DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Do we make the Dhamma/Dharma too complicated?

**dgdhgjjgj** · 04-07-2011, 09:58 AM

I don't know how people can stand to eat eggplant.

Hi fojiao2. I don't know what does this phrase means. What is to eat eggplant?

Every tradition has its elaborations, it's huge temples, giant statues, mythical legends and large bank accounts. Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana, it doesn't matter. These are mere ashes, ashes accumulated over 2500 years from all over the world.

True, I agree. Here we are talking about the many Buddh-isms that offer different attractions for different temperaments but not about the teachings of the historical Buddha. Some traditions and schools are closer to the original teachings than others and IMHO to be at the root of those teachings can give you a better idea of what is about the practice of them. That is all.

They are not what makes Dhamma complicated.

I don't agree. Those adornments are the outcome of mind entanglements around a teaching and represent an unnecessary sophisticated elaboration of Dhamma; they are a reflection of that and if we are not aware, the original purpose can be corrupted. This adornments, like the statues and temples you talk about, are cultural elaborations that are full of symbols that are neither good nor bad but veil the direct understanding; they represent mental fabrications and in an unaware mind, they work as noise to the direct contemplation and clear insight.

If these things bother me [...]

No way. I am not bothered about cultural elaborations around the many Buddhisms we have at hand. I practice in a very particular tradition, the Soto Zen, but I am aware of the many corruptions that Japanese Zen branches have. And the aim of argumentation here is a very sporty one, as having a friendly game of chess. I am learning here from the different perspectives that are at hand in the forum. It is important to know other ways of understanding and I think you have exposed them and they are useful for all members here. That is all.

If I claim that my Buddhism is right and yours is wrong, that one is simple and the other complicated, then I am following a Buddha who hasn't yet transcended dualism.

This will ever happen when we are about Buddh-isms but not, maybe, if we were about the teachings of the historical Buddha. Perhaps based on them there would not be the need to elaborate Buddh-isms in our minds and many agreements will be gathered.

04-07-2011, 09:58 AM	#10
dgdhgjjgj Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 481 Senior Member	I don't know how people can stand to eat eggplant. Hi fojiao2. I don't know what does this phrase means. What is to eat eggplant? Every tradition has its elaborations, it's huge temples, giant statues, mythical legends and large bank accounts. Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana, it doesn't matter. These are mere ashes, ashes accumulated over 2500 years from all over the world. True, I agree. Here we are talking about the many Buddh-isms that offer different attractions for different temperaments but not about the teachings of the historical Buddha. Some traditions and schools are closer to the original teachings than others and IMHO to be at the root of those teachings can give you a better idea of what is about the practice of them. That is all. They are not what makes Dhamma complicated. I don't agree. Those adornments are the outcome of mind entanglements around a teaching and represent an unnecessary sophisticated elaboration of Dhamma; they are a reflection of that and if we are not aware, the original purpose can be corrupted. This adornments, like the statues and temples you talk about, are cultural elaborations that are full of symbols that are neither good nor bad but veil the direct understanding; they represent mental fabrications and in an unaware mind, they work as noise to the direct contemplation and clear insight. If these things bother me [...] No way. I am not bothered about cultural elaborations around the many Buddhisms we have at hand. I practice in a very particular tradition, the Soto Zen, but I am aware of the many corruptions that Japanese Zen branches have. And the aim of argumentation here is a very sporty one, as having a friendly game of chess. I am learning here from the different perspectives that are at hand in the forum. It is important to know other ways of understanding and I think you have exposed them and they are useful for all members here. That is all. If I claim that my Buddhism is right and yours is wrong, that one is simple and the other complicated, then I am following a Buddha who hasn't yet transcended dualism. This will ever happen when we are about Buddh-isms but not, maybe, if we were about the teachings of the historical Buddha. Perhaps based on them there would not be the need to elaborate Buddh-isms in our minds and many agreements will be gathered.
	Quote