this monologue and the meditation are the same thing...

You didn't make these words happen, have no control or power over them, and regardless if you think they are 'not really Buddhist' or whatever it is, I already said there is no truth in these words or any others - but some sort of truth is kinda in the mix there, innit?

Anyhooo...

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

I guess that brings me to refuge. Taking refuge is a Buddhist tradition which is basically trust. There is refuge in Buddha (the enlightenment in yourself), dhamma (way of the universe) and sangha (the community and monks or teacher(s)). Obviously, if you don't trust your teacher or community, you won't take refuge in them, and you don't just throw your trust-pearls before the swine. People have show their trustworthiness to build up your trust in them, so refuge is a bit of process. Refuge in your enlightenment within is easier in principle, but in reality, there is a process of coming to full trust in 'life'.

Anyway. I talk a bit and people drift off, so this is enough. Make a comment and be happy.

Would you consider explaining what refuge is correctly when teaching others right speech? What you just explained as the 3 refuges is incorrect and is your take but is not what Buddhist teach.

Right speech would dictate that one would clearly inform the audience of the differences.

[Ciona]

I appreciate your posts here.

[jonesboy]

Originally Posted by Gem

G'day

Buddha said meditation is for purification, overcoming sorrow, staying the path of truth and spiritual liberation, and his lessons pertained to universal aspects of thoughts and feelings and virtues such as compassion and equanimity rather than sectarian beliefs and traditions. Not to put sectarian things down, as they might have some sort of cultural significance, just to say spiritualism is essentially universal and variations in culture/tradition aren't particularly relevant, but when I say 'truthfulness', you get it no matter your background, and since it's universal, we're on the same page.

The bolded is where you are going to have troubles if having a serious debate.

The fact that there are differences is why you have different traditions with different practices.

Also, not everyone is of moral standing, the practices are designed to help those with those issues. For instance Buddhism puts a lot of focus on opening the heart. Why? Because people need an open heart and most don't have it.

Morals are good and everyone should strive for right speech, etc.. but just like realizing energy or silence, some are farther along than others and shouldn't be judged.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by jonesboy

The bolded is where you are going to have troubles if having a serious debate.

The fact that there are differences is why you have different traditions with different practices.

Also, not everyone is of moral standing, the practices are designed to help those with those issues. For instance Buddhism puts a lot of focus on opening the heart. Why? Because people need an open heart and most don't have it.

Morals are good and everyone should strive for right speech, etc.. but just like realizing energy or silence, some are farther along than others and shouldn't be judged.

I didn't notice that Buddha put a lot of emphasis on opening the heart. It sounds uncharacteristic, really. Maybe the Tibetans are big into that sort of thing, but I don;t think Buddha put any particular emphasis on it.


Personally, I'm completely unconcerned with this tradition and that. Maybe they have some sort of cultural significance so I guess that is good, but it's nothing to do with dhamma. Dhamma is universal, like breath - everyone is breathing regardless of their tradition. The universe works as it does, and dhamma is all about nature's way. Sects might have some significance, but they do not change the way of things.