Studying Buddha's Dharma, not being a 'Buddhist'

[tomschwarz]

hello dear friends from beginningless time.... ...there is the idea of approaching buddhism as something to study, outside of your own personal experience. the idea is hard to put in words, of course everything you perceive is some kind of personal experience.

....but its the idea that buddhist dharma can effectively be learned without engaging your sense of "self", so that your personal/inter-personal experiences, for example, hope, fear, love, loss, fulfillment, longing, loneliness, happiness, and also heart-level non-conceptual experiences, e.g. sameness, discernment, mirror like wisdom, vastness of reality's expanse, accomplishment, etc... need not be considered.

question, is that a potentially positive approach to buddhism to any significant degree? for anyone? i recall a teaching from a great master of buddhism warning against this personally-removed approach to buddhism. saying something like buddhism can not be learned without relating it directly to your personal inner experience... ...has anyone else heard that? its funny, we buddhists seek emancipation from the illusion of independent self, but the idea here is that, in this case, you still very much have a sense of self, and without directly relating to that self on a personal level, buddhist dharma can not be learned....

[Simon E.]

Why did you not ask me what I meant on the relevant thread instead of starting a new one?
You have misunderstood completely the distinction between being a Dharma student and being a 'Buddhist'.
As is your wont, you raise points and then leave them unresolved.
The reality is in fact the reverse.
It is perfectly possible to be a 'Buddhist' without engaging anything but the discursive process.
But to be a student of the Buddha's Dharma requires a well developed interiority.
It also requires a personal relationship to an authentic teacher of Dharma.

[Simon E.]

You need to see it in the spirit in which it is meant when I say to you tomschwartz that I do not think that your English is subtle enough to follow the debates that you initiate.
So having set a discussion going that you do not follow in all its nuances you then start another one.

In brief, Buddhism and Buddhist are modern western constructs. Its the 'ism' and the 'ist' that are the problem.
There is the Buddha's Dharma. And there are those who attempt to realise it.
No isms or ists are required.

[muni]

question, is that a potentially positive approach to buddhism to any significant degree? for anyone? i recall a teaching from a great master of buddhism warning against this personally-removed approach to buddhism. saying something like buddhism can not be learned without relating it directly to your personal inner experience... ...has anyone else heard that? its funny, we buddhists seek emancipation from the illusion of independent self, but the idea here is that, in this case, you still very much have a sense of self, and without directly relating to that self on a personal level, buddhist dharma can not be learned....

No, "I" cannot learn.

One walking the path is illusion, there is not really one walking a path. Pathless path. When this path is taken as a solid thing to have to do by a solid one, then there is no liberation possible.

When the teaching of the Buddha is seen by a person so or so, in a particular category doing so and so while others so and so, there is samsara. H H Dalai Lama warned for personal approach, as then Dharma can turn in a weapon or poison, instead of a medicine to purify ones’ misperception.

The path, method and the whole Dharma, is nothing other than a tool, which is in fact illusion (necessary) of temporary use to allow what already is to reveal.

If we take then the Dharma to study or to apprehend as liberating Dharma, we are mistaken. We take the finger for the pointed nature. Then all is very solid; Buddha, Dharma, Sangha, Masters, texts, rituals, practices, mantras, sutras, tantras, shastras, termas,...

Genuine faith in order to realize nature is not a luxury.

From a solid ( independent ) basis all things/phenomena/beings arises as being independent. Or in delusion/ deluded moments, thoughts’ concepts are crystalized by fixation, trusting and believing them as real, as being out of our self.

O O

The blessing sutra by Wayfarer post in another tread, clarifies the delusion on a personal level:

http://diamond-sutra.com/audio-reading- ... ond-sutra/

[tomschwarz]

thank you )) I thought it was his holiness the great dalai lama of Tibet. What a magnificent Buddhist monk..

New thread because the other thread was about the death of two dear bulls.

what a wonderful audio recording the voice feels like a true friend. I think he is really trying to master the dharma.

But to play the devil's advocate, is there not even the possibility that someone could be going over facts and figures of Buddhism in some cold and heartless way (as often happens on this forum ) and still a seed is planted of true caring, true selflessness that much later grows in some significant way?

[muni]

But to play the devil's advocate, is there not even the possibility that someone could be going over facts and figures of Buddhism in some cold and heartless way (as often happens on this forum ) and still a seed is planted of true caring, true selflessness that much later grows in some significant way?

All is already selfness, only in our own dream not. That is probably why Buddha means Awaken.
Through Samadhi, Rigpa, Mahamudra, Zen, or whatever nondual practice there is automatically not a self- experienced, and as nondual ( emptiness) automatically Compassion is all what there is.
Then as much as possible trying to maintain practice/equipoise, or repeat so that it becomes slowly bit more familiar is at the same time slowly stopping own suffering experiences, not caught up by our delusion.
I have been wondering why for God sake we like so much to suffer as we keep holding on these while having the medicine of Dharma in so many ways? Why we are planting seeds for the continuation of own suffering while liberating practice is available and even offered on a goldon plate so to speak, and our habitual tendencies still go on? Why I feel so much the need to be busy all the time, avoiding to look inside?
And then I remember saying: exhausting the conceptual mind is not bad. *Ripening*?

And however waves move, they are inseparable with the ocean.

And oh yes: all is already sacred, all is already perfect, all is already Buddha Nature. _/\_

[muni]

Oh maybe one more metaphor: however rivers flow, whether with many turnings or not, their water flows in open ocean.

And as far as I know, dream is not everlasting. This sounds encouraging to me.

[tomschwarz]

Yes dear Muni. It is all as you say it is. A few words on attachment to suffering and unwillingness to sit quietly, of course you already know this, Amitabha (snang-ba mtha'-yas) - The pristine cognition of discernment, the natural purity of the aggregate of perceptions, free
from attachment, is the part of our mind where all things are logical like the growth of a crystal.

ßo turning to that wisdom in my own mind, I can see that I run around because I am afraid of myself. It is true what is written in the first noble truth, the truth of suffering. As his holiness the dalai lama points out, there are three types of suffering, suffering of change, suffering of conditioned existence and suffering of suffering (birth old age sickness death). So here I am, changing, rotting before my eyes. My identity will soon be completely gone and I will die alone.

And following that same direction , I don't cash in my golden ticket of the fourth noble truth because I don't believe it will work. So without a solution, I run like a ball around the course of a pinball machine with fear in my eyes in my heart on my skin and so on. That is how almost all people live if you look at them in a mall walking around, shopping, for example.

So based on that discernment and the surrounding logic and inevitability I choose to burn in my own hell ))))) no seriously I choose to sit, be silent and accept my demise. And I firmly and completely agree with you with my whole heart that compassion is the door to overcoming suffering and dissolving into the reality of interdependence that underlies our darting about in mortality. Let's listen again to your diamond sutra recording....

[muni]

So without a solution, I run like a ball around the course of a pinball machine with fear in my eyes in my heart on my skin and so on. That is how almost all people live if you look at them in a mall walking around, shopping, for example.

This make me reflect.

Maybe the difference between Buddha Dharma and Buddhism is suffering. I mean, when all goes smoothly, we feel no need to go beyond our identified person as we think and learned to be. And then we enjoy there our private restricted consciousness since all is fine there or not so bad at all, so no reason to go beyond. But when we are going through strong pain, heavy suffering, then this gives such a huge blows, there is no wish to remain in that restricted private consciousness, in which all this suffering is experienced. There is the wish to go out ( go beyond) of this world of inter-ideations or a three dimensional sh’t apprehended and constantly created and grasped as truths between two ears. But I do not wish beings go through such pains, in order to have faith and not merely trust what turns between two ears.

And I firmly and completely agree with you with my whole heart that compassion is the door to overcoming suffering and dissolving into the reality of interdependence that underlies our darting about in mortality.

This part is not easy for my thinking mind, since it thinks : how to “add” compassion when completely lost in distraction? The advice to remain as a rock, don’t move, don’t speak, don’t think can be a help of course. Our teachings say it can be 'cultivated', which happens together with purification. Or by introductions/pointing out, be thrown into inisght where compassion shines automatically. In any case, without any doubt, if I have no compassion, I am as deluded as can be, or there is deluded moment. Then there is no peace, no equanimity and only own suffering. A suffering which is even not recognized always as suffering but is then called rightness, fairness or other. Then there is the person popped up or the very restricted consciousness, protecting "its' being", as the believe of other independent ones arised. That is delusion. Then no compassion available.

diamond sutra

http://diamond-sutra.com/audio-reading- ... ond-sutra/

[muni]

I must say, I write here all things, but do not know what studying Buddha Dharma not being Buddhist mean.

In any case, I guess, whatever we call the precious guidance, which are in many ways, when we approach them all by mind ( sem) this is not going to awaken us right now or free us from our known and unknown suffering, we remain creating karma. But then so great there are at least good actions, which help to make mind-heart more flexible and more open. _/\_

http://www.rigpawiki.org/index.php?title=Four_reliances

[White Lotus]

compassion shares in suffering. love hurts. it is crucified for others. no love: no suffering. no love: no joy: no buddha?

[tomschwarz]

Maybe the difference between Buddha Dharma and Buddhism is suffering. I mean, when all goes smoothly, we feel no need to go beyond our identified person as we think and learned to be. And then we enjoy there our private restricted consciousness since all is fine there or not so bad at all, so no reason to go beyond. But when we are going through strong pain, heavy suffering, then this gives such a huge blows
http://diamond-sutra.com/audio-reading- ... ond-sutra/

That is geometric... ...Buddha Dharma, then a gap, then Buddhism. That gap is between the two, the suffering component that you discussed dear Muni. In your example, the suffering brings us to Buddhism. The practice of Buddhism involves ethics, meditation and wisdom. So there is the teaching, and the practice. And that which lies in between is suffering. Good one Munilogic. It is after all, the first noble truth...

Dear White Lotus, what you are describing here,

compassion shares in suffering. love hurts. it is crucified for others. no love: no suffering. no love: no joy: no buddha?

Is a mixture of ideas. I think 4 good ones and one bad one. 1, 2, 3, 5 good. The third one is the idea of Jesus Christ who suffered and died for our sins so that we may be forgiven and granted the kingdom of heaven. In Buddhism we believe, and I personally am 100% certain, that many religions lead to the same place if you follow them to their logical end. If you are a fan of Buddhism, don't forget, as is described in the Diamond Sutra, all that Buddhism (a.k.a. raft, a.k.a. the Dharma) will be abandoned if you achieve the goals of Buddhism (a.k.a. cross the river). #5 is the idea that love is fundamental part of happiness. Assuming we are talking about absolute love, agreed. Unconditional love is one of the 4 immeasurables.

But then #4 is a misnomer. There is the idea, in Buddhism we believe it is an illusion, that if you simply did not love (others) you would not suffer. But we believe quite the opposite. Again, here I refer to absolute love, which is simply to care for the happiness of another being irrespective of what you get or might not get out of the deal

So back to our theme, to answer the question, I think that a certain math can be applied here (inspired by muni):
Buddha Dharma - Buddhist = |Suffering| (as in absolute value or distance from 0)

In other words, you can have Buddha's Dharma without Buddhism but you will have as much suffering as you have Dharma ))) and visa versa.

[White Lotus]

some buddhas because of compassion carry the suffering of others. mixed happiness and pain. what a sacrifice!

[Simon E.]

Oh well, I tried...

Moving on....

[muni]

In Buddhism we believe, and I personally am 100% certain, that many religions lead to the same place if you follow them to their logical end.

Possible this can cause protestoron. (new word)
I heard religions are not the problem but humans who are misusing/misunderstanding them.
Clinging to Buddhism is making Buddhism useless.

[White Lotus]

do we open our eyes or close them. do we turn away or embrace. we can try. too much fear. thank u to hhdl for his kindness.

[tomschwarz]

right. so here is his holiness the great dalai lama of tibet speaking to muslims about developing kindness and compassion ))))). that is funny.

and he mentions at 17:40 that a root text of the kalachakra is that

we must respect all existing world religions.

phpBB [video]

i know why, you can see this if you meditate/vipasana with focus on death and the dawning of the ground luminosity after the bardo of dying, and it is clear that the dissolution will be just the same as the dissolution for all practitioners of other religions, like native american shamanism, or hinduism, and so on... we are talking about earth and water, air, space... that will not only leave "ism" and "ist" behind dear simon, that will leave simon itself along with the buddha's dharma, my old friend.

but if you want to get serious about your practice, suffering is the difference between buddha's dharma and buddhism.

[Herbie]

....but its the idea that buddhist dharma can effectively be learned without engaging your sense of "self"...

Don't want to talk about "buddhist dharma" ... however there is a philosophy which exclusively relies on rationality and starts with the analysis of the view of the transitory aggregates. The view of the transitory aggregates being the starting point there actually is no basis for a sense of "self".

[muni]

THank you for this youtube, Tom. It reminds me how we fight and grasp our own formed projections, our own home made colours/ideas, not realizing our dual grasping. And how it is irritating us to see others doing so, by which we lose compassion and do in fact the same.

I hear H H Dalai Lama saying: we can live together. This sounds for me not merely tolerating each other but realizing the delusion of the extremes. Maybe once I received a lesson in a Mosque:

I wanted to visit the big mosque in New Delhi. It was at that time monsoon and the whole square was filled with about 15 centimeters water. I had to cross that on naked feet. Arrived, an Indian man came out. He stood there and I stood there with my wet skirt on. I greeted with bowed head and he did the same. He placed his right hand on his heart and I did the same. Gone was me and gone was the Indian Moslim. In between a spaciousness which no any delusion could stain.

[Simon E.]

right. so here is his holiness the great dalai lama of tibet speaking to muslims about developing kindness and compassion ))))). that is funny.

and he mentions at 17:40 that a root text of the kalachakra is that

we must respect all existing world religions.

phpBB [video]

i know why, you can see this if you meditate/vipasana with focus on death and the dawning of the ground luminosity after the bardo of dying, and it is clear that the dissolution will be just the same as the dissolution for all practitioners of other religions, like native american shamanism, or hinduism, and so on... we are talking about earth and water, air, space... that will not only leave "ism" and "ist" behind dear simon, that will leave simon itself along with the buddha's dharma, my old friend.


but if you want to get serious about your practice, suffering is the difference between buddha's dharma and buddhism.

The whole point of the BuddhaDharma is to leave Simon (and tomschwartz) behind.
(And by the way, I am not your 'old friend' we are just two guys exchanging views on an online website. To pretend otherwise is either a lie, or is simply passive /aggressive, both of which are in contrast to Right Speech)

Trungpa Rinpoche "We see ourselves Enlightened in the future, on a stage, floodlit, with a crowd of admiring devotees. There is just one problem with that scenario. When Enlightenment happens 'we' wont be there".
As for taking practice seriously, it as been the thrust of my daily existence for more than forty years.
I say this not as a boast, I have nothing to prove. But I have in that time met teachers, had insights and experiences beyond your wildest dreams.
You at the moment tomschwartz are clueless, but presume to teach others.
You have just demonstrated once more that you do not understand the point I was making in the original post that sparked this exchange concerning the difference between Buddhadharma and 'Buddhism' . And I am not inclined to try again.
And you will remain clueless as long as you assume that other paths have the same ends and goals as Buddhadharma, and as long as you continue to fire off questions without reflecting on the answers you have already been given by many on this forum.
I have done what I can. There will be no more exchanges between us on this forum until you show some evidence that you are actually reflecting on what is being said to you by the many experienced members of this forum who have attempted to communicate with you.
Perhaps one of the German speaking members who grasps the point being made about the difference between Buddhadharma and 'Buddhism' could PM you in German.