Guest guest Posted October 2, 2000 Report Share Posted October 2, 2000 Dear Nazir, Thank you for your kind comments. Perhaps the Buddha meant something very different with the first 'marga' of right understanding. I am really no scholar and tend to talk from my own insight and experience, or lack thereof. So its not for me to say what the Buddha might have meant. But allow me to try and say something meaningful about the eight points you raised. In a way one could say that everything rests on right understanding. So right understanding really must be present in all the seven other points. Right understanding has nothing to do with knowledge, memory or mental projection. It may use knowledge and memory when it needs to express itself in logic and words, but in right understanding there is really no 'right'. There is only understanding as an ongoing process of clarity and insight which has its source not in memory, but in something totally unknowable and mysterious. It is a bit like if I were to ask you to add one plus one. Your mind will project the answer, which is two. The one, the plus, and the second one are concepts in mind. But that which comes to the answer is for ever un-knowable. The intelligence which adds the two together has its base in some mysterious, un-knowable 'source'. And it is my understanding that what might be alluded to in 'right understanding', is perhaps just this ability to let go of all conditioned , intellectual, memory based forms of intellec (tual) participation in life, and rather to allow this un-knowable intelligence to become the basis of our interaction with the living moment, and inseparable from it. So from this perspective one could say that 'right understanding' has no 'right' in it. It is open and free participation in the living moment, based on absolutely no PRIOR notion of what is right and wrong. It simply improvises in the most intelligent way possible when faced with a challenge. >From this may become clear why I have said that understanding is really the base of all seven other marga's. Without this disposition of openness to our inherent intelligence, the chances are that all that we may consider 'right' in all other marga's may be flawed or even wrong. 2) Right thoughts: 'Right understanding' has the discriminatory ability to make use of thought as a response of memory to a given challenge. For instance, it may differentiate between psychological and technical, practical thought processes. Thought then gets applied in the areas where it serves a practical, life-positive function, and remains quiet where it serves the psychological being, the self-centered activity of the 'me' and such other life-negative functions. So in the activity of thought, this discriminatory aspect of right understanding can bring about a radical change in our approach to the way we perceive both ourselves and reality. (3) (4) (5) (6) Right speech, action, effort, livelihood. One could say that once Right understanding has become the functional basis of one's involvement with life in general, it will tend to direct speech, action and livelihood from its disposition of open intelligence. As far as effort is concerned, again the discriminatory ability of understanding becomes imperative. Certain activities requires effort. Usually such effort is directed towards some goal or another. This is important for survival. We need to have the ability to think, project, plan, make effort in order to survive. But then there is the practice of allowing for the manifestation or revelation of the non-dual nature of things. Here right effort will very often start the process with the need to change things for the better. But as this process of investigating the possibility of a life different from that of the Samsaric vision unfolds, it will again be right understanding which will over time modify our efforts 'towards' such a'new' life by revealing to us a way of practice which requires less and less effort. Our practice along the way of our own understanding will start to take on the form of minimal effort, and finally find a way of practice which simply allows for the simplicity, and clarity of being to be the case. At that point it will be the clarity of right understanding itself in which we come to rest. (7) (8) Right understanding may reveal that right mindfulness is sufficient in the practice of the simplification and effortlessness of being. Concentration seems to me to have only limited play in this area of investigation. In fact, I see concentration as a process counter to the practice of mindfulness. It is perfectly true that mindfulness, if taken too far along the path of being mindful of its object of meditation, can and will lead to a kind of concentrated state of absorbtion. But I see little or no use for such a state of oblivion. Even if it may bring about states of bliss and other strange experiences. Understanding does not operate in a state of absorbtion which tends to be the final result of concentration. Concentration taken to this point is to my understanding the ultimate illusion. In this state may very well be a great sense of wholeness, but if this is reality, then what is the world of the senses? Can such a state of absorbtion function with Right Understanding in the world? Or must it be abandoned before we may again become functional human beings? What love, compassion, humanity are there in the totally absorbed state of deep concentration? But if mindfulness as a CONSCIOUS process is allowed to do its work, it has almost limitless potential as a practice for the revelation of the true nature of things as well as ourselves. As long as our practice remains ALIVE and AWAKE, in such wakefulness Right Understanding can function. And where mindfulness as a practice may start with some effort and narrowing of attention, the conscious aspect of it forms the basis and functional ground of openness for right understanding to lead such a practice from the narrow to the wide, and from the wide to the centerless without peripheri. Again it is at this 'point' where openness, intelligence and humanity become jointly the ground from which Right Understanding becomes all there is. And this is a perfectly functional sense of things. I hope this gives you some idea of how I understand these matters. Words, and the logic associated with them are so final and crude. And they seldom say much about the truth of the matter. Love Moller. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 3, 2000 Report Share Posted October 3, 2000 Dear Brother Moller, May be you're the 5th person who change my name from Nasir become Nazir :-) Well, I think Buddha's teaching always fit to any level of human being. As your level of understanding is higher than mine, you have a deeper understanding of what Buddha taught. For me, Right Understanding just mean that the understanding of this nature of life; suffering. And the way to end this suffering is doing good things. That's my understanding of 2,3,4,5 and 6 marga, doing goodness; not harmful. I would feel bad if I did something considered as wrong/bad thing by our community/people. You see, good and bad, right and wrong are Duality, and I live in duality and I chose to live in good/right side. Has been said that Reality/Truth is beyond Duality, but I'm not in there yet. So, I'm not gonna pretend to be an EO :-) I found that this life is quite funny... :-) With Love, Nasir " It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye. " The Fox > ---------- > Advaita[sMTP:Advaita] > Monday, October 02, 2000 11:44 PM > harsha > Nazir - Advaitist's illusion > > Dear Nazir, > > Thank you for your kind comments. > > Perhaps the Buddha meant something very different with the first > 'marga' of right understanding. I am really no scholar and tend to > talk > from my own insight and experience, or lack thereof. So its not for > me to say what the Buddha might have meant. > > But allow me to try and say something meaningful about the eight > points you raised. > > In a way one could say that everything rests on right understanding. > So right understanding really must be present in all the seven other > points. > > Right understanding has nothing to do with knowledge, memory or mental > projection. It may use knowledge and memory when it needs to express > itself in logic and words, but in right understanding there is really > no 'right'. There is only understanding as an ongoing process of > clarity and insight which has its source not in memory, but in > something totally unknowable and mysterious. It is a bit like if I > were to ask you to add one plus one. Your mind will project the > answer, which is two. The one, the plus, and the second one are > concepts in mind. But that which comes to the answer is for ever > un-knowable. The intelligence which adds the two together has its > base in some mysterious, un-knowable 'source'. And it is my > understanding that what might be alluded to in 'right understanding', > is perhaps just this ability to let go of all conditioned , > intellectual, memory based forms of intellec (tual) participation in > life, and rather to allow this un-knowable intelligence to become the > basis of our interaction with the living moment, and inseparable from > it. > > So from this perspective one could say that 'right understanding' > has no 'right' in it. It is open and free participation in the living > moment, based on absolutely no PRIOR notion of what is right and > wrong. It simply improvises in the most intelligent way possible when > faced with a challenge. > > From this may become clear why I have said that understanding is > really the base of all seven other marga's. Without this disposition > of openness to our inherent intelligence, the chances are that all > that we may consider 'right' in all other marga's may be flawed or > even wrong. > > 2) Right thoughts: 'Right understanding' has the discriminatory > ability to make use of thought as a response of memory to a given > challenge. For instance, it may differentiate between psychological > and technical, practical thought processes. Thought then gets applied > in the areas where it serves a practical, life-positive function, and > remains quiet where it serves the psychological being, the > self-centered activity of the 'me' and such other life-negative > functions. So in the activity of thought, this discriminatory aspect > of right understanding can bring about a radical change in our > approach to the way we perceive both ourselves and reality. > > (3) (4) (5) (6) Right speech, action, effort, livelihood. One could > say that once Right understanding has become the functional basis of > one's involvement with life in general, it will tend to direct > speech, action and livelihood from its disposition of open > intelligence. > > As far as effort is concerned, again the discriminatory ability of > understanding becomes imperative. Certain activities requires effort. > Usually such effort is directed towards some goal or another. This is > important for survival. We need to have the ability to think, > project, plan, make effort in order to survive. > > But then there is the practice of allowing for the manifestation or > revelation of the non-dual nature of things. Here right effort will > very often start the process with the need to change things for the > better. But as this process of investigating the possibility of a > life different from that of the Samsaric vision unfolds, it will again > be right understanding which will over time modify our efforts > 'towards' such a'new' life by revealing to us a way of practice which > requires less and less effort. Our practice along the way of our own > understanding will start to take on the form of minimal effort, and > finally find a way of practice which simply allows for the simplicity, > and clarity of being to be the case. At that point it will be the > clarity of right understanding itself in which we come to rest. > > (7) (8) Right understanding may reveal that right mindfulness is > sufficient in the practice of the simplification and effortlessness of > being. Concentration seems to me to have only limited play in this > area of investigation. In fact, I see concentration as a process > counter to the practice of mindfulness. It is perfectly true that > mindfulness, if taken too far along the path of being mindful of its > object of meditation, can and will lead to a kind of concentrated > state of absorbtion. But I see little or no use for such a state of > oblivion. Even if it may bring about states of bliss and other > strange experiences. > > Understanding does not operate in a state of absorbtion which tends to > be the final result of concentration. Concentration taken to this > point is to my understanding the ultimate illusion. In this state may > very well be a great sense of wholeness, but if this is reality, then > what is the world of the senses? Can such a state of absorbtion > function with Right Understanding in the world? Or must it be > abandoned before we may again become functional human beings? What > love, compassion, humanity are there in the totally absorbed state of > deep concentration? > > But if mindfulness as a CONSCIOUS process is allowed to do its work, > it has almost limitless potential as a practice for the revelation of > the true nature of things as well as ourselves. As long as our > practice remains ALIVE and AWAKE, in such wakefulness Right > Understanding can function. And where mindfulness as a practice may > start with some effort and narrowing of attention, the conscious > aspect of it forms the basis and functional ground of openness for > right understanding to lead such a practice from the narrow to the > wide, and from the wide to the centerless without peripheri. Again it > is at this 'point' where openness, intelligence and humanity become > jointly the ground from which Right Understanding becomes all there > is. And this is a perfectly functional sense of things. > > I hope this gives you some idea of how I understand these matters. > Words, and the logic associated with them are so final and crude. And > they seldom say much about the truth of the matter. > > Love > Moller. > > > > > > // > > All paths go somewhere. No path goes nowhere. Paths, places, sights, > perceptions, and indeed all experiences arise from and exist in and > subside back into the Space of Awareness. Like waves rising are not > different than the ocean, all things arising from Awareness are of the > nature of Awareness. Awareness does not come and go but is always Present. > It is Home. Home is where the Heart Is. Jnanis know the Heart to be the > Finality of Eternal Being. A true devotee relishes in the Truth of > Self-Knowledge, spontaneously arising from within into It Self. Welcome > all to a. > > To from this list, go to the ONElist web site, at > www., and select the User Center link from > the menu bar > on the left. This menu will also let you change your > subscription > between digest and normal mode. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.