Shouldn't Awareness In The Moment Be Our Goal? Not Some Place/state We Would Like To End Up In!

[rockyysdt]

After much research and interaction on this website, apart from valuable insights gained from active "awareness", I've been traveling with the view that the purpose of my practice is to get somewhere (Awakening/Enlightenment/Nibhanna).

I'm starting to think that I've been missing the point.

Shouldn't practice (Awareness in the Moment) be our goal?

We can only be in the present.

Awareness in the present, free of conditioned reaction.

Isn't this what we should strive for?

The metaphysical and astrological, if it exists, can take care of itself.

Isn't clinging to what we think or would like the metaphysical and astrological to be, an attachment of ego?

Endless debates about what we believe was, and what we believe will lie beyond when this fathom long carcass expires.

Shouldn't these matters take care of themselves?

Shouldn't we deepen our awareness of our breath, our body, our mind, and our feelings?

Shouldn't we deepen our wareness of how our conduct and speech impacts on others around us?

Isn't practice paramount?

Edited September 18, 2012 by rockyysdt

[Xangsamhua]

"Awareness in the present, free of conditioned reaction.

Isn't this what we should strive for?"

I think it is, Rocky. Awareness informed by understanding of the precepts and the four noble truths.

The metaphysical, ontological, etc will indeed take care of itself, but the searching, the clarification, etc. constitute for some of us an important stage along the way. Like a wooden stage, they give you a platform, a foundation on which to grow your awareness.

But the goal, I think, is to put the concepts and definitions and debates aside and to return to the centre.

The 18th century nun and poet, Ryonen, put it nicely in the last year of her life:

Sixty-six times have these eyes beheld the changing scenes of autumn.

I have said enough about moonlight,

Ask me no more.

Only listen to the voice of pines and cedars, when no wind stirs.

[Several]

Is it not about bringing that 'ideal' place into the present?

I hear of the way, I endure the way, I become the way.

Not sure what the astrological aspect is, but I've never had much time for it. Even if you knew your future to the second I suspect it would indeed distract you from here and now.

Not sure how a carcass can expire either. Sounds metaphysical to me.

[ccarbaugh]

"Awareness in the preset moment" requires

unconditional acceptance of "what-is"...

and the complete exclusion of "what-should-be."

[rockyysdt]

"Awareness in the present, free of conditioned reaction.

Isn't this what we should strive for?"

I think it is, Rocky. Awareness informed by understanding of the precepts and the four noble truths.

The metaphysical, ontological, etc will indeed take care of itself, but the searching, the clarification, etc. constitute for some of us an important stage along the way. Like a wooden stage, they give you a platform, a foundation on which to grow your awareness.

But the goal, I think, is to put the concepts and definitions and debates aside and to return to the centre.

The 18th century nun and poet, Ryonen, put it nicely in the last year of her life:

Sixty-six times have these eyes beheld the changing scenes of autumn.

I have said enough about moonlight,

Ask me no more.

Only listen to the voice of pines and cedars, when no wind stirs.

A nice poem Adrian.

Listening to the pines and cedars when no wind stirs reminds me of being deep in meditation.

I also thought the searching, and the clarification was important to me, particularly in order to validate or prove that what we follow is real and worthwhile.

I'm no longer sure. Particularly as no man amongst us has ever come forth and verified the Metaphysical/Cosmological.

I suspect choosing one interpretation of what the Buddha taught over another, based on the interpretations of those before, is not only a restrictive attachment, but is capable of conditioning our minds.

Through strong belief we rigidly shape our future and may end up, in the end, empty handed and having missed the point.

I'm becoming more convinced that precepts,the four en'nobling truths, and eightfold path is the best platform and foundation, as it allows us to be open and free of attachment, and to develop awareness and experience of what actually is,nothing more, nothing less.

If indeed the metaphysical, ontological, and cosmological will take care of itself, isn't it better that it reveals itself, rather than clinging to what we choose to believe it might be?

Edited September 19, 2012 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

Is it not about bringing that 'ideal' place into the present?

I hear of the way, I endure the way, I become the way.

Not sure what the astrological aspect is, but I've never had much time for it. Even if you knew your future to the second I suspect it would indeed distract you from here and now.

Sorry S.

I meant Cosmological.

In terms of "I hear of the way", I'm feeling that the Four En'nobling Truths and Eightfold Path is the way.

Not sure how a carcass can expire either. Sounds metaphysical to me.

The Buddha spoke of "this fathom long carcass" describing our bodies.

Thus have I heard:

The end of the world can never

Be reached by walking. However,

Without having reached the world’s end

There is no release from suffering.

I declare that it is in this fathom—

long carcass, with its perceptions

and thoughts, that there is the world, the

origin of the world, the cessation of the

world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.

Basically, the Buddha was saying not to look to the Metaphysical as the answer lies within us.

The answer is to free oneself of Dukkha by removing the shackles of greed, aversion, and delusion through practice of the Eightfold Path.

We don't need anything Metaphysical to achieve this.

Won't what we discover, when we have become proficient, take care of itself?

Edited September 19, 2012 by rockyysdt

[Several]

Its just the use of the word carcass that bothers me. Is it an accurate translation? This thing here typing is an animated body. If it has a major system failure it becomes a carcass, fertilizer.

Buddha was very specific in things he said and the term carcass is plainly inaccurate. If it is actually translated as carcass then I doubt he said it. One of those fake Buddha quotes, an addition by a later monk.

I can understand what is being said, but this use of poetic license smacks if addition. As if looking at a painting by a great master, but being bothered by the presence of a figure in the corner which turns out to be a later addition by an apprentice.

Technically it falls into the expectation of things to come, not here and now, to consider this body already dead. If you are reading this the amalgamation of your various parts are conspiring to keep you alive and perceptive. Death is inevitable, the last lesson we learn is 'How to Die'. There's no hurry to get to class, the teacher will come to you.

[rockyysdt]

Its just the use of the word carcass that bothers me. Is it an accurate translation? This thing here typing is an animated body. If it has a major system failure it becomes a carcass, fertilizer.

Buddha was very specific in things he said and the term carcass is plainly inaccurate. If it is actually translated as carcass then I doubt he said it. One of those fake Buddha quotes, an addition by a later monk.

I can understand what is being said, but this use of poetic license smacks if addition. As if looking at a painting by a great master, but being bothered by the presence of a figure in the corner which turns out to be a later addition by an apprentice.

Technically it falls into the expectation of things to come, not here and now, to consider this body already dead. If you are reading this the amalgamation of your various parts are conspiring to keep you alive and perceptive. Death is inevitable, the last lesson we learn is 'How to Die'. There's no hurry to get to class, the teacher will come to you.

It's in the Pali Canon.

(Anguttara Nikaya 4:45)

It's in the fourth of the five Nikayas in the Sutta Pitaka, which is one of the three baskets that comprise the Pali Tipitaka (Theravada Buddhism).

The translation "carcass" is used in many authoritative publications, and I'm aware of atleast one Cambridge University scholar specialising in Pali and Sanskrit languages who will verify the translation.

However this is an example of the very reason why we might be better off observing the Metaphysical and the Cosmological with an open mind.

What we clearly do is interpret what we want Buddhism to be in terms of our existing beliefs.

If something doesn't fit into our beliefs then we reject it, or re interpret it.

Much better to work on the practice, whilst being totally open to the teachings.

Once we lock ourselves into belief of what the Buddha taught then we automatically become rigid and attached, and through this, replace awareness with reactive conditioning.

When the Buddha said:

I declare that it is in this fathom—

long carcass, with its perceptions

and thoughts, that there is the world, the

origin of the world, the cessation of the

world, and the path leading to the cessation of the world.

What he was saying was that humans are of this world (the real world) and they possess everything required with which to reach the end of the world (freedom from Dukkha).

Attempting to understand anything related to the Metaphysical can only be fantasy.

It is beyong those of this world.

What are your thoughts?

Edited September 20, 2012 by rockyysdt

[rockyysdt]

z

Edited September 20, 2012 by rockyysdt

[Several]

That you are right, except the metaphysical isn't fantasy just misunderstood reality. Regardless of which position we take on it metaphysical investigation is not going to lead to realisation and is at best distracting, so for whatever reason stick to practice and let the weirdness alone.

Scholars may have interpreted the word as carcass, but I've found it safer to always take what they say with a pinch of salt. They were convinced Troy was a myth until Schliemann (I think) dug it up. Egyptology is a total disgrace. I have no problem with the rest of the sutta, theres just something about that word being in that place that doesn't jibe. Whatever, the message is the same. Its nothing really.

[Several]

X