[Buddha-l] Mahayana taught by the Buddha?

[Richard P. Hayes]

On Tue, 2005-06-21 at 09:03 +0100, Mike Austin wrote:

> I tend to agree. To me, 'beauty' is associated with something unknown - 
> something mystical even. As such, I find it the antithesis of dharma.

My compass is somewhat different, I suppose. When I say I can't think of
anything that I would call beautiful, I am thinking only of things
produced by human beings. To my tastes (which I would never take as
normative for others) sunrises, mountains, sunrises over mountains, the
nighttime sky, cloud formations over high desert country, yucca plants
and bamboo are all beautiful. Things made by human beings--buildings,
laser jet printers, power grids, clay pots, paintings, automobiles,
symphonies, Gregorian chants, mathematical theorems, Linux operating
systems, Paninian grammatical rules, the Bible, the Qur'an, and the
Buddha-dharma--are functional, interesting, engaging, sometimes
practical, occasionally ornamental and usually satisfactory only for a
while. They are like meals that keep one going for another few hours,
whereas nature nourishes the soul forever (if I may be permitted words
that are conventionally taboo in Buddhist discourse).

> But I wonder whether it is just my choice of words.  Mathematics can, at 
> times, be what I would describe 'elegant'. I think that could also apply 
> to Buddhism, i.e. simple, natural, uncontrived and no nonsense.

Yes, these matters do just amount to choices of words. They are not
matters of fact or truth but of taste and preference. That said, I am in
complete agreement with your choice of words. Others no doubt have other
tastes.

-- 
Richard Hayes
http://www.unm.edu/~rhayes