|
Post by silver on Nov 16, 2015 23:07:19 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 16, 2015 23:08:07 GMT -5
^^^
Sanskrit Kṣitigarbha
Ksitigarbha (Sanskrit Kṣitigarbha, Chinese: 地藏; pinyin: Dìzàng; Japanese: 地蔵) is a bodhisattva primarily revered in East Asian Buddhism and usually depicted as a Buddhist monk. His name may be translated as "Earth Treasury", "Earth Store", "Earth Matrix", or "Earth Womb". Ksitigarbha is known for his vow to take responsibility for the instruction of all beings in the six worlds between the death of Gautama Buddha and the rise of Maitreya, as well as his vow not to achieve Buddhahood until all hells are emptied. He is therefore often regarded as the bodhisattva of hell-beings, as well as the guardian of children and patron deity of deceased children and aborted fetuses in Japanese culture, where he is known as Jizō or Ojizō-sama.
Usually depicted as a monk with a halo around his shaved head, he carries a staff to force open the gates of hell and a wish-fulfilling jewel to light up the darkness.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 17, 2015 23:23:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 20, 2015 5:46:14 GMT -5
errr .. ..
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 20, 2015 11:44:15 GMT -5
errr .. .. What? You don't like tanks?
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 20, 2015 14:36:00 GMT -5
errr .. .. What? You don't like tanks? it must be the music!
|
|
|
Post by silver on Nov 20, 2015 14:57:35 GMT -5
What? You don't like tanks? it must be the music! There was music?
|
|
|
Post by zin on Nov 20, 2015 14:59:48 GMT -5
it must be the music! There was music? Yes, it gets badly violent when the tank comes!
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 3, 2015 22:49:01 GMT -5
Whatever worldly joy there is arises from wishing for others' happiness. Whatever worldly suffering there is arises from wishing for your own happiness.
Shantideva - A Guide to the Bodhisattva's Way of Life
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 3, 2015 22:54:42 GMT -5
"Bhikkhus, suppose there were a pool of water that was cloudy, turbid, and muddy. Then a man with good sight standing on the bank could not see shells, gravel and pebbles, and shoals of fish swimming about and resting. For what reason? Because the water is cloudy. So too, it is impossible for a bhikkhu with a cloudy mind to know his own good, the good of others, or the good of both, or to realize a superhuman distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. For what reason? Because his mind is cloudy."
"Bhikkhus, suppose there were a pool of water that was clear, serene, and limpid. Then a man with good sight standing on the bank could see shells, gravel and pebbles, and shoals of fish swimming about and resting. For what reason? Because the water is limpid. So too, it is possible for a bhikkhu with a limpid mind to know his own good, the good of others, and the good of both, and to realize a superhuman distinction in knowledge and vision worthy of the noble ones. For what reason? Because his mind is limpid."
AN 1.45-146 translated by Bhikkhu Bodhi
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 9, 2015 8:29:30 GMT -5
Ven U Vimalaramsi claims there are some radical mistakes with the translation of the suttas made in the late 1800s. He will use a different word then "right" to the 8 fold path... What happened with the translations in Buddhism, was, in the late 1800s, a very good scholar by the name of Rhys Davids went to Burma, and he took all of the texts, and he translated them into English. And because he was the first one to do the translation, a lot of the words that he used are still being used today. and actually, because he didn't have the practice, and he really didn't do much studying, to find out what the real meaning was behind some of the suttas, there's some pretty radical mistakes. Now when the Buddha was talking about the eightfold path, he used the word "samma," and Rhys Davids translated that as "right." This is "right" view, this is "right" thought--all of these kind of things. But actually, the word "samma" has a softer meaning to it. So I choose to use the word "harmonious." If you think of "right," it's like black-and-white: right and wrong. But when you use the word "harmonious," it has more of a flow to it, and that's really closer to the meaning of "samma" than "right" is. Harmonious Perspective or Right View (Understanding) Harmonious Imaging or Right Thought Harmonious Communication or Right Speech Harmonious Movement or Right Action Harmonious Life Style or Right Livelihood Harmonious Practice or Right Effort Harmonious Observation or Right Mindfulness Harmonious Collectedness or Right Concentration -from another forum in a recent thread Read more: spiritualteachers.proboards.com/thread/4070/buddhism-bits?page=27#ixzz3tpWCTKo9
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 9, 2015 10:12:14 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 9, 2015 21:19:26 GMT -5
Ironically, the sense of a self that uses language is itself an artifact of language -- a linguistic construct. Indo-European languages are dualistically structured in the way they distinguish nouns from verbs, subjects from predicates. To believe that words like I, me, mine, you, yours, etc., correspond to something real ("self-existing" is the Buddhist term) is to be trapped within a linguistic schema. Today we have neuro-scientific explanations of this process that are consistent with what Buddhism has been describing in its own way for 2500 years. And if the entanglement of language and our nervous system is what maintains the self, then we can appreciate why meditation is so important. Meditation enables us to let go of those dualistic linguistic patterns that largely determine our ways of thinking. Meditation helps us to transcend transcendence. www.huffingtonpost.com/david-loy/towards-a-new-buddhist-st_b_2545120.html
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 10, 2015 12:44:35 GMT -5
Groundless and Open
If we want to know what enlightenment is like, what awakening is like, we can practice the mind of non-clinging, non-fixation, nonattachment to anything at all. It's the mind of open groundlessness.
—Joseph Goldstein, "One Dharma"
|
|
|
Post by silver on Dec 31, 2015 12:38:59 GMT -5
From another forum,
But what's the difference between mind and consciousness?
I see the mind as pure awareness and the nervous system as the interface between that awareness and the physical world.
Consciousness, as in "he lost consciousness as a result of a hit to the head", seems to be measurable from the outside and would therefore involve the nervous system.
------
I felt that this response was close to how I view things re: mind / consciousness.
|
|