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:
In regard to the “mythic” elements of this and other early scriptures, I think it is important to understand the language of mysticism is not confined to didactic or dogmatic modes of thought. The opening of awareness which makes it possible to accrue merit and dispel delusion by reading or reciting a sutra does away with attachment to word-forms except as necessary to guide the seeker toward the recognition of mind.) Those who adhere to nihilistic or strictly materialist views object to such language because the images raised conflict with the world of appearances; they do not know the didactic or word-form teachings themselves are but expedient and that the truth revealed thereby in no way depends upon the teaching. To then go cherry picking (so to speak) through the sutras, discarding that which is of a mythic character, and clinging to that which seems real and in conformity with Western philosophic materialism, is to misread them in my opinion and closes off understanding. The dharma eye which is opened has no difficulty entering the mythic mode or the material mode of language without confusion, because the apparent reality of the rational material world and the apparent reality of myth or lyrical gate as are not different. To embrace one and reject another is not understanding.
That last part should read “mythic or lyrical gathas” not “gate as”. Sorry for the unintended auto-correct.
Very good comment apropos the understanding of the “mythic”, n. yeti! Thank you.
(It seems Europeans (“Westerners”) are especially allergic to the Sambhogakāya… There’s also an idée fixe (can see traces of it within myself) – that every path must be full of self-denying and cold dry suffering. – I remember a wise man once telling me: “Buddhism is a happy religion!” – To me, a person full of “Catholic-Theravadin guilt”, that was quite hard to believe! Surely the path must be full of self-crucifying and self-denying, without any joy or bliss, I thought back then! – But when one meets a true teacher (or perhaps one is lucky enough to stumble upon it by chance) – one realizes, in an instant: “oh! after all, this matter was always beyond words and letters! how wonderful! how wonderful!” – If that Light wants to send us various gifts in form of divinities, energies, and Bodhisattvas, even prophecies and visions, why should we reject it, one-sidedly preferring the senses instead? As if the senses were more reliable than the “celestial body”! – A Dharma master once said that dreams are more reliable than the senses, because in dreams, mind is not disturbed by the senses’ interference.)