K, The prescription/description of compassion you mentioned are just 2 sides of the same coin. The coin itself is essentially being not blind to suffering. I don't know what enlightenment means for you, but for me it is awakening to the seemless unfolding of moment into moment without anything being added to it (Especially discursive). In an instant we can be 'blind' to this just as easily as we can be to compassion. That's why I practice and practice and practice.
Mike --- On Thu, 14/6/12, Kristopher Grey <[email protected]> wrote: From: Kristopher Grey <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: The Self Illusion To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, 14 June, 2012, 4:06 In defending your points, you miss the point. My comments were not a critique, but a simple pointing that may offer a means of resolution of any apparent differences regarding 'cultivation'. But since you bring it up, can you not see that this claim that you are unenlightened proves only that your seeking for proof either way fills both eyes to the point you can't see? K On 6/13/2012 1:49 PM, mike brown wrote: k, I'm not arrogant enough to claim that my world view is entirely my own, all dreamt up on my ownsome, and so I acknowledge that there are teachers and teachings that have nudged this world view along. I can, however, differentiate for myself what compasssion in action is and what is merely navel gazing as to the nature of compassion. I'm not enlightened, and from what I can tell, no one on this forum is. Please feel free to tell me otherwise. So, to describe compassion as the action of a Buddha is all very well, but how do you know? Read it somewhere? Personally, until I'm fully enlightened, I'll admit to having to work on cultivating compassion in the same way as bringing my concentration back to the moment cultivates my mindfullness. Mike --- On Thu, 14/6/12, Kristopher Grey <[email protected]> wrote: From: Kristopher Grey <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: The Self Illusion To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, 14 June, 2012, 2:44 This argument you make, is it your own or one someone else once made to you you have adopted? Is this teaching simply a prescription for action from some respected dharma doctor, or a description of the nature of such action - an expression of dharma? In other words: Do you cultivate compassion through your actions, or is the cultivation itself compassion in action? Compassionately waiting for you to effortlessly realize this was never not so.... K On 6/13/2012 11:52 AM, mike brown wrote: ED, Maybe everyone on this forum intuitively understands what compassion is, but I would argue that it is still something that can be cultivated. When we begin practicing metta meditation, we usually start with those closest to us and then work towards people we don't know and then even include our enemies. Doesn't this indicate the difficulty of having compassion for all sentient beings? It's easy to say that we do, but much more difficult in practice. Feeling compassion for orphans in a war is a lot easier than feeling compassion for a serial rapist. I agree with Bill that tabeling it as such isn't necessary, but I'd argue further that compassion is cultivated thru practice. Mike --- On Thu, 14/6/12, ED <[email protected]> wrote: From: ED <[email protected]> Subject: [Zen] Re: The Self Illusion To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, 14 June, 2012, 1:34 Mike - I do - as does everyone else in this forum, IMO. I think that Bill in his message below has answered the question as to what a zenist should 'do' about compassion. --ED --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> wrote: > > ED, > Again, if you don't intuitively understand what compassion is then asking isn't going to get you closer to it. . > > Mike --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote: > > ED, > > 'Compassion' is not something you need to think about, much less strive to cultivate - any more than you have to strive to be hungry. > > ...Bill!
