Resolution?

 

The above was just a quote I liked. There's an opposite one about how good action pile up as well.

On page 120 of the hardback edition, Goldstein writes, "As the different traditions are now meeting in the West, is it possible to to hold the various perspectives--bodhisattva versus arhant--without creating an irresolvable sectarian conflict of views"

Page 130, "Rather than solidifying and then polarizing these two approaches to bodhicitta, as happens with sectarian attachments, we can see them as two sides of the same principle, helping to balance out the dangers that may arise from each one by itself." 

It was, I suppose, a matter of time, before these were treated as a sort of perfection of wisdom koan. So there is no resolution, except to say there is something beyond that both sides can inform, and you are clinging to sectarian views to see a contradiction. I have felt that way at times, that there was something beyond what someone saw as an apparent contradiction and to seek those out was to try and find a way to not go deeper, and to dismiss. I feel that way many times about carnist arguments.

I also remember Sayadaw U Pandita saying two people are on a road in the fog. I tell one to go left and I tell the other to go right. Both move towards the center of the road, but they see my instructions as contradictory.

When I worked with special education students at job sites, I would often realize that students didn't have a concept or a principle that lead to poor judgment. 

Even more close to home, I have been given a "dope slap", and been told to get a lobotomy, when I didn't see some higher principle, by my so-called friend and preceptor. I took umbrage at the time, and it's given me a lot to meditate about. I spent a retreat just watching my brain get angry at something he said, for 2-3 days. I worked to get back to the object of meditation when in the shrine room, but out on walks by myself I indulged the thoughts. Nobody is perfect. Sometimes finding out how people hit at you mentally in weird ways isn't easy at times. Usually further talk can resolve the issue. I think this is why friendship is so important in the spiritual life. Some people just don't know how to be friends with you. Sometimes I don't know how to be a good friend, and that has kept me isolated, which I don't mind because I'm an introvert. True friendship is deep and doesn't easily get off the tracks. You can't get rid of true friends, even if they tell you the hard things you need to hear. Sometimes also you have to give up on a friendship attempt because there's just too much to overcome, and it would almost be like you were a door mat to remain in the relationship. Or so people tell me.

One Dharma

I was wondering if One Dharma would resolve the arhant v. bodhisattva debate, which of course I realized is no problem. The Buddha was in 2 sanghas and had an independent group of 5 that he lead, in which he practiced and lead before he was enlightened. When he was enlightened he taught the first 60 arhants, and told them to disperse, no two going in the same direction. So you can be in a sangha and even lead a little group, even if you're not enlightened, but once you get more experience of enlightenment, you need to pass on what you have learned. I suppose it's a question of when. The Bodhisattva ideal says start before you are enlightened, and the arhant says just go for your own enlightenment. If that's selfish, I guess we could use more of that kind of selfishness in our world.

The next question I have is if mappo presents a problem for one dharma. Mappo is the idea that we have degenerated so much, that nobody can get enlightened any more, so you have to chant a mantra and hope to be born in a pure land. Goldsetin says it's an error to thin nobody is enlightened, or that you can't become enlightened. So how does he resolve the motivation for pure land Buddhism. Is it not Buddhism, or are there more than one Buddha Dharma.

There were interesting notes about his practice. Even though he was taught in the Vapassana tradition at the beginning ( Anagarika Sri Munindra,[12] Sri S.N. Goenka,[12] Mrs. Nani Bala Barua (Dipa Ma) and the Venerable Sayadaw U Pandita.[12] Tulku Urgyen Rinpoche,[12] Nyoshul Khenpo Rinpoche), he does Tibettan meditation to start his morning. He touts the Bodhisattva Ideal. Lets see where he goes with Pure Land, which I think is part of the one dharma. Put another way, Goldstein sees all the traditions as contributing to one dharma (so far, p 118).

One Dharma

 I started One Dharma today. The book came out when I was just getting into Buddhism, but I'm just getting to it now. It's one of the books in the Queens Library, which I love, so I got it as a library book. I'm going to read about the 4 reflections when I wake up tomorrow.

(I note there is a "one dharma" retreat at Buddhist Insight retreat center which will be lead by a Tendai leader. This is Japanese Tendai, not Chinese Tendai.)

It's an old idea, there is only one dharma. So how do you account for all the different traditions and different practices? So far the execution of the book has been OK.

In other news, Mastering the Addicted Brain is by a Thai-American who writes about the importance of meditation. It's very concise, practical and comprehensive. An ideal book for someone new to recovery, and anyone who wants to brush up on recovery principles and ways.