Subscriber Access Required
This teaching is reserved for active UnbornMind.com subscribers.
To continue reading, please subscribe using the link below:
Already a subscriber?
Log in here.
If you have completed your PayPal subscription but were not automatically redirected,
please create your account here:
I think when speaking of duty in the Gita, it is worthwhile to observe the core of Hindu philosophy is disinterest in the actions of the world. The Noble One adopts a renunciative posture whereby he or she releases all hold on the very material or psycho-emotive fruits of one’s incarnate existence, at the same time as one sees the sacred purpose of human life as an emanation of spiritual will, and of fulfilling this duty through detached action.
As we will see in chapter 5, Krishna makes clear desire does not arise from spirit. These wants (and fears) Arjuna experiences, which are causing him to waver, are induced by the nature of incarnate form, and Krishna is indifferent to them.
Therefore Krishna is not exhorting Arjuna to adopt a fatalistic and nihilistic posture; nor is it about the various temporal and worldly actions theselves; Krishna calls on Arjuna to fulfill his sacred duty by recognizing no matter what happens on this field of battle, the Spirit is ultimately transcendent.
The duty Krishna speaks of is not worldly, although it takes place in a worldly frame of reference and points to worldly results (as well as Nirvanic results): it is a spiritual duty he speaks of to see the world for what it is, and it is important to consider this as the song moves forward in the later chapters.
Nice panjiao you got there! Every panjiao has a rule: “Place myself at the top!” – Aristotle did this, when he classified all human endeavours in a hierarchy and put “Philosophy” at the top! Hegel did the same, when he interpreted History as evolution, and so necessarily saw himself as the pinnacle, the end point of evolution.
You crafted for yourself a nice panjiao that puts mystics of the Unborn at the top!
The Huayan and Tiantai scholars which are the pinnacle of Buddhism classified things differently … the mystics of the Unborn would be in the penultimate category, while the highest would be the Perfect Teaching.
The best Zennist was Yanshou Yongming I really recommend reading about him. Even better than Zongmi.
The Huayan and Tiantai scholars which [are the pinnacle of Buddhism] classified things differently … the mystics of the Unborn would be in the penultimate category, while the highest would be the Perfect Teaching. [brackets mine]
Oh, ok…down from the “top” then. That’s cool…
I’m not talking about some hocus pocus. It’s very simple what I’m saying. It’s about the relationship between principle and phenomena.
The Integrated Teaching is the one that can demonstrate a perfect interfusion / interpenetration between Principle and phenomena.
This is the same in Western and Eastern philosophy.
In the West Hegel was the most successful in this endevaor but he wasn’t as good as Hua-yan and even more , Tiantai – which were the only one to demonstrate the complete, absolute, interpenetration.
Now if you say I’m just a Slovenian idiot without spiritual experience I will just nod and agree. But “interprenetration” also means Buddhahood intepenetrates with idiocy.
The absolute distinction between “enlightened individual” and “idiot” pertains to the Separate Teaching which isn’t yet the Integrated / Perfect teaching.
I keep saying the same thing over and over it’s not hard to grasp for advanced yogis like you & N. Yeti. I’m just an idiot philosopher.
So instead of reading my comment with prejudice and presupposition try to really read what I’m writing. I’m not attacking you.
Methexis, the mind is a vessel whose shape is precisely that of its contents. If your discipline and faith keeps your practice on an even keel, I cannot and will not dispute your realization of this. A teacher is someone who has something to teach us; if there is nothing to learn from a teacher, that person is not a teacher. There is no need to debase others’ beliefs when teachings are of little effect or incompatible with our spiritual realizations. It is my deepest understanding that to manifest such destructive energies can only foil our attempts to refine our own dhyana practice.
You’re right.
“Destructive energies” is an exaggeration. I’m not debasing anyone. Don’t be so sensitive. We’re all being debased all the time. Sucking each other’s d … is not productive.
Instead of thinking about the drama here you could be researching what is meant by “Separate Teaching”, perhaps it would refine your “dhyana practice” – whatever you mean by that
In my exp. there’s a lot of talk of “dhyana practice” but very little practice done. How much do you practice daily?
I have researched this view and have realized its dualism.
I meditate once or twice a day in z a zen and study dharma about three or four hours a day. Not very much but adequate as a householder, whose duties preclude attention to all but the most severe spiritual emergency such as you are experiencing.
What do you do during zazen exactly? Can you describe your dhyana practice, or is it too personal?
I could but it would be not that.