Re: Refuge in Oneself
Posted: Sat Sep 19, 2009 1:37 am
In Dhamma there are no dhammas...appicchato wrote:There's only one Dhamma...everything else is a dhamma...kannada wrote:Dhammas are not dhammas but are called dhammas...
A Buddhist discussion forum on the Dhamma of Theravāda Buddhism
https://www.dhammawheel.com/
In Dhamma there are no dhammas...appicchato wrote:There's only one Dhamma...everything else is a dhamma...kannada wrote:Dhammas are not dhammas but are called dhammas...
This is Diamond Sutra stuff.appicchato wrote:There's only one Dhamma...everything else is a dhamma...kannada wrote:Dhammas are not dhammas but are called dhammas...
Of course, it depends....kannada wrote:In Dhamma there are no dhammas...appicchato wrote:There's only one Dhamma...everything else is a dhamma...kannada wrote:Dhammas are not dhammas but are called dhammas...
Only so as a conceptual structure. Reality of things seems to be a bit different.kannada wrote: In my view the best approach to practice is to drop the 'I' and 'other' notions... No 'I' that sees, just seeing. No 'I' that hears, just hearing etc etc Then drop the notions of 'seeing', 'hearing' etc. All in conformity with anatta. Couldn't be easier...
Says you...tiltbillings wrote:This is Diamond Sutra stuff.
Says me.appicchato wrote:Says you...tiltbillings wrote:This is Diamond Sutra stuff.
My earlier query (page 3) to Retro will explain its context.Tilt wrote:This is Diamond Sutra stuff.appicchato wrote:There's only one Dhamma...everything else is a dhamma...
On what? Under what circumstances are there dhammas in Dhamma?Tilt wrote:Of course, it depends....K wrote:In Dhamma there are no dhammas...
How?Tilt wrote:Only so as a conceptual structure. Reality of things seems to be a bit different.k wrote:In my view the best approach to practice is to drop the 'I' and 'other' notions... No 'I' that sees, just seeing. No 'I' that hears, just hearing etc etc Then drop the notions of 'seeing', 'hearing' etc. All in conformity with anatta. Couldn't be easier...
Are you really sure about that? When tired, sleep; when hungry, kill.kidd wrote:A wolf is just a wolf; it has no ego to protect or preserve; it has ‘no self’.
Yeah, well. No one is asking you to uncritically believe or accept anything, but the tradition rather strikes me as being a bit wiser than the position you are advocating.kannada wrote:Though I respect the body of works that constitute Buddhism I also have a healthy scepticism regarding authenticity, undisputable authenticity cannot be guaranteed.
Which is fine, but a practitioner of?I am a practitioner, not a believer.
Except both the Theravada and the Mahayana talk about conventional language and “ultimate” language, and understanding teachings in those terms.I do not see the teachings of Buddha-dharma as a series of levels.
And part of that methodology is the skilful use of language and the understanding that there are different ways of talking about the same thingI see them as a clearly defined methodology that produce certain results.
While the importance of anatta cannot be denied, it can be unskillfully emphasized.Anatta is a fact of Buddhist life and adherents of Buddhism should understand it accordingly. Without this understanding practice is a waste of time.
I think you are getting way, way too stuck on the expression of “taking refuge in oneself.”Refuge is taken in the Buddha, the Dharma and the sangha. There is no mention for taking refuge in oneself.
I do not think any one means it in any other way, and it is obvious that those who are talking about it here are well aware of anatta as the underlying “reality.”I assume the above quote to mean that the work of cessation cannot be performed on one's behalf by another. The work is performed by oneself, for oneself in order to remove the delusion of oneself.
I shrug my shoulders. I have said nothing that is not consistent with the Buddha’s teachings.I don't accept your theory of 'levels' if the teachings be competently taught.
You can play at that, imagine that you are doing that, but you cannot meaningfully will yourself to drop the “I” and “other.” It only meaningfully happens with insight into anicca, dukkha, and anatta, coming from the practices of morality and such things as dana and lovingkindness and concentrated mindfulness.In my view the best approach to practice is to drop the 'I' and 'other' notions...
Maybe easy for those few whose paramis are such, but for other it is a struggle and the Buddha outlined a path that allows one to progress towards awakening.No 'I' that sees, just seeing. No 'I' that hears, just hearing etc etc Then drop the notions of 'seeing', 'hearing' etc. All in conformity with anatta. Couldn't be easier...
What position did I advocate?Tilt wrote:the tradition rather strikes me as being a bit wiser than the position you are advocating.
Meditation.a practitioner of?
I don't see anything 'ultimate' about the said teachings, they are reasonably practical and straightforward.Except both the Theravada and the Mahayana talk about conventional language and “ultimate” language, and understanding teachings in those terms.
I agree, I have seen abundant examples of commentators who simply have no understanding of it.While the importance of anatta cannot be denied, it can be unskillfully emphasized.
What a coincidence – I thought the same about you.I think you are getting way, way too stuck on the expression of “taking refuge in oneself.”
Anatta is commensurate with cessation and cessation is not a reality, cessation is the absence of all 'realities' - Was that an example of an unskilful exposition?I do not think any one means it in any other way, and it is obvious that those who are talking about it here are well aware of anatta as the underlying “reality.”
You assume too much. I did not say anything about willing anything and I don't 'play' at anything.You can play at that, imagine that you are doing that, but you cannot meaningfully will yourself to drop the “I” and “other.” It only meaningfully happens with insight into anicca, dukkha, and anatta, coming from the practices of morality and such things as dana and lovingkindness and concentrated mindfulness.