James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Fri May 19, 2017 5:16 pm

Malcolm wrote:The three poisons never arose in the state of nirvana, they are not in a state called unborn or nonarisen. There can be no such state, by definition


Has any dharma whatsoever arisen in the state of nirvana? Why are the three poisons exempt? Aren't they empty like everything else?
Malcolm wrote:You also have to distinguish between the absorption of cessation, nirodhasamapatti, and the subsequent attainment of cessation, where one is no longer subject to birth and death.
On your reading what distinguishes the two? What has changed? (Besides the fact that perception and feeling have "resumed" and one is walking about, etc). I'm guessing you wouldn't accept "the destruction of hatred, greed, delusion" as a valid answer here :smile:
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 24511
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Malcolm » Fri May 19, 2017 5:25 pm

aflatun wrote:
Malcolm wrote:The three poisons never arose in the state of nirvana, they are not in a state called unborn or nonarisen. There can be no such state, by definition


Has any dharma whatsoever arisen in the state of nirvana? Why are the three poisons exempt? Aren't they empty like everything else?
Malcolm wrote:You also have to distinguish between the absorption of cessation, nirodhasamapatti, and the subsequent attainment of cessation, where one is no longer subject to birth and death.
On your reading what distinguishes the two? What has changed? (Besides the fact that perception and feeling have "resumed" and one is walking about, etc). I'm guessing you wouldn't accept "the destruction of hatred, greed, delusion" as a valid answer here :smile:

In the context, nirvana is not the cessation of all phenomena, it is the cessation of all afflictive phenomena.

The three poisons are not things that can be destroyed, like pots. In order to destroy them, you would have to destroy the mind. In other words, you would have to "Destroy the village to save it, sir."
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


Free of hope and fear, relax.
Human life spent in
a state of great spaciousness is enjoyable.


— Kunzang Dechen Lingpa

boda
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by boda » Fri May 19, 2017 5:35 pm

Wayfarer wrote:It means, rising above the need to make such judgements. It's not a matter of abandoning the understanding of right and wrong, but understanding it so well you don't have to think about it. It is called, in learning theory, 'unconscious competence'.
This theory may apply well to leaning a new skill like playing the piano, however right and wrong, in the sphere of morality, is not so straightforward. Also, right and wrong are essentially value judgements. How does one rise above the need to make value judgments?

boda
Posts: 1573
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 8:40 pm

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by boda » Fri May 19, 2017 5:41 pm

Astus wrote:
Malcolm wrote:Astus has studied with a number of Zen teachers, and couple of Kagyu ones too, if I am not mistaken.
My Little Dharma History
Hi Astus,

At the end of this blogpost you write: "No buddha can make people enlightened. Everyone has to do it oneself."

If I may ask, how exactly do you know this?

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Fri May 19, 2017 5:41 pm

Malcolm wrote:
aflatun wrote:
Malcolm wrote:The three poisons never arose in the state of nirvana, they are not in a state called unborn or nonarisen. There can be no such state, by definition


Has any dharma whatsoever arisen in the state of nirvana? Why are the three poisons exempt? Aren't they empty like everything else?
Malcolm wrote:You also have to distinguish between the absorption of cessation, nirodhasamapatti, and the subsequent attainment of cessation, where one is no longer subject to birth and death.
On your reading what distinguishes the two? What has changed? (Besides the fact that perception and feeling have "resumed" and one is walking about, etc). I'm guessing you wouldn't accept "the destruction of hatred, greed, delusion" as a valid answer here :smile:

In the context, nirvana is not the cessation of all phenomena, it is the cessation of all afflictive phenomena.

The three poisons are not things that can be destroyed, like pots. In order to destroy them, you would have to destroy the mind. In other words, you would have to "Destroy the village to save it, sir."
Can you explain what the context is then?

EDIT: I"m happy to take this to PM if you feel like I'm derailing this thread, i'll leave it up to you!
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
Posts: 6619
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Astus » Fri May 19, 2017 7:44 pm

boda wrote:"No buddha can make people enlightened. Everyone has to do it oneself."
If I may ask, how exactly do you know this?
"By oneself is evil done; by oneself is one defiled. By oneself is evil left undone; by oneself is one made pure. Purity and impurity depend on oneself; no one can purify another."
(Dhp 12.165)

"You yourselves must strive; the Buddhas only point the way. Those meditative ones who tread the path are released from the bonds of Mara."
(Dhp 20.276)

Question: "Does the Buddha really save or rescue all sentient beings?"
The master said: "There are really no sentient beings to be saved by Tathagata. Since there is, in reality, neither self nor non-self, how then can there be a Buddha to save or sentient beings to be saved?
(Huangbo, The Wan-Ling Record)

"Outside mind there’s no dharma, nor is there anything to be gained within it. What are you seeking? Everywhere you say, ‘Th ere’s something to practice, something to obtain.’ Make no mistake! Even if there were something to be gained by practice, it would be nothing but birth-and-death karma."
(Record of Linji, p 17, tr Sasaki)

One day, Guishan said to Xiangyan, “I’m not asking you about what’s recorded in or what can be learned from the scriptures! You must say something from the time before you were born and before you could distinguish objects. I want to record what you say.”
Xiangyan was confused and unable to answer. He sat in deep thought for a some time and then mumbled a few words to explain his understanding. But Guishan wouldn’t accept this.
Xiangyan said, “Then would the master please explain it?”
Guishan said, “What I might say would merely be my own understanding. How could it benefit your own view?”
Xiangyan returned to the monks’ hall and searched through the books he had collected, but he couldn’t find a single phrase that could be used to answer Guishan’s question.
Xiangyan then sighed and said, “A picture of a cake can’t satisfy hunger.”
He then burned all his books and said, “During this lifetime I won’t study the essential doctrine. I’ll just become a common mendicant monk, and I won’t apply my mind to this any more.”
Xiangyan tearfully left Guishan. He then went traveling and eventually resided at Nanyang, the site of the grave of National Teacher Nanyang Huizhong.
One day as Xiangyan was scything grass, a small piece of tile was knocked through the air and struck a stalk of bamboo. Upon hearing the sound of the tile hitting the bamboo, Xiangyan instantly experienced vast enlightenment.
(Zen's Chinese Heritage, p 191-192)
1 Myriad dharmas are only mind.
Mind is unobtainable.
What is there to seek?

2 If the Buddha-Nature is seen,
there will be no seeing of a nature in any thing.

3 Neither cultivation nor seated meditation —
this is the pure Chan of Tathagata.

4 With sudden enlightenment to Tathagata Chan,
the six paramitas and myriad means
are complete within that essence.


1 Huangbo, T2012Ap381c1 2 Nirvana Sutra, T374p521b3; tr. Yamamoto 3 Mazu, X1321p3b23; tr. J. Jia 4 Yongjia, T2014p395c14; tr. from "The Sword of Wisdom"

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 24511
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Malcolm » Fri May 19, 2017 7:54 pm

aflatun wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
aflatun wrote:

Has any dharma whatsoever arisen in the state of nirvana? Why are the three poisons exempt? Aren't they empty like everything else?



On your reading what distinguishes the two? What has changed? (Besides the fact that perception and feeling have "resumed" and one is walking about, etc). I'm guessing you wouldn't accept "the destruction of hatred, greed, delusion" as a valid answer here :smile:

In the context, nirvana is not the cessation of all phenomena, it is the cessation of all afflictive phenomena.

The three poisons are not things that can be destroyed, like pots. In order to destroy them, you would have to destroy the mind. In other words, you would have to "Destroy the village to save it, sir."
Can you explain what the context is then?
There is no reason any positive dharmas will cease as a result of insight. The purpose of insight is to see what is negative and remove the causes for that.
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


Free of hope and fear, relax.
Human life spent in
a state of great spaciousness is enjoyable.


— Kunzang Dechen Lingpa

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Sat May 20, 2017 4:05 am

Malcolm wrote:There is no reason any positive dharmas will cease as a result of insight. The purpose of insight is to see what is negative and remove the causes for that.
Agreed, although Nirvana, at least in the Pali tradition (which I'm not pushing) does have a sense in which all phenomena do cease, depending on who you ask, Nirvana without residue/Arahattaphala Samadhi (Nanananda), Timless, Cessation of the Personality Factors/Unconstructed Discernment (Peter Harvey), Nirvana without residue post mortem (Buddhaghosa). But we're not talking about that so I'm happy to leave it there.

Nirvana is the cessation of hatred, greed and delusion. I said "destruction" before, and it seems you took issue with this word. I'll take your word for it, as you are a scholar and I respect that. But the general form of the proposition is not controversial as I understand it.

While I appreciate this exchange (I mean that) I'd like to return to where it started. When I asked why cessation wasn't an experience you said:
Malcolm wrote:All experiences are necessarily conceptual.
Can you explain how this relates?

You also said:
Malcolm wrote:You cannot experience the absence of three poisons that have never arisen. This is why nirvana is peaceful. It is not an experience of an absence of anything. The three poisons never grew in the state of nirvana.
I still need help with this. Nirvana is the cessation of the three poisons. Saying they never grew (why is this in the past tense) in the state of nirvana sounds redundant to me. Of course they didn't, the state of nirvana is itself their irreversible cessation. What were you getting at here?

Further, Nirvana is in one sense precisely experience which is no longer conditioned by hatred, greed and delusion. So it is six sense base experience marked by the absence of cognitive and affective distortions. For Buddha Joe, those afflictions were once present, after awakening they're absent. This absence would have to be discernible. How? For one, suffering is now impossible, always and forever.

Further you stated:
Malcolm wrote:You cannot experience a tree that has never grown. Cessation is not the absence of something.
Malcolm wrote:A cessation is the absence of cause for arising. Saying you can experience a cessation is like saying you can experience the sprout that never grows from a burnt seed.
I can't resolve the two bolded statements. Help?
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 24511
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Malcolm » Sat May 20, 2017 4:33 am

aflatun wrote:
Malcolm wrote:There is no reason any positive dharmas will cease as a result of insight. The purpose of insight is to see what is negative and remove the causes for that.
Agreed, although Nirvana, at least in the Pali tradition (which I'm not pushing) does have a sense in which all phenomena do cease, depending on who you ask, Nirvana without residue/Arahattaphala Samadhi (Nanananda), Timless, Cessation of the Personality Factors/Unconstructed Discernment (Peter Harvey), Nirvana without residue post mortem (Buddhaghosa). But we're not talking about that so I'm happy to leave it there.

Nirvana is the cessation of hatred, greed and delusion. I said "destruction" before, and it seems you took issue with this word. I'll take your word for it, as you are a scholar and I respect that. But the general form of the proposition is not controversial as I understand it.

While I appreciate this exchange (I mean that) I'd like to return to where it started. When I asked why cessation wasn't an experience you said:
Malcolm wrote:All experiences are necessarily conceptual.
Can you explain how this relates?

You also said:
Malcolm wrote:You cannot experience the absence of three poisons that have never arisen. This is why nirvana is peaceful. It is not an experience of an absence of anything. The three poisons never grew in the state of nirvana.
I still need help with this. Nirvana is the cessation of the three poisons. Saying they never grew (why is this in the past tense) in the state of nirvana sounds redundant to me. Of course they didn't, the state of nirvana is itself their irreversible cessation. What were you getting at here?

Further, Nirvana is in one sense precisely experience which is no longer conditioned by hatred, greed and delusion. So it is six sense base experience marked by the absence of cognitive and affective distortions. For Buddha Joe, those afflictions were once present, after awakening they're absent. This absence would have to be discernible. How? For one, suffering is now impossible, always and forever.

Further you stated:
Malcolm wrote:You cannot experience a tree that has never grown. Cessation is not the absence of something.
Malcolm wrote:A cessation is the absence of cause for arising. Saying you can experience a cessation is like saying you can experience the sprout that never grows from a burnt seed.
I can't resolve the two bolded statements. Help?
.


The absence of a cause is not the absence of something since there is nothing by which that absence may be identified.
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


Free of hope and fear, relax.
Human life spent in
a state of great spaciousness is enjoyable.


— Kunzang Dechen Lingpa

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Sat May 20, 2017 4:38 am

Malcolm wrote:
aflatun wrote:
Malcolm wrote:There is no reason any positive dharmas will cease as a result of insight. The purpose of insight is to see what is negative and remove the causes for that.
Agreed, although Nirvana, at least in the Pali tradition (which I'm not pushing) does have a sense in which all phenomena do cease, depending on who you ask, Nirvana without residue/Arahattaphala Samadhi (Nanananda), Timless, Cessation of the Personality Factors/Unconstructed Discernment (Peter Harvey), Nirvana without residue post mortem (Buddhaghosa). But we're not talking about that so I'm happy to leave it there.

Nirvana is the cessation of hatred, greed and delusion. I said "destruction" before, and it seems you took issue with this word. I'll take your word for it, as you are a scholar and I respect that. But the general form of the proposition is not controversial as I understand it.

While I appreciate this exchange (I mean that) I'd like to return to where it started. When I asked why cessation wasn't an experience you said:
Malcolm wrote:All experiences are necessarily conceptual.
Can you explain how this relates?

You also said:
Malcolm wrote:You cannot experience the absence of three poisons that have never arisen. This is why nirvana is peaceful. It is not an experience of an absence of anything. The three poisons never grew in the state of nirvana.
I still need help with this. Nirvana is the cessation of the three poisons. Saying they never grew (why is this in the past tense) in the state of nirvana sounds redundant to me. Of course they didn't, the state of nirvana is itself their irreversible cessation. What were you getting at here?

Further, Nirvana is in one sense precisely experience which is no longer conditioned by hatred, greed and delusion. So it is six sense base experience marked by the absence of cognitive and affective distortions. For Buddha Joe, those afflictions were once present, after awakening they're absent. This absence would have to be discernible. How? For one, suffering is now impossible, always and forever.

Further you stated:
Malcolm wrote:You cannot experience a tree that has never grown. Cessation is not the absence of something.
Malcolm wrote:A cessation is the absence of cause for arising. Saying you can experience a cessation is like saying you can experience the sprout that never grows from a burnt seed.
I can't resolve the two bolded statements. Help?
.


The absence of a cause is not the absence of something since there is nothing by which that absence may be identified.
How does this follow? The cause is the three poisons. They are assuredly something (barring any one upmanship here :tongue: ). Their absence is identified by the cessation of suffering, birth, death, etc.
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

User avatar
Malcolm
Posts: 24511
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Malcolm » Sat May 20, 2017 4:59 am

A cause that does not produce a result is a non cause.
aflatun wrote:
Malcolm wrote:
aflatun wrote:
Agreed, although Nirvana, at least in the Pali tradition (which I'm not pushing) does have a sense in which all phenomena do cease, depending on who you ask, Nirvana without residue/Arahattaphala Samadhi (Nanananda), Timless, Cessation of the Personality Factors/Unconstructed Discernment (Peter Harvey), Nirvana without residue post mortem (Buddhaghosa). But we're not talking about that so I'm happy to leave it there.

Nirvana is the cessation of hatred, greed and delusion. I said "destruction" before, and it seems you took issue with this word. I'll take your word for it, as you are a scholar and I respect that. But the general form of the proposition is not controversial as I understand it.

While I appreciate this exchange (I mean that) I'd like to return to where it started. When I asked why cessation wasn't an experience you said:



Can you explain how this relates?

You also said:



I still need help with this. Nirvana is the cessation of the three poisons. Saying they never grew (why is this in the past tense) in the state of nirvana sounds redundant to me. Of course they didn't, the state of nirvana is itself their irreversible cessation. What were you getting at here?

Further, Nirvana is in one sense precisely experience which is no longer conditioned by hatred, greed and delusion. So it is six sense base experience marked by the absence of cognitive and affective distortions. For Buddha Joe, those afflictions were once present, after awakening they're absent. This absence would have to be discernible. How? For one, suffering is now impossible, always and forever.

Further you stated:





I can't resolve the two bolded statements. Help?
.


The absence of a cause is not the absence of something since there is nothing by which that absence may be identified.
How does this follow? The cause is the three poisons. They are assuredly something (barring any one upmanship here :tongue: ). Their absence is identified by the cessation of suffering, birth, death, etc.
Atikosha
Tibetan Medicine Blog
Sudarsana Mandala, Tibetan Medicine and Herbs
Buddhahood in This Life
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔


Free of hope and fear, relax.
Human life spent in
a state of great spaciousness is enjoyable.


— Kunzang Dechen Lingpa

User avatar
dharmagoat
Posts: 2154
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by dharmagoat » Sat May 20, 2017 5:04 am

Picture this hypothetical scenario:

I have been given a box of cereal and now sit at the breakfast table before opening it. I read on the packet how delicious and nutritious it is. I discuss it with my flatmate who is sitting with me, they read the packet too, agree with me that it must be very good cereal, but want to be sure. We go online and find people that assure us it tastes wonderful and is very healthy, some are experts in cereal and have written books about it, some have even tried it for themselves. We discuss what flavour is. We read about taste buds. We argue the importance of dietary fibre. We study the history of breakfast cereals. Time is up and we go off to work.

Anonymous X
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Anonymous X » Sat May 20, 2017 5:13 am

boda wrote:
Astus wrote:
Malcolm wrote:Astus has studied with a number of Zen teachers, and couple of Kagyu ones too, if I am not mistaken.
My Little Dharma History
Hi Astus,

At the end of this blogpost you write: "No buddha can make people enlightened. Everyone has to do it oneself."

If I may ask, how exactly do you know this?
There really is no sense in trying to argue this one way or another. It doesn't matter.

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Sat May 20, 2017 5:52 am

Malcolm wrote:A cause that does not produce a result is a non cause.

I thought we had a tacit agreement to stay conventional. You're shifting the ground rules, unless you're claiming the poisons don't produce results conventionally speaking.
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Sat May 20, 2017 6:02 am

dharmagoat wrote:Picture this hypothetical scenario:

I have been given a box of cereal and now sit at the breakfast table before opening it. I read on the packet how delicious and nutritious it is. I discuss it with my flatmate who is sitting with me, they read the packet too, agree with me that it must be very good cereal, but want to be sure. We go online and find people that assure us it tastes wonderful and is very healthy, some are experts in cereal and have written books about it, some have even tried it for themselves. We discuss what flavour is. We read about taste buds. We argue the importance of dietary fibre. We study the history of breakfast cereals. Time is up and we go off to work.
Yes. But before we get up and go to work we try to learn from others in that discussion :)
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

User avatar
dharmagoat
Posts: 2154
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by dharmagoat » Sat May 20, 2017 6:18 am

aflatun wrote:Yes. But before we get up and go to work we try to learn from others in that discussion :)
It can be a discussion over breakfast, for sure. Something like "this tastes good, what is it?"

But it is unfortunate to get sidetracked in discussions that have no basis in experience and you end up going hungry.

User avatar
aflatun
Posts: 102
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 3:21 am
Location: Bay Area, CA

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by aflatun » Sat May 20, 2017 6:36 am

dharmagoat wrote:
aflatun wrote:Yes. But before we get up and go to work we try to learn from others in that discussion :)
It can be a discussion over breakfast, for sure. Something like "this tastes good, what is it?"

But it is unfortunate to get sidetracked in discussions that have no basis in experience and you end up going hungry.
I agree. But I tend to think theoretical discussions have their place. And Malcolm knows his stuff.
"People often get too quick to say 'there's no self. There's no self...no self...no self.' There is self, there is focal point, its not yours. That's what not self is."

Ninoslav Ñāṇamoli
Senses and the Thought-1, 42:53

"Those who create constructs about the Buddha,
Who is beyond construction and without exhaustion,
Are thereby damaged by their constructs;
They fail to see the Thus-Gone.

That which is the nature of the Thus-Gone
Is also the nature of this world.
There is no nature of the Thus-Gone.
There is no nature of the world."

Nagarjuna
MMK XXII.15-16

Anonymous X
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2017 11:43 am
Location: Bangkok

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Anonymous X » Sat May 20, 2017 6:41 am

aflatun wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:
aflatun wrote:Yes. But before we get up and go to work we try to learn from others in that discussion :)
It can be a discussion over breakfast, for sure. Something like "this tastes good, what is it?"

But it is unfortunate to get sidetracked in discussions that have no basis in experience and you end up going hungry.
I agree. But I tend to think theoretical discussions have their place. And Malcolm knows his stuff.
Especially on a public board about Buddhism, which most posters will not agree on anything, 100%. :shrug:
Certainly, this can't bring certainty or confidence in your own experience. But, I think there is no way to escape the question/answer syndrome until one begins to see this as going nowhere.

User avatar
dharmagoat
Posts: 2154
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 8:39 pm

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by dharmagoat » Sat May 20, 2017 6:42 am

aflatun wrote:
dharmagoat wrote:
aflatun wrote:Yes. But before we get up and go to work we try to learn from others in that discussion :)
It can be a discussion over breakfast, for sure. Something like "this tastes good, what is it?"

But it is unfortunate to get sidetracked in discussions that have no basis in experience and you end up going hungry.
I agree. But I tend to think theoretical discussions have their place. And Malcolm knows his stuff.
Yes, to continue the food theme, they too can be part of a healthy, balanced diet.

User avatar
Wayfarer
Posts: 3434
Joined: Sun May 27, 2012 8:31 am
Location: Sydney AU

Re: James Ford on kensho, from Pathos

Post by Wayfarer » Sat May 20, 2017 9:14 am

boda wrote:
Wayfarer wrote:It means, rising above the need to make such judgements. It's not a matter of abandoning the understanding of right and wrong, but understanding it so well you don't have to think about it. It is called, in learning theory, 'unconscious competence'.
This theory may apply well to leaning a new skill like playing the piano, however right and wrong, in the sphere of morality, is not so straightforward. Also, right and wrong are essentially value judgements. How does one rise above the need to make value judgments?
As I said, by it being internalised, by not having to make judgements. I suppose there will be some times when you still need to deliberate over some things, but I think, like anything else, right action is a learned behaviour; once you internalise it, then it is second nature.
In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities; in the expert's mind there are few ~ Suzuki-roshi

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests