Joe,

Yes, the Buddhism in Thailand is Theravada which is indeed a world away from 
the idea of Buddhism in the West.

...Bill!

--- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@...> wrote:
>
> Bill!,
> 
> Points well taken.
> 
> Don't allow to get lost my reminder that all Buddhadharma is transmitted in 
> the midst of practice.  It is not intellectual.
> 
> It is as you say: one reads, studies, pours over the Sutras, maybe.  
> 
> But, one practices, and one has a teacher, and a sangha.
> 
> It's not ALL reading.  It's not ALL study.  That is a delusion held by people 
> in the West, who read ABOUT Buddhism, and Buddhist practice in it's various 
> extant sects.
> 
> Maybe in Thailand... well, I don't know what to ask about Buddhism in 
> Thailand.  Their school is probably not my preferred school, either.  And, 
> aren't they within Theravada, not Mahayana?
> 
> The sutras are not complex.  They are not even really teaching media.  They 
> are touchstones.  One's awakening should be in accord with what is in the 
> sutras.  If not, one may have strayed, or entered an "outer path", a path 
> that is not Buddhist.  Reading of the Sutras is a good touchstone for someone 
> who feels he/she may have awakened, even without a teacher to confirm this.  
> Again, there should be no space between one's mentality and what is shown in 
> the Sutras.  If so, back to work!  And, better, see a teacher ASAP.
> 
> Sutras to me are the most suggestive poetry, in the sense of suggesting and 
> hinting at the Buddha Mind, or our original mind.  If there is anything 
> complex, I know I am outside of it.  If it's like one's own voice, then no 
> need to read much, and better to go about and around, and help others, anyway.
> 
> I'll look again at the Sutras and see if they are complex: this is the first 
> I'm hearing about that, Bill!.   Granted, they have a style all their own -- 
> each one, individually, characteristically, like any writing -- but I don't 
> yet find them complex.  Just rather rich.
> 
> Interesting!  Thanks, replying.
> 
> --Joe
> 
> > "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote:
> >
> > Joe,
> > 
> > When I said I thought Buddhism proper was too complex I was mainly thinking 
> > of the sutras.  They are also very intellectual.  That's fine because I 
> > know they are used as the basis for a religion - Buddhism.
> > 
> > I'm just saying I don't need a religion, Buddhism or any other.  I'm not 
> > saying that all religions are trash.  They do certainly serve a very good 
> > purpose for the most part, and as we know sometimes invoke very bad actions 
> > also.
> > 
> > I just think relying on intellectually-based teachings are not the way to 
> > awaken, just as reading about how to do the backstroke is not the way to 
> > get across the pool.  Reading first might help, but sooner or later you 
> > have to jump in the water and swim.
> > 
> > Buddhism is teaching about awakening.  Zen is experiencing awakening.
>




------------------------------------

Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to