The Buddha divided people into two groups, those of noble character (arya) who were spiritually inclined, and those of a worldly character (prithagjana) who were attached to the conditioned world; who couldn’t conceive of a world beyond it if their life depended upon it; who also were like annihilationists who believe that when one dies, that’s it. There is no rebirth.
Those of a worldly character or disposition, over identify with the five aggregates of corporeality, feeling, perception, volition, and consciousness. These aggregates which are never other than conditioned, constitute their life or in the Buddha's words, their dung-like happiness. These are the same people that believe the Buddha taught that there is no self or atman.
Those who have a noble character, to use a modern analogy, are like someone who understands that the real source of the music from their radio is a radio wave which cannot be detected by the human senses. Without it, the radio has no music to amplify and play. On the same track, the great Zen master Bodhidharma said of these people:
Everyone wants to see this Mind, and those who move their hands and feet by its light are as many as the grains of the sand along the Ganges, but when you ask them, they can't explain it.
Those who have a noble character can look within their mind at high-resolution so to speak. They know what their thoughts are, in addition to mentation, and mental activity. If their teacher says that pure Mind is beyond thought, meaning it is totally empty of thought, those with a noble character understand and aim for this particular state which is kenshō. They don’t keep their investigation at a metaphysical level which is still immersed in thought. Those with a worldly character don’t get it. They might even fantasize that the do which I dare say is not uncommon.
Buddhism and especially Zen are not so easily taught especially in group situations. Once I went to a private lecture the Dalai Lama was giving on Dharmakīrti. Needless to say it was uninteresting to the huge majority of people who attended the Dalai Lama's lecture. He was more of a rock star to most people there, who just wanted to bathe in their fantasies about him. To borrow a line from the sagely wisdom of India, the arya are like the horns of the bull whereas the prithagjana are like hairs on his hide, many.
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.020.than.html
"When a disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be, it is not possible that he would run after the past, thinking, 'Was I in the past? Was I not in the past? What was I in the past? How was I in the past? Having been what, what was I in the past?' or that he would run after the future, thinking, 'Shall I be in the future? Shall I not be in the future? What shall I be in the future? How shall I be in the future? Having been what, what shall I be in the future?' or that he would be inwardly perplexed about the immediate present, thinking, 'Am I? Am I not? What am I? How am I? Where has this being come from? Where is it bound?' Such a thing is not possible. Why is that? Because the disciple of the noble ones has seen well with right discernment this dependent co-arising & these dependently co-arisen phenomena as they have come to be."
Posted by: Aryeh | April 19, 2019 at 06:47 PM