Kris,

>[Me]Not "reform", but refine
>>[Kris]AKA - Gilding the cage


Nice technique. AKA - 'mine quoting': taking part of a quote, or statement, and 
taking it out of context to make a point. A more truthful reading of my post 
would see that I used the word 'refine' as part of an ongoing, reflective 
process, to the point where reality is "experienced directly". I'm surprised to 
see you stoop to the tactics used by the Creationist brigade. What I actually 
wrote was:

"The sutras start with a conceptual understanding of emptiness and thru 
meditation we gradually refine our understandinguntil we have a direct 
experience of emptiness."

>Seeing meditation as better than not meditating

Who does? Me? You? I know I said that the mind in meditation should be taken in 
to everyday life 24/7. You're the one one creating dualism where none existed.


>>attaining samadhi better than not attaining samadhi, 


How many times have I written that attaining the jhanas/samadhi is supportive 
of insight wisdom, but not essential? I've written literally thousands of words 
on this, have the balls to tackle the things I've actually said. You're being 
disingenuous at best. This from my previous post:

"In fact, just so that I'm clear on this, the jhanas are not essential to 
liberation ... but they do support insight meditation by calming the mind and 
holding at bay the 5 Hindrances.." 

>>Doing or not doing, both point out the attachment to doer-ship 


Considering I said...

 "I don't see meditation as something we 'do' at specific times or divorced 
from our everyday life"... and ..."This sense of an 'I' who experiences these 
insights also arises and passes from moment to moment. How unsatisfying to try 
to attach to a solid, permanent 'I'! This 'I' is an illusion, empty. There is 
only non-self..  

... Only you would try to make a straw man out of this. 

>>When this sort of relation can no longer be sustained, the appearances may or 
>>may not change. 

 
No shit, Sherlock?! Maybe you're starting to get it now?  It's exactly thru 
those medatitive qualities in vipassana of questioning abd reflecting, amongst 
others means, that we can realise the belief of a self who 'experiences' cannot 
be sustained. It's one path of many to liberation. Are you going to argue that 
the great ball of doubt required in Zen Buddhism practice is also wrong 
practice because it employs, in part, reflective thinking? Realisation often 
flowers because the employment of reasoning is seen into. It would be shere 
hypo-kris-y, or denial, to argue that use of reasoning/discursive thinking is 
used as a tool against itself in Zem  Remember 'upaya' - skilful means?

Doesn't it all boil down to a flower being held aloft? Only one monk in a 
thousand could smile at that moment, yet all were students of Buddha's 
teachings and methods. Bad teaching?  


Mike

Reply via email to