I'm not always sure when someone is quoted whether that means a response is appreciated or if it is just meant to indicate what the post is referring back to. As you did say "Hi," I want to at least
say Hi back.
Let's see if anything else develops.
markandeya wrote: ↑
Thu Aug 09, 2018 8:52 pm
(As was mentioned here, whoever said that was speaking very informally, imprecisely, and ok, incorrectly.)
Can you describe Nibbana
I'm not sure you are actually asking me that, but if so my answer is "no" it would be way above my pay grade to attempt that.
The best I can do is have shifting notions of what it is and isn't based on descriptions from sources that I trust.
That was the source my post -- that I didn't think Nibbana "does" anything (which is not to say that attaining
Nibbana does not have consequences).
Whats the formal definition of something that cant be described, how to make it precise and explain and define in correctly. I could splutter and stutter with meaningless things like what I meant was... i really meant.. your not understanding what I meant.....
But that would simply be shadow boxing, plus it was yesterday and the train already left the station.
It cant be described. Something as profound and within the goal of Buddhist practice as nibbana is impossible to describe, yet so many us try to attempt. From my side it was just an informal spontaneous reflection, its as simple as that, does it need to be perfect when there was no intention to make it objectively and intellectually precise.
No need for an informal spontaneous reflection to be perfect. I was responding to the OP's request to discuss, and so posted my quick reaction. I was not trying to condemn the quote -- in fact, acknowledged that it did seem to be informal vs. technical. (I can't tell if you are indicating here that you are the source of the OP's quote or just saying you perceived it to be
an informal reflection. I certainly meant no offense to the source regardless -- my "IMHO" was quite sincere.)
Regarding "impossible to describe," just for the heck of it, I'll offer a "definition" from the glossary of Bhikkhu Bodhi's "In the Buddha's Words. "Nibbana
. The final goal of the Buddha's teaching; the unconditioned state beyond the round of rebirths, to be attained by the destruction of the defilements."
This description as an "unconditioned state" is what led me to suggest that Nibbana itself doesn't "do" anything. In fact this description seems to suggests that the "cooling down of all temperaments" (aka the destruction of the taints) is how Nibbana is attained
(not what nibbana does
For me this is the whole problem with constant and obsessive mental proliferation, its always about trying to define which is never really meant to be defined but only to be experienced and reflected upon.
Are poems meant to have commentary.
Its just second experience to even attempt it, something that William James covers in depth.
Two Zen Monks see a woman stranded, one carries the woman accross the road, or was it a river, maybe thats an important detail. further down the line, you know the rest...
Can you explain to me what is the taste of an apple, or the colour purple in words. It needs to be explained in a exact formal way, precisely and in such a correct way that it will replicate the exact same experience, if you cant then its falls within the same thing you that you have left as a comment.
You seem to be suggesting that I was holding the informal reflection to an impossible standard -- I don't think I was doing that, just taking up the OPs invitation to discuss by pointing out where I thought it was off-base -- while acknowledging that I thought the quote was not intended
to be some formal description. Certainly there is a relationship
between cooling all temperaments and Nibbana. (Sorry for repeating myself.)
Im just observing the whole thread as entertaining. Even if nibbana could be described would it give one a direct experience. If one could describe anthers experience could it be experienced in the same direct way just by describing.
Did I just waste 2 minutes of my life
I am not sure which of your questions you are actually looking for answers to
, but the answer to this one probably depends on what you were hoping to achieve with your two minutes.
This whole thing just reminded of a quote by Thomas Merton
"The logic of worldly success rests on a fallacy: the strange error that our perfection depends on the thoughts and opinions and applause of other men! A weird life it is, indeed, to be living always in somebody else's imagination, as if that were the only place in which one could at last become real!"
— Thomas Merton (The Seven Storey Mountain)
I am now wondering how the quote may apply to this exchange. Am I taking the time to reply in order to influence what is in your imagination about me? Not wanting you to think I am rude by not replying? Not wanting you to think I'm a jerk based on my original comment? On a conscious level, I am replying because we're "In This Together" which is the title of a short talk by Thanissaro Bhikkhu I just listened to given last month the evening before an ordination at Wat Metta. https://www.dhammatalks.org/mp3_index_current.html
Well worth a quick listen. Part of being "in this together" is my effort to practice right speech and to respond as appropriately as I can to our engagements hear at DW. I hope I have been reasonably successful.
BTW, I have no expectation that you should reply point-by-point or even at all to this post -- just trying to be clear.
"...the practice is essentially a practice, and not a theory to be idly discussed...right view leaves unanswered many questions about the cosmos and the self, and directs your attention to what needs to be done to escape from the ravages of suffering." Thanissaro Bhikkhu, On The Path.