buddha nature

Originally posted by guthrie
Is life about living, or observing? There I think we have one of the conflicts possible in buddhism and peoples interpretations of it.
I agree (and with the previous one) but I'd call it thinking and experiencing rather than living and observing. They are both needed to understand what Buddhism asserts, and they are both needed to figure out whether they are right or wrong. That's one of the reasons why no explanation of it can ever be completely convincing. It is why Buddhism is a practice and not the transmission of a theory.
 
Like canute says, life is about experiencing. Which I would say is a combination of the two living and observing.

Now this is a dissucsion of Buddhism, so I will keep it in the frames of that philosophy, however "buddhism" is just a collective name for some vague conceptualities.
What you have to do is apply the knowledge to verify it's truth...
 
hey, you nearly said what I wanted to say. Ahh well, maybe bigblue head will be back and we can talk about it with him!
 
Koan

I thought of a Koan. See what you think... I won't give an answere.

Siu Bai was walking through a village with one of his students, soon they came accross an old farmer who prostrated himself at Siu Bai's feet. Asking him to bless the crops by the grace of the Buddha. Sui Bai promised to do this and they walked along. Later he asked his student,
"These farmers, they truely beleive in the story of the Buddha. What about you dear student?"
The student was silent for a moment and then answered "No master, I do not."
Siu Bai smiled and said "Good."
 
I'd say that you've got an idea of the style. Now you just need to put some meaning into it.

It seems ulikely that anyone would agree to bless crops by the grace of the Buddha, the idea is a little incoherent.

You may also notice that in genuine koans very rarely does a master agree with the assertions of a student, or indeed any assertion at all. This is not for no reason.
 
:D lol yes, you are right about the blessing and the fact that the master never agrees.

However I did hide some meaning in there, or atleast I tried to. :bugeye:
 
I'm guessing that the message was that it doesn't matter whether you believe the story of the Buddha or not. Was this it? Trouble is that as it stands it suggests that it is better not to believe it, which isn't quite the same thing as it not mattering.

I've also tried to write koan-like stories and found it incredibly difficult. (I wouldn't dare go public with one of mine!). It made me realise just how brilliantly clever and subtle the traditional ones are.
 
Siu Bao and his student were in a restaurant, seated at the table. Each perused a menu for the meal most suited to his present condition. Finally the student settled upon a fajita platter, and the master a plate of calamari pasta.

Upon ordering, the two were committed to wait for their meals to arrive. Eager to make conversation, the student prompted, "Master, tell me of the Buddha."

"Why don't you ask him yourself?" The master replied. "He's sitting over there."

The student looked and, just as he had said, a great fat man with a bald head, large ears, and a wide grin was seated at a nearby table eating a roasted fish.

The student excused himself from the table and walked timidly over to the immense stranger. "Excuse me sir, but are you the Buddha?"

"Nope," the big man replied. "But, I get that a lot."

"Ah... sorry to bother you," the student apologized.

"No problem. You're a nice kid." The bald diner turned back to his meal.

The student returned to his table, where Siu Bao was waiting; their hot, steaming food had just arrived, and the master motioned him to sit down.

"That was not the Buddha," the student told Siu Bao.

"Oh... my mistake. Your dinner is ready," the master smiled.
 
Originally posted by Canute
I'm guessing that the message was that it doesn't matter whether you believe the story of the Buddha or not. Was this it? Trouble is that as it stands it suggests that it is better not to believe it, which isn't quite the same thing as it not mattering.

I've also tried to write koan-like stories and found it incredibly difficult. (I wouldn't dare go public with one of mine!). It made me realise just how brilliantly clever and subtle the traditional ones are.

Belief is but a subjective presumption. How can you know and experience the ALL if you harbor beleif. An undesireable state which cannot be equated to true objective experience of truth.
 
BBB, your storys are becoming less and less like Koans but more like satiric jokes.... Oh wait, uh.. that's what they're meant to be.
 
The master Siu Bao was at the supermarket with his student, buying some fruit. He selected a bunch of bananas, just ripe and glowing with tiny droplets of water.

As he exited the store, he was approached by Lao Jyu, another teacher. This man was towering, both in stature and in learning, and he often made his knowledge relentlessly known to others. Siu Bao's student remained very quiet as he approached.

"Siu Bao," began the learned master, "I have seen you purchase fine quality fruit from this establishment many times, and I have become convinced that you do not know the way."

"How so?" Siu Bao inquired.

"If you were a true follower, you would know that only contrast permits pleasure, as in the koan of the two tigers. How then can you enjoy your fruit if you do not suffer?" Lao Jyu asked, looking down from his great height.

"Try one of these bananas," Siu Bao told him, offering the yellow fruit.

The large man took a bite of the banana and chewed contentedly. Without warning, Siu Bao kicked him in the stomach. Lao Jyu doubled over in pain, groaning, with the banana still in his mouth.

"Is that not the most delicious banana you have ever tasted?" Siu Bao asked him.

"No," the injured Lao Jyu shook his head.

"Ah," said Siu Bao. "Then I must not have kicked you hard enough."
 
That's right exsto baby. They're also all about food. The real irony will be if reading them makes you hungry - HA!
 
Originally posted by exsto_human
Belief is but a subjective presumption. How can you know and experience the ALL if you harbor beleif. An undesireable state which cannot be equated to true objective experience of truth.
Belief is not a choice, it is necessary. Every system of knowledge has at least one axiom at its heart. Even direct knowledge requires a belief in ones own rationality and consciousness, neither of which can be proved beyond the need for a personal belief in them.

Are the above koans attempts at mockery? Would it be worth discussing what Buddhist koans actually are?
 
Last edited:
It is not mockery exactly... but Guthrie maintains that my fake koans will have no effect. I submit that they can contain subtle references to food, so that instead of the usual meditations on emptiness, they make you think about food.

Like delicious pancakes, dripping with melted butter and hot syrup...

Or beef stew with potato dumplings, in a steaming savory broth...

Or a warm salad of seafood, nuts and vegetables, that delights with its delicate tastes and textures...

.
.
.

Thereby, if they are sufficiently evocative, they will subtly steer the thinker toward worldly desires. Eheh heh heh.

The initial blunt imagery of the koan, usually lending itself more to the subjects of hardship and blows, is fertile ground for the lush, inviting imagery of food... from a narrative perspective it is almost perfect for the reintroduction of worldly pleasures to the poor beleaguered student.

Hunger is truly the best sauce.
 
Not so much subversion... these are so obvious they're practically warning signs.:D No philosophy is above further refinement... heh heh.
 
Originally posted by Canute
Belief is not a choice, it is necessary. Every system of knowledge has at least one axiom at its heart. Even direct knowledge requires a belief in ones own rationality and consciousness, neither of which can be proved beyond the need for a personal belief in them.

What?

I'm simply adding my spontaneous reaction to that.

Well you know I don't agree, and saying anything more is a waste of my time. So forgive me for not joing you in fruitfull didactic. :D
 
Originally posted by exsto_human
What?

I'm simply adding my spontaneous reaction to that.

Well you know I don't agree, and saying anything more is a waste of my time. So forgive me for not joing you in fruitfull didactic. :D
Are you sure you disagree? Is there an argument against what I said? If there please tell me. I've never come across it.
 
Back
Top