Was Buddism convoluted with Hindu beliefs?

[Brickbat]

Pointers, my friend, which is exactly what the Sutras are or the Toa Te Ching. Suggesting the same thing. Ramana Mahrishi , the sage who introduced Non Duality to the West, ( not the TM guy) said the Vedas is like a thorn to remove a splinter. Once the splinter is removed, both are thrown away. Vedas means Knowledge. Practice of Vedas is Vedanta. Means End of knowledge. Buddha got his pointers from Rama, Shiva and Krishna. It's all the same stuff. " be still and know that I am"

Now tell me, kind Sir, which bloody mind is still? Do you think Gautama or Laozi would bother with this forum. Doubt it. It's us, with monkey minds.

[rockyysdt]

Everything you say makes sense.

However, one must first have knowledge, and, after accepting this, then practice.

The OP suggests the knowledge is diluted/corrupted, hence the forum.

Quite rightly, knowledge without practice is useless.

Also practice of false knowledge is not a good thing.

This forum is an amalgam of monkey mind, clutching at straws, but also an attempt to understand the knowledge which will then give impetus to practice.

Unfortunately knowledge has had quite a bit of contamination and hence this quest to determine as best as possible its original essence.

Contamination is so pervasive many have no idea what the knowledge is. Ask what is Anatta? Most are clueless.

Without knowledge isn't practice like navigating without a compass sextant nor rudder?

Awareness is universal.

Without Dhamma you might end up with Atman, attached to an Ego larger than the one you started with.

Edited July 6, 2015 by rockyysdt

[Brickbat]

Mind with all its memory has to be dropped. Go within. Go beyond. Where there is no knowledge, no definitions. Until this simple but tough call can be executed, it's all a big joke. Waves thinking they are Permanant waves and not part of the ocean.

As Einstein said, what causes the problem can never fix the problem. Is that what we are attempting to do? Understand? With a corrupted, finite mind. Well, my under is not standing!!

[rockyysdt]

Do you think Gautama would bother with this forum. It's us, with monkey minds.

Yes I do.

Anything to do with thought is subject to monkey mind.

Conversely until practice is advanced tbought is not only valuable, one could not even begin without it.

This forum is what your thoughts make it.

To me it is a sangha.

An institution the Buddha taught.

You and others are guides and teaches.

The Buddha made himself available to Ananda and others.

You are on the money with what you teach.

It's just that the conclusions/practices you advocate are for the advanced.

Those at earlier stages need thought, discussion, logic, to advance, before actual experience from practice kicks in.

Even then there are pitfalls, all the way to the precipice, needing logic/guidance.

Don't you agree?

Edited July 6, 2015 by rockyysdt

[Brickbat]

My assumption. Most people lead lives in quiet desperation. Addicted to one thing or another for their sanity. Some commit suicides. Very few realise the cause of their pain/ suffering is their own thoughts. All religions are tainted with crap. But if one was to discover what the sages actually said, it's all about going within . Being still. Krishna said it, Buddha said it, Loazi said it, Yeasheau said it. It's clear as a bell. In this modern world of information at our finger tips, it takes a helluva lot to stop. And we pay the price. Feelings are drowned out with mentation.

[rockyysdt]

My assumption. Most people lead lives in quiet desperation. Addicted to one thing or another for their sanity. Some commit suicides. Very few realise the cause of their pain/ suffering is their own thoughts. All religions are tainted with crap. But if one was to discover what the sages actually said, it's all about going within . Being still. Krishna said it, Buddha said it, Loazi said it, Yeasheau said it. It's clear as a bell. In this modern world of information at our finger tips, it takes a helluva lot to stop. And we pay the price. Feelings are drowned out with mentation.

You're correct.

However simply going within is not enough.

To fully Awaken one needs to know how to navigate through the world within.

You need to know Dhamma.

Bikkhu Buddhadasa highlighted six different interpretations/beliefs of Anatta.

Many dead ends.

Hence this discussion.

However you did highlight a huge obstacle.

How do you overcome the minds attachment to greed, aversion & delusion?

Edited July 6, 2015 by rockyysdt

[AYJAYDEE]

Pointers, my friend, which is exactly what the Sutras are or the Toa Te Ching. Suggesting the same thing. Ramana Mahrishi , the sage who introduced Non Duality to the West, ( not the TM guy) said the Vedas is like a thorn to remove a splinter. Once the splinter is removed, both are thrown away. Vedas means Knowledge. Practice of Vedas is Vedanta. Means End of knowledge. Buddha got his pointers from Rama, Shiva and Krishna. It's all the same stuff. " be still and know that I am"

Now tell me, kind Sir, which bloody mind is still? Do you think Gautama or Laozi would bother with this forum. Doubt it. It's us, with monkey minds.

as teachers, of course they would

[AYJAYDEE]

My assumption. Most people lead lives in quiet desperation. Addicted to one thing or another for their sanity. Some commit suicides. Very few realise the cause of their pain/ suffering is their own thoughts. All religions are tainted with crap. But if one was to discover what the sages actually said, it's all about going within . Being still. Krishna said it, Buddha said it, Loazi said it, Yeasheau said it. It's clear as a bell. In this modern world of information at our finger tips, it takes a helluva lot to stop. And we pay the price. Feelings are drowned out with mentation.

You're correct.

However simply going within is not enough.

To fully Awaken one needs to know how to navigate through the world within.

You need to know Dhamma.

Bikkhu Buddhadasa highlighted six different interpretations/beliefs of Anatta.

Many dead ends.

Hence this discussion.

However you did highlight a huge obstacle.

How do you overcome the minds attachment to greed, aversion & delusion?

by following the eightfold path to its end

[Brickbat]

Knowing ( definitions, categorising, analysing) IS the impediment to the gates of Divine Wisdom, which is wordless communion and one with Nature

No mind can be overcome. No mind is peaceful. Mind has a mind of its own. Mind is the illusion, the delusion, the confusion.

Get out of it . Observe it and see its power dissipate. Go to the centre and watch it. Choicelessly. See it jump around. It will disappear , if it is observed without getting caught in its tentacles of judgement.

And Buddha said very clearly , Don't believe anyone. Be a light to your own self. Don't worship my finger if I point to the moon. We have to swelter towards our own salvation. Understanding that letting go of this mind is all there is. It's a sweltering ask.

[Brickbat]

Do you see the Buddha images in any form other than sitting with his eyes half shut, looking in?

I'll give you another clue by that other Buddhist monk, Yeasheau Ben Yusuf ( Jesus) " be in this world, but not of it"

Or " to see clearly, look with thine single eye" or " what Ye seek within will save you, what Ye seek without will destroy you"

Need more?

Through meditation, compassion arises. You can then do no wrong. And no wrong will ever be judged.

[AYJAYDEE]

Knowing ( definitions, categorising, analysing) IS the impediment to the gates of Divine Wisdom, which is wordless communion and one with Nature

No mind can be overcome. No mind is peaceful. Mind has a mind of its own. Mind is the illusion, the delusion, the confusion.

Get out of it . Observe it and see its power dissipate. Go to the centre and watch it. Choicelessly. See it jump around. It will disappear , if it is observed without getting caught in its tentacles of judgement.

And Buddha said very clearly , Don't believe anyone. Be a light to your own self. Don't worship my finger if I point to the moon. We have to swelter towards our own salvation. Understanding that letting go of this mind is all there is. It's a sweltering ask.

Buddha had a peaceful mind

[Brickbat]

No mind is peaceful. That is why he advocated getting out of it. " jhayanga, Jesse, para hate. Bodhi Swaha"

As Bodhidharma said " show me your mind" . It nothing but a single , powerless thought, referencing the past or future. It's those subsequent thoughts, stories, that create pleasure and pain, right and wrong, good and bad. One always accompanies the other. No winner, my friend. Just transcend this cunning animal. It has its uses. Use it to serve.

[Brickbat]

Auto correct wrecking havoc!! Ha ha ha

It is " Jhate , Jhate, Para Jhate, Bodhi Swaha"

Go, go, go beyond. Bodhi Swaha ( nirvana)

[AYJAYDEE]

No mind is peaceful. That is why he advocated getting out of it. " jhayanga, Jesse, para hate. Bodhi Swaha"

As Bodhidharma said " show me your mind" . It nothing but a single , powerless thought, referencing the past or future. It's those subsequent thoughts, stories, that create pleasure and pain, right and wrong, good and bad. One always accompanies the other. No winner, my friend. Just transcend this cunning animal. It has its uses. Use it to serve.

youre wrong

[Brickbat]

Mmmmm. Violent. Very un Buddha like. " your angry words fall into my silence and turn into flowers" said Gautam Buddha

" in spite of erring reason's spite, one truth is clear. Whatever is, is Right. Alexander Pope.

[AYJAYDEE]

Mmmmm. Violent. Very un Buddha like. " your angry words fall into my silence and turn into flowers" said Gautam Buddha

" in spite of erring reason's spite, one truth is clear. Whatever is, is Right. Alexander Pope.

no anger involved, simply disagreement with your platitudes

[Brucenkhamen]

" your angry words fall into my silence and turn into flowers" said Gautam Buddha

Have you got a reference for this quote? thanks.

[Brickbat]

Mr A, Socrates said that when a debate is lost, slander is the tool of the loser.

Mr B, it's in a Buddha Quotes app on my iPad.

[Brickbat]

It's time to let this go, my friends. Heartfelt thanks to all and we shall all be fertilising daffodils 100 years from now.

[AYJAYDEE]

It's time to let this go, my friends. Heartfelt thanks to all and we shall all be fertilising daffodils 100 years from now.

lol! declare oneself a winner and then bail! how trite.

[Brucenkhamen]

Mr B, it's in a Buddha Quotes app on my iPad.

Looks like it's a paraphrase of this fake Buddha quote http://fakebuddhaquotes.com/you-throw-thorns-falling-in-my-silence-they-become-flowers/

[VincentRJ]

Mr B, it's in a Buddha Quotes app on my iPad.

Looks like it's a paraphrase of this fake Buddha quote http://fakebuddhaquotes.com/you-throw-thorns-falling-in-my-silence-they-become-flowers/

To be fair and objective, I think it is clear that every saying attributed to the Buddha is at best a paraphrase, and at worst a complete invention.

This is why I attach so much importance to the Kalama Sutta. Even though the Kalama Sutta is no doubt a paraphrase of what the Buddha might have said, particularly in view of the translations into other languages, it makes complete sense to me; and that's what counts.

I have a tremendous lack of motivation to follow any path, process or activity which does not make sense.

[Brucenkhamen]

To be fair and objective, I think it is clear that every saying attributed to the Buddha is at best a paraphrase, and at worst a complete invention.

That's why to be fair and objective we should make some effort to weed out the inventions, translations are always going to have a degree of paraphrasing of course particularly when the language and culture is very different.

[VincentRJ]

To be fair and objective, I think it is clear that every saying attributed to the Buddha is at best a paraphrase, and at worst a complete invention.

That's why to be fair and objective we should make some effort to weed out the inventions, translations are always going to have a degree of paraphrasing of course particularly when the language and culture is very different.

Of course, but the task seems impossible.

The first degrees of paraphrasing would likely have taken place in the human memory as oral teachings were passed down through several generations of monks, during a period of 400 years or more.

The next stage of paraphrasing would have taken place during the compilation of the Pali Canon in a different language to the dialect that Gautama spoke.

The third stage of paraphrasing would have taken place during the many translation of the Pali Canon into English and other languages.

[Brucenkhamen]

That's why to be fair and objective we should make some effort to weed out the inventions,

Of course, but the task seems impossible.

Hardly, when there is no evidence the Buddha said it 2500 years ago and there is evidence that Osho said it presumably last century, I'd think it's as clear cut as it gets.

Does it have anything to do with "Was Buddism convoluted with Hindu beliefs"?

[VincentRJ]

That's why to be fair and objective we should make some effort to weed out the inventions,

Of course, but the task seems impossible.

Hardly, when there is no evidence the Buddha said it 2500 years ago and there is evidence that Osho said it presumably last century, I'd think it's as clear cut as it gets.

Does it have anything to do with "Was Buddism convoluted with Hindu beliefs"?

I'm talking in general terms, Bruce. We have no strong evidence that any particular saying, analogy or metaphor attributed to Gautama was actually uttered by him.

What we have is a body of concepts that seems to have an underlying unity in many respects, and which seem to have been taught, at least in part, in different countries and regions around the time that Gautama is supposed to have lived and even before he is supposed to have lived, in relation to the claimed dates of Lao Tzu's teachings, for example.

The similarity between the paraphrased sayings attributed to the Buddha and the paraphrased sayings attributed to Lao Tzu, as well as the similarity of the mythologies surrounding the birth of these two revered characters, have led some people to speculate that Lao Tzu was either Gautama's teacher or the actual Buddha himself.

Nevertheless, you are quite right that one should try to be accurate when attributing any particular saying to a particular historical character, although in the final analysis it is the truth behind the meaning that is more relevant.

I'm reminded here of the adage, "A picture is worth a thousand words". There has been a widespread belief that this saying is from Confucius. I used to believe that myself, being interested in photography, and I thought it a rather wise saying that seemed to be the sort of thing that Confucius would say.

However, some years ago, whilst checking the origins of the adage on the internet, I was surprised to learn that this saying does not appear anywhere in the Analects of Confucius, and has been attributed to an American advertising journalist, Fred R. Barnard, whose first use of the concept in 1921 took the form of, "One look is worth a thousand words".

A few years later, in 1927, Barnard modified the concept, creating another ad with the phrase, "One picture is worth ten thousand words". He later admitted that he called it a Chinese proverb so that people would take it seriously.

Now that is something I find interesting to learn about because it also sheds light on the sort of difficulties involved when trying to accurately attribute the first use of a saying, adage or proverb, because we have a natural tendency to paraphrase concepts.

At the risk of being tedious, the following Wikipedia article gives a few examples of the early use of this expression in a number of paraphrased forms. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_picture_is_worth_a_thousand_words

In addition to Fred Barnard's use of the concept, we have a similar saying from Napoleon Bonaparte, "A good sketch is better than a long speech". Not quite the same, but a good sketch is definitely a picture, and a long speech could easily be a thousand words.

The article also mentions an Arthur Brisbane using the same concept a few years earlier than Fred Barnard, "Use a picture. It's worth a thousand words."

Later, in 1966, another variation appears in the form of, "One showing is worth a hundred sayings".

My point here is, if we have so much difficulty in accurately attributing the origins of a concept despite the proliferation of written texts in our modern era, how much more difficult must it be to separate so-called Hindu tainting from pure Buddhism when we have to rely upon 400 years of human memory that preceded the written texts such as the Pali Canon.

[Brucenkhamen]

I'm talking in general terms, Bruce. We have no strong evidence that any particular saying, analogy or metaphor attributed to Gautama was actually uttered by him.

But it's not on topic.

It's good netiquette to include a reference whenever quoting someone so people can see it in context if they wish, we got to the bottom of it I think, so now normal programming can now resume.

[Brucenkhamen]

My point here is, if we have so much difficulty in accurately attributing the origins of a concept despite the proliferation of written texts in our modern era, how much more difficult must it be to separate so-called Hindu tainting from pure Buddhism when we have to rely upon 400 years of human memory that preceded the written texts such as the Pali Canon.

Luckiliy I noticed something in there on topic.

Of course there is a great deal of crossover between various Hindu based philosophies and Buddhism, there can't not be when they developed within the same culture over a similar timeframe.

The approach several Pali historians take, and I think it's a good one, is to isolate what is unique in the Buddhas teaching and use this as a starting point on the assumption that this is the core that motivated the Buddha to strike out on his own. Then work outward from there seeing other teachings in terms of how they integrate with the core.

Also then to look for the oldest evidence of a particular teaching, the dialect, and age of the language used, any cross referencing to other teachings, historical events, the location in which the discussion is set etc

Edited July 8, 2015 by Brucenkhamen

[rockyysdt]

Luckiliy I noticed something in there on topic.

Of course there is a great deal of crossover between various Hindu based philosophies and Buddhism, there can't not be when they developed within the same culture over a similar timeframe.

The approach several Pali historians take, and I think it's a good one, is to isolate what is unique in the Buddhas teaching and use this as a starting point on the assumption that this is the core that motivated the Buddha to strike out on his own. Then work outward from there seeing other teachings in terms of how they integrate with the core.

Also then to look for the oldest evidence of a particular teaching, the dialect, and age of the language used, any cross referencing to other teachings, historical events, the location in which the discussion is set etc

Source: Buddhadasa "Anatta": Quote: they got some bits and pieces of concepts from Mahayanists, secretly spread what they got to some others among themselves, and finally hold such concepts as the truth since they correspond to their viewpoints, which they have already believed in.

As you can see, cross referencing teachings is fraught with traps.

Edited July 8, 2015 by rockyysdt

[Brucenkhamen]

Source: Buddhadasa "Anatta": Quote: they got some bits and pieces of concepts from Mahayanists, secretly spread what they got to some others among themselves, and finally hold such concepts as the truth since they correspond to their viewpoints, which they have already believed in.

As you can see, cross referencing teachings is fraught with traps.

This quote is talking about people picking up ideas from other traditions/religions (Thais in this case, but westerners do it to), and they incorporate these other ideas into their own religion basically because they don't fully understand their own doctrines (this is how folk Buddhism develops).

It doesn't seem to have any relevance to the cross referencing between reputable sources that I was talking about, but is an example of how common folk practices deviate from the teachings over time.