In the Ayacana Sutta (S. i. 136) we learn that the Buddha “saw beings with little dust in their eyes and those with much dust.” I gather this is the dust of worldly attachment which makes the Buddha's teaching impossible to realize until there is much less dust obscuring the spiritual eye.
On the other hand, pop Buddhists—I am guessing—would argue that the Buddha was more like Superman. He was able to rid the masses of their heavy dust and thereby save the world! Well, this wasn't the case.
In a large crowd the Buddha would be lucky to find even one individual who had little dust in their eyes. One such example was the leper Suppabuddha (wide awake) (Udana V, iii). In a crowd listening to the Buddha preach the Dharma (P., dhamma), Suppabudda the leper gained dhamma-sight (dhammacakkhu) who was then dustless and stainless (virajam vîtamalam) effectively entering the path of stream entry (sotâpatti).
This brings up the problem modern Buddhists face: How much dust has occluded their spiritual or Dharma eye so the Buddha’s true teaching and light can’t be received? My own guess is that many modern day practitioners have way too much dust in their eyes who believe, for example, that by doing zazen they are becoming Buddhas.
The first task for modern day Buddhists is to remove the dust, at least as much as Suppabuddha otherwise they will never really understand the Buddha's teaching.
Be still. Attachment to dust is not the way. No gate bars the portal.
Posted by: 死鱼 | February 18, 2012 at 06:06 PM
All sentient beings are essentially Buddhas.
As with water and ice, there is no ice without water;
apart from sentient beings, there are no Buddhas.
Not knowing how close the truth is,
we seek it far away
--what a pity!
Posted by: Hakuin | February 17, 2012 at 06:43 PM
You should actually write a book, or a PDF. An introduction to Buddhism, a handbook.
Posted by: Silently Illuminated Wild Fox | February 16, 2012 at 06:12 PM
It will surely NEVER get old: you repeatedly bashing modern "pop"-buddhism, which exists nowhere outside of your mind (citta).
Seriously though. It'd be much more productive if you focused on your strong points (i.e. expounding your own gnosis, complete with scriptural quotes) rater than endlessly (and, alas, to no avail) raving against things you imagine people thinking and doing.
Well, your blog and your time.
Posted by: John Le Fucker | February 16, 2012 at 10:46 AM
pop things can be good too:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfxpfEYUv9g
Posted by: Indian Software Engineer | February 16, 2012 at 09:42 AM