« Wondrous Law of the One Mind | Main | Mediocre minds and their teachers »

October 07, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Certainly the historical Buddha advised us not simply to believe, not even him.Why? Because any belief is a thought construction difficult to discern from other like belief's.But I hope you can see that not having faith in (Buddha's) enlightenment is just on step from saying that there is no enlightenment and the Buddha is a metaphor for just sitting in other words your present state.This is precisely what is a major theme of this blog, that such belief in disbelief is not the path to the other shore(America, lol).The difficulty is to know why enlightenment is not a belief like other beliefs, well hoping that your stock value will increase is not hope but belief since it is something that can be validated through the senses.Enlightenment on the other hand is a hope and not a belief since it is a belief in something that transcends the senses.

Hope is a belief in a positive outcome related to events and circumstances in one's life.Wikipedia lol

This is my opinion for the first comment.Dear friend I think you have completely misunderstood very significant point in the above blog.The reason why we must have faith in Buddha's enlightenment is not because we should do something out of blind belief or fear of a dogmatic view, but because the enlightenment of a Buddha and for that matter of any sentient being since (and before) Buddha is a sin qua non or prerequisite for our own enlightenment. How?Faith in Buddha's enlightenment is the first outset of our journey and the first relation with truth, since it is in Buddha that we see our own future state.So when we exprese faith in someones enlightenment we express our hope for ourselves.If you heard that there was a promised land called America and it was discovered by Columbus, would you not try to find the port to take you to that shore.What if I told you that America does not exist and that Columbus is a metaphor for yourself in your present condition, what would happen then.

The problem with your argument is the same as with absolute belief in the bible. These are endlessly copied and interpreted texts, they have changed over time, how can you guarantee that they are the actual words precisely as spoken? Did the Buddha (not a verifiable historical figure and likely to have been an amalgamated or composite character, for the benefit of producing a concise literary picture ) have a stenographer permanently at his side?
Your argument is fundamentalist, limited whatever religion makes it.

Many, if not countless, use scripture to justify a selfish behaviour and the human creature if any, is one of extreme selfish behaviour.

When scripture and the religion it presents becomes greater than your own true self you are in danger of loosing yourself in the aforementioned. To loose yourself in something devoid of self is always a sure recipe of inevitable error and suffering.

Now, one whom can "use" scripture as a merely decoding and confirming tool for the vast spiritual richness of the True Mind is truly on the right path to a proper first enlightenment.

Ornate rhetoric and meaningless talk is what I hear from some of your detractors. As the Lotus Sutra teaches, "Shame on such monks. They will create their own fictions." The Mahaparinirvana Sutra teaches,

"In the defiled times of the latter age, those who slander the correct teaching will be as numerous as the specks of dirt in all the lands of the ten directions, while those who uphold the correct teaching will be as few as the specks of dirt that can be placed on a fingernail."

Bravo Zennist. Excellent post.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo