Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
Locked
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

[... Meditation is simply direct awareness. What distracts from direct awareness? Nothing other than thought. - Nat]

Sorry, that's just a case of trying to live in the moment. A false Zen. It's good for easing the anxiety levels of aimless people, and can trigger some altered states every now and then, but it isn't the great wisdom that Lao Tzu and Huang Po talked about. ...

- David

This Huang Po?
Huángbò often railed against traditional Buddhist textual practices, pointing to the necessity of direct experience over sutra study ...

... he claimed that “’Studying the Way’ is just a figure of speech….In fact, the Way is not something which can be studied. …You must not allow this name [the Way] to lead you into forming a mental concept of a road.” [17]”…any search is doomed to failure” [18]

- Wikipedia, Huangbo Xiyun, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huangbo_Xiyun

... One who reaches the ultimate source is called a Sramana. The fruit of a Sramana is the cessation of false thinking. This fruit cannot be attained through worldly learning. Using the mind to seek Mind and depending on others for insight, how can one reach or acquire the Tao? The ancient cultivators were possessed of wisdom. Just by hearing a few words of Dharma, they suddenly attained the state beyond study and thinking. Today, people only want to seek worldly learning, mistakenly believing that more knowledge leads to better practice. They do not know that more and more learning leads only to obstacles in their cultivation. ...

- The Zen Teachings of Huang Po, http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhis ... ang-po.htm
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by David Quinn »

Shardrol wrote:I think part of what leads to these disagreements (thought is good v thought is bad) is that in English we only have this one word 'thought' to mean several different things. There is the compulsive discursive mental blathering that sifts & categorizes experience as a method of bolstering the ego & then there is focused penetrative insight.

Certainly a Buddha would have no reason to engage in the former, but the latter would naturally be part of a Buddha's communication with other beings.

'Knowledge' is another one of those vague English words. In Tibetan one of the words for the enlightened state is 'rigpa', which literally means knowledge. This is obviously not the same kind of knowledge as that possessed by London taxi drivers who have memorized the map of the city & the shortest route between any two points (which is actually referred to as 'the Knowledge').

That's an interesting point. A lot of the translations of Eastern texts that we read nowadays have been translated by people who have a conditioned bias against rationality (as part of the anti-intellectual age that we all live in). Thus, when it comes to assigning meaning to these deeper spiritual concepts, they instinctively opt for slants that reflect the anti-intellectualism. A concept which means "knowledge" or "enlightened knowledge" in Tibetan or Chinese might become "intuition", or a concept about "academic reasoning" or "empirical reasoning" might become just "reasoning", and so on.

In this way, a sentence in Tibetan or Chinese which means, "Knowledge of the Tao cannot be attained by academic reasoning", becomes, "Intuiting the Tao cannot be attained by reasoning". An entirely different set of information is suddenly being presented.

On the other hand, I don't believe this sort of ambiguity presents much of a problem to those who are intelligent and flexible enough to know how to think deeply and fluidly about things. Problems really only arise when people become emmeshed in biased, limited views, such as Nat getting sucked into the view that consciousness of the Tao depends on the cessation of thought. This kind of bias immediately backs them into a corner, leading to the creation of all sorts of dilemmas.

Some of the dilemmas that flow from Nat's bias, for example, include the unmistakeable spectacle of Lao Tzu thinking and reasoning and conceptualizing all throughout the Tao Te Ching; the fact that his own mind is always conceptualizing in every single moment of his conscious life, even during the mystical experiences he has; the fact that every single view he expresses is generated out of a particular conception of the Tao, or the world, that he has; and so on.

In order to deal with these dilemmas, he has to involve himself in all sorts of convoluted maneuvers. For example, he is forced to depict things like knowledge, rationality, conceptualizing, etc, in an extreme and contrived manner. "Knowledge" is contrived to mean exclusively "the accumulation of concepts" or "bookish learning" , and "concepts" are restricted to mean the sterile, lifeless things of academia. He even has to invent bizarre terms like "hyper-rationality or "trans-rationality", just to try and disguise the fact that he has used, and is still using, rationality in the formation of his beliefs. Convolution piled on top of convolution, all of it stemming from a simple initial delusion.

A Buddha remains in awareness of nirvana all the time, including while making up grocery lists, sitting on the toilet, & writing comments on internet forums. There's nothing poisonous about thought that suddenly bumps one into a dualized state. If it's not possible to communicate anything about nirvana in dualized language why did all those people write all those books that are forever being quoted here?
Of course. This is so obvious that one wonders why we even have to talk about it or affirm it.

Indeed, it is a very odd thing to witness, that of a "liberated being" who claims to be free of all things happily confining his liberation to the realm of no-thought (and even odder when you consider that such a realm is a product of the imagination in the first place).

-
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by David Quinn »

RobertGreenSky wrote:
[... Meditation is simply direct awareness. What distracts from direct awareness? Nothing other than thought. - Nat]

Sorry, that's just a case of trying to live in the moment. A false Zen. It's good for easing the anxiety levels of aimless people, and can trigger some altered states every now and then, but it isn't the great wisdom that Lao Tzu and Huang Po talked about. ...

This Huang Po?

The very one. I have great admiration for Huang Po's work. He is my favourite of the Eastern sages. His words are always fresh and inspired. He knows how to stay focused on the core issue, while addressing it in thousands of subtley different ways. His gift for summing up the entire spiritual path in simple, concise and yet poetic phrases is quite remarkable. I love him like a brother.

Huángbò often railed against traditional Buddhist textual practices, pointing to the necessity of direct experience over sutra study ...

... he claimed that “’Studying the Way’ is just a figure of speech….In fact, the Way is not something which can be studied. …You must not allow this name [the Way] to lead you into forming a mental concept of a road.” [17]”…any search is doomed to failure” [18]

- Wikipedia, Huangbo Xiyun, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huangbo_Xiyun
Wonderful words. Fully agree with them.

... One who reaches the ultimate source is called a Sramana. The fruit of a Sramana is the cessation of false thinking. This fruit cannot be attained through worldly learning. Using the mind to seek Mind and depending on others for insight, how can one reach or acquire the Tao? The ancient cultivators were possessed of wisdom. Just by hearing a few words of Dharma, they suddenly attained the state beyond study and thinking. Today, people only want to seek worldly learning, mistakenly believing that more knowledge leads to better practice. They do not know that more and more learning leads only to obstacles in their cultivation. ...

- The Zen Teachings of Huang Po, http://www.abuddhistlibrary.com/Buddhis ... ang-po.htm
That's a horrible translation, clunky and unfeeling. A much better translation is the one made by John Blofeld, an example of which can be found here.

-
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

In Tibetan one of the words for the enlightened state is 'rigpa', which literally means knowledge.

- Shardrol
Nope.
Rigpa (Tibetan; Sanskrit vidya) is the primordial, nondual awareness advocated by the Dzogchen and Mahamudra teachings.

- Wikipedia, Rigpa, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigpa
Awareness is not knowledge.
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

... A lot of the translations of Eastern texts that we read nowadays have been translated by people who have a conditioned bias against rationality (as part of the anti-intellectual age that we all live in). Thus, when it comes to assigning meaning to these deeper spiritual concepts, they instinctively opt for slants that reflect the anti-intellectualism. A concept which means "knowledge" or "enlightened knowledge" in Tibetan or Chinese might become "intuition", or a concept about "academic reasoning" or "empirical reasoning" might become just "reasoning", and so on.

In this way, a sentence in Tibetan or Chinese which means, "Knowledge of the Tao cannot be attained by academic reasoning", becomes, "Intuiting the Tao cannot be attained by reasoning". An entirely different set of information is suddenly being presented.

- David
Who do you think translates those materials if they aren't intellectuals? You're accusing them of intellectual dishonesty but you're not giving a shred of proof for it. Which translators are you indicting? Assuming you don't speak and write, e.g., Tibetan and Chinese, which other translators are you using to do it?

Your characterization of 'hyper-rational' missed the point. I had noted, '... what I am getting at by [hyper-rational] is that one can be touched by the radical conclusions in Daoism (Dao is beyond naming) and Nagarjuna (ultimate reality is only conventionally real) and Zen (mu!) and carry them with us as we live and as we reason.' I didn't try to disguise that reason must be used - I've openly discussed that it must be and you wrote you'd remember it - and I've certainly explained that the ideas involved arguably take the practitioner beyond the limits of reason. If 'beyond reason' then hyper- or trans- are certainly ... reasonable.
Last edited by RobertGreenSky on Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

'A much better translation [of Huang Po] is the one made by John Blofeld, an example of which can be found [on David's site].' - David
The way is spiritual Truth and was originally without name or title. It was only because people ignorantly sought for it empirically that the Buddhas appeared and taught them to eradicate this method of approach. Fearing that nobody would understand, they selected the name "Way". You must not allow this name to lead you into forming a mental concept of a road. So it is said, "When the fish is caught we pay no more attention to the trap". When body and mind achieve spontaneity, the Way is reached and Mind is understood.

- Huang Po


So it is said, "When the fish is caught we pay no more attention to the trap". So it is also said, "When the orbit is obtained we pay no more attention to the booster."
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

If you would spend all your time - walking, standing, sitting or lying down - learning to halt the concept-forming activities of your own mind, you could be sure of ultimately attaining your goal. ... So, just discard all you have acquired as being no better than a bedspread for you when you were sick. Only when you have abandoned all perceptions, there being nothing objective to perceive; only when phenomena obstruct you no longer; only when you have rid yourself of the whole gamut of dualistic concepts of the" ignorant" and" Enlightened" category, will you at last earn the title of Transcendental Buddha.

- Huang Po, tr. Blofeld, ibid., emphasis mine.
Thanks, Dave!
User avatar
Shardrol
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:08 pm
Location: New York, USA

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Shardrol »

RobertGreenSky wrote:
In Tibetan one of the words for the enlightened state is 'rigpa', which literally means knowledge.

- Shardrol
Nope.
Rigpa (Tibetan; Sanskrit vidya) is the primordial, nondual awareness advocated by the Dzogchen and Mahamudra teachings.

- Wikipedia, Rigpa, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rigpa
Awareness is not knowledge.
I said 'literally'. In the sentence after the one you quote, it says rigpa 'generally means intelligence'.

The Sowa-Rigpa, a famous Tibetan medical text, uses the word rigpa to mean knowledge or science.

The special use of the word rigpa in Dzogchen to mean nondual awareness or the state of enlightenment does not negate the ordinary sense of the word but expands on it.

And since when is Wikipedia the ultimate in spiritual (or linguistic) authority?
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Kelly Jones »

RobertGreenSky wrote:
If you would spend all your time - walking, standing, sitting or lying down - learning to halt the concept-forming activities of your own mind, you could be sure of ultimately attaining your goal. ... So, just discard all you have acquired as being no better than a bedspread for you when you were sick. Only when you have abandoned all perceptions, there being nothing objective to perceive; only when phenomena obstruct you no longer; only when you have rid yourself of the whole gamut of dualistic concepts of the" ignorant" and" Enlightened" category, will you at last earn the title of Transcendental Buddha.

- Huang Po, tr. Blofeld, ibid., emphasis mine.
Thanks, Dave!
The irony is, Robert, you are holding onto a dualistic concept, that reasoning is unreal and that only non-reasoning is indicative of enlightenment. Hence you paint yourself into a corner, wanting only to perceive Suchness minus reasoning.

There's a funny scene in the Hollywood movie version of "The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy", where Zaphod Beeblebrox, Ford Prefect, Arthur Dent, and Marvin land in Frogsphere to rescue Trillian from being eaten by the Buggblatter Beast of Traal and the Vogons. On walking across the desert to the Vogon headquarters, Arthur is unexpectedly whacked by an invisible entity. Shocked, he cries out in pain. The others are ready to ignore him. But it happens again. And then, to their surprise, Ford and Zaphod experience a smart smack on the forehead. In astonishment, and on their guard, they start to advance forward to the Vogon building. But a series of whacks occurs again. Eventually, a pattern emerges, and the three friends realise that the unpredictable smacks are linked to their having ideas.

It's very comical, and it reminds me of the kind of unending pain you must be going through in your quest for Enlightenment.

;-)


...
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

Kelly Jones wrote:
RobertGreenSky wrote:
If you would spend all your time - walking, standing, sitting or lying down - learning to halt the concept-forming activities of your own mind, you could be sure of ultimately attaining your goal. ... So, just discard all you have acquired as being no better than a bedspread for you when you were sick. Only when you have abandoned all perceptions, there being nothing objective to perceive; only when phenomena obstruct you no longer; only when you have rid yourself of the whole gamut of dualistic concepts of the" ignorant" and" Enlightened" category, will you at last earn the title of Transcendental Buddha.

- Huang Po, tr. Blofeld, ibid., emphasis mine.
Thanks, Dave!
The irony is, Robert, you are holding onto a dualistic concept, that reasoning is unreal and that only non-reasoning is indicative of enlightenment. Hence you paint yourself into a corner, wanting only to perceive Suchness minus reasoning.

There's a funny scene in the Hollywood movie version of "The Hitch-hiker's Guide to the Galaxy", where Zaphod Beeblebrox, Ford Prefect, Arthur Dent, and Marvin land in Frogsphere to rescue Trillian from being eaten by the Buggblatter Beast of Traal and the Vogons. On walking across the desert to the Vogon headquarters, Arthur is unexpectedly whacked by an invisible entity. Shocked, he cries out in pain. The others are ready to ignore him. But it happens again. And then, to their surprise, Ford and Zaphod experience a smart smack on the forehead. In astonishment, and on their guard, they start to advance forward to the Vogon building. But a series of whacks occurs again. Eventually, a pattern emerges, and the three friends realise that the unpredictable smacks are linked to their having ideas.

It's very comical, and it reminds me of the kind of unending pain you must be going through in your quest for Enlightenment.

;-)


...
Amazingly enough, Shardrol's post was actually far more sensible than yours. And you're a bit of a sadist, aren't you?

Whatever might be my failings Huang Po said get your arse beyond the conceptual. You can hide from it, but there it is.
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

And since when is Wikipedia the ultimate in spiritual (or linguistic) authority?

- Shardrol
Can you point out where I claimed Wikipedia is the ultimate in spiritual or linguistic authority? Even if it isn't the ultimate authority it's better than none. At the end of it rigpa remains 'awareness' in Tibetan Buddhism, and not 'knowledge'.
User avatar
Shardrol
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:08 pm
Location: New York, USA

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Shardrol »

RobertGreenSky: as you were
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Unidian »

I'll begin by quoting the core of it, which is really all that needs to be said and was well-said by Robert:
Observing the limitations of reason is in this area making best use of reason. We never said don't well learn Buddhism, Zen, and Daoism, and observe that again and again we bring our knowledge of those subjects with us and that we reason from our understanding and from significant authors. Pointing out the limitations of reason is exactly what Buddhism, Zen, and Daoism themselves do and your readership should know it - you underemphasize it, from our position, and then you accuse us of being unreasonable when we point out what Buddhism, Zen, and Daoism actually say.
That's it right there in a nutshell. However, since that won't be accepted and contention and disputation will continue, let me address a couple of other things:

First of all, let's resolve one possible issue by noting that I don't address anything written by Kelly Jones - the simple reason being that she is a few sandwiches short of a picnic and there's nothing to be gained by engaging that sort of dynamic.

As for David, while the same is quite demonstrably (and diagnostically) true, to refuse to address him would make posting here kind of pointless, since he is (and always has been, in my experience) the backbone of the "QRS" mentality.

That being said...
On the other hand, I don't believe this sort of ambiguity presents much of a problem to those who are intelligent and flexible enough to know how to think deeply and fluidly about things. Problems really only arise when people become emmeshed in biased, limited views, such as Nat getting sucked into the view that consciousness of the Tao depends on the cessation of thought.
Ah, here is the typical and totally detached, non-egotistical implication that David's opponents (namely me, in this case) are stupid and inflexible, among other things. Duly noted.

Consciousness of the Tao, of course, does not depend on the "cessation of thought" (as if any such thing could ever even occur) but rather on the transcendence of thought. There is a world of difference, not that David would notice or care. Strawmen are his favorite things to knock down, because they are so easy to demolish and provide so much ego-boosting mileage in the eyes of the faithful.
This kind of bias immediately backs them into a corner, leading to the creation of all sorts of dilemmas.
Whatever dilemmas David imagines to exist in my thinking actually exist only in his. They are his fantasies, conjured up for the purpose of dismissing me (and all opponents) as confused, "unenlightened" beings - in opposition to his Lofty self.
Some of the dilemmas that flow from Nat's bias, for example, include the unmistakeable spectacle of Lao Tzu thinking and reasoning and conceptualizing all throughout the Tao Te Ching; the fact that his own mind is always conceptualizing in every single moment of his conscious life, even during the mystical experiences he has; the fact that every single view he expresses is generated out of a particular conception of the Tao, or the world, that he has; and so on.
Not a word of that is true, but please do carry on. Clueless and egotistical psychoanalysis is amusing.
In order to deal with these dilemmas, he has to involve himself in all sorts of convoluted maneuvers. For example, he is forced to depict things like knowledge, rationality, conceptualizing, etc, in an extreme and contrived manner.
Yes. That "extreme and contrived manner" is called Taoism and Zen, among other things.
"Knowledge" is contrived to mean exclusively "the accumulation of concepts" or "bookish learning" , and "concepts" are restricted to mean the sterile, lifeless things of academia.
Ha... this is the biggest howler yet. Everyone who knows me knows that I despise academia.
He even has to invent bizarre terms like "hyper-rationality or "trans-rationality", just to try and disguise the fact that he has used, and is still using, rationality in the formation of his beliefs.
Those "bizarre terms" are accurate representations of the Zen/Taoist epistemological position.

Yours aren't - nor do I suspect you even know what "epistemology" is beyond the dictionary definition.
Convolution piled on top of convolution, all of it stemming from a simple initial delusion.
Yes indeed. The delusion, no doubt, that David Quinn is a pathological blowhard rather than a fully-enlightened spiritual peer of Laozi, Zhuangzi, and Nagarjuna. In other words, the cardinal sin of Quinnology - the delusion that man can live by the bread given by legitimate spiritual authors rather than by every word that proceedeth from the bearded cake hole of David Quinn.
I live in a tub.
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by David Quinn »

RobertGreenSky wrote:
... A lot of the translations of Eastern texts that we read nowadays have been translated by people who have a conditioned bias against rationality (as part of the anti-intellectual age that we all live in). Thus, when it comes to assigning meaning to these deeper spiritual concepts, they instinctively opt for slants that reflect the anti-intellectualism. A concept which means "knowledge" or "enlightened knowledge" in Tibetan or Chinese might become "intuition", or a concept about "academic reasoning" or "empirical reasoning" might become just "reasoning", and so on.

In this way, a sentence in Tibetan or Chinese which means, "Knowledge of the Tao cannot be attained by academic reasoning", becomes, "Intuiting the Tao cannot be attained by reasoning". An entirely different set of information is suddenly being presented.
Who do you think translates those materials if they aren't intellectuals?
Even intellectuals can be infected with the anti-intellectual virus, particularly when it comes to the deepest matters concerning reality. It's called fear.

Our era generally operates by this principle - the more important the matter is, the less the intellect is applied to it.

Your characterization of 'hyper-rational' missed the point. I had noted, '... what I am getting at by [hyper-rational] is that one can be touched by the radical conclusions in Daoism (Dao is beyond naming) and Nagarjuna (ultimate reality is only conventionally real) and Zen (mu!) and carry them with us as we live and as we reason.' I didn't try to disguise that reason must be used - I've openly discussed otherwise - and I've certainly explained that the ideas involved arguably take the practitioner beyond the limits of reason. If 'beyond reason' then hyper- or trans- are certainly ... reasonable.
I'm sorry, but this is all gobbledy-gook. A person is either rational or he isn't. He is either without delusions or he isn't. You can't be hyper-rational any more than you can be hyper-without delusion. One is simply without delusion, or one is simply being rational.

"Hyper-rationality" is one of those terms that irrational people invent to justify the attachment they have to their own particular brand of irrationality.

It is important to grasp that no one can ever move beyond the limits of reason. Not even the Tao itself is beyond the limits of reason, let along the little speck-beings who exist within it, no matter how "hyper" they manage to get. The Tao has an identity - albeit the identity of no-identity - and this alone brings it into the clutches of reason. Awareness of the Tao also has an identity and thus can be reasoned about.

What we can do is "see through" the existence of everything - that is to say, understand the illusory nature of everything - and in that sense, we can eliminate the core materials that reason needs to work with. But then, as soon as we become aware of this, we have immediately conceptualized the matter and we are back to creating material for reason to operate once more.

RobertGreenSky wrote:
If you would spend all your time - walking, standing, sitting or lying down - learning to halt the concept-forming activities of your own mind, you could be sure of ultimately attaining your goal. ... So, just discard all you have acquired as being no better than a bedspread for you when you were sick. Only when you have abandoned all perceptions, there being nothing objective to perceive; only when phenomena obstruct you no longer; only when you have rid yourself of the whole gamut of dualistic concepts of the" ignorant" and" Enlightened" category, will you at last earn the title of Transcendental Buddha.

- Huang Po, tr. Blofeld, ibid., emphasis mine.
Thanks, Dave!
And yet there is Huang Po using concept-forming activities to construct these sentences for the purpose of helping other beings (another concept) to become enlightened (yet another concept).

How is he doing this? How is he both forming concepts and not forming concepts at the same time? It's a mystery ......

Again, being conscious of the Tao doesn't mean having a blank, thoughtless mind. Rather, it refers to something much deeper - that of not being fooled by any kind of dualistic manifestation at all.

The irony is that by insisting that thoughts have to disappear, or be transcended, before consciousness of the Tao can arise, it means that you still being fooled by duality - in this case, by the mirage of a thoughtless realm.

RobertGreenSky wrote:'A much better translation [of Huang Po] is the one made by John Blofeld, an example of which can be found [on David's site].' - David
The way is spiritual Truth and was originally without name or title. It was only because people ignorantly sought for it empirically that the Buddhas appeared and taught them to eradicate this method of approach. Fearing that nobody would understand, they selected the name "Way". You must not allow this name to lead you into forming a mental concept of a road. So it is said, "When the fish is caught we pay no more attention to the trap". When body and mind achieve spontaneity, the Way is reached and Mind is understood.

- Huang Po

So it is said, "When the fish is caught we pay no more attention to the trap". So it is also said, "When the orbit is obtained we pay no more attention to the booster."
These are fine words and very true (if interpreted correctly). It is true that the enlightened person no longer has to rely on the booster (his past intellectual reasonings and meditative breakthroughs) which propelled him into enlightenment. He is utterly free in that sense. But this doesn't mean that he starts tearing down all boosters, or undermining the value of them. In his freedom, he is still mindful of the needs of others.

-
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by David Quinn »

Unidian wrote:I'll begin by quoting the core of it, which is really all that needs to be said and was well-said by Robert:
Observing the limitations of reason is in this area making best use of reason. We never said don't well learn Buddhism, Zen, and Daoism, and observe that again and again we bring our knowledge of those subjects with us and that we reason from our understanding and from significant authors. Pointing out the limitations of reason is exactly what Buddhism, Zen, and Daoism themselves do and your readership should know it - you underemphasize it, from our position, and then you accuse us of being unreasonable when we point out what Buddhism, Zen, and Daoism actually say.
That's it right there in a nutshell.

Again, it's interesting to observe this obsessive focus on the "limitations of reason". There is almost never any mention made of, say, the limitations of the emotions, or the limitations of joy.

Funny that.

Also interesting is that the "limitations of reason" is never mentioned by Lao Tzu, or Chuang Tzu for that matter. I've also never seen it in Nagarjuna (although I haven't read all his work). And Huang Po barely gives it any consideration at all and when he does it is usually in connection to "empirical reasoning". Yet, according to you guys, it goes to the heart of all their teachings.

No mention of "direct awareness" is ever made by these sages either.

Consciousness of the Tao, of course, does not depend on the "cessation of thought" (as if any such thing could ever even occur) but rather on the transcendence of thought.
Okay, I'll ask the same queston that Robert declined twice to answer. If a Lao Tzu or a Chuang Tzu engages in thought does he automatically lose consciousness of the Tao?

-
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

Even intellectuals can be infected with the anti-intellectual virus, particularly when it comes to the deepest matters concerning reality. It's called fear.

Our era generally operates by this principle - the more important the matter is, the less the intellect is applied to it.

- David
You again provided no support for your claim. Which translators are you accusing of intellectual dishonesty and which translators are you relying on in order to do so? You're accusing our sources of intellectual dishonesty. If you cannot support your position isn't it reasonable to conclude you are being intellectually dishonest?
... but this is all gobbledy-gook. A person is either rational or he isn't. ... It is important to grasp that no one can ever move beyond the limits of reason. Not even the Tao itself is beyond the limits of reason ...
That is the gobbledygook! Nagarjuna and Laozi held otherwise and we've quoted the material again and again. We've quoted Laozi that the Dao [itself!] is beyond naming (= being beyond thinking). When presented with direct information from two sources that Nagarjuna disputed A = A you simply ignored it. Agree with Nagarjuna's position on A = A or disagree with it, either way you lose.

We read from Huang Po and from your own webpage: If you would spend all your time - walking, standing, sitting or lying down - learning to halt the concept-forming activities of your own mind, you could be sure of ultimately attaining your goal. (- Huang Po)

Now given Huang Po said learn to halt the concept-forming activities of your mind, do you agree with Huang Po or do you disagree with him?
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

Okay, I'll ask the same queston that Robert declined twice to answer. If a Lao Tzu or a Chuang Tzu engages in thought does he automatically lose consciousness of the Tao?

I wouldn't answer a stupid question like that. Are you going to pretend you can answer it? Who the hell made you a Laozi, Zhuangzi, Nagarjuna, or Huang Po, especially given that you don't agree with them in the first place.

Your spiritual pretension suggests pathology.
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Unidian »

Okay, I'll ask the same queston that Robert declined twice to answer. If a Lao Tzu or a Chuang Tzu engages in thought does he automatically lose consciousness of the Tao?
Of course not, and it's a patently ridiculous question. Is there any question that Laozi and Zhuangzi though (for example) about what clothes they were going to wear upon awakening in the morning, or whether tea was ready? Did they lose their connection to Tao when these thoughts occurred? Of course not - no more than they would lose that same connection when thoughts about Tao occurred (as they surely did).

They difference is that these men did not cling to such thoughts or become intellectually attached to them - but rather, as Taoism and Zen advises repeatedly, they simply observed them and allowed them to run their course without associating them with a sense of self-involvement. Rather, they regarded them like watching passing storm clouds (Zhuangzi's words, and Laozi's implication [see Zhuangzi, ch. 2 and TTC, ch. 23]).

Trans-rationality is not the abandonment, squelching, or suppressing of rational thought - rather, it is the recognition that rationality can take us only so far, and that what really matters lies beyond its borders. According to Taoism and Zen, liberation and awakening have always been present and available to us - and it is only our mind's (egotistical) grasping and chattering interference that has prevented them from being our constant experience.

It's all really pretty simple, which is perhaps why Laozi says:
My words are easy to understand and easy to live by,
Yet no man anywhere knows them or practices them.
Perhaps no man wants to, because there's no ego-boost or comforting self-image in it for them.
I live in a tub.
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

Again, it's interesting to observe this obsessive focus on the "limitations of reason". There is almost never any mention made of, say, the limitations of the emotions, or the limitations of joy.

Funny that.

Also interesting is that the "limitations of reason" is never mentioned by Lao Tzu, or Chuang Tzu for that matter. I've also never seen it in Nagarjuna (although I haven't read all his work). And Huang Po barely gives it any consideration at all and when he does it is usually in connection to "empirical reasoning". Yet, according to you guys, it goes to the heart of all their teachings.

No mention of "direct awareness" is ever made by these sages either.

- Quinn
Must every phrase, clause, and word we use be exactly present in the literature? How often we are criticized for not doing our own reasoning. Yet even when we support our arguments Quinn can't support his.

No 'direct awareness'?

A special transmission outside the scriptures;
No dependence on words and letters;
Direct pointing to the mind of man;
Seeing into one's nature and attaining Buddhahood.

- Bodhidharma on Zen, http://www.amacord.com/taste/essays/zen.html

So will Quinn complain I can't reason on my own or will he just misinterpret it? He's bound to say Zen depends on words and letters because there they are! It must begin occurring to people that Quinn would not be properly understanding Bodhidharma, just as he does not properly understand Huang Po and he does not properly understand Nagarjuna.

Laozi said in effect 'get beyond naming', Bodhidharma said 'get beyond words and letters', and Huang Po said 'get beyond concepts'. Quinn says remain enslaved to inferior ideas that those three individuals reject.
User avatar
Unidian
Posts: 1843
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2005 7:00 pm
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Unidian »

I wouldn't answer a stupid question like that. Are you going to pretend you can answer it? Who the hell made you a Laozi, Zhuangzi, Nagarjuna, or Huang Po, especially given that you don't agree with them in the first place.
Well, you know the answer to that. He made himself one, as have all the QRSites (Dan possibly excepted).

I suppose it's possible they have a valid claim, although the evidence doesn't seem to support it at all and the history of those who have similarly proclaimed themselves supreme spiritual masters is well-known, all too lengthy, and filled with things like cyanide Kool-Aid and the Branch Davidians. Hey, guess who just quit smoking? David Koresh.
Your spiritual pretension suggests pathology.
So does his official psychiatric diagnosis (Schizoid Personality Disorder), which he was misguided enough to post publicly in the belief that it would shore up his credentials as a Genius.
I live in a tub.
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Kelly Jones »

RobertGreenSky wrote:Amazingly enough, Shardrol's post was actually far more sensible than yours.
Which post? The one about A=A? Or the more recent one about rigpa meaning knowledge? Why shouldn't Shardrol be a sensible person, anyway? Non sequitorial comment.

And you're a bit of a sadist, aren't you?
I'm only pointing out what you seem unwilling to acknowledge. If you find it painful, so be it. I can't take away the stumbling block, and I don't wish to.

Whatever might be my failings Huang Po said get your arse beyond the conceptual. You can hide from it, but there it is.
I already have gone beyond the conceptual. It is you who have not. The conceptual is the One Mind, as is the non-conceptual. If the One Mind was not present in the conceptual, and only in the non-conceptual, then one would be falling into the error of giving a dualistic nature to the One Mind, saying it is "green" rather than "yellow", or "short" rather than "tall".

There is no ultimate reality in the conceptual. Everything is Suchness. Thus, I can think to the cows come home, and never be deceived.

All is One law, not two.


..
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Kelly Jones »

Unidian wrote:They difference is that these men did not cling to such thoughts or become intellectually attached to them - but rather, as Taoism and Zen advises repeatedly, they simply observed them and allowed them to run their course without associating them with a sense of self-involvement. Rather, they regarded them like watching passing storm clouds (Zhuangzi's words, and Laozi's implication [see Zhuangzi, ch. 2 and TTC, ch. 23]).
You say one has to remain uninvolved with thoughts. What about things generally? Do you think wisdom is living in a state of detached observation, like a spectator, keeping a sense of separation from finite things..................?


Trans-rationality is not the abandonment, squelching, or suppressing of rational thought - rather, it is the recognition that rationality can take us only so far, and that what really matters lies beyond its borders. According to Taoism and Zen, liberation and awakening have always been present and available to us - and it is only our mind's (egotistical) grasping and chattering interference that has prevented them from being our constant experience.
Beyond rationality (dualism) is nondualism. By definition, nondualism has no boundaries. Therefore, it must be present in reasoning.


..
User avatar
RobertGreenSky
Posts: 272
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 1:24 pm

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by RobertGreenSky »

I already have gone beyond the conceptual.

- Her Holiness Kelly Jones
I'm sure everyone at Genius Forum believes you. Do you think you're Quinn's peer? Have you observed that Quinn has gotten caught contradicting both Nagarjuna and Huang Po? Pretty classy posting, wasn't it?

- Hugh Betcha
User avatar
Kelly Jones
Posts: 2665
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 3:51 pm
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by Kelly Jones »

Robert,

I'm not trying to convince anyone. My reasoning is plain for all to see. If there truly is something false in my reasoning, then it is easy enough for you to point to it. I am open to your critique. However, saying "Guru X didn't say that", is hardly of any worth here. Or is it - are you interested in dogmatically following religious writings, rather than understanding what is true ....... ? I didn't think you were.

What about this, that I posted to you earlier? You didn't respond to any of my comment. Can you answer why Nagarjuna spoke of erroneous cognition, instead of cognition per se? Do you think he was wrong? If so, why?
The process of clinging and disputation originates from attachment and false cognition which grasps at the unreal as though it were real.
(Notice: not cognition per se, but false cognition).
Those who are affected by erroneous cognition suffer affliction.
(Notice: not cognition per se, but erroneous cognition).

Here is exactly what I've been saying, too. From Huang Po:
Therefore, if you students of the way seek to progress through seeing, hearing, feeling and knowing, when you are deprived of your perceptions your way to Mind will be cut off and you will find nowhere to enter. Only realize that, though real Mind is expressed in these perceptions, it neither forms part of them, nor is separate from them. You should not start reasoning from these perceptions, nor allow them to give rise to conceptual thought; yet nor should you seek the One Mind apart from them or abandon them in your pursuit of the Dharma. Do not keep them, nor abandon them, nor dwell in them, nor cleave to them. Above, below and around you, all is spontaneously existing, for there is nowhere which is outside the Buddha-Mind.

— Huang Po
(My italics).

In other words, one doesn't have to get hung up on reasoning as if it is somehow a blockage to perceiving what is ultimately real. If one has the "eye of kensho", as Hakuin put it, then one can see Mind everywhere.


..
User avatar
David Quinn
Posts: 5708
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 6:56 am
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: Arbitrary absolutism: the values of the house philosophy

Post by David Quinn »

Unidian wrote:
Okay, I'll ask the same queston that Robert declined twice to answer. If a Lao Tzu or a Chuang Tzu engages in thought does he automatically lose consciousness of the Tao?
Of course not, and it's a patently ridiculous question. Is there any question that Laozi and Zhuangzi though (for example) about what clothes they were going to wear upon awakening in the morning, or whether tea was ready? Did they lose their connection to Tao when these thoughts occurred? Of course not - no more than they would lose that same connection when thoughts about Tao occurred (as they surely did).

Well, you did assert only yesterday that thought was a distraction away from direct awareness of the Tao. To quote you directly from page 6, half-way along:
What distracts from direct awareness? Nothing other than thought.
So what's it to be?

-
Locked