Hi Alex > Yes. I think that the Buddha was absolutely the most > misunderstood person in history. Because his teaching > was so abstract, it allowed (and is still allowing) > many people to read all kind of agendas into it. Also, > the Buddha's teaching, as recorded by his disciples, > was mostly suggestive in nature. What Nagarjuna did > was to systematize this teaching, to give it > unambiguous structure. That in itself helped eliminate > some more coarse misconceptions. Unfortunately, due to > the relative obscurity of Madhyamika, this wonderful > teching did not realy penetrate the mainstream > Buddhist practice. > You are absolutely correct that the Buddha taught > many, many methods of liberation. But each of these > methods, as different as they were, pointed to the > same place. And Madhyamika is a systematized way that > explains that very place the Buddha was pointing at.
Thanks for sharing your observation. > > For Zen people to go into intellectual discussion of > > Madhyamika is > > actually a step *backwards*. > For the Madhyamaka, to abandon the intellectual ways > it teaches and to plunge into zen would actually also > be a step *backwards*. Funny how these things work, > eh? Haha... funny indeed. And do you happen to know that part of Zen is also to just reflect like a mirror, which you just did. You plunged into Zen while trying to avoid it. Funny how these things work, eh? > > Not that there is > > anything wrong with > > Madhyamika (it is a wonderful teaching), but because > > intellectual > > discussion is unable to access truths, since truths > > are beyond > > conceptualization and hence inexpressible through > > speech, except > > with 'live' words. > > I'm sure intellectual discussion has some merits of > > its own. But > > after you have crossed the river, would you still > > want to be carrying > > the raft? > This is the jist of our misunderstanding. Madhyamika > teaches that it is a prejudice that intellectual > discussion is unable to access truths. It is > indisputably correct that the truth is always beyond > conceptualization. Madhyamika and zen agree on that > 100%. But, what Madhyamika teaches is that the truth > must be accessed via concepts. > Intellectual discourse could be likened to a raft used > to cross the river. Once you cross to the other shore, > you actually wouldn't be able to carry the raft > around. So, the question is in a way meaningless. I would think that after we have crossed the river, we are still on the river but at the shoreline. To get up to the shore, we must *first* abandon the raft. If we continue to keep the raft, then we can't move up the shore (because the raft is too heavy and shores don't like rafts), so we will still be stuck in the river. Actually, the raft-less raft is the Zen way: When you drop the raft You will at once realize that, You have *always* been on the other shore, Where is the river, much less the crossing? But if we are attached to "no raft, no shore, no river, no crossing", then we'll have a problem too. So how? > > When Nagarjuna taught Madhyamika, I doubt very much > > that He wants you > > to only indulge yourself in intellectual discussion, > > for that would > > be mistaking the finger for the moon. He would want > > you to digest the > > teachings and EXPERIENCE truths DIRECTLY instead of > > through your > > INTELLECT. > What Nagarjuna taught is that there is no other way to > reach the truth than through your intellect. Yes, the > intellect could be likened to a finger pointing to the > moon, but that's the only way you could ever get to > see the moon. > So do not disqualify the finger, is what Nagarjuna was > saying. Not disqualifying the finger, never did. But when looking at the finger, we should look at WHERE IT IS POINTING, instead of analyzing how long or how short the finger is, how fat or how thin, what colour and what shape. > > If you find *talking* about the Middle Way so > > fulfilling , don't you > > feel that *living* the Middle Way will be even more > > fulfilling? And > > it is only through *living* the teachings that they > > truly come > > *alive*. > Talking about something is every bit as much living as > it is living something without talking. I see no > difference between the two. Talking is living, living > is talking. How could it be any other way? The above is just metaphorical. Talking is of course part of living, so is everything else. But can we satisfy our hunger by just talking about food? > > To me, this too is a cause for alarm. That's why I'm > > seizing every opportunity to promote Zen > > teaching. People are blissfully unaware of it, even > > some of my hard core Buddhist friends who have been > > practising full tilt for almost 20 years. And not > > being aware of the full blown teaching of Zen is > > truly sad, in my eyes. :->> > Great. That's why I'm enjoying reading your posts. Enjoy reading your posts too. > > What makes you so sure that no one did Zen during > > Buddha's or > > Nagarjuna's time? > Not in an organized fashion, anyway. Not in an organised fashion? I suppose this is not something that anyone can truly verify with any certainty at all. Perhaps you mean not widely practised, which I might agree. When Buddha transmitted the Zen lineage to Mahakasyapa, He said, "I have a special transmission outside the doctrinal teachings, not dependent on words, this I give to Mahakasyapa." I also understand that Nagarjuna is the 14th Zen Patriach in the Indian Zen Lineage. So why be so anti-Zen? The Chinese Zen Sixth Patriach Hui Neng said (in the Platform Sutra), "To those who belong to other schools, and whose views and objects are different from ours (the Sudden school), the dharma should not be transmitted, since it will be anything but good for them. This step is taken lest ignorant persons who cannot understand our system should make slanderous remarks about it and thereby annihilate their seed of Buddha-nature for hundreds of kalpas and thousands of incarnations." So if you can't accept Zen, then just leave it alone. I think it's better that you do not be critical of Zen (or even Varajyana, Pureland, Vipassana, etc.) lest you accumulate negative karma and annihilate your seed of Buddha-nature for a very long time. Thanks for your reply, and your insights. wai ===== Much negative karma is produced from blasphemous posts ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Make a clean sweep of pop-up ads. Yahoo! Companion Toolbar. Now with Pop-Up Blocker. Get it for free! http://us.click.yahoo.com/L5YrjA/eSIIAA/yQLSAA/S27xlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Noble Eightfold Path: Right View, Right Intention, Right Speech, Right Action, Right Effort, Right Mindfulness, Right Concentration, Right Livelihood Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ZenForum/ <*> 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/
