Originally posted by I No Stupid:How one wants to commit is again personal. Refuge-taking may be one. To me, it is a 'religious-practice' requirement and does not necessarily mean that the refuge-taking Buddhist is a committed one! People just go thru the ceremony for some reason, just like baptism.
Yes of course, that is why the rite itself is not the main point of it. That person has to make a sincere commitment and put the teachings into practice.
But if he does not make a serious commitment, then it is very hard for him/her to seriously start practicing, much less to bear any fruition.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:4NTs are truths derived from experiential realization, and the 4th truth - the path to the end of suffering, contains the method, the method being the noble eight fold path.
So the method is one part of the 4 noble truths. The method is born out of Buddha's experience.
The entire 4NTs is the method of problem-solving. The 4th NT is the path or solution to the problem - not method as you claimed. I think you are confused.
The path is the method...
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Yes of course, that is why the rite itself is not the main point of it. That person has to make a sincere commitment and put the teachings into practice.
But if he does not make a serious commitment, then it is very hard for him/her to seriously start practicing, much less to bear any fruition.
By going thru the rite, it is supposed to be a form of commitment. Since the rite is not the main point, why insist that one must take refuge?
By the same token, one who did not take refuge can be as commited as one who has.
If you want to be committed, you will go through the ceremony, just like if you want to be committed to a marriage, you will (usually, unless circumstances are unfavourable) go through a formal ceremony or ROM registration or whatever.
At a deeper level, commitment and refuge are one and the same.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:The path is the method...
The path or 4th NT is the solution. The entire 4NTs is the method of problem-solving. You are confused. Have you studied principles of management?
Originally posted by I No Stupid:The path or 4th NT is the solution. The entire 4NTs is the method of problem-solving. You are confused. Have you studied principles of management?
They don't apply to dharma. Dharma is not the path of intellectual inferencing. There is indeed problem solving, but it cannot be solved through intellectualization.
Originally posted by I No Stupid:The path or 4th NT is the solution. The entire 4NTs is the method of problem-solving. You are confused. Have you studied principles of management?
The eightfold path is the solution.
The 4NTs simply state what the Buddha realised.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:If you want to be committed, you will go through the ceremony, just like if you want to be committed to a marriage, you will (usually, unless circumstances are unfavourable) go through a formal ceremony or ROM registration or whatever.
At a deeper level, commitment and refuge are one and the same.
Marriage is a man-made requirement, not a natural law. In a recent court case, the judge declared a mistress to be as 'committed' to the man such that they were effectively husband and wife, without ROM.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:They don't apply to dharma. Dharma is not the path of intellectual inferencing. There is indeed problem solving, but it cannot be solved through intellectualization.
There are many ways to solve problem. You are just dogmatic.
Originally posted by I No Stupid:There are many ways to solve problem. You are just dogmatic.
Intellectualization cannot comprehend dharma, that's all.
Originally posted by realization:The eightfold path is the solution.
The 4NTs simply state what the Buddha realised.
The 4NTs is certainly what Buddha had formulated. And his approach was similar to problem-solving method employed today. I would give Buddha credits for this since management science or management studies is less than 200 years or so.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Intellectualization cannot comprehend dharma, that's all.
I disagree. Buddha did a lot of intellectualization. And scholar-monks do.
Originally posted by I No Stupid:I disagree. Buddha did a lot of intellectualization. And scholar-monks do.
Intellectualization is different from experiential realization, and only experiential realization can result in liberation and a true experiential understanding of things.
And I disagree that the Buddha did a lot of intellectualization, as he simply, and directly comprehend phenomena in his experience.
Therefore,
The Perfect One is free from any theory, for the Perfect One has
understood what the body is, and how it arises, and passes away. He
has understood what feeling is, and how it arises, and passes away.
He has understood what perception is, and how it arises, and passes
away. He has understood what the mental formations are, and how
they arise, and pass away. He has understood what consciousness is,
and how it arises, and passes away.
Therefore, I say, the Perfect One has won complete deliverance
through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection, and
getting rid of all opinions and conjectures, of all inclination to
the vainglory of I and mine.
- Majjhima Nikaya, 72
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:Intellectualization is different from experiential realization, and only experiential realization can result in liberation and a true experiential understanding of things.
And I disagree that the Buddha did a lot of intellectualization, as he simply, and directly comprehend phenomena in his experience.
Therefore,
The Perfect One is free from any theory, for the Perfect One has understood what the body is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what feeling is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what perception is, and how it arises, and passes away. He has understood what the mental formations are, and how they arise, and pass away. He has understood what consciousness is, and how it arises, and passes away.
Therefore, I say, the Perfect One has won complete deliverance through the extinction, fading away, disappearance, rejection, and getting rid of all opinions and conjectures, of all inclination to the vainglory of I and mine.
- Majjhima Nikaya, 72
hmmm .... how did the Perfect One understood? If indeed he understood something according to his own understanding or experience, then why theorise?
Like I said before, if he had the experience, why spend 6 years wandering and wondering?
Originally posted by I No Stupid:hmmm .... how did the Perfect One understood? If indeed he understood something according to his own understanding or experience, then why theorise?
Like I said before, if he had the experience, why spend 6 years wandering and wondering?
He spent 6 years on the wrong path, i.e. hardcore ascetism, practicing the formless absorptions under 2 meditation teachers which didn't lead to liberation, for example.
After he remembered an experience of the 1st jhana he had when he was 5 years old, he pursued that path, entered into the four jhanas, and attained the three knowledges which are experiential insights. After which he became enlightened and liberated.
He did not theorize at all.
By the way I don't understand your question "if he had the experience, why spend 6 years wandering and wondering?"
It is precisely because he didn't have the experience of the end of suffering, that is why he spent time trying to seek that experience and realization.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:He spent 6 years on the wrong path, i.e. hardcore ascetism, practicing the formless absorptions under 2 meditation teachers which didn't lead to liberation, for example.
After he remembered an experience of the 1st jhana he had when he was 5 years old, he pursued that path, entered into the four jhanas, and attained the three knowledges which are experiential insights. After which he became enlightened and liberated.
He did not theorize at all.
If you say someone sits in a quiet corner to ponder a problem, gain insight and come up with the solution - it is perfectly acceptable. That 'insight' could have come about thru contemplation, past experience, past learning or knowledge and even intuition. However, if you say the very same person came up with a solution thru experential realization, then you have to say what was his experience. He must have the same experience of a similar problem before he can come up with a solution. And if he had the experience before, he wouldn't have to waste 6 yrs doing the wrong things as you claimed.
Originally posted by I No Stupid:If you say someone sits in a quiet corner to ponder a problem, gain insight and come up with the solution - it is perfectly acceptable. That 'insight' could have come about thru contemplation, past experience, past learning or knowledge and even intuition. However, if you say the very same person came up with a solution thru experential realization, then you have to say what was his experience. He must have the same experience of a similar problem before he can come up with a solution. And if he had the experience before, he wouldn't have to waste 6 yrs doing the wrong things as you claimed.
It is precisely he did not have that experience until he contemplated and experientially realized himself through his meditation.
He realized the four noble truths.
Originally posted by An Eternal Now:It is precisely he did not have that experience until he contemplated and experientially realized himself through his meditation.
He realized the four noble truths.
There are several meanings to the word 'realize' - to make concrete, to accomplish, to make it seems real. The issue is how he 'realised'. That the Buddha came up with the 4NT is not in question whatever words are used to express that. When you said 'experential' realization - you are saying he realised the 4NT by experience only.
Originally posted by I No Stupid:Can you be sure the Dhammapada is the Buddha's words only and does not contained some words from its writers'?
The 4NT did NOT imply the refuge. It is your implication.
The refuge is like a respite from the world of samsara, The sarana is like a place where one goes to find peace, security and safety. By all means take refuge but the title of this thread is 'learning Buddhism starts with taking refuge' - to which I disagree. You are barking up the wrong tree.
You sound as if you are better than Buddha. You are just here for the sake of arguing and trying to show others that you are different from the rest. For goodness sake, please don't interpret the sutras as you pleased. You are the only one interpreting it differently. It cannot be you are correct, thousands and millions including the Venerables are wrong.
I would suggest moderators to delete "I NOT STUPID" postings inorder not to confuse the beginners.
said before, i like Hui Neng's approach as not to mislead followers in taking refuge in Buddha, Dharma and Sangha, he totally changed the word to taking refuge in Awareness觉, Proper æ£and Purity净 respectively.
pls read:
Taking Refuge in the Triple Jewels
http://www.amtb.org.tw/e-bud/releases/tjewels.htm
i also think Intellect is not equal to wisdom. wisdom need experience and morality. if not Intellect can also be use to commit crimes and hurt people.
Wisdom is more than just understanding on an intellectual level. It is only realized when it becomes part of compassionate support.
You can only increase your wisdom if you are compassionate, and you increase your compassion as you acquire wisdom. One could use the image of a bicycle to explain this truth. In this image, the two wheels of the bicycle would represent wisdom and compassion. The front wheel, which steers the bicycle, is wisdom, and the back wheel, which drives the bicycle forward, is compassion. The bicycle only functions when both wheels are in order. You could say that the back wheel can only move forward when the front wheel moves forward as well. Or you could say that the bicycle can only move forward properly when both wheels move forward. The pedaling has to be done by you, though. And the steering.
Cleverness is not going to solve the real problems of the world, like war, civil strife, poverty and the high incidence of violence. Neither is it going to solve the mental problems so rife in the modern world. Only wisdom and compassion can solve these problems.
Only wisdom and compassion can give cleverness the right direction. It can turn science into true progress. It can turn economy into something serving the people and the environment, and not just profit and greed.
Without these qualities, science can become a nightmare. Nuclear power has been used to create weapons of mass destruction. Technology has been used to destroy people’s livelihoods. Even medicine is often used in a heartless way in service of profit, causing unnecessary suffering to millions of poor people and sending them prematurely to their deaths.
We are witnessing what damage can be done by economic systems serving mainly greed and profit, and how they increase rather than diminish suffering and destruction. Only compassion can turn cleverness into wisdom, and inspire economic systems dedicated to improving conditions for all, and to sustaining the environment for future generations.
Only compassion and wisdom can solve the mental problems so rife in the world today, for they can tame greed, the source of so much exploitation, dissatisfaction and futility.
/\
i prefer it's best to use the heart/mind to take refuge. 心皈�(�是行�皈�).
our MCK and even Nathan president of SG also know 佛法�实质,��形�. Buddhism stress on the actual doing than the apparent gesture. not that gesture is no good, they are good in terms of displining oneself.
This was said by the Blessed One, said by the Arahant, so I have heard: "Even if a monk, taking hold of my outer cloak, were to follow right behind me, placing his feet in my footsteps, yet if he were to be greedy for sensual pleasures, strong in his passions, malevolent in mind, corrupt in his resolves, his mindfulness muddled, unalert, uncentered, his mind scattered, & his faculties uncontrolled, then he would be far from me, and I from him. Why is that? Because he does not see the Dhamma. Not seeing the Dhamma, he does not see me.
"But even if a monk were to live one hundred leagues away, yet if he were to have no greed for sensual objects, were not strong in his passions, not malevolent in mind, uncorrupt in his resolves, his mindfulness established, alert, centered, his mind at singleness, & his faculties well-restrained, then he would be near to me, and I to him. Why is that? Because he sees the Dhamma. Seeing the Dhamma, he sees me."
Though following right behind,
full of desire, vexation:
see how far he is! —
the perturbed
from the unperturbed,
the bound
from the Unbound,
the greedy one
from the one with no greed.
But the wise person who, through
direct knowledge of Dhamma,
gnosis of Dhamma,
grows still & unperturbed
like a lake unruffled by wind:
see how close he is! —
the unperturbed to the unperturbed,
the Unbound to the Unbound,
the greedless one
to the one with no greed.
Itivuttaka's Sanghaá¹ikaṇṇa Sutta. Scroll down to Sutta 92
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/iti/iti.3.050-099.than.html
/\
Originally posted by I No Stupid:There are several meanings to the word 'realize' - to make concrete, to accomplish, to make it seems real. The issue is how he 'realised'. That the Buddha came up with the 4NT is not in question whatever words are used to express that. When you said 'experential' realization - you are saying he realised the 4NT by experience only.
He realized 4NT solely through the path of meditative absorption (the jhanas), plus the vipassana awareness of one's direct experience. Means he was observing his own experience in a meditative setting.
Direct realization can only be understood when there is a shift in perception. This requires the mind to realize Itself.
Before one realizes this, it is impossible to relate the unconditioned to the conceptual conditioned mind.