A bird’s eye view of where the Buddha is coming from before one looks at the various aspects of Buddhism is very helpful to say the least. Such a view, however should not be taken to be an oversimplification. Nor is such a view a historical one.
When Gautama awakened, becoming Buddha, he awakened to the absolute from which this world, including his human body and mental life were composed. Although phenomena still existed as did his thoughts, etc., from his new standpoint their existence became illusory. In other words, the only thing that truly exists is the absolute. All else is barren or empty; it has no substance. Furthermore, to try and possess what is barren or empty; which is continually changing, causes only suffering. There is no release or cooling from such a negative enterprise.
For Gautama his realization was certainly positive and all encompassing. Nothing was outside of it; nothing could defeat it or make it disappear. Teaching it to others was, however, a much different undertaking. It was burdened with difficulties. Other than himself, people lacked the finesse to apprehend the hyper-subtle absolute. First, they had to be weaned off their desire to find the absolute through sensory consciousness. Eventually, these people also had to learn that the absolute of the Buddha transcends all phenomenality, coarse or fine.
The Taoist paradigm seems to be that when we're children, we "know", but then as time goes on, we "unenlighten" ourselves.
But the Buddhist perspective is different, it seems to me. We're born into ignorance. Only a select few, after many lifetimes, can "see".
Am I wrong?
Posted by: Jay Kay | May 15, 2012 at 12:47 PM