[Buddha-l] Mere meness

[Piya Tan]

Which reminds me of a very interesting aspect of the Suttas that I have not
mentioned here before. Anyone with a good knowledge (even some knowledge) of
computer programming (ask the experts which ones), will see that their are
interesting patterns in the way the Suttas are orally transmitted.

There are recursive patterns, nested passages (and stories), concatenations
of ideas, doctrinal cycles, etc.

I find that there are two kinds of repetitions (peyyaala): one is purely
incidental or factual (other than Dharma), and the other Dharma, esp when a
teaching is given in detail about say the five aggregates or any other
doctrinal sets (esp one of the "7 Sets").  The best effect is to "listen" to
these passages in full (record them on mp3 and listen, for example: they are
for reflection.

Reading can bore a person who has only an academic interest in the Buddhism.
For the mindfulness practitioner, listening to the Dharma in this way gives
a remarkable sense of peace and growing insight.

I'm glad to see that we actually have sections of the Access to Insight
website, for example, that have "audio Dharma" where you hear famous living
Buddhist names read selected texts. It would be great to hear Dayamati's
voice for one of such readings!

The Dharma is meant to be heard, not read (originally anyway).

Piya



On 8/30/06, Joy Vriens <joy.vriens at nerim.net> wrote:
>
>  Hi Piya Tan,
>
>
>
>  "Mere Buddhism then would also be "early Buddhism" (in the sense of that
> of the Buddha's own time and say about a century after that), or
> pre-sectarian Buddhism. We have enough record of such teachings to live
> by. "
>
> ***I have my doubts and intuitions about our knowledge of "early
> Buddhism", or at least that which is generally presented as such, but I am
> convinced that the teachings going under the header "early Buddhism" are
> good teachings to live by.
>
>
>
> "I have just an article by Ajahn Brahmali (a pupil of Ajahn Chah) about
> Samadhi and Lokuttarajjhana, where he commented something like we should
> take the Suttas as they are: let the Suttas interpret themselves, and not
> use the Commentaries to do that. (Of course, purists may say that we are
> treating the early texts like evangelists the Bible). Let's simply answer
> that we are not evangelists."
>
>
> ***Yes, I find that an excellent approach too. I have been taught too
> many nutshell summaries of what was the actual message of this philosopher
> and that religious teacher, that kept me from actually directly plunging in
> their sayings and writings. After having done so (the plunging that is) for
> a couple of them, I got a totally different experience and idea of them. I
> think that going for a core message and then to define thinkers/seekers by
> that reducing them to a couple of core quotations is a mistake anyway. By
> going for core messages, one often misses the best parts. To read a "writer"
> (by lack of a better generalist term) is to travel along with him/her,
> letting oneself being mesmerized by him/her for a start. First surrender to
> it, then use your critical thinking if you have to. A bit like with story
> telling. Can one enjoy a story and get the essence of a story (and I don't
> mean the morality etc., but the pleasure) when one's critical thinking is
> activated?
>
>
> "Mere Buddhism also refers in a very significant way to mindful training.
> "Traditional orghnized Buddhism" I think has it the wrong way: study the
> texts then you will understand what meditation is about"..
> ***The reality is I think mindfulness training (having learned the basics
> form an experienced and compassionate practitioner) helps one understand the
> texts and traditions better. More important than that, it bring a profound
> mental calm and clarity."
>
> In order to do something specific, we need a story/narration to motivate
> us to do so, we have to hypnotise ourselves into it. When we adhere to a
> story, we are already calmer and clearer. I don't know about its profundity
> though, I wouldn't know how to measure it ;-) Then whatever we believe we
> need to do to make us calmer and clearer will indeed make us calmer and
> clearer.
>
> "Otherwise we would mostly be merely dumplng our own mental garbage in
> this anarchy called the internet (or Buddha-L)."
>
> ***As you may have already noticed ;-) I have found that in the mental
> domain, anarchy tends to be what really happens. A continuous afflux of
> various information and disinformation. I have learned to make it more or
> less manageable for me through filtering, but I am afraid the filtering (and
> therefore the impression of calm this produces) is less real than the
> anarchy.
>
> Joy
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/private/buddha-l/attachments/20060830/0a998594/attachment.htm